Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"I want nothing. I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo."

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by pamak View Post

    Trump gave it to them with the transcript.
    What "strong evidence" did Trump give with the transcript?


    "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Nichols View Post

      What "strong evidence" did Trump give with the transcript?

      I will not repeat again here all the pieces of evidence that were mentioned during dozens of hours of depositions and public hearings. The simple fact is that Trump during the phonemail with Zelenski mentioned Biden in connection with Burisma and told Zelenski to talk to Guiliani while the diplomats who were tasked by Trump to work with the Ukrainians claim that they saw the investigation of Burisma as separate from the Bidens and saw Giuliani as somebody who was pursuing a policy that contradicted the one that they were pursuing.

      https://apnews.com/5efa7ff2af78438e96d4126557999d04

      During his testimony, Volker said he saw Burisma and Biden as separate.

      “I did not understand that others believed that any investigation of the Ukrainian company, Burisma, which had a history of accusations of corruption, was tantamount to investigating Vice President Biden. I drew a distinction between the two.”
      Last edited by pamak; 21 Nov 19, 22:20.
      My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by pamak View Post

        I will not repeat again here all the pieces of evidence that were mentioned during dozens of hours of depositions and public hearings.
        Of course you won't repeat it because there was no "strong evidence" as you claim.

        The only evidence produced was second hand, hearsay, and presumption. That is evidence that proved there was no quid pro quo....no bribery.

        There was an interesting note from today's 'witness'

        She said that when Trump won, the started collecting information on other world leaders and what they said about Trump.

        Obviously Trump didn't order that collection or the democrats would have used that for impeachment.

        So the question is; why did these careerist order this collection of data?
        "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by Nichols View Post

          Of course you won't repeat it because there was no "strong evidence" as you claim.

          The only evidence produced was second hand, hearsay, and presumption. That is evidence that proved there was no quid pro quo....no bribery.

          There was an interesting note from today's 'witness'

          She said that when Trump won, the started collecting information on other world leaders and what they said about Trump.

          Obviously Trump didn't order that collection or the democrats would have used that for impeachment.

          So the question is; why did these careerist order this collection of data?
          I said I won't repeat ALL the pieces of evidence. I just gave you one piece of information which you chose not to address. An the transcript and mentioning of Biden and Giuliani as the president's trusted person is not hearsay. Those came from Trump's mouth.

          Actually Hill said that numerous foreign officials made comments against Trump when he was a candidate but such comments did not not result in changing the official policy of the US towards the countries of those officials nor did such comments revealed a Russian type of top-down operation to influence the US elections. She also revealed that the so called criticism Trump received by an Ukrainian ambassador was after Trump claimed at the time that perhaps Crimea can be under the Russians.

          https://www.theatlantic.com/news/arc...crimea/493280/

          Donald Trump's Crimean Gambit


          The Republican presidential nominee appeared to suggest he’d recognize Russia’s annexation of the Ukrainian territory in 2014. KRISHNADEV CALAMUR JULY 27, 2016

          And let's not forget the different nasty comments Trump made about other foreign officials or ambassadors of our allies. Still, people do not see such comments as equal with an American attempt to use US intelligence, misinformation, hacking and bots to influence the results of the elections within our NATO allies (or Brexit) as Russia did in 2016 with the US elections
          Last edited by pamak; 21 Nov 19, 23:36.
          My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by pamak View Post

            I said I won't repeat ALL the pieces of evidence.
            There is nothing for you to repeat.

            You haven't given any of what you call "strong evidence"

            TDS is blocking you from accepting reality.

            "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by Nichols View Post

              There is nothing for you to repeat.

              You haven't given any of what you call "strong evidence"


              Obviously I am wasting my time since you are not willing to address the totality of my posts and you are only interested in making comments on 1-2 isolated sentences that you pick.

              Have a good night
              My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by pamak View Post

                I said I won't repeat ALL the pieces of evidence. I just gave you one piece of information which you chose not to address. An the transcript and mentioning of Biden and Giuliani as the president's trusted person is not hearsay. Those came from Trump's mouth.

                Actually Hill said that numerous foreign officials made comments against Trump when he was a candidate but such comments did not not result in changing the official policy of the US towards the countries of those officials nor did such comments revealed a Russian type of top-down operation to influence the US elections. She also revealed that the so called criticism Trump received by an Ukrainian ambassador was after Trump claimed at the time that perhaps Crimea can be under the Russians.

                https://www.theatlantic.com/news/arc...crimea/493280/

                Donald Trump's Crimean Gambit


                The Republican presidential nominee appeared to suggest he’d recognize Russia’s annexation of the Ukrainian territory in 2014. KRISHNADEV CALAMUR JULY 27, 2016

                And let's not forget the different nasty comments Trump made about other foreign officials or ambassadors of our allies. Still, people do not see such comments as equal with an American attempt to use US intelligence, misinformation, hacking and bots to influence the results of the elections within our NATO allies (or Brexit) as Russia did in 2016 with the US elections
                And why should Trump not recognize the Anschluss of Crimea by Russia ? A fact is stronger than a Lord Mayor .Refusing to admit a fact will not make this fact disappear .
                Britain also tried to influence US elections .
                And US are especialists into intervening in the elections of other countries .

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by pamak View Post

                  I will not repeat again here all the pieces of evidence that were mentioned during dozens of hours of depositions and public hearings. The simple fact is that Trump during the phonemail with Zelenski mentioned Biden in connection with Burisma and told Zelenski to talk to Guiliani while the diplomats who were tasked by Trump to work with the Ukrainians claim that they saw the investigation of Burisma as separate from the Bidens and saw Giuliani as somebody who was pursuing a policy that contradicted the one that they were pursuing.

                  https://apnews.com/5efa7ff2af78438e96d4126557999d04

                  During his testimony, Volker said he saw Burisma and Biden as separate.

                  “I did not understand that others believed that any investigation of the Ukrainian company, Burisma, which had a history of accusations of corruption, was tantamount to investigating Vice President Biden. I drew a distinction between the two.”
                  The duty of diplomats is not to pursue a policy but to follow the orders of the potus . If they do not like the policy of the potus, they know what they have to do .
                  It is a fact that Ukraine was corrupt and that the Bidens aided this corruption
                  Three exemples from leftists media

                  The NYT : Biden's ''hiring ''allowe Burisma to create the perception that it was backed by powerful Americans .
                  The WAPO : Trump did something wrong,but that thus not absolve the Bidens of their malfeasance.
                  Bloomberg : it has become increasingly clear that Obama-era US politicians backed the wrong people in Ukraine . (The West backed the wrong men in Ukraine 2017 -12-05 )
                  Already the quote from the NYT proves that the Bidens were guilty .
                  And, if Volker saw Burisma and the Bidens as separate, he needs new glasses . Besides, his opinion is irrelevant .He is only an ambassador = an executant .If he disagrees with Trump,he must resign, but not stab Trump in the back .

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    bump
                    {}

                    "Any story sounds true until someone tells the other side and sets the record straight." -Proverbs 18:17

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Trump could have provided more authenticity to his "I want nothing. I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo" phone call which he made after the whistle had already been blown if he would have added in a loud clear voice...

                      "...because that would be wrong!"

                      He's an obvious con-artist.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by Canuckster View Post
                        (…)
                        "...because that would be wrong!"
                        "Not to mention illegal !"

                        He's an obvious con-artist.
                        But he's funny, almost charming, in his simplicity though
                        Lambert of Montaigu - Crusader.

                        Bolgios - Mercenary Game.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Yes he is. And that is probably the 'nicest' thing that can be said about him.
                          We are not now that strength which in old days
                          Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
                          Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
                          To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by ljadw View Post

                            And why should Trump not recognize the Anschluss of Crimea by Russia ? A fact is stronger than a Lord Mayor .Refusing to admit a fact will not make this fact disappear .
                            Britain also tried to influence US elections .
                            And US are especialists into intervening in the elections of other countries .
                            No, the question is why should not an Ukrainian ambassador criticize Trump for implying such recognition. If one makers such claims, he invites criticism and such reaction is not evidence of some nefarious plan of having Ukraine intervene in the Us elections.
                            My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by ljadw View Post

                              The duty of diplomats is not to pursue a policy but to follow the orders of the potus . If they do not like the policy of the potus, they know what they have to do .
                              It is a fact that Ukraine was corrupt and that the Bidens aided this corruption
                              Three exemples from leftists media

                              The NYT : Biden's ''hiring ''allowe Burisma to create the perception that it was backed by powerful Americans .
                              The WAPO : Trump did something wrong,but that thus not absolve the Bidens of their malfeasance.
                              Bloomberg : it has become increasingly clear that Obama-era US politicians backed the wrong people in Ukraine . (The West backed the wrong men in Ukraine 2017 -12-05 )
                              Already the quote from the NYT proves that the Bidens were guilty .
                              And, if Volker saw Burisma and the Bidens as separate, he needs new glasses . Besides, his opinion is irrelevant .He is only an ambassador = an executant .If he disagrees with Trump,he must resign, but not stab Trump in the back .
                              In order to follow the orders of the POTUS the diplomats must be aware of what the president wants. Te testimonies show that many of them claim ignorance of what Trump really wanted and when they were seeking details, they were getting answers such as "talk to Guiliani"

                              I said again that the DOJ issues a statement which said that Trump never spoke to Barr about investigating the Bidens and that Barr has not talked to Ukrainians about such investigation. If Burisma wanted to gain prestige by hiring a person like Hunter Biden this is not a crime.

                              And yes, Volker claims that he saw such things as separate. That is because he and EVERYBODY else testified that it is wrong for a US president to ask a foreign leader to investigate a political rival and he did not want to appear as somebody who was cooperating with the president for such cause. And no his opinion is not irrelevant and it was in fact the REPUBLICANS who called him as a friendly to their cause witness.
                              My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Burisma did NOT hide Hunter to gain prestige,they did not pay Hunter millions to gain prestige, they gave Hunter bribe money to survive .And why Hunter ? Because his father almost ruled the Ukraine as an uncrowned king .

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X