woodguru

Wake up, it's not about being limited to the phone call, the ignorance of continuing a narrative like that's it is purely ridiculous.

It is about withholding aid, in order to understand where the line of how bad what he did was you need to know the details, which actually are coming out every day. So without keeping up with the details you are still back at a dialog where the phone call was not impeachable.

JediKnight

Try this familiar republican headline:

"F**E NEWS!" You can continue trying to spin that dribble anyway you want too -until the cows come home, but sadly, no, its not going to work. The president does not direct or request investigations into American citizens -(especially those who are his/her political opponents) because we have an AG -although he has been bought and sold by Trump - and we have various law enforcement agencies that do such investigations.

Further, a legally "perfect" call would not be stored on the secret Covert Ops server to hide it from the monitors. You guys have reached for every possible available straw conceivable to cover for Trump, but as I said, the time for Trump and his complicit republicans honoring themselves will soon be at its end. You may as well get ready for it buddy....its happening as we post.

JediKnight

Republican Talking Point # 1: LIE, DEFLECT, LIE, PROJECT, RINSE AND REPEAT!

woodguru

So then by that right there the past was not the issue...the reality was that the Ukraine had a new prosecutor who had been working with our embassy person Yovanovitch, and they had made tremendous progress installing honest people who were cleaning things up. Yovanovitch was not supporting Giuliani, Perry, and Sondland's ideas of replacing honest people with others who were not, which is why Giuliani wanted her gone. The trump administration was trying to dictate to the new president terms and contracts involving gas and oil policies and contracts. Giuliani posed far more problems with new corruption than Biden did with the past that was no longer occurring.

There was going to be no misappropriation of military funding, it was going towards weapons and arms to be used against Russia if they illegally attacked them...which is the only problem trump had with that funding.

woodguru

Just BTW, the huge difference is that it is done as a foreign policy within the official channels of the state department and intelligence, the policy of withholding the military aid was done illegally under the radar of official policies, as congress and the state department had authorized it for national security purposes.

woodguru

And how about blocking the Ukraine from getting high tech anti tank weapons that would be used against Russia. Trump did Putin a huge favor at the expense of our allies, the Ukraine

woodguru

This country was in far more stable shape when Trump took office than it is now

woodguru

Take it slower there skippy. The executive had no role in this except to facilitate it according to the wishes of Congress. Congress authorized the military support for the Ukraine. Trump tried to block it and say he would veto it, but the house and senate passed it with veto proof numbers and said they would do so if he tried to block it. So trump took the other route, which was to slow walk it and block funding from happening. Mulvaney apparently blocked funding on the grounds that "they", they being obviously trump because, the whole rest of the state department, intelligence, and the pentagon were aware of the dire need to help the Ukraine defend themselves against Russia.

So now the question becomes, who gave a damn about whether Putin would have a problem with the US giving the Ukraine military aid that would be used against them? That was the idea, it was for Putin to have a problem with it, and congress and the state department were okay with giving some butt hurt to Putin, Trump had a problem with doing something he wouldn't like.

Trump and Mulvaney acted against the interests of this country's national security interests, and it appears to be out of fear of or on behalf of Putin.

The deep state didn't cook this up, it's trump that abused the power of the office for his own reasons, wh**ever they were.

debeda

The t***h, as I perceive it from your posts on religion and politics, is that you are TRIPPIN big time

Navigator

You and Jediknight continue to get things backwards. Yes, congress approves funds but it is the sole province of the executive department how, when and with what method the funds are distributed. Yes, the State Department, Justice Department and Intelligence agencies investigate wrongdoing by Americans and foreigners in and out of the US. Where you are confused is that all these agencies, including all US ambassadors, work for the POTUS and ALL of their activities are directed by the POTUS or his appointees under the direction of the POTUS. To restate for your thick skulls, the President does not do the bidding of the State Department, US ambassadors, the FBI, the CIA, the interagency group or the Justice Department; they do his bidding and if they are pursuing agendas they know are not in conformance with what POTUS wants or failing to push the agenda they know the POTUS wants, wh**ever their justification, they are acting in a treasonous manner and the POTUS has the right, nay the responsibility, to hold them accountable by t***sferring, firing or prosecuting them.

Navigator

To keep beating a dead horse, the aid was never denied it was merely delayed by the POTUS who, and I repeat myself, has the full legal authority to direct the exact manner of and time schedule over which the aid is doled out as authorized by the constitution. BTW, saying the State Department authorized the aid is synonymous with saying POTUS authorized the aid since the State Department acts at the beck and call of the POTUS and for the third time, the POTUS has full legal and constitutional authority to direct the Departments of State and Defense to dispense the aid according to wh**ever method or schedule the POTUS desires.

Lt. Rob Polans ret.

I still didn't hear any quid pro quo whoever that guy is. If you're looking for someone who withheld aid go back a few years to the Obammie crime spree. And yes, it'swell documented in nsa.

Louie27 Loc: Peoria, AZ

I believe that any President of this country has the obligation to ask a alliance partner, to investigate , what they believe to have been, a crime committed in a foreign country by Americans, especially if it is to have a American Congress man trying to get dirt on the opposition candidate. Where in the transcript does it state, Trump held monies that were to be for Ukrainian protection. I only have seen that he had asked for a favor. No coercion of any kind. Just false speculation from none other than the far left. Where would it ever hurt our countries security. Yahoo is a real journalistic forum to see the t***h about any conservative.

JediKnight

Wood: ForeverTrumpers will never admit to Trump's criminal activity because they are incapable of comprehending t***h. Yes, they know that Trump is an unfit and corrupt liar, but they have bought into his bs because they so badly want to be 'superior' and in charge of everyone else, for starters. Any sane person can see that Trump is corrupt, and a seriously flawed person.

You will never get these types to even understand that "the president does NOT investigate foreign nations -even if he/she suspects that nation of corruption" - largely because we have an AG (although the current guy has been bought and sold by republicans), and numerous "intelligence agencies" who have the job of investigating corruption. These republicans will use ANY lie they can conceive in their continued pathetic scheme to support Trump. However, I've said it before, and its worth repeating: Trump, and his complicit republicans time of honoring themselves will soon be at its end - thank God!

padremike Loc: Phenix City, Al

Deb, The comments from these two are hilarious all the while patting one another on the butt, smiling in continuous agreement. The interest they've generated for rebuttal is zero because we recognize they are only repeaters of f**e news in which they are thoroughly engaged. I can't say they are kool Aid drinkers because my understanding is they've cut their liquor consumption in half - They've tossed out the chaser. Kool Aid as a chaser? it's as cheap as their comments!