• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

White House releases memo of Trump-Ukraine call

W_Heisenberg said:
Hi.

You cool with the President calling for a Civil War?
Hugs and kisses.
Click to expand...

Like other tweets, democrats totally misunderstand and misinterpret Trump's tweets. He is not calling for a civil war if the democrats don't alter their unjust and barbarous behaviors, he is correctly predicting a civil war will break out just like one broke out two centuries ago when bad Americans would not change their bad thinking and actions.
 
W_Heisenberg said:
Hi.

You cool with the President calling for a Civil War?



Hugs and kisses.
Click to expand...

That was written by Pastor Robert Jeffress.

The President was not calling for a Civil War.

Note: the use of (which they will never be) my addition (able to accomplish)

Since, Trump remains confident he will not be removed from Office... no civil war to worry about.

Roseann:)
 
marke said:
I assume you don't like me bringing up the failed democrat-inspired Trump/Russian collusion conspiracy theory?
Click to expand...
If you provided any non biased evidence for your claims, I wouldn't have any issue with them. But you can't do that.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
 
HAL9000 said:
It's called being diplomatic. Zelensky wasn't waiting for Congress. That article was written on 3/13. Congress finalized the approval of the money 5/24. The call was on 7/25.

How about you explain me this: Why hasn't Ukraine bought more Javelin's yet, when they were almost ready to buy them in July?

Oh, right, because the aid was withheld.
Click to expand...

What are Javelin missiles and why did Trump discuss them in call with Ukraine's president? - ABC News

In March 2018, Trump approved the $47 million sale of 210 Javelin anti-tank missiles and 37 launchers to Ukraine. The missiles were the first lethal military assistance provided to Ukraine by the United States in its fight against Russian-supported separatists in eastern Ukraine since that fighting began in 2014.

Since that first sale, U.S. officials confirm that there have been long-running discussions between the U.S. and Ukraine about a future purchase of more Javelins, but nothing has been finalized.

As such, Javelin missiles were not part of the $250 million military aid package to Ukraine at the center of controversial Trump call with Zelenskiy that has triggered a formal impeachment inquiry by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.


Roseann:)
 
HAL9000 said:
It's called being diplomatic. Zelensky wasn't waiting for Congress. That article was written on 3/13. Congress finalized the approval of the money 5/24. The call was on 7/25.

How about you explain me this: Why hasn't Ukraine bought more Javelin's yet, when they were almost ready to buy them in July?

Oh, right, because the aid was withheld.
Click to expand...

Government sources said Trump ordered a hold on the money because he was unsure whether the new president was pro Russia or pro America. Is that true? Maybe, but not proven, just like all other assumptions. However, can we assume Trump withheld the money and then called the new Ukrainian resident to pressure him for information? Maybe, but we must ask and answer a few questions.

If we assume both the Ukrainian president and Trump knew Trump was putting the screws on the Ukrainian president the way Biden did years before, then how are we going to prove that when we have no record of such an understanding being communicated between the two? There is nothing in the recorded conversation to prove either or both of them assumed that was being implied, and both later said nothing of the sort was ever implied.

Now democrats have to prove Trump was pressuring Ukraine for information when there is no record of such pressure being explicitly communicated and all eyewitnesses claim it was not communicated.

Democrat Trump/Ukrainian conspiracy theory = fail.
 
CharisRose said:
That was written by Pastor Robert Jeffress.

The President was not calling for a Civil War.

Note: the use of (which they will never be) my addition (able to accomplish)

Since, Trump remains confident he will not be removed from Office... no civil war to worry about.

Roseann:)
Click to expand...

retweeting is endorsing a point.
 
CharisRose said:
What are Javelin missiles and why did Trump discuss them in call with Ukraine's president? - ABC News

In March 2018, Trump approved the $47 million sale of 210 Javelin anti-tank missiles and 37 launchers to Ukraine. The missiles were the first lethal military assistance provided to Ukraine by the United States in its fight against Russian-supported separatists in eastern Ukraine since that fighting began in 2014.

Since that first sale, U.S. officials confirm that there have been long-running discussions between the U.S. and Ukraine about a future purchase of more Javelins, but nothing has been finalized.

As such, Javelin missiles were not part of the $250 million military aid package to Ukraine at the center of controversial Trump call with Zelenskiy that has triggered a formal impeachment inquiry by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.


Roseann:)
Click to expand...

They weren't part of the 2018 $200 million aid package either. The $47 million sale wasn't tied to the aid package. Ukraine gets to spend the money how it sees fit, as long as the extra $50 million provided in 2019 is all on defensive lethal weapons. Ukraine still hasn't bought the javelins that they were "almost ready" to buy in July.
 
HAL9000 said:
They weren't part of the 2018 $200 million aid package either. The $47 million sale wasn't tied to the aid package. Ukraine gets to spend the money how it sees fit, as long as the extra $50 million provided in 2019 is all on defensive lethal weapons. Ukraine still hasn't bought the javelins that they were "almost ready" to buy in July.
Click to expand...

Biden plainly told the Ukrainian president that if he did not fire his prosecutor he would not get any of the $1 billion in aid promised to his country. Democrats were fine with that because they claimed Obama had a legitimate concern about whether or not Ukraine was committed to ending corruption in its own country. OK, let's give them that and forget Hunter Biden's suspicious involvement with a corrupt Ukrainian company. If Joe Biden was genuinely concerned about corruption in Ukraine then he should have also pressured his son to get the hell out of there before he is caught taking dirty money from the Ukrainian mob

Fast forward to 2019. Trump tells Congress he is withholding money to Ukraine until he can be sure the new president is not going to be just another crooked arm of Russia. Democrats respond:

"What the hell? Trump is withholding money to Ukraine because he is trying to pressure the Ukrainian president to fabricate dirt on Biden. Impeach him now. What need we have to keep searching for a crime now that we have this?"

Democrats cannot help drawing false ridiculous dummass conclusions which have no basis in reality or support from the facts, because they have sold their souls to the democrat party and its evil head, the devil.
 
marke said:
Government sources said Trump ordered a hold on the money because he was unsure whether the new president was pro Russia or pro America. Is that true? Maybe, but not proven, just like all other assumptions. However, can we assume Trump withheld the money and then called the new Ukrainian resident to pressure him for information? Maybe, but we must ask and answer a few questions.

If we assume both the Ukrainian president and Trump knew Trump was putting the screws on the Ukrainian president the way Biden did years before, then how are we going to prove that when we have no record of such an understanding being communicated between the two? There is nothing in the recorded conversation to prove either or both of them assumed that was being implied, and both later said nothing of the sort was ever implied.

Now democrats have to prove Trump was pressuring Ukraine for information when there is no record of such pressure being explicitly communicated and all eyewitnesses claim it was not communicated.

Democrat Trump/Ukrainian conspiracy theory = fail.
Click to expand...

Presidential records act is still a thing and it applies to Vice Presidents too. There are transcripts of Biden's talks with Poroshenko and Trump has access to them.

So the question we must ask is why isn't Trump releasing them? or at least,relying on them as the basis for a case that he could give to the DOJ, instead of getting his personal lawyer and a couple right-wing snake-oil salesmen to investigate.

We know that Giuliani cancelled his trip, and that Zelensky would have likely refused to meet him in May.


Zelensky wasn't oblivious as to what Trump wanted. I was paying attention in May, were you? I knew what Trump wanted too.

Now you keep saying what Democrats have to prove, but at the same time, you don't what attempted Hobbs Act extortion under color of official right is. How it was made to deal with corrupt politicians who constantly try to bend the rules as much as possible. And how "the coercive element is provided by the public office itself."(Evans v. U.S.) And how "Although the offense implies a coercive relationship, duress is not an element of the offense;and there is no requirement that a public official request or invite a corrupt payment."

So, the hurdles you've placed are all in your head.
 
marke said:
Biden plainly told the Ukrainian president that if he did not fire his prosecutor he would not get any of the $1 billion in aid promised to his country. Democrats were fine with that because they claimed Obama had a legitimate concern about whether or not Ukraine was committed to ending corruption in its own country. OK, let's give them that and forget Hunter Biden's suspicious involvement with a corrupt Ukrainian company. If Joe Biden was genuinely concerned about corruption in Ukraine then he should have also pressured his son to get the hell out of there before he is caught taking dirty money from the Ukrainian mob

Fast forward to 2019. Trump tells Congress he is withholding money to Ukraine until he can be sure the new president is not going to be just another crooked arm of Russia. Democrats respond:

"What the hell? Trump is withholding money to Ukraine because he is trying to pressure the Ukrainian president to fabricate dirt on Biden. Impeach him now. What need we have to keep searching for a crime now that we have this?"

Democrats cannot help drawing false ridiculous dummass conclusions which have no basis in reality or support from the facts, because they have sold their souls to the democrat party and its evil head, the devil.
Click to expand...

Whataboutism doesn't work on a person like me, who has said:

HAL9000 said:
How bout we put Trump and Biden in the same cell, and they can suck each others dicks until they die?
Click to expand...
 
SCrider said:
retweeting is endorsing a point.
Click to expand...

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump....If the Democrats are successful in removing the President from office (which they will never be), it will cause a Civil War like fracture in this Nation from which our Country will never heal.” Pastor Robert Jeffress, @FoxNews

And when reading a tweet it is important to use all the words to get the actual point of the tweet.

"It will cause a Civil War like fracture in this Nation from which our Country will never heal."

That was not a call for a Civil War.

It is an idea, that the removal of the President from office by Democrats would cause "a Civil War like fracture"

You must note the use of the work like used in between Civil War and fracture.

The point being made was not an actual Civil War being started or called for...

But a similar type of fracture (break) between the opposing sides worsening to the point that our Country will never heal.

Like dictionary definition | like defined

adjective Like means similar or nearly the same. An example of like is white as compared to off-white.

Roseann:)
 
marke said:
The Constitution? Does the Constitution tell us that Joe Biden must strongarm the president of Ukraine to fire his investigator into corruption in his sovereign European nation?
Click to expand...

It's funny that leftist like to claim that this is all right wing lies. Especially since there is recorded testimony that such things actually happened because of Biden.

I guess they only believe in evidence when it's not their man on the chopping block.
 
CharisRose said:
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump....If the Democrats are successful in removing the President from office (which they will never be), it will cause a Civil War like fracture in this Nation from which our Country will never heal.” Pastor Robert Jeffress, @FoxNews

And when reading a tweet it is important to use all the words to get the actual point of the tweet.

"It will cause a Civil War like fracture in this Nation from which our Country will never heal."

That was not a call for a Civil War.

It is an idea, that the removal of the President from office by Democrats would cause "a Civil War like fracture"

You must note the use of the work like used in between Civil War and fracture.

The point being made was not an actual Civil War being started or called for...

But a similar type of fracture (break) between the opposing sides worsening to the point that our Country will never heal.

Like dictionary definition | like defined

adjective Like means similar or nearly the same. An example of like is white as compared to off-white.

Roseann:)
Click to expand...

How Trump tells people to do bad things

I mean, this **** has been meta for awhile, but it's starting to get super extra meta.
 
HAL9000 said:
They weren't part of the 2018 $200 million aid package either. The $47 million sale wasn't tied to the aid package. Ukraine gets to spend the money how it sees fit, as long as the extra $50 million provided in 2019 is all on defensive lethal weapons. Ukraine still hasn't bought the javelins that they were "almost ready" to buy in July.
Click to expand...

What are Javelin missiles and why did Trump discuss them in call with Ukraine's president? - ABC News

In March 2018, Trump approved the $47 million sale of 210 Javelin anti-tank missiles and 37 launchers to Ukraine. The missiles were the first lethal military assistance provided to Ukraine by the United States in its fight against Russian-supported separatists in eastern Ukraine since that fighting began in 2014.

Since the first sale, U.S. officials confirm that there have been long-running discussions between the U.S. and Ukraine about a future purchase of more Javelins, but nothing has been finalized.

As such, Javelin missiles were not part of the $250 million military aid package to Ukraine at the center of controversial Trump call with Zelenskiy that has triggered a formal impeachment inquiry by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

NOTE: The sentence in between the other 2 sentences... Since the first sale... "

The first sale occurred in 2018 and during the phone call... The Ukraine President thanked Trump for approving that past sale of the Javelins.

Then NOTE: U.S. officials confirm that there have been long-running discussions between the U.S. and Ukraine about a future purchase of more Javelins, but nothing has been finalized.

Note the use of a future purchase of more Javelins and that nothing has been finalized.

In the phone conversation The Ukraine President was talking about the future purchase of more Javelins that they were almost ready to buy in July.

Then NOTE:the last sentence was talking about the future purchase of Javelins The Ukraine President was almost ready to buy in July and that those future Javelin were what they were talking during their conversation.

Note: the last sentence the future purchase of Javelins being discussed were not part of the $250 military aid package to Ukraine at the center of the controversial Trump call with The Ukraine President that triggered House Speaker Nancy Pelosi impeachment inquiry.

Roseann:)
 
CharisRose said:
What are Javelin missiles and why did Trump discuss them in call with Ukraine's president? - ABC News

In March 2018, Trump approved the $47 million sale of 210 Javelin anti-tank missiles and 37 launchers to Ukraine. The missiles were the first lethal military assistance provided to Ukraine by the United States in its fight against Russian-supported separatists in eastern Ukraine since that fighting began in 2014.

Since the first sale, U.S. officials confirm that there have been long-running discussions between the U.S. and Ukraine about a future purchase of more Javelins, but nothing has been finalized.

As such, Javelin missiles were not part of the $250 million military aid package to Ukraine at the center of controversial Trump call with Zelenskiy that has triggered a formal impeachment inquiry by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

NOTE: The sentence in between the other 2 sentences... Since the first sale... "

The first sale occurred in 2018 and during the phone call... The Ukraine President thanked Trump for approving that past sale of the Javelins.

Then NOTE: U.S. officials confirm that there have been long-running discussions between the U.S. and Ukraine about a future purchase of more Javelins, but nothing has been finalized.

Note the use of a future purchase of more Javelins and that nothing has been finalized.

In the phone conversation The Ukraine President was talking about the future purchase of more Javelins that they were almost ready to buy in July.

Then NOTE:the last sentence was talking about the future purchase of Javelins The Ukraine President was almost ready to buy in July and that those future Javelin were what they were talking during their conversation.

Note: the last sentence the future purchase of Javelins being discussed were not part of the $250 military aid package to Ukraine at the center of the controversial Trump call with The Ukraine President that triggered House Speaker Nancy Pelosi impeachment inquiry.

Roseann:)
Click to expand...

Uh huh, like I said, the spending was largely discretionary. Ukraine could spend their $250 mill for 2019 in a variety of ways, provided they spent $50 mill of their 2019 money on lethal weapons. There was no specific funding for Javelins specified in Ukranian military aid in 2019, or 2018, or 2017...

Still Ukraine hasn't bought the Javelins they were "almost ready" to buy in July. Trump only released the money 2 weeks ago.
 
CharisRose said:
Couldn't read the article.

What are you trying to say in your last sentence?

Roseann:)
Click to expand...

For future reference, if you've viewed your limit of free articles at the Washington Post, the New York Times, or others, open in a new incognito/private window/tab.

but here's a pastebin for the text, if need be.

What I'm trying to say is it's strange that I'm posting an article on how Trump communicates with his people, for his people, yet, at the same time, realizing you probably won't grok it.
 
marke said:
Hillary and the DNC conspired with Russians to cook up the phony Trump/Russian Steele dossier and they then blamed Trump for supposedly being in Putin's pocket, which is another democrat lie. Many Americans believe the lies even though facts prove them wrong, so that is why the democrats keep lying in hopes of improving their chances of winning in 2020.
Click to expand...

The facts are what make you sound like a hack. You have none. Everything you believe is a lie. I feel sorry for you.
 
marke said:
I am opposed to impeaching any president, any court justice, or any government official of any party just because of political hatred and nothing more.
Click to expand...

We get it. You adore your dear leader and he can do no wrong. Stop boring us.
 
HAL9000 said:
What were your least favorite parts?
Click to expand...

Every time he takes massive leaps in logic to make it seem as though Trump is giving orders and directly asking for favors.

With the rules this man is running by, give me a few months to go through all of Obama's communications with all the foreign leaders he's spoken with. Then let's see just how many times he's leveraged his political power, or abuse his office to get something out of it. Not to mention just betraying his country.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom