[talaniman]

Or you anounce investigations into Biden and Ukraine interference and I give you money! He got caught so Ukraine doesn't have to announce it via CNN, so yes his BS didn't work. Attempted bribery is a crime just as serious as actual bribery. So is attempted extortion given the dufus's tremendous leverage over a country that is at war with a super power.

In case you haven't noticed Clete the dufus loves his talking points that smear and degrade his opponents and having a foe under investigation by a foreign country is right up his alley as was Clintons emails. Doesn't take a genius to figure that out or that Biden is a favorite of repubs looking to vote against the dufus. Who else even has a chance with the independent conservative crowd be they disenchanted by his antics or HC haters.

Darn the law, it's illegal to encourage election help from a foreign source, and this fool got away with it once already so of course he will do it again, and his right wing noise machine is right there with him. Elected repubs are scared stiff to hold him accountable for anything, so he thinks he is above the law.

Just ask JL, or Vac7, you think they care the dufus breaks the law? Naw, they rather listen to his OBVIOUS and continuous LIES, and call dems sore losers, and go along with the lies and antics. Come on Clete, even with your biases you're smarter than that.

I could be wrong about that.

[Vacuum7]

Here's the fly in the ointment in all of this: Biden's son was suspected of breaking the law: How do I know this? Because the UKRAINE (not the U.S. while Obama was in Office) was poised ready to investigate them. So Old Pappy Biden, as V.P. coerces the Ukraine, through Quid Pro Quo threats, to drop the investigation.....which kind of makes Biden look like the dirty rascal he is.....Fast forward, Trumps in Office and the Ukraine investigation is still stalled...whatever Biden's boy was up to is still a potential criminal act worthy of investigation, so Trump asks the Ukraine about the investigation: How is that stretched into a crime? If you follow this logic out to Nth degree, all a criminal has to do is commit a crime in a foreign country then declare himself a U.S. POTUS candidate and he automatically can't be pursued as a criminal because it could be misconstrued as "using a foreign government to assist in an election process": You can see why this all stinks to high heaven! A CRIMINAL SHOULD NOT GET AWAY WITH A CRIME JUST BECAUSE HE IS A POTUS CANDIDATE! And Trump should be in trouble for pursuing JUSTICE any where in the world or with anybody, regardless of who or what position they hold: JUSTICE SHOULD OBSERVE NO BARRIERS!

[jlisenbe]

Taylor, Holmes, Williams, Vindman, Morrison, Sondland,

None of those had first hand knowledge of the offering of a bribe. I've already dispensed with Vindman by quoting his testimony. Sondland is the only one who is thought to have the potential of being able to say he has first hand knowledge of such a thing. Taylor? Taylor admitted that he spoke with Zelensky three times and there was no mention of withholding aid. Taylor was a great big zero in his testimony. Morrison and Williams haven't even publicly testified yet. They are scheduled for Tuesday. All that is known is from leaked information from the so-called "closed door" testimony of those two. The best either one can say is that they listened to the phone call, the transcript of which was released weeks ago. They likely have nothing more than the other so called "witnesses" the dems have called in.

Time will tell, but from what I am reading, Sondland is the only real hope the dems have. And bear in mind that both Zelensky and the Uke foreign minister say there was no connection between the aid and doing an investigation.

Darn the law, it's illegal to encourage election help from a foreign source, and this fool got away with it once already so of course he will do it again, and his right wing noise machine is right there with him. Elected repubs are scared stiff to hold him accountable for anything, so he thinks he is above the law.

You come up with something more that hearsay evidence that he broke a law and we can talk about it. Same pathetic situation as Kavanaugh. Someone said he did it, we don't like him, so he must surely be guilty. That's all you have for a second time.

Just ask JL, or Vac7, you think they care the dufus breaks the law? Naw, they rather listen to his OBVIOUS and continuous LIES, and call dems sore losers, and go along with the lies and antics. Come on Clete, even with your biases you're smarter than that.

Says the man who listened to Obama lie and thought nothing of it. If you want to make an appeal to morality, then better make sure you have a clear conscience yourself first.

This is the same party that impeached Clinton for lying about his private sex life, yet find bribery (specifically listed in the Constitution as impeachable) not impeachable.

He was not impeached for lying about his sex life. He was impeached for perjury before a federal grand jury and obstruction of justice. There is no direct evidence that Trump committed bribery. Which witness so far has alleged he/she heard Trump attempt to bribe someone? As I understand it, the only reason the dems switched tactics to extortion/bribery is because they ran focus groups that showed them the average person did not understand quid pro quo. Real ethical, that approach.

[Vacuum7]

Sondland is a filthy turd, already a proven liar: He has already changed his version of events. Sondland cannot be trusted: He will do anything to save his own arse. Sondland has impugned himself.

[jlisenbe]

Just more evidence of the swamp that D.C. has become.

The Rev. Al Sharpton raked in $1,046,948 from his own charity last year, according to National Action Network’s latest tax filings obtained by The Post.

Sharpton got a $324,000 salary — 32% higher than his 2017 pay — in addition to a $159,596 bonus and $563,352 in “other compensation.”

[talaniman]

According to the dufus released memo what favors did he ask of Zelesnski?

What does quid pro quo literally mean?

Who put a hold on Ukrainian assistance, and how?

Simple questions with simple answers. You are allowed to use any resource you have. This is a simple test to determine whether you are a right wing loon, have simple intellectual skills to understand simple stuff, or just trying to sound smart by talking dumb stuff, or if you are just a parrot hoping to get a cracker.

You do understand what you have posted has no basis in facts, or even fits a loose logic other than right wing loony NOISE! The dufus has been invited to tell his side anytime he wants too, and it was reported he is strongly considering it.

Bonus question;

How did Clinton commit perjury?

[jlisenbe]

According to the dufus released memo what favors did he ask of Zelesnski?

The text says, "The· President: I would like you to do us a favor though
because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a
lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with
this whole si�uation with Ukraine, they s_ay Crowdstrike... I guess
you have one of your wealthy people... The server, they say
Ukraine has.it� There - are a lot. of things that went on, the·
:whole situation ..I think you 1 re _surrounding yourse·lf with some
of the same people. I .would like to have the Attorney General
call you or your people and I would like you t� ·get to the
bottom of it�. As you sa� yest�rday, that whole nonsetise ended
with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mue�le_r, an
incompetent performance -, _but they. say a lot of it started with
Ukraine. Whatever you can do, ·it's very important that· you. do it
if that's possible."

Oooohhh! Really sounds sinister!! Please do us a favor??

What does quid pro quo literally mean?

Literally it means "this for that".

Who put a hold on Ukrainian assistance, and how?

According to Politico, "The Trump administration is slow-walking $250 million in military assistance to Ukraine, annoying lawmakers and advocates who argue the funding is critical to keeping Russia at bay.

President Donald Trump asked his national security team to review the funding program, known as the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, in order to ensure the money is being used in the best interest of the United States, a senior administration official told POLITICO on Wednesday."

Simple questions with simple answers. You are allowed to use any resource you have. This is a simple test to determine whether you are a right wing loon, have simple intellectual skills to understand simple stuff, or just trying to sound smart by talking dumb stuff, or if you are just a parrot hoping to get a cracker.

Wow. What an angry man you have become. The name calling serves no purpose. I would hope you would be above that.

You do understand what you have posted has no basis in facts, or even fits a loose logic other than right wing loony NOISE!

I absolutely challenge you to show any assertion I have made which has "no basis in facts." Go ahead and go for it. Let's see what you've got. All you did in your post above was engage in name calling and ask questions.

Bonus question;

How did Clinton commit perjury?

For your reading pleasure. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...jury092498.htm

[talaniman]

Here's the fly in the ointment in all of this: Biden's son was suspected of breaking the law: How do I know this? Because the UKRAINE (not the U.S. while Obama was in Office) was poised ready to investigate them. So Old Pappy Biden, as V.P. coerces the Ukraine, through Quid Pro Quo threats, to drop the investigation.....which kind of makes Biden look like the dirty rascal he is.....Fast forward, Trumps in Office and the Ukraine investigation is still stalled...whatever Biden's boy was up to is still a potential criminal act worthy of investigation, so Trump asks the Ukraine about the investigation: How is that stretched into a crime? If you follow this logic out to Nth degree, all a criminal has to do is commit a crime in a foreign country then declare himself a U.S. POTUS candidate and he automatically can't be pursued as a criminal because it could be misconstrued as "using a foreign government to assist in an election process": You can see why this all stinks to high heaven! A CRIMINAL SHOULD NOT GET AWAY WITH A CRIME JUST BECAUSE HE IS A POTUS CANDIDATE! And Trump should be in trouble for pursuing JUSTICE any where in the world or with anybody, regardless of who or what position they hold: JUSTICE SHOULD OBSERVE NO BARRIERS!

Please supply links to what you claim. Only the dufus and his sycophants are calling for an investigation with no probable cause or claim of wrong doing. Now if you wanted to investigate everybody that served on the board that's a whole nuther tree to bark up, so links into this conspiracy theory would be great and be sure to take my quiz so I don't go jumping into the sh1t of an innocent person.

In the USA the rule of law has specific processes, policies, and procedures that should be adhered to and the dems say not only did the dufus break the law, but did so willfully with a criminal intent, and has a history of it going back decades.

[jlisenbe]

Highlight the statement you want to double check. Right click and select "search bing". It'll find it for you.

You really think I'm going to go out of my way to help you find those links after this crappy statement you made? "You are allowed to use any resource you have. This is a simple test to determine whether you are a right wing loon, have simple intellectual skills to understand simple stuff, or just trying to sound smart by talking dumb stuff, or if you are just a parrot hoping to get a cracker."

Nah. You find it yourself. Let's see what kind of "simple intellectual skills" you have.


BTW, I did give you one link to the bonus question. Did you read it?

[talaniman]

The text says, "The· President: I would like you to do us a favor though
because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a
lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with
this whole si�uation with Ukraine, they s_ay Crowdstrike... I guess
you have one of your wealthy people... The server, they say
Ukraine has.it� There - are a lot. of things that went on, the·
:whole situation ..I think you 1 re _surrounding yourse·lf with some
of the same people. I .would like to have the Attorney General
call you or your people and I would like you t� ·get to the
bottom of it�. As you sa� yest�rday, that whole nonsetise ended
with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mue�le_r, an
incompetent performance -, _but they. say a lot of it started with
Ukraine. Whatever you can do, ·it's very important that· you. do it
if that's possible."

Oooohhh! Really sounds sinister!! Please do us a favor??

You forgot the rest of the his call JL,

The ot�er thing,
There's a lot talk about Biden's son,. that Biden stopped the
prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so
whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great.
Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if
you ·can look into it ... It sounds horrible to me.

Sounds pretty sinister to me since the ONLY investigations the dufus was concerned about was his political opposition and a right wing conspiracy theory started by Vlad to deflect attention away from HIS 2016 election meddling.

Literally it means "this for that".

Do me a favor and we release money. The peoples money duly authorized for Ukraine security. Under law this is bribery or extortion,

According to Politico, "The Trump administration is slow-walking $250 million in military assistance to Ukraine, annoying lawmakers and advocates who argue the funding is critical to keeping Russia at bay.

President Donald Trump asked his national security team to review the funding program, known as the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, in order to ensure the money is being used in the best interest of the United States, a senior administration official told POLITICO on Wednesday."

Yeah, his ONLY concerns were investigating the Bidens and Ukraine election interference and collusion with the dems. That's a pretty narrow review, and pretty specific and a quid pro quo, THIS for THAT. Or did we miss more favors he requested. The tell here is what he asked for, which by law is illegal, even as a "favor" , and what NSA team?

Wow. What an angry man you have become. The name calling serves no purpose. I would hope you would be above that.

That's not anger at all just amusement and mocking in my own inimitable style cause you and Vac talk crazy sometimes, so sorry if you took it personally and can you blame me for checking to see if you are a right wing loon? Most times you sound like one or do you accidently miss (Or just dismiss) obvious things like the rule of law. Further it's not name calling if it's TRUE. Obviously you dismiss that too, since I have to keep reminding you.

I absolutely challenge you to show any assertion I have made which has "no basis in facts." Go ahead and go for it. Let's see what you've got. All you did in your post above was engage in name calling and ask questions.

Asking a foreign power to investigate your political opponents is against the law. More so if you use bribery or extortion to do it.

Bonus question;

For your reading pleasure. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...jury092498.htm[/QUOTE]

Read that years ago, it was about adulterous behavior for sure, and while I'm here, Hearsay is not admissible in a criminal case except under certain conditions and since this is an INQUIRY those rules don't even apply. None of the witnesses has even testified to the legality or illegality YET, of the dufus actions except in the actual way he held up the funds.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hearsa...ted_States_law

"Generally in common law courts the "hearsay rule" applies, which says that a trier of fact (judge or jury) cannot be informed of a hearsay statement unless it meets certain strict requirements. However, the rules for admissibility are more relaxed in court systems based on the civil law system. In the civil law system, the courts, whether consisting only of judges or featuring a jury, have wide latitude to appreciate the evidence brought before them....Furthermore, even in common-law systems, the hearsay rule only applies to actual trials. Hearsay is admissible as evidence in many other judicial proceedings, such as grand jury deliberations, probation hearings,
parole revocation hearings, and proceedings before administrative bodies."

When you don't have a clue then anybody can lie right to your face! Present company excepted. You can quote scripture but concepts like the law escape you and ignorance of the LAW is no excuse. Ever hear that before?

[jlisenbe]

Do me a favor and we release money.

Might have some meaning IF Trump had said that. You have no case, so you have to make things up.

That's not anger at all just amusement and mocking in my own inimitable style cause you and Vac talk crazy sometimes, so sorry if you took it personally and can you blame me for checking to see if you are a right wing loon? Most times you sound like one or do you accidently miss (Or just dismiss) obvious things like the rule of law. Further it's not name calling if it's TRUE. Obviously you dismiss that too, since I have to keep reminding you.

I'm going to challenge you again. Find the places where I have misstated facts.

There's a lot talk about Biden's son,. that Biden stopped the
prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so
whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great.
Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if
you ·can look into it ... It sounds horrible to me.

Sounds reasonable to me. So where is that part where Trump says, "I won't release the money if you don't investigate"? Do you see that part? I don't see it. Do you see it ANYWHERE??? And why wouldn't the Ukes investigate Biden's son? Had the smell of corruption all over it.

You are conveniently forgetting to note that both the Uke pres and foreign minister have stated they were not pressured to investigate anything. The money went through and no investigation has taken place. What is it about that which you find so hard to comprehend?

I have no idea why you posted all the garbage at the bottom. The rules of civil cases don't apply here. This is the government alleging Trump committed a crime. Hearsay is not admissible in a criminal trial because (duh!) it proves nothing. That's what's so funny about your post. Your paragraph at the bottom supports the idea that hearsay is not allowed in a criminal trial!! Your own source shoots you down. And you think I don't know the law??? Good luck, my friend. Now yes, this is a hearing, but if you want to be able to impeach a pres, you will have to have direct evidence. "I heard my friend say that his mother heard her boyfriend say that Trump was a crook!" just won't do.

[talaniman]

It was innapropriate that the dufus framed his call around "we have done so much for Ukraine" and it hasn't been reciprocated and ask a favor of a country at war with HIS well known buddy Vlad that is of interest to himself, AND Vlad, an obvious inference, or implied threat as was his REVIEW of corruption in the Ukraine, which sounds reasonable to his sycophants, I mean what would you expect the guy to say? How would he look to his people to admit such a thing, a newly elected president of the most corrupted (BY VLAD!) nation on Earth? It's called a rock and a hard place and you cannot comprehend THAT? Come on guy.

The government has alleged nothing, but it is in their constitutional power of OVERSIGHT to INVESTIGATE this situation, which is why it's called an INQUIRY. Maybe you confuse a CRIMINAL trial with an INQUIRY, or fail to note the distinct difference, which I provided to you. Whether articles of impeachment are actually filed is another matter. Now you can play it dumb as to my hearsay references but again the law is the law and doesn't matter what you can or cannot comprehend. That's why you should read the transcripts and note the framing of questions and the language of the replies, and the latest testimony by Morrison that you have already dismissed.

Page 15 line 9, through page 17 inclusive. (Site would not allow C&P)

I doubt you read the whole thing but as others have testified they all were aware of the irregular process as opposed to the regular process of Ukrainian policy and warned to stay away from it and that involved Sondland and often Giuliani at the behext of the dufus directly. Wait until you get a load of Mulvaney's emails, but you aren't much on homework, reading, or any kind of research that's not quoted in scripture.

I am well aware of the process and evidence it takes to dump the dufus or send him to jail like the rest of his flunkies.

[Vacuum7]

Trump asked for an a review of why the investigation into Biden's son was halted: NOT OLD BIDEN, BIDEN'S SON! Technically, Trump didn't ask about OLD BIDEN! So, no illegal act.

With all the money that the U.S. has pissed down the toilet in the last almost 20 years (Afghanistan, Iraq, & Syria, as well as multiple other little slices of heaven), I am glad someone IS QUESTIONING AND LOOKING AT HOW U.S. TAX DOLLARS ARE SPENT OR, BETTER PUT, GIVEN AWAY! We are Congresses' boss and they have proven to be frivolous with OUR MONEY! About time someone said "Let's reevaluate this spending!"

[jlisenbe]

The government has alleged nothing,

The House is not a part of the government??? Well why didn't you say so before now? That clears up everything.

Many words, but no evidence of a crime. This is just a witch hunt for a bunch of bitter democrats. Nothing more.

[talaniman]

You're a card but you no longer can make excuses for not reading, researching or doing your own homework. In otherwords YOU FLUNKED!

Make up test!

Title X of the Act, also known as the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, specifies that the President may request that Congress rescind appropriated funds. If both the Senate and the House of Representatives have not approved a rescission proposal (by passing legislation) within 45 days of continuous session, any funds being withheld must be made available for obligation. Congress is not required to vote on the request, and has ignored most Presidential requests.^[4] In response, some^[who?] have called for a line item veto to strengthen the rescission power and force Congress to vote on the disputed funds.The Act was passed in response to feelings in Congress that President Nixon was abusing his power of impoundment by withholding funding of programs he opposed. The Act, especially after Train v. City of New York (1975), effectively removed the presidential power of impoundment.<sup>[5]

Vac, sorry guy, but your on probation slick!</sup>

[Vacuum7]

Talaniman: We have wasted TOO MUCH of our precious TAXPAYER monies on bottomless pits of nations......these were monies better spent here, at home, to provide for the needy of the U.S. Whatever can be done to prevent Congress from just straight-out burning U.S. Taxpayer monies is a good thing: In this case, it appears the UNLIKELY and RELUCTANT HERO OF TAXPAYER MONEY IS PRESIDENT TRUMP: He may take a bullet for all of us because he may be IMPEACHED protecting our TAXPAYER MONIES from a Congress that want to give it away like a drunken sailor on Norfolk's Granby St. If Trump is willing to heroically STAND IN THE GAP TO PROTECT THE FUTURE MONETARY WEALTH OF U.S. CITIZENS, he would have performed far above and beyond that any of us thought he was capable of when he was elected.

Congress needs its wings clipped: For far too long, Congress has tried to usurp the power of the Presidency: Don't you think its time we give the POTUS his power back?

[paraclete]

Talaniman: We have wasted TOO MUCH of our precious TAXPAYER monies on bottomless pits of nations......these were monies better spent here, at home, to provide for the needy of the U.S. Whatever can be done to prevent Congress from just straight-out burning U.S. Taxpayer monies is a good thing: In this case, it appears the UNLIKELY and RELUCTANT HERO OF TAXPAYER MONEY IS PRESIDENT TRUMP: He may take a bullet for all of us because he may be IMPEACHED protecting our TAXPAYER MONIES from a Congress that want to give it away like a drunken sailor on Norfolk's Granby St. If Trump is willing to heroically STAND IN THE GAP TO PROTECT THE FUTURE MONETARY WEALTH OF U.S. CITIZENS, he would have performed far above and beyond that any of us thought he was capable of when he was elected.

Congress needs its wings clipped: For far too long, Congress has tried to usurp the power of the Presidency: Don't you think its time we give the POTUS his power back?

Ok Vac, so america first, this is what you want? I can agree with you, each nation should put its own interests first, but you know, I thought that was what america is doing with its War on Drugs, War on Terror, Trade War with China, beggar my neighbour foriegn policies, beggar my neighbour free trade agrements, and still you complain that america isn't putting its interests first, there is just no feeding that avericous maw

[talaniman]

Heck no dump the dufus and lock him up like his cronies have been! Are you kidding? This is the dude who scammed consumers and donors alike with his charities and schools, and before then fudged the books and bilked the government on rent subsidies and currently is still an unindicted co conspirator with his other fixer lawyer Cohen.

You continue to try and make a snake into a hero don't you? This is the guy who wanted the next G7 at his Doral Golf course! Come on man!

Or are you just pulling our leg with that wacky humor of yours? Hard to tell sometimes.

[jlisenbe]

Ok Vac, so america first, this is what you want? I can agree with you, each nation should put its own interests first, but you know, I thought that was what america is doing with its War on Drugs, War on Terror, Trade War with China, beggar my neighbour foriegn policies, beggar my neighbour free trade agrements, and still you complain that america isn't putting its interests first, there is just no feeding that avericous maw

What you say we compare foreign aid by the U.S. versus foreign aid for Aussie Land. About 50 bil for us compared to about 4 bil for you. And you want to point fingers?

[Vacuum7]

Talaniman: You don't think people can change? It is very possible that Trump has "A HIGHER LOYALTY", one that we never imagined......Isn't history full of individuals that have demonstrated these qualities? I am forever an optimist.