Official President Trump Impeachment Inquiry Thread

[IGotWorms 3,300]

Just now, Filthy Fernadez said:

Refresh our memories. Exact quote please.

I’m not playing fetch for you. You know what I’m talking about

[IGotWorms 3,300]

1 minute ago, drobeski said:

Obama did it, you accepted it. What's the law ? Link it.

Hawkeye already did. Probably a fock ton of other laws involved as well.

[drobeski 3,061]

5 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Of course it’s illegal and it’s definitely not the kind of behavior that ANYONE should accept from ANY president, regardless if political affiliation.

To put it in perspective, this is almost exactly what Nixon did except even worse because at least Nixon didn’t try to go through a g0ddamn foreign government — and hold up military aid vital to US national security interests in the process!!

Vital ? Which national security interests are those ? Didnt Obama refuse to provide vital arms to this vital foreign government?

[drobeski 3,061]

Just now, IGotWorms said:

Hawkeye already did. Probably a fock ton of other laws involved as well.

No he didn't 

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

1 minute ago, IGotWorms said:

I’m not playing fetch for you. You know what I’m talking about

I've already debunked most if not all of your claims. You'll have to post the evidence kiddo. 

[IGotWorms 3,300]

Just now, drobeski said:

Vital ? Which national security interests are those ? Didnt Obama refuse to provide vital arms go this vital foreign government?

It would be the one where RUSSIA is attempting a hostile armed takeover of Eastern Europe and the Ukraine is the only thing standing in his way. Keeping in mind Putin has ALREADY taken part of the Ukraine

[IGotWorms 3,300]

Just now, Filthy Fernadez said:

I've already debunked most if not all of your claims. You'll have to post the evidence kiddo. 

With what? Tweets from FatSoccerMomWhoWantsToSuckTrump? 

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

Just now, IGotWorms said:

FatSoccerMomWhoWantsToSuckTrump? 

Your mom dating again?

[Gladiators 1,903]

So Worms and Hawkeye got him? They’re going to be GC legends!!!

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

 

[Strike 3,947]

13 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

I’m not playing fetch for you. You know what I’m talking about

I actually looked up the quotes from Mulvaney.  Here is what he said:
 

Quote

 

Q: "Did you do anything to pressure Ukraine to investigate the Bidens?

Mulvaney: "No." 

 

Yeah, that's a full on admission of guilt!!!!  You got him now!!!

Idiot.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,588]

14 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

It would be the one where RUSSIA is attempting a hostile armed takeover of Eastern Europe and the Ukraine is the only thing standing in his way. Keeping in mind Putin has ALREADY taken part of the Ukraine

The 1980's called.  They want their foreign policy back. 

[drobeski 3,061]

16 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

It would be the one where RUSSIA is attempting a hostile armed takeover of Eastern Europe and the Ukraine is the only thing standing in his way. Keeping in mind Putin has ALREADY taken part of the Ukraine

So that's the vital country Obama withheld vital stinger missiles from and his v.p. refused aid unless they stopped investigating his kid ? That country who's now vital ?

[Hawkeye21 1,848]

6 minutes ago, Gladiators said:

So Worms and Hawkeye got him? They’re going to be GC legends!!!

You guys really go out of your way to be asses, don’t you?

[Mike Honcho 4,009]

2 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

You guys really go out of your way to be asses, don’t you?

I'm pretty sure it just comes naturally to most of them.  

[Gladiators 1,903]

4 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

You guys really go out of your way to be asses, don’t you?

I don’t take the political threads too seriously. I do read them for some comic relief. When I see you posting what I believe to be a statute and Worms stating what Trump did was clearly illegal, I can’t help myself.

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

15 minutes ago, Mike Honcho said:

I'm pretty sure it just comes naturally to most of them.  

Don't come off as high and mighty. I saw that spread of yours in Playgirl Mr. Honcho. 

[Hawkeye21 1,848]

14 minutes ago, Gladiators said:

I don’t take the political threads too seriously. I do read them for some comic relief. When I see you posting what I believe to be a statute and Worms stating what Trump did was clearly illegal, I can’t help myself.

This is the problem though, I never said what he did was clearly illegal. I was only discussing how I thought it could be illegal based on how I interpreted the law. It’s the others who put words in my mouth. 

[Mike Honcho 4,009]

1 minute ago, Filthy Fernadez said:

Don't come off as high and mighty. I saw that spread of yours in Playgirl Mr. Honcho. 

Raises more questions about you than me.   

[TimmySmith 2,782]

3 hours ago, IGotWorms said:

I guess you missed where the one guy said he was really uncomfortable with the quid pro quo. 

Then Sondland said “Whaaaaat?? There’s no quid pro quo, I totally swear.”

And then today Sondland said well actually I was lying and there was definitely quid pro quo 

Must have missed it. Can you point it out. And also where he said definitely quid pro quo. In the name of facts.

[IGotWorms 3,300]

30 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

You guys really go out of your way to be asses, don’t you?

They’ve got nothing else since “no quid pro quo” went t1ts up

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

John Solomon breaks another doosey. Obama admin knew there was clearly a conflict with Joe Biden but did nothing about it other than to prep the State Dept (yes, that b!tch Yovanovitch big surprise) on how to answer questions regarding that conflict. 

"There also was a December 2015 New York Times story that raised the question of whether Hunter Biden’s role at Burisma posed a conflict of interest for the vice president, especially when Joe Biden was leading the fight against Ukrainian corruption while Hunter Biden’s firm was under investigation by Ukrainian prosecutors.

But whatever the Biden family recollections, the Obama State Department clearly saw the Burisma Holdings investigation in the midst of the 2016 presidential election as a Joe Biden issue.

Memos newly released through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by the Southeastern Legal Foundation on my behalf detail how State officials in June 2016 worked to prepare the new U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, to handle a question about “Burisma and Hunter Biden.”

In multiple drafts of a question-and-answer memo prepared for Yovanovitch’s Senate confirmation hearing, the department’s Ukraine experts urged the incoming ambassador to stick to a simple answer.

“Do you have any comment on Hunter Biden, the Vice President’s son, serving on the board of Burisma, a major Ukrainian Gas Company?,” the draft Q&A asked.

The recommended answer for Yovanovitch: “For questions on Hunter Biden’s role in Burisma, I would refer you to Vice President Biden’s office.”

The Q&A is consistent with other information flowing out of State. As I reported yesterday, when a Burisma representative contacted State in February 2016 to ask for the department’s help in quashing the corruption allegations, Hunter Biden’s role on the company’s board was prominently cited. (i.e. QUID PRO QUO)

And a senior State Department official who testified recently in the impeachment proceedings reportedly told lawmakers he tried to warn the vice president’s office that Burisma posed a conflict for Joe Biden but was turned aside."

https://johnsolomonreports.com/in-midst-of-2016-election-state-department-saw-burisma-as-joe-bidens-issue-memos-show/

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

6 minutes ago, Mike Honcho said:

Raises more questions about you than me.   

Speaking of questions, I wanted to know if the room where it was shot was really cold? 

[vuduchile 1,940]

11 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

This is the problem though, I never said what he did was clearly illegal. I was only discussing how I thought it could be illegal based on how I interpreted the law. It’s the others who put words in my mouth. 

Which line are you interpreting here?   There’s no language in here about investigating political rivals, quid pro quo, withholding aid or anything else the House is investigating.  This is all about contributions and donations 

It shall be unlawful for-

(1) a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make-

(A) a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election;

(B) a contribution or donation to a committee of a political party; or

 (C) an expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication (within the meaning of section 30104(f)(3) of this title); or

 

(2) a person to solicit, accept, or receive a contribution or donation described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) from a foreign national.

[IGotWorms 3,300]

Okay, okay, so there was quid pro quo.

Forget where we staked everything on there being no quid pro quo. We were kidding.

BUT, it doesn’t matter if there was quid pro quo anyway! Right? I mean... right?!

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,493]

4 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Okay, okay, so there was quid pro quo.

Forget where we staked everything on there being no quid pro quo. We were kidding.

BUT, it doesn’t matter if there was quid pro quo anyway! Right? I mean... right?!

Nope.   No quid pro quo at all.

Oh...unless you're talking about Biden?  Then absolutely there was.  In fact, it's right on video with Joe braggin' about it.

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

7 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Okay, okay, so there was quid pro quo.

Forget where we staked everything on there being no quid pro quo. We were kidding.

BUT, it doesn’t matter if there was quid pro quo anyway! Right? I mean... right?!

You mean the 'presumed' quid pro quo? 

I 'presume' you'll take the bait for the next bombshell dud the Dems/MSM has.  

[Hawkeye21 1,848]

48 minutes ago, vuduchile said:

Which line are you interpreting here?   There’s no language in here about investigating political rivals, quid pro quo, withholding aid or anything else the House is investigating.  This is all about contributions and donations 

It shall be unlawful for-

(1) a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make-

(A) a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election;

(B) a contribution or donation to a committee of a political party; or

 (C) an expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication (within the meaning of section 30104(f)(3) of this title); or

 

(2) a person to solicit, accept, or receive a contribution or donation described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) from a foreign national.

I already posted this exact info. 

[drobeski 3,061]

34 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

I already posted this exact info. 

Yes and he's pointing out that nothing trump is accused of doing falls under any of it.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,493]

1 hour ago, Filthy Fernadez said:

You mean the 'presumed' quid pro quo? 

I 'presume' you'll take the bait for the next bombshell dud the Dems/MSM has.  

Breaking news coming out that DJT returned a VHS cassette tape 30 days late to BlockBuster back in the 90s.  The person who reported this is asking for anonymous Whistleblower status.

This is BIG!  They got him now!

[vuduchile 1,940]

41 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

I already posted this exact info. 

Yes.  I copied it from your post. Which line refers to anything that Trump is being accused of?

[IGotWorms 3,300]

3 hours ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

Nope.   No quid pro quo at all.

Oh...unless you're talking about Biden?  Then absolutely there was.  In fact, it's right on video with Joe braggin' about it.

You need to get up to date on your talking points. There definitely was quid pro quo, but somehow that’s okay. Even though it totally isn’t in any way shape or form. HTH

[IGotWorms 3,300]

3 hours ago, Filthy Fernadez said:

You mean the 'presumed' quid pro quo? 

I 'presume' you'll take the bait for the next bombshell dud the Dems/MSM has.  

It’s their own admissions you dumbass. You can try to deny a lot of things, but not that.

[IGotWorms 3,300]

2 hours ago, drobeski said:

Yes and he's pointing out that nothing trump is accused of doing falls under any of it.

He’s flat wrong, though

[Hardcore troubadour 12,588]

10 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

You need to get up to date on your talking points. There definitely was quid pro quo, but somehow that’s okay. Even though it totally isn’t in any way shape or form. HTH

Definetly? When did that come out? I must have missed it. Can you let me in on it? All I've heard is speculation. The speculation could be right, but that's all it is right now. 

[IGotWorms 3,300]

DECLARATION OF AMBASSADOR GORDON D. SONDLAND

I, Gordon Sondland, do hereby swear and affirm as follows:

1. I have reviewed the October 22, 2019, opening statement of Ambassador William Taylor. I have also reviewed the October 31, 2019, opening statement of Tim Morrison. These two opening statements have refreshed my recollection about certain conversations in early September 2019.

2. Ambassador Taylor recalls that I told Mr. Morrison in early September 2019 that the resumption of U.S. aid to Ukraine had become tied to a public statement to be issued by Ukraine agreeing to investigate Burisma. Ambassador Taylor recalls that Mr. Morrison told Ambassador Taylor that I told Mr. Morrison that I had conveyed this message to Mr. Yermak on September 1, 2019, in connection with Vice President Pence's visit to Warsaw and a meeting with President Zelensky. Mr. Morrison recalls that I said to him in early September that resumption of U.S. aid to Ukraine might be conditioned on a public statement reopening the Burisma investigation.

3. In my October 17, 2019 prepared testimony and in my deposition, I made clear that I had understood sometime after our May 23, 2019, White House debriefing that scheduling a White House visit for President Zelensky was conditioned upon President Zelensky's agreement to make a public anti-corruption statement. This condition had been communicated by Rudy Giuliani, with whom President Trump directed Ambassador Volker, Secretary Perry, and me, on May 23, 2019, to discuss issues related to the President's concerns about Ukraine. Ambassador Volker, Secretary Perry, and I understood that satisfying Mr. Giuliani was a condition for scheduling the White House visit, which we all strongly believed to be in the mutual interest of the United States and Ukraine.

4. With respect to the September 1, 2019, Warsaw meeting, the conversations described in Ambassador Taylor's and Mr. Morrison's opening statements have refreshed my recollection about conversations involving the suspension of U.S. aid, which had become public only days earlier. I always believed that suspending aid to Ukraine was ill-advised, although I did not know (and still do not know) when, why, or by whom the aid was suspended. However; by the beginning of September 2019, and in the absence of any credible explanation for the suspension of aid, I presumed that the aid suspension had become linked to the proposed anti-corruption statement. As I said in my prepared testimony, security aid to Ukraine was in our vital national interest and should not have been delayed for any reason. And it would have been natural for me to have voiced what I had presumed to Ambassador Taylor, Senator Johnson, the Ukrainians, and Mr. Morrison.

5. Also, I now do recall a conversation on September 1, 2019, in Warsaw with Mr. Yermak. This brief pull-aside conversation followed the larger meeting involving Vice President Pence and President Zelensky, in which President Zelensky had raised the issue of the suspension of U.S. aid to Ukraine directly with Vice President Pence. After that 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. I also recall some question as to whether the public statement could come from the newly appointed Ukrainian Prosecutor General, rather than from President Zelensky directly.

6. Soon thereafter, I came to understand that, in fact, the public statement would need to come directly from President Zelensky himself. I do not specifically recall how I learned this, but I believe that the information may have come either from Mr. Giuliani or from Ambassador Volker, who may have discussed this with Mr. Giuliani. In a later conversation with Ambassador Taylor, I told him that I had been mistaken about whether a public statement could come from the Prosecutor General; I had come to understand that the public statement would have to come from President Zelensky himself.

7. Finally, as of this writing, I cannot specifically recall if I had one or two phone calls with President Trump in the September 6-9 time frame. Despite repeated requests to the White House and the State Department, I have not been granted access to all of the phone records, and I would like to review those phone records, along with any notes and other documents that may exist, to determine if I can provide more complete testimony to assist Congress. However, although I have no specific recollection of phone calls during this period with Ambassador Taylor or Mr. Morrison, I have no reason to question the substance of their recollection about my September 1 conversation with Mr. Yermak.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the aforementioned is true.

Executed on November 4, 2019.

[IGotWorms 3,300]

I mean, if I had a case against somebody, and I got that declaration... game over. The fat lady has sung. Your own witness admitting he lied and in VERY materiel fashion.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,588]

8 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

I mean, if I had a case against somebody, and I got that declaration... game over. The fat lady has sung. Your own witness admitting he lied and in VERY materiel fashion.

"It might" " I presumed" "I don't know why". Sounds like speculation to me. I could be wrong. But until someone says Trump ordered the code red, I see no smoking gun. 

[IGotWorms 3,300]

15 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

"It might" " I presumed" "I don't know why". Sounds like speculation to me. I could be wrong. But until someone says Trump ordered the code red, I see no smoking gun. 

Let me help you:

“I told Mr. Morrison in early September 2019 that the resumption of U.S. aid to Ukraine had become tied to a public statement to be issued by Ukraine agreeing to investigate Burisma.”

 

“I had conveyed this message to Mr. Yermak on September 1, 2019, in connection with Vice President Pence's visit to Warsaw and a meeting with President Zelensky.”

 

“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. Ialso recall some question as to whether the public statement could come from the newly appointed Ukrainian Prosecutor General, rather than from President Zelensky directly.”

 

“I came to understand that, in fact, the public statement would need to come directly from President Zelensky himself. I do not specifically recall how I learned this, but I believe that the information may have come either from Mr. Giuliani or from Ambassador Volker, who may have discussed this with Mr. Giuliani. In a laterconversation with Ambassador Taylor, I told him that I had been mistaken about whether a public statement could come from the Prosecutor General; I had come to understand that the public statement would have to come from President Zelenskyhimself.“

 

“I cannot specifically recall if I had one or two phone calls with President Trump in the September 6-9 time frame. Despite repeated requests to the White House and the State Department, I have not been grantedaccess to all of the phone records, and I would like to review those phone records, along with any notes and other documents that may exist, to determine if I can provide more complete testimony to assist Congress. However, although I have no specific recollection of phone calls during this period with Ambassador Taylor or Mr. Morrison, I have no reason to question the substance of their recollection about my September 1 conversation with Mr. Yermak.”

 

 Straight up threw em under the bus too. Goodbye Pence. “Can’t remember” if I heard it from the president but yes I talked to him perhaps multiple times around the same period when I “became aware” that aid was tied to announcing an investigation on Biden and there are notes and other materials but White House is hiding them.

 

Good job, good effort.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,493]

2 hours ago, IGotWorms said:

Let me help you:

“I told Mr. Morrison in early September 2019 that the resumption of U.S. aid to Ukraine had become tied to a public statement to be issued by Ukraine agreeing to investigate Burisma.”

 

“I had conveyed this message to Mr. Yermak on September 1, 2019, in connection with Vice President Pence's visit to Warsaw and a meeting with President Zelensky.”

 

“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. Ialso recall some question as to whether the public statement could come from the newly appointed Ukrainian Prosecutor General, rather than from President Zelensky directly.”

 

“I came to understand that, in fact, the public statement would need to come directly from President Zelensky himself. I do not specifically recall how I learned this, but I believe that the information may have come either from Mr. Giuliani or from Ambassador Volker, who may have discussed this with Mr. Giuliani. In a laterconversation with Ambassador Taylor, I told him that I had been mistaken about whether a public statement could come from the Prosecutor General; I had come to understand that the public statement would have to come from President Zelenskyhimself.“

 

“I cannot specifically recall if I had one or two phone calls with President Trump in the September 6-9 time frame. Despite repeated requests to the White House and the State Department, I have not been grantedaccess to all of the phone records, and I would like to review those phone records, along with any notes and other documents that may exist, to determine if I can provide more complete testimony to assist Congress. However, although I have no specific recollection of phone calls during this period with Ambassador Taylor or Mr. Morrison, I have no reason to question the substance of their recollection about my September 1 conversation with Mr. Yermak.”

 

 Straight up threw em under the bus too. Goodbye Pence. “Can’t remember” if I heard it from the president but yes I talked to him perhaps multiple times around the same period when I “became aware” that aid was tied to announcing an investigation on Biden and there are notes and other materials but White House is hiding them.

 

Good job, good effort.

So this is one mans interpretation we're taking as fact now?  Wut?  

Trump has several that say the exact opposite.

You're the same guys who believed in pee tapes and 40 year old uncorraberated allegations as "fact"!  GTFO with that sh*t.