Read The Closed-Door Hearing Transcripts Here

[g5000]

I'm reading them. What I think you meant to say is that no parroting Trump rube will read them.

Why would we bother reading fabricated Dem propaganda? Grow a pair and just admit it, the fix was in before the first 'witness' testified.

It's fascinating just how terrified you Trumptards are of these transcripts. Probably because your lies don't fly in the face of the fact the Republicans questioned the witnesses for as long as the Democrats did.

What a submissive little pussy you are!

 

[Picaro]

Democrats just put out those doctored and edited 'transcripts' to test their base and see if they're still the dumbass fashionista morons they were a month ago.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

No one is going to read hundreds of pages of testimony

I will. Maybe it's just beyond your ability level. Reading is hard, after all.

 

[Borillar]

Michael McKinley's hearing transcript: Michael McKinley transcript: Read full text of former Pompeo adviser's testimony in Trump impeachment inquiry — live updates - CBS News

Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch's hearing transcript: Yovanovitch transcript.pdf

The purpose of Schiff's closed door hearing was to hide his injustices from the public.
These "transcripts" are not complete and therefore worthless propaganda.

Like the transcripts of Trump’s perfect phone call?

 

[Stormy Daniels]

These "transcripts" are not complete

Evidence?

We are going to try our feelings for just once

So, you're just going to make up crap. OK, glad we cleared that up.

 

[Hellokitty]

Michael McKinley's hearing transcript: Michael McKinley transcript: Read full text of former Pompeo adviser's testimony in Trump impeachment inquiry — live updates - CBS News

Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch's hearing transcript: Yovanovitch transcript.pdf

No one is going to read hundreds of pages of testimony

I'm reading them. What I think you meant to say is that no parroting Trump rube will read them.

I'm saying point people to a specific pages you want them to read showing a crime and not an opinion.

 

[Siete]

Michael McKinley's hearing transcript: Michael McKinley transcript: Read full text of former Pompeo adviser's testimony in Trump impeachment inquiry — live updates - CBS News

Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch's hearing transcript: Yovanovitch transcript.pdf

No one is going to read hundreds of pages of testimony

I'm reading them. What I think you meant to say is that no parroting Trump rube will read them.

I'm saying point people to a specific pages you want them to read showing a crime and not an opinion.

it doesnt need to be a crime to be impeached ....

 

[OKTexas]

Michael McKinley's hearing transcript: Michael McKinley transcript: Read full text of former Pompeo adviser's testimony in Trump impeachment inquiry — live updates - CBS News

Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch's hearing transcript: Yovanovitch transcript.pdf

So the commies released the two they consider the most damning, where are the rest that contradict them?

.

 

[BluesLegend]

Then you should have no problem with our side questioning him under oath.

To what end? It's not necessary to question the motives of the guy who called 911 when the fire dept is on the scene and fighting the fire.
More like you wish to leak their identity in an effort to impugne their reputation in violation of federal law.

The president has a constitutional right to face his accuser or have you forgotten that?

He doesn't ,dope.

Whistleblower identities are protected under federal law.

The SCOTUS says you don't know what you are talking about.

More like you don't know what you're talking about.

There's been a dozen witnesses who've corroborated the whistleblower's claim. The whistleblower is irrelevant at this point and any attempt to out them would only be seen as punative and retaliatory.

Give it up.

I see a dozen witnesses you say, then one more shouldn't bother you then should it.

 

[BluesLegend]

I'm reading them. What I think you meant to say is that no parroting Trump rube will read them.

Why would we bother reading fabricated Dem propaganda? Grow a pair and just admit it, the fix was in before the first 'witness' testified.

It's fascinating just how terrified you Trumptards are of these transcripts. Probably because your lies don't fly in the face of the fact the Republicans questioned the witnesses for as long as the Democrats did.

What a submissive little pussy you are!

You're losing it lib you're off in lib fantasy land with the pink unicorns.

 

[g5000]

Michael McKinley's hearing transcript: Michael McKinley transcript: Read full text of former Pompeo adviser's testimony in Trump impeachment inquiry — live updates - CBS News

Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch's hearing transcript: Yovanovitch transcript.pdf

So the commies released the two they consider the most damning, where are the rest that contradict them?

.

There will be more released tomorrow. Patience.

 

[WEATHER53]

These "transcripts" are not complete

Evidence?

We are going to try our feelings for just once

So, you're just going to make up crap. OK, glad we cleared that up.

Identify what is made up and what facts prove it’s made up

 

[Lesh]

I'm saying point people to a specific pages you want them to read showing a crime and not an opinion.

Trump wanted a foreign government to help him get re-elected by manufacturing a bogus investigation against his oppponent.

The mere "ask" is illegal and impeachable

A Quid pro Quo is not required...even though it exists

 

[Picaro]

These "transcripts" are not complete

Evidence?

We are going to try our feelings for just once

So, you're just going to make up crap. OK, glad we cleared that up.

Like Democrats did for their 'transcript' of nothing but innuendo and fake 'gotchas'? Their feelings are more valid and truthful. Your silly response is ironic.

 

[OKTexas]

Michael McKinley's hearing transcript: Michael McKinley transcript: Read full text of former Pompeo adviser's testimony in Trump impeachment inquiry — live updates - CBS News

Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch's hearing transcript: Yovanovitch transcript.pdf

So the commies released the two they consider the most damning, where are the rest that contradict them?

.

There will be more released tomorrow. Patience.

And most will only hear what the press wants them to hear, because they have lives and don't have time to read all that crap. This is nothing but a dog and pony show so the commies in the house can try to influence the election.

.

 

[g5000]

I have read to page 200 of 317 pages of Yovanovitch's testimony, and here is what I have gathered so far.

Prosecutor General Shokin was a very crooked guy who had close ties to President Poroshenko. Poroshenko and Shokin were the godfathers to each other's children.

Shokin was so corrupt that the European Union, the IMF, and the people of the Ukraine called for his removal. Shokin's corruption revolved around selective prosecutions of political enemies. Kind of like Trump is trying to do these days.

Shokin "investigated" Burisma but got nowhere. However, just to keep their political enemies on the hook, the prosecutor will not close an investigation and will keep it open.

After the US (by way of Biden) and the IMF and the EU and everyone but Russia called for Shokin to be removed, he finally was. When Biden used to brag about Shokin's removal, he made it sound like he was solely responsible for getting rid of the guy. He gave himself more credit than he was due.

But then Shokin was replaced by Lutsenko. Lutsenko is not even a lawyer! Yet he was appointed as Prosecutor General. They had to actually pass a law and change their constitution to allow Lutsenko to be made the Prosecutor General.

Lutsenko was also close to Poroshenko and also just as corrupt as Shokin. However, the Ukrainian people were rising up and revolting against all the naked corruption and it became obvious that a reformer, Zelensky, was going to be the next President, and it was assumed he would boot Lutsenko to the curb (which he did), and so there was no movement by the international community to get rid of Lutsenko since it was obvious he was going to be booted soon.

Under Lutsenko, there was this special prosecutor named Kholodnitsky. Kholodnitsky was caught on tape coaching witnesses on how to avoid prosecution in cases that were before his office.

This was "beyond the pale" in the words of Ambassador Yovanovitch. And yet Lutsenko did not fire Kholodnitsky. So that tells you how corrupt Lutsenko was.


So the Ukrainian people are sick and tired of this shit, and in comes Zelensky the reformer by a huge landslide.

The next thing you know, Rudy Giuliani is keeping regular company with Lutsenko, the former corrupt General Prosecutor.

Actually, Giuliani has been conducting business in Ukraine for over a decade under the corrupt regimes of Poroshenko and Yanukovych (a total Russian stooge who ran to Russia after he was booted out). Giuliani has been moving in Russian circles, as well.

Giuliani begins using the thoroughly corrupt Lutsenko's political connections to build a hoax case against Joe Biden. Rudy begins a shadow diplomacy campaign and he has to take out our real ambassador (Yovanovitch) in order to become the sole voice of America whispering in the ear of the new regime.

At Giuliani's bidding, Lutsenko invents a totally bullshit "list of people not to prosecute" he says was given to him by Yovanovitch.

Lutsenko has since recanted all these hoaxes. There was no dirt on Biden, there was no active investigation into Burisma when Hunter Biden joined the board, there was no "list of people not to prosecute". He was just trying to please Giuliani and Trump.


And now this just in: Exclusive: Giuliani associate now willing to comply with Trump impeachment inquiry - lawyer

Parnas would be a crucial witness if he were to cooperate. He has said he played a key role in connecting Giuliani to Ukrainian officials during Giuliani’s investigation into Biden and his son Hunter.

 

[Picaro]

Michael McKinley's hearing transcript: Michael McKinley transcript: Read full text of former Pompeo adviser's testimony in Trump impeachment inquiry — live updates - CBS News

Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch's hearing transcript: Yovanovitch transcript.pdf

No one is going to read hundreds of pages of testimony

I'm reading them. What I think you meant to say is that no parroting Trump rube will read them.

I'm saying point people to a specific pages you want them to read showing a crime and not an opinion.

it doesnt need to be a crime to be impeached ....

It does when you gimps keep claiming he committed one, yet can't seem to find any evidence for one, after going three years of lying and sniveling. Meanwhile, evidence of actual crimes committed by your beloved Hillary and the treasons of Obama go unprosecuted and denied by you and your ilk. See, you just have no credibility, and neither does your Party, and it likely will never have any again, which is why you scum are hoping to flood the country with gangsters from other countries. It's hilarious watching you buffoons trying to sell it, reminds of those 'Two Wild N Crazy Guys!!!!' from SNL trying to pick up girls, only with Democrats its under age trannies they like to hit on.

 

[Syriusly]

I'm sure the Dem transcripts during the Salem witch trials were equally as biased.

I am sure that the Republican transcripts during the Benghazi witch trials were more biased.

A U.S. ambassador was killed during your Benghazi fiasco fool.

I believe you are talking about the Benghazi witch trial.

Where Nunes spent years trying to find a crime to charge Obama or Clinton with- largely behind closed doors.

There were ten investigations into the Benghazi matter: one by the FBI; one by an independent board commissioned by the State Department; two by Democrat-controlled Senate Committees; and six by Republican-controlled House Committees. After the first five Republican investigations found no evidence of wrongdoing by senior Obama administration officials, Republicans in 2014 opened a sixth investigation, the House Select Committee on Benghazi, chaired by Trey Gowdy. This investigation also failed to find any evidence of wrongdoing by senior Obama administration officials. A possible political motive for the investigation was revealed on September 29, 2015, when Republican House majority leader Kevin McCarthy, then vying to become Speaker of the House, told Sean Hannity on Fox News that the investigation was part of a "strategy to fight and win,' adding "Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi special committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping."[247][248]

Shortly after the Benghazi attack, Secretary of State Clinton commissioned an independent Accountability Review Board to investigate, chaired by retired ambassador Thomas R. Pickering with vice-chair retired Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Michael Mullen. The Board released their final report on December 19, 2012.[249] It made 29 recommendations to the State Department on how to improve its operations, which Clinton pledged to implement.[250] As part of this investigation, four career State Department officials were criticized for denying requests for additional security at the facility prior to the attack. By the end of 2012, Eric J. Boswell, the Assistant Secretary of State for Diplomatic Security, resigned under pressure, while three others were suspended.[251] None of the other Benghazi investigations identified wrongdoing by any individuals.

The House Select Committee on Benghazi's final report was released on June 28, 2016 and the committee closed down five months later.[252] It criticized the actions and speed of response of the State Department, and the Defense Department, leading up to and during the attacks in Benghazi.[253] No further public investigations have been conducted since.

The findings of the two-year investigation by the Republican-controlled House Intelligence Committee, the fifth of six Republican investigations, was summarized by the Associated Press on November 21, 2014:[254]

A two-year investigation by the Republican-controlled House Intelligence Committee has found that the CIA and the military acted properly in responding to the 2012 attack on a U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, and asserted no wrongdoing by Obama administration appointees.

Debunking a series of persistent allegations hinting at dark conspiracies, the investigation of the politically charged incident determined that there was no intelligence failure, no delay in sending a CIA rescue team, no missed opportunity for a military rescue, and no evidence the CIA was covertly shipping arms from Libya to Syria.

In the immediate aftermath of the attack, intelligence about who carried it out and why was contradictory, the report found. That led Susan Rice, then U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, to inaccurately assert that the attack had evolved from a protest, when in fact there had been no protest. But it was intelligence analysts, not political appointees, who made the wrong call, the committee found. The report did not conclude that Rice or any other government official acted in bad faith or intentionally misled the American people.

 

[Syriusly]

Michael McKinley's hearing transcript: Michael McKinley transcript: Read full text of former Pompeo adviser's testimony in Trump impeachment inquiry — live updates - CBS News

Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch's hearing transcript: Yovanovitch transcript.pdf

No one is going to read hundreds of pages of testimony

I'm reading them. What I think you meant to say is that no parroting Trump rube will read them.

I'm saying point people to a specific pages you want them to read showing a crime and not an opinion.

it doesnt need to be a crime to be impeached ....

It does when you gimps keep claiming he committed one, yet can't seem to find any evidence for one, after going three years of lying and sniveling. Meanwhile, evidence of actual crimes committed by your beloved Hillary and the treasons of Obama go unprosecuted and denied by you and your ilk. See, you just have no credibility, and neither does your Party, and it likely will never have any again, which is why you scum are hoping to flood the country with gangsters from other countries.

So why do you think that Trump is covering up for Obama and Clinton?

3 years of being in charge of the AG and the FBI- and still no charges.

Why the Trump cover up of the charges you think are so obvious against Clinton and Obama?

 

[JGalt]

So you've read it? What is it Trump supposedly did?

Or is this just one more in a long string of nothingburgers?

nah - a long string of quid pro quo admissions from Goldiloks ----

Well post them here. I have more important things to do than download a 128 MB PDF file, and spend the rest of the day searching for something that isn't there.

you dont give a shit what the report says - so sit back and bitch

No, actually I don't give a shit what it says. You people are liars. Every fabricated "scandal" you've come up with since Trump was inaugurated, has been nothing but one long string of lies.

Why should I believe anything you people say? Never heard of the story about the little boy who cried "wolf"?

poor little pissant - the big bad world is out to get you and Trump.



zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

I'm not the one who's crying, little snowflake. You leftists have been either been crying your eyes out or howling like jihadists for three years straight.

I'm winning. And I'll keep winning right through to 2024.