factnotfiction

So the trump and con line of a 'perfect call' and no quid pro quo, continues to evolve, and the latest line is it happened, it wasn't appropriate, but it is not impeachable.

After the public hearings start, the trump con lie is sure to change again.




https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-impeachment-mac-thornberry-abc-this-week-165743982.html

proud republican Loc: RED CALIFORNIA

So?? It was not perfect ,we know that BUT IT IS NOT IMPEACHABLE!!! So all your impeachment BS will kick you Butt at the end!!! Thanks to you,Rats .Trump will win his ree******n!!! MAGA !!KAG!!

padremike Loc: Phenix City, Al

debeda

Navigator

I disagree. It is perfectly appropriate to hold up aid until you verify a new government in a currently extraordinarily corrupt country is not going to misappropriate millions of American taxpayer dollars. It is also perfectly appropriate, and in the best interests of ALL Americans, to ask a country with whom you
have a legal treaty to investigate suspected wrong doing by a former vice president of the US and to further investigate Ukrainian involvement in the 2016 US p**********l e******n. Although it appears that Ukrainian officials did not realize there was a connection between these two events (therefore no quid pro quo existed) I believe it is perfectly appropriate to let a foreign government know that aid promised to them is contingent upon certain legal actions being taken on their part. Just a BTW, the US has made similar demands hundreds of times in the past and will continue to do so, perfectly legally.

Sew_What

I guess will start to unfold it for YOU, since you're struggling so hard with what is impeachable.

Just tune into C-Span.

JediKnight

One day all lying will cease....until then, it is good that we have many who do not sip the kool-aide, and know T***H when they hear and see it. You are correct on one thing though, the call was NOT perfect, but it is impeachable. Trump is unfit to lead. period.

debeda

JediKnight

I would really like to know what legitimate source you take your opinion from -it sounds like something you just made up. It is not the president's job to withhold Congressionally approved funds because the president wants to start a corrupt investigation against a political opponent. Nor is it the president's job to investigate corruption of a foreign country -that's why we have all of those intelligence agencies and the court system. By the way, you failed to mention just "what certain legal actions Ukraine was supposed to take" to get the money already approved for them by congress. I would say "nice try though" - but it wasn't.

debeda

Oh gosh you're on a tear today. My eyes are gonna roll around to the back if I keep reading your posts

Navigator

I would say open your eyes and look around at the great shape your country is in as a result of DJT, but it appears the Kool-Aide has blinded you.

JediKnight

Sometimes the t***h does in fact hurt.

JediKnight

DJT did not save the country from recession, he didn't even provide the "great new tax plan to benefit the middle class" -and last I heard, Mexico still ain't paying for the wall. So the credit you give Trump for the 'great shape' of the country actually belongs to others.

And no need trying to spin the "kool-aide" line back on me, everyone knows it is owned by republicans - which I am not of course. Nice try though.

Navigator

Let's take is slow for you. It ABSOLUTELY IS the job of the executive branch to effectuate the disbursement of congressionally approved funds, in fact, that is one of the constitutional roles of the executive branch. There was no "corrupt investigation of a political opponent" but legal investigations by agencies of the executive branch (presidency, justice department, state department) and official requests to the Ukraine for investigative assistance into possible criminal activity by a former vice president and criminal interference in the US 2016 P**********l e******n. As you state, investigation of a foreign country for interference is the role of the executive branch, members of which include the intelligence agencies, state department, presidency, FBI, etc.-all under the supervision and direction of the chief of the executive branch, i.e. the President of the US, as outlined in the constitution of the US. There were no "...legal actions Ukraine was supposed to take..." to get the US aid; the US aid was given to Ukraine in September after DJT was convinced the new Ukrainian government was a significant departure from the corruption as usual old Ukrainian government. BTW, where was your indignation about the executive department investigating the corruption of Russia the last 3 years? The Mueller investigation was an investigation under the US department of Justice and the US Department of Justice is under the direct control of, you guessed it, the executive department controlled by, you guessed it again, DJT. As Harry Truman often said, the buck stops here and where it stops in the investigation of the interference of a foreign government in the US e*******l process is at the door of the POTUS.

Navigator

He did, he did and they are. Now you can sleep better.