DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus IMPEACHMENT: James Madison warned us that Trump is dangerously un-American

Are those witnesses in jail, have they been prosecuted for lying under oath?

He's not confused. He knows Trump is deplorable, a traitor, a crook... He just doesn't care because justifying his vote in 2016 means more to him than anything else.

Trump called the impeachment hearings a "lynching" today... so there was that. smh

Are you saying the Republican who was appointed special prosecutor, Mueller, by another republican, Rosenstein is lying?

Just for grins though arch, since you depend on everyone else to do your homework for you......

Trump confidant Roger Stone: Charged with lying to Congress

Former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn: Pleaded guilty to lying to investigators

Former Trump campaign aide Rick Gates: Pleaded guilty to lying to investigators

Former Trump personal lawyer Michael Cohen: Pleaded guilty to tax and bank charges, campaign finance violations and lying to Congress

Former Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos: Served 12 days in prison for lying to investigators

Alex van der Zwaan: Served 30 days in prison for lying to investigators

https://time.com/5556331/mueller-investigation-indictments-guilty-pleas/

You're welcome.

Did I SAY that?

I'm asking which of the witnesses that lied under oath were prosecuted for lying under oath.

I listed those but it was probably while you were responding.

Yet we both know that people often times lie and it's nothing you can prove. I'm sure you've had that happen to you many times. You know someone is lying because their answers simply don't make sense and or don't add up. You know what they did but having the actual evidence to make it something you can prove in court are two different things.

My take is Mueller knew this happened several times and didn't find the actual proof needed to convict.

I also think that a lot of these cases of lying witnesses are still open and under investigation or part of ongoing prosecutions. So not all will get away with it.

Diplomat says Ukraine aid was tied to political investigations

https://thehill.com/policy/national-secu...-aid-to-ukraine


A top diplomat to Ukraine on Tuesday told House investigators that he believed the Trump administration withheld aid to Ukraine in an effort to get Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to launch politically motivated investigations, according to multiple sources familiar with his testimony.

One source told The Hill that William Taylor said the U.S ambassador to the European Union, Gordon Sondland, told him that security aid to Ukraine could have been held up in part because of a push for Ukraine to publicly announce probes into the 2016 presidential election as well as one of his top 2020 political opponents, former Vice President Joe Biden.


“It’s clear he thought there was” a quid pro quo, another source echoed.

Most Democrats emerging Tuesday from Taylor’s closed-door testimony in the Capitol basement were tight-lipped on details but effusive on a central point: the ambassador, they said, was delivering the most damning testimony yet in the Democrats' impeachment investigation into President Trump.

"Without question the most powerful testimony we've heard," said Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.), who sits on the Oversight Committee.

"This testimony is a sea change. I think it could accelerate matters," Lynch continued. "This will, I think, answer more questions than it raises."

Taylor, the U.S. chargé d'affaires of Ukraine, was among the State Department veterans who had raised red flags about the White House campaign, led by Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, to pressure Zelensky for political favors. The Democrats’ impeachment inquiry is now focused squarely on that episode, fueled by allegations from a government whistleblower that Trump had dangled almost $400 million in U.S. military aid to Ukraine if Zelensky failed to open the investigations Trump sought.

In text message conversations with several other diplomats, including Sondland, Taylor last month had warned against the “crazy” strategy of withholding U.S. aid “for help with a political campaign." At one point he threatened to quit the State Department in protest.

Sondland, a wealthy hotel magnate and Trump donor with no previous diplomatic experience, pushed back, saying Taylor was "incorrect" in surmising Trump's intentions.

"The president has been crystal clear no quid pro quos of any kind," Sondland wrote.

Sondland had testified last week before the three House committees leading the Democrats’ impeachment inquiry: Intelligence, Oversight and Foreign Affairs. But based on Taylor’s testimony Tuesday, some Democrats are already suggesting Sondland will be called back to explain apparent discrepancies.

“I walk away with the impression Mr. Sondland will have some explaining to do,” said Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.), a member of the Intelligence Committee.

Lynch described Taylor as a "meticulous" note-taker who had kept detailed records of his involvement in the months-long effort by Trump and some of his closest allies to pressure Ukrainian leaders to find dirt on Trump's political rivals.

"He indicated that he kept extensive notes on all of this," Lynch said.

Rep. Tom Malinowski (D.N.J.), a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, also suggested Taylor's testimony was supportive of the central allegations facing Trump on his dealings with Ukraine.

"I would say it certainly filled in many of the remaining gaps in the narrative," Malinowski said. "I would say he remembered some things that previous witnesses have not been able to remember."

Democrats participating in the deposition said Taylor has also stood by his earlier statement that it would be “crazy” to leverage the U.S. financial assistance — which aimed to combat Russian aggression in Ukraine — to win a commitment from Zelensky to open such investigations.

“His testimony was withering with respect to some earlier testimony,” said Lynch.

They'll be working hard to attack everyone who has uncovered and testified to their quid pro quo scheme.

Hmmmm - it's worked every other time for them.

Step 1: go to the post that contains this quote.
Step 2:



one space.

this time they might not be able to dodge this one, though.

i mean....bro the whistleblower complaint pretty much nailed everything.

if this isn't an impeachable offense, but lying about an affair is, then we have officially sank to the lowest level ever in our history.

and for all to understand, here is another way to look at what trump did:

He held up our taxpayer money designated for military aid as a bargaining chip in order to get the ukrainian president to open an investigation into his 2020 political rival.

good lord, you MAGA hatters elected someone worse than nixon.

The weight of the evidence will be the key as dems will now inevitably vote to impeach Trump. If the evidence is undeniable, Senate Republicans will have to weigh their patriotism against their party allegiance OR more specifically their allegiance to Trump. Impeachment is going to happen, removal is up to the Senate.

Dems should spend some time getting the full story out as soon as they finish collecting the facts. BUT they should not let this inquiry drag on into 2020 the primaries time.

Step 1: Check out the times of the posts.
Step 2:

I hear this all of the time about Bill Clinton. But it's not quite that simple. Bill Clinton committed perjury for lying under oath.

But let's be real here. Both Bill and Hillary did testify under oath. Something Trump refuses to do. Even he realizes he can't tell the truth long enough to dodge the perjury bullet.

But you did get your answer, correct?

I'd like to add that Pence, Mnuchin, Giuliani, Pompeo, Barr and others are involved as well and they are all impeachable. Will Pence also be impeached?

This article discusses it:

https://time.com/5692947/mike-pence-impeachment/

Yes.

And the snarky, smarmy reply by someone.

BREAKING NEWS: Anonymous Trump insider who rocked White House with 'resistance' op-ed will tell EVERYTHING in behind-the-scenes book

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article...-tell-book.html

The hits just keep coming for Trump and company. I'd feel for the guy if he wasn't such a traitorous crooked scumbag.

I guess my only point would be that you could answer your own question with a 30 second Google search. Not trying to start a fight, but it seems that some people just don't care enough about what's going on with all of this to even bother to look for themselves.

This is far different than anything I've seen in my lifetime. And it just seems as if some people don't even care enough to find out what's going on.

Let me give you yet another example.

He's talking yet once again about banning certain media outlets from the White House. This time it's the Wall Street Journal and the New York times.

He tried this same thing a couple of years ago with CNN. CNN sued and a judge ruled against Trump.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/16/business/media/cnn-acosta-trump.html

Let's face it, just because a newspaper or TV channel says things you don't like is no actual reason to prohibit them access. This is no more than censorship and punishment to the free press for saying things and expressing views you don't like.

Things like this go on all the time. Too much to post or even keep up with. It's a sad time in our country.

im convinced Arch gets his news from this board.

i dont have any other explanation as to why he seems to be oblivious to the news out there.

Need a much more reliable source than the Daily Mail which is a pretty crappy paper.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/22/books/anonymous-op-ed-trump-book.html

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/22/politics/anonymous-trump-official-book/index.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/...b5ce_story.html

my guy in the resistance strikes again.

Nah, I come here to read. I get 'news' here, and elsewhere. I don't believe much 'news'.

as i said before, trump and his loser zealots have becoming the conspirators in their quest to hunt a completely debunked conspiracy, in the quest of advancing their own political interest.

the right have basically elected Alex jones to the oval office. and it shouldnt be surprising, seeing as its the same people who believe in:

obama being a foreign born muslim

the deep state (which hilariously ended up being Trump himself)

pizzagate

uranium one

jade helm (still my favorite)

and a bunch of other mind boggling nonsense...


Anatomy of a conspiracy theory: The 'server' Trump keeps looking for will never be found, because it doesn't exist

https://news.yahoo.com/trump-dnc-server-conspiracy-ukraine-crowdstrike-hannity-duffy-201008650.html

It’s the conspiracy theory that could bring down a presidency: the idea that an old Democratic National Committee email server is hidden somewhere in Ukraine and could rewrite the history of the 2016 election.

If it does lead to President Trump’s impeachment, it will be because he believed it.

“There was a server, the DNC server, that had never went to the FBI — the FBI didn’t take it,” Trump said in an interview with Fox News. “It was taken by somebody, I guess it’s CrowdStrike, that’s what I have heard.”

Trump pushed the same line last week in the Oval Office, stating, “For instance, I still ask the FBI, ‘Where is the server?’ How come the FBI never got the server from the DNC? Where is the server? I want to see the server.”

There is no DNC server. CrowdStrike is a cybersecurity firm that investigated the 2016 hack into DNC emails and turned its findings over to the FBI. Trump brought up CrowdStrike and the server in a July call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. In the memo about the call released by the White House, Trump said, “I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say CrowdStrike,” followed by an ellipsis, followed by “The server, they say Ukraine has it.”

Trump and his fellow conspiracy theorists on the right believe that the server would contain evidence proving that Russia wasn’t responsible for the hack. (CrowdStrike found that Russia was responsible, as did special counsel Robert Mueller.) The impeachment inquiry was sparked by a whistleblower complaint about the president’s attempt to pressure Ukraine into pursuing his theory about the server and investigating former Vice President Joe Biden and his son.

President Trump searches for a computer server. (Photo illustration: Yahoo News; photos: AP, Getty Images)
President Trump searches for a computer server. (Photo illustration: Yahoo News; photos: AP, Getty Images)
Trump’s acting chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, acknowledged last week that military aid to Ukraine was put on hold by the White House as part of the pressure campaign. The administration subsumes the server myth and Biden’s dealings with the Ukrainian government in 2016 under the rubric of “corruption.”

“Did [Trump] also mention to me in passing the corruption related to the DNC server?” said Mulvaney in a press briefing last week about his conversations with Ukrainian officials. “Absolutely. No question about that.”

“But to be clear, what you just described is a quid pro quo,” asked a reporter, seeking clarification that Mulvaney had just admitted to the basis of the House’s impeachment inquiry. “It is: Funding will not flow unless the investigation into the Democratic server happens as well.”

“We do that all the time with foreign policy,” said Mulvaney.

Neither CrowdStrike nor Ukraine has the server because the investigation was done through forensic replicas of the DNC hard drives called “imaging,” not looking at a physical server. CrowdStrike is not a Ukrainian-based company — it was co-founded by an American citizen who emigrated from Russia — and people associated with the firm are baffled and infuriated by Trump’s insinuations. Robert Johnston, a former CrowdStrike investigator who worked on the probe into the hacking of the DNC, told the Washington Post that Trump’s comments were “insane.”

“This is absolute babbling to the president of Ukraine,” said Johnston. “It’s hard to finger exactly which conspiracy theory he’s subscribing to. But none of them have any grounding in reality.”

“As we’ve repeatedly stated, we stand by the findings and analysis of our investigation, and, as detailed in our company statement, we’ve provided all forensic evidence and analysis to the FBI as requested,” said CrowdStrike in a statement. “Additionally, our findings have been supported by the U.S. intelligence community and other cybersecurity companies.”

Trump wasn’t the only one pushing the theory on cable news this week. Former Rep. Sean Duffy began his job as a political commentator on CNN by advancing the same story. Duffy, a Republican, previously represented a district in Wisconsin but resigned last month, citing family health issues.

“Democrats and the media were all about what happened in the 2016 election,” Duffy said on the network Sunday. “What Mick Mulvaney said was Donald Trump said let’s look and say let’s get this server, this is the DNC server.”

“This is a disputed, absurd conspiracy theory that you’re talking about right now,” said Amanda Carpenter, a conservative panelist.

“What you are stating is completely inaccurate and factually wrong,” said Jen Psaki, a former Obama White House staffer. “It is a conspiracy theory on the right wing.”

Former Wisconsin Rep. Sean Duffy (Photo: Mary F. Calvert/Reuters)
Former Wisconsin Rep. Sean Duffy (Photo: Mary F. Calvert/Reuters)
Duffy, undeterred, tried the same line on Monday when asked by host Alisyn Camerota about Mulvaney admitting to a quid pro quo between the U.S. and Ukraine.

“We spent two years talking about Russia collusion, Russia influence in our 2016 election,” said Duffy. “What Mick Mulvaney was talking about was actually trying to find the server that was the DNC’s server at the heart of the Russia investigation.”

“That’s a conspiracy theory,” said Camerota.

They continued going back and forth before an exasperated Camerota said, “Ukraine doesn’t have the server, Sean.”

“They might not,” said Duffy. “They might be wrong on that. They might be wrong on whether Ukraine has the server.”

CNN didn’t respond to a question about whether it was concerned that its new hire had pushed a conspiracy theory on his first two days on the job. The network has previously faced criticism over its 2016 hiring of Trump staffer Corey Lewandowski after he left the campaign following allegations he had assaulted a female reporter, although charges were later dropped. In congressional testimony last month, Lewandowski admitted he often lied to the media.

On Tuesday, one of Duffy’s former colleagues raised the issue in a House hearing on election security.

“It has been reported that the FBI never obtained the original servers from the Democratic National Committee that had allegedly been hacked by Russia, instead relying on imaged copies,” said Rep. Debbie Lesko, R-Ariz. “Is that correct?”

One of the witnesses, Adam Hickey, a deputy assistant attorney general for the Justice Department’s National Security Division, confirmed CrowdStrike’s account.

“We got the information that we required for our investigation, and it’s pretty common for us to work with a security vendor in connection with an investigation of a computer intrusion,” said Hickey.

This top diplomat to Ukraine admitted to Pompeo he had his own agenda and if things didn't go his way in Ukraine, he would come down hard.

Well he didn't agree with Trump and here he comes.

But of course the Republicans in these committees are not allowed to call rebuttal witnesses. That might be justice.

If the police were investigating you, do you think you would get a chance to hear the evidence as they discover it and call for rebuttal witnesses at that time OR do you think you'd have to wait until the trial?

Stop bringing crybaby Trump's BS talking points in here to rebut facts.

I think the Police might question me to get my side of the story too. If they felt they had a case after putting together both sides, they would arrest and charge me. Then on to trial where I get Due Process.

I don't think the Police would only question the other side and then leak each interview to the Press, drip drip drip on a daily basis. That would be corrupt. That would be a Lynching.

But Schiff gets to talk about his "proof" of collusion for some 946 days........without showing proof.

Now, they have private meetings about whatever the hell they are investigating now - and no one else is allowed to hear any evidence. Just 'leaks'.

And no vote on impeachment.........just words and stories for the media's sake. More investigations. Heck, on here, we've heard for the last 3+ years about impeachment. Sorry ass losers are just that.

There's a small part of me that hopes they finally get Trump. A small part of me. Because if they don't get him? There's about 6-12 people on this board that will forever look like idiots.

Well, Stupid is as Stupid does.

j/c:

It amazes me that the lot of you even exist. It's hard to believe that almost each and everyone of you are so one-sided, hateful, and blind to problems on your own side.

What a life that must be. Fueled by hate and bias.

You two should take that act on the road! The two of you discussing how others look like stupid idiots is the funniest thing I've seen in a LONG ASS TIME!

Apparently you haven't looked in the mirror in a long, long time. 3 1/2 years of jibberish bs from you on a daily basis. 3 1/2 years of daily fails.

I await Rudy showing up for a deposition under oath, same for Pompeo, same for Perry, same for Barr. Let them tell their side as well and get questioned. But they won’t, because it is smarter to wait until the trial.

I didn't know there was a trial scheduled. Can you fill me in on that? Or, is more posturing?

If the house votes to impeach, a trial is held by the senate with John Roberts as judge.

From the constitution.