Bizarre Hypothetical Outcome of Impeachment

[eagle1462010]

No, Ukraine has a history of promising to do one thing and doing another. Trump believed that by pressuring Zelensky to make a public statement, it would better hold him to his word. Nobody has evidence as to why Trump held up aid. For one, it was only for two weeks, and two, Trump made the statement he wanted to look into some matters of the corrupt country. He's allowed to do that. He never once said he was withholding aid until he got compliance from Ukraine. The Democrats don't even believe that. If they did, they would have remained silent about it and waited until Trump actually did what they are accusing him of.

Some matters of a corrupt country? You know how many times Trump mentioned the word corruption or looking into anyone BUT his political opposition in his 2 calls with Zelensky? ZERO times, which is a few less times than him talking about Ukraine not recieprocating generous Amrican aid and bringing up Biden.

As Soderland testified to saying, Trump didn't give a crap about Ukraine. The matters Trump was after had directly to do with his own little narrow political interests.

Rudy publicly said that he was looking for Biden dirt in Ukraine.
Trump publicly said he wanted Ukraine to investigate Biden.
Mulveney publicly stated that the President ordered hold of the aid to pressure Ukraine for investigations.

To say that there is just no way we could ever figure out what Trump was after in Ukraine is to willingly do this:

Oh the GREAT PRESUME EVIDENCE............LMAO

Mulvaney publicly and explicitly stated that money was held back by Trump for the purpose of pressuring Ukraine for investigations...did I not just say it?

You just praised Sondlands testimony.........and I called your ass on it....

Moron did you read what you quoted?

Mulveney, Trump' chief of Staff and a Director of OMB admited publicly that Trump held up aid to pressure Ukraine.

Sondlands take on what the President was after is not in a vacum, it is a consistent piece of the same story that all the people invoved are testifying to or have publicly admited.

Sondland had ZERO FIRST HAND EVIDENCE OF ANYTHING............PERIOD....his testimony would be laughed out of a courtroom.

You don't have SHIT. And if a real style trial with witnesses your side don't want to testify show up............Your party is going to get it's asses handed to them.,

 

[AntonToo]

Some matters of a corrupt country? You know how many times Trump mentioned the word corruption or looking into anyone BUT his political opposition in his 2 calls with Zelensky? ZERO times, which is a few less times than him talking about Ukraine not recieprocating generous Amrican aid and bringing up Biden.

As Soderland testified to saying, Trump didn't give a crap about Ukraine. The matters Trump was after had directly to do with his own little narrow political interests.

Rudy publicly said that he was looking for Biden dirt in Ukraine.
Trump publicly said he wanted Ukraine to investigate Biden.
Mulveney publicly stated that the President ordered hold of the aid to pressure Ukraine for investigations.

To say that there is just no way we could ever figure out what Trump was after in Ukraine is to willingly do this:

Oh the GREAT PRESUME EVIDENCE............LMAO

Mulvaney publicly and explicitly stated that money was held back by Trump for the purpose of pressuring Ukraine for investigations...did I not just say it?

You just praised Sondlands testimony.........and I called your ass on it....

Moron did you read what you quoted?

Mulveney, Trump' chief of Staff and a Director of OMB admited publicly that Trump held up aid to pressure Ukraine.

Sondlands take on what the President was after is not in a vacum, it is a consistent piece of the same story that all the people invoved are testifying to or have publicly admited.

Sondland had ZERO FIRST HAND EVIDENCE OF ANYTHING............PERIOD....his testimony would be laughed out of a courtroom.

You don't have SHIT. And if a real style trial with witnesses your side don't want to testify show up............Your party is going to get it's asses handed to them.,

...Polly wants a craker?

 

[eagle1462010]

Oh the GREAT PRESUME EVIDENCE............LMAO

Mulvaney publicly and explicitly stated that money was held back by Trump for the purpose of pressuring Ukraine for investigations...did I not just say it?

You just praised Sondlands testimony.........and I called your ass on it....

Moron did you read what you quoted?

Mulveney, Trump' chief of Staff and a Director of OMB admited publicly that Trump held up aid to pressure Ukraine.

Sondlands take on what the President was after is not in a vacum, it is a consistent piece of the same story that all the people invoved are testifying to or have publicly admited.

Sondland had ZERO FIRST HAND EVIDENCE OF ANYTHING............PERIOD....his testimony would be laughed out of a courtroom.

You don't have SHIT. And if a real style trial with witnesses your side don't want to testify show up............Your party is going to get it's asses handed to them.,

...Polly wants a craker?

Sure make it a Saltine................You used Sondland in your quotes.........and he isn't nothing more than this song and you know it.

 

[Faun]

When are you lefties going to realize the difference between evidence and hunches or suspicions? Evidence is based on something that can't be refuted. Hunches and mind reading is what this impeachment is all based on.

Bro, you have to be stright up stupid to still think that Trump and Rudy were fighting corruption in Ukraine.

Who said they were? Trump never asked for any investigation. He never once threatened US aid. He asked Zelensky to simply look into the matter. The commies said "I don't care what the transcript actually said, or why Trump held up the money, but because we can read minds, we know what he really meant when talking to Zelensky, and we know what his intentions were regardless why he stated he held the money up."

Simply look at the matter?

Is that why his administration held up the aid and were directly involved in drafting Zelesnky's public statement announcing investigations...because they wanted him to look into it?

Do you know how ignorant you sound right now?

No, Ukraine has a history of promising to do one thing and doing another. Trump believed that by pressuring Zelensky to make a public statement, it would better hold him to his word. Nobody has evidence as to why Trump held up aid. For one, it was only for two weeks, and two, Trump made the statement he wanted to look into some matters of the corrupt country. He's allowed to do that. He never once said he was withholding aid until he got compliance from Ukraine. The Democrats don't even believe that. If they did, they would have remained silent about it and waited until Trump actually did what they are accusing him of.

Some matters of a corrupt country? You know how many times Trump mentioned the word corruption or looking into anyone BUT his political opposition in his 2 calls with Zelensky? ZERO times, which is less times than him talking about Ukraine not recieprocating generous American aid and bringing up Biden.

As Soderland testified to saying, Trump didn't give a crap about Ukraine. The matters Trump was after had directly to do with his own little narrow political interests.

Rudy publicly said that he was looking for Biden dirt in Ukraine.
Trump publicly said he wanted Ukraine to investigate Biden.
Mulveney publicly stated that the President ordered hold of the aid to pressure Ukraine for investigations.

To say that there is just no way we could ever figure out what Trump was after in Ukraine is to willingly do this:

They are willfully ignorant.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No, Ukraine has a history of promising to do one thing and doing another. Trump believed that by pressuring Zelensky to make a public statement, it would better hold him to his word. Nobody has evidence as to why Trump held up aid. For one, it was only for two weeks, and two, Trump made the statement he wanted to look into some matters of the corrupt country. He's allowed to do that. He never once said he was withholding aid until he got compliance from Ukraine. The Democrats don't even believe that. If they did, they would have remained silent about it and waited until Trump actually did what they are accusing him of.

Some matters of a corrupt country? You know how many times Trump mentioned the word corruption or looking into anyone BUT his political opposition in his 2 calls with Zelensky? ZERO times, which is a few less times than him talking about Ukraine not recieprocating generous Amrican aid and bringing up Biden.

As Soderland testified to saying, Trump didn't give a crap about Ukraine. The matters Trump was after had directly to do with his own little narrow political interests.

Rudy publicly said that he was looking for Biden dirt in Ukraine.
Trump publicly said he wanted Ukraine to investigate Biden.
Mulveney publicly stated that the President ordered hold of the aid to pressure Ukraine for investigations.

To say that there is just no way we could ever figure out what Trump was after in Ukraine is to willingly do this:

Oh the GREAT PRESUME EVIDENCE............LMAO

Mulvaney publicly and explicitly stated that money was held back by Trump for the purpose of pressuring Ukraine for investigations...did I not just say it?

You just praised Sondlands testimony.........and I called your ass on it....

Moron did you read what you quoted?

Mulveney, Trump' chief of Staff and a Director of OMB admited publicly that Trump held up aid to pressure Ukraine.

Sondlands take on what the President was after is not in a vacum, it is a consistent piece of the same story that all the people invoved are testifying to or have publicly admited.


You say Trump didn't hold up aid to force Ukraine into investigating his political opposition?

Well there is a very simple way for Trump to vindicate himself and emberass them impeachin' Democrats - have people directly involved in this matter come testify before Congress, explain what was going on and how Trump was just doing a good job in Ukraine.

Of course Trump is fighting tooth and nail to prevent people from testifying. Why do you think that is?

Please provide a site where Mulveney said that Trump personally told him he was withholding aid from Ukraine for that reason. What Sondland said is he presumed what Trump wanted. But when questioned about what Trump actually told him, it was the exact opposite of what he presumed.

Furthermore, this call took place in July of last year, which is (give or take) a year away from the nomination of Trump's contender. Trump had no idea who he would be facing. He still doesn't today. Nobody does.

In order to support the phony allegation that Trump acted on behalf of discrediting his political opponent, they would have to do one of two things: Show me this crystal ball they used to predict the Biden nomination, or show me how they planned to rig the primary again, so that only Joe could win. Then, show me how Trump knew about either.

Until the Democrats can do that, then this charge that Trump asked Zelensky to "dig up dirt" on Biden because he was a political opponent--and not because of the corruption by the last administration, then the allegation of their claim is completely bogus. Biden is not Trump's rival yet. He is the rival of Sanders, Warren, Buddy-jiz, but not Trump.

 

[buckeye45_73]

I think every president going forward will be impeached because of the bar democrats set.

No shit, just like they have to recount every election they lose....what a bunch of douchebags

 

[bripat9643]

Hunter Biden and Chris Heinz (stepson to John Kerry) formed Rosemont capital which has received millions of dollars from Ukraine and China.

So?

HUNTER BIDEN IS A CRACK HEAD LOL do you want your taxes going to pay for a politicians son?

Whose tax dollars are going to Hunter?? You said his money came from Ukraine and China.

It's coming out of the money we send to Ukraine.

Except, no, it's not.

Of course it is. Joe finalized that transaction.

 

[AntonToo]

Some matters of a corrupt country? You know how many times Trump mentioned the word corruption or looking into anyone BUT his political opposition in his 2 calls with Zelensky? ZERO times, which is a few less times than him talking about Ukraine not recieprocating generous Amrican aid and bringing up Biden.

As Soderland testified to saying, Trump didn't give a crap about Ukraine. The matters Trump was after had directly to do with his own little narrow political interests.

Rudy publicly said that he was looking for Biden dirt in Ukraine.
Trump publicly said he wanted Ukraine to investigate Biden.
Mulveney publicly stated that the President ordered hold of the aid to pressure Ukraine for investigations.

To say that there is just no way we could ever figure out what Trump was after in Ukraine is to willingly do this:

Oh the GREAT PRESUME EVIDENCE............LMAO

Mulvaney publicly and explicitly stated that money was held back by Trump for the purpose of pressuring Ukraine for investigations...did I not just say it?

You just praised Sondlands testimony.........and I called your ass on it....

Moron did you read what you quoted?

Mulveney, Trump' chief of Staff and a Director of OMB admited publicly that Trump held up aid to pressure Ukraine.

Sondlands take on what the President was after is not in a vacum, it is a consistent piece of the same story that all the people invoved are testifying to or have publicly admited.


You say Trump didn't hold up aid to force Ukraine into investigating his political opposition?

Well there is a very simple way for Trump to vindicate himself and emberass them impeachin' Democrats - have people directly involved in this matter come testify before Congress, explain what was going on and how Trump was just doing a good job in Ukraine.

Of course Trump is fighting tooth and nail to prevent people from testifying. Why do you think that is?

Please provide a site where Mulveney said that Trump personally told him he was withholding aid from Ukraine for that reason. What Sondland said is he presumed what Trump wanted. But when questioned about what Trump actually told him, it was the exact opposite of what he presumed.

Furthermore, this call took place in July of last year, which is (give or take) a year away from the nomination of Trump's contender. Trump had no idea who he would be facing. He still doesn't today. Nobody does.

In order to support the phony allegation that Trump acted on behalf of discrediting his political opponent, they would have to do one of two things: Show me this crystal ball they used to predict the Biden nomination, or show me how they planned to rig the primary again, so that only Joe could win. Then, show me how Trump knew about either.

Until the Democrats can do that, then this charge that Trump asked Zelensky to "dig up dirt" on Biden because he was a political opponent--and not because of the corruption by the last administration, then the allegation of their claim is completely bogus. Biden is not Trump's rival yet. He is the rival of Sanders, Warren, Buddy-jiz, but not Trump.

1. Trump started squealing “no quid-pro-quo!!!” to Sondland just as Congress opened the investigations into admin’s withholding whistleblower complaint that used that language.

It’s completely silly to use these after-getting-caught denials as evidence of innocence.

2. Biden presents the foremost challenge to Trump if he wins. Don’t take my word for it, take a look at Trump’s campaign blowing millions on anti-Biden adds in Democratic primary states.

The easiest way for Trump to not lose to Joe is to not run against him at all.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Oh the GREAT PRESUME EVIDENCE............LMAO

Mulvaney publicly and explicitly stated that money was held back by Trump for the purpose of pressuring Ukraine for investigations...did I not just say it?

You just praised Sondlands testimony.........and I called your ass on it....

Moron did you read what you quoted?

Mulveney, Trump' chief of Staff and a Director of OMB admited publicly that Trump held up aid to pressure Ukraine.

Sondlands take on what the President was after is not in a vacum, it is a consistent piece of the same story that all the people invoved are testifying to or have publicly admited.


You say Trump didn't hold up aid to force Ukraine into investigating his political opposition?

Well there is a very simple way for Trump to vindicate himself and emberass them impeachin' Democrats - have people directly involved in this matter come testify before Congress, explain what was going on and how Trump was just doing a good job in Ukraine.

Of course Trump is fighting tooth and nail to prevent people from testifying. Why do you think that is?

Please provide a site where Mulveney said that Trump personally told him he was withholding aid from Ukraine for that reason. What Sondland said is he presumed what Trump wanted. But when questioned about what Trump actually told him, it was the exact opposite of what he presumed.

Furthermore, this call took place in July of last year, which is (give or take) a year away from the nomination of Trump's contender. Trump had no idea who he would be facing. He still doesn't today. Nobody does.

In order to support the phony allegation that Trump acted on behalf of discrediting his political opponent, they would have to do one of two things: Show me this crystal ball they used to predict the Biden nomination, or show me how they planned to rig the primary again, so that only Joe could win. Then, show me how Trump knew about either.

Until the Democrats can do that, then this charge that Trump asked Zelensky to "dig up dirt" on Biden because he was a political opponent--and not because of the corruption by the last administration, then the allegation of their claim is completely bogus. Biden is not Trump's rival yet. He is the rival of Sanders, Warren, Buddy-jiz, but not Trump.

1. Trump started squealing “no quid-pro-quo!!!” to Sondland just as Congress opened the investigations into admin’s withholding whistleblower complaint that used that language.

It’s completely silly to use these after-getting-caught denials as evidence of innocence.

2. Biden presents the foremost challenge to Trump if he wins. Don’t take my word for it, take a look at Trump’s campaign blowing millions on anti-Biden adds in Democratic primary states.

The easiest way for Trump to not lose to Joe is to not run against him at all.

So where are these ads you speak of, and in what part of the country were they ran?

Joe Biden is a gaff machine. He can't go one week without being confused about something. He would be the easiest candidate for Trump to beat, especially with all the discovered scandals by the administration he was part of. Trump would rip him apart. For crying out loud, during a debate, he told the audience he was the only contestant that had the support of the only black Senator. Problem was, he was on the debate stage with Harris when he said it.



Yeah, this is what Trump is deathly afraid of?

 

[AntonToo]

Mulvaney publicly and explicitly stated that money was held back by Trump for the purpose of pressuring Ukraine for investigations...did I not just say it?

You just praised Sondlands testimony.........and I called your ass on it....

Moron did you read what you quoted?

Mulveney, Trump' chief of Staff and a Director of OMB admited publicly that Trump held up aid to pressure Ukraine.

Sondlands take on what the President was after is not in a vacum, it is a consistent piece of the same story that all the people invoved are testifying to or have publicly admited.


You say Trump didn't hold up aid to force Ukraine into investigating his political opposition?

Well there is a very simple way for Trump to vindicate himself and emberass them impeachin' Democrats - have people directly involved in this matter come testify before Congress, explain what was going on and how Trump was just doing a good job in Ukraine.

Of course Trump is fighting tooth and nail to prevent people from testifying. Why do you think that is?

Please provide a site where Mulveney said that Trump personally told him he was withholding aid from Ukraine for that reason. What Sondland said is he presumed what Trump wanted. But when questioned about what Trump actually told him, it was the exact opposite of what he presumed.

Furthermore, this call took place in July of last year, which is (give or take) a year away from the nomination of Trump's contender. Trump had no idea who he would be facing. He still doesn't today. Nobody does.

In order to support the phony allegation that Trump acted on behalf of discrediting his political opponent, they would have to do one of two things: Show me this crystal ball they used to predict the Biden nomination, or show me how they planned to rig the primary again, so that only Joe could win. Then, show me how Trump knew about either.

Until the Democrats can do that, then this charge that Trump asked Zelensky to "dig up dirt" on Biden because he was a political opponent--and not because of the corruption by the last administration, then the allegation of their claim is completely bogus. Biden is not Trump's rival yet. He is the rival of Sanders, Warren, Buddy-jiz, but not Trump.

1. Trump started squealing “no quid-pro-quo!!!” to Sondland just as Congress opened the investigations into admin’s withholding whistleblower complaint that used that language.

It’s completely silly to use these after-getting-caught denials as evidence of innocence.

2. Biden presents the foremost challenge to Trump if he wins. Don’t take my word for it, take a look at Trump’s campaign blowing millions on anti-Biden adds in Democratic primary states.

The easiest way for Trump to not lose to Joe is to not run against him at all.

So where are these ads you speak of, and in what part of the country were they ran?

Joe Biden is a gaff machine. He can't go one week without being confused about something. He would be the easiest candidate for Trump to beat, especially with all the discovered scandals by the administration he was part of. Trump would rip him apart. For crying out loud, during a debate, he told the audience he was the only contestant that had the support of the only black Senator. Problem was, he was on the debate stage with Harris when he said it.



Yeah, this is what Trump is deathly afraid of?

Blah blah blah. Money does the real talking.

Trump campaign to drop bomb on Biden in early voting states

If Trump campaign really thought Biden would be an easier ooponent than others they would certiainly not be spending to sink him now.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You just praised Sondlands testimony.........and I called your ass on it....

Moron did you read what you quoted?

Mulveney, Trump' chief of Staff and a Director of OMB admited publicly that Trump held up aid to pressure Ukraine.

Sondlands take on what the President was after is not in a vacum, it is a consistent piece of the same story that all the people invoved are testifying to or have publicly admited.


You say Trump didn't hold up aid to force Ukraine into investigating his political opposition?

Well there is a very simple way for Trump to vindicate himself and emberass them impeachin' Democrats - have people directly involved in this matter come testify before Congress, explain what was going on and how Trump was just doing a good job in Ukraine.

Of course Trump is fighting tooth and nail to prevent people from testifying. Why do you think that is?

Please provide a site where Mulveney said that Trump personally told him he was withholding aid from Ukraine for that reason. What Sondland said is he presumed what Trump wanted. But when questioned about what Trump actually told him, it was the exact opposite of what he presumed.

Furthermore, this call took place in July of last year, which is (give or take) a year away from the nomination of Trump's contender. Trump had no idea who he would be facing. He still doesn't today. Nobody does.

In order to support the phony allegation that Trump acted on behalf of discrediting his political opponent, they would have to do one of two things: Show me this crystal ball they used to predict the Biden nomination, or show me how they planned to rig the primary again, so that only Joe could win. Then, show me how Trump knew about either.

Until the Democrats can do that, then this charge that Trump asked Zelensky to "dig up dirt" on Biden because he was a political opponent--and not because of the corruption by the last administration, then the allegation of their claim is completely bogus. Biden is not Trump's rival yet. He is the rival of Sanders, Warren, Buddy-jiz, but not Trump.

1. Trump started squealing “no quid-pro-quo!!!” to Sondland just as Congress opened the investigations into admin’s withholding whistleblower complaint that used that language.

It’s completely silly to use these after-getting-caught denials as evidence of innocence.

2. Biden presents the foremost challenge to Trump if he wins. Don’t take my word for it, take a look at Trump’s campaign blowing millions on anti-Biden adds in Democratic primary states.

The easiest way for Trump to not lose to Joe is to not run against him at all.

So where are these ads you speak of, and in what part of the country were they ran?

Joe Biden is a gaff machine. He can't go one week without being confused about something. He would be the easiest candidate for Trump to beat, especially with all the discovered scandals by the administration he was part of. Trump would rip him apart. For crying out loud, during a debate, he told the audience he was the only contestant that had the support of the only black Senator. Problem was, he was on the debate stage with Harris when he said it.



Yeah, this is what Trump is deathly afraid of?

Blah blah blah. Money does the real talking.

Trump campaign to drop bomb on Biden in early voting states

If Trump campaign really thought Biden would be an easier ooponent than others they would certiainly not be spending to sink him now.

The linked article was written in October. The phone call was in July. Since that time, Biden has attacked Trump repeatedly calling him a white supremacist, racist, and so forth. Remember that Biden too was part of the administration that spied on him, so the animosity against Biden is certainly understandable.

 

[AntonToo]

Moron did you read what you quoted?

Mulveney, Trump' chief of Staff and a Director of OMB admited publicly that Trump held up aid to pressure Ukraine.

Sondlands take on what the President was after is not in a vacum, it is a consistent piece of the same story that all the people invoved are testifying to or have publicly admited.


You say Trump didn't hold up aid to force Ukraine into investigating his political opposition?

Well there is a very simple way for Trump to vindicate himself and emberass them impeachin' Democrats - have people directly involved in this matter come testify before Congress, explain what was going on and how Trump was just doing a good job in Ukraine.

Of course Trump is fighting tooth and nail to prevent people from testifying. Why do you think that is?

Please provide a site where Mulveney said that Trump personally told him he was withholding aid from Ukraine for that reason. What Sondland said is he presumed what Trump wanted. But when questioned about what Trump actually told him, it was the exact opposite of what he presumed.

Furthermore, this call took place in July of last year, which is (give or take) a year away from the nomination of Trump's contender. Trump had no idea who he would be facing. He still doesn't today. Nobody does.

In order to support the phony allegation that Trump acted on behalf of discrediting his political opponent, they would have to do one of two things: Show me this crystal ball they used to predict the Biden nomination, or show me how they planned to rig the primary again, so that only Joe could win. Then, show me how Trump knew about either.

Until the Democrats can do that, then this charge that Trump asked Zelensky to "dig up dirt" on Biden because he was a political opponent--and not because of the corruption by the last administration, then the allegation of their claim is completely bogus. Biden is not Trump's rival yet. He is the rival of Sanders, Warren, Buddy-jiz, but not Trump.

1. Trump started squealing “no quid-pro-quo!!!” to Sondland just as Congress opened the investigations into admin’s withholding whistleblower complaint that used that language.

It’s completely silly to use these after-getting-caught denials as evidence of innocence.

2. Biden presents the foremost challenge to Trump if he wins. Don’t take my word for it, take a look at Trump’s campaign blowing millions on anti-Biden adds in Democratic primary states.

The easiest way for Trump to not lose to Joe is to not run against him at all.

So where are these ads you speak of, and in what part of the country were they ran?

Joe Biden is a gaff machine. He can't go one week without being confused about something. He would be the easiest candidate for Trump to beat, especially with all the discovered scandals by the administration he was part of. Trump would rip him apart. For crying out loud, during a debate, he told the audience he was the only contestant that had the support of the only black Senator. Problem was, he was on the debate stage with Harris when he said it.



Yeah, this is what Trump is deathly afraid of?

Blah blah blah. Money does the real talking.

Trump campaign to drop bomb on Biden in early voting states

If Trump campaign really thought Biden would be an easier ooponent than others they would certiainly not be spending to sink him now.

The linked article was written in October. The phone call was in July. Since that time, Biden has attacked Trump repeatedly calling him a white supremacist, racist, and so forth. Remember that Biden too was part of the administration that spied on him, so the animosity against Biden is certainly understandable.

What the hell is the difference? The point is Trump campaign CLEARLY considers Biden a serious threat worth taking a hit on and in July Biden’s numbers were even better than October.

 

[bripat9643]

Please provide a site where Mulveney said that Trump personally told him he was withholding aid from Ukraine for that reason. What Sondland said is he presumed what Trump wanted. But when questioned about what Trump actually told him, it was the exact opposite of what he presumed.

Furthermore, this call took place in July of last year, which is (give or take) a year away from the nomination of Trump's contender. Trump had no idea who he would be facing. He still doesn't today. Nobody does.

In order to support the phony allegation that Trump acted on behalf of discrediting his political opponent, they would have to do one of two things: Show me this crystal ball they used to predict the Biden nomination, or show me how they planned to rig the primary again, so that only Joe could win. Then, show me how Trump knew about either.

Until the Democrats can do that, then this charge that Trump asked Zelensky to "dig up dirt" on Biden because he was a political opponent--and not because of the corruption by the last administration, then the allegation of their claim is completely bogus. Biden is not Trump's rival yet. He is the rival of Sanders, Warren, Buddy-jiz, but not Trump.

1. Trump started squealing “no quid-pro-quo!!!” to Sondland just as Congress opened the investigations into admin’s withholding whistleblower complaint that used that language.

It’s completely silly to use these after-getting-caught denials as evidence of innocence.

2. Biden presents the foremost challenge to Trump if he wins. Don’t take my word for it, take a look at Trump’s campaign blowing millions on anti-Biden adds in Democratic primary states.

The easiest way for Trump to not lose to Joe is to not run against him at all.

So where are these ads you speak of, and in what part of the country were they ran?

Joe Biden is a gaff machine. He can't go one week without being confused about something. He would be the easiest candidate for Trump to beat, especially with all the discovered scandals by the administration he was part of. Trump would rip him apart. For crying out loud, during a debate, he told the audience he was the only contestant that had the support of the only black Senator. Problem was, he was on the debate stage with Harris when he said it.



Yeah, this is what Trump is deathly afraid of?

Blah blah blah. Money does the real talking.

Trump campaign to drop bomb on Biden in early voting states

If Trump campaign really thought Biden would be an easier ooponent than others they would certiainly not be spending to sink him now.

The linked article was written in October. The phone call was in July. Since that time, Biden has attacked Trump repeatedly calling him a white supremacist, racist, and so forth. Remember that Biden too was part of the administration that spied on him, so the animosity against Biden is certainly understandable.

What the hell is the difference? The point is Trump campaign CLEARLY considers Biden a serious threat worth taking a hit on and in July Biden’s numbers were even better than October.

There's nothing clear about that. Trump considered Biden to be a crook.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Please provide a site where Mulveney said that Trump personally told him he was withholding aid from Ukraine for that reason. What Sondland said is he presumed what Trump wanted. But when questioned about what Trump actually told him, it was the exact opposite of what he presumed.

Furthermore, this call took place in July of last year, which is (give or take) a year away from the nomination of Trump's contender. Trump had no idea who he would be facing. He still doesn't today. Nobody does.

In order to support the phony allegation that Trump acted on behalf of discrediting his political opponent, they would have to do one of two things: Show me this crystal ball they used to predict the Biden nomination, or show me how they planned to rig the primary again, so that only Joe could win. Then, show me how Trump knew about either.

Until the Democrats can do that, then this charge that Trump asked Zelensky to "dig up dirt" on Biden because he was a political opponent--and not because of the corruption by the last administration, then the allegation of their claim is completely bogus. Biden is not Trump's rival yet. He is the rival of Sanders, Warren, Buddy-jiz, but not Trump.

1. Trump started squealing “no quid-pro-quo!!!” to Sondland just as Congress opened the investigations into admin’s withholding whistleblower complaint that used that language.

It’s completely silly to use these after-getting-caught denials as evidence of innocence.

2. Biden presents the foremost challenge to Trump if he wins. Don’t take my word for it, take a look at Trump’s campaign blowing millions on anti-Biden adds in Democratic primary states.

The easiest way for Trump to not lose to Joe is to not run against him at all.

So where are these ads you speak of, and in what part of the country were they ran?

Joe Biden is a gaff machine. He can't go one week without being confused about something. He would be the easiest candidate for Trump to beat, especially with all the discovered scandals by the administration he was part of. Trump would rip him apart. For crying out loud, during a debate, he told the audience he was the only contestant that had the support of the only black Senator. Problem was, he was on the debate stage with Harris when he said it.



Yeah, this is what Trump is deathly afraid of?

Blah blah blah. Money does the real talking.

Trump campaign to drop bomb on Biden in early voting states

If Trump campaign really thought Biden would be an easier ooponent than others they would certiainly not be spending to sink him now.

The linked article was written in October. The phone call was in July. Since that time, Biden has attacked Trump repeatedly calling him a white supremacist, racist, and so forth. Remember that Biden too was part of the administration that spied on him, so the animosity against Biden is certainly understandable.

What the hell is the difference? The point is Trump campaign CLEARLY considers Biden a serious threat worth taking a hit on and in July Biden’s numbers were even better than October.

The difference is this took place in July of last year. Nobody knew who would be the candidate, including Trump. So the charge of Trump asking Zelensky to look into the matter because he was a rival is as phony as a black woman with a blond wig.

 

[AntonToo]

1. Trump started squealing “no quid-pro-quo!!!” to Sondland just as Congress opened the investigations into admin’s withholding whistleblower complaint that used that language.

It’s completely silly to use these after-getting-caught denials as evidence of innocence.

2. Biden presents the foremost challenge to Trump if he wins. Don’t take my word for it, take a look at Trump’s campaign blowing millions on anti-Biden adds in Democratic primary states.

The easiest way for Trump to not lose to Joe is to not run against him at all.

So where are these ads you speak of, and in what part of the country were they ran?

Joe Biden is a gaff machine. He can't go one week without being confused about something. He would be the easiest candidate for Trump to beat, especially with all the discovered scandals by the administration he was part of. Trump would rip him apart. For crying out loud, during a debate, he told the audience he was the only contestant that had the support of the only black Senator. Problem was, he was on the debate stage with Harris when he said it.



Yeah, this is what Trump is deathly afraid of?

Blah blah blah. Money does the real talking.

Trump campaign to drop bomb on Biden in early voting states

If Trump campaign really thought Biden would be an easier ooponent than others they would certiainly not be spending to sink him now.

The linked article was written in October. The phone call was in July. Since that time, Biden has attacked Trump repeatedly calling him a white supremacist, racist, and so forth. Remember that Biden too was part of the administration that spied on him, so the animosity against Biden is certainly understandable.

What the hell is the difference? The point is Trump campaign CLEARLY considers Biden a serious threat worth taking a hit on and in July Biden’s numbers were even better than October.

The difference is this took place in July of last year. Nobody knew who would be the candidate, including Trump. So the charge of Trump asking Zelensky to look into the matter because he was a rival is as phony as a black woman with a blond wig.

Quit strawgrasping, it was always known that Biden would be a serious challenge to Trump should he run and all polling showed that from the start.

He was the most high profile democrat with the most extensive record and Trump certainly is not going to be able to pull the “crazy socialist!!” routine on him.

 

[AntonToo]

1. Trump started squealing “no quid-pro-quo!!!” to Sondland just as Congress opened the investigations into admin’s withholding whistleblower complaint that used that language.

It’s completely silly to use these after-getting-caught denials as evidence of innocence.

2. Biden presents the foremost challenge to Trump if he wins. Don’t take my word for it, take a look at Trump’s campaign blowing millions on anti-Biden adds in Democratic primary states.

The easiest way for Trump to not lose to Joe is to not run against him at all.

So where are these ads you speak of, and in what part of the country were they ran?

Joe Biden is a gaff machine. He can't go one week without being confused about something. He would be the easiest candidate for Trump to beat, especially with all the discovered scandals by the administration he was part of. Trump would rip him apart. For crying out loud, during a debate, he told the audience he was the only contestant that had the support of the only black Senator. Problem was, he was on the debate stage with Harris when he said it.



Yeah, this is what Trump is deathly afraid of?

Blah blah blah. Money does the real talking.

Trump campaign to drop bomb on Biden in early voting states

If Trump campaign really thought Biden would be an easier ooponent than others they would certiainly not be spending to sink him now.

The linked article was written in October. The phone call was in July. Since that time, Biden has attacked Trump repeatedly calling him a white supremacist, racist, and so forth. Remember that Biden too was part of the administration that spied on him, so the animosity against Biden is certainly understandable.

What the hell is the difference? The point is Trump campaign CLEARLY considers Biden a serious threat worth taking a hit on and in July Biden’s numbers were even better than October.

There's nothing clear about that. Trump considered Biden to be a crook.

Trump is a crook, he surrounds himself with crooks, thinks other normal people are crooks and calls principled non-crooks crazy.

Besides our musing on what Trump thinks, it doesn’t even matter. Believe it or not but there is actually an APPROPRIATE PROCESS to report crime and have authorities investigate it. Trump trying to inappropriately force Ukraine to publicly announce investigation HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH JUSTICE, it’s the opposite.

 

[eddiew]

I think every president going forward will be impeached because of the bar democrats set.

Y’all impeached Clinton. Did you forget that?

Yes he broke the law and was disbarred

He lied Trump lied 15000 times so far in 3 years,and he'll cut off his right arm before he EVER puts his hand on a bible

 

[eddiew]

Impeachment will now be at the top of the list for every new president when the opposite party controls the house.

Yes and whom do you think will be left to try and become President ? The cream of the crap ,like Nunes Giuliani ,McConnell? What good American would take that spot ?

 

[MAGAman]

Would lie about cheating on your wife?

And you're confused about the whole mess. It was Monica lewinsky they accused him of lying about.

If these things upset you I can expect you to be outraged at tRump in your next post, right?

1. I wouldn't cheat on my wife.
2. I certainly would not commit felony perjury, particularly not on internationally broadcast live television.
3. Clinton perjured himself to stop his sexual harassment victim from receiving a fair trail. (That's real obstruction of justice, just in case you want to pretend to care about such things.)

 

[AntonToo]

Would lie about cheating on your wife?

And you're confused about the whole mess. It was Monica lewinsky they accused him of lying about.

If these things upset you I can expect you to be outraged at tRump in your next post, right?

1. I wouldn't cheat on my wife.
2. I certainly would not commit felony perjury, particularly not on internationally broadcast live television.
3. Clinton perjured himself to stop his sexual harassment victim from receiving a fair trail. (That's real obstruction of justice, just in case you want to pretend to care about such things.)

What harassment victim? What trial? Wtf are you talking about? It was a completely consensual relationship.