The Impeachment Thread

[Stew Cook]

Did the IG interview the first hand witness that brought it to the "whistle-blowers" attention? I thought I saw that the "whistle-blower" didn't name his source.

I think it was reported that the IG followed up with the source(s).

I'll look into later, but feel free to see what you can find.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Since we’re playing that game then all of this impeachment nonsense was blown out of the water by Zelensky saying no quid pro quo. He was on the call and supposedly the one pressured so are you saying he isn’t credible?

That is what he has to say publicly while Trump is still in office. It's not that Zelensky isn't credible. It's that he is in a very tough spot. He needs backing from the United States right now. He can't afford to make an enemy of Trump, while Trump is still the president. I'm sure that Zelensky hates being a part of our politics.

 

[Velo Vol]

Still throwing stuff at the wall.

 

[BowlBrother85]

It’s hilarious how you automatically believe anyone that testifies something with which you agree yet call anyone who testified otherwise a liar, including the Ukrainian President and POTUS.

Trump and Zelensky have not testified under oath. I haven't called anyone who testified under oath a liar.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Still throwing stuff at the wall.

And even though Rand Paul is a doctor, not a lawyer, he understands that an impeachment inquiry is not a criminal prosecution. He knew that he was giving a BS answer... but he gave it anyway.

 

[BowlBrother85]

There is no damning evidence. There is he said/she said, innuendo, and people who love their party more than the republic, so they post ******** like the above as a facade for overturning an election.

There is damning evidence all over the place and the hearsay narrative from the right has become outdated in light of the testimony of Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman who was on the July 25th phone call between Trump and Zelensky.

...and when you say "and people who love their party more than the republic", I can only assume that you are talking about Jim Jordan, Matt Gaetz, Kevin McCarthy and Devin Nunes.

 

[volfanjustin]

There is damning evidence all over the place and the hearsay narrative from the right has become outdated in light of the testimony of Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman who was on the July 25th phone call between Trump and Zelensky.

...and when you say "and people who love their party more than the republic", I can only assume that you are talking about Jim Jordan, Matt Gaetz, Kevin McCarthy and Devin Nunes.

I would assume he means the likes of vindman, pelosi, s****y schiff, nadler and many of you here

 

[BowlBrother85]

I would assume he means the likes of vindman, pelosi, s****y schiff, nadler and many of you here

It's funny that you include Vindman in a list of politicians. He is a career Army officer and there is no evidence at all that he holds any political biases. That is an absurd narrative from Republicans in a pathetic attempt to discredit the testimony of a credible witness who has served and sacrificed more for this country than most have.

 

[volfanjustin]

It's funny that you include Vindman in a list of politicians. He is a career Army officer and there is no evidence at all that he holds any political biases. That is an absurd narrative from Republicans in a pathetic attempt to discredit the testimony of a credible witness who has served and sacrificed more for this country than most have.

He has proved himself to be as worthless as schiff

 

[hUTch2002]

He wanted the prosecutor fired. It just had nothing to do with his son. Simple research makes it clear the prosecutor wasn’t even trying to prosecute Burisma. The whole thing about Biden demanding the prosecutor be fired to protect his son is a total lie the republicans have started recently.

So what was the reason?

 

[BowlBrother85]

He has proved himself to be as worthless as schiff

How so? LOL!

 

[MontyPython]

Typo. Damn sure ISN'T a promotion

Hehhehe. That's just your subconscious shining through, my friend.

 

[hUTch2002]

As I said in the post, this is remedial fundamentals of right and wrong. Pretending or admitting you can’t figure it out to try to “own the libs” just undermines your own credibility.

I don’t have some weird desire to “own the libs” so save your fingers the typing of such nonsense. I’ll give you credit for at least admitting that perhaps Biden did do it for his own interest. The fact is we will never know just like we will never know with Trump. Everyone is making assumptions on both when the reality is neither is provable as it stands today. Maybe more comes out on neither and maybe more on both. The bottom line with Trump says it is about 2016, Zelensky says there’s no quid pro quo, and they got the money.

 

[hUTch2002]

Trump and Zelensky have not testified under oath. I haven't called anyone who testified under oath a liar.

Fair enough. The problem is I doubt either ever will, even if they have been 100% honest.

 

[volfanjustin]

How so? LOL!

They have been partnering in an attempted illegal overthrow on an American President, now there are many others like this 3rd person removed whistleblower and they all deserve severe repercussions

 

[BowlBrother85]

Fair enough. The problem is I doubt either ever will, even if they have been 100% honest.

Even if Trump has been 100% honest???? Uh, okay.

 

[BowlBrother85]

They have been partnering in an attempted illegal overthrow on an American President, now there are many others like this 3rd person removed whistleblower and they all deserve severe repercussions

You have no proof that Vindman is a political partisan. You simply don't like what he testified to because some of it was damaging to Trump.

 

[volfanjustin]

You have no proof that Vindman is a political partisan. You simply don't like what he testified to because some of it was damaging to Trump.

It was only damaging to the hacks in the room that were already anti-Trump so their opinion means nothing. If he doesn't like the current administrations policies he should run for office instead of trying to kill the Republic. He's a coward and in my mind a criminal.

 

[luthervol]

Put you efforts behind a candidate of your choosing.

Of course, it's just that the only candidate that is standing out at this point is Anybody B. Trump. I'll let the field continue to narrow a bit before I pick just one.

 

[hUTch2002]

Even if Trump has been 100% honest???? Uh, okay.

Yes. The fact is you have absolutely no idea who is telling the truth and who isn’t. I bet they’re all lying about something so then it becomes which parts are true and which aren’t and, again, you have no idea, no matter what you’re telling yourself.

 

[carlos86]

 

[volfanjustin]

Kyle Griffin, lol

 

[BowlBrother85]

It was only damaging to the hacks in the room that were already anti-Trump so their opinion means nothing. If he doesn't like the current administrations policies he should run for office instead of trying to kill the Republic. He's a coward and in my mind a criminal.

He didn't defend Trump = coward and criminal. Purple heart, be damned!

 

[Velo Vol]

So surprising. No one could have imagined the initial story would change.

One step closer to "so what if he did it."

 

[BowlBrother85]

So surprising. No one could have imagined the initial story would change.

One step closer to "so what if he did it."

I think we are on the doorstep itself. Still, Trump doesn't like to change his catch phrases. He has been saying "No quid-pro-quo" from the very beginning of this six weeks ago.