• 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!

Republicans want Hunter Biden, Ukraine whistleblower as impeachment inquiry witnesses

He went where the corruption was and it was in Ukraine.
Especially after the Ukraine President said he wanted to drain the swamp also.
It's really not complicated or shocking when you're not eager to be shocked.

The Department of Defense certified that Ukraine had taken action to root out corruption.

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/6430088/Pentagon-Letter-On-Ukraine-Aid.pdf

We know that there is absolutely zero basis for any kind of reasonable estimation that either Ukraine wasn't doing enough to battle corruption, or that aid should be withheld as a result.

Further, if one looks at the pattern of behavior it's clear that this had nothing to do with corruption. If it was about corruption, why wasn't it widely announced as Biden had done so earlier? Why was there an attempt to hid the call record? Why isn't there any corroboration in the government that this to be the case; indeed, why was the rest of the government stating the complete opposite? Why were anti-corruption advocates on the American side such as Yovanovitch pushed aside?

We also know that, according to George Kent, this extortion scheme was specifically about Zelensky announcing an investigation into Clinton and the Bidens and had nothing to do with corruption:

"POTUS wanted nothing less than President Zelenskyy to go to microphone and say investigations, Biden and Clinton."

George Kent is the Deputy Assistant to Mike Pompeo.

We have the testimonies of Bill Taylor, Marie Yovanovitch, Gordon Sondland and others that corroborate Kent's testimony, which were all made under oath.
 
Yes you do.
Or at least you can when you're President.
He went where the corruption was and it was in Ukraine.
Especially after the Ukraine President said he wanted to drain the swamp also.
It's really not complicated or shocking when you're not eager to be shocked.
No, especially not as the President when it involves political rivals, either Party or person. It is highly unethical and at the very least appears corrupt. Hence current impeachment and over 50% of the country supporting the impeachment investigation. Even more view what Trump did as wrong.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
 
The Department of Defense certified that Ukraine had taken action to root out corruption.

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/6430088/Pentagon-Letter-On-Ukraine-Aid.pdf

We know that there is absolutely zero basis for any kind of reasonable estimation that either Ukraine wasn't doing enough to battle corruption, or that aid should be withheld as a result.

Further, if one looks at the pattern of behavior it's clear that this had nothing to do with corruption. If it was about corruption, why wasn't it widely announced as Biden had done so earlier? Why was there an attempt to hid the call record? Why isn't there any corroboration in the government that this to be the case; indeed, why was the rest of the government stating the complete opposite? Why were anti-corruption advocates on the American side such as Yovanovitch pushed aside?

We also know that, according to George Kent, this extortion scheme was specifically about Zelensky announcing an investigation into Clinton and the Bidens and had nothing to do with corruption:

"POTUS wanted nothing less than President Zelenskyy to go to microphone and say investigations, Biden and Clinton."

George Kent is the Deputy Assistant to Mike Pompeo.

We have the testimonies of Bill Taylor, Marie Yovanovitch, Gordon Sondland and others that corroborate Kent's testimony, which were all made under oath.

Ukraine rooted out corruption? What did they find about the DNC and Chalupa and Hunter?

What was 1st hand and something more than disagreement about policy?
I know of 1 and it supported Trump. How many do you know of?
 
No, especially not as the President when it involves political rivals, either Party or person. It is highly unethical and at the very least appears corrupt. Hence current impeachment and over 50% of the country supporting the impeachment investigation. Even more view what Trump did as wrong.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

that's where the corruption was so that was one of the the subjects discussed. Biden doesn't have immunity because he's the opposition.
 
Ukraine rooted out corruption? What did they find about the DNC and Chalupa and Hunter?

What was 1st hand and something more than disagreement about policy?
I know of 1 and it supported Trump. How many do you know of?

We have a firsthand account from John Rood that the Department of Defense certified that Ukraine had taken enough measures against corruption to authorize the release of aid.

We have no firsthand accounts to support the sad conspiracy theory that there was some kind of corruption happening with Hunter and Joe Biden in Ukraine. In fact, we don't even have an account by any conservative that says what this alleged corruption even is. Certainly no firsthand accounts.

We have a mountain of proof of the following:

1. The official view of the US government under Obama was that Ukraine wasn't doing enough to fight corruption
2. The official decision of the US government was to condition aid on Ukraine's efforts at fighting corruption as a matter of national policy
3. The official view of several western European governments was also that Ukraine wasn't doing enough to fight corruption
4. Ukrainian anti-corruption activists officially concurred with these views
5. Shokin was not pursuing corruption investigations, and in fact was actively refusing to cooperate in such investigations
6. The investigation into Burisma went dormant under Shokin
7. Hunter only joined the board of Burisma after the investigation had started

None of these can be disputed. All of these would need to be disputed in order for you conspiracy theory to have any basis.

There is zero evidence that the Bidens committed any crime in Ukraine, or even that they did anything unethical, and that so far not a single republican has pointed out what it is they are alleged to have done.
 
that's where the corruption was so that was one of the the subjects discussed. Biden doesn't have immunity because he's the opposition.

You could very well be the first person to actually come out and state what it is that the Bidens are alleged to have done in Ukraine. So what did they do?
 
We have a firsthand account from John Rood that the Department of Defense certified that Ukraine had taken enough measures against corruption to authorize the release of aid.

We have no firsthand accounts to support the sad conspiracy theory that there was some kind of corruption happening with Hunter and Joe Biden in Ukraine. In fact, we don't even have an account by any conservative that says what this alleged corruption even is. Certainly no firsthand accounts.

We have a mountain of proof of the following:

1. The official view of the US government under Obama was that Ukraine wasn't doing enough to fight corruption
2. The official decision of the US government was to condition aid on Ukraine's efforts at fighting corruption as a matter of national policy
3. The official view of several western European governments was also that Ukraine wasn't doing enough to fight corruption
4. Ukrainian anti-corruption activists officially concurred with these views
5. Shokin was not pursuing corruption investigations, and in fact was actively refusing to cooperate in such investigations
6. The investigation into Burisma went dormant under Shokin
7. Hunter only joined the board of Burisma after the investigation had started

None of these can be disputed. All of these would need to be disputed in order for you conspiracy theory to have any basis.

There is zero evidence that the Bidens committed any crime in Ukraine, or even that they did anything unethical, and that so far not a single republican has pointed out what it is they are alleged to have done.

You don't have a mountain of proof and is definitely disputable.
I ask again, what did Ukraine find about the DNC and Chalupa and Hunter in their measures against corruption? And under what Ukraine administration were those measures taken?
 
You don't have a mountain of proof and is definitely disputable.
Standard denial crap.
I ask again, what did Ukraine find about the DNC and Chalupa and Hunter in their measures against corruption?
What evidence do you have that they found anything and why ask if you know instead of just presenting it? Hypocrisy much?
 
You could very well be the first person to actually come out and state what it is that the Bidens are alleged to have done in Ukraine. So what did they do?

Junior got the job offer because of pops position and pops bribed the prior administration to fire the guy who was said to be investigating junior's employer.
The beauty part is that the investigation didn't even have to be active because Ukraine folded due to pop's bribe regardless.
Tough call deciding which is worse.
 
Standard denial crap.
What evidence do you have that they found anything and why ask if you know instead of just presenting it? Hypocrisy much?

I didn't claim Ukraine investigated corruption already. The other guy claimed that. But I heard the same thing.

I do know that someone named Chalupa working for the DNC was active in Ukraine to dig up dirt on Trump's campaign.
Ukrainian Embassy confirms DNC contractor solicited Trump dirt in 2016 | TheHill
Is that what you're looking for?
On top of that it turns out, I believe, she's also a friend of Eric Ciaramella.
Isn't that something? Oh what a tangled web they weave.
 
This has nothing to do with necessity. It's all about putting on a show and keeping the names in front of the public. Republicans are nothing but a bunch of ****ing clowns.
 
I doubt it will end with just him.

This whole thing is going to backfire on the Democrats, big time.

Any day now, right?

Gotta wait for Barr to get back from Timbuktu.

Trump heard lots of people saying that that is where Ukraine sent the DNC server racks to hide them.

Disguised as a goat

What he doesn't know is that those servers are hidden where he will never find them.

In the salad.
 
You don't have a mountain of proof

Sure there is. It's all readily available online in news archives, press releases, official releases, interviews and more. You can google substantial and credible support for every single one of these claims.

and is definitely disputable.

Not a single item I listed is disputable.

I ask again, what did Ukraine find about the DNC and Chalupa and Hunter in their measures against corruption? And under what Ukraine administration were those measures taken?

"Jet fuel can't melt steel beams"
 
Last edited:
Junior got the job offer because of pops position

Perhaps but nothing weird about that at all.

and pops bribed the prior administration to fire the guy who was said to be investigating junior's employer.

Again, we already know that "pops" was trying to get the prosecutor fired that wasn't investigating junior's employer. That's an indisputable fact.

We also know that he was openly doing so as a broader anti-corruption measure which was an official policy position of the US government, other western allies and Ukrainian anti-corruption activists.

So, again, nothing you've listed here is a crime or even unethical, and we have mountains of evidence that prove the opposite.

And, more importantly, you still haven't answered the question which no republican can seem to answer. Even if we suspend belief and assume for a moment that everything you're saying is true, there's still no explanation for what crime the Bidens were alleged to have committed that they were trying to cover up by having the prosecutor fired. So if you'd like to try to explain the crux of your conspiracy theory again, be my guest, because as of yet not a single republican has explained this part of it.
 
You don't have a mountain of proof and is definitely disputable.
I ask again, what did Ukraine find about the DNC and Chalupa and Hunter in their measures against corruption? And under what Ukraine administration were those measures taken?

Then why can't you dispute it with some credible evidence?
 
I know. It just seems like conservatives are trying to give the Trump base something to feel angry and wronged about. It will feed the conspiracy minded ones.

Hillary Clinton was investigated endlessly, and they couldn’t let it go. I always knew Trump was equally if not more corrupt than her, but the anti Hillary crowd never saw it. If they are truly anti corruption and want the swamp drained, we will know. They are either look like political partisans and hacks or anti corruption


Even now, they’re scheming to find a way to get her name back into the news. Clinton and Omama.
 
On the tape of VP Biden bragging how he got the Ukraine government to fire the prosecutor, who was looking into his son's employer, Biden told them to ask Obama if he; Biden, had the authority yo stop the aid, if they did not act.

I would call Obama and the US Diplomat chain of command in Ukraine, as witnesses. I would ask them if they were aware, if this call was made, and what was said up the chain to and including Obama. Ukraine came back with its tail between its legs and fired the prosecutor. This meant they went up the food chain.

I know if I was in the position of Ukraine, being blackmailed for US aid, I would double check with the US president, to make sure he was aware of the conflict of interest; Biden's son and the corrupt energy firm. This could potentially bite Obama, politically if he was not aware. What did the diplomat chain of command and Obama say, and was Obama in on it? Maybe this will come out in the Durham investigation. Biden implicated Obama. This may be the main reason for the all out Democrat Hail Mary pass that breaks all the rules.

I heard that Trump is going to release another transcript from April. Trump led the Democrats to a cliff. Now they will have to jump.
 
Last edited:
I didn't claim Ukraine investigated corruption already. The other guy claimed that. But I heard the same thing.
Was it supported or you just fel for it as for all the other crap talking points?

I do know that someone named Chalupa working for the DNC was active in Ukraine to dig up dirt on Trump's campaign.
What was found? Was it illegal?

On top of that it turns out, I believe, she's also a friend of Eric Ciaramella.
Isn't that something?
Yea and I hear she also like tacos. That must be something too, no?

Oh what a tangled web they weave.
You are deluding yourself.
 
Perhaps but nothing weird about that at all.



Again, we already know that "pops" was trying to get the prosecutor fired that wasn't investigating junior's employer. That's an indisputable fact.

We also know that he was openly doing so as a broader anti-corruption measure which was an official policy position of the US government, other western allies and Ukrainian anti-corruption activists.

So, again, nothing you've listed here is a crime or even unethical, and we have mountains of evidence that prove the opposite.

And, more importantly, you still haven't answered the question which no republican can seem to answer. Even if we suspend belief and assume for a moment that everything you're saying is true, there's still no explanation for what crime the Bidens were alleged to have committed that they were trying to cover up by having the prosecutor fired. So if you'd like to try to explain the crux of your conspiracy theory again, be my guest, because as of yet not a single republican has explained this part of it.

Hardly indisputable ...
Hunter Biden’s name, in fact, was specifically invoked by the Burisma representative as a reason the State Department should help, according to a series of email exchanges among U.S. officials trying to arrange the meeting. The subject line for the email exchanges read simply “Burisma.”
By early 2016 the Ukrainian investigation had advanced enough that then-Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin authorized a court-ordered seizure of Zlochevsky’s home and other valuables, including a luxury car. That seizure occurred on Feb. 2, 2016, according to published reports in Ukraine.

The same day that the Zlochevsky seizure was announced in Ukraine, Hunter Biden used his Twitter account to start following Deputy Secretary of State Tony Blinken, a longtime national security adviser to Vice President Joe Biden who was promoted to the No. 2 job at State under Secretary John Kerry.

The Feb. 4, 2016 Twitter notification from Hunter Biden to Blinken was captured by State email servers and turned over to me as part of the FOIA release.

Within a few weeks of Tramontano’s overture to Novelli and of Archer’s overture to Kerry, Vice President Joe Biden took a stunning action, one that has enveloped his 2020 campaign for president in controversy.

By his own admission in a 2018 speech, Joe Biden used the threat of withholding $1 billion in U.S. aid to strong-arm Ukraine into firing Shokin, a prosecutor that he and his office knew was investigating Burisma.

Biden has said he forced Shokin’s firing because he and Western allies believed the prosecutor wasn’t aggressive enough in fighting corruption.

Shokin disputes that account, telling both me and ABC News that he was fired specifically because he would not stand down from investigating Burisma. In fact, Shokin alleges, he was making plans to interview Hunter Biden about his Burisma work and payments when he got the axe.

Hunter Biden’s Ukraine gas firm pressed Obama administration to end corruption allegations, memos show | John Solomon Reports
 
Then why can't you dispute it with some credible evidence?

I did in #135 and a new one in #146. I give you permission to read posts not addressed to you.
 
Was it supported or you just fel for it as for all the other crap talking points?

What was found? Was it illegal?

Yea and I hear she also like tacos. That must be something too, no?

You are deluding yourself.

Schultz? Sgt. Schultz? Is that you?
 
If you're whining that Manafort got caught being a crooked money laundering tax cheat, I'm not interested in that discussion. If you have any evidence Obama had a hand in it, present it.

Yep-- the allegation is that the Obama Admin pressurred Ukraine to release info on Manafort.
That's what was going on-- if they can pressure Ukraine over this prosecutor, could they also pressure Ukraine over Manafort.
That Manafort is corrupt is of no relevance to the issue that was being investigated: Ukraine role in the origins of the thinking that the Trunp campaign was conspiring with Russia.
 
If you're whining that Manafort got caught being a crooked money laundering tax cheat, I'm not interested in that discussion. If you have any evidence Obama had a hand in it, present it.

That investigation is a good example, actually, because it was authorized at the very top of the FBI and DoJ, especially including Mueller's investigation which was authorized in fact by a Trump appointee and controlled at all times by Trump appointees. Mueller worked for the DoJ, and operated under DoJ rules and guidelines at all times.

What that does is create a way to hold those involved accountable for their actions. Barr is allegedly doing that now, and he CAN do that because the DoJ has jurisdiction over wrongdoing by U.S. government employees and citizens, and they are bound by U.S. laws at every step.

It's ENTIRELY different when POTUS asks a foreign government to DO the investigation of an American citizen. The ask wasn't to cooperate with Barr's investigation, which we liberals might not have liked, might have complained about, but it's definitely legal, and there are official channels, processes, to make that happen, demand that they cooperate. But Barr nor any of his minions did not do that because there wasn't then or now any investigation into Joe or Hunter Biden. It doesn't exist.

That is the core of the problem here, and you guys have it pointed out to you over and over and over, and yet you keep ignoring it.

Can you name ANY other case of a President demanding a foreign country investigate a U.S. citizen?

And at the end of the day, it didn't actually happen.
The funds were dispersed with no strings attached.
 
Back
Top Bottom