Offical Impeachment Thread

[playtime]

A shakedown with no quid, no pro, and no quo?

How does that work?

It wouldn't matter if there was. As Professor Dershowitz pointed out, there is no law against quid pro quo's in the statute. He looked up, down and sideways. Couldn't find one.

ray ray ray.... articles of impeachment do not hafta follow traditional criminal law. doucherwitz is grabbing at straws.

Yeah see how far it gets in the senate without criminal wrong doing.


.

I am sure there are many Republicans who will vote no.

I can think of a couple of dems that may as well.

.

literally only 2.

 

[bripat9643]

sondalnd admitted that there was a shake down.

A shakedown with no quid, no pro, and no quo?

How does that work?

It wouldn't matter if there was. As Professor Dershowitz pointed out, there is no law against quid pro quo's in the statute. He looked up, down and sideways. Couldn't find one.

ray ray ray.... articles of impeachment do not hafta follow traditional criminal law. doucherwitz is grabbing at straws.

Yeah see how far it gets in the senate without criminal wrong doing.


.

silly kitty cat... this is much bigger than just getting the complacent (R)s to see the light & get on the right side of history.

"Getting on the right side of history" means riding the turd all the way down the toilet bowl.

 

[Baz Ares]

Favor regarding 2016 or 2020? 2016 is OK but 2020 is not. Therein lies the intent. How do you prove it was for 2020? I ll wait patiently.

because biden is the top candidate that polls are showing who could beat donny. that video that every dumbfuck here is trying to peddle as the smoking gun that 'proves' biden was committing a crime.... back in 2018... when donny was a year into his term... but nothingg came of it until after biden got into the race & the polls are favorable.

"Nothing came of it" until Schiff-for-Brains started trying to impeach Trump.

Wrong.

Apparently you believe we don't watch the news.

 

[playtime]

it was a joint effort between the US & other nations. biden, along with other american officials were our point men & did not go rogue on this.

What really happened when Biden forced out Ukraine's top prosecutor

There isn't a shred of evidence to support that claim.

it states that biden wasn't alone.

Please quote the relevant material.

sure little asswipe, i'll throw you a bone -

Without pressure from Joe Biden, European diplomats, the International Monetary Fund and other international organizations, Shokin would not have been fired, said Daria Kaleniuk, co-founder and executive director of the Anti Corruption Action Centre in Kiev.

You’re flirting with bripat? Weird

what's wrong with you?

 

[OKTexas]

Really? When did Obama approve it? When did both houses of Congress approve it?

it was a joint effort between the US & other nations. biden, along with other american officials were our point men & did not go rogue on this.

What really happened when Biden forced out Ukraine's top prosecutor

There isn't a shred of evidence to support that claim.

it states that biden wasn't alone.

Please quote the relevant material.

sure little asswipe, i'll throw you a bone -

Without pressure from Joe Biden, European diplomats, the International Monetary Fund and other international organizations, Shokin would not have been fired, said Daria Kaleniuk, co-founder and executive director of the Anti Corruption Action Centre in Kiev.

Wow, quoting a Soros front organization. That's really laughable.

.

 

[playtime]

A shakedown with no quid, no pro, and no quo?

How does that work?

It wouldn't matter if there was. As Professor Dershowitz pointed out, there is no law against quid pro quo's in the statute. He looked up, down and sideways. Couldn't find one.

ray ray ray.... articles of impeachment do not hafta follow traditional criminal law. doucherwitz is grabbing at straws.

Yeah see how far it gets in the senate without criminal wrong doing.


.

silly kitty cat... this is much bigger than just getting the complacent (R)s to see the light & get on the right side of history.

"Getting on the right side of history" means riding the turd all the way down the toilet bowl.

oooOOOOooo.... how profound.

 

[bripat9643]

It wouldn't matter if there was. As Professor Dershowitz pointed out, there is no law against quid pro quo's in the statute. He looked up, down and sideways. Couldn't find one.

ray ray ray.... articles of impeachment do not hafta follow traditional criminal law. doucherwitz is grabbing at straws.

Yeah see how far it gets in the senate without criminal wrong doing.


.

silly kitty cat... this is much bigger than just getting the complacent (R)s to see the light & get on the right side of history.

"Getting on the right side of history" means riding the turd all the way down the toilet bowl.

oooOOOOooo.... how profound.

That's about as much as your shriveled brain can absorb.

 

[IM2]

it was a joint effort between the US & other nations. biden, along with other american officials were our point men & did not go rogue on this.

What really happened when Biden forced out Ukraine's top prosecutor

There isn't a shred of evidence to support that claim.

it states that biden wasn't alone.

Please quote the relevant material.

sure little asswipe, i'll throw you a bone -

Without pressure from Joe Biden, European diplomats, the International Monetary Fund and other international organizations, Shokin would not have been fired, said Daria Kaleniuk, co-founder and executive director of the Anti Corruption Action Centre in Kiev.

Wow, quoting a Soros front organization. That's really laughable.

.

This George Soros, who we never see, must be the president of planet earth.

 

[playtime]

it was a joint effort between the US & other nations. biden, along with other american officials were our point men & did not go rogue on this.

What really happened when Biden forced out Ukraine's top prosecutor

There isn't a shred of evidence to support that claim.

it states that biden wasn't alone.

Please quote the relevant material.

sure little asswipe, i'll throw you a bone -

Without pressure from Joe Biden, European diplomats, the International Monetary Fund and other international organizations, Shokin would not have been fired, said Daria Kaleniuk, co-founder and executive director of the Anti Corruption Action Centre in Kiev.

Wow, quoting a Soros front organization. That's really laughable.

.

you & your fellow basket dwellers are the ones to be laughed at.

A Republican Conspiracy Theory About a Biden-in-Ukraine Scandal Has Gone Mainstream. But It Is Not True.
Robert Mackey
May 10 2019, 9:52 p.m.

In an interview with The Intercept, Daria Kaleniuk, an American-educated lawyer who founded Ukraine’s Anti-Corruption Action Center, expressed frustration that two recent front-page stories in the New York Times, on how the conspiracy theory is being used to attack Biden, failed to properly debunk the false accusation. According to Kaleniuk, and a former anti-corruption prosecutor, there is simply no truth to the rumor now spreading like wildfire across the internet.

The United States and other Western nations had for months called for the ousting of Mr. Shokin, who was widely criticized for turning a blind eye to corrupt practices and for defending the interests of a venal and entrenched elite. He was one of several political figures in Kiev whom reformers and Western diplomats saw as a worrying indicator of a return to past corrupt practices, two years after a revolution that was supposed to put a stop to self-dealing by those in power.
A Republican Conspiracy Theory About a Biden-in-Ukraine Scandal Has Gone Mainstream. But It Is Not True.

lol... next?

 

[playtime]

ray ray ray.... articles of impeachment do not hafta follow traditional criminal law. doucherwitz is grabbing at straws.

Yeah see how far it gets in the senate without criminal wrong doing.


.

silly kitty cat... this is much bigger than just getting the complacent (R)s to see the light & get on the right side of history.

"Getting on the right side of history" means riding the turd all the way down the toilet bowl.

oooOOOOooo.... how profound.

That's about as much as your shriveled brain can absorb.

so basically all you have left is 3rd grade insults. no wonder donny loves you long time.

 

[bripat9643]

There isn't a shred of evidence to support that claim.

it states that biden wasn't alone.

Please quote the relevant material.

sure little asswipe, i'll throw you a bone -

Without pressure from Joe Biden, European diplomats, the International Monetary Fund and other international organizations, Shokin would not have been fired, said Daria Kaleniuk, co-founder and executive director of the Anti Corruption Action Centre in Kiev.

Wow, quoting a Soros front organization. That's really laughable.

.

you & your fellow basket dwellers are the ones to be laughed at.

A Republican Conspiracy Theory About a Biden-in-Ukraine Scandal Has Gone Mainstream. But It Is Not True.
Robert Mackey
May 10 2019, 9:52 p.m.

In an interview with The Intercept, Daria Kaleniuk, an American-educated lawyer who founded Ukraine’s Anti-Corruption Action Center, expressed frustration that two recent front-page stories in the New York Times, on how the conspiracy theory is being used to attack Biden, failed to properly debunk the false accusation. According to Kaleniuk, and a former anti-corruption prosecutor, there is simply no truth to the rumor now spreading like wildfire across the internet.

The United States and other Western nations had for months called for the ousting of Mr. Shokin, who was widely criticized for turning a blind eye to corrupt practices and for defending the interests of a venal and entrenched elite. He was one of several political figures in Kiev whom reformers and Western diplomats saw as a worrying indicator of a return to past corrupt practices, two years after a revolution that was supposed to put a stop to self-dealing by those in power.
A Republican Conspiracy Theory About a Biden-in-Ukraine Scandal Has Gone Mainstream. But It Is Not True.

lol... next?

Another Dim talking point that has never been proven.

 

[Bush92]

Let’s call the third hand information whistleblower to testify. Why not? If the law was violated...prosecute her.

 

[Bush92]

Yeah see how far it gets in the senate without criminal wrong doing.


.

silly kitty cat... this is much bigger than just getting the complacent (R)s to see the light & get on the right side of history.

"Getting on the right side of history" means riding the turd all the way down the toilet bowl.

oooOOOOooo.... how profound.

That's about as much as your shriveled brain can absorb.

so basically all you have left is 3rd grade insults. no wonder donny loves you long time.

You’re ignorant of American government and politics. Trump is safe from yet ANOTHER partisan attempt by Democrats to overturn the 2016 election.

 

[OKTexas]

Hearsay is not admissible evidence, as Jordan made very clear with Sondland's correction that had 6 men and 4 conversations making a mockery of Taylor's "clear (3rd hand) understanding".

Ken Starr nailed the summary, not a hint of a crime was presented, let alone an impeachable crime.

sondland will be front & center to testify as a first person witness next week - on wednesday i believe; so there goes your little happy place thought bubble popping.

Yep, and he will testify that Trump told him directly there was no quid pro quo.

.

ummmm.... he changed his testimony. d'oh!

Link?

.

wow - what kinda bubble do you live in, kitty cat?

Sondland, Trump's appointee, changes testimony to say there was clear quid pro quo
By Mike Lillis and Olivia Beavers - 11/05/19 02:02 PM EST

A top diplomat appointed by President Trump revised his testimony to lawmakers in the House's impeachment inquiry, saying in the latest version that the president’s dealings with Ukraine amounted to a clear quid pro quo.
Sondland, Trump's appointee, changes testimony to say there was clear quid pro quo

or choose any one of the multitudes of articles:

sundland changed testimony - Google Search

you're welcome.

From your link:

“After a large meeting, I now recall speaking individually with Mr. Yermak, where I said that resumption of U.S. aid would likely not occur until Ukraine provided the public anti-corruption statement that we had been discussing for many weeks,” Sondland said.

Wow, how non-specific can you get? Was there a mention of the Bidens I missed in there somewhere? And that meeting happened more than a month after the call. Also both the Ukraine President and Foreign Minister said flat out they knew of no linkage to the aid.

.

 

[OKTexas]

sondalnd admitted that there was a shake down.

A shakedown with no quid, no pro, and no quo?

How does that work?

It wouldn't matter if there was. As Professor Dershowitz pointed out, there is no law against quid pro quo's in the statute. He looked up, down and sideways. Couldn't find one.

ray ray ray.... articles of impeachment do not hafta follow traditional criminal law. doucherwitz is grabbing at straws.

Yeah see how far it gets in the senate without criminal wrong doing.


.

silly kitty cat... this is much bigger than just getting the complacent (R)s to see the light & get on the right side of history.

So far the only bipartisanship has been on the side of the (R)s, dip. The only defections have come from your side, with many more to come, bet on it.

.

 

[Bush92]

Let’s get the whistleblower to testify....or did Hunter Biden screw her like he did his dead brother’s wife?

 

[playtime]

sondland will be front & center to testify as a first person witness next week - on wednesday i believe; so there goes your little happy place thought bubble popping.

Yep, and he will testify that Trump told him directly there was no quid pro quo.

.

ummmm.... he changed his testimony. d'oh!

Link?

.

wow - what kinda bubble do you live in, kitty cat?

Sondland, Trump's appointee, changes testimony to say there was clear quid pro quo
By Mike Lillis and Olivia Beavers - 11/05/19 02:02 PM EST

A top diplomat appointed by President Trump revised his testimony to lawmakers in the House's impeachment inquiry, saying in the latest version that the president’s dealings with Ukraine amounted to a clear quid pro quo.
Sondland, Trump's appointee, changes testimony to say there was clear quid pro quo

or choose any one of the multitudes of articles:

sundland changed testimony - Google Search

you're welcome.

From your link:

“After a large meeting, I now recall speaking individually with Mr. Yermak, where I said that resumption of U.S. aid would likely not occur until Ukraine provided the public anti-corruption statement that we had been discussing for many weeks,” Sondland said.

Wow, how non-specific can you get? Was there a mention of the Bidens I missed in there somewhere? And that meeting happened more than a month after the call. Also both the Ukraine President and Foreign Minister said flat out they knew of no linkage to the aid.

.

there was quid pro quo as quoted by sondland after he changed his testimony. he will also be testifying openly on wednesday including the new info that came out about his underling overhearing his conversation with donny on unsecured cell phones,

in a restaurant,

in kiev,

that is crawling with roooskie commie spies.


lol.......................

 

[OKTexas]

It wouldn't matter if there was. As Professor Dershowitz pointed out, there is no law against quid pro quo's in the statute. He looked up, down and sideways. Couldn't find one.

ray ray ray.... articles of impeachment do not hafta follow traditional criminal law. doucherwitz is grabbing at straws.

Yeah see how far it gets in the senate without criminal wrong doing.


.

I am sure there are many Republicans who will vote no.

I can think of a couple of dems that may as well.

.

literally only 2.

You've already had 2, I'm talking in the Senate.

.

 

[Ame®icano]

Hey Obama appointed ambassador *****.

An impeachment hearing is not about you being butt hurt over getting fired.

She was appointed to Ukraine in May 2016, just in time for the Ukrainian meddling with DNC against Trump. She's part of the whole Clinton/Democrat conspiracy against Trump.

What does she think, that once you're Ambassador, you'll remain Ambassador for life? Was she also butthurt when she was recalled from Ambassador post from Armenia in 2011? Why she was recalled back then?

Obama appointed ambassador ***** was fired because she was closely associated with the old corrupt Ukrainian President and the new President wanted her gone.

Next witness please.

By firing, Trump did favor to Ukraine.

 

[playtime]

ray ray ray.... articles of impeachment do not hafta follow traditional criminal law. doucherwitz is grabbing at straws.

Yeah see how far it gets in the senate without criminal wrong doing.


.

I am sure there are many Republicans who will vote no.

I can think of a couple of dems that may as well.

.

literally only 2.

You've already had 2, I'm talking in the Senate.

.

i already said that doesn't matter at this point - but i hope you aren't betting on a rock solid united front from all the (R)s, are you?