Breaking! Here is the phone transcript word for word between Trump and Ukraine President


Neither of those links provide a readable copy. But you're quick to post your opinion when you haven't even read the damn thing.
Did it hurt when you had your brain sucked out three years ago? Do you miss it?

What? I read it. It was not unreadable. I don't think my eyes are significantly better than average.
 
He never said he was withholding funds. He actually discusses with him how France and Germany don’t do their fair share. He was withholding funds until other European nations paid up. He actually ran on that rhetoric. Again you’re trying things together that should not be tied together.
He did it for what...maybe a week? Less? A few days before the phone call and then....suddenly the check is in the mail. Huh.
You could be right that it was entirely coincidental. However, if he was waiting for other nations to cough up some cash, he sure didn't do much about it, except stop the payment to Ukraine until he got the obesiance he wanted from U. Did he stop the aid to other countries as well, or was it just Ukraine? Did he try to get some buy in from other countries in NATO at their last pow wow, or was he just grumbling? That doesn't usually make money appear.
I haven't heard that.
Well, now you have. If you're not going to read ANY news whatsoever, you probably ought to limit yourself to the Food Forum.
trump went to the friggn UN and gave a speech to them all about not giving. fk I hate your kind of stupid.
Not giving what?
fk I hate trying to translate your incoherent posts. You at the pub already?

Not giving enough $$. He is tired of the US footing the bill for everything. We have a $23trn deficit while Germany runs at a surplus. He stated he wanted the Ukrainian administration to work with Barr. I am pretty sure the AG would not be an accomplice in a high crime.
I can understand that.

Reopening an investigation into a private company whose corrupt owner fled the country five years ago would not be a high crime, but it might be kind of ??? hard to understand why Trump would want to investigate that particular company, unless, of course, the real reason is the one Trump stated--to look into Biden and his son.

Well.... he said openly, in that transcript why he was concerned.

He said very specifically, "Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution (implying of his son) so if you can look into it, it sounds horrible to me".

That's directly from the transcript.... and that sounds very reasonable to me. It doesn't sound like a bribery attempt to me, and honestly it sounds like he's just trying to deal with corruption.

That's something all Americans should be in favor of.

Now again, I'm going based on what was released. If there is more, then my assessment may change.
 

My understanding is that he did release the AID a long time ago.
 
What I see those here, in the media etc. engaging in what I would call "biased inference"
They look at the transcript, and honestly believe they see all manner of evil doing...even calling it "reads like a mobster novel".
That is what they see, because they are heavily influenced by their bias.
Yet, these same people will actually try to deny what is overwhelmingly obvious in the Biden video. Actually admitting, on tape, using $1 Billion of taxpayer money as a threat if they don't fire a Ukraine prosecutor. That happens to be interested in the dealings of a Ukrainian business that Biden's son sits on the board of.
You see, Democrats don't see that. Or say something asininely stupid as "there is no evidence of wrongdoing by Biden's son"... no fucking shit Sherlock... they fired the prosecutor who was beginning to look into it!! How can you have evidence without anyone looking for it?

But nevertheless..... Orange Man Bad

I disagree. It goes beyond bias. The media is engaging in flat out corruption. Anyone in the media who read the transcript and is implying or stating any wrongdoing is lying to their audience/readers.
 
trump went to the friggn UN and gave a speech to them all about not giving. fk I hate your kind of stupid.
Not giving what?
fk I hate trying to translate your incoherent posts. You at the pub already?

Not giving enough $$. He is tired of the US footing the bill for everything. We have a $23trn deficit while Germany runs at a surplus. He stated he wanted the Ukrainian administration to work with Barr. I am pretty sure the AG would not be an accomplice in a high crime.
I can understand that.

Reopening an investigation into a private company whose corrupt owner fled the country five years ago would not be a high crime, but it might be kind of ??? hard to understand why Trump would want to investigate that particular company, unless, of course, the real reason is the one Trump stated--to look into Biden and his son.
His son is unimportant. The question is, when Biden threatened to withhold $1 billion in US aid unless Ukraine immediately fired the prosecutor who was investigating that company did he do it to protect his son, in which case it would be a criminal act of malfeasance, or was there some other reason Biden went after that particular prosecutor?
Please read the article below--it's not that long but it lays out the facts without spin. Then read the rest of my reply.

Just a rundown of the facts, with no spin. Obama supported investigations into corruption; he didn't want to be throwing good money after bad, either. The owner of Burisma fled to Russia with Veshenko before the Bidens arrived on the scene. The EU and the World Bank, as well as Obama, wanted Shokin out because he was AG and was not prosecuting corruption in his country. Anyone planning to be a creditor or give aid had a good reason to want the corruption stopped.

This article pretty much lays out the basic facts. I'm confused why Biden needs any underlying motive to get rid of Shokin--he had Obama and most of the developed world telling him to. It wasn't some big secret at the time.

What Were The Bidens Doing In Ukraine? 5 Questions Answered

The only alarm bells I hear right now are why the new president of Ukraine is calling Shokin a good prosecutor. Have they elected someone in the Moscow old boys club again?
What is clear from the article is that the new government in Ukraine which Obama supported was not trusted by the Obama administration. That's implicit in the Dem's claim Biden was sent there to strongarm the government into firing the Chief Prosecutor. I have heard two versions of why Obama and Biden wanted him fired. The version the Democrats are pushing today is that this prosecutor who had been appointed by the government Obama supported was not prosecuting corruption cases fast enough, and the other version is that despite the new government that was pro West, corruption was still rampant in Ukraine and corrupt officials remained in high places and wanted him fired because he was prosecuting corruption cases too aggressively. I'm inclined to go with the second version because the new Chief Prosecutor did not prosecute corruption cases aggressively, so the evidence is nothing was gained by firing the Chief Prosecutor.

Zelensky, the new President is very pro western and led a mini revolution campaigning against Russia and against corruption and won in a landslide over the last President whom Obama supported. He now says he will appoint a new chief prosecutor who will prosecute corruption aggressively.

It is worth noting that the Ukrainian government Obama supported was led by a billionaire oligarch who was himself frequently accused of being corrupt both in his businesses and in government. It was claimed that he tried to force prosecutor to charge his political opponents with crimes. Seeing all this, it is difficult to buy the idea Biden made his threats out of a desire to fight corruption.
 
The Democrats just threw Bidens campaign under the bus and backed over him. They also just threw a number of Democrat House winners in 2020, and when they continue down this path, it will be clear to Americans "Democrats have no policies and they want my vote".

So, now that Biden is finished, who will be the nominee for DNC?
Princess Lying Rug....She checks more boxes than any of the other supposed front runners do.

But I wouldn't be surprised if Big Mike were secretly warming up in the bullpen.

Big Mike would have an orgasm, hell maybe he is the whistle blower.
 
Well, this certainly is going to blow up in the Dems' Collective Face.

Key points of the discussion:

- Trump congratulates Zelensk on his victory.
- Zelensky says he was inspired by Trump's example adn is gong to clean the swamp in Ukraine.
- Some back and forth about how the U.S. helps Ukraine far more than the EU; and that the EU should do more.
- Trump asks him to look into Ukraine/Crowdstrike, the possible origin of entire Mueller inquiry (the Mueller testimony was the day before).
- Zelensky notes he has replaced his U.S. ambassador, and is going to hire competent, friendly people.
- Zelensky welcomes a visit by Giulinani.
- Trump says he is glad and that he heard that Ukraine had had a very good prosecutor who was shut down by some bad people, and that Biden had something to do with getting him fired - that a lot of people are talking about that (which is true given Biden bragging publicly about it).
- Zelensky says he wanted to discuss the prosecutor issue with Trump and that his new prosecutor would be looking into the corruption - that it is important to restore honesty to his government.
- Zelensky then asks Trump if he has any additional information about this mattter and the former ambassador Ivanovich, whom he describes as bad and aligned with the former president (gee, sounds familiar).
- Trump says he will discuss with Barr and Giuliani, and that he had heard that the prosecutor was treated unfairly. He wishes Zelensky good luck with everything.

The rest is mostly pleasantries about friends, the economy, etc., with Trump mentioning he would have Barr and Giuliani call Ukraine.

There is no mention of getting dirt on Biden - just an honest effort to want to know how Ukraine was involved in what led to the Mueller Fracas and how the prosecutor was fired.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Unclassified09.2019.pdf
There is no mention of getting dirt on Biden - just an honest effort to want to know how Ukraine was involved in what led to the Mueller Fracas and how the prosecutor was fired.
?What do you call this?

"There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution, and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it ... It sounds horrible to me," Mr. Trump told Zelensky, in reference to Joe Biden.

He asked a simple question. No quid pro quo. No bribery. No high crimes, which per our constitution are necessary to impeach.
whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great... so if you can look into it ...
That isn't a question. It is a request. Apparently, the fact that Trump is sending over Giuliani to help him with the "looking into it" and that it will certainly be beneficial to Trump's campaign if the Ukraine can find Biden's son and Biden guilty of something nefarious, is why the ICIG was concerned. Or maybe there is more we don't know about yet since the whistleblower himself has said NOTHING.

You realize there is absolutely nothing illegal or even ethically wrong with this - right?
You realize that the former Ukraine prosecutor, that we know as a fact was fired immediately after BIDEN pressured the then Ukranian President to do so AND WITHHELD FUNDS till he did - you know this right?
You know which one is illegal and which one isn't right?


Are you an attorney?
 
He prefaced it with the fact that the Mueller investigation found nothing and it began in the Ukraine. You need to read the entire conversation and gauge the tenor not just bits and pieces. To me it flowed well and he cannot command the President of Ukraine to do anything. "It would be great" means he is asking not telling. He literally said "Whatever you can do with the Attorney General"
I DID read the entire conversation, twice. The fact that the President put his request politely doesn't mean it isn't a request. And let's not forget that the military aid that had been promised to Ukraine had been stopped by Trump a few days before. Hence all the sucking up in that phone call; it, too, was part of the "tenor" of that discussion.

He never once mentioned quid pro quo. You’re drawing your own conclusions. Aka seeing what you want to see.
Why is it that when Biden withheld funds to pressure Ukraine to fire the prosecutor, it is considered a crime, but when Trump just did the exact same thing, it is absolutely fine?
Biden was expressing the will of the U.S., the European Union, and other allies in wanting this corrupt prosecutor fired. That's the part that wingnuts like boedicca leave out.


B'loney. Biden threatened Ukraine in order to cover up his corruption and he did it with Obama's approval. That's one of the reasons why the Dems are desperate to destroy Trump.

You know this how?
 
There is no mention of getting dirt on Biden - just an honest effort to want to know how Ukraine was involved in what led to the Mueller Fracas and how the prosecutor was fired.
?What do you call this?

"There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution, and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it ... It sounds horrible to me," Mr. Trump told Zelensky, in reference to Joe Biden.

He asked a simple question. No quid pro quo. No bribery. No high crimes, which per our constitution are necessary to impeach.
whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great... so if you can look into it ...
That isn't a question. It is a request. Apparently, the fact that Trump is sending over Giuliani to help him with the "looking into it" and that it will certainly be beneficial to Trump's campaign if the Ukraine can find Biden's son and Biden guilty of something nefarious, is why the ICIG was concerned. Or maybe there is more we don't know about yet since the whistleblower himself has said NOTHING.

You realize there is absolutely nothing illegal or even ethically wrong with this - right?
You realize that the former Ukraine prosecutor, that we know as a fact was fired immediately after BIDEN pressured the then Ukranian President to do so AND WITHHELD FUNDS till he did - you know this right?
You know which one is illegal and which one isn't right?
Ethically, Trump was angling for dirt on Biden, his election opponent. Once again, encouraging foreign governments' involvement in our election by providing opposition fodder. That is a campaign no-no. It is just another example of Trump's complete disregard for what is REAL respect for the American system.

The allegations you mentioned about Biden have been disproven, I think. If he did something so illegal, why hasn't he been arrested? Pretty convenient that this all comes up now that he's running for President, isn't it?
Trump trying to see if Biden broke the law isn't against the law. Oh, and Biden broke the law.

How do you know Biden broke the law? What evidence do you have?
 
He asked a simple question. No quid pro quo. No bribery. No high crimes, which per our constitution are necessary to impeach.
whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great... so if you can look into it ...
That isn't a question. It is a request. Apparently, the fact that Trump is sending over Giuliani to help him with the "looking into it" and that it will certainly be beneficial to Trump's campaign if the Ukraine can find Biden's son and Biden guilty of something nefarious, is why the ICIG was concerned. Or maybe there is more we don't know about yet since the whistleblower himself has said NOTHING.

You realize there is absolutely nothing illegal or even ethically wrong with this - right?
You realize that the former Ukraine prosecutor, that we know as a fact was fired immediately after BIDEN pressured the then Ukranian President to do so AND WITHHELD FUNDS till he did - you know this right?
You know which one is illegal and which one isn't right?
Ethically, Trump was angling for dirt on Biden, his election opponent. Once again, encouraging foreign governments' involvement in our election by providing opposition fodder. That is a campaign no-no. It is just another example of Trump's complete disregard for what is REAL respect for the American system.

The allegations you mentioned about Biden have been disproven, I think. If he did something so illegal, why hasn't he been arrested? Pretty convenient that this all comes up now that he's running for President, isn't it?
Trump trying to see if Biden broke the law isn't against the law. Oh, and Biden broke the law.

How do you know Biden broke the law? What evidence do you have?

Who the heck needs any evidence for anything anymore?
 
I haven't got a magnifying glass on me.

You didn't bother to look in the link, as THIS was right there at the top:

The Trump White House released the full transcript of the July call between President Trump and President Zelensky.

It is easy to read format.

By the way I read it, it is clear the Democrats impeachment talk over this is a colossal mistake, pure stupidity.

The so called whistleblower complaint was a lie!
Easy, Tommy, I found it on the CBS site and just finished reading it.
Let's wait to see what the whistleblower has to say and find out why the ICIG found the call of serious concern.
It's pretty clear though that Trump requested the Pres. of Ukraine look into the Biden thing and in true lapdog fashion, the President of Ukraine said "of course. whatever you find bad, we find bad."
Whether that is any worse than a hundred other things Trump has done, though, I don't know.
Nope. He asked the President of Ukraine to look into the interference in our election.
Now that's some funny shit right there!!!

Tell us another one!
 

Forum List

Back
Top