The Impeachment Thread

[hooligan_COLD]

Originally Posted by TheWatchGuy

the problem is he is an idiot. but the funds made it to the intended parties and nothing was stolen.

"State Supreme Court Justice Saliann Scarpulla, in her Nov. 7 court order, wrote that the $2.8 million donated to the Trump Foundation “was used for Mr. Trump’s political campaign and disbursed by Mr. Trump’s campaign staff, rather than by the Foundation,” in violation of state law. However, she acknowledged that “the Funds did ultimately reach their intended destinations, i.e., charitable organizations supporting veterans.”"

I'd be mildly interested in the timing of the movement of funds vs. actual disbursement - could be that they knew they were caught and had an "oh, shit!" moment that prompted them to cough up the money to the charities. That's complete speculation on my part, though. Possible, but nothing to indicate it actually happened that way.

[TheWatchGuy]

Originally Posted by hooligan_COLD

I'd be mildly interested in the timing of the movement of funds vs. actual disbursement - could be that they knew they were caught and had an "oh, shit!" moment that prompted them to cough up the money to the charities. That's complete speculation on my part, though. Possible, but nothing to indicate it actually happened that way.

my guess is he or someone working for him got confused and thought it was a campaign fundraiser. if you believe the articles about it, he was supposed to have a campaign fundraiser the same day but cancelled for this event.

donations get allocated to the campaign, someone figures out what happened, the full $ amount of donations goes to vets.

[Captain Blood]

Originally Posted by hooligan_COLD

I'd be mildly interested in the timing of the movement of funds vs. actual disbursement - could be that they knew they were caught and had an "oh, shit!" moment that prompted them to cough up the money to the charities. That's complete speculation on my part, though. Possible, but nothing to indicate it actually happened that way.

Kind of like the argument from yesterday?

The money eventually got there?

[NormanConquest]

Day one and the leading witness is a i heard from my uncle cousin friend who heard from his x girlfriend who heard from the bum on the street who heard from an antifa protestor that trump did this

Day 1

View post on imgur.com

[UncleWede]

Originally Posted by KingOfJericho

I still want my car back.

It will buff right out, don't worry

[TheWatchGuy]

Originally Posted by KingOfJericho

I still want my car back.

it identifies as my car now

[Poiseuille]

Originally Posted by Captain Blood

Trump supporters never like a fact Check!

https://apnews.com/08dd50fd26b6498b8f79ab2dbf023f7f

WASHINGTON (AP) — Congressional Republicans pressed the discredited theory that Ukraine meddled in the 2016 U.S. election in defending President Donald Trump in Wednesday's impeachment hearings.

A look at some of the remarks in the House Intelligence Committee proceeding:

fact check?
sadly, this appears to be another instance of RD not actually reading the articles he links to.
for example, the short bit included in your post describes a "..discredited theory".
after 90 seconds of further reading in the article that changes to "...unsubstantiated theory" before it peters out altogether.
anyway, open-minded fellow that I am, perhaps you can provide a link to an actual investigation that ever reached a conclusion regarding Ukraine in this context?
Robert Mueller's only comment on the subject, twenty-seven million dollars later, was only a partially audible ".... not in my purview".
so disappointing.

[Captain Blood]

Originally Posted by Poiseuille

fact check?
sadly, this appears to be another instance of RD not actually reading the articles he links to.
for example, the short bit included in your post describes a "..discredited theory".
after 90 seconds of further reading in the article that changes to "...unsubstantiated theory" before it peters out altogether.
anyway, open-minded fellow that I am, perhaps you can provide a link to an actual investigation that ever reached a conclusion regarding Ukraine in this context?
Robert Mueller's only comment on the subject, twenty-seven million dollars later, was only a partially audible ".... not in my purview".
so disappointing.

I stand by the article. As I stated, Trump supporters don't like fact checks.

As far as Ukraine goes, show us. Is it the NYT article that tells us there may have been some Ukraine meddling, that doesn't come close to the scope of the Russian meddling?

[Poiseuille]

Originally Posted by Captain Blood

I stand by the article. As I stated, Trump supporters don't like fact checks.

As far as Ukraine goes, show us. Is it the NYT article that tells us there may have been some Ukraine meddling, that doesn't come close to the scope of the Russian meddling?

ummmm, that's why there needs to be an investigation.

[Captain Blood]

Originally Posted by Poiseuille

ummmm, that's why there needs to be an investigation.

Sure, and thats why we also need to investigate Alice's claims about a rabbit hole...........Maybe we need to investigate why ACME is biased against Wiley E Coyote.........same relevence.

Of course, Trump believes that. He believed Putin over our own intellignece services.

[TheWatchGuy]

Originally Posted by Captain Blood

Sure, and thats why we also need to investigate Alice's claims about a rabbit hole...........Maybe we need to investigate why ACME is biased against Wiley E Coyote.........same relevence.

Of course, Trump believes that. He believed Putin over our own intellignece services.

considering several of these trump investigations started with less, yes. hell, kavanaugh's investigations started with even less and they wanted him hanged for it.

if you really want the corruption to stop, you should investigate everything regardless of which side it can hurt. if you are a hypocrite and really only care about stopping trump, then yes, your current playbook is correct.

[hooligan_COLD]

Originally Posted by Poiseuille

ummmm, that's why there needs to be an investigation.

Ummmmmm, investigations need probable cause to justify them.

Where's the PC?

[Captain Blood]

Napolitano: Asking for a favor in return for doing a legal obligation -- releasing the funds -- is pretty clearly a violation of a criminal bribery laws. Republicans may not want to acknowledge that, which is why they'd rather undermine the witnesses than address the merits.

[Captain Blood]

Originally Posted by TheWatchGuy

considering several of these trump investigations started with less, yes. hell, kavanaugh's investigations started with even less and they wanted him hanged for it.

if you really want the corruption to stop, you should investigate everything regardless of which side it can hurt. if you are a hypocrite and really only care about stopping trump, then yes, your current playbook is correct.

Are you following the roger stone trial?

[Captain Blood]

Could this be corroboration part three?


https://apnews.com/6d318542e50b45dc9e1d4d829ad36c96 WASHINGTON (AP) — A second U.S. embassy staffer in Kyiv overheard a key cellphone call between President Donald Trump and his ambassador to the European Union discussing the need for Ukrainian officials to pursue "investigations," The Associated Press has learned.

[NormanConquest]

Originally Posted by hooligan_COLD

Ummmmmm, investigations need probable cause to justify them.

Where's the PC?

Fyi we have people actually convicted in Ukraine for this stuff, if that not enough probable cause for you then nothing will be enough. Meanwhile Orange man bad hear say is enough probable cause!

[Poiseuille]

Originally Posted by hooligan_COLD

Ummmmmm, investigations need probable cause to justify them.

Where's the PC?

just to clarify: my response to RD's post (shown below) was prompted by his opening remark to the effect that we don't like "fact check". in support of that idiotic statement RD supplied a link to an article that contained no facts much less checks of anything.
the very first sentence of the linked article included the phrase "...Republicans pressed the discredited theory.."
oh really? so how, exactly, was this theory "discredited"? who did this investigation and when?
in the spirit of informed debate I merely invited RD (or anyone else who cared to butt in) to supply a link, or even a name to facilitate further research into this investigation.
I'm just curious as to how something, in your view, actually gets to be "discredited", or "debunked" or whatever tf the current debate-ending buzzword is.
didn't get any answers, although it quickly became clear that you guys don't want Ukraine looked at.
ever.
nothing to see here folks....
move along....

[pennsiveguy]

Originally Posted by Captain Blood

Could this be corroboration part three?


https://apnews.com/6d318542e50b45dc9e1d4d829ad36c96 WASHINGTON (AP) — A second U.S. embassy staffer in Kyiv overheard a key cellphone call between President Donald Trump and his ambassador to the European Union discussing the need for Ukrainian officials to pursue "investigations," The Associated Press has learned.

"The second diplomatic staffer also at the table was Suriya Jayanti, a foreign service officer based in Kyiv. A person briefed on what Jayanti overheard spoke to AP on condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive matter currently under investigation."

Third-hand information from an anonymous source. Hell, slap the bracelets on him. He'll look great in that orange jumpsuit. Case closed!
</sarcasm>

FFS

[pennsiveguy]

Originally Posted by Poiseuille

just to clarify: my response to RD's post (shown below) was prompted by his opening remark to the effect that we don't like "fact check". in support of that idiotic statement RD supplied a link to an article that contained no facts much less checks of anything.
the very first sentence of the linked article included the phrase "...Republicans pressed the discredited theory.."
oh really? so how, exactly, was this theory "discredited"? who did this investigation and when?
in the spirit of informed debate I merely invited RD (or anyone else who cared to butt in) to supply a link, or even a name to facilitate further research, into this investigation.
I'm just curious as to how something, in your view, actually gets to be "discredited", or "debunked" or whatever tf the current debate-ending buzzword is.
didn't get any answers, although it quickly became clear that you guys don't want Ukraine looked at.
nothing to see here folks....
move along....

Thoughtful people of all political inclinations like facts. Facts are our friends. But we know the clear difference between actual verifiable facts, and non-facts that are slipped into the discourse with telltale tags like "theory," "may have been," "reportedly," and "allegedly" and mysterious origins like "a source close to the investigation" or "speaking on condition of anonymity."

[Poiseuille]

Originally Posted by pennsiveguy

"The second diplomatic staffer also at the table was Suriya Jayanti, a foreign service officer based in Kyiv. A person briefed on what Jayanti overheard spoke to AP on condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive matter currently under investigation."

Third-hand information from an anonymous source. Hell, slap the bracelets on him. He'll look great in that orange jumpsuit. Case closed!
</sarcasm>

FFS

jay-suss, as a yute i made up some pretty convoluted stories regarding my failure to produce homework assignments but that quote would be enough to confound a Talmudic scholar.
to think that some adults are able to say stuff like that with their bare faces hanging out....

[Fliplegend]

If I rob a bank and halfway out the door I have a change of heart (because there's a butt load of cops outside) and give the money back, no crime right? amirite?

[Captain Blood]

Originally Posted by pennsiveguy

"The second diplomatic staffer also at the table was Suriya Jayanti, a foreign service officer based in Kyiv. A person briefed on what Jayanti overheard spoke to AP on condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive matter currently under investigation."

Third-hand information from an anonymous source. Hell, slap the bracelets on him. He'll look great in that orange jumpsuit. Case closed!
</sarcasm>

FFS

I know, sounds like an immigrant. Send him/her back where he came from! They can't be trusted!