Amb William Taylor, is Tramp embezzeling, its like he thinks the money

[Crepitus]

Oh and your claim that "Abusing the office for personal gain is illegal" must also be provable in a court of law, not the court of public opinion for it to be illegal, so far from what I've seen it's currently only a court of public opinion ruling.
Sworn evidence, if it's second hand or lacks any concrete, substantial, corroborative evidence is considered in a court of law to be flimsy.
I'm addressing how courts and law work, not whether Trump is guilty or not.

The trial hasn't happened yet, and sworn testimony from credible witnesses is grade A evidence. Not flimsy at all.

You keep telling yourself that. Me? Unlike you partisan hacks I won't convict until the evidence is irrefutable and not in a partisan "I say it is" way........

So, you understand there is a trial phase coming, right?

We are in the Indictment phase....the Dems are performing the task of a Grand Jury. The Senate will hold the trial.

Voters will see what Repubs publicly defend a proven extortion ....

Your mind is a dangerous place. It finds extortion only in the windmills of its own sick little mind.

Withholding needed aid for personal.profit could indeed be viewed as extortion.

 

[JimH52]

Oh and your claim that "Abusing the office for personal gain is illegal" must also be provable in a court of law, not the court of public opinion for it to be illegal, so far from what I've seen it's currently only a court of public opinion ruling.
Sworn evidence, if it's second hand or lacks any concrete, substantial, corroborative evidence is considered in a court of law to be flimsy.
I'm addressing how courts and law work, not whether Trump is guilty or not.

The trial hasn't happened yet, and sworn testimony from credible witnesses is grade A evidence. Not flimsy at all.

You keep telling yourself that. Me? Unlike you partisan hacks I won't convict until the evidence is irrefutable and not in a partisan "I say it is" way........

So, you understand there is a trial phase coming, right?

We are in the Indictment phase....the Dems are performing the task of a Grand Jury. The Senate will hold the trial.

Voters will see what Repubs publicly defend a proven extortion ....

Your mind is a dangerous place. It finds extortion only in the windmills of its own sick little mind.

Sure....now the GOP is going to come up with a new word to describe withholding tax payer, appropriated funds for one's personal political gain....

Hey! Lets's call it TREASON!

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Secret hearings?

You and Scalise should read up on how impeachment inquiries are conducted.

There were nearly two years of closed hearings during watergate.

Don't be so easily led by dopey rhetoric.

They voted on it first so each side had equal council.

What does that even mean?

It means no railroading like they are doing.
One sided only ,never goes over well with the people.

It's not one sided, dope. Every investigating committee has equal numbers of Dems and Reps.

Dummies or plain out refusal to see it?

It's one sided when the other side can't call their witness like the members of the DNC contractor Alexandra Chalupa a well known Trump hater.

Under what circumstances does the minority get to call witnesses?

 

[Ringel05]

Obviously you have no clue how a court of law works but that's true of 99.9 percent of the people on this board.
Number one: It has to be illegal. So it has to be determined if the activity breaks any laws. It has to be determined by attorneys and the courts excluding the court of public opinion.

Number two: If the action is declared illegal a real attorney would never attempt to prosecute on such truly flimsy evidence, most of it second hand with a high probability of built in bias.

Abusing the office for personal gain is illegal.

Sworn testimony is not "flimsy evidence", nor is the call summary, nor a tRumps own actions and admissions.

The only thing that's flimsy here is your excuse making.

Oh and your claim that "Abusing the office for personal gain is illegal" must also be provable in a court of law, not the court of public opinion for it to be illegal, so far from what I've seen it's currently only a court of public opinion ruling.
Sworn evidence, if it's second hand or lacks any concrete, substantial, corroborative evidence is considered in a court of law to be flimsy.
I'm addressing how courts and law work, not whether Trump is guilty or not.

The trial hasn't happened yet, and sworn testimony from credible witnesses is grade A evidence. Not flimsy at all.

You keep telling yourself that. Me? Unlike you partisan hacks I won't convict until the evidence is irrefutable and not in a partisan "I say it is" way........

So, you understand there is a trial phase coming, right?

Wow, you figured that out all on your own. I'm impressed. Hell, I bet you even think I'm a Trumpbot because I don't toe the DNC party line don'tcha..........

 

[Ringel05]

Soliciting foreign assistance in elections is a crime.

It is? Show the statute.

[USC02] 52 USC 30121: Contributions and donations by foreign nationals

View attachment 285965

Just because it's there doesn't specifically mean it applies. As legal scholars have already pointed out nothing of value was exchanged.

See, unlike you all I'm not a self appointed judge, jury and executioner.

LMf'nAO!!!!

Dude, give it a rest.

Otherwise you might never get the orange off your lips.

Yup, that's what I thought, friggin hack thinks anyone who doesn't automatically follow you in lockstep is the other side.......

 

[Ringel05]

Abusing the office for personal gain is illegal.

Sworn testimony is not "flimsy evidence", nor is the call summary, nor a tRumps own actions and admissions.

The only thing that's flimsy here is your excuse making.

Oh and your claim that "Abusing the office for personal gain is illegal" must also be provable in a court of law, not the court of public opinion for it to be illegal, so far from what I've seen it's currently only a court of public opinion ruling.
Sworn evidence, if it's second hand or lacks any concrete, substantial, corroborative evidence is considered in a court of law to be flimsy.
I'm addressing how courts and law work, not whether Trump is guilty or not.

The trial hasn't happened yet, and sworn testimony from credible witnesses is grade A evidence. Not flimsy at all.

You keep telling yourself that. Me? Unlike you partisan hacks I won't convict until the evidence is irrefutable and not in a partisan "I say it is" way........

So, you understand there is a trial phase coming, right?

We are in the Indictment phase....the Dems are performing the task of a Grand Jury. The Senate will hold the trial.

Voters will see what Repubs publicly defend a proven extortion ....

Self appointed judge, jury and executioner..... Why am I not surprised...... Pathetic.

 

[Ringel05]

Oh and your claim that "Abusing the office for personal gain is illegal" must also be provable in a court of law, not the court of public opinion for it to be illegal, so far from what I've seen it's currently only a court of public opinion ruling.
Sworn evidence, if it's second hand or lacks any concrete, substantial, corroborative evidence is considered in a court of law to be flimsy.
I'm addressing how courts and law work, not whether Trump is guilty or not.

The trial hasn't happened yet, and sworn testimony from credible witnesses is grade A evidence. Not flimsy at all.

You keep telling yourself that. Me? Unlike you partisan hacks I won't convict until the evidence is irrefutable and not in a partisan "I say it is" way........

So, you understand there is a trial phase coming, right?

We are in the Indictment phase....the Dems are performing the task of a Grand Jury. The Senate will hold the trial.

Voters will see what Repubs publicly defend a proven extortion ....

They act like they don't understand the process. Investigation first. Then indictment, then trial. The trial is when the defense gets to call it's it' witnesses, cross examine prosecution witnesses, and all the other stuff they are bitching about. They wanna put the cart before the horse.

They do understand that though. They have finally come up against something they can't defend, so they are attacking the process.

What do you think I've been talking about all this time knumb knut? And who the fuck are "they"?

Deal with one who misreads what I'm saying and now I have another who does the same thing only worse, you in essence accuse me of being a Trumptard. At least he was smart enough not to do that because he knows I'm not. And I gave you credit for being smarter than that, guess I was wrong.

 

[depotoo]

Oh and your claim that "Abusing the office for personal gain is illegal" must also be provable in a court of law, not the court of public opinion for it to be illegal, so far from what I've seen it's currently only a court of public opinion ruling.
Sworn evidence, if it's second hand or lacks any concrete, substantial, corroborative evidence is considered in a court of law to be flimsy.
I'm addressing how courts and law work, not whether Trump is guilty or not.

The trial hasn't happened yet, and sworn testimony from credible witnesses is grade A evidence. Not flimsy at all.

You keep telling yourself that. Me? Unlike you partisan hacks I won't convict until the evidence is irrefutable and not in a partisan "I say it is" way........

So, you understand there is a trial phase coming, right?

We are in the Indictment phase....the Dems are performing the task of a Grand Jury. The Senate will hold the trial.

Voters will see what Repubs publicly defend a proven extortion ....

They act like they don't understand the process. Investigation first. Then indictment, then trial. The trial is when the defense gets to call it's it' witnesses, cross examine prosecution witnesses, and all the other stuff they are bitching about. They wanna put the cart before the horse.

They do understand that though. They have finally come up against something they can't defend, so they are attacking the process.

Congressman Zeldin said Wednesday that Bill Taylor was using FOURTH HAND INFO during his deposition.

“One fun fact from yesterday — I saw the opening statement leaked — this is what happens. This is the Democrats’ strategy. They like to cherry-pick leaks,” Zeldin said before he stormed the SCIF with his fellow Republican lawmakers. “Turn to page 12…In that one reference to Joe Biden, it’s not first-hand from Ambassador Taylor, it’s not second-hand from Ambassador Taylor, it’s not third-hand from Ambassador Taylor!”

Zeldin continued, “Ya’ll making a big deal of Ambassador Taylor telling him that Tim Morrison told him that Sondland told Morrison that the President told Sondland that the President told Zelensky — give me a break! This whole thing has been a joke!”

 

[Crepitus]

Abusing the office for personal gain is illegal.

Sworn testimony is not "flimsy evidence", nor is the call summary, nor a tRumps own actions and admissions.

The only thing that's flimsy here is your excuse making.

Oh and your claim that "Abusing the office for personal gain is illegal" must also be provable in a court of law, not the court of public opinion for it to be illegal, so far from what I've seen it's currently only a court of public opinion ruling.
Sworn evidence, if it's second hand or lacks any concrete, substantial, corroborative evidence is considered in a court of law to be flimsy.
I'm addressing how courts and law work, not whether Trump is guilty or not.

The trial hasn't happened yet, and sworn testimony from credible witnesses is grade A evidence. Not flimsy at all.

You keep telling yourself that. Me? Unlike you partisan hacks I won't convict until the evidence is irrefutable and not in a partisan "I say it is" way........

So, you understand there is a trial phase coming, right?

Wow, you figured that out all on your own. I'm impressed. Hell, I bet you even think I'm a Trumpbot because I don't toe the DNC party line don'tcha..........

It's common knowledge among anyone not lost in the GOO echo chamber.

And you're a tRumpling because you are.

 

[Crepitus]

The trial hasn't happened yet, and sworn testimony from credible witnesses is grade A evidence. Not flimsy at all.

You keep telling yourself that. Me? Unlike you partisan hacks I won't convict until the evidence is irrefutable and not in a partisan "I say it is" way........

So, you understand there is a trial phase coming, right?

We are in the Indictment phase....the Dems are performing the task of a Grand Jury. The Senate will hold the trial.

Voters will see what Repubs publicly defend a proven extortion ....

They act like they don't understand the process. Investigation first. Then indictment, then trial. The trial is when the defense gets to call it's it' witnesses, cross examine prosecution witnesses, and all the other stuff they are bitching about. They wanna put the cart before the horse.

They do understand that though. They have finally come up against something they can't defend, so they are attacking the process.

What do you think I've been talking about all this time knumb knut? And who the fuck are "they"?

Deal with one who misreads what I'm saying and now I have another who does the same thing only worse, you in essence accuse me of being a Trumptard. At least he was smart enough not to do that because he knows I'm not. And I gave you credit for being smarter than that, guess I was wrong.

"They" is you.

 

[Dana7360]

is his.
------------------------------------------

A few days later, on Sept. 7, Taylor testified that Morrison related to him another conversation that Trump had with Sondland that gave him a “sinking feeling.” He told Taylor that Trump “did insist that President Zelensky go to a microphone and say he is opening investigations of Biden and 2016 election interference, and that President Zelensky should want to do this himself,” Taylor said, summarizing what he heard for lawmakers.

Taylor also told lawmakers that Sondland had explained that Trump is a “businessman” and that when a businessman is about to sign a check to someone he asks for what he is owed. Taylor scoffed at the notion that Ukraine “owed” anything to Trump.

U.S. envoy says he was told release of Ukraine aid was contingent on public declaration to investigate Bidens, 2016 election
-----------------------------------------------

He is using our tax payers money like its his!! Its just unbelievable.

It's not his money and Ukraine doesn't owe him anything.

The man sure is arrogant.

 

[Ringel05]

Oh and your claim that "Abusing the office for personal gain is illegal" must also be provable in a court of law, not the court of public opinion for it to be illegal, so far from what I've seen it's currently only a court of public opinion ruling.
Sworn evidence, if it's second hand or lacks any concrete, substantial, corroborative evidence is considered in a court of law to be flimsy.
I'm addressing how courts and law work, not whether Trump is guilty or not.

The trial hasn't happened yet, and sworn testimony from credible witnesses is grade A evidence. Not flimsy at all.

You keep telling yourself that. Me? Unlike you partisan hacks I won't convict until the evidence is irrefutable and not in a partisan "I say it is" way........

So, you understand there is a trial phase coming, right?

Wow, you figured that out all on your own. I'm impressed. Hell, I bet you even think I'm a Trumpbot because I don't toe the DNC party line don'tcha..........

It's common knowledge among anyone not lost in the GOO echo chamber.

And you're a tRumpling because you are.

Yeah and that's why the Trumptards call me a liberoid....... You're just as pathetic as your right wing counterparts.

 

[Ringel05]

You keep telling yourself that. Me? Unlike you partisan hacks I won't convict until the evidence is irrefutable and not in a partisan "I say it is" way........

So, you understand there is a trial phase coming, right?

We are in the Indictment phase....the Dems are performing the task of a Grand Jury. The Senate will hold the trial.

Voters will see what Repubs publicly defend a proven extortion ....

They act like they don't understand the process. Investigation first. Then indictment, then trial. The trial is when the defense gets to call it's it' witnesses, cross examine prosecution witnesses, and all the other stuff they are bitching about. They wanna put the cart before the horse.

They do understand that though. They have finally come up against something they can't defend, so they are attacking the process.

What do you think I've been talking about all this time knumb knut? And who the fuck are "they"?

Deal with one who misreads what I'm saying and now I have another who does the same thing only worse, you in essence accuse me of being a Trumptard. At least he was smart enough not to do that because he knows I'm not. And I gave you credit for being smarter than that, guess I was wrong.

"They" is you.

That's kinda what I figured. You been smokin' too much ganja. Probably laced with PCP...... Stop listening to the ultra left nutjobs on the board, like the right wing nutjobs they don't know what they're talking about.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Amb William Taylor went to Harvard, and also knew the aid was held up, I'm sure Pres. Z was aware as well.

You are sure? That's why he stated in the phone call that there was no pressure. It seems you are at odds with yourself, dumbass!

BTW, Taylor graduated from West Point. He went to graduate school at Harvard AFTER his Army career was over.

 

[Dana7360]

No shit Sherlock, I'm not addressing that. I'm addressing the claim by some that Trump is guilty of any crime, a claim that so far can only stand up in the court of public opinion. But more so I'm addressing HOW evidence is viewed by the courts, nothing more, nothing less. Hell, my point should have been obvious with "you have no clue how a court of law works".........

Soliciting foreign assistance in elections is a crime.

It is? Show the statute.

[USC02] 52 USC 30121: Contributions and donations by foreign nationals

View attachment 285965

Just because it's there doesn't specifically mean it applies. As legal scholars have already pointed out nothing of value was exchanged.

See, unlike you all I'm not a self appointed judge, jury and executioner.

The law says it's illegal to solicit anything of value from a foreign nation for an election.

The operative word in that sentence is SOLICIT.

Obviously you don't know what it means.

Something of value doesn't have to exchange. Just asking is illegal.

Words do have real meaning. Here's there real meaning of the word solicit:

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Soliciting foreign assistance in elections is a crime.

It is? Show the statute.

[USC02] 52 USC 30121: Contributions and donations by foreign nationals

View attachment 285965

Just because it's there doesn't specifically mean it applies. As legal scholars have already pointed out nothing of value was exchanged.

See, unlike you all I'm not a self appointed judge, jury and executioner.

The law says it's illegal to solicit anything of value from a foreign nation for an election.

The operative word in that sentence is SOLICIT.

Obviously you don't know what it means.

Something of value doesn't have to exchange. Just asking is illegal.

Words do have real meaning. Here's there real meaning of the word solicit:

View attachment 286012

Information is not of a value, or a price could be placed upon it. You are wrong, yet again dumbass!

 

[Ringel05]

Soliciting foreign assistance in elections is a crime.

It is? Show the statute.

[USC02] 52 USC 30121: Contributions and donations by foreign nationals

View attachment 285965

Just because it's there doesn't specifically mean it applies. As legal scholars have already pointed out nothing of value was exchanged.

See, unlike you all I'm not a self appointed judge, jury and executioner.

The law says it's illegal to solicit anything of value from a foreign nation for an election.

The operative word in that sentence is SOLICIT.

Obviously you don't know what it means.

Something of value doesn't have to exchange. Just asking is illegal.


Words do have real meaning. Here's there real meaning of the word solicit:

View attachment 286012

Well I'm only relating what legal scholars have said about it, pretty sure you're not a legal scholar..........

Here's where your interpretation, taken somewhat out of context can get very sticky in a court of law; "a person to solicit, accept, or receive a contribution or donation described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) from a foreign national."
If you're even remotely familiar with the law and lawyers then you understand why that may or may not work in your favor.
So like I'm telling everyone else I'll wait and see and not jump to conclusions. I'm not a legal scholar.......... Or a lawyer........ Or even a judge.

 

[Penelope]

The trial hasn't happened yet, and sworn testimony from credible witnesses is grade A evidence. Not flimsy at all.

You keep telling yourself that. Me? Unlike you partisan hacks I won't convict until the evidence is irrefutable and not in a partisan "I say it is" way........

So, you understand there is a trial phase coming, right?

We are in the Indictment phase....the Dems are performing the task of a Grand Jury. The Senate will hold the trial.

Voters will see what Repubs publicly defend a proven extortion ....

They act like they don't understand the process. Investigation first. Then indictment, then trial. The trial is when the defense gets to call it's it' witnesses, cross examine prosecution witnesses, and all the other stuff they are bitching about. They wanna put the cart before the horse.

They do understand that though. They have finally come up against something they can't defend, so they are attacking the process.

Congressman Zeldin said Wednesday that Bill Taylor was using FOURTH HAND INFO during his deposition.

“One fun fact from yesterday — I saw the opening statement leaked — this is what happens. This is the Democrats’ strategy. They like to cherry-pick leaks,” Zeldin said before he stormed the SCIF with his fellow Republican lawmakers. “Turn to page 12…In that one reference to Joe Biden, it’s not first-hand from Ambassador Taylor, it’s not second-hand from Ambassador Taylor, it’s not third-hand from Ambassador Taylor!”

Zeldin continued, “Ya’ll making a big deal of Ambassador Taylor telling him that Tim Morrison told him that Sondland told Morrison that the President told Sondland that the President told Zelensky — give me a break! This whole thing has been a joke!”

That is why Morrison needs to come in to be questioned, but he won't , and Sondland for lying under oath.

What does one do , when the trampers decide not to give documents or agree to testify, give charges of obstructions to tramp who is telling them not to.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

You keep telling yourself that. Me? Unlike you partisan hacks I won't convict until the evidence is irrefutable and not in a partisan "I say it is" way........

So, you understand there is a trial phase coming, right?

We are in the Indictment phase....the Dems are performing the task of a Grand Jury. The Senate will hold the trial.

Voters will see what Repubs publicly defend a proven extortion ....

They act like they don't understand the process. Investigation first. Then indictment, then trial. The trial is when the defense gets to call it's it' witnesses, cross examine prosecution witnesses, and all the other stuff they are bitching about. They wanna put the cart before the horse.

They do understand that though. They have finally come up against something they can't defend, so they are attacking the process.

Congressman Zeldin said Wednesday that Bill Taylor was using FOURTH HAND INFO during his deposition.

“One fun fact from yesterday — I saw the opening statement leaked — this is what happens. This is the Democrats’ strategy. They like to cherry-pick leaks,” Zeldin said before he stormed the SCIF with his fellow Republican lawmakers. “Turn to page 12…In that one reference to Joe Biden, it’s not first-hand from Ambassador Taylor, it’s not second-hand from Ambassador Taylor, it’s not third-hand from Ambassador Taylor!”

Zeldin continued, “Ya’ll making a big deal of Ambassador Taylor telling him that Tim Morrison told him that Sondland told Morrison that the President told Sondland that the President told Zelensky — give me a break! This whole thing has been a joke!”

That is why Morrison needs to come in to be questioned, but he won't , and Sondland for lying under oath.

What does one do , when the trampers decide not to give documents or agree to testify, give charges of obstructions to tramp who is telling them not to.

Sorry! You need to learn what Executive privilege means and why.

 

[Crepitus]

It is? Show the statute.

[USC02] 52 USC 30121: Contributions and donations by foreign nationals

View attachment 285965

Just because it's there doesn't specifically mean it applies. As legal scholars have already pointed out nothing of value was exchanged.

See, unlike you all I'm not a self appointed judge, jury and executioner.

The law says it's illegal to solicit anything of value from a foreign nation for an election.

The operative word in that sentence is SOLICIT.

Obviously you don't know what it means.

Something of value doesn't have to exchange. Just asking is illegal.

Words do have real meaning. Here's there real meaning of the word solicit:

View attachment 286012

Information is not of a value, or a price could be placed upon it. You are wrong, yet again dumbass!

That has got to be the most vacuous, empty-headed, dumbass thing I have ever heard here!

Information has no value?

Were you this stupid before you started sucking tRump's ass?