***Official Impeachment Proceedings***

Surfdog

Duke status
Apr 22, 2001
16,018
104
63
Oceanside,CA
So did the goal post just move?

Asking for quid pro quo is fine, but since there wasn't an exchange, its okay?

Let me draw you a timeline:

September 1: Sondland relayed the message that the withholding of military aide was connected to a public statement on the Bidens.

September 8: Sondland told Taylor that the Ukrainians have agreed to do a CNN interview set for September 13th.

September 11: White house finally released military aid to Ukraine, due to whistleblower making public the call, and public attention about this matter.

September 13 is the date of the CNN interview with Ukrainian president. Was canceled due to whistle blower complaint becoming public.
MR. RATCLIFFE: Ambassador Taylor, my name is John Ratcliffe.
I want to read from direct you to your opening statement this morning, page 9, the bottom paragraph, and it
reads: "Just days later, on August 27, Ambassador Bolton arrived in Kyiv and met with President Zelensky. During
their meeting"
AMBASSADOR TAYLOR: Congressman, can I get you to hold on? I'm looking at a different one. Yeah, thank you.
MR. RATCLIFFE: Last paragraph, page 9.
AMBASSAD0R TAYL0R: Yes , got it . Okay , met with . Yes .
MR. RATCLIFFE: "During their meeting, security assistance was not discussed amazingly, news of the hold
did not leak out until August 29. I, on the other hand, was aIl too aware of and still troubled by the hold."
Have I read that correctly?
AMBASSAD0R TAYLOR: Yes, sir.
MR. RATCLIFFE: Okay. It sounds like, from your statement today, that you were aware of the hold and troubled
by i but that President Zelensky was not aware of it at that point in time.
AMBASSADOR TAYLOR: That is correct.
MR. RATCLIFFE: Okay. So, based on your knowledge, nobody in the Ukrainian Government became aware of a hold on
military aid until 2 days later, on August 29th.
AMBASSADOR TAYLOR: That's my understanding.
MR. RATCLIFFE: That's your understanding. And that would have been well over a month after the July 25th call
between President Trump and President Zelensky.
AMBASSADOR TAYLOR: Correct.
MR. RATCLIFFE: So you're not a lawyer, are you, Ambassador Taylor?
AMBASSADOR TAYLOR: I am not .
MR. RATCLIFFE: Okay. So the idea of a quid pro quo is it's a concept where there is a demand for action or an
attempt to influence action in exchange for something eIse. And in this case, when people are talking about a quid pro
quo, that something else is military aid. So, if nobody in the Ukrainian Government is aware of a military hold at the time of the Trump-Zelensky call, then, as a matter of law and as a matter of fact, there can be no quid pro quo, based on military aid. I just want to be real clear that, again, as of July 25th, you have no knowledge of a quid pro quo involving military aid .
AMBASSADOR TAYLOR: July 25th is a week after the hold was put on the security assistance. And July 25th, they had
a conversation between the two Presidents, where it was not discussed.
MR. RATCLIFFE: And to your knowledge, nobody in the Ukrainian Government was aware of the hold?
AMBASSADOR TAYLOR: That is correct.
MR. RATCLIFFE: Great. Thank you for clarifying.
 

Surfdog

Duke status
Apr 22, 2001
16,018
104
63
Oceanside,CA
Of course it has to do with the whistleblower.

Some people have conscience and ethics rules they adhere to.

Not you.

Hunter Biden stuff, while not criminal, is gross and voters reacted to it.

Trump did million way worse things and you are still standing behind him. That's fucking vile.
So, as I mentioned before, if Biden WASN'T running for prez, he would be fair game in the hunt for corruption with old Ukraine government. But, since he's running for office, he's off limits and has total immunity, like these foreign ambassadors have in the USA?
 

utoma

Nep status
Apr 19, 2019
685
137
43
Hey dummy. Not sure why you're quoting Taylor's testimony, when it's Sondland that relayed the message that the military aid is tied to Ukraine's commitment to investigate Biden.
 

FecalFace

Duke status
Nov 21, 2008
37,778
556
113
The Californias
So, as I mentioned before, if Biden WASN'T running for prez, he would be fair game in the hunt for corruption with old Ukraine government. But, since he's running for office, he's off limits and has total immunity, like these foreign ambassadors have in the USA?
No Biden doesn't have immunity ding dong.

If Biden wasn't running, Trump would not care about corruption. Biden would not even be on his radar.

What conman cares about corruption?

If Biden did something against the law, he should go to prison with Trump and his minions who are already in jail.

Now let's hear you say that about Trump.
 
Last edited:

mundus

Kelly Slater status
Feb 26, 2018
7,919
340
83
How many times have we heard these stupid claims. You ever seen the cartoon with the little boy trying to kick a football?
Allergic to facts huh? As well as being dumb, delusional, you scumbags are of deplorable moral character
 

Ifallalot

Duke status
Dec 17, 2008
60,091
578
113
HB, CA
I'm not saying Trump is not the president, nor am I saying he will continue being the president, nor that he might win again in 2020.

I'm saying that Trump has done some horrific unethical acts as a person, let alone as the President. And your refusal to see these obvious things is very telling.

Trump also continues to be in power due to the GOP doing the same things you are now. No republican thinks Trump should be held accountable, and the easiest response is to believe what Trump has done to be totally okay.
Horrific?

HOLD THE DRAMA SISTER!
 

hammies

Michael Peterson status
Apr 8, 2006
3,501
108
63
So, as I mentioned before, if Biden WASN'T running for prez, he would be fair game in the hunt for corruption with old Ukraine government. But, since he's running for office, he's off limits and has total immunity, like these foreign ambassadors have in the USA?
Article 1, Section 9 says the Prez basically cannot accept anything of any value from any foreign state. If a President asks a foreign state to engage in an investigation of said President's declared political rival, is that asking for a thing of value from a foreign state? A corollary question would be that if the subject of that investigation was NOT a political rival, would the President not be asking for a thing of value?
 

Surfdog

Duke status
Apr 22, 2001
16,018
104
63
Oceanside,CA
Hey dummy. Not sure why you're quoting Taylor's testimony, when it's Sondland that relayed the message that the military aid is tied to Ukraine's commitment to investigate Biden.
Then that's LONG after the original "favor" phone call, if that matters.

Ambassador Gordon Sondland never had any firsthand knowledge of any “quid pro quo” involving U.S. military aid for Ukraine in exchange for Ukraine conducting investigations, according to his recently released closed-door testimony as part of the impeachment inquiry.
When he was asked by the Republican counsel, “To the best of your knowledge, do you know about any preconditions on the aid?” he responded, “No.”

“There were a lot of rumors swirling around as to why the aid had been held up, including they wanted a review, they wanted Europe to do more. There were all kinds of rumors,” he added.

He said he called the president on September 9, 2019, to find out what he wanted from Ukraine.

“He said: ‘I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo. I want Zelensky to do the right thing.’ And I said: ‘What does that mean?’ And he said: ‘I want him to do what he ran on.’ And that was the end of the conversation.”

Two days later, on September 11, 2019, the aid — which had been temporarily frozen — was released to Ukraine, without the Ukrainians having to do anything.

Sondland also testified: “I recall hearing multiple reasons why the aid was being held from various people. I never heard that it was being held specifically to investigate the Bidens. I never heard the word ‘Biden’ mentioned with aid.”

He also acknowledged that the aid was released, and Trump had a phone call and a face-to-face meeting with Zelensky at the United Nations General Assembly in September 2019 — without anything in exchange from Ukraine.

Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-NY) asked Sondland during the testimony: “If I understand correctly, President Trump did in fact meet with President Zelensky at the U.N. General Assembly, correct?”

Sondland responded, “That’s correct.”

However, after Sondland’s testimony was released last week, Democrats seized on a portion in which Sondland said he told an aide to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on September 1, 2019, that the resumption of U.S. aid “would likely not occur until Ukraine provided the public anti-corruption statement that we had been discussing for many weeks.”

However — Sondland had also testified that he had only “presumed” the aid suspension had become linked to the proposed anti-corruption statement. His conversation with Zelensky’s aide also came before his direct call with the president.

Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC), who attended Sondland’s testimony, also highlighted that in a recent tweet.

“Folks, if someone tells you Gordon Sondland affirmed quid pro quo, you’re being lied to. He didn’t say this. He said he *did not know* what happened, but he began to *assume* aid was tied to an anti-corruption statement. President Trump corrected Sondland on this, shortly after,” Meadows tweeted.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So much more that the MSM is NOT telling their viewers in all these testimonies. There's plenty more where he Sondland basically say he never knew of any quid pro quo. Read Sondlands testimony for yourself....

https://www.npr.org/2019/11/05/776170895/read-the-deposition-by-gordon-sondland-u-s-ambassador-to-the-european-union
 
Last edited:

GromsDad

Duke status
Jan 21, 2014
22,994
422
83
West of the Atlantic. East of the ICW.
No Biden doesn't have immunity ding dong.

If Biden wasn't running, Trump would not care about corruption. Biden would not even be on his radar.

What conman cares about corruption?

If Biden did something against the law, he should go to prison with Trump and his minions who are already in jail.

Now let's hear you say that about Trump.
The simple fact that Biden's conduct was worthy of investigation completely absolves Trumby any way you slice it.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: FecalFace

utoma

Nep status
Apr 19, 2019
685
137
43
Then that's LONG after the original "favor" phone call, if that matters.
Hey Dummy.

I like how you ignore his revised testimony.


Please read number 5.

"After that large meeting, I now recall speaking individually with Mr. Yermak, where I said that resumption of U.S. aid would likely not occur until Ukraine provided the public anti-corruption statement that we had been discussing for many weeks."
 

utoma

Nep status
Apr 19, 2019
685
137
43

"Sondland said "I now do recall" a conversation in Poland where he told a Zelenskiy aide that resumption of military aid likely would not happen until Ukraine had provided a public anti-corruption statement. "


Shows the exact same transcript shown by Vox. It's telling how you try to discredit the source automatically, without checking for yourself. You are the epitome of deflection and ignorance.

Fox news does not provide the actual transcript, but only summarizes it. Suspicious as they put "I now do recall" in quotes to mislead the interpretation of Sondland's updated testimony, but don't actually give the source document. Failure of a news outlet if you don't provide the source document.
 

utoma

Nep status
Apr 19, 2019
685
137
43
The simple fact that Biden's conduct was worthy of investigation completely absolves Trumby any way you slice it.
The simple fact that Biden's conduct was not worthy of investigation completely condemns Trump in his attempt to ask a foreign government for political influence while withholding military aid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FecalFace

utoma

Nep status
Apr 19, 2019
685
137
43
This is the #1 tactic your side uses. Absolutely the #1 tactic any time guys like you, Fecal, Skully, hal, etc. use when you are confronted with information from anything other than the most left wing of sources. Suck it kook.
You link actual conspiracy websites like Brietbart. I've now given you foxnews and cnbc. I originally linked vox, because they put up an easy to read article to the source document.

Please try harder.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Ifallalot

utoma

Nep status
Apr 19, 2019
685
137
43
The simple fact that Biden's conduct was worthy of investigation completely absolves Trumby any way you slice it.
Yelling into the wind will not make this statement true.

Hunter Biden's story has been debunked multiple times.