Inquiries and Impeachment of Trump

. Second Whistleblower With Direct Knowledge Of Ukraine Call Steps Forward, Lawyer Says

https://www.npr.org/2019/10/06/76767...orward-lawyer-

If you’re keeping score that 2 Whistleblowers from intelligence and 1 Whistleblower from the IRS.

Viva La Whistleblowers

. Second Whistleblower With Direct Knowledge Of Ukraine Call Steps Forward, Lawyer Says

https://www.npr.org/2019/10/06/76767...orward-lawyer-

If you’re keeping score that 2 Whistleblowers from intelligence and 1 Whistleblower from the IRS.

Viva La Whistleblowers Originally Posted by Jaxson66

well if Bobbo the Hutt Mueller had found any real evidence these whistleblowhards wouldn't be coming forward. he failed so Schitthead Schiff needed a plan B.

what you refuse to accept is that the mandate of a special prosecutor is clear .. indict or decline to indict. can even you claim Bobbo the Hutt Mueller referred any charges? name one indictment from his report.

Bobbo the Hutt Mueller's role was not to "leave it to Congress". that's not how the legal system in the US works for criminal cases and it's not how the role of a special prosecutor works.

when a grand jury declines to return an indictment .. it's over. same with Bobbo the Hutt Mueller. he declined to indict. if there was anything the Democrats could actually use in the report they would have so they needed a plan B.

the Democrats were ginning up possible reasons to impeach Trump before he was even sworn in. all of these efforts will fail. there is nothing impeachable about the call with the Ukraine president.

the Democrats would have been far better served by picking a better candidate that that sea hag Clinton.


BBAHHAHAAAAAAA

Listen up, you stupid trumpster,
The Mueller Report. Volume 11 thread is where your ignorant ass should be posting your stupid shit.

This thread is about the Ukraine extortion, keep up or stay out, Loser Originally Posted by Jaxson66

You'd be the dipshit of limited intellect with the reading and comprehension problem. No where in Mueller's fucking report is there any conclusion that Trump colluded with the Russians to support your asinine refrain.

another whistle blowhard?

another whistle blowhard? Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

more fake hope for the left. should we feel sorry for them? NOPE!


BAHHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAA

I'm not sure that's correct. Vitaly Kasko, who's kind of like Serpico, Daniel Ellsberg and Deep Throat rolled into one, said Shokin, the Ukrainian prosecutor, was slow walking the investigation into the company of which Hunter Biden was a director. What Biden did, in pushing for Shokin to get fired, was against the best interests of his son.

Kasko resigned from the Prosecutor's office because of Shokin's corruption and "total lawlessness." Originally Posted by Tiny

Now that is hilarious!

He wanted a better prosecutor to get his son?

Now that is hilarious!

He wanted a better prosecutor to get his son? Originally Posted by friendly fred

No, that’s not what I wrote. The old prosecutor, Shokin, refused to progress an investigation into Burisma Holdings or the oligarch who controlled it, Mykola Zlochevsky. Biden’s son was a director of Burisima. Shokin was replaced and the investigation resumed. Zlochevsky was initially cleared but then accused again in 2018 after secret recordings came to light. He’s currently on the run I think, maybe in Monaco.

Burisima Holdings was just one of many investigations that slowed to a crawl under Shokin. If you believe Hunter Biden or Burisima was up to no good in Ukraine, his father did him no favor by helping push Shokin out

I just read some State Department texts. The most problematic for Trump are between the charge d’affaires at the US Embassy in Ukraine, Bill Taylor, and the US Ambassador to the EU, Gordon Sondland. It’s obvious from the texts that Ukraine needed to announce an investigation into Burisima Holdings (company of which Hunter Biden was a director) in order to get a face to face meeting between Ukraine president Zelensky and Trump. Taylor expressed concern to Sondland, a Trump political appointee, about a link between US aid to Ukraine and an investigation into Biden. Sondland assured him that there absolutely was no link and told him to quit texting about it.

No, that’s not what I wrote. The old prosecutor, Shokin, refused to progress an investigation into Burisma Holdings or the oligarch who controlled it, Mykola Zlochevsky. Biden’s son was a director of Burisima. Shokin was replaced and the investigation resumed. Zlochevsky was initially cleared but then accused again in 2018 after secret recordings came to light. He’s currently on the run I think, maybe in Monaco.

Burisima Holdings was just one of many investigations that slowed to a crawl under Shokin. If you believe Hunter Biden or Burisima was up to no good in Ukraine, his father did him no favor by helping push Shokin out Originally Posted by Tiny

really? what's your source? MSDNC? ABDNC? CBDNC?



you might find this interesting reading ..



Viktor Shokin Affidavit Mentions Joe Biden, Dmytro Firtash




https://heavy.com/news/2019/09/vikto...fidavit-biden/


Viktor Shokin, the ousted Ukrainian prosecutor whose name has surfaced in the wake of President Donald Trump’s controversial call with the Ukrainian president, claimed in an affidavit that he was forced out of office because he was leading a “wide-ranging corruption probe” into a company on whose board of directors Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, sat.




here is his statement ...


https://www.scribd.com/document/4276...okin-Statement


you may find this passage very interesting ...

Bloomberg interviewed Kasko and published this in May:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-s-biden-claim

The New York Times also did some investigative reporting.

Shokin is corrupt and a liar. About your excerpt, Shokin was probably paid off by Dymytro Firtash (DF). Firtash is in Austria, fighting extradition to the USA, where he faces 50 years in prison and seizure of his assets. If he’s sent back to the Ukraine maybe he thinks he’ll get off. Firtash did Gazprom’s dirty work in Ukraine and profited mightily from it, when Russian proxies controlled the Ukrainian government. Giuliani and Trump likely don’t want Firtash to go to trial in the USA because he has links to Manafort. See Firtash’s entry in Wikipedia and this,

https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-pol...h-firtash.html
M

Bloomberg interviewed Kasko and published this in May:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-s-biden-claim

The New York Times also did some investigative reporting.

Shokin is corrupt and a liar. About your excerpt, Shokin was probably paid off by Dymytro Firtash (DF). Firtash is in Austria, fighting extradition to the USA, where he faces 50 years in prison and seizure of his assets. If he’s sent back to the Ukraine maybe he thinks he’ll get off. Firtash did Gazprom’s dirty work in Ukraine and profited mightily from it, when Russian proxies controlled the Ukrainian government. Giuliani and Trump likely don’t want Firtash to go to trial in the USA because he has links to Manafort. See Firtash’s entry in Wikipedia and this,

https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-pol...h-firtash.html
M Originally Posted by Tiny

i'm completely aware of the Bloomberg report. i'm also aware that other news outlets like the federalist and thehill report different than Bloomberg.

name me anyone in the Ukraine government that isn't considered corrupt? the real reason Trump held up the aid to Ukraine is to have the conversation with the incoming President, an outsider .. like Trump. what's improper about that? this is why the so-called case against Trump will fail completely. but since Mueller couldn't get the job done and Schitthead Schiff can't produce the "evidence" he's been screaming about for three years .. they needed a plan B because the clock is ticking till Nov 2020.

Rep. Al Green said it .. "If we don't impeach Trump he'll likely win again". now what is that???

and i'm sure an avid reader of this forum like yourself knows that the US happens to have a treaty with Ukraine to cooperate on criminal matters. especially corruption. was it an abuse of power for Trump to invoke a standing treaty? it is if you ask Nancy and Adam Schitthead.

Is there anyone in Ukraine who ISN'T corrupt and doesn't just say whatever they think the person talking to them wants to hear, especially if that person looks like someone who might have mucho dinero in his pocket?

All I see are blurry shady shadowy creepsters everywhere. They almost seem interchangeable. The whole thing is giving me a headache!

Maybe someone can explain it to me after everyone gets their narratives straight. Or never.

i'm completely aware of the Bloomberg report. i'm also aware that other news outlets like the federalist and thehill report different than Bloomberg.

name me anyone in the Ukraine government that isn't considered corrupt? the real reason Trump held up the aid to Ukraine is to have the conversation with the incoming President, an outsider .. like Trump. what's improper about that? this is why the so-called case against Trump will fail completely. but since Mueller couldn't get the job done and Schitthead Schiff can't produce the "evidence" he's been screaming about for three years .. they needed a plan B because the clock is ticking till Nov 2020.

Rep. Al Green said it .. "If we don't impeach Trump he'll likely win again". now what is that???

and i'm sure an avid reader of this forum like yourself knows that the US happens to have a treaty with Ukraine to cooperate on criminal matters. especially corruption. was it an abuse of power for Trump to invoke a standing treaty? it is if you ask Nancy and Adam Schitthead. Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

you know they are trying to sling much mud as possible to so it sticks to trump. there is precedent for that.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics...t-edmund-ross/

Think Andrew Johnson not Nixon. there is a lot of similarity between the A. Johnson administration and Trump administration. both faced hostile congress. both found the presidents actions or non-actions objectionable.

now there is a difference in the how the politics ran between those 2 eras. Johnson didn't have any support in both houses. Trump on the other hand has the support of the senate.

the precedent... after his "acquittal" by the senate, Johnson was damaged goods after a fashion. He ran for a 2nd presidential term as a democrat. Johnson was met by a democrat challenger from New York by the name of Seymore. Johnson lost the primary by 1 vote.

I think this is where Pelosi & her silly merry go around fools are going to.

you know they are trying to sling much mud as possible to so it sticks to trump. there is precedent for that.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics...t-edmund-ross/

Think Andrew Johnson not Nixon. there is a lot of similarity between the A. Johnson administration and Trump administration. both faced hostile congress. both found the presidents actions or non-actions objectionable.

now there is a difference in the how the politics ran between those 2 eras. Johnson didn't have any support in both houses. Trump on the other hand has the support of the senate.

the precedent... after his "acquittal" by the senate, Johnson was damaged goods after a fashion. He ran for a 2nd presidential term as a democrat. Johnson was met by a democrat challenger from New York by the name of Seymore. Johnson lost the primary by 1 vote.

I think this is where Pelosi & her silly merry go around fools are going to. Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

of course it's all about trying to influence as many independent/undecided voters against Trump as possible to hamper his chances to get re-elected. Al "The Werewolf" Green said so!
problem is .. today unlike 1869 with Johnson there is no chance whatsoever Trump won't be the the RNC nominee. idiots like Weld have absolutely no chance to unseat him as the 2020 candidate. So they will have to defeat Trump the old-fashioned way .. via the election. if you look at the comments on Yahoo .. and notice many of the uber liberal sites like HuffPost and VOX do not allow comments .. this impeachment over Ukraine is already backfiring. many commenters who may not be Trump supporters are saying they don't get the issue. they don't see anything improper and certainly not impeachable by what Trump said to the Ukraine president. of course the uber leftist Trump haters are screaming like loons, but they do that anyway and they wouldn't vote for Trump if you put a gun their heads. These are the same libtard jackasses that fawned over Clinton and then cried like bitches when she lost.


i think many independent voters are not buying this bullshit and when it comes down to it will not vote for a retard like Warren or Sanders. Even Biden with his gaffe reel idiot brain if he is the nominee and i doubt it .. will say so much stupid shit he'll ruin his chances. more bullshit like "poor kids are just as smart as white kids" and " truth over facts" crap. even Chung Tran knows Trump will wipe the floor with Biden in a debate. I actually think Warren will do worse than Biden. Not because she's a dolt brained idiot like Biden but because she's a firebrand crusader who thinks she can "stand up" to Trump. Trump will make one of his famous flippant comments and Warren will lose it. And i mean LOSE IT. MELTDOWN. she'll start ranting like an escapee from a mental institution. Game Over.


there are typically three camps in a presidential election. firm Democrats, firm Republicans and independents. nothing this impeachment crap can do will change the hardcore on the left or right. they vote by party. here, there will be another group and i'll call then disinterested voters. both parties have them, voters that would vote Democrat or Republican but don't vote at all. Trump has already pulled a lot of "lazy" Republicans out to vote in 2016 it's one of the reasons he won. He'll do it again and in even greater numbers directly due to this sham impeachment. and the press with their constant demonizing of all things Republican and conservative will help Trump in that regard, not quite realizing it of course. and then there are the independents and moderate Democrats. Once the Democrats nominate Free Shit Fauxahontous she will lose moderate Democrats in droves and turn off independents. she will also turn off "liberal" Republicans and this is clearly a recipe for disaster for the Democrats in 2020. and not just for President, the course the Democrats are going could easily cause a backlash similar to that Muslim asshole traitor Obama. they could lose seats across the board, hand the House right back to the Republicans, give them a near veto proof Republican majority in the Senate and swing dozens of State house/senate races Republican. Obama showed it can happen .. because it did happen (here's poking a stick in yer eye Little Munster) and the Democrats are putting themselves into a situation where recent history will repeat itself.


BAHHHAHAAAAAAA