DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Impeachment: Unbreakable

“I did say that then, and then I’ve done all the extensive research,” “I’ve been immersing myself in dusty old books, and I’ve concluded that no, it has to be crime.”

“Even if the factual allegations are true -- which are highly disputed and which the defense team will show contrary evidence -- but even if true, they did not allege impeachable offenses,” “So there can’t be a constitutionally authorized impeachment.”

-Alan Dershowitz, 2020

Here is how the sloth you support acts. You do realize you are supporting a kindergarten brain with the vocabulary of a fourth grader right?



You would expect better from your own six year old child. And you act like you're proud of him?

Regan is rolling over in his grave. Oh how you've sold out your souls.

Who is that?

Ah yes I forgot the A. But even with the A I'm pretty sure the question would still be the same from many. They've obviously forgotten what a real president looks like.

You might have a point - but Trump came out and crowed about his call and what he did. We then have umpteen credible witnesses all saying the same thing. We then have dozens and dozens of factual supporting evidence... The whistle blower is irrelevant - everything has been verified.

If you want to talk about the merits of the case - talk about all of it. Not selective little bits that you want to manipulate into something it's not.

As for Mueller - Russia - all the rest of it. If you want to discuss THAT please answer or explain why Trump has yet to acknowledge Russia was actively looking to influence the election in Trump's favor. And please verify that you acknowledge the same .... i keep asking but none of the Trump supporters want to answer.

Perhaps if you will prove to us just how many Americans changed their votes because Putin wanted them to, I will answer that.

While you are at it, find out who Uncle Puty wants us to vote for in 2020.

I didn't claim Russia changed a single vote. But thanks. Why does anyone have to quantify that to acknowledge what is factual and known?

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/26/us/politics/trump-bolton-book-ukraine.html

Oops. Nothing to see here. LOL

What?

If russia was trying to influence the election, wouldn't there be proof of that by now?

See, you take a false claim, that russia was working for trump, and you perpetuate it by claiming it's true, despite the fact that it wasn't.

You keep asking to prove what never happened never happened.

Sorry, you can't be making stuff up like schiff and expect people to prove a lie, when the origin of the fake facts is a lie to begin with.

Bolton book alleges Trump tied Ukraine aid freeze to Biden investigations: NYT

Former national security adviser John Bolton reportedly claims in his as yet unpublished memoir that President Trump sought to tie hundreds of millions of dollars in aid to Ukraine to his requests for the country's leaders to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden.

Multiple sources familiar with Bolton's book told The New York Times that he writes that President Trump personally told him that $391 million in aid to Ukraine should be frozen until Ukrainian officials announced the investigations, including one into the Democratic National Committee.

The book, which does not have a publication date as of yet, has been submitted to the White House for review. White House officials did not immediately return a request for comment from The Hill on the report.

The report comes as the Senate has debated for days over whether to allow witnesses in Trump's ongoing impeachment trial beyond those who spoke to House investigators in past months.

Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), who has pressed Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) to allow such witnesses to testify, reiterated his demand following news of Bolton's allegations.

"John Bolton has the evidence," he tweeted. "It’s up to four Senate Republicans to ensure that John Bolton, Mick Mulvaney, and the others with direct knowledge of President Trump’s actions testify in the Senate trial."



Bolton left the White House last year, with the president and his former aide disagreeing publicly at the time over whether he had been fired or resigned. The claim in his upcoming book revealed Sunday directly contradicts statements from Trump and other administration officials who have denied that aid to Ukraine was ever tied to the president's efforts to convince Ukraine's president to open investigations.

https://thehill.com/policy/national-secu...freeze-to-biden

Well now we'll see what Republicans have to say about that...

First, another person writes a book and actively promotes it.

Seen that a bunch of times over the years.

Second, We all heard there was corruption in Ukraine especially involving the DNC and the Bidens. Trump wants it investigated because his gut tells him they are up to no good.

Third, we know the Biden's played games with getting a prosecutor fired and his son a job he was never qualified for.

Fourth, we already know Trump wanted the money held back because of the corruption as he didn't want tax payers money wasted on crooks. He released the money before the deadline and even sent anti tank weapons to help them stop the Russians.

I don't see anything news worthy here.

How many kids of democrats are making mega bucks from Burisma?

Sorry bub. The whole world and their intelligence agencies know and proved Russia interfered ... And while there was fake news that undermined both candidates ... It was overwhelmingly on Trump's favor.

The fact you don't k ow that and can't acknowledge that doesn't surprise me.

How many red dogs does it take to make a whataboutism?

Good one !! Too funny.

I take that back. I am shocked. I mean this is so utterly incorrect.

I guess I should try to clarify, are you saying that Putin didn't try to interfere and promote Trump? or are you saying that he wasn't doing it in coordination with Trump?

Only one I know of is Biden but there is also this...

It got almost no attention, but in May, CNN reported that Sens. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) and Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) wrote a letter to Ukraine’s prosecutor general, Yuriy Lutsenko, expressing concern at the closing of four investigations they said were critical to the Mueller probe. In the letter, they implied that their support for U.S. assistance to Ukraine was at stake. Describing themselves as “strong advocates for a robust and close relationship with Ukraine,” the Democratic senators declared, “We have supported [the] capacity-building process and are disappointed that some in Kyiv appear to have cast aside these [democratic] principles to avoid the ire of President Trump,” before demanding Lutsenko “reverse course and halt any efforts to impede cooperation with this important investigation.”

So, it’s okay for Democratic senators to encourage Ukraine to investigate Trump, but it’s not okay for the president to allegedly encourage Ukraine to investigate Hunter Biden?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/...den-than-trump/

Did they illegally withhold funding? In order to coerce Ukraine ?

In the letter, they implied that their support for U.S. assistance to Ukraine was at stake.

Quid?
Pro?
Can you give me a Quo?

This has already been debated among those that KNOW the law and what they did was well within their authority and completely constitutional. But hey, when muckraking is all you have, I completely understand why you bring crap like this up all the time.

Trump and Rudy Giuliani slam Bolton, question his manhood after book excerpt report

https://news.yahoo.com/trump-rudy-giuliani-slam-bolton-074735720.html

Lmfao, now even trump supporters have to admit that this is bad. The guy with first hand knowledge has the trump administration scrambling now.

A mountain of evidence points in one direction: Russia sought to sway the 2016 US election

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018...rump/878910002/



Who said Russia was working "with Trump"? Nobody I know of. There is a mountain of evidence ( see article above ) that Russia was working to try and help get Trump elected. And we already know Putin wanted Trump to be president. Yes I have proof of that as well.




You can't just ignore the proof and then pretend it never happened and blame others because you refuse to look at it.

Can’t wait for the MAGA hatters to start claiming that Bolton is a deep state liberal lefty lmfao

That's pretty much the go to line for anyone who speaks out against him. Or this one, "Yeah, but it's in their book." I mean nothing in books can be true, right?

Yep. And don’t forget the last resort: “the president was joking”

When you help elect a man that thinks the Revolutionary Army stormed Enland's airports, that you have to flush toilets fifteen times and we have to protect Thomas Edison and the inventor of the wheel, they have to scramble for excuses.

From Fox News

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/leaked-...hment-testimony

From Washington Post

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/...tmare-scenario/

Bolton basically said yeah, I'm withholding aid until I get the Biden announcement.

Trump said it's not true..

Only one of them is willing to testify under oath....

Can you guess which one?

Trump has proven to be such a bastion of truth how could one question his version of events?

Sorry but...

It does not alter any the fundamental facts.

There was no quid pro quo in the transcript of Trump's July 25 call with Zelensky.

Both individuals of the call, President Trump and President Zelensky have repeatedly said there was no linkage, there was no pressure.

The Ukrainians didn't know aid was withheld at the time of the call, they didn't know until a month later, and most importantly, they took no action.

They didn't start an investigation, promise to start an investigation, or make any announcement that they were going to do an investigation, and they got the security assistance money.

The timing of the Bolton leak is very suspicious as Democrats are pressuring Republicans to call witnesses and prolong the circus.

Nice try tho.

Only MAGA hatters would believe this blatant ass lie. It’s mind boggling how stupid he can get on Twitter.

I wish his stupidity was only on Twitter. Sadly he’s subjects us all to it in many other ways, daily.

You do understand the difference between a summary and a transcript, right? Or has Trump really dumbed you down that much?

Don't forget you can borrow groceries from the grocery store.

40: Trump being guilty doesn't matter because we've rigged the trial... no do-overs, no new facts, no witnesses... Trump walks.

John Bolton: Hamma Time!

They must really know me well at Kroger. They know me so well in fact I don't even have to show my ID to buy groceries.

j/c

Romney: 'Increasingly likely' other Republicans will join his call for witnesses

Republican Sen. Mitt Romney said Monday that he has had discussions with his GOP colleagues and it is "increasingly likely" that others would join his ongoing push for former national security adviser John Bolton to testify in the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump.
"I've said for some time that I would hope to hear from John Bolton. I think with the story that came out yesterday that it is increasingly apparent that it would be important to hear from John Bolton," the Utah Republican said. "I think it's increasingly likely that other Republicans will join those of us who think we should hear from John Bolton."
LIVE UPDATES: Impeachment trial of President Trump
Romney, who has before expressed frustration with Trump, previously indicated that he would be interested in hearing testimony from Bolton. "I think it's very likely I'll be in favor of witnesses, but I haven't made a decision finally yet and I won't until the testimony is completed," he said.

"I am not going to speak for any other Republican senators," Romney said when asked Monday who he has spoken with. "I have spoken with others who have opined on this as well."
The President's legal team resumed its second day of arguments on Monday, but all of the attention will be focused on the Republican senators sitting in the chamber and how they react to Sunday night's New York Times bombshell that Bolton's draft manuscript says Trump told him US security assistance to Ukraine was conditioned on investigations into Democrats, including former Vice President Joe Biden. Trump's attempts to pressure Ukraine to investigate Hunter Biden and Joe Biden, his potential general election rival, are at the center of the President's impeachment trial.
Trump has repeatedly made unfounded and false claims to allege that the Bidens acted improperly in Ukraine. There is no evidence of wrongdoing by either Joe or Hunter Biden.
Democrats need four Republicans to vote with them in favor of subpoenas for witnesses or new evidence in order to extend the trial and gather new information. Four senators, specifically, are being closely watched to vote for those subpoenas. That short list includes Romney, moderate Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, and endangered senators up for reelection like Sen. Cory Gardner of Colorado.
Collins said Monday morning that "the reporting on John Bolton strengthens the case for witnesses and has prompted a number of conversations among my colleagues."
"I think fairness requires us to allow both sides to present their cases before we move to the issue of witnesses, and I've worked very hard to get language in the governing resolution that would ensure a vote on whether or not to call witnesses and subpoena other documents," she told a small group of reporters in the Capitol. "I've also said from the beginning that it was very likely that I would vote for witnesses. And that has not changed."

Murkowski released her own statement Monday, saying "I stated before that I was curious as to what John Bolton might have to say.
"From the outset, I've worked to ensure this trial would be fair and that members would have the opportunity to weigh in after its initial phase to determine if we need more information," Murkowski said. "I've also said there is an appropriate time for us to evaluate whether we need additional information —that time is almost here. I look forward to the White House wrapping up presentation of its case."

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/27/politics/mitt-romney-susan-collins-impeachment-witnesses/index.html

Going to wait for clarification before I add anything to this. The part in white is certainly true and proven. The part in yellow isn't the point.

Listened to 15 minutes of Ken Star - really not a good day for those trying to bury this and ignore the facts.

Look I get that anyone who supports Trump doesn't want a trial - it'll lose Trump the presidency. Self interest is fine and dandy - but we've got to a point where the weight of evidence from every witness says Trump orchestrated a full court press on Ukraine to force them to undermine his political opponent. Just in the last 24 hours - Bolton verifying first hand knowledge and witness to Trump doing it. Hopefully Romney and enough principled Republicans will force the issue. It'll be good for the country.

Incidentally I listened to 15 minutes of Ezra Klein talking on NPR about his book "Why We're Polarized" .... can't recommend trying to listen him or probably read the book enough. It was highly insightful.

LOL - Now we have Jane Raskin trying to paint Guiliani as a National Hero instead of an bad joke. Too funny.

Wow this 'dream team defense' is a trainwreck! lmao

I do not remember the House testimony of John Bolton. Oh Wait, they rushed it thru and wanted the Senate to do their dirty work. Sorry too late.

A look back at how Clinton’s impeachment trial unfolded

https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2...-trial-unfolded

Three witnesses were deposed under oath during the Clinton impeachment trial. Now you want special rules for your guy. Odd how that works.