• 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!

Lots Of Impeachment Evidence But One Thing Missing

Moderate Right

Moderate Right

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 21, 2015
Messages
53,813
Reaction score
10,864
Location
Kentucky
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
From AP, not Fox News:

Yet the witness accounts left one prominent hole that offered a lifeline for Trump and his GOP allies. None of the witnesses could personally attest that Trump directly conditioned the release of the $400 million in military aid on a Ukrainian announcement of investigations into former Vice President Joe Biden and the Democratic National Committee.

Analysis: Lots of impeachment evidence but one thing missing
 
Because it didn’t happen.

Grand Illusion
 
"Ambassador Taylor recalls that mr Morrison told ambassador taylor that i told mr morrison that i conveyed this messsage to mr yarmak on september 1st 2019 in connection with vice president mr pences visit to warsaw in a meeting with president zelensky"​

~Jim Jordan
 
Moderate Right said:
From AP, not Fox News:

Yet the witness accounts left one prominent hole that offered a lifeline for Trump and his GOP allies. None of the witnesses could personally attest that Trump directly conditioned the release of the $400 million in military aid on a Ukrainian announcement of investigations into former Vice President Joe Biden and the Democratic National Committee.

Analysis: Lots of impeachment evidence but one thing missing
Click to expand...

It's likely why Trump went through Guiliani instead of the State Department. Step 1 in doing something shady, keep it off the books.
 
Moderate Right said:
From AP, not Fox News:

Yet the witness accounts left one prominent hole that offered a lifeline for Trump and his GOP allies. None of the witnesses could personally attest that Trump directly conditioned the release of the $400 million in military aid on a Ukrainian announcement of investigations into former Vice President Joe Biden and the Democratic National Committee.

Analysis: Lots of impeachment evidence but one thing missing
Click to expand...

That may be so, yet what was the reason stated for the aid's delay and release (coincidentally?) immediately following the WB complaint?
 
Moderate Right said:
From AP, not Fox News:

Yet the witness accounts left one prominent hole that offered a lifeline for Trump and his GOP allies. None of the witnesses could personally attest that Trump directly conditioned the release of the $400 million in military aid on a Ukrainian announcement of investigations into former Vice President Joe Biden and the Democratic National Committee.

Analysis: Lots of impeachment evidence but one thing missing
Click to expand...

Life line?

The President didn't need a lifeline.

Schiff and his clowns will get their just due down the road.

They will be the ones looking for life lines....
 
Last edited:
It could be answered if a couple of people would comply with their subpoenas. Mulvaney and Rudy were mentioned pretty regularly as sources of information on those things. Without them we just have to deal with people saying that they spoke to either of those guys and understood it meant military aid. Either way, the POTUS dangling a White House meeting in front of a foreign leader with the condition that they investigate a specific company, where the son of his biggest political opponent worked, is still damning. It's particularly damning given that we know that Trump doesn't care about corruption to that extent. He has met with plenty of corrupt leaders at the White House.
 
Moderate Right said:
From AP, not Fox News:

Yet the witness accounts left one prominent hole that offered a lifeline for Trump and his GOP allies. None of the witnesses could personally attest that Trump directly conditioned the release of the $400 million in military aid on a Ukrainian announcement of investigations into former Vice President Joe Biden and the Democratic National Committee.

Analysis: Lots of impeachment evidence but one thing missing
Click to expand...

Zelenski : "I would also like to thank you for your great support in the area of defense. We are ready to continue to cooperate for the next steps."

Trump : "I would like you to do us a favor, though." ... "There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great."
 
Gee, i wonder if we can figure this out with a single piece of hundreds, not explicitly evidenced.


24930990-jigsaw-puzzle-with-one-green-piece-missing.jpg


Well golly gee, I guess the glove don't fit!! Be serious.
 
Acadia said:
"Ambassador Taylor recalls that mr Morrison told ambassador taylor that i told mr morrison that i conveyed this messsage to mr yarmak on september 1st 2019 in connection with vice president mr pences visit to warsaw in a meeting with president zelensky"​

~Jim Jordan
Click to expand...

LOL. Well, that's rock solid!
 
Ikari said:
It's likely why Trump went through Guiliani instead of the State Department. Step 1 in doing something shady, keep it off the books.
Click to expand...

It's what these guys do all the time, all of them. The Clintons always got by by having so much smoke in the room no one could ever see the gun. And it worked. Assuming this is what happened here, it's nothing new for any of them. Hillary had a pension for not being able to remember things.
 
Trump said:
Because it didn’t happen.

Grand Illusion
Click to expand...

What do you think of the comment Trump "wanted an announcement of the investigations, not an actual opening of an investigation."

What does that mean, to you, in detail?
 
Moderate Right said:
It's what these guys do all the time, all of them. The Clintons always got by by having so much smoke in the room no one could ever see the gun. And it worked. Assuming this is what happened here, it's nothing new for any of them.
Click to expand...

I'll ask you the same.

What do you make of the notion Trump wanted only an announcement of an investigation, and not that the investigation be opened?
 
The Dems tried to nail Trump on things that all the presidents have been doing since probably the 1890s.
If Congress actually votes, the Senate will shoot it down.
I don't know, but it seems to me that this whole fiasco might be bad for the Dems in 2020.
Trump was pretty good on Fox and Friends this morning.
 
Mach said:
Gee, i wonder if we can figure this out with a single piece of hundreds, not explicitly evidenced.
Well golly gee, I guess the glove don't fit!! Be serious.
Click to expand...

there is no evidence.
sondland said that he had no evidence he simply guessed or made an assumption. when he did ask the president he was told no quid pro quo.

taylor testified and admitted that none of the phone calls that he had linkage of any kind was discussed.
vindman could not point to quid pro quo in any of his notes or phone transcript that he called highly accurate.

volker and morrison both stated that they have 0 evidence of quid pro quo or bribery or anything else.

you puzzle picture is more like a new puzzle just opened out of the box
schiff dumps it all on the table and goes see i put it together.

that is pretty much what all of this amounts to.
 
Mach said:
Gee, i wonder if we can figure this out with a single piece of hundreds, not explicitly evidenced.


View attachment 67268620


Well golly gee, I guess the glove don't fit!! Be serious.
Click to expand...

Hill's testimony about Russia is compelling. I am unsure why the republicans continue to spit out this narrative about Ukraine interfereing, beyond ensuring they suck up to Trump in every single instance they possibly can.

I really do not understand it.

Our intelligence agencies, decorated officials, foreign policy experts, all have stated with no uncertainty Ukraine did NOT interfere. Russia DID. I just don't get why they're doing this. I suspect the Parnas testimony will absolutely show some of them, Nunes, possibly Jordan, are taking money.

I really am confounded by this.

You would think the Hill testimony would be a UNIFYING moment for us; we were manipulated by Russian intelligence to this point, and no one, NO ONE, on the other side, wants to admit it.
 
Moderate Right said:
From AP, not Fox News:

Yet the witness accounts left one prominent hole that offered a lifeline for Trump and his GOP allies. None of the witnesses could personally attest that Trump directly conditioned the release of the $400 million in military aid on a Ukrainian announcement of investigations into former Vice President Joe Biden and the Democratic National Committee.

Analysis: Lots of impeachment evidence but one thing missing
Click to expand...

Doh! Go ahead, one guess, figure out the missing number..... 1,2,3,...,5.

Missing link, my ass! Get ready for an affirmative vote in the House on Impeachment!
 
Moderate Right said:
It's what these guys do all the time, all of them. The Clintons always got by by having so much smoke in the room no one could ever see the gun. And it worked. Assuming this is what happened here, it's nothing new for any of them.
Click to expand...

The Clintons were a bit more capable in their subterfuge. Trump isn't so delicate and that's why he got caught with his hands in the cookie jar. Still, he had enough presence of mind to use his personal lawyer to do the dirty work, though that's pretty much how he always did things anyway.

These things may have happened in the past, we don't really know. We know it's happened now. And it's not appropriate power or privilege of the President, he's not a king. Well, he's not supposed to be a king. And if we cared about proper separations of powers, checks and balances, and control of the government; we'd be giving far greater concerns to the actions here than merely trying to make the tired excuse of "Well the Clintons did it".
 
Grandpappy said:
The Dems tried to nail Trump on things that all the presidents have been doing since probably the 1890s.
If Congress actually votes, the Senate will shoot it down.
I don't know, but it seems to me that this whole fiasco might be bad for the Dems in 2020.
Trump was pretty good on Fox and Friends this morning.
Click to expand...

He must have taken his sudafed.
 
MrPeanut said:
It could be answered if a couple of people would comply with their subpoenas. Mulvaney and Rudy were mentioned pretty regularly as sources of information on those things. Without them we just have to deal with people saying that they spoke to either of those guys and understood it meant military aid. Either way, the POTUS dangling a White House meeting in front of a foreign leader with the condition that they investigate a specific company, where the son of his biggest political opponent worked, is still damning. It's particularly damning given that we know that Trump doesn't care about corruption to that extent. He has met with plenty of corrupt leaders at the White House.
Click to expand...

Assuming that Trump is guilty (for debate's sake), I find it rather funny that the left expect Trump to provide the witnesses to convict him. That goes against the very nature of legal defense. People who break the law are not required to provide the witnesses that will convict them. That's the prosecution's job and executive privilege is a thing for a reason.
 
Digger said:
Zelenski : "I would also like to thank you for your great support in the area of defense. We are ready to continue to cooperate for the next steps."

Trump : "I would like you to do us a favor, though." ... "There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great."
Click to expand...

AP:None of the witnesses could personally attest that Trump directly conditioned the release of the $400 million in military aid on a Ukrainian announcement of investigations into former Vice President Joe Biden and the Democratic National Committee.
 
Ikari said:
The Clintons were a bit more capable in their subterfuge. Trump isn't so delicate and that's why he got caught with his hands in the cookie jar. Still, he had enough presence of mind to use his personal lawyer to do the dirty work, though that's pretty much how he always did things anyway.

These things may have happened in the past, we don't really know. We know it's happened now. And it's not appropriate power or privilege of the President, he's not a king. Well, he's not supposed to be a king. And if we cared about proper separations of powers, checks and balances, and control of the government; we'd be giving far greater concerns to the actions here than merely trying to make the tired excuse of "Well the Clintons did it".
Click to expand...

Republicans used to be the party of national security. Bush is probably getting hemmorhoids over this. I am sure Reagan is rolling over in his grave.

The Russians have won this exchange and may have won the war, frankly. If the republicans gave one **** about national security and our allies they would rebuke this president's use of a false, phoney actor, Giuliani, and see it for what it is; a dangerous misuse of bad actors to conduct foreign policy and throw legitimate diplomats under the bus for a fake, russian propagated hoax.
 
Obscurity said:
What do you think of the comment Trump "wanted an announcement of the investigations, not an actual opening of an investigation."

What does that mean, to you, in detail?
Click to expand...

Ukraine was so fitly corrupt in prior administration Trump wanted new President on record as reformer ....

Tell Z to do the right thing.....I don't want anything
 
Lots Of Impeachment Evidence But One Thing Missing
Click to expand...

Republican senators who are willing to be honest jurors?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom