Offical Impeachment Thread

[Sandy Shanks]

E.U. Ambassador Gordon Sondland is a political appointee, not a career foreign service advisor, having contributed one million dollars to the Trump campaign. Whenever he wants, he can dial up the President. That may change after today.

“I know that members of this Committee have frequently framed these complicated issues in the form of a simple question: Was there a ‘quid pro quo?’,” Sondland’s statement reads. “As I testified previously, with regard to the requested White House call and White House meeting, the answer is yes.”

Specifically, “a quid pro quo for arranging a White House visit for [Ukrainian] President [Volodymyr] Zelensky,” which Zelensky felt was essential to his country's survival against Russian aggression.

In addition, Sondland summarized Giuliani’s role in his testimony.

Mr. Giuliani’s requests were a quid pro quo for arranging a White House visit for President Zelensky. Mr. Giuliani demanded that Ukraine make a public statement announcing investigations of the 2016 election/DNC server and Burisma. Mr. Giuliani was expressing the desires of the President of the United States, and we knew that these investigations were important to the President.

Burisma is code for Biden. Hunter Biden was on the board of Burisma.

For Trump, Sondland's testimony was devastating. There is much more, far too much for this venue.

 

[mamooth]

How did it pan out for me? Clinton lost the election because her corrupt behavior was exposed.

Interesting. Conservatives see self-worth as being about winning, no matter how vile and disgusting they had to act to win. In contrast, liberals see self-worth as being about being being a good person.

It worked out rather well for me. How did it work out for you?

As I won't burn in Hell for eternity, pretty damn good.

 

[Sandy Shanks]

Fox News reports, "Former Whitewater Independent Counsel Ken Starr said that the testimony of Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland all but guarantees articles of impeachment will be drawn up by House Democrats."

The Republicans are struggling to defend Trump. Basically, their defense is three-pronged.

They attack the Democrats, call the impeachment inquiry a sideshow, and attack the media for reporting the developments of the inquiry.

They say that President Zelensky never felt the pressure of extortion. American assistance and Trump's good graces are existential for Ukraine, and the very last thing Zelensky would do is impugn the American President's intentions. It would be suicidal, and that goes for his ministers as well.

They would ask if Trump ever told the witnesses directly that he was extorting the Ukrainian leader to get what he wanted. This last defense indicates they think that Trump is an idiot. The idea that Trump didn't tell Sondland that he was bribing Zelensky to get the investigations of the Bidens and the debunked Crowdstrike is no defense. Trump did tell Sondland, Volker, and Perry, "Talk to Rudy." Giuliani was working to get the investigations, and the "Three Amigos" did as they were told and worked with Giuliani who was in turn working for his client, Trump.

The other weakness of the third defense is that it exposes the obvious. Who did have personal knowledge of the Trump's wishes and the quid pro quo? Why, Mulvaney, Bolton, Pompeo, and Giuliani, of course. Who is preventing those four to testify? Why, Trump, of course.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

We've gone from second and third hand witnesses to some asshole who presumed a bunch of shit.

This is done. What a fucking joke you democrats are,

 

[Sandy Shanks]

Trump campaign sources say EU Ambassador Gordon Sondland's allegation of a quid pro quo implicating Trump and top administration officials "blindsided" aides inside the White House, the re-election campaign as well as some Republican lawmakers.

A separate Trump campaign adviser was furious with Sondland's testimony, calling it "aggravating." The adviser said it came as a complete surprise that the EU Ambassador would implicate senior members of the administration. "It was really bizarre," the adviser said, adding Sondland appeared to be throwing top administration officials under the bus in real time.

Another campaign source in touch with the White House team handling impeachment today said at the outset of the Sondland hearing, those aides seemed to be distressed – seemed to be “freaking out.” The source acknowledged Sondland’s testimony undermined the White House’s central argument that there was “no quid pro quo,” noting there are some Trump allies who have wanted to shift from that to arguing the appearance of quid pro quo was really just the President executing his legitimate foreign policy goals.

Then, of course, came the usual denial of reality.

A third campaign source said enough questions were raised about Sondland's testimony by GOP members to protect Trump from sustaining serious damage. "No direct hit," the Trump adviser said.

https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-n...g-11-20-19/h_3ab96a833fe6cad36af65a69daf9b320

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Does the Democratic Party establishment know something everyone else does not know? Have they already nominated Biden behind closed doors like they did Clinton? Because the Trump-Ukraine phone call was 7 months out from the first Iowa caucus to determine the Democratic Party nominee (at least that's supposed to be how it works). Biden is nowhere near being the nominee. Given his poor fundraising efforts and his laughable debate performances, how can the Dems, with a straight face, call Biden a "political rival?" Only if they have already predetermined that Biden is the nominee, can they claim that an alleged investigation into his son's ties to Ukraine is of political benefit to Trump. If the Democratic primaries are truly a democratic process (doubtful), and Biden loses (probable, without a lot of help from the establishment), then Trump's benefit from investigating the Bidens is non-existent.

Now, as to why Trump may have done this. Who knows? Maybe he got sick and tired of everyone calling his kids crooks and liars, and when he got wind of Biden's kid collecting $50,000/mo. from one of the poorest countries on the planet for board-sitting, he decided it was time for a little payback. I might have done the same thing in his position.

Which is why I said if they impeach Trump, it will be over mind reading.

First they have to prove that Biden was going to be his opponent in the presidential race, and then prove the reason Trump withheld funds.

The only way the commies could possibly do that is by claiming mind reading and being able to see the future.

 

[eagle1462010]

How did it pan out for me? Clinton lost the election because her corrupt behavior was exposed.

Interesting. Conservatives see self-worth as being about winning, no matter how vile and disgusting they had to act to win. In contrast, liberals see self-worth as being about being being a good person.

It worked out rather well for me. How did it work out for you?

As I won't burn in Hell for eternity, pretty damn good.

Your side has been calling for a bare knuckles fight.......You have one now....

Your scam is falling apart...............after years of BS...........Enjoy what's coming.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Let's sum up the Impeachment process to date.

Here we go.

View attachment 290731

It's a democrat party and you're the pivot man.

 

[depotoo]

[MEDIA][/MEDIA]

cnn headline at the time
Sondland says 'It was no secret' that quid pro quo came at 'express direction of the President' - CNNPolitics

 

[mamooth]

Your side has been calling for a bare knuckles fight.......You have one now....

And now we're beating your bitch asses and laughing about it.

Your scam is falling apart...............after years of BS...........Enjoy what's coming.

Not to worry, we'll enjoy beating your bitch asses for quite some time. The funny thing is how much you seem to enjoy it. Oh well, I guess that means everyone is happy.

 

[eagle1462010]

Your side has been calling for a bare knuckles fight.......You have one now....

And now we're beating your bitch asses and laughing about it.

Your scam is falling apart...............after years of BS...........Enjoy what's coming.

Not to worry, we'll enjoy beating your bitch asses for quite some time. The funny thing is how much you seem to enjoy it. Oh well, I guess that means everyone is happy.

Your side has been Losing since the last election.

You lost the election............
You lost the Supreme Court........
You lost several Fed Courts.......
Obama Legacy is dead........

Then you lost your minds.
Now you will lose in the Impeachment.....
And then you will lose the next election.

BTW. I am enjoying this...........

 

[IM2]

Bullshit.

Links and the statement of one of Vidman's supervisors has been included in this thread, so no, it's not bullshit.

.

Yes, it is bullshit. Most of what comes from alt-right media is bullshit. Anybody can create a website.

The statement posted was from Col Hickman who commanded Vindman in Europe. So no, it's not bullshit. It's just not convenient to your propaganda.

.

It's bullshit because he's working as National Security staff and if what Hickman said was true, it would be reflected on his record since Hickman was his CO. I don't think you become NS staff working in DC with a security clearance and a foreign portfolio if what Hickman said was true,

His language skills is what got him many jobs in the military, people tend to overlook minor infractions for people with those skills. You've never been in the military have you? I've seen many people fuck up and move up.

.

.

You don't work at that level if he was anything like Hickman described. I'm not going to be arguing with people who use fox news and alt- right media for sources. If this guy would have praised Trump this Hickman guy would not exist.

 

[mamooth]

Oh, so you're not interested in the truth. You just want your ORANGE MAN BAD fantasies validated.

Why not subpoena the child molestor pizza parlor owner too? Oh, that's right, because it's just one of your fraudulent retarded conspiracy theories.

Why is it you cult sheep can't grasp that your conspiracy babbling is not a justification for subpoenas? Oh wait, I just answered that, with the 'cult sheep' thing.

 

[Snouter]

TDS folks apply Prep H externally only! Quit eating it.

 

[Hossfly]

Joe Biden bragged about this from his own mouth.....

You can't hide it Lib.

Suuuuure he did.

Who feeds you this stuff, and why do you fall for it? I mean, it gets debunked every single time, but you never learn. Your masters lie to you and leave you twisting in the wind, and what do you do? You run back to them, drop to your knees, lick their boots with gusto, thank them for lying to you, and beg for more lies.

Council On Foreign Relations fed the country this stuff. Ever watch the news?

 

[IM2]

- Under 18 U.S.C. § 1505, however, a defendant can be convicted of obstruction of justice by obstructing a pending proceeding before Congress or a federal administrative agency.Obstruction of justice
-18 U.S. Code § 201.Bribery of public officials
specifically:being a public official or person selected to be a public official, directly or indirectly, corruptly demands, seeks, receives, accepts, or agrees to receive or accept anything of value personally or for any other person or entity, in return for:
official act;
18 U.S. Code § 201 - Bribery of public officials and witnesses
-52 USC 30121: Contributions and donations by foreign nationals
specifically: (2) a person to solicit, accept, or receive a contribution or donation described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) from a foreign national. [USC02] 52 USC 30121: Contributions and donations by foreign nationals

Any more questions?

define obstruction. defense of oneself is not obstruction.

Sure it is. If the house subpoenas peoples and documents you are obstructing their investigation. It was in the articles for impeachment for Nixon and Clinton too. You defend yourself by speaking the truth, let other people tell the truth and delivering documents if asked. If you don't you aren't defending yourself but obstructing justice.

oh someone isn't allowed to defend themselves in your fked up brain? too funny. son, you're in the wrong country. go back to russia.

Of course, you are allowed to defend yourself. Defending yourself tough does NOT include the right to withhold evidence. You can't defend yourself by shooting a witness for instance either. There are limits on the right to defend yourself. Refusing to comply with a subpoena issued by the house is one of those.

it's not an official impeachment. he isn't obstructing shit.[/QUOTE]

It's official. Refusing to comply with a subpoena issued by the house is obstruction whether this is an impeachment inquiry or not.[/QUOTE]
They challenged the subpoenas in court. Try to get some facts for once.[/QUOTE]
I got plenty of facts. Fact 1 and only-if this was truly a hoax or witch hunt, trump would not be hiding documents and blocking witnesses. He'd let it all come out so the hoax and witch hunt would be revealed without question. But trump knows his supporters are dumb and he can tell them anything. So he hides documents, blocks testimonies then runs around talking about how nobody has been able to prove anything and you guys are stupid enough to believe it.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Links and the statement of one of Vidman's supervisors has been included in this thread, so no, it's not bullshit.

.

Yes, it is bullshit. Most of what comes from alt-right media is bullshit. Anybody can create a website.

The statement posted was from Col Hickman who commanded Vindman in Europe. So no, it's not bullshit. It's just not convenient to your propaganda.

.

It's bullshit because he's working as National Security staff and if what Hickman said was true, it would be reflected on his record since Hickman was his CO. I don't think you become NS staff working in DC with a security clearance and a foreign portfolio if what Hickman said was true,

His language skills is what got him many jobs in the military, people tend to overlook minor infractions for people with those skills. You've never been in the military have you? I've seen many people fuck up and move up.

.

.

You don't work at that level if he was anything like Hickman described. I'm not going to be arguing with people who use fox news and alt- right media for sources. If this guy would have praised Trump this Hickman guy would not exist.

The retarded Malcumx fan would like to question your sources, and speak to the manager.

 

[mamooth]

Your side has been Losing since the last election.

So you've forgotten how we slaughtered you in 2017, 2018 and 2019? I suppose the cult has told you to suppress those memories. Too painful.

And you've forgotten how Trump accomplished essentially nothing for your cause, even with an (R) house and senate? That has to sting. Why couldn't they deliver on the promised Stalinist utopia?

What's more, Republicanism is now permanently associated with treason and corruption. The Republican demographic is dying off and it's not being replaced. Your cult is dying. It's never pretty when cults die.

Now you will lose in the Impeachment.....

How does one "lose" an impeachment? Trump will be impeached. Given the hard evidence of his guilt, there's no doubt about that. If the senate won't convict, that hands the senate to the Democrats.

And then you will lose the next election.

Given the polls, you're going to get beaten much harder in 2020.

If you had any brains, you'd be pushing for Trump to resign. The more this goes on, the more Republicans get implicated in the corruption.

 

[mamooth]

Council On Foreign Relations fed the country this stuff. Ever watch the news?

Yes, Biden pushed to get a corrupt prosecutor fired. He bragged about it because it was the policy of the State Department, the USA, NATO, the EU, and pretty much everyone. He was working in the service of the USA.

Claiming he did it for his son is a big whopper on your part. That's just something your Stalinist cult made up.

See if you can understand the difference:

Politicians are allowed to lobby for policy on behalf of the USA.

Politicians are not allowed to lobby for policy to simply benefit themselves.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

define obstruction. defense of oneself is not obstruction.

Sure it is. If the house subpoenas peoples and documents you are obstructing their investigation. It was in the articles for impeachment for Nixon and Clinton too. You defend yourself by speaking the truth, let other people tell the truth and delivering documents if asked. If you don't you aren't defending yourself but obstructing justice.

oh someone isn't allowed to defend themselves in your fked up brain? too funny. son, you're in the wrong country. go back to russia.

Of course, you are allowed to defend yourself. Defending yourself tough does NOT include the right to withhold evidence. You can't defend yourself by shooting a witness for instance either. There are limits on the right to defend yourself. Refusing to comply with a subpoena issued by the house is one of those.

it's not an official impeachment. he isn't obstructing shit.

It's official. Refusing to comply with a subpoena issued by the house is obstruction whether this is an impeachment inquiry or not.[/QUOTE]
They challenged the subpoenas in court. Try to get some facts for once.[/QUOTE]
I got plenty of facts. Fact 1 and only-if this was truly a hoax or witch hunt, trump would not be hiding documents and blocking witnesses. He'd let it all come out so the hoax and witch hunt would be revealed without question. But trump knows his supporters are dumb and he can tell them anything. So he hides documents, blocks testimonies then runs around talking about how nobody has been able to prove anything and you guys are stupid enough to believe it.[/QUOTE]

So how many witnesses did Schiff Face bring to the inquiry? How many did Trump? Zero.

We go through this stuff every single time one of your attempts to get Trump fail. When you lose, you cry foul because you want even more people or articles to try and prove you're right. Well you on the left are not right, and never were.

Write to the President and ask him to do an exchange with Schiff Face. Trump will let two of his people testify in exchange for the testimony of the so-called whistleblower and the person responsible for providing that whistleblower with the information.

See, that's what's called "fair."