The Impeachment Thread

#16,780
#16,780
I don't like Bolton's policies, but I wouldn't question his integrity. If Republicans accuse Bolton of lying or try to paint him as a liberal or a "never Trumper", that will be a hard sell... and how would the Trump apologists on Fox News handle Bolton giving damaging testimony on Trump? They kept him on as an analyst for several years while always referring to him as "an expert on foreign affairs and diplomacy".
 
#16,782
#16,782
evillawyer said:
Yes.

This is also a good read that discusses what the founders may have intended by "bribery" in the constitution--and it's even broader than what's in the US Code.

The Founders Would Have Called Out Trump for Bribery
Click to expand...
Makes sense.

One of the Clinton impeachment lawyers had an OpEd in Newsweek yesterday reminding everyone that DOJ had found it was impossible to place a value on this type of exchange.

I can’t help but roll my eyes a bit that there are grown ass men trying to argue that. You don’t have to establish what the value was. You just have to establish that the investigation had value. Guess what? Trump did that.

The fact that a campaign or politician worked hard for something establishes that it has value. When they sent Giuliani and his stooges, Crabbe and Goyle, Sondland, and Volker out to secure this investigation, they established its value.

The only question I have after reading the statute is whether Sondland notifying the Ukrainians that the withholding of aid in exchange for the investigation can be said to be explicitly tied to Trump.

I remember reading that OMB was told that the president authorized the withholding of aid when questions were raised, but cannot remember if that’s been established by testimony. That with Sondland, Vindman, and Taylor would do it for me.
 
#16,784
#16,784
RockyTop85 said:
Makes sense.

One of the Clinton impeachment lawyers had an OpEd in Newsweek yesterday reminding everyone that DOJ had found it was impossible to place a value on this type of exchange.

I can’t help but roll my eyes a bit that there are grown ass men trying to argue that. You don’t have to establish what the value was. You just have to establish that the investigation had value. Guess what? Trump did that.

The fact that a campaign or politician worked hard for something establishes that it has value. When they sent Giuliani and his stooges, Crabbe and Goyle, Sondland, and Volker out to secure this investigation, they established its value.

The only question I have after reading the statute is whether Sondland notifying the Ukrainians that the withholding of aid in exchange for the investigation can be said to be explicitly tied to Trump.

I remember reading that OMB was told that the president authorized the withholding of aid when questions were raised, but cannot remember if that’s been established by testimony. That with Sondland, Vindman, and Taylor would do it for me.
Click to expand...

There's also the WH visit, which was a thing of value that was being withheld pending an announcement of the investigation by Ukraine
 
#16,789
#16,789
I can see why they would want to leave Chalupa's name out..she was the point person in the DNC-Ukraine collusion
 
#16,794
#16,794
VolnJC said:
They all running and lying but it's too late they are trapped
Click to expand...

Paul Sperry's facts are mixed up (and that was probably a deliberate mistake, to try and confuse people like VolnJC, who won't know the difference). Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman testified that he was not the "whistleblower", he never said that he didn't know who the "whistleblower" was. It was Bill Taylor who testified that he didn't know who the "whistleblower" was, when he was asked point blank if the name Eric Ciaramella 'rang a bell'. Eric Ciaramella's name was not redacted from that question in the transcript of Taylor's testimony, but it was redacted from the transcript of Lt. Col. Vindman's testimony.

The attempts by the right-wing to either stain the integrity of Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman or to cast him as being a biased "never Trumper" are despicable ... and you can't come up with anything by honest means. So, you resort to lies such as this. Maybe Paul Sperry should do some reflecting on how strong his own integrity is?
 
  • Like
Reactions: samanderson and Hunerwadel
#16,796
#16,796
Bolton is "good" if he reveals secret crimes being committed.

No way he supported the withholding of Ukrainian assistance that Congress approved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BowlBrother85
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top