[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

Facebook Tips - SeriousLee - Dec 16, 2019 - 1:35am
 
Baseball, anyone? - ScottFromWyoming - Dec 16, 2019 - 1:26am
 
Some servers in the pool are down? - philippe44 - Dec 15, 2019 - 11:26pm
 
Radio Paradise NFL Pick'em Group - islander - Dec 15, 2019 - 7:12pm
 
how do you feel right now? - GeneP59 - Dec 15, 2019 - 6:55pm
 
Adding new streams to TuneIn? - BillG - Dec 15, 2019 - 4:43pm
 
OUR CATS! - westslope - Dec 15, 2019 - 4:07pm
 
Gotta Get Your Drink On - Ohmsen - Dec 15, 2019 - 3:16pm
 
What are you listening to now? - Antigone - Dec 15, 2019 - 2:51pm
 
Religion - Ohmsen - Dec 15, 2019 - 1:51pm
 
YouTube: Music-Videos - Ohmsen - Dec 15, 2019 - 1:20pm
 
Sweden | Sverige - Ohmsen - Dec 15, 2019 - 11:02am
 
Surfing! - Ohmsen - Dec 15, 2019 - 10:52am
 
Apple Computer - Ohmsen - Dec 15, 2019 - 10:02am
 
NEED A COMPUTER GEEK! - Ohmsen - Dec 15, 2019 - 9:39am
 
Vinyl Only Spin List - SeriousLee - Dec 15, 2019 - 9:18am
 
Words that should be put on the substitutes bench for a year - Ohmsen - Dec 15, 2019 - 8:31am
 
RP on a loop via Alexa on Sonos - BillG - Dec 15, 2019 - 7:21am
 
What makes you smile? - triskele - Dec 15, 2019 - 6:50am
 
Today in History - Red_Dragon - Dec 15, 2019 - 6:10am
 
Economix - Lazy8 - Dec 14, 2019 - 10:27pm
 
Radio Paradise - ScottFromWyoming - Dec 14, 2019 - 9:00pm
 
TV shows you watch - jahgirl8 - Dec 14, 2019 - 8:49pm
 
Android bluetooth metadata - left_channel - Dec 14, 2019 - 3:05pm
 
Coffee - westslope - Dec 14, 2019 - 2:42pm
 
Rock Movies/Documentaries - jahgirl8 - Dec 14, 2019 - 12:18pm
 
260,000 Posts in one thread? - SeriousLee - Dec 14, 2019 - 12:18pm
 
Art Show - Proclivities - Dec 14, 2019 - 12:17pm
 
Just a TY from Copenhagen - BillG - Dec 14, 2019 - 12:11pm
 
Trump - westslope - Dec 14, 2019 - 11:32am
 
Impeachment Time: - rgio - Dec 14, 2019 - 8:27am
 
Yamaha Musiccast - elmbow - Dec 14, 2019 - 6:02am
 
Things You Thought Today - miamizsun - Dec 14, 2019 - 5:24am
 
Canada - westslope - Dec 13, 2019 - 6:21pm
 
Automotive Lust - Red_Dragon - Dec 13, 2019 - 3:26pm
 
Derplahoma Questions and Points of Interest - Red_Dragon - Dec 13, 2019 - 11:43am
 
Strips, cartoons, illustrations - R_P - Dec 13, 2019 - 10:04am
 
Food Texture Issues - miamizsun - Dec 13, 2019 - 9:33am
 
Florida - rgio - Dec 13, 2019 - 9:02am
 
RPeep News You Should Know - ScottFromWyoming - Dec 13, 2019 - 8:03am
 
Grammar Question - miamizsun - Dec 13, 2019 - 7:48am
 
Radio Paradise Comments - sunybuny - Dec 13, 2019 - 5:28am
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - gtufano - Dec 12, 2019 - 11:38pm
 
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum - VV - Dec 12, 2019 - 7:06pm
 
How Cold Is It? - miamizsun - Dec 12, 2019 - 2:37pm
 
Message To Lucky - Proclivities - Dec 12, 2019 - 1:40pm
 
Democratic Party - westslope - Dec 12, 2019 - 12:28pm
 
Things that piss me off - Ohmsen - Dec 12, 2019 - 11:27am
 
Music Videos - Red_Dragon - Dec 12, 2019 - 10:47am
 
Counting with Pictures - ScottN - Dec 12, 2019 - 9:39am
 
Nice set Bill.... - ScopPics - Dec 12, 2019 - 8:29am
 
Remembering the Good Old Days - Proclivities - Dec 12, 2019 - 7:54am
 
Name My Band - Coaxial - Dec 12, 2019 - 7:05am
 
Strange & Cool Music - Proclivities - Dec 12, 2019 - 6:45am
 
Lyrics that strike a chord today... - Red_Dragon - Dec 12, 2019 - 5:08am
 
Books read recently - Egctheow - Dec 12, 2019 - 3:26am
 
Bernie Sanders 2016? - #feelthebern - R_P - Dec 11, 2019 - 10:54pm
 
Finland - westslope - Dec 11, 2019 - 9:57pm
 
Republican Party - kurtster - Dec 11, 2019 - 9:23pm
 
Amazon Echo/Alexa stream not working - jarro - Dec 11, 2019 - 6:54pm
 
(Big) Media Watch - Red_Dragon - Dec 11, 2019 - 5:26pm
 
Annoying stuff. not things that piss you off, just annoyi... - Red_Dragon - Dec 11, 2019 - 3:47pm
 
Mixtape Culture Club - ColdMiser - Dec 11, 2019 - 1:19pm
 
FLAC Streaming - geeteaare - Dec 11, 2019 - 10:36am
 
What Puts You In the Christmas Mood? - buddy - Dec 11, 2019 - 9:59am
 
Environment - R_P - Dec 11, 2019 - 9:55am
 
Photos you haven't taken of other people... - Proclivities - Dec 11, 2019 - 8:58am
 
Health Care - R_P - Dec 10, 2019 - 4:16pm
 
RP forum post editing - westslope - Dec 10, 2019 - 1:53pm
 
Mars - Manbird - Dec 10, 2019 - 1:52pm
 
Afghanistan - westslope - Dec 10, 2019 - 1:48pm
 
Post your favorite 'You Tube' Videos Here - Manbird - Dec 10, 2019 - 1:29pm
 
Things for which you would sell ManBird's soul - Manbird - Dec 10, 2019 - 1:27pm
 
Critical Thought - miamizsun - Dec 10, 2019 - 8:34am
 
Evolution! - R_P - Dec 9, 2019 - 11:09pm
 
Index » Regional/Local » USA/Canada » Impeachment Time: Page: 1, 2, 3 ... 39, 40, 41  Next
Post to this Topic
rgio

rgio Avatar

Location: West Jersey
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 14, 2019 - 8:27am



 kurtster wrote:

...  I would agree with you, but only because I believe that the system is rotten to core with an insubordinate bureaucratic 4th branch of government that few will even acknowledge exists.  ...

 
The reason that our President is the beginning of the end.  Far from perfect, our system and infrastructures have generally been the best answer yet for large populations and their freedoms. 

When someone can look at the moon and say it's made of cheese, and then get 1/3rd to 1/2 of the people to aspire to be mice, we're nearing the end.
miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 14, 2019 - 5:26am

 islander wrote:
 Proclivities wrote:
 ScottFromWyoming wrote:

Jeez, I'd almost forgotten about that $h­Ï†head.
 

It's a joke, or he's trying to trigger the libs, they would never do something against the constitution (until...). 
 

twitter can be a great news/info aggregation feed or troll spring board
Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 13, 2019 - 12:22pm



 islander wrote:

 Proclivities wrote:
Jeez, I'd almost forgotten about that $h­Ï†head.
 
It's a joke, or he's trying to trigger the libs, they would never do something against the constitution (until...). 
 
I figure it was a joke on his part but it's annoying that we still have to hear about that imbecile; it's bad enough having to hear about Rick Perry, another dim-witted, shamelessly homophobic and bigoted, one-time Presidential candidate.  At least Santorum seems to know enough to keep a low profile anymore. 
islander

islander Avatar

Location: Seattle
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 13, 2019 - 12:08pm



 Proclivities wrote:


 ScottFromWyoming wrote:

 

Jeez, I'd almost forgotten about that $h­Ï†head.
 

It's a joke, or he's trying to trigger the libs, they would never do something against the constitution (until...). 
Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 13, 2019 - 11:32am



 ScottFromWyoming wrote:

 

Jeez, I'd almost forgotten about that $h­Ï†head.
Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar



Posted: Dec 13, 2019 - 10:36am



 ScottFromWyoming wrote:

 


ScottFromWyoming

ScottFromWyoming Avatar

Location: Powell
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 13, 2019 - 10:00am


Ohmsen

Ohmsen Avatar

Location: Valhalla Mists


Posted: Dec 12, 2019 - 10:35am


Hypocrisy all over it seems. 
miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 7, 2019 - 11:54am

 kcar wrote:
A former federal prosecutor, now a law professor, takes Turley's arguments apart like a cheap watch: 

The Republicans’ expert is wrong about bribery

Turley concluded his written testimony concerning bribery by saying, “As a criminal defense attorney, I would view such an allegation from a prosecutor to be dubious to the point of being meritless.” Funny, as a former federal prosecutor, that’s exactly how I feel about Turley’s bribery defense. This is a case I’d be very comfortable taking to a jury.

 

he's entitled to his opinion/interpretation

i don't know much about him but his name seemed sort of familiar

then i realized he was in a conversation with harvey silverglate (of aclu fame) and others sometime back

check it out when you can
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: drifting
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 6, 2019 - 7:56pm



 kcar wrote:


An aside: neither the Times' article nor Turley seems to address Mick Mulvaney (one of Turley's desired first-hand witnesses) and his comments during a press conference in which he openly admitted that there was a quid pro quo and told his audience to "get over it."

IIRC


neither the article nor Turley acknowledge that
another first-hand witness, Gordon Sondland, stated under oath there was a quid pro quo.





No you do not recall correctly. If you had listened to Part 2 of Sondland's testimony in the afternoon, he clearly stated that he only assumed there was a quid pro qou. He clearly stated that no one ever told him that there was a quid pro quo underway or being attempted. In his opening prepared statement he said that there was a quid pro quo, but as he admitted in the afternoon, that was only an assumption on his part and nothing more.







Another aspect of the POLITICAL REALITY is that an impeachment trial is not a criminal prosecution. Impeachment prosecutors don't have to prove beyond the shadow of a reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty. An impeachment trial is a mix of a legal action, based on the Constitution and supporting laws, and a test of popular opinion about the rightness of a president's conduct. If an impeachment inquiry or trial drags on too long, the will of voters and their representatives to engage in the impeachment process fades away —regardless of the strength of the case against the president. A complete set of evidence that included testimony of first-hand witnesses while desirable would take too long to obtain.




You are right in that an impeachment must have the support of the majority of the public to actually succeed.

However,

I think you underestimate the trial in the Senate.  The Chief Justice of SCOTUS presides.    This is where a political argument between the Legislative branch and the Executive branch runs into the 3rd branch of our government.  There are specific rules of order and for evidence that have yet to be determined.  The standards for evidence such as no hearsay allowed for starters.  That sure narrows things down a whole lot and eliminates most of the testimony recorded in the Intelligence Committee hearings.  Also we will likely hear from many more witnesses, some of whom where blocked from testifying by Schiff.

You have basically only heard one side of the story from one side so far.  A trial will allow for a legal and proper defense.

But no worries.  I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that your mind, and many others' are made up to Trump's guilt and necessity to remove him from office already.  Didn't Pelosi order Nadler to just go ahead and write up the articles of impeachment without any further hearings in his committee ?  There's an open predisposition and assumption of guilt if I have ever heard one.
 
Quite frankly, I don't know how anyone who has been closely following this story on any side of the aisle cannot see that this impeachment attempt openly began the afternoon of January 20, 2017.  So far it has been foiled 8 ways to Sunday.

You are aware that the DOJ IG's (that is Great Pumpkin #1 to you) report finally comes out Monday ?  How do you think that will impact the impeachment process ?  I know, not at all, because you really do believe that there has been no wrong doing in the process of trying to take down Trump and that none will be found.  And you know what ?  I would agree with you, but only because I believe that the system is rotten to core with an insubordinate bureaucratic 4th branch of government that few will even acknowledge exists.  Anyone remember that Alternate EPA group that went rogue and even had their own website and mission statement ?   Does anyone believe that this insubordinate behavior was limited only to the EPA ?  Sally Yates ?

Your commentary throughout has strongly stood up for the integrity of the system. 

Once again, no worries. 

Of the two of us,  only you  can be disappointed or surprised by what is to come.





hayduke2

hayduke2 Avatar

Location: Southampton, NY
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 6, 2019 - 1:41pm

A former Republican Congress member explains what happened to his party  
kcar

kcar Avatar



Posted: Dec 6, 2019 - 11:10am

A former federal prosecutor, now a law professor, takes Turley's arguments apart like a cheap watch: 


The Republicans’ expert is wrong about bribery


Turley concluded his written testimony concerning bribery by saying, “As a criminal defense attorney, I would view such an allegation from a prosecutor to be dubious to the point of being meritless.” Funny, as a former federal prosecutor, that’s exactly how I feel about Turley’s bribery defense. This is a case I’d be very comfortable taking to a jury.



kcar

kcar Avatar



Posted: Dec 6, 2019 - 10:36am



 miamizsun wrote:

here's turley's take...


 

My take on Jonathan Turley's primary concern—that the House impeachment inquiry is moving too fast and should start again to obtain the testimony of first-hand witnesses like Pompeo, Bolton and Mulvaney—is that Turley is willfully ignoring POLITICAL REALITY and the sufficiency of EVIDENCE already gathered.

There is enough EVIDENCE to prove to an informed, engaged and non-partisan audience that Trump committed at least one impeachable offense by pressuring a foreign government to actively help his re-election plans. The loosely defined nature of the term "high crimes and misdemeanors", I think, should also allow prosecutors to argue that Trump's desire to force Zelensky to lie in public increases the corrupt nature of Trump's plans and thus increases the need to remove Trump from office.

An aside: neither the Times' article nor Turley seems to address Mick Mulvaney (one of Turley's desired first-hand witnesses) and his comments during a press conference in which he openly admitted that there was a quid pro quo and told his audience to "get over it."

IIRC neither the article nor Turley acknowledge that another first-hand witness, Gordon Sondland, stated under oath there was a quid pro quo.


As for Turley ignoring POLITICAL REALITY—the excerpted piece below notes that the Trump administration could use appeals and litigation to delay enforcement of a subpoena until after the 2020 presidential election: 


Trump Blocked Key Impeachment Witnesses. Should Congress Wait?



The Trump legal team’s claim of absolute immunity for top presidential aides has been a losing one in court. A Federal District Court judge already rejected it in a 2008 case involving a congressional subpoena to Harriet Miers, President George W. Bush’s former White House counsel. Another trial judge rejected it again late last month, in a case centering on a subpoena to Donald F. McGahn II, Mr. Trump’s former White House counsel.


But the legal unraveling of Mr. Trump’s argument has been a slow process. The opening stage of the fight over the subpoena to Mr. McGahn consumed nearly a third of the year before the judge completed a 120-page ruling rejecting it. The Justice Department then immediately appealed. It can repeat that process before a three-judge panel, and then again before the full appeals court and then before the Supreme Court.

And even if the Supreme Court ultimately orders such an official to show upfor testimony, he could then refuse to discuss conversations with Mr. Trump on the ground that their contents are privileged. That would start a new cycle of litigation.

That means that for the witnesses Mr. Turley identified as having potentially material additional information, the Justice Department would very likely be able to keep the subpoena tied up in court until long after the 2020 election.



...



The question facing Congress, then, is whether the available record, while imperfect, is nevertheless sufficient to fairly deduce that Mr. Trump was the architect of a quid pro quo — or whether to wait for the distant prospect of someday obtaining more facts through court.






Another aspect of the POLITICAL REALITY is that an impeachment trial is not a criminal prosecution. Impeachment prosecutors don't have to prove beyond the shadow of a reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty. An impeachment trial is a mix of a legal action, based on the Constitution and supporting laws, and a test of popular opinion about the rightness of a president's conduct. If an impeachment inquiry or trial drags on too long, the will of voters and their representatives to engage in the impeachment process fades away —regardless of the strength of the case against the president. A complete set of evidence that included testimony of first-hand witnesses while desirable would take too long to obtain.


miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 6, 2019 - 5:11am

 miamizsun wrote:
usually when it comes to legal/constitutional matters i defer to three people

turley, dershowitz and napolitano

here's a pretty good conversation that touches on his thoughts
 
here's turley's take...


kcar

kcar Avatar



Posted: Dec 5, 2019 - 10:30pm



 kurtster wrote:
Just checking in to see if I have things straight.

1.
Pelosi prays for Trump everyday ... âˆš

2.
First Trump was colluding with Russia and now Trump is colluding with Ukraine who are enemies of each other ... âˆš

3.
If you are a friend or supporter of Trump, you are the enemy ...  √

4. Trump is guilty of obstructing Congress because Congress is too lazy to properly challenge his use of Executive Privilege in the Courts ... âˆš

5.
If Biden was not running for POTUS, none of this would be happening ... âˆš



Did I miss anything ?  Don't think so.  ba, bye ....
 

1. Nancy's a big enough person that she could do that. Trump wants God to pray to Trump. God farts politely in response.

2. More or less. But hey, congrats on catching up! Russia wants Ukraine back in its political and economic orbit. I gather that Russians view Ukraine as the traditional source of Russian culture. Ukrainians would rather be free.

3. Oh honey. Have you had too much whine?






5. No, no. Trump would have found another way to get impeached—and without even trying! That can happen when you're incredibly arrogant, stupid and corrupt.



The gif says it all, my friend.



Steely_D

Steely_D Avatar

Location: Biscayne Bay
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 5, 2019 - 10:17pm



 kurtster wrote:
Just checking in to see if I have things straight.

Pelosi prays for Trump everyday ... âˆš

First Trump was colluding with Russia and now Trump is colluding with Ukraine who are enemies of each other ... âˆš

If you are a friend or supporter of Trump, you are the enemy ...  √

Trump is guilty of obstructing Congress because Congress is too lazy to properly challenge his use of Executive Privilege in the Courts ... âˆš

If Biden was not running for POTUS, none of this would be happening ... âˆš



Did I miss anything ?  Don't think so.  ba, bye ....
 

You forgot Trump's promises to you/us:

He built a big beautiful wall, paid for by Mexico - wait, no he didn't

He repealed and replaced Obamacare - wait, no he didn't

He canceled all funding to sanctuary cities - wait, no he didn't

He established a commission on radical Islam - wait, no he didn't

He  ensured that criminal aliens convicted of illegal re-entry receive strong mandatory minimum sentences - wait, no he didn't

He ended birthright citizenship - wait, no he didn't

He got a constitutional amendment enacting term limits for Congress - wait, no he didn't

He imposed the death penalty for cop killers - wait, no he didn't

He appointed a special prosecutor for Hillary Clinton - wait, no he didn't

He eliminated Common Core - wait, no he didn't

He froze hiring of federal employees - wait, no he didn't


These all seem like pretty big unmet promises. And he still has support from the folks who elected him? Why?
How much more could he let you down and you think he's doing his job well?
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: drifting
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 5, 2019 - 10:05pm

Just checking in to see if I have things straight.

Pelosi prays for Trump everyday ... 

First Trump was colluding with Russia and now Trump is colluding with Ukraine who are enemies of each other ... 

If you are a friend or supporter of Trump, you are the enemy ... 

Trump is guilty of obstructing Congress because Congress is too lazy to properly challenge his use of Executive Privilege in the Courts ... 

If Biden was not running for POTUS, none of this would be happening ... 



Did I miss anything ?  Don't think so.  ba, bye ....
rgio

rgio Avatar

Location: West Jersey
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 3, 2019 - 6:56am



 kcar wrote:

Ukraine Knew of Aid Freeze in July, Says Ex-Top Official in Kyiv

 

This is one of those topics that you almost can't tell if those supporting the President have completely sold out (and why), or if they are just that inept?

You're the President of a country that needs friends, both financially and politically to keep Russia from attacking.  It would be foolish to say anything to upset the US President, as he could be there for another 5 years and you NEED his help!  The Republican "Ask the Ukrainians....no quid pro quo" is literally akin to a gunpoint confession.  

What's amazing is how the Ukrainians outlasted Trump, and STAYED OUT of the corruption by not going on TV and announcing an investigation they knew  was purely political.  The student has become the teacher.
kcar

kcar Avatar



Posted: Dec 3, 2019 - 2:41am


Officials in the Ukrainian government knew of the freeze of vital US military aid to Ukraine at the time of or before the July 25 phone call between Trump and Zelensky. Ukraine has tried to suppress publication of that knowledge in order to stay out of the American impeachment inquiry and to placate Trump.

Former deputy foreign minister Olena Zerkal resigned from her position to protest Ukraine's behind-the-scenes dealings with the US about the issues surrounding the US military aid. Ukraine President Zelensky has stated that he learned of the freeze of aid only in early September, a position that now seems like a lie.



Ukraine Knew of Aid Freeze in July, Says Ex-Top Official in Kyiv






Ukraine’s government learned of the military aid freeze during the Trump administration’s pressure campaign — and tried to keep that knowledge from going public, says an ex-deputy foreign minister.



KYIV, Ukraine — As deputy foreign minister, it was Olena Zerkal’s job to read incoming diplomatic cables from embassies around the world. One from Washington caught her eye back in July, she recalled: It said the Trump administration had frozen military aid for Ukraine.

“We had this information,” Ms. Zerkal said in an interview. “It was definitely mentioned there were some issues.”

...

Ms. Zerkal’s account is the first public acknowledgment by a Ukrainian official that senior figures in Kyiv knew about the aid freeze during the Trump administration’s pressure campaign — and that the Zelensky administration sought to keep that fact from surfacing to avoid getting drawn into the American impeachment debate.

She said her own government blocked a trip she had planned to Washington to meet members of Congress in October, worried she would discuss matters related to impeachment and drag its president into an inquiry he has been eager to avoid.

“They worried bout this,” she said of Mr. Zelensky’s advisers. “They said, ‘This is not the time for you to travel to D.C.’” The cancellation of her trip was confirmed by Congressional aides.

Mr. Zelensky, whose government is still dependent on the Trump administration for aid and diplomatic backing, has said he did not learn of the aid freeze until before a meeting with
Vice President Mike Pence on Sept. 1, though he has been vague about exactly when.

But according to testimony in the impeachment inquiry, Ukrainian diplomats in Washington knew there was a problem with the aid as early as July 25, the day Mr. Trump spoke with the Ukrainian president by phone and asked him to investigate his rivals.



...

In the interview, Ms. Zerkal, who said she resigned from her post last week to protest her government’s back channel diplomacy with both the Trump administration last summer and Russia this fall, provided an insider’s account of when senior officials in Kyiv learned of the freeze, and how they tried to keep the information from becoming public.

Her account is backed by Laura K. Cooper, the American deputy assistant secretary of defense for Russia, Ukraine and Eurasia, who said in Congressional testimony during the impeachment inquiry that Ukrainian diplomats knew about the aid freeze at least by July 25, when they began to question United States officials about it.

Ms. Zerkal says she became aware of the hold by July 30, a few days after Mr. Trump’s phone call with Mr. Zelensky.

...

Whether senior Ukrainian officials knew of the aid freeze before the July 25 phone call or not, the accounts of Ms. Zerkal and Ms. Cooper show that the Ukrainian government was aware of the hold on aid through several critical weeks in August as United States diplomats pressed Mr. Zelensky to make a public statement on the investigations.

Later, as the impeachment inquiry ramped up in the United States, Mr. Zelensky’s administration tried to squelch information that could embarrass or undercut Mr. Trump, Ms. Zerkal said.

...

Ms. Zerkal’s account demonstrates just how hard, bordering on impossible, it is for Mr. Zelensky to avoid taking sides in the impeachment inquiry. If he is misleading people about his knowledge of the aid freeze, then he is damaging the Democrats’ case against Mr. Trump. If he admits knowing, he damages Mr. Trump’s case.

The Zelensky administration, Ms. Zerkal said, is most concerned about placating Mr. Trump,
having decided that the impeachment inquiry will fail in the Senate and that Mr. Trump could be re-elected.

Indications had already been stacking up that Ukrainian officials knew well before the hold became public in August, first in a blog posted by the Atlantic Council on Aug. 14 and then in an article published by Politico on Aug. 28.

An associate of Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani, Lev Parnas, has said he warned of a possible aid freeze as early as May, though others who attended the same meeting have contested his account.

Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, the top Ukraine specialist in the National Security Council, testified that he learned of a hold in early July. More United States officials became aware during a conference call on July 18, and the Office of Management and Budget put the hold in writing on July 25, shortly after Mr. Trump’s call with Mr. Zelensky.











miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 29, 2019 - 6:14am

usually when it comes to legal/constitutional matters i defer to three people

turley, dershowitz and napolitano

here's a pretty good conversation that touches on his thoughts


Page: 1, 2, 3 ... 39, 40, 41  Next