• 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!

Schiff says whistleblower testimony is 'redundant and unnecessary'

SkyFox76 said:
Only the WB can provide what? They filed a complaint with a handful of issues. Two that are simple is: When Zelenskiy brought up aide from the US (mentioning the missiles) Trump immediately comes back with "need you do do a favor though. It's similar to your kid coming up to you and asking if they can use the car. You reply: Sure, I need you to do me a favor though, take out the trash and do the dishes in the sink.
Click to expand...
Sorry not even close.
SkyFox76 said:
Next is the WB made claims of the calls transcript being moved to a coded server. Trump's own people have corroborated that since almost the beginning. The reason given was, the legal team felt there could be issues if the call got released. And whattaya know!
Click to expand...
Is there a point here?
SkyFox76 said:
A month ago the cries were the WB claims were secondhand knowledge and garbage it doesn't count. Now not only has the transcript shown the claims were accurate, but there has been a line of people to confirm the claims (meaning the WB no longer holds any relevant information). So now you guys are wetting your pants because the persons identity isn't known, which as has been pointed out (repeatedly on this thread) would not make a damn bit of difference because we have a memo of the call and we have first hand knowledge.
Click to expand...
LOL, man you're squirming over this, aren't you. A month ago we weren't talking a Congressional hearing. The WB has admitted he lacks personal knowledge we need to know his sources and possibly question them as well.
SkyFox76 said:
In the end the WB has agreed to answer written questions. I'm sure you recall someone else recently doing that, so he wouldn't perjure himself, but hey, if it's good enough for him, it's a great new norm for the country to start abiding by.
Click to expand...
Again, the President is a tad different that a hearsay witness. Written questions can't be expanded upon.
 
W_Heisenberg said:
This isn't accurate. Trump abused his office, and abuse of office is an impeachable offense. The best evidence we have that Trump abused his office was when he said, "I would like you to do me a favor though.." AFTER Zelenskyy asked for more javelin missile sales. Trump followed this up with a request to investigate the Bidens. This is all in Trump's call transcript, the one the WH released.
Click to expand...
LOL, pure partisan nonsense. "Do me a favor" is hardly "crucify Biden or no missiles for you" As I recall Zelensky also discussed starting the investigations as well.
 
Bullseye said:
Why are you so afraid of him testifying live?
Click to expand...

He/she is the one who might be afraid. Might end-up killed.
And I think it gives the wrong message to any future whistleblowers.

Why exactly do you want the person's IDENTITY revealed? I'd be fine with one of those televised testimonies using voice-altering technology and with the person's face hidden.
 
GreatNews2night said:
Well, I respectfully disagree. I think he is not a very effective senator. He's been in the Senate for decades and doesn't have a lot to show. I think many of his positions are naive or frankly misleading. Some of the vacuous promises, I see as not very different from saying that the Mexicans will pay for a beautiful wall, as Bernie must know that his more extreme proposals would never get enough support to be voted into bills and become laws. I'd be a lot more comfortable if he talked about ideals but added that we aren't ready for those things yet, but he'd slowly work for them to one day be possible. And some of his ideas are frankly utterly absurd. His latest add-ons to his platform amount to effectively open borders (decriminalizing illegal immigration and freezing deportation is actually, effectively, allowing anyone to come in and stay), and this, added to extending free elective healthcare to illegal aliens, would only result in people with expensive health conditions (cancer, need for transplant, for heart or brain surgery) to flock to the United States for free care, something that is utterly untenable. So, he doesn't think through the unintended consequences of things, and doesn't seem to understand the importance of Wall Street to middle class families (the middle class families themselves don't understand it, but they are a lot more dependent on Wall Street than they imagine). His positions are ultimately destructive and if implemented would plunge the United States into the deepest of crises. The very fabric of society would convulse like a volcano. I think that actually, if made president, and if by some sort of miracle he obtained a complacent Congress with supporting sycophants like Trump has, Bernie would manage to be more destructive to the United States than Trump.

Bernie is pretty much the only Dem (I mean, fake Dem; the opportunism is mind-boggling - anytime the doesn't need the Dems to run, he says he is an independent and deeply criticizes the Democratic Party's rules, but anytime he needs them, he rushes to join, then disrespects the party's rules) I might not vote for, if running against Trump, because I'd have a bit of a hard time establishing for myself, which one I consider to be the lesser evil. I probably would have to sit out, because I wouldn't be able to vote for Trump, but I feel that I wouldn't be able to vote for Bernie either.

Thankfully, I think Bernie is the past, in terms of electoral chances. He still lives in 2016, hasn't changed his views except for the worse (even more extreme, even more out of touch with the silent majority in the middle), is four years older, his health is failing, and he is no longer alone in terms of the progressive vote. I think that Bernie has very poor chances of actually winning the nomination, which will be a relief, because it will spare me the doubt of being torn about the lesser evil. Pretty much anybody else, I'll vote for with no hesitation, against Trump. Even Elizabeth Warren. Not to forget, I won't have to disagree with my wife, in November 2020... and I really love my dear wife and don't want to upset her. So hopefully Bernie will bow out before his candidacy becomes a point of discord between us, hehe.
Click to expand...

You know what the problem is with healthcare, don't you? It's escalating costs. You know why it got like that?

Because back in the 50's, the Baby Boomers lived under the terror of polio. I don't know if you're a Baby Boomer or not.... I'm pushing 50 myself, so my parents were the Boomers, and whenever they talked about the time, that's always what they bring up. Swimming pool closures; the kid in the neighborhood in the Iron Lung. And then Dr. Jonas Salk came along with his polio vaccine and all of a sudden, their whole world changed. Bring on the marvels of modern medicine! So we go into the 60's and the 70's and the 80's, and those scared kids from 1952 are suddenly ruling the world... and guess what? They have this idea they're going to live forever. It's The Who generation..... and they're all going die before they get old - only getting old is for squares. So what do they do? They pump everything they own into the health research sector.... new and better equipment, more R&D, better drugs (did I mention they had a thing for drugs?), whatever it takes. Invest, invest, invest. If we landed on the Moon, we can cure cancer. Only investment is just the thin end of the wedge... it's own thing to pioneer new treatments - it's another thing entirely to implement them.

So now it's 2019... and we've got the healthcare technology of 2049.... but we're trying to pay for it in 2019 dollars. There's going to be a bit of a cost premium there. And if you get sick, are you going to want to settle for anything but the best? Can't take it with you, right? So supply and demand doesn't really work in the same way it would if you were selling cars instead.
 
GreatNews2night said:
He/she is the one who might be afraid. Might end-up killed.
And I think it gives the wrong message to any future whistleblowers.
Click to expand...
Seems like that ship has already sailed.
GreatNews2night said:
Why exactly do you want the person's IDENTITY revealed? I'd be fine with one of those televised testimonies using voice-altering technology and with the person's face hidden.
Click to expand...
He's accusing the president of an impeachable crime even though he admits he has no personal knowledge. He needs to be seen and questioned in open court.
 
Bullseye said:
Slight difference between the President of the United States and an ordinary citizen.
Click to expand...

You're exactly right! I would expect much more honesty and credibility from the person assigned to leading this country than just an ordinary citizen.

When I was growing up kids had a dream of becoming people who are admired. Doctor, astronaut, scientist, etc. I remember one of my friends family use to have conversations at the dinner table (when I was invited to stay) and sometimes it was political. We were young but it opened doors of thought for me because my own family just dealt with it as it played along. They were Republicans but nothing like I see today. But anyways, when various presidential things would get televised the family would meet in the living room to watch. There was a proud sense of learning to the whole thing.

Current times? I think most people tell their kids to go play somewhere when Trumps face appears on the TV because they have no clue what will come out of the guys mouth. He lies, he calls people names, and he throws tantrums. All qualities every parent hopes their kid grows up with. :lamo

So maybe you're not concerned that the man running this country can't go before a court because it's a given he'll perjure himself, but imo that's not the guy that needs to be in charge of a daycare facility, much less the USA..
 
Cordelier said:
You know what the problem is with healthcare, don't you? It's escalating costs. You know why it got like that?

Because back in the 50's, the Baby Boomers lived under the terror of polio. I don't know if you're a Baby Boomer or not.... I'm pushing 50 myself, so my parents were the Boomers, and whenever they talked about the time, that's always what they bring up. Swimming pool closures; the kid in the neighborhood in the Iron Lung. And then Dr. Jonas Salk came along with his polio vaccine and all of a sudden, their whole world changed. Bring on the marvels of modern medicine! So we go into the 60's and the 70's and the 80's, and those scared kids from 1952 are suddenly ruling the world... and guess what? They have this idea they're going to live forever. It's The Who generation..... and they're all going die before they get old - only getting old is for squares. So what do they do? They pump everything they own into the health research sector.... new and better equipment, more R&D, better drugs (did I mention they had a thing for drugs?), whatever it takes. Invest, invest, invest. If we landed on the Moon, we can cure cancer. Only investment is just the thin end of the wedge... it's own thing to pioneer new treatments - it's another thing entirely to implement them.

So now it's 2019... and we've got the healthcare technology of 2049.... but we're trying to pay for it in 2019 dollars. There's going to be a bit of a cost premium there. And if you get sick, are you going to want to settle for anything but the best? Can't take it with you, right? So supply and demand doesn't really work in the same way it would if you were selling cars instead.
Click to expand...

Yeah, sure. The dynamics of the healthcare market are not a typical free market balance, because as you said, there are matters of life and death involved (and because patients don't really know how much care will cost, don't have how to compare, and often don't have any choice). But take a country like France. It has the very best, #1 healthcare system in the world (ours is #37). Technology-wise, theirs is just as advanced as ours. I know their system intimately, because I lived in France for five years, and both my wife and my son needed their healthcare system for serious illnesses (which they very competently managed to cure 100%, both made full recoveries). Well, their system is hybrid, has three sectors, one 100% free and public, one mixed (the government pays for part of the care, and the patient co-pays another chunk), and one entirely private, fee-for-service. These sectors are regulated and audited, and while providers need to pick one and prominently display to patients in which sector they practice, the patients themselves can freely migrate between all three sectors. They basically can pick and choose and establish how much they want to spend (the tables of costs for each procedure are regulated and are public knowledge so they CAN actually shop for the best deal for them), and whether or not they want the less luxurious sector with a bit more waiting time, or the intermediate one, or the expensive one with no waiting time. If they want to contract with insurance to help with the middle sector, they can - premiums are lower than here because the government does pick up part of the bill. The fee-for-service sector doesn't accept insurance.

So, the French manage to spend a lot less than we do per capita, and to have MUCH better outcomes and health indicators than we do (#1 vs. #37), and they have all the same technology that we have. So, don't tell me that it's impossible and the fault of the Baby Boomers.

Migrating slowly to a hybrid system with a public option, in my opinion, would be the solution, but Bernie and Warren want a sudden transformation that will only manage to collapse the whole system, with disastrous consequences that they don't see (for example, immediate unemployment for the hundreds of thousands of workers employed by the health insurance industry; utter confusion and chaos in the system; doctors prematurely retiring by the hundreds of thousands, and so on and so forth); or if they do, they are lying to their voters like Trump lied about his "beautiful wall that Mexico will pay for."
 
Last edited:
SkyFox76 said:
You're exactly right! I would expect much more honesty and credibility from the person assigned to leading this country than just an ordinary citizen.

When I was growing up kids had a dream of becoming people who are admired. Doctor, astronaut, scientist, etc. I remember one of my friends family use to have conversations at the dinner table (when I was invited to stay) and sometimes it was political. We were young but it opened doors of thought for me because my own family just dealt with it as it played along. They were Republicans but nothing like I see today. But anyways, when various presidential things would get televised the family would meet in the living room to watch. There was a proud sense of learning to the whole thing.

Current times? I think most people tell their kids to go play somewhere when Trumps face appears on the TV because they have no clue what will come out of the guys mouth. He lies, he calls people names, and he throws tantrums. All qualities every parent hopes their kid grows up with. :lamo

So maybe you're not concerned that the man running this country can't go before a court because it's a given he'll perjure himself, but imo that's not the guy that needs to be in charge of a daycare facility, much less the USA..
Click to expand...

A daycare facility? I'd be afraid that the man is a pedophile. Remember his thing about going into teenagers' locker rooms while they were naked? And his perv talk about his own daughter Ivanka, in the Howard Stein interview? And his support for a pedophile in an election?

OK, so definitely he shouldn't run a daycare facility. He shouldn't run Trump University either, it was a scam. And the Trump Foundation, he managed to steal from it. So, no. He managed to bankrupt several casinos, which are usually very profitable enterprises. He said he'd surround himself with only "the best people" and managed to see many of them indicted, and the hugest turnover ever seen in the White House.

I think the man can't run just about anything. I wonder who really runs the Trump Organization, and what's his real net worth (there's a reason why he isn't showing his tax returns).

Anyway, yes, for the above and all the other reasons you mentioned and more, I'd be really upset if my son or my daughter started looking at Trump as a role model.

Yes, in the past, we used to deeply respect the President of the United States, even if we had voted for the defeated opponent.

These days... oh my...
 
Last edited:
Bullseye said:
Sorry not even close.
Is there a point here?
LOL, man you're squirming over this, aren't you. A month ago we weren't talking a Congressional hearing. The WB has admitted he lacks personal knowledge we need to know his sources and possibly question them as well.
Again, the President is a tad different that a hearsay witness. Written questions can't be expanded upon.
Click to expand...

Let's cut to the chase here chief. What did the WB get wrong? Did Trump say to Zelenskiy "need a favor though" when the topic of missiles was brought into the conversation? Simple yes or no, I can ccp the quote.

Did the Trump people admit that the legal team realized their could be issues so the call transcript was taken to the coded server? Again, a simple yes or no. (It's already been admitted).

And I was offering a loose timeline of when the claims came out, vs the transcript. Pick whatever date you'd like. It doesn't change the fact that the Trump supporters were screaming that the WB was second hand and therefore had no credibility.Now? Must hear from WB!!

I don't think there is a single person here that will give you a thumbs down on the WB giving written testimony and answers with the obvious exception of Trump criers.. The fact still remains that we're weeks over the original complaint and people with firsthand knowledge have come forward. So while Vindman is testifying under oath that he took issue on the call, tied to correct missing elements, you're over on the curb screaming what about the WB?????? Boxers or briefs??? How does he like his eggs? :shock:
 
GreatNews2night said:
He/she is the one who might be afraid. Might end-up killed.
And I think it gives the wrong message to any future whistleblowers.

Why exactly do you want the person's IDENTITY revealed? I'd be fine with one of those televised testimonies using voice-altering technology and with the person's face hidden.
Click to expand...

I was actually thinking the same thing. But I'm sure the claim would be it's not really the WB sitting there.
 
SkyFox76 said:
Let's cut to the chase here chief. What did the WB get wrong? Did Trump say to Zelenskiy "need a favor though" when the topic of missiles was brought into the conversation? Simple yes or no, I can ccp the quote.

Did the Trump people admit that the legal team realized their could be issues so the call transcript was taken to the coded server? Again, a simple yes or no. (It's already been admitted).

And I was offering a loose timeline of when the claims came out, vs the transcript. Pick whatever date you'd like. It doesn't change the fact that the Trump supporters were screaming that the WB was second hand and therefore had no credibility.Now? Must hear from WB!!

I don't think there is a single person here that will give you a thumbs down on the WB giving written testimony and answers with the obvious exception of Trump criers.. The fact still remains that we're weeks over the original complaint and people with firsthand knowledge have come forward. So while Vindman is testifying under oath that he took issue on the call, tied to correct missing elements, you're over on the curb screaming what about the WB?????? Boxers or briefs??? How does he like his eggs? :shock:
Click to expand...

You couldn't have said it any better. But it's useless. The Trump Cult of Personality has a side effect of blindness and deafness. Not muteness, though. These people spout out nonsense over and over.
 
SkyFox76 said:
I was actually thinking the same thing. But I'm sure the claim would be it's not really the WB sitting there.
Click to expand...

It could be done in Congress, within closed doors. With the FBI bringing in the whistleblower, covered with some sort of veil. Now, of course, the Trumpsters will ALWAYS find fault with anything that might compromise their cult leader.

But if the Republicans truly wanted to do it, it could be arranged. But they don't really want to do it. They just want to be able to use the obvious need for protecting the identity of the whistleblower, to distract and obfuscate and smear and cry foul. If you actually do what they are asking for, just like in the case of the vote for the inquiry rules, they will run for the hills.
 
SkyFox76 said:
Let's cut to the chase here chief. What did the WB get wrong? Did Trump say to Zelenskiy "need a favor though" when the topic of missiles was brought into the conversation? Simple yes or no, I can ccp the quote.
Click to expand...
Doesn't matter. No threat, no deal.
SkyFox76 said:
Did the Trump people admit that the legal team realized their could be issues so the call transcript was taken to the coded server? Again, a simple yes or no. (It's already been admitted).
Click to expand...
And again, so what? Did they "realize there could be issues? That's YOUR TDS supposition.
SkyFox76 said:
And I was offering a loose timeline of when the claims came out, vs the transcript. Pick whatever date you'd like. It doesn't change the fact that the Trump supporters were screaming that the WB was second hand and therefore had no credibility.Now? Must hear from WB!!
Click to expand...
Of course to make his dishonesty and shakiness of his accusations in public. There may also be some violations involved against his sources.
SkyFox76 said:
I don't think there is a single person here that will give you a thumbs down on the WB giving written testimony and answers with the obvious exception of Trump criers.. The fact still remains that we're weeks over the original complaint and people with firsthand knowledge have come forward. So while Vindman is testifying under oath that he took issue on the call, tied to correct missing elements, you're over on the curb screaming what about the WB?????? Boxers or briefs??? How does he like his eggs? :shock:
Click to expand...
Simply idiotic rambling. HOW do we even KNOW he actually wrote the answers or if he had coaching and advisement?
 
SkyFox76 said:
You're exactly right! I would expect much more honesty and credibility from the person assigned to leading this country than just an ordinary citizen.

When I was growing up kids had a dream of becoming people who are admired. Doctor, astronaut, scientist, etc. I remember one of my friends family use to have conversations at the dinner table (when I was invited to stay) and sometimes it was political. We were young but it opened doors of thought for me because my own family just dealt with it as it played along. They were Republicans but nothing like I see today. But anyways, when various presidential things would get televised the family would meet in the living room to watch. There was a proud sense of learning to the whole thing.

Current times? I think most people tell their kids to go play somewhere when Trumps face appears on the TV because they have no clue what will come out of the guys mouth. He lies, he calls people names, and he throws tantrums. All qualities every parent hopes their kid grows up with. :lamo

So maybe you're not concerned that the man running this country can't go before a court because it's a given he'll perjure himself, but imo that's not the guy that needs to be in charge of a daycare facility, much less the USA..
Click to expand...
Meaningless TDS ramblings. :roll:
 
Bullseye said:
Doesn't matter. No threat, no deal.
And again, so what? Did they "realize there could be issues? That's YOUR TDS supposition.
Of course to make his dishonesty and shakiness of his accusations in public. There may also be some violations involved against his sources.
Simply idiotic rambling. HOW do we even KNOW he actually wrote the answers or if he had coaching and advisement?
Click to expand...

Jesus, you have just stepped in a pile a mile wide and don't even realize it. Who answered the questions Mueller sent the POTUS? Got proof it was Trump? No? Thx for playing.

The administration has admitted to moving the freakin call to the coded server because the legal team saw it could raise problems. Guess what? It has!!

And I love this part. I mean seriously you worked overtime on this one right? To date, the memo of the call that (Trump released) has matched the the WB complaints. Over a weeks worth of people have come forward to corroborate that QPQ was taking place, and here you are still screaming Boxers or Briefs????? Must see face!!! Seriously, try harder past "they're being mean!!" :cry:
 
Bullseye said:
Meaningless TDS ramblings. :roll:
Click to expand...

Why not just be honest and admit you can't refute what's known? Or if you think you can, then go that route. The whole TDS neener neener is just below jo momma so short, she plays handball on the curb jokes. You look silly and unable to hold your own on the topic. Feel free to prove me wrong. :)
 
GreatNews2night said:
Yeah, sure. The dynamics of the healthcare market are not a typical free market balance, because as you said, there are matters of life and death involved (and because patients don't really know how much care will cost, don't have how to compare, and often don't have any choice). But take a country like France. It has the very best, #1 healthcare system in the world (ours is #37). Technology-wise, theirs is just as advanced as ours. I know their system intimately, because I lived in France for five years, and both my wife and my son needed their healthcare system for serious illnesses (which they very competently managed to cure 100%, both made full recoveries). Well, their system is hybrid, has three sectors, one 100% free and public, one mixed (the government pays for part of the care, and the patient co-pays another chunk), and one entirely private, fee-for-service. These sectors are regulated and audited, and while providers need to pick one and prominently display to patients in which sector they practice, the patients themselves can freely migrate between all three sectors. They basically can pick and choose and establish how much they want to spend (the tables of costs for each procedure are regulated and are public knowledge so they CAN actually shop for the best deal for them), and whether or not they want the less luxurious sector with a bit more waiting time, or the intermediate one, or the expensive one with no waiting time. If they want to contract with insurance to help with the middle sector, they can - premiums are lower than here because the government does pick up part of the bill. The fee-for-service sector doesn't accept insurance.

So, the French manage to spend a lot less than we do per capita, and to have MUCH better outcomes and health indicators than we do (#1 vs. #37), and they have all the same technology that we have. So, don't tell me that it's impossible and the fault of the Baby Boomers.

Migrating slowly to a hybrid system with a public option, in my opinion, would be the solution, but Bernie and Warren want a sudden transformation that will only manage to collapse the whole system, with disastrous consequences that they don't see (for example, immediate unemployment for the hundreds of thousands of workers employed by the health insurance industry; utter confusion and chaos in the system; doctors prematurely retiring by the hundreds of thousands, and so on and so forth); or if they do, they are lying to their voters like Trump lied about his "beautiful wall that Mexico will pay for."
Click to expand...

Oui, mais impossible n'est pas français.

To be fair, I never said anything was impossible, or even endorsed a proposed solution... I just pointed out where I thought we were. À tout pourquoi il y a un parce que.
 
Lol...Adam’s troll has Fox News now broadcasting the name of the secret witness.

Excellent job, Mr. Schiff.
 
PoS said:
Adam Schiff says whistleblower testimony is 'redundant and unnecessary' - CNNPolitics


Strange. Why would the Dems hide the accuser from cross examination? If the case is so airtight, why not go public with all of it?
Click to expand...

Because he cannot add any evidence other than hearsay, that is why he is not being called. This is just a cheap attempt of the Trump supporters to get this guy outed because they hate him for accurately notifying his superiors of things that were told to him.

Only people who actually HEARD the phone call itself or were party to any discussions about said case would be relevant witnesses. What do the Trumpers want next, the person who transcribed the closed door hearings or the guy who installed the phone on which the call took place. All diversion tactics to try and frustrate the hearings process.

Just like wanting to question Biden's son. Also illogical, he is the victim of Trump's quid pro quo dealings, he also has no evidence to give about the high crimes and misdemeanors that Trump is being accused of.
 
QUOTE=Cordelier;1070875208]You're the one making the accusations against Chairman Schiff.... I'm just inviting you to back them up. That's fair, isn't it?[/QUOTE]


I already have.

You claim you've read all the testimony, so you're asking me to tell you what's wrong with it? Are you absolutely certain you've read it, or are you just referring to it when a question about it pops up? I certainly haven't read it all, but I've read enough presumption, conjecture, and opinion, some using those very words, to discount it as non-factual blather.

So, if you guys are serious, write up articles of impeachment and introduce a resolution. Get Pelosi on the phone, tell her to tighten up those dentures, and get this done. The left has been playing this game with the public for nearly three years now while significant issues before congress languish. Honestly, it looks exactly like the only thing you guys are gonna do is talk about it because you can't actually do anything.
 
The whistleblower rage is simply a distraction. What the whistleblower did is simply saying "hey, i passed by a house last night and I heard some weird noises, you should probably check that out. It looked like someone was being attacked"

Then, the police goes and talks to 4 neighbours and ONE PERSON INSIDE THE HOUSE who corroborate the claims. How is in any way outing or destroying the reputation of the whistleblower relevant?

The thing is, the whistleblower could be outed as Hillary clinton tomorrow and it wouldn't change a thing. What the whistleblower said is corroborated, even the WH confirmed. The goddamn transcript confirms it.
 
W_Heisenberg said:
I. Would. Like. You. To. Do. Us. A. Favor. Though.
Click to expand...

Yes, and? Put that in your articles of impeachment.

The last time a distant relative of mine approached me for money - he has a drug abuse problem - I gave him the money. I asked him not to spend it on drugs, and conditioned the gift on it. That's a reasonable request, and if it is met, both the money and his abstinence accrue to his benefit. This is no different, or would you prefer that our aid line the pockets of the crooks Ukraine is noted for?

I'll assume the latter in your case, because Trump. You'd prefer Ukraine accept the aid, steal weapons, and sell them to the Ukrainian military, thereby doubling or tripling their money - all in their personal pockets. This has actually happened there, and the crooks were so confident that they listed it as a line item in the annual report of their company.

And you think a request to investigate corruption is out of line? Tell me another joke.
 
humbolt said:
Yes, and? Put that in your articles of impeachment.

The last time a distant relative of mine approached me for money - he has a drug abuse problem - I gave him the money. I asked him not to spend it on drugs, and conditioned the gift on it. That's a reasonable request, and if it is met, both the money and his abstinence accrue to his benefit. This is no different, or would you prefer that our aid line the pockets of the crooks Ukraine is noted for?

I'll assume the latter in your case, because Trump. You'd prefer Ukraine accept the aid, steal weapons, and sell them to the Ukrainian military, thereby doubling or tripling their money - all in their personal pockets. This has actually happened there, and the crooks were so confident that they listed it as a line item in the annual report of their company.

And you think a request to investigate corruption is out of line? Tell me another joke.
Click to expand...

You sound like the mob.
 
W_Heisenberg said:
Schiff is not concerned about an endless litany of speculation and conjecture.
Click to expand...

Okay. I'll assume he will be presenting his incontrovertible evidence of collusion tomorrow. I'm not sure why he's waited so long, but I'm sure you can tell me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom