• 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 directs House Democrats to proceed with articles of impeachment against Trump

Lord of Planar said:
Remarks like yours drive me crazy.

Like sjmay points out, that was his opening remarks. When questioned about it, he admitted he didn't know it as fact, but presumed it as fact.

It's called confirmation bias!
Click to expand...

Cat's out of the bag, a "presumption" is an insignificant distinction. Republicans were fishing for anything spinnable.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Remarks like yours drive me crazy.

Like sjmay points out, that was his opening remarks. When questioned about it, he admitted he didn't know it as fact, but presumed it as fact.

It's called confirmation bias!

Of course, the lying media, and pundits will not tell you the whole truth. They have an agenda against the president.

How can you trust such unethical sources?
Click to expand...

Honestly, anyone quoting Sondland might as well be ignored since he rescinded his entire testimony
 
sjmay said:
Agreed, except, that isn't what he said was it?
Click to expand...

Not in a verbatim sense, no. But I'm glad you agree with the concept, because that's exactly what happened here.

Trump set up a quid pro quo, it was carried out by his minions, then a whistleblower called him out and he tried to walk it back after the fact.
 
Lord of Planar said:
If you know something nobody else does, I suggest you offer to testify.
Click to expand...

I know what everyone does, Trump committed an impeachable act by trying to extort Ukraine for a personal favor. Some are just in denial such as yourself.
 
Keridan said:
Honestly, anyone quoting Sondland might as well be ignored since he rescinded his entire testimony
Click to expand...

It's amazing the lies people will believe.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Maybe that is just coincidence?

Maybe Hunter is a criminal in this matter, and it is being made to look the other way around.

Isn't that just as likely?

Did you read my post 273?
Click to expand...


Trump wants to investigate corruption in ukraine?

Prosecute this guy!

Dmytro Firtash - Wikipedia

Investigate Viktor Shokin, Yuri Lutsenko, and Kostiantyn Kulyk. The corrupt trio of prosecutors who seem to be at the center of this Ukraine mess because their misinformation is still being circulated.

At least Ukraine had the sense to fire those people.

Ukraine plans to fire the prosecutor who led investigations into the firm where Joe Biden's son served on the board, a central figure in the activity at the heart of impeachment proceedings against U.S. President Donald Trump, a source told Reuters.

Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani has acknowledged meeting the prosecutor, Kostiantyn Kulyk, to discuss accusations against the Bidens.

The decision to sideline someone who played an important role in Giuliani's efforts to find out damaging information about the Bidens comes as Ukraine has tried to avoid getting drawn into a partisan fight in Washington.

...

The source said a decision had been taken to fire Kulyk for failing to show up for an exam that all employees of the General Prosecutor's Office have been ordered to pass to keep their jobs during a clean-up of the prosecution service.

Prosecutor General Ruslan Ryaboshapka has already fired more than 400 prosecutors, or around a third of all staff.
Click to expand...


Exclusive: Ukraine to fire prosecutor who discussed Bidens with Giuliani - source - Reuters
 
Deuce said:
Not in a verbatim sense, no. But I'm glad you agree with the concept, because that's exactly what happened here.

Trump set up a quid pro quo, it was carried out by his minions, then a whistleblower called him out and he tried to walk it back after the fact.
Click to expand...

Yet nobody has testified your presumption is valid under questioning.
 
Lord of Planar said:
The only thing that appears related in my view, was the idea that the money would not be released without the concerns of corruption addressed. Now if that corruption included Biden's son, then why would it be off limits?

The standing agreement wasn't by individual, but of corruption itself.
Click to expand...

Because it was for personal gain.

Did trump demand an announcement of an investigation into the company?

No he named a political rivals son.

You can try to spin this anyway you want but it always lands on extortion and abuse of power, not to mention the solicitation of a foreign governments assistance to influence an American election.

Let's put it this way if this happened when the founders were still around he would have been strung up by now, they had no time for traitors..
 
sjmay said:
Perfect, so if the House is the cops and the senate is the judge/jury,

How the **** is the house complaining that Trump is obstructing justice?
Click to expand...

In this scenario, the suspect is dictating that witnesses remain silent.

You don't think that qualifies? In a general law enforcement investigation would you find this remotely acceptable? A suspect/defendant able to unilaterally suppress evidence against him?
 
sjmay said:
LMAO ok fine...show me how it's correct, corroborate it please.
Click to expand...

See the Mulvaney video where he admitted to QPQ on live TV
 
Grim17 said:
If it is so simple, then why is it you're unable to cite any compelling evidence that there was a quid pro quo with regards to the aid, or that a crime was committed?

If you can't even do that, then it's clear who the real simpletons are.
Click to expand...

You're kidding right???
 
sjmay said:
Absolutely, so I guess your take on it, is, bribery is good as long as the person is a dirty crooked rotten slimeball and deserved what he got?
Click to expand...

I am saying that the stories about biden being corrupt come from Shokin, who was fired for being corrupt. Why should anyone trust the claims made by Shokin as being honest given the corruption he indulged in?
 
sjmay said:
Could it be that oh..I dunno, Joe Biden CONFESSED TO IT ON VIDEO? Think about it for a minute...you want to investigate corruption, and you have Biden confessing to corruption on video, it's perfectly normal to focus on that, and use that as an example....right?

Fair enough, you disagree,

You still haven't explained how 16 witnesses, can not link aid to investigations, bribery, extortion, qpq, anything you want to call it, they've all said, they have no proof of it, how do you explain that?
Click to expand...

You're still pulling out that completely debunked Biden bull****?
 
Deuce said:
In this scenario, the suspect is dictating that witnesses remain silent.

You don't think that qualifies? In a general law enforcement investigation would you find this remotely acceptable? A suspect/defendant able to unilaterally suppress evidence against him?
Click to expand...

It's been pointed out many times to me that this isn't a law enforcement investigation....

But let's take your point and run with it....a gang gets arrested, or pulled in for questioning and the leader...yells LAWYER UP everyone.... is he obstructing justice?
 
Winston said:
See the Mulvaney video where he admitted to QPQ on live TV
Click to expand...

Yea, I've seen it,theres nothing specific about it...and he literally says, its part of it....so...how much is it a part of....a tiny bit? a large bit? Can you answer that?
 
sjmay said:
No, they didn't, they literally said when directly asked, they had no proof, nor knowledge of it....
Click to expand...


I think maybe you need to actually watch the interviews rather than the fox faux news out takes...
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
I am saying that the stories about biden being corrupt come from Shokin, who was fired for being corrupt. Why should anyone trust the claims made by Shokin as being honest given the corruption he indulged in?
Click to expand...

Umm...no....the stories of Biden corruption comes from Biden himself admitting that he withheld aid to get Shokin fired.....
 
GDViking said:
You're still pulling out that completely debunked Biden bull****?
Click to expand...

? I'm pulling out what? The fact that there is video out of there of Biden saying, he withheld aid until Shotkin was fired? umm...I guess so.
 
sjmay said:
It's been pointed out many times to me that this isn't a law enforcement investigation....

But let's take your point and run with it....a gang gets arrested, or pulled in for questioning and the leader...yells LAWYER UP everyone.... is he obstructing justice?
Click to expand...

Your scenario doesn't fit what's happening. Trump is ordering people under his command to ignore a legal subpoena.
 
GDViking said:
I think maybe you need to actually watch the interviews rather than the fox faux news out takes...
Click to expand...

Don't get fox news, but I'm starting to think you changed the channel after the majoritys questions.....

Point out one person who said there was quid pro quo without either A. walking it back (ala Sondland) or B. prefacing it with I believe, I think, I presumed, and C. show me ONE person who was asked a direct question if they had proof or knowledge of anything illegal, qpq, abuse of power, etc, in the affirmative.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom