PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Wow.
Kent.
Impeccable.
Kent.
Impeccable.
The People's House Openly Examines Misconduct: Happy Trump Impeachment Hearings Day!!
- Thread starter PoliTalker
- Start date
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Kent makes it deeply understandable why supporting Ukraine is so important to the United States.
Rocking us right to our roots in the American Revolution of 1776.
Rocking us right to our roots in the American Revolution of 1776.
countryboy
Verified User
You have nothing. Should've taken a bath while you had the chance. We have the transcript, this whole charade is a great big nothing burger. You idiots are going to be disappointed yet again. You SHOULD be embarrassed, but you have no shame.
Noking
Fight authoritarianism support Noking
Day off today?????
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Hello and Happy Public Impeachment Day 2,
Now, let's hear from the excellent State Officer that Trump fired because she was standing in the way of Trump's extortion / bribery scheme.
Now, let's hear from the excellent State Officer that Trump fired because she was standing in the way of Trump's extortion / bribery scheme.
Last edited:
U.S. envoy Sondland did not link Biden probe to aid: Ukraine minister
KIEV (Reuters) - Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Vadym Prystaiko said on Thursday that U.S. ambassador Gordon Sondland did not explicitly link military aid to Kiev with opening an investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Interfax Ukraine reported.
Trump and his allies are accused by Democrat opponents of freezing nearly $400 million in security aid to Ukraine to pressure President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to open investigations into Biden, Trump’s main rival for the 2020 presidential race.
Trump calls the inquiry a witch hunt.
“Ambassador Sondland did not tell us, and certainly did not tell me, about a connection between the assistance and the investigations. You should ask him,” Prystaiko said about Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union.
Prystaiko’s comments came a day after William Taylor, the acting ambassador to Ukraine, testified in the first televised hearing of the impeachment inquiry.
In a disclosure that drew the most attention, Taylor pointed to Trump’s keen interest in getting the eastern European ally to investigate Biden and reiterated his understanding that $391 million in U.S. security aid was withheld from Kiev unless it cooperated.
Taylor said a member of his staff had overheard a July 26 phone call between Trump and Sondland in which the Republican president asked about investigations into the Bidens, and Sondland told him that the Ukrainians were ready to proceed.
That call occurred a day after Trump had asked Zelenskiy during a phone call to conduct the investigations.
“I have never seen a direct relationship between investigations and security assistance,” Prystaiko was quoted as saying by Interfax. “Yes, the investigations were mentioned, you know, in the conversation of the presidents. But there was no clear connection between these events.”
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...iden-probe-to-aid-ukraine-minister-idUSKBN1XO
What say you Politalker Snowflake?
KIEV (Reuters) - Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Vadym Prystaiko said on Thursday that U.S. ambassador Gordon Sondland did not explicitly link military aid to Kiev with opening an investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Interfax Ukraine reported.
Trump and his allies are accused by Democrat opponents of freezing nearly $400 million in security aid to Ukraine to pressure President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to open investigations into Biden, Trump’s main rival for the 2020 presidential race.
Trump calls the inquiry a witch hunt.
“Ambassador Sondland did not tell us, and certainly did not tell me, about a connection between the assistance and the investigations. You should ask him,” Prystaiko said about Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union.
Prystaiko’s comments came a day after William Taylor, the acting ambassador to Ukraine, testified in the first televised hearing of the impeachment inquiry.
In a disclosure that drew the most attention, Taylor pointed to Trump’s keen interest in getting the eastern European ally to investigate Biden and reiterated his understanding that $391 million in U.S. security aid was withheld from Kiev unless it cooperated.
Taylor said a member of his staff had overheard a July 26 phone call between Trump and Sondland in which the Republican president asked about investigations into the Bidens, and Sondland told him that the Ukrainians were ready to proceed.
That call occurred a day after Trump had asked Zelenskiy during a phone call to conduct the investigations.
“I have never seen a direct relationship between investigations and security assistance,” Prystaiko was quoted as saying by Interfax. “Yes, the investigations were mentioned, you know, in the conversation of the presidents. But there was no clear connection between these events.”
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...iden-probe-to-aid-ukraine-minister-idUSKBN1XO
What say you Politalker Snowflake?
Last edited:
No extortion, no bribery, Snowflake, per Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Vadym Prystaiko.
See post no. 26.
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Yovanovich did nothing wrong. 33 years of impeccable Statehood experience thrown away because she stood in the way of corruption and Trump.
No corruption... per Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Vadym Prystaiko.
Stop with the lies, Snowflake.
"U.S. envoy Sondland did not link Biden probe to aid: Ukraine minister."
She was strong against corruption in Ukraine. That was unacceptable to Ghouliani and Dapper Don De Medici
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Nunes lays it on thick with the lies.
"Democrats have been trying to impeach Trump since the election"
Baloney.
SOME Democrats have. Schiff has resisted, for years, UNTIL THIS COMPELLING EVIDENCE CAME FORWARD.
"Democrats have been trying to impeach Trump since the election"
Baloney.
SOME Democrats have. Schiff has resisted, for years, UNTIL THIS COMPELLING EVIDENCE CAME FORWARD.
Because that whole "If I don't see it, it's not happening" charade has always worked so well in the past.
U.S. envoy Sondland did not link Biden probe to aid: Ukraine minister
KIEV (Reuters) - Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Vadym Prystaiko said on Thursday that U.S. ambassador Gordon Sondland did not explicitly link military aid to Kiev with opening an investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Interfax Ukraine reported.
Trump and his allies are accused by Democrat opponents of freezing nearly $400 million in security aid to Ukraine to pressure President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to open investigations into Biden, Trump’s main rival for the 2020 presidential race.
Trump calls the inquiry a witch hunt.
“Ambassador Sondland did not tell us, and certainly did not tell me, about a connection between the assistance and the investigations. You should ask him,” Prystaiko said about Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union.
Prystaiko’s comments came a day after William Taylor, the acting ambassador to Ukraine, testified in the first televised hearing of the impeachment inquiry.
In a disclosure that drew the most attention, Taylor pointed to Trump’s keen interest in getting the eastern European ally to investigate Biden and reiterated his understanding that $391 million in U.S. security aid was withheld from Kiev unless it cooperated.
Taylor said a member of his staff had overheard a July 26 phone call between Trump and Sondland in which the Republican president asked about investigations into the Bidens, and Sondland told him that the Ukrainians were ready to proceed.
That call occurred a day after Trump had asked Zelenskiy during a phone call to conduct the investigations.
“I have never seen a direct relationship between investigations and security assistance,” Prystaiko was quoted as saying by Interfax. “Yes, the investigations were mentioned, you know, in the conversation of the presidents. But there was no clear connection between these events.”
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...ter-idUSKBN1XO
What say you Politalker Snowflake?
KIEV (Reuters) - Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Vadym Prystaiko said on Thursday that U.S. ambassador Gordon Sondland did not explicitly link military aid to Kiev with opening an investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Interfax Ukraine reported.
Trump and his allies are accused by Democrat opponents of freezing nearly $400 million in security aid to Ukraine to pressure President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to open investigations into Biden, Trump’s main rival for the 2020 presidential race.
Trump calls the inquiry a witch hunt.
“Ambassador Sondland did not tell us, and certainly did not tell me, about a connection between the assistance and the investigations. You should ask him,” Prystaiko said about Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union.
Prystaiko’s comments came a day after William Taylor, the acting ambassador to Ukraine, testified in the first televised hearing of the impeachment inquiry.
In a disclosure that drew the most attention, Taylor pointed to Trump’s keen interest in getting the eastern European ally to investigate Biden and reiterated his understanding that $391 million in U.S. security aid was withheld from Kiev unless it cooperated.
Taylor said a member of his staff had overheard a July 26 phone call between Trump and Sondland in which the Republican president asked about investigations into the Bidens, and Sondland told him that the Ukrainians were ready to proceed.
That call occurred a day after Trump had asked Zelenskiy during a phone call to conduct the investigations.
“I have never seen a direct relationship between investigations and security assistance,” Prystaiko was quoted as saying by Interfax. “Yes, the investigations were mentioned, you know, in the conversation of the presidents. But there was no clear connection between these events.”
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...ter-idUSKBN1XO
What say you Politalker Snowflake?
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Jordan and Stefanik both tried to disrupt the proceedings and had to be repeatedly gaveled to order by the Chairman!
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Ambassador Yovanovitch correctly pointed out that she was removed without good reason at a crucial time, and such removal harmed our Statehood efforts.
She was removed by a smear campaign conducted by corrupt individuals for personal political reasons at odds with creating peace and respect for the United States.
Her removal harmed US interests.
She was removed by a smear campaign conducted by corrupt individuals for personal political reasons at odds with creating peace and respect for the United States.
Her removal harmed US interests.
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Ambassador Yovanovitch risked her life under gunfire for the United States, with an impeccable career of dedication, and the thanks she got was to be tossed to the curb by Trump.
Jason Chaffetz: Why Schiff's whistleblower claims at Trump impeachment hearing are impossible to believe
Jason Chaffetz
By Jason Chaffetz | Fox News
"Schiff ends impeachment hearing insisting he doesn’t know whistleblower
Rep. Adam Schiff sticks to his story that he doesn't know the whistleblower
Americans had a front-row seat for Day One of impeachment inquiry hearings in the House on Wednesday. But missing from the testimony on Capitol Hill was the “witness” who started it all. Six grueling hours of testimony by two hearsay witnesses shed little light on the allegations against President Trump.
Neither George Kent, deputy assistant secretary of state for Europe nor William Taylor, the charge d’affaires in Kiev had firsthand information and both clearly had an ax to grind over their differences with the president on foreign policy.
More interesting than their testimony was the complete whitewashing of any reference to the original whistleblower, whose second-hand allegations so deeply concerned House Democrats that they opened an official impeachment inquiry – a process they had three times explicitly rejected in previous House votes.
DAVID BOSSIE: IMPEACHMENT CASE AGAINST TRUMP IS FALLING APART – DEMOCRATS WANT TO HURT HIM IN 2020 ELECTION
What was so compelling about the testimony of this witness that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who had long held that impeachment should only proceed as a bipartisan effort, would abandon her position and pursue a one-sided inquiry?
Americans still don't know.
In the first day of testimony, there was barely any mention of the original witness or the transcript of the call that lies at the center of the allegations.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff went to great lengths to suppress any reference to the witness during the first day of testimony, even going so far as to claim (laughably) that he doesn't know who the witness is.
Let’s think about that for a moment. We know that the whistleblower met with Schiff’s STAFF. Are we supposed to believe that the Congressman stepped out of the office when he arrived or hid in another room when the whistleblower meeting took place?
The notion that Adam Schiff doesn't know the identity of a whistleblower so many in Washington can already identify by name is laughable.
Is Schiff trying to tell us that his staff told him, “We’ve just met with the whistleblower.” To which he replied, “don’t tell me his name! I don’t want to meet him! But let me use everything he just told you to impeach the president.” Who could believe that? Such a scenario is not only ridiculous, but it would also be irresponsible.
Remember, this is the same Schiff whose promises of "ample evidence of collusion in plain sight" were repudiated by the final Mueller Report. He is hardly a beacon of credibility, but the notion that he doesn't know the identity of a whistleblower so many in Washington can already identify by name is laughable.
He Who Must Not Be Named is not expected to testify at all. That's totally unacceptable.
The American people cannot be expected to accept a partisan impeachment inquiry in which only one side calls witnesses, exculpatory evidence is suppressed, and the primary witness cannot be identified, much less questioned. Particularly given the fact that the whistleblower is no whistleblower, having no firsthand knowledge of the allegations. But he or she does have firsthand knowledge of the machinations within the White House designed to thwart a sitting president. That testimony is relevant.
We know what justice looks like. This is not justice. The House Intelligence Committee is neither an impeachment committee nor a Grand Jury.
More from Opinion
Tucker Carlson: It’s never been clear what Dems believe is Trump’s impeachable offense. Now we know. It’s THIS
Leslie Marshall: Trump, impeachment and the future – Here's what I tell my Democratic friends
Andrew McCarthy: Elections, not impeachments are how we resolve policy disputes in this country
With great fanfare, Speaker Pelosi initiated the formal impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump in September promising that, "no one is above the law." She claimed the president's actions "have seriously violated the Constitution."
That’s not what viewers saw on this first day of public testimony. If there are violations of the law or the Constitution by this president, these witnesses couldn't testify to it. Their accounts were based on hearsay, opinion and media reports.
If anyone has been treated as though they are above the law, it is this so-called whistleblower."
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/schiff-whistleblower-claims-trump-impeachment-jason-chaffetz
Jason Chaffetz
By Jason Chaffetz | Fox News
"Schiff ends impeachment hearing insisting he doesn’t know whistleblower
Rep. Adam Schiff sticks to his story that he doesn't know the whistleblower
Americans had a front-row seat for Day One of impeachment inquiry hearings in the House on Wednesday. But missing from the testimony on Capitol Hill was the “witness” who started it all. Six grueling hours of testimony by two hearsay witnesses shed little light on the allegations against President Trump.
Neither George Kent, deputy assistant secretary of state for Europe nor William Taylor, the charge d’affaires in Kiev had firsthand information and both clearly had an ax to grind over their differences with the president on foreign policy.
More interesting than their testimony was the complete whitewashing of any reference to the original whistleblower, whose second-hand allegations so deeply concerned House Democrats that they opened an official impeachment inquiry – a process they had three times explicitly rejected in previous House votes.
DAVID BOSSIE: IMPEACHMENT CASE AGAINST TRUMP IS FALLING APART – DEMOCRATS WANT TO HURT HIM IN 2020 ELECTION
What was so compelling about the testimony of this witness that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who had long held that impeachment should only proceed as a bipartisan effort, would abandon her position and pursue a one-sided inquiry?
Americans still don't know.
In the first day of testimony, there was barely any mention of the original witness or the transcript of the call that lies at the center of the allegations.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff went to great lengths to suppress any reference to the witness during the first day of testimony, even going so far as to claim (laughably) that he doesn't know who the witness is.
Let’s think about that for a moment. We know that the whistleblower met with Schiff’s STAFF. Are we supposed to believe that the Congressman stepped out of the office when he arrived or hid in another room when the whistleblower meeting took place?
The notion that Adam Schiff doesn't know the identity of a whistleblower so many in Washington can already identify by name is laughable.
Is Schiff trying to tell us that his staff told him, “We’ve just met with the whistleblower.” To which he replied, “don’t tell me his name! I don’t want to meet him! But let me use everything he just told you to impeach the president.” Who could believe that? Such a scenario is not only ridiculous, but it would also be irresponsible.
Remember, this is the same Schiff whose promises of "ample evidence of collusion in plain sight" were repudiated by the final Mueller Report. He is hardly a beacon of credibility, but the notion that he doesn't know the identity of a whistleblower so many in Washington can already identify by name is laughable.
He Who Must Not Be Named is not expected to testify at all. That's totally unacceptable.
The American people cannot be expected to accept a partisan impeachment inquiry in which only one side calls witnesses, exculpatory evidence is suppressed, and the primary witness cannot be identified, much less questioned. Particularly given the fact that the whistleblower is no whistleblower, having no firsthand knowledge of the allegations. But he or she does have firsthand knowledge of the machinations within the White House designed to thwart a sitting president. That testimony is relevant.
We know what justice looks like. This is not justice. The House Intelligence Committee is neither an impeachment committee nor a Grand Jury.
More from Opinion
Tucker Carlson: It’s never been clear what Dems believe is Trump’s impeachable offense. Now we know. It’s THIS
Leslie Marshall: Trump, impeachment and the future – Here's what I tell my Democratic friends
Andrew McCarthy: Elections, not impeachments are how we resolve policy disputes in this country
With great fanfare, Speaker Pelosi initiated the formal impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump in September promising that, "no one is above the law." She claimed the president's actions "have seriously violated the Constitution."
That’s not what viewers saw on this first day of public testimony. If there are violations of the law or the Constitution by this president, these witnesses couldn't testify to it. Their accounts were based on hearsay, opinion and media reports.
If anyone has been treated as though they are above the law, it is this so-called whistleblower."
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/schiff-whistleblower-claims-trump-impeachment-jason-chaffetz
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
What an excellent point.
"If you fight corruption, you piss off corrupt people."
Ambassador Yovanovitch worked to eliminate corruption, with a stellar career. Her efforts apparently pissed off Giuilani and Trump.
Trump removed Ambassador Yovanovitch without giving any reason what so ever.
I can see the reason.
Trump is corrupt!
"If you fight corruption, you piss off corrupt people."
Ambassador Yovanovitch worked to eliminate corruption, with a stellar career. Her efforts apparently pissed off Giuilani and Trump.
Trump removed Ambassador Yovanovitch without giving any reason what so ever.
I can see the reason.
Trump is corrupt!
Hans von Spakovsky: Trump impeachment not justified by evidence and testimony made public so far
Hans A. von Spakovsky
By Hans A. von Spakovsky | Fox News:
"Democrats and Republicans battle over 'hearsay' during impeachment hearings
House Oversight Committee members Rep. Mark Meadows and Rep. Jim Jordan weighs in on impeachment proceedings on 'Hannity.'
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., hasn’t yet produced most of his witnesses in the public impeachment hearings regarding President Trump. But if the State Department’s George Kent and Acting Ambassador to Ukraine William Taylor are representative of the testimony Democrats are relying on, future historians may label this episode The Big Impeachment Blowout.
The House impeachment inquiry is not a criminal proceeding. But as I listened to the hearsay and speculation that Kent and Taylor were offering Wednesday at the opening public hearing on impeachment, I couldn’t help thinking of REO Speedwagon’s song “Take it on the Run.”
One line of the song says: “Heard it from a friend who heard it from a friend who heard it from another you been messin’ around.”
YOVANOVITCH TO FACE GOP GRILLING ON SECOND DAY OF PUBLIC IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS
Both Kent and Taylor admitted they never talked to President Trump and only heard third-hand what supposedly occurred in the president’s July 25 telephone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
More from Opinion
Jason Chaffetz: Why Schiff's whistleblower claims at Trump impeachment hearing are impossible to believe
Rep. Steve Scalise: Trump impeachment inquiry requires the truth – America must hear from whistleblower
Democrats seem to have dropped the quid pro quo claim, since there was no evidence of it in the rough transcript the White House released of the call. The claim does not seem to be playing with the American public.
Taylor admitted in the hearing that Zelensky had no idea that U.S. aid was being delayed, and Zelensky himself has said there was no quid pro quo.
Democrats have now switched to using the terms “bribery” and “extortion,” no doubt because those terms sound more sinister, despite the fact that they’ve produced no evidence – so far – that would come even close to showing a violation of the federal laws defining bribery and extortion."
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/hans...-public-so-far
Hans A. von Spakovsky
By Hans A. von Spakovsky | Fox News:
"Democrats and Republicans battle over 'hearsay' during impeachment hearings
House Oversight Committee members Rep. Mark Meadows and Rep. Jim Jordan weighs in on impeachment proceedings on 'Hannity.'
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., hasn’t yet produced most of his witnesses in the public impeachment hearings regarding President Trump. But if the State Department’s George Kent and Acting Ambassador to Ukraine William Taylor are representative of the testimony Democrats are relying on, future historians may label this episode The Big Impeachment Blowout.
The House impeachment inquiry is not a criminal proceeding. But as I listened to the hearsay and speculation that Kent and Taylor were offering Wednesday at the opening public hearing on impeachment, I couldn’t help thinking of REO Speedwagon’s song “Take it on the Run.”
One line of the song says: “Heard it from a friend who heard it from a friend who heard it from another you been messin’ around.”
YOVANOVITCH TO FACE GOP GRILLING ON SECOND DAY OF PUBLIC IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS
Both Kent and Taylor admitted they never talked to President Trump and only heard third-hand what supposedly occurred in the president’s July 25 telephone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
More from Opinion
Jason Chaffetz: Why Schiff's whistleblower claims at Trump impeachment hearing are impossible to believe
Rep. Steve Scalise: Trump impeachment inquiry requires the truth – America must hear from whistleblower
Democrats seem to have dropped the quid pro quo claim, since there was no evidence of it in the rough transcript the White House released of the call. The claim does not seem to be playing with the American public.
Taylor admitted in the hearing that Zelensky had no idea that U.S. aid was being delayed, and Zelensky himself has said there was no quid pro quo.
Democrats have now switched to using the terms “bribery” and “extortion,” no doubt because those terms sound more sinister, despite the fact that they’ve produced no evidence – so far – that would come even close to showing a violation of the federal laws defining bribery and extortion."
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/hans...-public-so-far