Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

President Donald Trump - Formal Impeachment Inquiry Announced

Options
1…124125127129130…173

Comments

  • Options
    #3782
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Quin_Dub wrote: »
    Except he wasn't investigating them at the time, not did he have any plans to - That angle has been debunked repeatedly.



    Or if you prefer , this one from the Financial times
    Here we go again... dueling reports.
    “Mr. Shokin attempted to continue the investigations but on or around June or July of 2015, the U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey R. Pyatt told him that the investigation has to be handled with white gloves, which according to Mr. Shokin, that implied do nothing,” the notes from the interview stated. The notes also claimed Shokin was told Biden had held up U.S. aid to Ukraine over the investigation.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ukraine-prosecutor-biden-burisma-back-off-state-department-files

    Since there seems to be conflicting reports regarding a serious matter in which a vice president of the US committed a potential quid pro quo, wouldn’t you agree an investigation is warranted?

    Or since the reports you like to rely on clears a democrat of wrongdoing, it's settled silence?

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #3783
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,413 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Here we go again... dueling reports.



    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ukraine-prosecutor-biden-burisma-back-off-state-department-files

    Since there seems to be conflicting reports regarding a serious matter in which a vice president of the US committed a potential quid pro quo, wouldn’t you agree an investigation is warranted?

    Or since the reports you like to rely on clears a democrat of wrongdoing, it's settled silence?

    What does any of this have to do with trump using the presidential office for his personal benefit?


  • Options
    #3784
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    What does any of this have to do with trump using the presidential office for his personal benefit?
    It doesn't because he didn't use it for his personal benefit. Just because you keep saying it doesn't make it true.

    But since you continue to go down this path… Hillary Clinton and the DNC paid for the bogus dossier which became the basis to spy on the Trump campaign, I guess Hillary, Biden (as it seems he and Obama had knowledge of the spying as it was happening because it was their political appointees who orchestrated the lying to the FISA courts to get spy warrants), nor any other Democrat should be allowed to run for president, right?

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #3785
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,413 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    notobtuse wrote: »
    It doesn't because he didn't use it for his personal benefit. Just because you keep saying it doesn't make it true.

    It's not just me that keeps saying it.
    notobtuse wrote: »
    But since you continue to go down this path… Hillary Clinton and the DNC paid for the bogus dossier which became the basis to spy on the Trump campaign, I guess Hillary, Biden (as it seems he and Obama had knowledge of the spying as it was happening because it was their political appointees who orchestrated the lying to the FISA courts to get spy warrants), nor any other Democrat should be allowed to run for president, right?

    what does any of that have to do with trumps impeachment trial?


  • Options
    #3786
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    It's not just me that keeps saying it.



    what does any of that have to do with trumps impeachment trial?
    Obviously there exists one standard for Trump and completely different standards for democrats. TDS at its finest.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #3787
    Penn
    Registered Users Posts: 33,604 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    notobtuse wrote: »
    But since you continue to go down this path… Hillary Clinton and the DNC paid for the bogus dossier which became the basis to spy on the Trump campaign, I guess Hillary, Biden (as it seems he and Obama had knowledge of the spying as it was happening because it was their political appointees who orchestrated the lying to the FISA courts to get spy warrants), nor any other Democrat should be allowed to run for president, right?

    Didn't Trump/Barr's own DOJ do an investigation into that dossier etc and come up with diddly squat?


  • Options
    #3788
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 40,006 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    notobtuse wrote: »
    It doesn't because he didn't use it for his personal benefit.

    Ah he did lad.

    He didn't want an investigation, he wanted an announcement of an investigation.

    You'd want to be a complete and utter simpleton to believe Trump was trying to root out fraud.


  • Options
    #3789
    duploelabs
    Registered Users Posts: 11,278 ✭✭✭✭duploelabs


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Obviously there exists one standard for Trump and completely different standards for democrats. TDS at its finest.

    So if even standards is what you seek, then anyone on the Dems side should be investigated right? HC got a full acquittal, so quid pro quo and trump should be fully investigated, I'm sure he'll be acquitted if he released all documents and allowed all subpoenas


  • Options
    #3790
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Penn wrote: »
    Didn't Trump/Barr's own DOJ do an investigation into that dossier etc and come up with diddly squat?
    They're investigating it now. Obama's appointees started it with the FBI and DOJ before Trump got elected. Then they used the fake dossier paid by Hillary and the DNC to get a special investigation into Trump once he took office. Now that the investigation is over clearing Trump of all the lies told about him, a proper investigation into all the wrongdoings is finally taking place.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #3791
    Igotadose
    Registered Users Posts: 13,452 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Here we go again... dueling reports.



    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ukraine-prosecutor-biden-burisma-back-off-state-department-files

    Since there seems to be conflicting reports regarding a serious matter in which a vice president of the US committed a potential quid pro quo, wouldn’t you agree an investigation is warranted?

    Or since the reports you like to rely on clears a democrat of wrongdoing, it's settled silence?

    Since the latter report, was provided by Giuliani (or, was 'notes of a meeting with Mr. Giuliani) as soon as he testifies we'll get the truth, won't we? Rudy can clear this all up, under oath of course. That's evidence.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #3792
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,454 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    Penn wrote: »
    Didn't Trump/Barr's own DOJ do an investigation into that dossier etc and come up with diddly squat?

    Yes , Just like the Benghazi Investigation , the Voter Fraud Investigations and every other investigation into Republican fever dreams of the other side cheating.

    However ,when the GOP and it's operatives get investigated??

    Convictions and Jail terms aplenty.

    Interesting.....


  • Options
    #3793
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,413 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    notobtuse wrote: »
    They're investigating it now. Obama's appointees started it with the FBI and DOJ before Trump got elected. Then they used the fake dossier paid by Hillary and the DNC to get a special investigation into Trump once he took office. Now that the investigation is over clearing Trump of all the lies told about him, a proper investigation into all the wrongdoings is finally taking place.

    what does this have to do with his impeachment trial? there is no connection between any of that and the offence he is on trial for.


  • Options
    #3794
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,413 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Quin_Dub wrote: »
    Yes , Just like the Benghazi Investigation , the Voter Fraud Investigations and every other investigation into Republican fever dreams of the other side cheating.

    However ,when the GOP and it's operatives get investigated??

    Convictions and Jail terms aplenty.

    Interesting.....

    yeah its all a big conspiracy against the GOP :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #3795
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Penn wrote: »
    Didn't Trump/Barr's own DOJ do an investigation into that dossier etc and come up with diddly squat?

    The Durham investigation is ongoing.

    The Horowitz investigation (which was limited in scope because so much was outside his purview) indicated the FBI brass was not cleared of wrongdoing in Trump-Russia probe.

    I know people on the Left like to claim his investigation cleared Obama’s appointees in the FBI of misdeeds, but that is just plain wrong. Testifying before a Senate panel, Horowitz rebutted claims his report released the week before exonerated the FBI.

    https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/dec/18/michael-horowitz-says-he-did-not-reach-conclusion-/

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #3796
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Boggles wrote: »
    Ah he did lad.

    He didn't want an investigation, he wanted an announcement of an investigation.

    You'd want to be a complete and utter simpleton to believe Trump was trying to root out fraud.
    That's some fancy science fiction writing from the transcript of the call Trump released.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #3797
    Igotadose
    Registered Users Posts: 13,452 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    notobtuse wrote: »
    The Durham investigation is ongoing.

    The Horowitz investigation (which was limited in scope because so much was outside his purview) indicated the FBI brass was not cleared of wrongdoing in Trump-Russia probe.

    I know people on the Left like to claim his investigation cleared Obama’s appointees in the FBI of misdeeds, but that is just plain wrong. Testifying before a Senate panel, Horowitz rebutted claims his report released the week before exonerated the FBI.

    https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/dec/18/michael-horowitz-says-he-did-not-reach-conclusion-/

    No, he basically said the results were inconclusive. So, shall he do another investigation? Seems either the FBI really put one over on Horowitz (yet, they're routintely derided by the POTUS and his 'whip me Orange Man' followers' ), or as they say, there's no there, there.
    "Mr. Horowitz said he could not conclude that bias was a factor, but he also could not offer explanations for the FBI’s actions."


    Of course, this is happening under the Trump WH regime, which hasn't shown a whole lot of competency at complicated things.


  • Options
    #3798
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 40,006 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    notobtuse wrote: »
    That's some fancy science fiction writing from the transcript of the call Trump released.

    Who said anything about a call?
    Sondland: He had to announce the investigations, he didn’t have to actually do it as I understand it.


  • Options
    #3799
    duploelabs
    Registered Users Posts: 11,278 ✭✭✭✭duploelabs


    notobtuse wrote: »
    That's some fancy science fiction writing from the transcript of the call Trump released.

    Where's the recording of said call? Surely releasing it would exonerate T-dizzle right?


  • Options
    #3800
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 40,006 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Then they used the fake dossier paid by Hillary and the DNC to get a special investigation into Trump once he took office.

    Firstly the "Steele Dossier" is not fake, it's very much real with the some of the main claims having very much been corroborated.

    Secondly the FBI investigation had commenced months before the "Dossier" had been released.
    Crossfire Hurricane was the code name for the counterintelligence investigation undertaken by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in 2016 and 2017 into links between Trump associates and Russian officials and "whether individuals associated with the Donald J. Trump for President Campaign were coordinating, wittingly or unwittingly, with the Russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 U.S. presidential election."[1]

    The investigation was officially opened on July 31, 2016, initially due to information on Trump campaign member George Papadopoulos's early assertions of Russians having damaging material on Donald Trump's rival candidate Hillary Clinton.

    From late July to November 2016, the joint effort between the FBI, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and the National Security Agency (NSA) examined evidence of Russian meddling in the 2016 United States presidential election. The FBI's team enjoyed a large degree of autonomy within the broader interagency probe.

    The FBI's work was taken over on May 17, 2017, by the Special Counsel investigation of 2017–2019, which eventually resulted in the Mueller Report. Mueller concluded that Russian interference occurred in a "sweeping and systematic fashion" and that there were substantial links with the Trump campaign, but that the evidence available to investigators did not establish that the Trump campaign had "conspired or coordinated" with the Russian government.

    Trump and his allies repeatedly promoted conspiracy theories asserting that the Crossfire Hurricane investigation was opened on false pretenses for political purposes.[2] A subsequent inquiry by Justice Department Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz, released in redacted form in December 2019, did not find political bias in the FBI investigation, and determined that the investigation was properly predicated on a legal and factual basis. Attorney General Bill Barr and his designated investigator John Durham publicly stated their belief the evidence justified opening only a preliminary rather than a full investigation and indicated they would continue to investigate.[3] The Inspector General also determined that the FBI made 17 errors or omissions — some of them severe — in its FISA warrant applications to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA Court) for surveillance of Trump aide Carter Page.[2][4] Horowitz nevertheless attributed the warrant problems to "gross incompetence and negligence" rather than intentional malfeasance or political bias

    That particular CT has been busted wide open, by Trumps own justice department.


  • Options
    #3801
    Outlaw Pete
    Registered Users Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    Schiff played a clip of Trump and quoted him out of context. Effectively lying yet again. This guy.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #3802
    duploelabs
    Registered Users Posts: 11,278 ✭✭✭✭duploelabs


    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    Schiff played a clip of Trump and quoted him out of context. Effectively lying yet again. This guy.

    Lying? Projection again?? Try again bone spurs


  • Options
    #3803
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,524 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    notobtuse wrote: »
    That's some fancy science fiction writing from the Memorandum of the call Trump released.

    Fixed that fixed truth, It wasn't a transcript.


  • Options
    #3804
    Cody montana
    Registered Users Posts: 5,268 ✭✭✭Cody montana


    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    Schiff played a clip of Trump and quoted him out of context. Effectively lying yet again. This guy.

    What do you think of the thousands of lies from Trump?
    Seeing as you're so concerned about the truth.


  • Options
    #3805
    Outlaw Pete
    Registered Users Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    Loving this Jay Sekulow guy. Handing Schiff his arse already :P


  • Options
    #3806
    duploelabs
    Registered Users Posts: 11,278 ✭✭✭✭duploelabs


    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    Loving this Jay Sekulow guy. Handing Schiff his arse already :P

    No, he's not. Absolutely no rebuttal of the evidence presented to the house


  • Options
    #3807
    Outlaw Pete
    Registered Users Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    More lies from Schiff! Says Mulvaney said on live that Russia didn't try to intervene in the 2016 election, that it was Ukraine.

    When will they stop pushing this lie. Saying people from Ukraine tried to intervene in 2016 is NOT saying Russia did not hack the DNC and leak emails ffs.

    Asshats.


  • Options
    #3808
    Stateofyou
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,431 ✭✭✭Stateofyou


    Cody montana wrote: »
    What do you think of the thousands of lies from Trump?
    Seeing as you're so concerned about the truth.

    He's going to pretend he didn't see that question. Because he's a hypocrite and he knows it. Trump is now up to over 16,000 documented lies since 2016.


  • Options
    #3809
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 40,006 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    More lies from Schiff! Says Mulvaney said on live that Russia didn't try to intervene in the 2016 election, that it was Ukraine.

    When will they stop pushing this lie. Saying people from Ukraine tried to intervene in 2016 is NOT saying Russia did not hack the DNC and leak emails ffs.

    Asshats.

    We have no information that indicates that Ukraine interfered with the 2016 presidential election

    - FBI Director Christopher Wray

    Another conspiracy theory busted by Trumps own people.


  • Options
    #3810
    MeMen2_MoRi_
    Registered Users Posts: 1,982 ✭✭✭MeMen2_MoRi_


    Boggles wrote: »

    - FBI Director Christopher Wray

    Another conspiracy theory busted by Trumps own people.

    You're making the mistake of using FBI, CIA, NSA etc to go against the trump/GOP narrative, cause you know those organisations are part of the deepstate, when the opposite happens the intelligence they have is perfect, results in trump having to make split second decisions that will save US Embassies and US citizens being attacked..


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #3811
    Outlaw Pete
    Registered Users Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    More lies Schiff lies exposed:

    https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/21/schiff-parnas-trump-evidence-101832
    House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff appears to have mischaracterized a text message exchange between two players in the Ukraine saga, according to documents obtained by POLITICO — a possible error the GOP will likely criticize as another example of the Democrats’ rushed effort to impeach President Donald Trump.

    Hyde was on with Fredo last night and the chap is as mad as a box of frogs. Seemed drunk or high or both.


Advertisement