Offical Impeachment Thread

[jc456]

The blowjob was not an impeachable offense. Are you so much of a dumbass that you cannot read the Articles of Impeachment for Bubba Clinton?

He lied under oath.

About an intern blow job.

He lied, proven. Why does it matter about what?

Oh Jesus fucking Christ! Will you people please get on topic or just shut the fuck up. Do you even understand the difference between Clinton's actions and Trump's in relation to national security, the integrity of the constitution and the founders intent regarding impeachment? I don't think so.

Where the impeachment case stands as Democrats prepare to bring a barrage of new witnesses

No not at all explain?

Are you of the position that trump can’t respond in kind?

He was treated maliciously

MALICIOUSLY

This entire inquiry is malicious

That’s you now for three years, thanks for the selfy

 

[jc456]

The Law Enforcement Assistance and Cooperation Treaty with Ukraine specifies that the designated officials of the two nations are the US Attorney General and the Ukraine Minister of Justice, (3.1.d.). The treaty binds those two offices--and so the usual rules in both nations, regarding those offices: In the Treaty. So from the New York Times, about the phone--Barbarous Anti-American sentiment is apparently what the White House has documented.

"A Justice Department official said that Mr. Barr had no knowledge of the call until the director of national intelligence and the intelligence community’s inspector general sent the department the whistle-blower’s criminal referral late last month, and that Mr. Trump has not spoken with the attorney general “about having Ukraine investigate anything relating to former Vice President Biden or his son.”

Political interference is not considered cause, stated in the Treaty provisions.

https://www.congress.gov/106/cdoc/tdoc16/CDOC-106tdoc16.pdf

Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!
(Red-Hatter waving takes on a new appearance. "Banzai! Surprise!" Attack on the USA apparently is supported--or on Ukraine, or Crimea!)

Help please. Trump calls Jennifer Williams a "Never trumper." She is a member of Pence's staff. If she is a Never trumper," why was she hired in the first place? Duh.

Who cares

 

[jc456]

Why does it matter?

I'm sure it doesn't matter to you if a president bribes a foreign power with military aid in order to discredit his political opposition. However, most people would consider that misuse of executive power, bribery, and a violation of his oath of office.

Not at all. We're all behind you. Just give us empirical evidence that Trump did such a thing, because so far, not one of you has been able to do it yet.

You may hear that next week as more witnesses closer to Trump start testifying.

Keep dreaming. Usually they put their strongest witnesses up first. They shot their load. It's over. What we were treated to was several people who stated in front of Congress they had no first hand knowledge about anything with Trump and the supposed bribery, or quid pro quo, or whatever term they are calming now. But here's the stupidity of all this:

First off, a President delaying funds is not an impeachable offense. Secondly, you can't bribe or blackmail (another lib word going around) a person when the so called subject has no idea they are being bribed. Thirdly, Trump never got anything in return either before or after the funds were released. Fourth of course, nobody can claim Trump was using bribery in effort to promote his campaign, because nobody knows who he'll be running against yet. Lastly, the best thing for Trump would be to have Biden as his opponent. I can't think of anybody more confused, more out of touch in that pathetic Democrat lineup than Biden.

You wish it was over. This week, for your viewing pleasure, we have:

Tuesday -
Jennifer Williams, aide to Mike Pence
Lt Col Alexander Vindman, NSC aide
Kurt Volker, former US special envoy to Ukraine
Tim Morrison, NSC aide

Wednesday -
Gordon Sondland, US Ambassador to the European Union
Laura Cooper, Deputy Asst Secy of Defence
David Hale, Under Secy of State for Political Affairs

Thursday -
Fiona Hill, Former White House Russia Expert

I am especially interested in the testimony of Vindman and Sondland.

I bought an extra large bag of impeachment blend popcorn. I can't wait.

Hahaha hahaha hahaha hahaha dude, really? Hahaha hahaha

 

[jc456]

Of course, because we all know that this isn't a witch hunt.

well i know that if it were & president tinkles had the evidence to show it was, he sure as hell would do EVERYTHING he could to show the witch hunters how wrong they were. he would hold a televised 'event' with spotlights, a red carpet, & probably make it a pay per view so he could make $$$ off it.

but none of that is gonna happen. & we both know why.

Then maybe we can make a trade: Ask the President for those witnesses, and in return, we get to question the whistleblower and the person he or she got their information from; the person that was listening on the phone.

Sound like a good deal to you???

Sounds more like the Kavanaugh scam that never was. How about burden of proof goes on the prosecution, and you don’t have to do or say anything. Like in real criminal law? It’s good enough for everything else. Shit, the alleged victim said he wasn’t a victim, and that’s not good enough. WTF?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just trying to demonstrate to these hypocrites that they are hypocrites.

They want Trump to give them anything and everything for them to try and prove guilt, yet they defend Schiff Face when he doesn't do the same for his defense. Their claim is Trump is trying to hide something, while it is they who are hiding things by not bringing all their evidence forward. So far, they brought nothing.

Schiff Face kept secret meetings taking place in the basement for weeks, and carefully choosing the so-called witnesses that he though made his best case. Now we see his best witnesses are nothing but he said/ she said people, and nothing of substance.

I have news, overhearing a conversation is not hearsay. Witnesses matter.

Trump is toast.

Overhearing is only one side.

 

[RealDave]

So you're saying it is just a coincidence that Trump withheld the military aid just days before the phone call. And it's just coincidental that Trump dropped a request that Zelensky open a corruption investigation when discussing military aid in the phone conversation. And of course, it's just a coincidence that Biden's son worked for the company to be investigated. And it was coincidental that Trump fired the Ambassador to the Ukraine, who was not on the Trump team, just weeks before the phone call. And of course Zelensky's much sought after meeting with the president was being delayed.

WOW! What a strange series of coincidences.

Why does it matter?

I'm sure it doesn't matter to you if a president bribes a foreign power with military aid in order to discredit his political opposition. However, most people would consider that misuse of executive power, bribery, and a violation of his oath of office.

Not at all. We're all behind you. Just give us empirical evidence that Trump did such a thing, because so far, not one of you has been able to do it yet.

You may hear that next week as more witnesses closer to Trump start testifying.

Keep dreaming. Usually they put their strongest witnesses up first. They shot their load. It's over. What we were treated to was several people who stated in front of Congress they had no first hand knowledge about anything with Trump and the supposed bribery, or quid pro quo, or whatever term they are calming now. But here's the stupidity of all this:

First off, a President delaying funds is not an impeachable offense. Secondly, you can't bribe or blackmail (another lib word going around) a person when the so called subject has no idea they are being bribed. Thirdly, Trump never got anything in return either before or after the funds were released. Fourth of course, nobody can claim Trump was using bribery in effort to promote his campaign, because nobody knows who he'll be running against yet. Lastly, the best thing for Trump would be to have Biden as his opponent. I can't think of anybody more confused, more out of touch in that pathetic Democrat lineup than Biden.

First, jackass, why would the President of the Ukraine admit he accepted a bribe? Second, why would he piss off Trump when Trump controlled the funding.

Using funds to try to bribe a foreign official is illegal

Biden was leading in the polls. Joe Biden was the centrist. He was kicking Trumps ass in e ery poll.

Nice Try but Trump is toast.

 

[luchitociencia]

I know some of "strategy", and I can tell that a distraction is happening which is dangerous.

The character named as the whistleblower still is working and "spying" in favor of Democrats.

This is what nobody is paying attention to.

His identity must be revealed in order to validate the claims. This is to say, such a character must have followed the correspondent procedure and channels for his assumed report made according to his point of view. Any "I heard this and that" is invalid. Without the present testimony of such a character there is no valid impeachment.

Just check the former impeachments, the accuser was present, evidence was presented which clearly without doubt pointed the former presidents at fault. In this so called impeachment only "heard says" have been presented.

In private business this problem is solved by sending home without pay to all the ones doing the same job of the whistlblower. Eventually one of the affected ones will end pointing the finger on the identity of the suspect.

Just remember, the wistleblower still is continuing with his spy "job" inside that agency.

 

[IM2]

That ignores Reagan, Bush 41, and Bush the Lesser. None of them were impeached.

Getting an intern blow job is also an impeachable offense, don't forget that. I don't imagine that will be an issue for Trump because he has to pay for sex and interns don't get paid enough for that horror.

The blowjob was not an impeachable offense. Are you so much of a dumbass that you cannot read the Articles of Impeachment for Bubba Clinton?

He lied under oath.

About an intern blow job.

He lied, proven. Why does it matter about what?

Oh Jesus fucking Christ! Will you people please get on topic or just shut the fuck up. Do you even understand the difference between Clinton's actions and Trump's in relation to national security, the integrity of the constitution and the founders intent regarding impeachment? I don't think so.

Where the impeachment case stands as Democrats prepare to bring a barrage of new witnesses

No not at all explain?

Are you of the position that trump can’t respond in kind?

He was treated maliciously

MALICIOUSLY

This entire inquiry is malicious

Bullshit. Trump has committed serious violations.

 

[Lastamender]

Why does it matter?

I'm sure it doesn't matter to you if a president bribes a foreign power with military aid in order to discredit his political opposition. However, most people would consider that misuse of executive power, bribery, and a violation of his oath of office.

Not at all. We're all behind you. Just give us empirical evidence that Trump did such a thing, because so far, not one of you has been able to do it yet.

You may hear that next week as more witnesses closer to Trump start testifying.

Keep dreaming. Usually they put their strongest witnesses up first. They shot their load. It's over. What we were treated to was several people who stated in front of Congress they had no first hand knowledge about anything with Trump and the supposed bribery, or quid pro quo, or whatever term they are calming now. But here's the stupidity of all this:

First off, a President delaying funds is not an impeachable offense. Secondly, you can't bribe or blackmail (another lib word going around) a person when the so called subject has no idea they are being bribed. Thirdly, Trump never got anything in return either before or after the funds were released. Fourth of course, nobody can claim Trump was using bribery in effort to promote his campaign, because nobody knows who he'll be running against yet. Lastly, the best thing for Trump would be to have Biden as his opponent. I can't think of anybody more confused, more out of touch in that pathetic Democrat lineup than Biden.

First, jackass, why would the President of the Ukraine admit he accepted a bribe? Second, why would he piss off Trump when Trump controlled the funding.

Using funds to try to bribe a foreign official is illegal

Biden was leading in the polls. Joe Biden was the centrist. He was kicking Trumps ass in e ery poll.

Nice Try but Trump is toast.

Joe Biden was the centrist.

Biden could not find the center from the middle. He is senile.

 

[Lastamender]

The blowjob was not an impeachable offense. Are you so much of a dumbass that you cannot read the Articles of Impeachment for Bubba Clinton?

He lied under oath.

About an intern blow job.

He lied, proven. Why does it matter about what?

Oh Jesus fucking Christ! Will you people please get on topic or just shut the fuck up. Do you even understand the difference between Clinton's actions and Trump's in relation to national security, the integrity of the constitution and the founders intent regarding impeachment? I don't think so.

Where the impeachment case stands as Democrats prepare to bring a barrage of new witnesses

No not at all explain?

Are you of the position that trump can’t respond in kind?

He was treated maliciously

MALICIOUSLY

This entire inquiry is malicious

Bullshit. Trump has committed serious violations.

Trump is foreign policy, he really can't do much wrong.

 

[IM2]

About an intern blow job.

He lied, proven. Why does it matter about what?

Oh Jesus fucking Christ! Will you people please get on topic or just shut the fuck up. Do you even understand the difference between Clinton's actions and Trump's in relation to national security, the integrity of the constitution and the founders intent regarding impeachment? I don't think so.

Where the impeachment case stands as Democrats prepare to bring a barrage of new witnesses

No not at all explain?

Are you of the position that trump can’t respond in kind?

He was treated maliciously

MALICIOUSLY

This entire inquiry is malicious

Bullshit. Trump has committed serious violations.

Trump is foreign policy, he really can't do much wrong.

He can and he has done so.

 

[Lastamender]

The excuses and so call defense republicans and trump have for his crimes with Ukraine keep falling apart and being replaced by new lies.

Analysis: Trump’s core impeachment defense suffers a double blow — including a self-inflicted one

As much as I believe Trump is not doing himself any favors with his ranting on twatter the reality is Trump will not be convicted and remove...

the GreAt Douche just attacked VP Dence aide.

View attachment 290401

Your Mueller for president, you already have a senile old man running, Joe Biden.

 

[Jitss617]

Why does it matter?

I'm sure it doesn't matter to you if a president bribes a foreign power with military aid in order to discredit his political opposition. However, most people would consider that misuse of executive power, bribery, and a violation of his oath of office.

Not at all. We're all behind you. Just give us empirical evidence that Trump did such a thing, because so far, not one of you has been able to do it yet.

You may hear that next week as more witnesses closer to Trump start testifying.

Keep dreaming. Usually they put their strongest witnesses up first. They shot their load. It's over. What we were treated to was several people who stated in front of Congress they had no first hand knowledge about anything with Trump and the supposed bribery, or quid pro quo, or whatever term they are calming now. But here's the stupidity of all this:

First off, a President delaying funds is not an impeachable offense. Secondly, you can't bribe or blackmail (another lib word going around) a person when the so called subject has no idea they are being bribed. Thirdly, Trump never got anything in return either before or after the funds were released. Fourth of course, nobody can claim Trump was using bribery in effort to promote his campaign, because nobody knows who he'll be running against yet. Lastly, the best thing for Trump would be to have Biden as his opponent. I can't think of anybody more confused, more out of touch in that pathetic Democrat lineup than Biden.

First, jackass, why would the President of the Ukraine admit he accepted a bribe? Second, why would he piss off Trump when Trump controlled the funding.

Using funds to try to bribe a foreign official is illegal

Biden was leading in the polls. Joe Biden was the centrist. He was kicking Trumps ass in e ery poll.

Nice Try but Trump is toast.

Congress controls funding you moron

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Why does it matter?

I'm sure it doesn't matter to you if a president bribes a foreign power with military aid in order to discredit his political opposition. However, most people would consider that misuse of executive power, bribery, and a violation of his oath of office.

Not at all. We're all behind you. Just give us empirical evidence that Trump did such a thing, because so far, not one of you has been able to do it yet.

You may hear that next week as more witnesses closer to Trump start testifying.

Keep dreaming. Usually they put their strongest witnesses up first. They shot their load. It's over. What we were treated to was several people who stated in front of Congress they had no first hand knowledge about anything with Trump and the supposed bribery, or quid pro quo, or whatever term they are calming now. But here's the stupidity of all this:

First off, a President delaying funds is not an impeachable offense. Secondly, you can't bribe or blackmail (another lib word going around) a person when the so called subject has no idea they are being bribed. Thirdly, Trump never got anything in return either before or after the funds were released. Fourth of course, nobody can claim Trump was using bribery in effort to promote his campaign, because nobody knows who he'll be running against yet. Lastly, the best thing for Trump would be to have Biden as his opponent. I can't think of anybody more confused, more out of touch in that pathetic Democrat lineup than Biden.

First, jackass, why would the President of the Ukraine admit he accepted a bribe? Second, why would he piss off Trump when Trump controlled the funding.

Using funds to try to bribe a foreign official is illegal

Biden was leading in the polls. Joe Biden was the centrist. He was kicking Trumps ass in e ery poll.

Nice Try but Trump is toast.

Trump didn't bribe anybody and you have no facts to backup your claim. We heard the testimony, we have the phone call transcript. Nowhere did Trump ever state US aid would be contingent on any of his requests. Tell me, what did Biden brag about? He bragged that he told Ukrainian officials that if they didn't fire the prosecutor, they wouldn't be getting any US funds. If you want to use the word bribery, that's where it rightfully belongs. Biden threatened funds, and he got what he wanted out of it. Trump got nothing.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Why does it matter?

I'm sure it doesn't matter to you if a president bribes a foreign power with military aid in order to discredit his political opposition. However, most people would consider that misuse of executive power, bribery, and a violation of his oath of office.

Not at all. We're all behind you. Just give us empirical evidence that Trump did such a thing, because so far, not one of you has been able to do it yet.

You may hear that next week as more witnesses closer to Trump start testifying.

Keep dreaming. Usually they put their strongest witnesses up first. They shot their load. It's over. What we were treated to was several people who stated in front of Congress they had no first hand knowledge about anything with Trump and the supposed bribery, or quid pro quo, or whatever term they are calming now. But here's the stupidity of all this:

First off, a President delaying funds is not an impeachable offense. Secondly, you can't bribe or blackmail (another lib word going around) a person when the so called subject has no idea they are being bribed. Thirdly, Trump never got anything in return either before or after the funds were released. Fourth of course, nobody can claim Trump was using bribery in effort to promote his campaign, because nobody knows who he'll be running against yet. Lastly, the best thing for Trump would be to have Biden as his opponent. I can't think of anybody more confused, more out of touch in that pathetic Democrat lineup than Biden.

You wish it was over. This week, for your viewing pleasure, we have:

Tuesday -
Jennifer Williams, aide to Mike Pence
Lt Col Alexander Vindman, NSC aide
Kurt Volker, former US special envoy to Ukraine
Tim Morrison, NSC aide

Wednesday -
Gordon Sondland, US Ambassador to the European Union
Laura Cooper, Deputy Asst Secy of Defence
David Hale, Under Secy of State for Political Affairs

Thursday -
Fiona Hill, Former White House Russia Expert

I am especially interested in the testimony of Vindman and Sondland.

I bought an extra large bag of impeachment blend popcorn. I can't wait.

Hope you enjoy yourself as much as we will.......but I doubt it.

 

[The Original Tree]

 

[jc456]

Why does it matter?

I'm sure it doesn't matter to you if a president bribes a foreign power with military aid in order to discredit his political opposition. However, most people would consider that misuse of executive power, bribery, and a violation of his oath of office.

Not at all. We're all behind you. Just give us empirical evidence that Trump did such a thing, because so far, not one of you has been able to do it yet.

You may hear that next week as more witnesses closer to Trump start testifying.

Keep dreaming. Usually they put their strongest witnesses up first. They shot their load. It's over. What we were treated to was several people who stated in front of Congress they had no first hand knowledge about anything with Trump and the supposed bribery, or quid pro quo, or whatever term they are calming now. But here's the stupidity of all this:

First off, a President delaying funds is not an impeachable offense. Secondly, you can't bribe or blackmail (another lib word going around) a person when the so called subject has no idea they are being bribed. Thirdly, Trump never got anything in return either before or after the funds were released. Fourth of course, nobody can claim Trump was using bribery in effort to promote his campaign, because nobody knows who he'll be running against yet. Lastly, the best thing for Trump would be to have Biden as his opponent. I can't think of anybody more confused, more out of touch in that pathetic Democrat lineup than Biden.

First, jackass, why would the President of the Ukraine admit he accepted a bribe? Second, why would he piss off Trump when Trump controlled the funding.

Using funds to try to bribe a foreign official is illegal

Biden was leading in the polls. Joe Biden was the centrist. He was kicking Trumps ass in e ery poll.

Nice Try but Trump is toast.

Why would you presume to know there was one? It seems you’re the jackass. Calling the guy a liar

 

[NotYourBody]

I'm sure it doesn't matter to you if a president bribes a foreign power with military aid in order to discredit his political opposition. However, most people would consider that misuse of executive power, bribery, and a violation of his oath of office.

Not at all. We're all behind you. Just give us empirical evidence that Trump did such a thing, because so far, not one of you has been able to do it yet.

You may hear that next week as more witnesses closer to Trump start testifying.

Keep dreaming. Usually they put their strongest witnesses up first. They shot their load. It's over. What we were treated to was several people who stated in front of Congress they had no first hand knowledge about anything with Trump and the supposed bribery, or quid pro quo, or whatever term they are calming now. But here's the stupidity of all this:

First off, a President delaying funds is not an impeachable offense. Secondly, you can't bribe or blackmail (another lib word going around) a person when the so called subject has no idea they are being bribed. Thirdly, Trump never got anything in return either before or after the funds were released. Fourth of course, nobody can claim Trump was using bribery in effort to promote his campaign, because nobody knows who he'll be running against yet. Lastly, the best thing for Trump would be to have Biden as his opponent. I can't think of anybody more confused, more out of touch in that pathetic Democrat lineup than Biden.

You wish it was over. This week, for your viewing pleasure, we have:

Tuesday -
Jennifer Williams, aide to Mike Pence
Lt Col Alexander Vindman, NSC aide
Kurt Volker, former US special envoy to Ukraine
Tim Morrison, NSC aide

Wednesday -
Gordon Sondland, US Ambassador to the European Union
Laura Cooper, Deputy Asst Secy of Defence
David Hale, Under Secy of State for Political Affairs

Thursday -
Fiona Hill, Former White House Russia Expert

I am especially interested in the testimony of Vindman and Sondland.

I bought an extra large bag of impeachment blend popcorn. I can't wait.

Hope you enjoy yourself as much as we will.......but I doubt it.

Guaranteed I will enjoy it more than you. I don't have to worry about defending the jackass.

Is it Tuesday yet?

 

[OKTexas]

What you said is like the call transcript. It's available for all to see.

Trump holds up money to Ukraine for whatever purposes he held it up for. But because it may have also benefited him in the event he ran against Biden, that makes it an impeachable offense. Did you not say that?

And if so, that means that Trump couldn't have held up the money for any reason, even if he knew it would end up in corrupt hands, because Biden is in the race. Did you not say that???

So you're saying it is just a coincidence that Trump withheld the military aid just days before the phone call. And it's just coincidental that Trump dropped a request that Zelensky open a corruption investigation when discussing military aid in the phone conversation. And of course, it's just a coincidence that Biden's son worked for the company to be investigated. And it was coincidental that Trump fired the Ambassador to the Ukraine, who was not on the Trump team, just weeks before the phone call. And of course Zelensky's much sought after meeting with the president was being delayed.

WOW! What a strange series of coincidences.

Why do you keep perpetrating the lies. Zelensky didn't take office till May, the Ambassador was reassigned, not fired, the same month. Trump held the aid till he got a feel for Zelensky and saw who he was appointing. Nothing unusual about that, given Ukraines history. And they weren't discussing military aid, they were talking about a arms deal unrelated to the aid.

Also Biden was the administrations point man in Ukraine at the same time billions, in US aid, disappeared from the bank that was owned by his sons employer and not a damn thing was done about it. If that were the case in the Trump administration you commies would be all over it.

.

Actually, she was recalled, not fired. However, in diplomatic circles recalling an ambassador is done either because of displeasure with actions of the country or the ambassador. If Trump had fired her, then there would be the question of cause and obviously he did not want to attract the media attention.

If freezing military aid with the election of a new president was a usual occurrence, then why was congress not notified as required? And why was the transcript of the call secured with top secret document. I think the fact is the whole episode of freezing military aid and attempting to bride the Zelensky was meant to be kept secret.

Seems I said she was "reassigned, not fired", should I use a larger font? And the aid was only on hold for a few weeks while Trump got a feel for the new administration in a very corrupt country.

.

Just another coincidence? BTW, the freeze on the aid was not released till Sept 11, a few days before the impeachment inquiry began. The aid was frozen before July 3rd.

Tell the class why it matters how long the aid was held, it's not like someone in Ukraine was making collection calls of reporting us to the credit bureau. They got the aid, so where's the problem?

.

 

[jc456]

The blowjob was not an impeachable offense. Are you so much of a dumbass that you cannot read the Articles of Impeachment for Bubba Clinton?

He lied under oath.

About an intern blow job.

He lied, proven. Why does it matter about what?

Oh Jesus fucking Christ! Will you people please get on topic or just shut the fuck up. Do you even understand the difference between Clinton's actions and Trump's in relation to national security, the integrity of the constitution and the founders intent regarding impeachment? I don't think so.

Where the impeachment case stands as Democrats prepare to bring a barrage of new witnesses

No not at all explain?

Are you of the position that trump can’t respond in kind?

He was treated maliciously

MALICIOUSLY

This entire inquiry is malicious

Bullshit. Trump has committed serious violations.

Name one

 

[OKTexas]

Poor little short bus, if Biden can be investigated if he wasn't running, then he can be investigated when he is. How Trump decides to pursue it is irrelevant, Bidens corruption likely occurred in Ukraine or they have some knowledge about it, asking Zelensky about cooperation is not a crime.

.

Holyfuckingshit!

WTF is wrong with you?? I say candidate Biden can be investigated if Trump had asked the DoJ to investigate him -- and you still think I'm saying Biden can't be investigated because he's a candidate.

You're truly fucked in the head.

You mad short bus? Trump asked for cooperation with the AG 4 times during the call, that's not a crime.

.

LOL

Why would I be mad at an idiot who makes me laugh?

And Trump lied. I already showed you the DoJ said Trump didn't ask Barr to look into it. Just like Trump also lied to Zelensky about Biden stopping a prosecution by getting Shokin fired -- there was no such prosecution. There wasn't even an active investigation.

And Trumo didn't merely ask for cooperation into an investigation that didn't actually exist -- he asked Zelensky to look into it...

"Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it... "​

If raising questions about Bidens corruption would hurt his chances at the nomination, why would Trump have to ask anyone for assistance? Wouldn't he just pose the question in a rally or something? I guess your limited short bus abilities just don't allow you to think these things through. The commie hearings are bringing up more questions about Biden than Trump ever could by himself. Is shitt one of your bus mates?

.

Your reasoning is flawed because nobody pays attention to Trump rallies except red state nutters.

Also, Trump wanted the Ukraine's to announce an investigation into the Bidens. He probably thought it would give his claims against the Bidens more legitimacy if a foreign government started an investigation.

I'm sure Trump planned to claim he had nothing to do with it.

Wow, more commie lies, every news agency in the world wants to be the first to fact check everything Trump says. So if you really think no one is listening, you're crazy or delusional.

.