patrick.net

Ambassador Sondland:
"President Trump never told me directly that the aid was conditioned on the meetings."

"I never heard from President Trump that aid was conditioned on an announcement of" investigations.

"I never heard those words."

“I don’t recall President Trump ever talking to me about any security assistance. Ever.”

And of course, Ukraine actively interfered in the 2016 election. Not just behind the scenes, but Publicly.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/analysis-what-if-trump-was-right-about-ukraine

But apparently WH Photo Ops are a mandate for the President to provide (They aren't).

Now, let's get an independent council to look into Biden, Nuland, and Pyatt's role in Burisma and the 2016 Election. A $20M budget and all the time they need to gather the facts.

Tim Aurora says

Come on Trumptards, looking for your defense of quid pro quo

The whole crew, from Parson Pence to lard ass Pompeo knew what was going on "everyone was in the loop" Duh, fucking Trump cant keep his mouth shut, is obsessed with winning and is a moron. All he wanted was a sound bite to club Biden with he didn't even want the investigations, great corruption fighter that he is. Pitiful

Worst criminals ever. Retards

APOCALYPSEFUCKisShostikovitch says

IMBECILIC CUNT!

nough said.

Guamtards!

So let's be clear. The democrat position is that republicans asking for corruption investigations of any kind that may implicate democrats is illegal? I just want to be sure that is the position.

Sondland said that HE told Zelinski that an investigation of the Bidens was needed before releasing aid funds. He said that he somehow knew Trump wanted this even though he’d never spoken to Trump about it.
Clearly, Trump is guilty of quid pro quo!
Haha hahahaha hah
You leftists are always losers because you can’t fucking THINK!

Shaman says

It’s sad that they are decommissioning San Onofre :(

I always liked seeing the atomic boobies on the way to San Diego.

I doubt they will remove the boobies anytime soon. Maybe never.

I doubt they will remove the boobies anytime soon. Maybe never.

They should allow citizens to paint them. I am sure we could get creative.

ignoreme says

The democrat position is that republicans asking for corruption investigations of any kind that may implicate democrats is illegal?

Nope, only when you extort a foreign government by withholding 390 million dollars in tax payer funded congressionally appropriated aid to force said foreign government to investigate an American citizen who also happens to be the person who you believe is your main political rival in your 2020 reelection campaign. Got it? It's really not that complicated.

HeadSet says

They should allow citizens to paint them. I am sure we could get creative.

Maybe some tassels would jazz them up a bit!

Shaman says

HeadSet says

They should allow citizens to paint them. I am sure we could get creative.

Maybe some tassels would jazz them up a bit!

Yep, one type of Patnetter would add tassels, pink nips, and so on. Another type would add blue veins and augmentation scars.

if goals set under the Paris climate agreement are to be achieved.

The USA has done far more to eliminate "carbon" than signatory countries like China and India.

I would love to have that image in a portable format, that I can whip out every time a Liberals asks me, about Trump and his supporters calling the Media "Fake News". Because they think that's fascist and sets a dangerous precedence.

I would like to take out that political cartoon, and tell them.
"If this image confuses you, because it conflicts with the only narrative you have on Ukraine, and you don't get the honest humor in this, then YOU are why it's called Fake News. You have no intellectual integrity, that you honestly believe the ONLY SINGLE news worthy event in the last 3 years, has been the continuation of Resist Trump. You're oblivious to any news stories, whether reported by Breitbart, or Politico and even in some instances The New York Times, but they rarely followed up on it, or passed it along to the wire for wide distribution. As there was no Journalism apparatus that would have picked up the story anyway, but The Gateway Pundit, The Daily Caller, and Breitbart"

Most of the time these gullible stupid sons of bitches ask "WHO?!"

The Gateway Pundit, Your Fake News cabal all colluded to demand they NOT be part of the President Press Pool or be present at White House Briefings. So as a result, Trump just gives Holt, Pollak, and others dierect news, scoops directly from the source. His own lips.

"Who?!?"


Shaman says

rdm says

Nope..

Got it? It's really not that complicated.

Why so argumentative? We basically agree.

Can Trump withhold aid for corruption investigation? Yes. We agree.

Can Trump withhold aid for corruption investigation into a Democrat? Yes. We agree.

Can Trump withhold aid for a corruption investigation if the Democrat may run against him for president? I say yes, you say no.

Please correct anything I have misunderstood about your position then please explain what law makes it illegal to investigate someone just because they are running against you in an election.

please explain what law makes it illegal to investigate someone just because they are running against you in an election.

A better phrasing may be "please explain what law grants immunity from investigation just because that person is running against you in an election."

Also, if investigating a Presidential candidate is a crime, how can you overlook the frivolous investigations of Trump when he was a candidate?

The Democrat’s case COMPLETELY hinges on the idea that a blow to the Bidens is a “thing of value” to the President. That’s a pretty shaky foundation considering:
1)Biden isn’t the nominee and may never be the nominee.
2)Trump doesn’t need Biden to go to prison to beat him in an election.

Also, stock market is tumbling today, so it looks like the market fears impeachment. Anyone see this as a buying opportunity?

HeadSet says

Also, stock market is tumbling today, so it looks like the market fears impeachment. Anyone see this as a buying opportunity?

It's a pullback because a deal with China is likely delayed into the new year. Don't think impeachment is feared, Republicans will never sack the best president in a while with the best economy going on. Not sure about buying opportunity - while the general uptrend is still intact market probably needs a breather for a while. It has been making new highs almost every day for a while now.

Tim Aurora says

It has to be an approved investigation that is a US policy

WTF is an approved investigation? Genuinely curious. Did you just make that up?

Shaman says

The Democrat’s case COMPLETELY hinges on the idea that a blow to the Bidens is a “thing of value” to the President.

I don’t see how it can hinge on that even. If that was the crime then it’s just a campaign finance violation. He’d just need to declare it on the proper form. That is if the form even exists. If campaign finance laws makes this illegal because there’s no form, then the law is unconstitutional since the president as commander in chief and head of the department of justice has a duty to investigate crime.

That would be if he actually received anything of value from Ukraine, which he didn’t because no investigation was ever done.

You see, I think the TDS folks on this board are confused because they are watching the house hearing and everything is centered on “was there quid pro quo”. Like they think if they prove quid pro quo that’s a crime. No, first you need to prove quid pro quo, then you need to prove Trump got something of value, then you need to prove Trump had no other reason for doing the investigation then to get the valuable thing.

They can’t prove #1. Trump is too smart and insulated himself via Giuliani.

#2 didn’t happen, no Ukraine investigation occurred.

And #3 clearly isn’t true, Trump was required by the freaking Ukraine aid bill itself to investigate corruption.

jazz_music says

The applicable law in this case is Article II of the Constitution: BRIBERY

What bribes did Trump take?

ignoreme says

And #3 clearly isn’t true, Trump was required by the freaking Ukraine aid bill itself to investigate corruption.

And by his powers as chief executive and primary law enforcer of the country.

Many TDS sufferers think running for office makes somebody immune from investigation, prosecution, or an ethics violation - even if the activity happened while they were in office before they were a candidate.

They might want to be very careful about taking that angle, given Spygate.

Tim Aurora says

He demand an inquiry of his opponent and investigation into 2016 election, both of which were helpful to Trump, in lieu of releasing the money for Ukraine. That is a bribe ( not money but a favor to help him )

Which "Witness" has testified they were directly asked by Trump to do so?

Sondland, Yovanovich, Vindman, etc. all directly answered that they were not told such a thing from the horses mouth.

Hearsay through the grapevine and conjecture as to motives aren't admissible in anything resembling a due process trial.

What Democrats are saying is that the current Sheriff who plans to run for re-election can't investigate wrongdoing by any potential political opponent by asking officials under his control to follow up on leads. That's nonsense.

Also, if we find out State Department and NSC staff were looking for dirt and asking Ukrainian officials for stuff on Trump in 2016, they're going to be tried to, yes?

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, BRIBERY, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Are you talking about Biden? Sure sounds like it.

HeadSet says

Are you talking about Biden? Sure sounds like it.

That's different. Biden protecting himself (something of value) from being harmed by an investigation of the company his son is a board member of (and other Democrats plus Mittens also have Children involved in a company that consults for Burisma) by demanding the prosecutor get Fired is all American goodness.

It's "Dormant", which is a word that has no meaning other than the usual "Old News" deflection propaganda.

The Leakerblower seems to have been involved in meetings about Shonkin.

jazz_music says

The applicable law in this case is Article II of the Constitution: BRIBERY

There’s so much agreement in this thread I feel warm and fuzzy! You failed to cite any law that makes it inherently illegal for a president to investigate a political opponent, so I assume we agree on this. Yay!

We also agree bribery is illegal!

Please cite the proof for points 1, 2, and 3 that I posted above to show the bribe took place. I’ll even be nice and give you #1 (although even this is iffy). Please tell me the thing of value that Trump received and also explain why Trump had no other valid reason to look into Ukraine corruption other then to help his campaign.

Also, it’s 100% fact and admitted by the Democrats that the only reason why Ukraine hasn’t done any corruption investigation to date is because they don’t want to endanger their aid. Why is this clear bribe not a bribe?

Guamtardation run amok!

It's amazing that even after the secret dress rehearsal in the basement, the kabuki theatre is going so poorly for the Democrats' witnesses.

““I want nothing, I want nothing, I want no quid pro quo. Tell Zelensky to do the right thing,” Trump said, according to Sondland. “Something to that effect.””

Doesn’t seem like the Donkeys star witness is cooperating with The Narrative they are trying to tell.

willywonka says

Newsome agrees to welcome homeless autoworkers.

Homeless wouldn't be so bad, as long as those autoworkers were at least workers.

Higher taxes here we come