Jump to content
Alias Detective

Official President Trump Impeachment Inquiry Thread

Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, drobeski said:

Is that your gut feeling?

Did you even read my post before responding? 😢

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To the Senate of the United States:
    With a view to receiving the advice and consent of the 
Senate to ratification, I transmit herewith the Treaty Between 
the United States of America and Ukraine on Mutual Legal 
Assistance in Criminal Matters with Annex, signed at Kiev on 
July 22, 1998. I transmit also, for the information of the 
Senate, an exchange of notes which was signed on September 30, 
1999, which provides for its provisional application, as well 
as the report of the Department of State with respect to the 
Treaty.
    The Treaty is one of a series of modern mutual legal 
assistance treaties being negotiated by the United States in 
order to counter criminal activities more effectively. The 
Treaty should be an effective tool to assist in the prosecution 
of a wide variety of crimes, including drug trafficking 
offenses. The Treaty is self-executing. It provides for a broad 
range of cooperation in criminal matters. Mutual assistance 
available under the Treaty includes: taking of testimony or 
statements of persons; providing documents, records, and 
articles of evidence; serving documents; locating or 
identifying persons; transferring persons in custody for 
testimony or other purposes; executing requests for searches 
and seizures; assisting in proceedings related to restraint, 
confiscation, forfeiture of assets, restitution, and collection 
of fines; and any other form of assistance not prohibited by 
the laws of the requested state.
    I recommend that the Senate give early and favorable 
consideration to the Treaty and give its advice and consent to 
ratification.

                                                William J. Clinton.
                          LETTER OF SUBMITTAL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Hawkeye21 said:

I'm not sure if that's accurate.  If they felt there was a legit reason for an investigation then obstructing it would be illegal whether there turned out to be something there or not.

Wrong, you should brush up on what it takes to qualify as obstruction.

3 parameters have to be met, one of which is intent.

If there was never any underlying crime, which the Mueller report showed, then it is impossible to assume Trump's intent was anything other than defending himself against false charges.

No underlying crime = no intent = no obstruction.

I'll say this nicely, some of you dumb focks should turn off CNN and FBG, you are poisoning your brain.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, MDC said:

You’re not entirely wrong here about the Dems but since Trump has no problem throwing around baseless accusations and smears he can go fock himself. :thumbsup: 

Believe me, after 2024, I'm right there with you, he's a total jackazz.... but I'd rather vote for a jackazz who know's how to improve the country than a choir boy/girl who doesn't or will screw it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TimmySmith said:

Well the fact that the aid would be tied to other provisions certainly appeared to be Obama policy.  Followed by both Obama, Biden, and now Trump.  :dunno:

Funny thing is that is how is has always been. We do not give billions in aid every year to dozens of random shithole countries out of the goodness of our hearts.

Every dollar in aid is quid for some sort of quo.

People are acting like qpq is some novel thing that never existed before Trump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Believe me, after 2024, I'm right there with you, he's a total jackazz.... but I'd rather vote for a jackazz who know's how to improve the country than a choir boy/girl who doesn't or will screw it up.

I don’t think he’s done anything you wouldn’t have gotten out of Jeb or Cruz other than he an even bigger ass hole. Trump is going to have the worst second term you’ve ever seen. And I’m in all likelihood voting for the green or libertarian party again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Intense Observer said:

Wrong, you should brush up on what it takes to qualify as obstruction.

3 parameters have to be met, one of which is intent.

If there was never any underlying crime, which the Mueller report showed, then it is impossible to assume Trump's intent was anything other than defending himself against false charges.

No underlying crime = no intent = no obstruction.

I'll say this nicely, some of you dumb focks should turn off CNN and FBG, you are poisoning your brain.

I don't watch CNN or any news station you sad, ignorant man.  Sorry, but I'm sick of getting told this by people like you.

I'm not an expert on politics by any means and have no issues letting people know that.  I'm learning more ever day and that's why I take part in the forums on here, FBG and other sites.  I am not a liberal or conservative and I don't really care to be labeled anything actually.  I try to gather info from multiple sources and people then I form my own opinion.  Stop grouping me in with others because I am not the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/11/us/ukraine-trump.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage

 

WASHINGTON — Like every presidential conversation with a foreign leader, this one had scripted talking points and a predigested news release recounting an exchange yet to take place. Aides in the White House Situation Room clustered around a speaker phone, pens and pads in hand to document what they heard.

At 9:03 a.m. on Thursday, July 25, they listened as President Trump picked up the phone in the White House residence and was connected to Volodymyr Zelensky, the newly elected president of Ukraine. Within minutes, two note-takers exchanged troubled looks.

Mr. Trump had not merely veered off his talking points. By the conversation’s end, he had asked Mr. Zelensky — a leader in dire need of American military aid to fight the Russian-led invasion on his eastern border — to “do us a favor” by investigating one of his political rivals and an unfounded conspiracy theory about the 2016 election. 

That 30-minute conversation has now emerged as a mortal threat to Mr. Trump’s presidency. This week, the House of Representatives begins public hearings that could lead to the impeachment of a president for only for the third time in American history. More than a half dozen Trump administration officials have called the phone conversation and the events surrounding it insidious and shocking. Five officials who dealt with Ukraine have resigned since September.

The unfolding story is in many ways a sequel to the events that led to Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. Once again, the plot involves foreign influence in an election and is centered in the post-Soviet sphere. 

Only one day before Mr. Trump spoke to Mr. Zelensky, Mr. Mueller had testified to Congress about how the Russians had tried to help elect Mr. Trump by organizing the theft and release of emails damaging to his opponent. In that case, the Russians were the pursuers who sought contacts with Mr. Trump’s campaign. 

Now the president and his minions were the aggressors, seeking help with the 2020 re-election effort. They asked the Ukrainians to investigate unfounded allegations about former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., one of Mr. Trump’s leading Democratic rivals, as well as to chase a conspiracy theory that Ukraine, not Russia, had intervened in 2016.

The story is also another chapter in Mr. Trump’s war on the wheels of American governance, from the intelligence community to the diplomatic corps to Congress itself. In his zeal to win Mr. Zelensky’s compliance, the president ousted the American ambassador to Ukraine, froze congressionally approved military aid, shut out foreign-policy experts in the National Security Council and sidestepped the State Department to set up a back-channel to Kiev with his personal lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani.

The Ukraine saga is yet another episode in which Russia is the potential beneficiary of White House decisions. Mr. Trump not only sought to muddy the picture of Russia’s role in the 2016 election, but also withheld nearly $400 million in military aid, a tenth of Ukraine’s defense budget, for its war with Russian-backed forces.

The Russians “would love the humiliation of Zelensky at the hands of the Americans,” William B. Taylor Jr., the top diplomat in Kiev who nearly quit in protest, testified to Congress.

 

 

lots more at the link...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/11/us/ukraine-trump.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage

 

WASHINGTON — Like every presidential conversation with a foreign leader, this one had scripted talking points and a predigested news release recounting an exchange yet to take place. Aides in the White House Situation Room clustered around a speaker phone, pens and pads in hand to document what they heard.

At 9:03 a.m. on Thursday, July 25, they listened as President Trump picked up the phone in the White House residence and was connected to Volodymyr Zelensky, the newly elected president of Ukraine. Within minutes, two note-takers exchanged troubled looks.

Mr. Trump had not merely veered off his talking points. By the conversation’s end, he had asked Mr. Zelensky — a leader in dire need of American military aid to fight the Russian-led invasion on his eastern border — to “do us a favor” by investigating one of his political rivals and an unfounded conspiracy theory about the 2016 election. 

That 30-minute conversation has now emerged as a mortal threat to Mr. Trump’s presidency. This week, the House of Representatives begins public hearings that could lead to the impeachment of a president for only for the third time in American history. More than a half dozen Trump administration officials have called the phone conversation and the events surrounding it insidious and shocking. Five officials who dealt with Ukraine have resigned since September.

The unfolding story is in many ways a sequel to the events that led to Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. Once again, the plot involves foreign influence in an election and is centered in the post-Soviet sphere. 

Only one day before Mr. Trump spoke to Mr. Zelensky, Mr. Mueller had testified to Congress about how the Russians had tried to help elect Mr. Trump by organizing the theft and release of emails damaging to his opponent. In that case, the Russians were the pursuers who sought contacts with Mr. Trump’s campaign. 

Now the president and his minions were the aggressors, seeking help with the 2020 re-election effort. They asked the Ukrainians to investigate unfounded allegations about former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., one of Mr. Trump’s leading Democratic rivals, as well as to chase a conspiracy theory that Ukraine, not Russia, had intervened in 2016.

The story is also another chapter in Mr. Trump’s war on the wheels of American governance, from the intelligence community to the diplomatic corps to Congress itself. In his zeal to win Mr. Zelensky’s compliance, the president ousted the American ambassador to Ukraine, froze congressionally approved military aid, shut out foreign-policy experts in the National Security Council and sidestepped the State Department to set up a back-channel to Kiev with his personal lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani.

The Ukraine saga is yet another episode in which Russia is the potential beneficiary of White House decisions. Mr. Trump not only sought to muddy the picture of Russia’s role in the 2016 election, but also withheld nearly $400 million in military aid, a tenth of Ukraine’s defense budget, for its war with Russian-backed forces.

The Russians “would love the humiliation of Zelensky at the hands of the Americans,” William B. Taylor Jr., the top diplomat in Kiev who nearly quit in protest, testified to Congress.

lots more at the link...

🤣 🤣 🤣

Is this your "next big we got'eeeeeem!!!"?  I was right:  It's an hourly swindle with you.

The NYTimes and Wapo just whip out their cacks and you just swallow it whole.  Every....single....time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

🤣 🤣 🤣

Is this your "next big thing"?  I was right:  It's an hourly swindle with you.

It’s not really anything new. Rather it’s a pretty good article that puts the pieces together in linear fashion.

You won’t like it since it doesn’t conform to your beliefs, but any objective person reading it should be greatly alarmed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, IGotWorms said:

It’s a pretty good article that puts the pieces together in linear fashion.

You won’t like it since it doesn’t conform to your beliefs, but any objective person reading it should be greatly alarmed.

So they put the lies and half-truths in a linear fashion for you to read?  Do they also do it in crayon so it's easier for you?  Any pop-ups too?  :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, MDC said:

I don’t think he’s done anything you wouldn’t have gotten out of Jeb or Cruz other than he an even bigger ass hole. Trump is going to have the worst second term you’ve ever seen. And I’m in all likelihood voting for the green or libertarian party again.

When NJ came around, it was Trump, Kasich (whom I voted for), and Cruz.  I didn't mind Cruz, but me, he was clearly 3rd.  Still, Cruz at that point had no shot, and neither did Kasich really, so it didn't matter.  In the end, the only options we had were Trump and Hillary.  I don't vote 3rd party because I never like them more than the Republican candidate.  I don't see Democrats as electable at this point in time.  There's too many socialists.  Even the more middle of the road Democrats, I don't trust them because when push comes to shove, they're going to have to pander to the far left to get things done, so there's no option there.

I think Trump could have a huge second term, but only if people realize that they need to vote for Republican's in the House next year.  If that happens, the USMCA deal will finally get through and put into place, which will be really big for the Midwest (primarily).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

🤣 🤣 🤣

Is this your "next big we got'eeeeeem!!!"?  I was right:  It's an hourly swindle with you.

The NYTimes and Wapo just whip out their cacks and you just swallow it whole.  Every....single....time.

I stopped reading when I saw the link was from the NYT.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

13,000 Ukrainian soldiers have died in that war Barry held up military aid for :(

Fixed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

WHAT?!?!?

🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣

Having trouble comprehending English?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/11/us/ukraine-trump.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage

 

WASHINGTON — Like every presidential conversation with a foreign leader, this one had scripted talking points and a predigested news release recounting an exchange yet to take place. Aides in the White House Situation Room clustered around a speaker phone, pens and pads in hand to document what they heard.

At 9:03 a.m. on Thursday, July 25, they listened as President Trump picked up the phone in the White House residence and was connected to Volodymyr Zelensky, the newly elected president of Ukraine. Within minutes, two note-takers exchanged troubled looks.

Mr. Trump had not merely veered off his talking points. By the conversation’s end, he had asked Mr. Zelensky — a leader in dire need of American military aid to fight the Russian-led invasion on his eastern border — to “do us a favor” by investigating one of his political rivals and an unfounded conspiracy theory about the 2016 election. 

That 30-minute conversation has now emerged as a mortal threat to Mr. Trump’s presidency. This week, the House of Representatives begins public hearings that could lead to the impeachment of a president for only for the third time in American history. More than a half dozen Trump administration officials have called the phone conversation and the events surrounding it insidious and shocking. Five officials who dealt with Ukraine have resigned since September.

The unfolding story is in many ways a sequel to the events that led to Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. Once again, the plot involves foreign influence in an election and is centered in the post-Soviet sphere. 

Only one day before Mr. Trump spoke to Mr. Zelensky, Mr. Mueller had testified to Congress about how the Russians had tried to help elect Mr. Trump by organizing the theft and release of emails damaging to his opponent. In that case, the Russians were the pursuers who sought contacts with Mr. Trump’s campaign. 

Now the president and his minions were the aggressors, seeking help with the 2020 re-election effort. They asked the Ukrainians to investigate unfounded allegations about former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., one of Mr. Trump’s leading Democratic rivals, as well as to chase a conspiracy theory that Ukraine, not Russia, had intervened in 2016.

The story is also another chapter in Mr. Trump’s war on the wheels of American governance, from the intelligence community to the diplomatic corps to Congress itself. In his zeal to win Mr. Zelensky’s compliance, the president ousted the American ambassador to Ukraine, froze congressionally approved military aid, shut out foreign-policy experts in the National Security Council and sidestepped the State Department to set up a back-channel to Kiev with his personal lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani.

The Ukraine saga is yet another episode in which Russia is the potential beneficiary of White House decisions. Mr. Trump not only sought to muddy the picture of Russia’s role in the 2016 election, but also withheld nearly $400 million in military aid, a tenth of Ukraine’s defense budget, for its war with Russian-backed forces.

The Russians “would love the humiliation of Zelensky at the hands of the Americans,” William B. Taylor Jr., the top diplomat in Kiev who nearly quit in protest, testified to Congress.

 

 

lots more at the link...

I give you permission to cut and paste the text from the Bill Clinton treaty text I posted and send it to your fellow hacks at the NYT. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Having trouble comprehending English?

Uhm...no.  It's the lies you continue to flat out fall for (or make yourself) that I'm flabbergasted by.  

You are literally being fooled every hour, on the hour by your masters.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hang on folks this is going to be fun. Trump is really going down this time, we cannot let the voting public re-elect him. We have to get rid of him so the deplorables can’t vote for him and kick our ass.
 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Baker Boy said:

What laws did Trump violate?

Did I say he violated laws? You quoted me with no quote. I think you may be posting with the wrong username accidentally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, MDC said:

Did I say he violated laws? You quoted me with no quote. I think you may be posting with the wrong username accidentally.

So you agree he violated no laws? If you disagree what laws did he break? And if he didn’t break any laws what is the impeachment about? I’ll hang up and wit.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

🍿

I smell a trap.

Is the first phone call going to show the Ukraine president bringing up Ukraine interference in the 2016 election and corruption involving the Biden Bribe and Biden Payoff?

I expect Worms to be here with a lawfare copy pasta explaining how the president of the United States has no authority to investigate crimes involving American citizens. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Intense Observer said:

 

🍿

I smell a trap.

Is the first phone call going to show the Ukraine president bringing up Ukraine interference in the 2016 election and corruption involving the Biden Bribe and Biden Payoff?

I expect Worms to be here with a lawfare copy pasta explaining how the president of the United States has no authority to investigate crimes involving American citizens. 

4d Chess 

Worms already warned us it will be doctored.  :lol:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Intense Observer said:

 

🍿

I smell a trap.

Is the first phone call going to show the Ukraine president bringing up Ukraine interference in the 2016 election and corruption involving the Biden Bribe and Biden Payoff?

I expect Worms to be here with a lawfare copy pasta explaining how the president of the United States has no authority to investigate crimes involving American citizens. 

I expect worms to be in here saying the president has no authority to make phone calls, much less a phone call to the Ukraine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Is it possible to have a quid pro quo when the quid is given and no quo is received?

Civics 101 items the Dems need to go back and review:

1. Quid pro quo

2. Political enemy

3. Election interference

4. Which branch is responsible for foreign policy

5. Who is responsible for hiring/firing US ambassadors

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, IGotWorms said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/11/us/ukraine-trump.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage

 

WASHINGTON — Like every presidential conversation with a foreign leader, this one had scripted talking points and a predigested news release recounting an exchange yet to take place. Aides in the White House Situation Room clustered around a speaker phone, pens and pads in hand to document what they heard.

At 9:03 a.m. on Thursday, July 25, they listened as President Trump picked up the phone in the White House residence and was connected to Volodymyr Zelensky, the newly elected president of Ukraine. Within minutes, two note-takers exchanged troubled looks.

Mr. Trump had not merely veered off his talking points. By the conversation’s end, he had asked Mr. Zelensky — a leader in dire need of American military aid to fight the Russian-led invasion on his eastern border — to “do us a favor” by investigating one of his political rivals and an unfounded conspiracy theory about the 2016 election. 

That 30-minute conversation has now emerged as a mortal threat to Mr. Trump’s presidency. This week, the House of Representatives begins public hearings that could lead to the impeachment of a president for only for the third time in American history. More than a half dozen Trump administration officials have called the phone conversation and the events surrounding it insidious and shocking. Five officials who dealt with Ukraine have resigned since September.

The unfolding story is in many ways a sequel to the events that led to Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. Once again, the plot involves foreign influence in an election and is centered in the post-Soviet sphere. 

Only one day before Mr. Trump spoke to Mr. Zelensky, Mr. Mueller had testified to Congress about how the Russians had tried to help elect Mr. Trump by organizing the theft and release of emails damaging to his opponent. In that case, the Russians were the pursuers who sought contacts with Mr. Trump’s campaign. 

Now the president and his minions were the aggressors, seeking help with the 2020 re-election effort. They asked the Ukrainians to investigate unfounded allegations about former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., one of Mr. Trump’s leading Democratic rivals, as well as to chase a conspiracy theory that Ukraine, not Russia, had intervened in 2016.

The story is also another chapter in Mr. Trump’s war on the wheels of American governance, from the intelligence community to the diplomatic corps to Congress itself. In his zeal to win Mr. Zelensky’s compliance, the president ousted the American ambassador to Ukraine, froze congressionally approved military aid, shut out foreign-policy experts in the National Security Council and sidestepped the State Department to set up a back-channel to Kiev with his personal lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani.

The Ukraine saga is yet another episode in which Russia is the potential beneficiary of White House decisions. Mr. Trump not only sought to muddy the picture of Russia’s role in the 2016 election, but also withheld nearly $400 million in military aid, a tenth of Ukraine’s defense budget, for its war with Russian-backed forces.

The Russians “would love the humiliation of Zelensky at the hands of the Americans,” William B. Taylor Jr., the top diplomat in Kiev who nearly quit in protest, testified to Congress.

 

 

lots more at the link...

Can someone enlighten me on the hostility with the Russians?  Was it their effective fight against ISIS in Syria, or am I missing something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, IGotWorms said:

Says a lawyer who doesn't know anything about subpoenas for depositions.  Fireballer, please brief this guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Casual Observer said:

Says a lawyer who doesn't know anything about subpoenas for depositions.  Fireballer, please brief this guy.

I don’t huh? Weird since I seem to be fighting one right now, but it’s probably fake just like my job :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Casual Observer said:

Can someone enlighten me on the hostility with the Russians?  Was it their effective fight against ISIS in Syria, or am I missing something?

She lost and now not only does their pillaging of the treasury get ruined, they also become vulnerable to exposure of their crimes. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

I don’t huh? Weird since I seem to be fighting one right now, but it’s probably fake just like my job :(

Earlier in this thread you exposed you lack of knowledge, Donk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Casual Observer said:

Earlier in this thread you exposed you lack of knowledge, Donk.

I seem to recall your assh0le got sore because I suggested people will sometimes see if a person will voluntarily sit for a deposition before subpoenaing them. You know, because sometimes the recipient interprets being served with a subpoena as an act of hostility (rightly or not), and if you want to be friendly toward a witness hoping they’ll help your case then maybe you don’t antagonize them right off the bat. However, you seem like a tremendous assh0le who has probably never even thought of NOT antagonizing someone, so it was difficult for you to comprehend that logic.

Do I have it right? I don’t memorize every little slap fight here, apparently unlike you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×