Page 4 of 264 FirstFirst ... 234561454104 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 2636

Thread: Pelosi officially announces impeachment inquiry

  1. #31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Seran View Post
    Huge difference between a waffle-maker like Back and the Fox News regurgitating sheeple the rest of you are. It's /almost/ shocking the blindness to actual actions taken by a President that you are willing to overlook.
    I don’t much like Trump but I think he was onto something with Biden and Ukraine.

    From NYTimes article on the Biden/Ukraine connection:
    But new details about Hunter Biden’s involvement, and a decision this year by the current Ukrainian prosecutor general to reverse himself and reopen an investigation into Burisma, have pushed the issue back into the spotlight just as the senior Mr. Biden is beginning his 2020 presidential campaign.

    They show how Hunter Biden and his American business partners were part of a broad effort by Burisma to bring in well-connected Democrats during a period when the company was facing investigations backed not just by domestic Ukrainian forces but by officials in the Obama administration. Hunter Biden’s work for Burisma prompted concerns among State Department officials at the time that the connection could complicate Vice President Biden’s diplomacy in Ukraine, former officials said.

    ...

    And one of his most memorable performances came on a trip to Kiev in March 2016, when he threatened to withhold $1 billion in United States loan guarantees if Ukraine’s leaders did not dismiss the country’s top prosecutor, who had been accused of turning a blind eye to corruption in his own office and among the political elite.

    The pressure campaign worked. The prosecutor general, long a target of criticism from other Western nations and international lenders, was soon voted out by the Ukrainian Parliament.

    Among those who had a stake in the outcome was Hunter Biden, Mr. Biden’s younger son, who at the time was on the board of an energy company owned by a Ukrainian oligarch who had been in the sights of the fired prosecutor general.

  2. #32

    Default

    If everything being reported on now is true then it looks like this is all going to blow up in the Democrats' face within the week.

    Apparently the IG, the one everyone thought was such a big deal because he said the "whistleblower's" complaint was valid, has determined that the "whistleblower" has political bias against the president.

    Not only that but Trump will release the unredacted transcript of the phone call (but oh yeah, we have already determined he will fake that), the redacted complaint from the whistleblower, and is clearing the way for the whistleblower to speak with Congressional investigators.

    For someone engaging in a coverup Trump sure is going about it the wrong way.
    Last edited by Tgo01; 09-24-2019 at 11:20 PM.

  3. #33

    Default

    Yeah, he's not clearing the way for the whistle blower, the reporter required by law to report suspected crimes by the President. Unless you're meaning he wont' send his lawyers to fall in front of that train in an effort to slow it down.
    Last edited by Seran; 09-24-2019 at 11:54 PM.

  4. #34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Seran View Post
    Yeah, he's not clearing the way for the whistle blower, the reporter required by law to report suspected crimes by the President. Unless you're meaning he wont' send his lawyers to fall in front of that train in an effort to slow it down.
    "Required by law to report suspected crimes by the president."

    Where do you get your dumb shit from?

    And again this person is NOT a whistleblower. Trump is not part of the intelligence community, and even if he were, a whistleblower has to have direct knowledge of what the fuck they are talking about.

    You can't pass along second hand rumors in an effort to further your political agenda and then demand whistleblower protection.
    Last edited by Tgo01; 09-25-2019 at 12:09 AM.

  5. #35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tgo01 View Post
    "Required by law to report suspected crimes by the president."
    Executive Order 12333, signed by none other than Ronald Reagan requires the following;

    1.7Senior Officials of the Intelligence Community. The heads of departments and agencies with organizations in the Intelligence Community or the heads of such organizations, as appropriate, shall:

    (a) Report to the Attorney General possible violations of federal criminal laws by employees and of specified federal criminal laws by any other person as provided in procedures agreed upon by the Attorney General and the head of the department or agency concerned, in a manner consistent with the protection of intelligence sources and methods, as specified in those procedures;


    Following the law is furthering a political agenda? How close are you to joining FoxNews in labeling anyone going against the current administration as a traitor, regardless of lawfulness?

  6. #36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Seran View Post
    Executive Order 12333, signed by none other than Ronald Reagan requires the following;

    1.7Senior Officials of the Intelligence Community. The heads of departments and agencies with organizations in the Intelligence Community or the heads of such organizations, as appropriate, shall:

    (a) Report to the Attorney General possible violations of federal criminal laws by employees and of specified federal criminal laws by any other person as provided in procedures agreed upon by the Attorney General and the head of the department or agency concerned, in a manner consistent with the protection of intelligence sources and methods, as specified in those procedures;


    Following the law is furthering a political agenda? How close are you to joining FoxNews in labeling anyone going against the current administration as a traitor, regardless of lawfulness?
    Let me see if I understand your dumb train of thought.

    The person who actually heard the supposed illegal action made by Trump didn't feel it rose to the level of a crime, or just didn't bother to report it, but someone who heard this person say something thought it rose to the level of a crime and this doesn't scream political agenda to you?

    The IG is expected within the next few days to say the "whistleblower" has a political bias against Trump. If true are you going to slink back into the shadows until the next fake outrage the Democrats gin up, or are you going to then say Trump forced the guy to say that or some shit? Just curious how bad your TDS really is. You might be the next time4fun, here to save us from the mundane bullshit by providing us all with a common target to mock and laugh at. Our savior is here!

  7. #37

    Default

    It's eerie that knowing nothing of the person's political affiliation, activism or history that you assume there is some sort of bias.

    A crime is a crime, whether you have knowledge of it first person, second person or third person.

  8. #38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Seran View Post
    It's eerie that knowing nothing of the person's political affiliation, activism or history that you assume there is some sort of bias.

    A crime is a crime, whether you have knowledge of it first person, second person or third person.
    It's eerie that you "know" this is a crime based on next to zero information. The transcript hasn't even come out yet, the "whistleblower" hasn't even said what they know yet. But you know it's a crime already.

  9. #39

    Default

    Yup, that is exactly what Executive Order 12333 was put into place to address. Intelligence officials becoming aware of suspected crimes by the Executive. We'll see how it all plays out, but I suspect the Senate will decline to try the impeachment referral, but John Roberts will push it forward.

  10. #40

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Seran View Post
    Yup, that is exactly what Executive Order 12333 was put into place to address. Intelligence officials becoming aware of suspected crimes by the Executive. We'll see how it all plays out, but I suspect the Senate will decline to try the impeachment referral, but John Roberts will push it forward.
    A real impeachment inquiry hasn't even been passed yet and you already suspect the Senate won't try the impeachment that is nowhere close to even being voted on.

    I would say it will be fun watching you meltdown when nothing comes of this, but I think you're the type of person to just tuck his tail between his legs and run away when you are made to look the fool.
    Last edited by Tgo01; 09-25-2019 at 01:04 AM.

Similar Threads

  1. Biden Impeachment!
    By Shaps in forum Politics
    Replies: 81
    Last Post: 01-24-2021, 09:41 PM
  2. Impeachment Trial
    By Methais in forum Politics
    Replies: 166
    Last Post: 02-11-2020, 01:28 PM
  3. another stats inquiry
    By MadHatter in forum Empath
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 04-13-2017, 04:11 PM
  4. Replies: 27
    Last Post: 08-10-2007, 05:42 PM
  5. Impeachment
    By Back in forum Politics
    Replies: 87
    Last Post: 04-21-2006, 06:29 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •