The Democrats witness dilemma

[bhaktajan]

trump is using Ukraine corruption as a cover...

To cover up his Sting operation.

He'll be found guilty of leading a sting operation into organised influence.


The real Cover-up is obscured by the wagging dog and
the bait has been dropped and the switch will be visible in
slow-motion replays for posterity.

 

[dukkha]

His cover story for investigating corruption is ... investigating corruption.

Joe Biden got caught getting his son a top job in the most corrupt country in the world, while he was Obama's pointman in Ukraine. Then got caught, in Jan 2018, bragging about threatening a Ukraine prosecutor, who was investigating his son, by withholding a Billion in Aid. Prosecutor Shokin should be called as a witness at the impeachment trial.

And yes I doubt you. Yours is nothing but a fantasy lib fill-in-the-blanks scenario. There is Zero evidence Zelensky was ever threatened. Call him as a witness, too.

The Aid was approved on May 23, ... two days before Poroshenko was to leave office.

solid points
Since Poroshenko was still president when Congress approved - shouldn't Trump ask about corruption
to the incoming administration?

This whole construct relies on a quid pro quo = which over and over has been shown to not have happened

 

[dukkha]

To cover up his Sting operation.

He'll be found guilty of leading a sting operation into organised influence.


The real Cover-up is obscured by the wagging dog and
the bait has been dropped and the switch will be visible in
slow-motion replays for posterity.

the old double-blind switcheroo!
Trump is a criminal mastermind.

 

[Bigdog]

solid points
Since Poroshenko was still president when Congress approved - shouldn't Trump ask about corruption
to the incoming administration?

This whole construct relies on a quid pro quo = which over and over has been shown to not have happened

Yep.

It was approved for the Poroshenko gov't on May 23, not the Z gov't. And it still had weeks to go before a final approval.

A change in presidents is certainly a credible reason to pause.

 

[Darth Omar]

So you are arguing that Biden's supposed crimes have been covered up by trump and the Republicans in Congress. Remember Republicans still control the Senate. Maybe the problem is there is no there, there. There is nothing to investigate with Biden.

There is the accusation of a potential appearance of a conflict of interest that never became an actual appearance of a conflict of interest, which is to say, there is the accusations that there was no crime. trump has worse scandals weekly.

A conflict of interest is a conflict of interest lol.

And the Biden/Ukraine conflict of interest came up under Obama: Joe Biden was approached about it and claimed to be in ‘over load’ or something. It was around the time he lost his other son. That’s understandable but his claim he and Hunter ‘never discussed’ Hunter’s business in Ukraine, maybe not so much.

Hunter was, supposedly, in place to help Burisma clean up their act; Joe Biden was appointed to look after Ukraine yet Joe and Hunter never talked about it? Not sure why anyone should believe that.

Having the son of a VP serve on your board of directors would be a neat way to protect your outfit from investigation or further investigation. The VP’s son needs a job [not just any old job, but a job that pays very well for doing not much of anything] and Burisma needs protected from investigation. Since the VP is a very powerful man that has considerable control over billions of dollars that flow to the government, he could see to it that Burisma is ‘safe’.

And everyone is happy.

 

[Earl]

A conflict of interest is a conflict of interest lol.

And the Biden/Ukraine conflict of interest came up under Obama: Joe Biden was approached about it and claimed to be in ‘over load’ or something. It was around the time he lost his other son. That’s understandable but his claim he and Hunter ‘never discussed’ Hunter’s business in Ukraine, maybe not so much.

Hunter was, supposedly, in place to help Burisma clean up their act; Joe Biden was appointed to look after Ukraine yet Joe and Hunter never talked about it? Not sure why anyone should believe that.

Having the son of a VP serve on your board of directors would be a neat way to protect your outfit from investigation or further investigation. The VP’s son needs a job [not just any old job, but a job that pays very well for doing not much of anything] and Burisma needs protected from investigation. Since the VP is a very powerful man that has considerable control over billions of dollars that flow to the government, he could see to it that Burisma is ‘safe’.

And everyone is happy.

Especially the Biden and son crime family.

 

[Darth Omar]

Especially the Biden and son crime family.

Mutual benefit lol.

Keep in mind it could have been above-board. The point is *the appearance* of possible corruption constitutes probable cause for an investigation. Bingo. Trump had justification to ask Zelensky to look into it. It doesn’t matter that Trump would/could benefit politically—that’s on the Obama administration for leaving it lay there for Trump to pick up.

That’s about the sum extent to this Silly Burger Impeachment charade.

It was boneheaded to allow this conflict of interest with the Biden’s to go on. Obama and/or whoever probably thought Democrats had the 2016 election in the bag and it wouldn’t matter. Some foreword thinker should have stepped in and said ‘hmm...maybe having Hunter in place at Burisma isn’t a great idea’ but that apparently never happened.

 

[Earl]

Mutual benefit lol.

Keep in mind it could have been above-board. The point is *the appearance* of possible corruption constitutes probable cause for an investigation. Bingo. Trump had justification to ask Zelensky to look into it. It doesn’t matter that Trump would/could benefit politically—that’s on the Obama administration for leaving it lay there for Trump to pick up.

That’s about the sum extent to this Silly Burger Impeachment charade.

It was boneheaded to allow this conflict of interest with the Biden’s to go on. Obama and/or whoever probably thought Democrats had the 2016 election in the bag and it wouldn’t matter. Some foreword thinker should have stepped in and said ‘hmm...maybe having Hunter in place at Burisma isn’t a great idea’ but that apparently never happened.

There was no lock that Trump would benefit from an investigation of the Biden and son crime family.
If the Bidens were as clean as new-fallen snow, no harm, no foul. Investigations can’t be avoided just because someone would benefit if the investigation exposes corruption.

Of course the entire Obama team was not worried about the Bidens’ crimes being uncovered. The election was a lock...lol.

 

[Darth Omar]

There was no lock that Trump would benefit from an investigation of the Biden and son crime family.
If the Bidens were as clean as new-fallen snow, no harm, no foul. Investigations can’t be avoided just because someone would benefit if the investigation exposes corruption.

Of course the entire Obama team was not worried about the Bidens’ crimes being uncovered. The election was a lock...lol.

Pretty much.

This is much ado about not a whole lot. In reading the call transcript I got the impression Zelensky was thinking to himself ‘I’m not going to do that’ lol. Why would he inject himself into our politics if he didn’t have to?

And *he didn’t have to*. Ukraine got the aid and Trump’s requests went into one of Zelensky’s ears and out the other. Zelensky denied there was pressure, twice. There’s nothing to it.

 

[Earl]

This attempt to remove a sitting president that the American people elected, that began when he was elected, will fail.

What have the radical Democrat Socialists done for the working men and women of America?

Squat.

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello Darth,

It’s clear that Democrats need witnesses in the Senate impeachment trial since it’s a slam dunk acquittal based on the articles Nancy solemnly/gleefully sent over to the Senate.

Which begs the question if they should have been sent to begin with—but Democrats wanted their Trump impeachment*, so yeah.

At any rate, that means the defense gets to call Hunter Biden, and others, since Democrats insist on the trial being ‘fair’. Do Democrats risk playing ‘dog catches car’ by putting Hunter Biden under oath? What confidence do they have that Hunter is clean besides reassuring themselves, back and forth, that Hunter is clean? The fact is, Hunter Biden is a Black Box—no one knows what’s inside it until it’s opened. And we all know his past is ‘checkered’, to be diplomatic about it.

Or how about the WB? For months, Democrats and their media minions have been lying about the WB protection law which *doesn’t* guarantee anonymity. If Democrats want Bolton to appear—so will the WB. Then we’ll get to find out if there was anything resembling a set-up going on between the WB and Adam Schiff.

Shifty may be a House manager but he’s also *a material witness* to how this whole thing started. Do Democrats really want a known liar under oath in a Senate trial? This won’t be the basement of the House where Democrats can tightly control everything.

This can get ugly, quick. But I fully expect Democrats to keep the pedal to the metal.

I would be good with any witnesses Trump wants to call. You can have them all, as long as the Democrats get the same freedom.

Your witnesses against ours.

You're totally on.

I would take that deal in a heartbeat.

Trump would be gone and I don't care who else might go down at the same time.

That would be totally worth it.

You can have Hunter Biden.

He is worth nothing to me.

Then after the dust is settled we will elect any of the remaining Dem candidates in 2020 and finally put this country back on track.

We have to get rid of Trump to save the world from climate change.

We don't have 4 more years. It's now or doom.

We are down to the wire.

Please don't destroy Earth. It's a nice place to live.

And there is no planet B.

 

[Earl]

There was no lock that Trump would benefit from an investigation of the Biden and son crime family.
If the Bidens were as clean as new-fallen snow, no harm, no foul. Investigations can’t be avoided just because someone would benefit if the investigation exposes corruption.

Of course the entire Obama team was not worried about the Bidens’ crimes being uncovered. The election was a lock...lol.

 

[Earl]

Hello Darth,



I would be good with any witnesses Trump wants to call. You can have them all, as long as the Democrats get the same freedom.

Your witnesses against ours.

You're totally on.

I would take that deal in a heartbeat.

Trump would be gone and I don't care who else might go down at the same time.

That would be totally worth it.

You can have Hunter Biden.

He is worth nothing to me.

Then after the dust is settled we will elect any of the remaining Dem candidates in 2020 and finally put this country back on track.

We have to get rid of Trump to save the world from climate change.

We don't have 4 more years. It's now or doom.

We are down to the wire.

Please don't destroy Earth. It's a nice place to live.

And there is no planet B.

Horse mierda. Corrupt Biden and his corrupt son will go down if called as witnesses.

 

[Darth Omar]

Hello Darth,



I would be good with any witnesses Trump wants to call. You can have them all, as long as the Democrats get the same freedom.

Your witnesses against ours.

You're totally on.

I would take that deal in a heartbeat.

Trump would be gone and I don't care who else might go down at the same time.

That would be totally worth it.

You can have Hunter Biden.

He is worth nothing to me.

Then after the dust is settled we will elect any of the remaining Dem candidates in 2020 and finally put this country back on track.

We have to get rid of Trump to save the world from climate change.

We don't have 4 more years. It's now or doom.

We are down to the wire.

Please don't destroy Earth. It's a nice place to live.

And there is no planet B.

How about no witnesses lol?

Didn’t you say Democrats only needed the articles they passed?

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello Darth,

I have no problem with both sides calling all the witnesses they can think of. Call Roger Stone. Call Cohen. All of Trump's closest men. Call Hunter Biden. Call Hillary. Question her about Benghazi one more time. You can have them all, as long as we get ours. Deal?

How about no witnesses lol?

Aha. Once your bluff is called, now we see what you really want.

Didn’t you say Democrats only needed the articles they passed?

Clinton's impeachment trial had witnesses. And Clinton took the stand in his own defense. He faced up to the American people. Clinton took the oath. He was sworn in, swore that his testimony was the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Basically, Clinton manned up.

But I understand if you don't think Trump can man up like Clinton did.

After all.

Clinton was a real President.

 

[Walt]

Especially the Biden and son crime family.

If you really believe that Biden and his son are guilty of crimes, why aren't you more angry with trump for refusing a real investigation? Remember, he was only interested in a press conference to tarnish Biden's image, and still has not sanctioned an actual investigation.

And if you have evidence of a crime, why don't you turn over the evidence to the FBI, so they can start an investigation?

 

[Darth Omar]

Hello Darth,

I have no problem with both sides calling all the witnesses they can think of. Call Roger Stone. Call Cohen. All of Trump's closest men. Call Hunter Biden. Call Hillary. Question her about Benghazi one more time. You can have them all, as long as we get ours. Deal?



Aha. Once your bluff is called, now we see what you really want.



Clinton's impeachment trial had witnesses. And Clinton took the stand in his own defense. He faced up to the American people. Clinton took the oath. He was sworn in, swore that his testimony was the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Basically, Clinton manned up.

But I understand if you don't think Trump can man up like Clinton did.

After all.

Clinton was a real President.

Trump is as real and legitimate as any other president.

It’s actually not a question of whether I want witnesses or don’t. The constitutional question is whether the Senate should allow them or not. They certainly aren’t required to since *the way it’s supposed to work* is the House does the impeachment inquiry—that means gathering the evidence, interviewing ALL witnesses and/or allowing the courts to settle any issues involving executive privilege and etc.

Democrats didn’t do this. They were ‘in a hurry’. So now they want to effectively extend an impeachment inquiry into the Senate.

Why should the Senate allow Democrats to abuse the process? I can’t think of a single reason.

 

[Darth Omar]

If you really believe that Biden and his son are guilty of crimes, why aren't you more angry with trump for refusing a real investigation? Remember, he was only interested in a press conference to tarnish Biden's image, and still has not sanctioned an actual investigation.

And if you have evidence of a crime, why don't you turn over the evidence to the FBI, so they can start an investigation?

I don’t know if the Bidens are guilty or not.

My point is the Biden’s conflict of interest in Ukraine was suspicious looking enough to constitute probable cause. The narrative is that it was somehow outlandish for Trump to ask Zelensky to look into it.

An outlandish request would asking Zelensky to look for dirt on Warren or Crazy Joe. It always goes back to Hunter’s relationship with Burisma while Joe was VP and appointed to look after Ukraine. If that situation didn’t exist none of this would have happened.

Or maybe Democrats would have come up with something else by now anyway.

 

[dukkha]

I don’t know if the Bidens are guilty or not.

My point is the Biden’s conflict of interest in Ukraine was suspicious looking enough to constitute probable cause. The narrative is that it was somehow outlandish for Trump to ask Zelensky to look into it.

An outlandish request would asking Zelensky to look for dirt on Warren or Crazy Joe. It always goes back to Hunter’s relationship with Burisma while Joe was VP and appointed to look after Ukraine. If that situation didn’t exist none of this would have happened.

Or maybe Democrats would have come up with something else by now anyway.

don't forget this sequence ( if I can recall it)

Shokin is ready to interview Hunter
Hunter contacts State
State ( Nuland) contacts Poroshenko
Uncle Joe calls Poroshenko 3x in one month
Shokin is fired when Uncle Joe goes to Ukraine
(by memory from Solomon's docs)
~~
Uncle Joe is upto his ears in it

 

[Darth Omar]

don't forget this sequence ( if I can recall it)

Shokin is ready to interview Hunter
Hunter contacts State
State ( Nuland) contacts Poroshenko
Uncle Joe calls Poroshenko 3x in one month
Shokin is fired when Uncle Joe goes to Ukraine
(by memory from Solomon's docs)
~~
Uncle Joe is upto his ears in it

Would hardly be surprising.

I think the point is it’s never actually been investigated beyond some in house bureaucrat checking the boxes.