The Impeachment Thread

#14,687
#14,687
DC_Vol said:
Well...he almost was. Until you found that “though” in there. That was some fine sleuthing.
Click to expand...
I would like to take credit for it but I wasn't the first to notice it, or the first to understand that it was an indication that Trump was placing conditions on the military aid. And once again, that phone call is not the only source of this investigation. Read Tim Morrison's testimony from earlier today. He confirmed that there was a quid-pro-quo.
 
#14,688
#14,688
BowlBrother85 said:
I would like to take credit for it but I wasn't the first to notice it, or the first to understand that it was an indication that Trump was placing conditions on the military aid. And once again, that phone call is not the only source of this investigation. Read Tim Morrison's testimony from earlier today. He confirmed that there was a quid-pro-quo.
Click to expand...

We have the transcript of the phone call. We should see it there. But we don’t. Ukraine’s President has no idea what you’re talking about.

You won’t be convinced though. Carry on with the partisan charade. And thanks in advance for the help.
 
  • Like
Reactions: W.TN.Orange Blood
#14,689
#14,689
lawgator1 said:
You -- and Trump -- are in denial.

The reason so many career personnel are making such a big deal about this is because it was a big deal. And Trump's reaction to it, including lashing out at people and their patriotism, gives us some sense of the level of panic he feels right now. And it is deep. And justified.
Click to expand...
And you said the same kind of things back during the Mueller investigation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tennvols77
#14,690
#14,690
DC_Vol said:
We have the transcript of the phone call. We should see it there. But we don’t. Ukraine’s President has no idea what you’re talking about.

You won’t be convinced though. Carry on with the partisan charade. And thanks in advance for the help.
Click to expand...
That is ridiculous. You are saying that a quid-pro-quo could have only been in place if it was explicitly discussed on one specific phone call... and that is not even a verbatim transcript of the call.
 
#14,691
#14,691
BowlBrother85 said:
That is ridiculous. You are saying that a quid-pro-quo could have only been in place if it was explicitly discussed on one specific phone call... and that is not even a verbatim transcript of the call.
Click to expand...
DC is more flexible than he gives himself credit for. He's pulling off some amazing contortions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BowlBrother85
#14,692
#14,692
luthervol said:
DC is more flexible than he gives himself credit for. He's pulling off some amazing contortions.
Click to expand...
DC Vol is the sort of Republican who really would believe that the Nixon tapes had come with a complete transcript of what was discussed, and that Rosemary Woods really had accidentally erased 18 minutes worth of conversation by accident... and those 18 minutes were of Nixon and Haldeman discussing White House floral arrangements. It's not that he is naive. People like that will believe what they want.
 
#14,694
#14,694
BowlBrother85 said:
Trump had placed the hold on the military aid and his reasons for why that was done have been inconsistent to say the least. At first it was because he said he wanted European countries to share in the financial burden, but that made no sense because European countries weren't aware of the hold. Trump then changed his reasoning for the hold to concerns over Ukrainian corruption, but that doesn't make any sense either, because both Trump and Rudy Giuliani have done personal business in the Ukraine. Bottom line: If there was a contingency placed on the release of the military aid - and "contingent" is an important word here - that contingency could only have been placed by the man who was withholding the aid and that was Trump.
Click to expand...

Would have been easier for him to just say it on video cast like Biden did.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StarRaider
#14,695
#14,695
VolnJC said:
Eric the leaker might as well suck it up...he's gonna have to testify the GOP is gonna subpoena him
Click to expand...

Republicans can try and subpoena witnesses but the Democrats can vote those recommendations down by a committee vote. I guarantee you that whoever the whistleblower is, they will not have to testify. The Democrats have control of the House and make the rules, remember? That whole elections have consequences thing.
 
#14,696
#14,696
BowlBrother85 said:
Republicans can try and subpoena witnesses but the Democrats can vote those recommendations down by a committee vote. I guarantee you that whoever the whistleblower is, they will not have to testify. The Democrats have control have control of the House and make the rules, remember? That whole elections have consequences thing.
Click to expand...
And the Senate?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Obsessed and hjeagle1vol
#14,699
#14,699
BowlBrother85 said:
That is ridiculous. You are saying that a quid-pro-quo could have only been in place if it was explicitly discussed on one specific phone call... and that is not even a verbatim transcript of the call.
Click to expand...

Is there evidence it was discussed elsewhere? Because it definitely wasn’t discussed or hinted at on the phone call.

You are correct that it’s not a verbatim transcript but it is put together by a team of people. And several people have testified that it is an accurate transcript.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolnJC
#14,700
#14,700
DC_Vol said:
Is there evidence it was discussed elsewhere? Because it definitely wasn’t discussed or hinted at on the phone call.

You are correct that it’s not a verbatim transcript but it is put together by a team of people. And several people have testified that it is an accurate transcript.
Click to expand...
Yes, it was. It wasn't explicitly spelled out if that is what you are looking for. And people have testified that which was included was accurate... it is not clear what was excluded.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top