• 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!

Pelosi suggests whistleblower complaint prompted release of Ukraine aid

trixare4kids

Trix has reentered the building.
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 16, 2017
Messages
68,185
Reaction score
63,078
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Pelosi suggests whistleblower complaint prompted release of Ukraine aid

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi suggested that the disclosure to Congress of the existence of the whistleblower complaint about President Trump's dealings with Ukraine prompted the White House to release hundreds of millions of dollars in military aid to the country after a months-long delay.

Asked by "Face the Nation" moderator Margaret Brennan if she saw a connection between the whistleblower and the release of the aid, Pelosi said "of course."

Mind you, Pelosi never explains that connection, and only insists that there is one.

And yet, on October 1, “It wasn’t explained to me," Zelensky said "about the withholding of the support from July until Sept. 11. Trump has cited corruption in Ukraine as one of the reasons the U.S. held back the funds."

Source for Zelensky quotes cited above and below:
Ukraine president: Nobody explained to me why US military aid was delayed | Fox News

Who you going to believe? Pelosi, who after day two of the impeachment inquiry farce calls the POTUS an imposer who bribed newly elected president of Ukraine? Or do we side with our president and President Zelensky who "pushed back against allegations that Trump used military aid as leverage during the leaders' July 25 call?"

Or will you believe the Senate Republicans who "said that happened in part because Sen. Dick Durbin, an Illinois Democrat, threatened to block $5 billion in Pentagon spending for 2020 if the aid wasn’t given to Ukraine?" Source: Timeline: The curious release of military aid to Ukraine

Where is Pelosi's proof for what she alleged? She said he did? That's it???

Remember this is the same Nancy Pelosi, who on Thursday accused the president of the CRIME bribery but won't admit that the house will get to the point of taking an impeachment vote.

I don't know about you but if I were coup coup Pelosi and had proof

1) The aid was released because the WH got wind of the WB's complaint

and

2) The president committed the crime of bribery

Why delay in taking the impeachment vote?
 
Last edited:
Pelosi suggests whistleblower complaint prompted release of Ukraine aid



Mind you, Pelosi never explains that connection, and only insists that there is one.

And yet, on October 1, “It wasn’t explained to me," Zelensky said "about the withholding of the support from July until Sept. 11. Trump has cited corruption in Ukraine as one of the reasons the U.S. held back the funds."

Source for Zelensky quotes cited above and below:
Ukraine president: Nobody explained to me why US military aid was delayed | Fox News

Who you going to believe? Pelosi, who after day two of the impeachment inquiry farce calls the POTUS an imposer who bribed newly elected president of Ukraine? Or do we side with our president and President Zelensky who "pushed back against allegations that Trump used military aid as leverage during the leaders' July 25 call?"

Or will you believe the Senate Republicans who "said that happened in part because Sen. Dick Durbin, an Illinois Democrat, threatened to block $5 billion in Pentagon spending for 2020 if the aid wasn’t given to Ukraine?" Source: Timeline: The curious release of military aid to Ukraine

Where is Pelosi's proof for what she alleged? She said he did? That's it???

Remember this is the same Nancy Pelosi, who on Thursday accused the president of the CRIME bribery but won't admit that the house will get to the point of taking an impeachment vote.

I don't know about you but if I were coup coup Pelosi and had proof

1) The aid was released because the WH got wind of the WB's complaint

and

2) The president committed the crime of bribery

Why delay in taking the impeachment vote?
They are not gonna take an impeahment vote because there is bipartisan support against it and if it did pass they would have to surrender control of the process and the narative over to the GOP.

They need to come up with an exit strategy that does not make them look bad in the eyes of the public when they balk from calling the vote.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
They are not gonna take an impeahment vote because there is bipartisan support against it and if it did pass they would have to surrender control of the process and the narative over to the GOP.

They need to come up with an exit strategy that does not make them look bad in the eyes of the public when they balk from calling the vote.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Time will tell, right?

Democratic Representative Jeff Van Drew said that he and other Democrats are growing weary of all this. He said this morning while on Maria Bartiromo, "You always have to watch for executive power getting too great on either side of the aisle."

Sounds like he is one of the few House Democrats who doesn't have their heads up their ass.
 
Last edited:
If you rob a bank and are caught, and then return the money, be prepared to get laughed at when you say you were going to return the money anyway.
 
They are not gonna take an impeahment vote because there is bipartisan support against it and if it did pass they would have to surrender control of the process and the narative over to the GOP.

They need to come up with an exit strategy that does not make them look bad in the eyes of the public when they balk from calling the vote.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Just out of curiosity, who is feeding you guys this talking point?
 
Time will tell, right?

Democratic Representative Jeff Van Drew said that he and other Democrats are growing weary of all this. He said this morning while on Maria Bartiromo, "You always have to watch for executive power getting too great on either side of the aisle."

Sounds like he is one of the few House Democrats who doesn't have their heads up their ass.
They all put their self interests ahead of everything. Without even knowing who Van Drew is I'd be willing to wager he represents a district with a large number of republicans in it. He cant afford to piss them off.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
They are not gonna take an impeahment vote because there is bipartisan support against it and if it did pass they would have to surrender control of the process and the narative over to the GOP.

They need to come up with an exit strategy that does not make them look bad in the eyes of the public when they balk from calling the vote.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Agree. Any guesses what their exit strategy will be? Dems are not going to let the GOP take over in the Senate. They will go straight for the Bidens and the "whistleblower".
And Schiff.
 
They all put their self interests ahead of everything. Without even knowing who Van Drew is I'd be willing to wager he represents a district with a large number of republicans in it. He cant afford to piss them off.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Pelosi can't afford to have her Democrats tied up in a protracted Senate hearing. Bad timing.
 
Just out of curiosity, who is feeding you guys this talking point?
Some of us are capable of critical thinking without the assistance of force fed talking points.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Agree. Any guesses what their exit strategy will be? Dems are not going to let the GOP take over in the Senate. They will go straight for the Bidens and the "whistleblower".
And Schiff.
I think what they will do is playing this show out at full volume. Then after their grand finale they will self proclaim themselves victorious and the media will dutifully agree with that conclusion. Then pelosi will announce that they fullfilled their ethical responsibility to expose his corruption but since the senate is in cahoots with him she wont be calling a vote and leave it up to the voters to remove him next november. Again the media will dutifully applaud like trained seals.

The hope being that taking the onus off the Democrats and onto the voters will appease the public while simultaneously never allowing the gop to counter the narrative they created.

Thats my best guess how it plays out. How the public will react os anybodys guess

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
They all put their self interests ahead of everything. Without even knowing who Van Drew is I'd be willing to wager he represents a district with a large number of republicans in it. He cant afford to piss them off.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Not sure this is true about Van Drew. NJ is a blue state. Perhaps he's just a good guy calling out another nothing burger?

Time to call this what it is... a political witch hunt, a political coup by the stomp their feet, anti-American, left wing, crybaby faction of the Democratic party. They are out of control with their constitutional quest to regain power.
 
Pelosi can't afford to have her Democrats tied up in a protracted Senate hearing. Bad timing.
If this goes to the senate and the gop has the balls to attack it properly they could blow up the democrats entire argument and sideline half of the democrats nominees. I will be very surprised if it makes it to the senate.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
If this goes to the senate and the gop has the balls to attack it properly they could blow up the democrats entire argument and sideline half of the democrats nominees. I will be very surprised if it makes it to the senate.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

That's a mighty bold prediction with a lot of witnesses and testimony still to go in the house...
 
Not sure this is true about Van Drew. NJ is a blue state. Perhaps he's just a good guy calling out another nothing burger?

Time to call this what it is... a political witch hunt, a political coup by the stomp their feet, anti-American, left wing, crybaby faction of the Democratic party. They are out of control with their constitutional quest to regain power.
You might of found one of very few lol

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
Pelosi suggests whistleblower complaint prompted release of Ukraine aid



Mind you, Pelosi never explains that connection, and only insists that there is one.

And yet, on October 1, “It wasn’t explained to me," Zelensky said "about the withholding of the support from July until Sept. 11. Trump has cited corruption in Ukraine as one of the reasons the U.S. held back the funds."

Source for Zelensky quotes cited above and below:
Ukraine president: Nobody explained to me why US military aid was delayed | Fox News

Who you going to believe? Pelosi, who after day two of the impeachment inquiry farce calls the POTUS an imposer who bribed newly elected president of Ukraine? Or do we side with our president and President Zelensky who "pushed back against allegations that Trump used military aid as leverage during the leaders' July 25 call?"

Or will you believe the Senate Republicans who "said that happened in part because Sen. Dick Durbin, an Illinois Democrat, threatened to block $5 billion in Pentagon spending for 2020 if the aid wasn’t given to Ukraine?" Source: Timeline: The curious release of military aid to Ukraine

Where is Pelosi's proof for what she alleged? She said he did? That's it???

Remember this is the same Nancy Pelosi, who on Thursday accused the president of the CRIME bribery but won't admit that the house will get to the point of taking an impeachment vote.

I don't know about you but if I were coup coup Pelosi and had proof

1) The aid was released because the WH got wind of the WB's complaint

and

2) The president committed the crime of bribery

Why delay in taking the impeachment vote?

What is the alternative? That it was all just one giant insane coincidence, and that Trump is just stupid and says stupid things and does stupid things for no actual reason? That he withheld the aid for the hell of it and randomly released it when the mood struck him?

Trump withheld the aid. No one knows for absolute certainty why he did it in his own mind, only why he said he was doing it at the time (to pressure Ukraine to investigate his political opponent, according to witnesses.) Zelensky thanked Trump for the promised aid during a phone call. Trump then directly told Zelensky "I want you to do us a favor, though," and asked him to open an investigation into the Bidens and Burisma. He then released the aid ONLY AFTER the whistleblower complaint went public.

What is your theory on what actually happened here?
 
Last edited:
That's a mighty bold prediction with a lot of witnesses and testimony still to go in the house...
Its just my opinion based on what i know so far. If new information comes in its subject to change but it would need to be something that really affects public opinions

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
Pelosi suggests whistleblower complaint prompted release of Ukraine aid



Mind you, Pelosi never explains that connection, and only insists that there is one.

And yet, on October 1, “It wasn’t explained to me," Zelensky said "about the withholding of the support from July until Sept. 11. Trump has cited corruption in Ukraine as one of the reasons the U.S. held back the funds."

Source for Zelensky quotes cited above and below:
Ukraine president: Nobody explained to me why US military aid was delayed | Fox News

Who you going to believe? Pelosi, who after day two of the impeachment inquiry farce calls the POTUS an imposer who bribed newly elected president of Ukraine? Or do we side with our president and President Zelensky who "pushed back against allegations that Trump used military aid as leverage during the leaders' July 25 call?"

Or will you believe the Senate Republicans who "said that happened in part because Sen. Dick Durbin, an Illinois Democrat, threatened to block $5 billion in Pentagon spending for 2020 if the aid wasn’t given to Ukraine?" Source: Timeline: The curious release of military aid to Ukraine

Where is Pelosi's proof for what she alleged? She said he did? That's it???

Remember this is the same Nancy Pelosi, who on Thursday accused the president of the CRIME bribery but won't admit that the house will get to the point of taking an impeachment vote.

I don't know about you but if I were coup coup Pelosi and had proof

1) The aid was released because the WH got wind of the WB's complaint

and

2) The president committed the crime of bribery

Why delay in taking the impeachment vote?

I would suspect she's trying to put senate republicans in a box of trying to justify not voting to impeach when the evidence makes the high crime indisputable. (To people outside the cult, of course.)

While statistics suggest that many independents get their news from fox, I'm not sure that they will continue to swallow obvious deflection and lies.

Time will tell.
 
Some of us are capable of critical thinking without the assistance of force fed talking points.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Funny that y'all always seem to come to the same conclusions as the talking points, though.

Using exactly the same verbiage and imagery.

Almost miraculous, even.
 
You might of found one of very few lol

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

He didn't mention names this morning during Bartiromo's interview, but he said there is chatter from other Democrats that is reflecting his view that enough is enough. IOW, these Democrats weren't elected to go after the POTUS, and nothing he sees so far is compelling evidence.
 
Funny that y'all always seem to come to the same conclusions as the talking points, though.

Using exactly the same verbiage and imagery.

Almost miraculous, even.
Maybe they read my posts?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
He didn't mention names this morning during Bartiromo's interview, but he said there is chatter from other Democrats that is reflecting his view that enough is enough. IOW, these Democrats weren't elected to go after the POTUS, and nothing he sees so far is compelling evidence.
Is he one of the ones who voted against the inquiry?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
What is the alternative? That it was all just one giant insane coincidence, and that Trump is just stupid and says stupid things and does stupid things for no actual reason? That he withheld the aid for the hell of it and randomly released it when the mood struck him?

Trump withheld the aid. No one knows for absolute certainty why he did it in his own mind, only why he said he was doing it at the time (to pressure Ukraine to investigate his political opponent, according to witnesses.) Zelensky thanked Trump for the promised aid during a phone call. Trump then directly told Zelensky "I want you to do us a favor, though," and asked him to open an investigation into the Bidens and Burisma. He then released the aid ONLY AFTER the whistleblower complaint went public.

What is your theory on what actually happened here?

Archive my nic. Plenty of my opinions throughout the forum on what has "happened here".
 
Maybe they read my posts?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Sometimes I think the "pundits" from both sides get their talking points from forums.
I wish there were royalties granted for some... Maybe forum peeps need to get a patent for expressing their opinions. Lol ;)
 
Sometimes I think the "pundits" from both sides get their talking points from forums.
I wish there were royalties granted for some... Maybe forum peeps need to get a patent for expressing their opinions. Lol ;)
I feel so used...[emoji26]

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top Bottom