There Was No Quid Pro Quo...It's Now Bribery As Defined By Sondland: It's just as well, the right was having a tough time defining quid pro quo, they were all over the map on whether...

woodguru

It's just as well, the right was having a tough time defining quid pro quo, they were all over the map on whether it's even acceptable. Okay, this looks more like bribery, and bribery is an impeachable offense by definition.

Dig up and read the transcripts of Sondland's corrections to his perjury.

karpenter Loc: Headin' Fer Da Hills !!

Yawn....

Was He Lying Then
Or Is He Lying Now
Doesn't Really Matter Either Way
Does It ??

youngwilliam Loc: Deep in the heart

woodguru wrote:

It's just as well, the right was having a tough time defining quid pro quo, they were all over the map on whether it's even acceptable. Okay, this looks more like bribery, and bribery is an impeachable offense by definition.

Dig up and read the transcripts of Sondland's corrections to his perjury.

Which perjury, before or after. Like Debeda said, "does it matter".

teabag09

woodguru wrote:

It's just as well, the right was having a tough time defining quid pro quo, they were all over the map on whether it's even acceptable. Okay, this looks more like bribery, and bribery is an impeachable offense by definition.

Dig up and read the transcripts of Sondland's corrections to his perjury.

Sorry sawdust, you're just blowing in the wind. Mike

karpenter Loc: Headin' Fer Da Hills !!

Speaking Of Quid Pro Quo
Did Someone Suborn His Perjury ??

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

woodguru wrote:

It's just as well, the right was having a tough time defining quid pro quo, they were all over the map on whether it's even acceptable. Okay, this looks more like bribery, and bribery is an impeachable offense by definition.

Dig up and read the transcripts of Sondland's corrections to his perjury.

Why don't you copy and paste the pertinant parts for us, as if you have read them all! LOLOL!

steve66613

woodguru wrote:

It's just as well, the right was having a tough time defining quid pro quo, they were all over the map on whether it's even acceptable. Okay, this looks more like bribery, and bribery is an impeachable offense by definition.

Dig up and read the transcripts of Sondland's corrections to his perjury.

You’re worried about who is lying while whiffin’ Joe, sniffin’ H****r and Yovanovich are up to their necks in corruption(?)

Wood, you’ve stepped in “it” again!

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

steve66613 wrote:

You’re worried about who is lying while whiffin’ Joe, sniffin’ H****r and Yovanovich are up to their necks in corruption(?)

Wood, you’ve stepped in it again!

Woody can make it up like Schiff makes it up.

PeterS

nwtk2007 wrote:

Why don't you copy and paste the pertinant parts for us, as if you have read them all! LOLOL!

Ive tried that before and it doesn't do any good. Unless it's what you guys what to hear you act like there is nothing on the page...

woodguru

steve66613 wrote:

You’re worried about who is lying while whiffin’ Joe, sniffin’ H****r and Yovanovich are up to their necks in corruption(?)

Wood, you’ve stepped in “it” again!

Yovanovitch got dumped by Giuliani because she wouldn't play with what he wanted, she registered complaints against Giuliani and Sondland not working within official channels. If they had legitimate state department business, which they did not, they wouldn't have objected to Yovanovitch.

woodguru

karpenter wrote:

Yawn....

Was He Lying Then
Or Is He Lying Now
Doesn't Really Matter Either Way
Does It ??

Nice try, it does, he modified in the way that his first lies that covered for trump were corrected so that he couldn't be held liable for perjury.

steve66613

woodguru wrote:

Yovanovitch got dumped by Giuliani because she wouldn't play with what he wanted, she registered complaints against Giuliani and Sondland not working within official channels. If they had legitimate state department business, which they did not, they wouldn't have objected to Yovanovitch.

That’s right.....Yovanovitch would squawk like a chicken on the chopping block.....she’s “dirty” as hell....even if she only knows what the Biden crime cabal is up to!

C’mon Wood.....tell us how righteous Gropin’ Joe was when he was on the tube performing quid pro quo......

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

PeterS wrote:

Ive tried that before and it doesn't do any good. Unless it's what you guys what to hear you act like there is nothing on the page...

The point being that we don't believe you unless you post it. We can then also see what the context is.

BigMike Loc: yerington nv

woodguru wrote:

Nice try, it does, he modified in the way that his first lies that covered for trump were corrected so that he couldn't be held liable for perjury.

Your guys are spinning their wheels noisily. You'll see.

JW

woodguru wrote:

It's just as well, the right was having a tough time defining quid pro quo, they were all over the map on whether it's even acceptable. Okay, this looks more like bribery, and bribery is an impeachable offense by definition.

Dig up and read the transcripts of Sondland's corrections to his perjury.

Have you ever been told, or told your child, if you don't clean your room you won't get your allowance? That is essentially what Sondland changed his testimony to say.

"After a 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," Sondland said, referring to the aide, Andriy Yermak.

Trump was saying if you don't clean up your corruption you won't get our money. How is that wrong in any way, shape or form? Would you prefer that we just send planeloads of taxpayer funds to corrupt countries?