Official President Trump Impeachment Inquiry Thread

[Hawkeye21 2,405]

6 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

What's the poontang situation in Ukraine? Are they hot? 

They have some quality women.

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/435906-us-embassy-pressed-ukraine-to-drop-probe-of-george-soros-group-during-2016

More of the Obama State Dept stopping Ukraine from prosecuting corruption i.e. protecting Soros. Soros is a huge gravy train for the Dems (as we've seen by the millions he's poured into 2016/2018 elections as well as small local prosecutor elections) and he must be protected at all costs.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,518]

5 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

They have some quality women.

Nice.  Kinda like pollacks 

[KSB2424 3,148]

I don't understand this testimony.   Yovanovitch is simply complaining that she was fired and upset over it. 

Where is any testimony about.....you know some criminal offense....or bribery or anything close to what this whole thing is supposed to be about? 

All this is, is former state department people whining about Trump.

[Alias Detective 1,412]

Witness Intimidation 

 

The new Shifty catch phrase.

[IGotWorms 4,059]

17 minutes ago, KSB2424 said:

I don't understand this testimony.   Yovanovitch is simply complaining that she was fired and upset over it. 

Where is any testimony about.....you know some criminal offense....or bribery or anything close to what this whole thing is supposed to be about? 

All this is, is former state department people whining about Trump.

Willfully dumb.

There was a smear campaign to justify her removal because she was seen as an obstacle to Trump‘s nefarious plans. Known lies were intentionally spread about her and she was threatened BY THE PRESIDENT.

[Alias Detective 1,412]

1 minute ago, IGotWorms said:

Willfully dumb.

There was a smear campaign to justify her removal because she was seen as an obstacle to Trump‘s nefarious plans. Known lies were intentionally spread about her and she was threatened BY THE PRESIDENT.

Get your words correct.  Witness Intimidation 

[IGotWorms 4,059]

Just now, Alias Detective said:

Get your words correct.  Witness Intimidation 

No that’s what he is doing NOW. I was talking about what he did before she was a witness to anything

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

1 minute ago, IGotWorms said:

Willfully dumb.

There was a smear campaign to justify her removal because she was seen as an obstacle to Trump‘s nefarious plans. Known lies were intentionally spread about her and she was threatened BY THE PRESIDENT.

She spied on Journalists.

She told Ukrainians who they couldn't investigate.

She told Ukrainians not to listen to her boss; you know, the President of the United States.

The President of the United States dictates foreign policy; NOT the State Dept. 

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

Just now, IGotWorms said:

No that’s what he is doing NOW. I was talking about what he did before she was a witness to anything

How is Trump intimidating these witnesses? They and only they (they being hand picked by Dems) are allowed to testify.

[Alias Detective 1,412]

Just now, IGotWorms said:

No that’s what he is doing NOW. I was talking about what he did before she was a witness to anything

 Bwahahahahahah. 
 

You soon will be using the words witness intimidation. 
 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,518]

Hey Worms, you do know the President is in charge of our foreign policy, not the diplomats, right?  They do as told or take a hike. It's always been like that. But Orange man bad cans someone and it's a crisis.  

[Alias Detective 1,412]

Witness intimidation 

[IGotWorms 4,059]

3 minutes ago, Filthy Fernadez said:

She spied on Journalists.

She told Ukrainians who they couldn't investigate.

She told Ukrainians not to listen to her boss; you know, the President of the United States.

If you bothered listening to the testimony none of that is true and has been recanted

And now you’re suddenly concerned about journalists

[IGotWorms 4,059]

3 minutes ago, Alias Detective said:

 Bwahahahahahah. 
 

You soon will be using the words witness intimidation. 
 

I’ve used them before dipsh1t, in reference to the mueller inquiry. Because it was true

[IGotWorms 4,059]

3 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Hey Worms, you do know the President is in charge of our foreign policy, not the diplomats, right?  They do as told or take a hike. It's always been like that. But Orange man bad cans someone and it's a crises.  

For official policy, sure.

Because they’re seen as standing in the way of your plan to grossly abuse your power by withholding vital military aid in an effort to extort a foreign government into meddling in a US election on your own personal behalf? Not so much.

[Alias Detective 1,412]

4 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

If you bothered listening to the testimony none of that is true and has been recanted

And now you’re suddenly concerned about journalists

Wait, you mean listen to the testimony of the leading questions from a Dem?

 

bwahahahahahah.  You will soon see why Shiff didn’t allow any points of order.  
 

The Repubs line of questioning may reveal otherwise.

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

4 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

If you bothered listening to the testimony none of that is true and has been recanted

And now you’re suddenly concerned about journalists

Recanted according to whom? I posted links early that detail those points. Just because she says those are false doesn't make it so.

And YES I am concerned about journalists. They're in short supply at this time and certainly extinct in regard to the news sources you follow.

[IGotWorms 4,059]

Just now, Filthy Fernadez said:

Recanted according to whom? I posted links early that detail those points. Just because she says those are false doesn't make it so.

And YES I am concerned about journalists. They're in short supply at this time and certainly extinct in regard to the news sources you follow.

Recanted by the people who made them, dummy.

And just last week journalists were all enemies of the people, but not suddenly you’re so terribly concerned about them!  Well I’m glad you’ve seen the light, but it has nothing to do with the impeachment inquiry

[Baker Boy 1,704]

Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump

FollowFollow @realDonaldTrump

More

Everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad. She started off in Somalia, how did that go? Then fast forward to Ukraine, where the new Ukrainian President spoke unfavorably about her in my second phone call with him. It is a U.S. President’s absolute right to appoint ambassadors.

7:01 AM - 15 Nov 2019

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

8 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Recanted by the people who made them, dummy.

And just last week journalists were all enemies of the people, but not suddenly you’re so terribly concerned about them!  Well I’m glad you’ve seen the light, but it has nothing to do with the impeachment inquiry

You're a focking fool. My retort and your curb stomping.........

15 essential questions for Marie Yovanovitch by John Solomon:

https://johnsolomonreports.com/the-15-essential-questions-for-marie-yovanovitch-americas-former-ambassador-to-ukraine/

5. John Solomon reported at The Hill and your colleagues have since confirmed in testimony that the State Department helped fund a nonprofit called the Anti-Corruption Action Centre of Ukraine that also was funded by George Soros’ main charity. That nonprofit, also known as AnTac, was identified in a 2014 Soros foundation strategy document as critical to reshaping Ukraine to Mr. Soros’ vision. Can you explain what role your embassy played in funding this group and why State funds would flow to it? And did any one consider the perception of mingling tax dollars with those donated by Soros, a liberal ideologue who spent millions in 2016 trying to elect Hillary Clinton and defeat Donald Trump?

6. In March 2019, Ukrainian prosecutor general Yuriy Lutsenko gave an on-the-record, videotaped interview to The Hill alleging that during a 2016 meeting you discussed a list of names of Ukrainian nationals and groups you did not want to see Ukrainian prosecutors target. Your supporters have since suggested he recanted that story. Did you or your staff ever do anything to confirm he had recanted or changed his story, such as talk to him, or did you just rely on press reports?

7. Now that both the New York Times and The Hill have confirmed that Lutsenko stands by his account and has not recanted, how do you respond to his concerns? And setting aide the use of the word “list,” is it possible that during that 2016 meeting with Mr. Lutsenko you discussed the names of certain Ukrainians you did not want to see prosecuted, investigated or harassed?

8. Your colleagues, in particular Mr. George Kent, have confirmed to the House Intelligence Committee that the U.S. embassy in Kiev did, in fact, exert pressure on the Ukrainian prosecutors office not to prosecute certain Ukrainian activists and officials. These efforts included a letter Mr. Kent signed urging Ukrainian prosecutors to back off an investigation of the aforementioned group AnTac as well as engaged in conversations about certain Ukrainians like Parliamentary member Sergey Leschenko, journalist Vitali Shabunin and NABU director Artem Sytnyk. Why was the US. Embassy involved in exerting such pressure and did any of these actions run afoul of the Geneva Convention’s requirement that foreign diplomats avoid becoming involved in the internal affairs of their host country?

[Strike 5,614]

So it turns out the reason Nancy is using the word "bribery" now to describe Trump's transgressions is because the Dems held focus groups:

Quote

The shift came after the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee conducted focus groups in key House battlegrounds in recent weeks, testing messages related to impeachment. Among the questions put to participants was whether “quid pro quo,” “extortion” or “bribery” was a more compelling description of Trump’s conduct. According to two people familiar with the results, which circulated among Democrats this week, the focus groups found “bribery” to be most damning. The people spoke on the condition of anonymity because the results have not been made public.

ROFLMAO.  Isn't this supposed to be about actual, defined, crimes and what's best for the country?  Seriously, you can't make this sh*t up!!

[lickin_starfish 1,942]

Now watch the crooked news start using the word bribery instead of the quid-pro-quo term.

They will beat it into dummies heads for the next year so that the retards will check the D box at the polls.

[Intense Observer 344]

1 hour ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

What's the poontang situation in Ukraine? Are they hot? 

Hottest in the entire world

[Intense Observer 344]

Worms is so fücking dumb he thinks that Trump needs a reason to fire this lying skank.

Breaking news: ambassadors serve at the pleasure of the president, they are part of the executive branch, can be fired anytime for no reason.

How many ambassadors did Obama fire?

[Mr. Hand 482]

Of course at FFGuys they have this all figured out. Here is something I don’t understand...how can they claim Trump tried to do witness intimidation from a tweet while Yovanovitch was testifying? Was she checking Twitter? A total clown show.

[Strike 5,614]

12 minutes ago, Intense Observer said:

Worms is so fücking dumb

FYP.

[Intense Observer 344]

This is yet another example of Democrats using the media to trick casual observers (no offense to the poster) into thinking something that is commonplace is now a crime because Trump did it.

- kids in cages

- official transcripts that are actually notes taken from people listening

- firing ambassadors

- firing a previous administration's cabinet

- funding a physical barrier on the southern border

- kicking a reporter out

- not releasing tax returns

- grabbing women by the püssy (when they want you to)

- asking a foreign nation for help with help investigating criminal matters

- and on and on and on

[Mike Honcho 5,304]

How the majority of the Geek Club watches these hearings:
 

 

[Strike 5,614]

Just now, Mike Honcho said:

How the majority of the Geek Club watches these hearings:
 

 

You WATCH that crap?

[Intense Observer 344]

Reminder:

The bïtch testifying today was not on the phone call between Trump and Ukraine president. She was not even ambassador. She was fired months earlier for misconduct. She is testifying in an impeachment inquiry about something that she had as much involvement in as wiff.

That is who Honcho thinks is a star witness.

[Strike 5,614]

1 minute ago, Intense Observer said:

Reminder:

The bïtch testifying today was not on the phone call between Trump and Ukraine president. She was not even ambassador. She was fired months earlier for misconduct. She is testifying in an impeachment inquiry about something that she had as much involvement in as wiff.

That is who Honcho thinks is a star witness.

Isn't this the same level of knowledge as all the previous witnesses? 

[IGotWorms 4,059]

Wonder who’s banging that super hot blond sitting behind the republican lawyer

[IGotWorms 4,059]

1 hour ago, Filthy Fernadez said:

You're a focking fool. My retort and your curb stomping.........

15 essential questions for Marie Yovanovitch by John Solomon:

https://johnsolomonreports.com/the-15-essential-questions-for-marie-yovanovitch-americas-former-ambassador-to-ukraine/

5. John Solomon reported at The Hill and your colleagues have since confirmed in testimony that the State Department helped fund a nonprofit called the Anti-Corruption Action Centre of Ukraine that also was funded by George Soros’ main charity. That nonprofit, also known as AnTac, was identified in a 2014 Soros foundation strategy document as critical to reshaping Ukraine to Mr. Soros’ vision. Can you explain what role your embassy played in funding this group and why State funds would flow to it? And did any one consider the perception of mingling tax dollars with those donated by Soros, a liberal ideologue who spent millions in 2016 trying to elect Hillary Clinton and defeat Donald Trump?

6. In March 2019, Ukrainian prosecutor general Yuriy Lutsenko gave an on-the-record, videotaped interview to The Hill alleging that during a 2016 meeting you discussed a list of names of Ukrainian nationals and groups you did not want to see Ukrainian prosecutors target. Your supporters have since suggested he recanted that story. Did you or your staff ever do anything to confirm he had recanted or changed his story, such as talk to him, or did you just rely on press reports?

7. Now that both the New York Times and The Hill have confirmed that Lutsenko stands by his account and has not recanted, how do you respond to his concerns? And setting aide the use of the word “list,” is it possible that during that 2016 meeting with Mr. Lutsenko you discussed the names of certain Ukrainians you did not want to see prosecuted, investigated or harassed?

8. Your colleagues, in particular Mr. George Kent, have confirmed to the House Intelligence Committee that the U.S. embassy in Kiev did, in fact, exert pressure on the Ukrainian prosecutors office not to prosecute certain Ukrainian activists and officials. These efforts included a letter Mr. Kent signed urging Ukrainian prosecutors to back off an investigation of the aforementioned group AnTac as well as engaged in conversations about certain Ukrainians like Parliamentary member Sergey Leschenko, journalist Vitali Shabunin and NABU director Artem Sytnyk. Why was the US. Embassy involved in exerting such pressure and did any of these actions run afoul of the Geneva Convention’s requirement that foreign diplomats avoid becoming involved in the internal affairs of their host country?

Oh yes John Solomon. Very credible source there 

[IGotWorms 4,059]

54 minutes ago, Mr. Hand said:

Of course at FFGuys they have this all figured out. Here is something I don’t understand...how can they claim Trump tried to do witness intimidation from a tweet while Yovanovitch was testifying? Was she checking Twitter? A total clown show.

Other witnesses you focking tard. They see how the president of the United States treats this one and don’t want to suffer the same fate. Jesus you’re truly thick

[vuduchile 1,945]

5 minutes ago, Intense Observer said:

Reminder:

The bïtch testifying today was not on the phone call between Trump and Ukraine president. She was not even ambassador. She was fired months earlier for misconduct. She is testifying in an impeachment inquiry about something that she had as much involvement in as wiff.

That is who Honcho thinks is a star witness.

They're just laying the groundwork for the big bombshell.  The really big, gigantic one.  

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

5 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Oh yes John Solomon. Very credible source there 

He is and should win a Pulitzer for his work uncovering what went on in the 2016 election cycle (and events since).

You're a focking cartoon character man. Seriously; you know that The Hill is left leaning and Solomon worked there for years. 

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

Speaking of Schifforbrains.................here's Schiff introducing his friend Dr. Bruce Hensel. Hensel was just arrested for soliciting nude photos from a 9 year old girl. Schiff has a lot of friends that run amok with the law in sexual ways.

 

[IGotWorms 4,059]

8 minutes ago, Filthy Fernadez said:

He is and should win a Pulitzer 

Don’t hold your breath

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

2 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Don’t hold your breath

I'll wager you........................find an article of Solomon's where he's been proven wrong.