Are you fine with Schiff’s Soviet Styled witness tampering?

By not allowing Republicans the witnesses they want, Schiff is witness tampering in the worst way.

It’s not an impeachment inquiry following past precedent, but a kangaroo court coverup... now that we know:

1. The transcript illustrated no Quid Pro Quo.

2. Zelensky said there was no Quid Prom Quo.

3. Schiff colluded with the whistle-leaker and lied about it.

4. The only “witnesses” to the call... Vindmann could not illustrate Quid Pro Quo in the text of the call when asked to do so and given ample time to do so by Rep. Ratcliffe.

Are you fine with this setup... where Republicans cannot call key witnesses... where Schiff is engaging in Soviet style witness tampering by not allowing the defense to call key witnesses?

5. The Whistle-leaker who started this entire fiasco.

6. Hunter Biden... who is central to the entire story.

Trump threatening people not to testify to congress isn't witness tampering? You don't care about the truth, you only care about covering for dear leader. A soviet style dictatorship would allow its leader to commit crimes without consequence or any oversight, which is apparently what you want.

Everything the whistleblower alleged has been confirmed under oath by multiple top Trump administration officials, so he is completely and totally irrelevant. There's no evidence whatsoever to support the conspiracy theory that Hunter Biden did anything wrong other than rambling Trump tweets, and since we don't live in a soviet style dictatorship that's not enough to indict someone.

Squirm harder.

Trump extorted and bribed a foreign power to interfere in an American election by smearing his political rival with a fake investigation, and he withheld $400 million in critical military aid in order to coerce Zelensky into opening that investigation.

All the evidence supports this assertion, and none refutes it:

1)Trump's phone call, in which he certainly appears to be demanding an investigation into his political rival in return for releasing critical military aid.
2)Giuliani, who admitted on live television that Trump made that demand.
3)Mick Mulvaney, who admitted to the quid pro quo, again on live television.
4)Senator Johnson, who said in an interview that he believed that release of the military aid was contingent on Zelensky opening an investigation into Trump's political rival.
5)John Bolton, who shut down a meeting once it became apparent that it was about demanding an investigation into Trump's political rival.
6. Colonel Vindman, who testified that the Trump administration altered the phone transcript to delete explicit mentions of Biden and Burisma, and said that Sondland implicated Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff, in a quid pro quo. Also, he testified that Zelensky knew perfectly well what Trump's "do me a favor" comment meant.
7. Fiona Hill, who also testified that Sondland implicated Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff, in a quid pro quo, as well as the unsubstantiated attacks on Marie L. Yovanovitch, who didn't appear to be playing ball in the shakedown of a foreign country, as well as the fact that Giuliani was running a shadow foreign policy effort.
8. Marie Yovanovitch, who testified that she was pushed out because she was uncomfortable with the plans to extort Zelensky.
9. Michael McKinley, who testified that he quit because the State Department was being used to dig up dirt on Trump's political opponent, cementing that it was a key point in the Trump administration to use the powers of the Presidency to destroy a political rival by any means.
10. Gordon Sondland, who testified that release of the military aid was contingent on Zelensky beginning an investigation into Trump's political rival.
11. William Taylor, who testified about a clear understanding of a quid pro quo, the belief that a meeting between President Donald Trump and Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky wasn’t “worth it” if Kyiv had to interfere in US politics, and a growing suspicion of Rudy Giuliani’s role in the administration’s Ukraine policy.
12. The fact that the Zelensky administration not only was aware of the extortion, but had actually made the decision to cave in to that extortion and announce on CNN the opening of an investigation into Biden, exactly as Trump demanded. They were saved only by the story blowing up and going public.

Hill and Vindman Testimony: Key Excerpts From Impeachment Inquiry Transcripts - The New York Times
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...9aa720-ff29-11e9-8501-2a7123a38c58_story.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...itchs-an-michael-mckinleys-ukraine-testimony/
Here Are 5 Key Takeaways From the Hundreds of Pages of Testimony That Were Released Monday by Lawmakers Overseeing the Impeachment Investigation
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/11/05/takeaways-gordon-sondlands-testimony/
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/07/world/europe/ukraine-trump-zelensky.html[/QUOTE]

zimmer said:

By not allowing Republicans the witnesses they want, Schiff is witness tampering in the worst way.

It’s not an impeachment inquiry following past precedent, but a kangaroo court coverup... now that we know:

1. The transcript illustrated no Quid Pro Quo.

2. Zelensky said there was no Quid Prom Quo.

3. Schiff colluded with the whistle-leaker and lied about it.

4. The only “witnesses” to the call... Vindmann could not illustrate Quid Pro Quo in the text of the call when asked to do so and given ample time to do so by Rep. Ratcliffe.

Are you fine with this setup... where Republicans cannot call key witnesses... where Schiff is engaging in Soviet style witness tampering by not allowing the defense to call key witnesses?

5. The Whistle-leaker who started this entire fiasco.

6. Hunter Biden... who is central to the entire story.

Click to expand...

Admittedly I'm only half-following this, since the "news" is 99.6% democrat propaganda. Are you saying that Vindmann was a first person witness to the call, and could not come up with quid pro quo?

With 'text of the call', this suggests that Vindmann was not actually on the call and is merely interpreting a transcript.

Do we know who was actually on the call, and have they been called to testify?

Just a bunch of fake news, lies, and spin to try to get the big bad Orange man..

I'm positive it will flop..

Republican witnesses are simple a redirect to direct the investigation to Biden. This has already been done and no wrongdoing was found.

If Trump is really innocent then why doesn't he allow those closest to him to testify. Rudy, Mulvaney and Bolton.

zimmer said:

By not allowing Republicans the witnesses they want, Schiff is witness tampering in the worst way.

It’s not an impeachment inquiry following past precedent, but a kangaroo court coverup... now that we know:

1. The transcript illustrated no Quid Pro Quo.

2. Zelensky said there was no Quid Prom Quo.

3. Schiff colluded with the whistle-leaker and lied about it.

4. The only “witnesses” to the call... Vindmann could not illustrate Quid Pro Quo in the text of the call when asked to do so and given ample time to do so by Rep. Ratcliffe.

Are you fine with this setup... where Republicans cannot call key witnesses... where Schiff is engaging in Soviet style witness tampering by not allowing the defense to call key witnesses?

5. The Whistle-leaker who started this entire fiasco.

6. Hunter Biden... who is central to the entire story.

Click to expand...

That was all astounding dishonest. Very Trump like on your part. You should be proud of yourself for doing such a good jump emulating your orange hero.

1. It wasn't a transcript, it was notes from the call, and even in the notes, it was clear Trump was trying to extort the government of Ukraine.

2. Vindmann's actually testified that:

Question: "You were listening in real time to this call along with President Zelenskiy when President Trump was speaking?"

Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman (the National Security Council’s top expert on Ukraine): "Correct."

Question: "And was there any doubt in your mind as to what the President, our President, was asking for as a deliverable?"

Vindman: "There was no doubt."

3. The initial whistleblower at this point is irrelevant has numerous witnesses have corroborated his claims.

4. Hunter Biden is irrelevant to the investigation at this point. Let's just say that Hunter Biden is a total crook. That doesn't change the fact that Trump attempted to extort the government of Ukraine into investigating a political rival and meddling in our election on his behalf. So, if you think Hunter Biden is a crook, then open another investigation into him, but whether he is a crook or not has nothing to do with whether Trump attempted to extort the government of Ukraine.

This whole thing is a farce...

Psst. The whistleblower's name is Eric Ciaramella. Pass it on...

I am beginning to think they will not vote for impeachment. There is enough outcry about the Democrats not even allowing a semblance of due process to doom the outcome. The question is whether they are fully committed to a suicide pact or whether they will try to salvage something.

History will remember this as one of the low marks of the Democratic party.

Jay59 said:

I am beginning to think they will not vote for impeachment. There is enough outcry about the Democrats not even allowing a semblance of due process to doom the outcome.

Click to expand...

Pelosi committed them to voting to impeach when she started all this, they can't afford to hand him a win in an election year - now they're trying to justify it with bs claims of extortion and bribery which have as much chance of being prosecuted as the Democrats have of being committed to a mental institution for delusional paranoia.

zimmer said:

By not allowing Republicans the witnesses they want, Schiff is witness tampering in the worst way.

Click to expand...

It is called the Chair not allowing the investigation to run off the rails into lala land.

Your post fails.

Taylor said:

Pelosi committed them to voting to impeach when she started all this, they can't afford to hand him a win in an election year - now they're trying to justify it with bs claims of extortion and bribery which have as much chance of being prosecuted as the Democrats have of being committed to a mental institution for delusional paranoia.

Click to expand...

Put it this way, I am beginning to wonder if the votes are there. The stench is getting pretty vile.

As this thread and many others show, Trump supporters only defence is “nah ah”.

That’s it, they have nothing else.

rickc said:

Republican witnesses are simple a redirect to direct the investigation to Biden. This has already been done and no wrongdoing was found.

If Trump is really innocent then why doesn't he allow those closest to him to testify. Rudy, Mulvaney and Bolton.

Click to expand...

ROTFLOL...

1. The whistle-leaker is central. He’s the accuser.

2. **** Hunter Biden is central. As we’ve learned ... he was hired for $83,000 per month because of his name, and his name was used to access the State Dept. in order to circumvent.

Trump asking for assistance to root out corruption is not illegal... it’s an absurd contention the Soviets in Congress and the Media have hung their hats on.**

3. If these people are not central (and everyone knows they are) why not let Republicans make fools of themselves? Because their testimony under oath would explode in the faces of Democrats. We’ll have to wait for the Senate to reveal the Democrats Soviet Styled Corruption.




**We have a treaty with Ukraine to assist one another in rooting out corruption.

Jetboogieman said:

As this thread and many others show, Trump supporters only defence is “nah ah”.

That’s it, they have nothing else.

Click to expand...

Absurd response from one of the Supreme Soviets in this forum.

That he’s for a Soviet Styled process is no surprise. But that he ... ROTFLOL... complains that the R’s have no defense when it’s his Soviets that are denying them the witnesses they want is ****ing hilarious.

Not one for deep thinking are you? No... but... you see... that is the beauty of free speech and why I encourage Leftists and Soviets like you to open your yaps and vomit out what’s in the echo-chamber between your ears.

Here Comrade... you’ve earned it:

View attachment 67268117

PS> Comrade BoogieMan... Tell us... what is it about a fair process... that you so despise?

Y’know Comrade... you seem like the type of Goode stepping Soviet who would deny someone their free speech and due process at the drop of a hat, and rejoice in it.

Trump's going down, and not just on Putin and the Saudi murderer.

haymarket said:

It is called the Chair not allowing the investigation to run off the rails into lala land.

Your post fails.

Click to expand...

And you believe that... ROTFLOL...

Of course that’s the reason they don’t want the two primary and central characters in this charade from testifying.

Goebbels, Schiff, Pelosi and Fat Man (Below) would have been proud of you and your ability to tell massive whoppers so easily.

View attachment 67268118

zimmer said:

By not allowing Republicans the witnesses they want, Schiff is witness tampering in the worst way.

It’s not an impeachment inquiry following past precedent, but a kangaroo court coverup... now that we know:

1. The transcript illustrated no Quid Pro Quo.

2. Zelensky said there was no Quid Prom Quo.

3. Schiff colluded with the whistle-leaker and lied about it.

4. The only “witnesses” to the call... Vindmann could not illustrate Quid Pro Quo in the text of the call when asked to do so and given ample time to do so by Rep. Ratcliffe.

Are you fine with this setup... where Republicans cannot call key witnesses... where Schiff is engaging in Soviet style witness tampering by not allowing the defense to call key witnesses?

5. The Whistle-leaker who started this entire fiasco.

6. Hunter Biden... who is central to the entire story.

Click to expand...

Are you fine with Trump's Soviet styled criminal activities? Yes or no, answer the question.

zimmer said:

By not allowing Republicans the witnesses they want, Schiff is witness tampering in the worst way.

It’s not an impeachment inquiry following past precedent, but a kangaroo court coverup... now that we know:

1. The transcript illustrated no Quid Pro Quo.

2. Zelensky said there was no Quid Prom Quo.

3. Schiff colluded with the whistle-leaker and lied about it.

4. The only “witnesses” to the call... Vindmann could not illustrate Quid Pro Quo in the text of the call when asked to do so and given ample time to do so by Rep. Ratcliffe.

Are you fine with this setup... where Republicans cannot call key witnesses... where Schiff is engaging in Soviet style witness tampering by not allowing the defense to call key witnesses?

5. The Whistle-leaker who started this entire fiasco.

6. Hunter Biden... who is central to the entire story.

Click to expand...

That's not the only witness tampering by Schiffty.

He leaked testimony from closed hearings that clued upcoming witnesses to what was being said...at the same time he was defending having the closed hearings so that witnesses wouldn't be clued into what was being said and coordinating testimony.

:doh:roll:

zimmer said:

And you believe that...

Click to expand...

You have enlisted on the wrong side of this war against the American people. You will lose. Russia will lose. Trump will lose.

How is not allowing a witness, "Soviet-style"?

Schiff is a coward, and it makes no difference whether he allows the testimony or not. Trump won't be leaving the WH anytime soon.

But if this had been the Soviet Union, there wouldn't even be open hearings. Trump would have been secretly outed by the Politburo in an internal coup and we'd never hear the reasons why. Or maybe Trump would have outmaneuvered Schiff and his ilk and they'd simply all be in Siberia now. Either way, we'd only get a whitewashed "everything is fine!" version of events.

zimmer said:

Soviet

Click to expand...

It is the height of irony when reading orange supporters spout labels like this.... when orange has been working for the interests of Putin, a former KGB foreign intelligence officer.

****ing tough ****. Same rules as Clinton.

Nunes is opening with hysterical conspiracy theory and nothing relevant to the impeachment.

Pathetic. Truly pathetic.

eman623 said:

How is not allowing a witness, "Soviet-style"?

Schiff is a coward, and it makes no difference whether he allows the testimony or not. Trump won't be leaving the WH anytime soon.

But if this had been the Soviet Union, there wouldn't even be open hearings. Trump would have been secretly outed by the Politburo in an internal coup and we'd never hear the reasons why. Or maybe Trump would have outmaneuvered Schiff and his ilk and they'd simply all be in Siberia now. Either way, we'd only get a whitewashed "everything is fine!" version of events.

Click to expand...

They tried their best with their Soviet Styled basement vault hearings... until Matt Gaetz and other R’s stormed in on the farce ... and the greater public learned about what was going on.

This hearing they’re denying witnesses central to the case.

Democrat leadership... exhibiting behavior which is very Soviet-like.

zimmer said:

By not allowing Republicans the witnesses they want, Schiff is witness tampering in the worst way.

It’s not an impeachment inquiry following past precedent, but a kangaroo court coverup... now that we know:

1. The transcript illustrated no Quid Pro Quo.

2. Zelensky said there was no Quid Prom Quo.

3. Schiff colluded with the whistle-leaker and lied about it.

4. The only “witnesses” to the call... Vindmann could not illustrate Quid Pro Quo in the text of the call when asked to do so and given ample time to do so by Rep. Ratcliffe.

Are you fine with this setup... where Republicans cannot call key witnesses... where Schiff is engaging in Soviet style witness tampering by not allowing the defense to call key witnesses?

5. The Whistle-leaker who started this entire fiasco.

6. Hunter Biden... who is central to the entire story.

Click to expand...

"Soviet styled"?

:lamo