Still no evidence of anything impeachable.... maybe the evidence is in the prize egg at the egg hunt.

[AU9377 4,967]

15 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

Here is the transcript:

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6429034-White-House-memo-on-Trump-call-with-Ukraine

What part of asking a foreign leader to investigate possible corruption is impeachable? 

I've stated previously I thought it inappropriate for Trump to point to the Biden's specifically. He should have suggested to root out corruption no matter how high up it goes, even in our own government. Zelensky would have gotten the point and likely there would have been nothing to criticize. Trump went about it crudely for sure. But it wasn't impeachable. 

That phone call was only one point in the timeline of demands Trump was making.  He had specifically instructed members of his administration to be even more direct and they were.  He also utilized Rudy Giuliani as a back channel to make the same demands.  None of that is based on assumptions.  Multiple government officials have testified under oath and their testimony was consistent.

https://www.businessinsider.com/giuliani-was-conduit-ukraine-demanded-investigations-kurt-volker-2019-11?op=1

The degree to which you want to whitewash the entire thing is astonishing, considering how much information exists proving what exactly took place.

https://time.com/5937491/rudy-giuliani-ukraine-trump-impeachment/

[AUFAN78 3,911]

45 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

Those were the findings and that also has nothing to do with his actions regarding Ukraine months after he was sworn in as President. 

Some of you act as though there was no reason to investigate Trump campaign ties to Russia.  Trump's campaign manager had been on the Russian payroll just a couple years prior, for crying out loud.  Thankfully, the investigation did not find any collusion between the two, but it did establish the existence of a Russian disinformation campaign. Mueller's team isn't the only investigative panel to reach that conclusion.

Below is the Republican led Senate Select Committee on Intelligence's Report concerning Russian interference in the 2016 election. The Kremlin funded Internet Research Agency is referred to in the report as the "IRA." Pretending that the concern about connections between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin were in some way unfounded is just nonsense.  Again, keep in mind, it wasn't Democrats that chose to move forward with Mueller being appointed.  Republicans started that process.

The Senate committee's findings were crystal clear.....

".........that the IRA sought to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election by harming Hillary Clinton's chances of success and supporting Donald Trump at the direction of the Kremlin."

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Report_Volume2.pdf

Can you imagine the yelling and screaming that House Republicans would be doing today if the same intelligence sources concluded the Kremlin was supporting Biden's campaign?  Step out of that swamp of hypocrisy long enough to consider what actually occurred.

 

I have no problem investigating Russian interference. This has been an ongoing task for decades. They aren't going to stop.

The intentional investigative leaks and media hyperbole were unnecessary. I mean, look how it's affected you.

Edited March 22 by AUFAN78

[AUFAN78 3,911]

23 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

That phone call was only one point in the timeline of demands Trump was making.  He had specifically instructed members of his administration to be even more direct and they were.  He also utilized Rudy Giuliani as a back channel to make the same demands.  None of that is based on assumptions.  Multiple government officials have testified under oath and their testimony was consistent.

https://www.businessinsider.com/giuliani-was-conduit-ukraine-demanded-investigations-kurt-volker-2019-11?op=1

The degree to which you want to whitewash the entire thing is astonishing, considering how much information exists proving what exactly took place.

https://time.com/5937491/rudy-giuliani-ukraine-trump-impeachment/

You guys brought up the phone call. I just detailed it wasn't impeachable. And I never stated Trump alone sought an investigation into possible corruption. It is widely known multiple people were doing so.

I'm not whitewashing anything. I am telling you trying to get to the bottom of foreign corruption isn't a crime much less impeachable. 

 

[AU9377 4,967]

6 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

I have no problem investigating Russian interference. This has been an ongoing task for decades. They aren't going to stop.

The intentional investigative leaks and media hyperbole were unnecessary. I mean, look how it's affected you.

LOL...  People just have such a tendency to slowly reconstruct the past in ways that fit a comfortable narrative for them in the present.  If someone wants to support Trump, they have every right to do so, but just admit that those things don't matter.  Instead, they paint him as some sort of victim and often pretend that none of those other things even happened. 

[AU9377 4,967]

6 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

You guys brought up the phone call. I just detailed it wasn't impeachable. And I never stated Trump alone sought an investigation into possible corruption. It is widely known multiple people were doing so.

I'm not whitewashing anything. I am telling you trying to get to the bottom of foreign corruption isn't a crime much less impeachable. 

 

So sending Giuliani and the ambassador to speak with Ukrainian officials in order to inform them that any statement on corruption needed to include an investigation of Biden before a White House visit would be granted and aid released was an investigation into corruption?   OK

Edited March 23 by AU9377

[AUFAN78 3,911]

38 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

LOL...  People just have such a tendency to slowly reconstruct the past in ways that fit a comfortable narrative for them in the present.  If someone wants to support Trump, they have every right to do so, but just admit that those things don't matter.  Instead, they paint him as some sort of victim and often pretend that none of those other things even happened. 

Sounds again like you're denying factual information. If you're trying to be clever it isn't working. I have called out Trump countless times and did not vote for him, but yes, support all presidents in general. I mean, I am an American. And no, I have no problem with a president seeking information on possible corruption. Who said it didn't happen? I provided the transcript. 

[AUFAN78 3,911]

44 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

So sending Giuliani and the ambassador to speak with Ukrainian officials in order to inform them that any statement on corruption needed to include an investigation of Biden before a White House visit would be granted and aid released was an investigation into corruption?   OK

I've already detailed more than just Trump was investigating possible corruption. I don't necessarily agree with how they went about it, but it wasn't impeachable. 

[aubiefifty 16,807]

14 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

I've already detailed more than just Trump was investigating possible corruption. I don't necessarily agree with how they went about it, but it wasn't impeachable. 

did you ride the short bus to school? just asking for a friend.

[homersapien 11,387]

23 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

Here is the transcript:

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6429034-White-House-memo-on-Trump-call-with-Ukraine

What part of asking a foreign leader to investigate possible corruption is impeachable? 

I've stated previously I thought it inappropriate for Trump to point to the Biden's specifically. He should have suggested to root out corruption no matter how high up it goes, even in our own government. Zelensky would have gotten the point and likely there would have been nothing to criticize. Trump went about it crudely for sure. But it wasn't impeachable. 

Note the highlighted parts of your own reference.

And keep in mind what happened a week before:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/trump-ordered-hold-on-military-aid-days-before-calling-ukrainian-president-officials-say/2019/09/23/df93a6ca-de38-11e9-8dc8-498eabc129a0_story.html

Trump ordered hold on military aid days before calling Ukrainian president, officials say

And then consider testimony from the diplomatic corps:

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry/u-s-diplomat-bill-taylor-who-called-trump-s-ukraine-n1069941

Top diplomat Bill Taylor says Ukraine aid was linked to Trump demands of Biden, 2016 probes

Taylor drew a "direct line" between Trump's demand that Ukraine investigate his political rivals and distribution of U.S. military aid, Democrats said.

 

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/diplomat-who-raised-concerns-about-withholding-ukraine-aid-set-to-testify

 

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/22/politics/bill-taylor-deposition-text-messages/index.html

 

Trump was leaning on Zelensky and Ukraine like a mafia mobster running a protection racket.

 

You are contorting yourself trying to deny it.

[homersapien 11,387]

On 3/22/2024 at 12:51 PM, AUFAN78 said:

And let me remind you:

 "the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities".

the investigation "does not conclude that the President committed a crime"

 

What Mueller did find:

The Special Counsel investigation uncovered extensive criminal activity

• The investigation produced 37 indictments; seven guilty pleas or convictions; and compelling evidence that the president obstructed justice on multiple occasions. Mueller also uncovered and referred 14 criminal matters to other components of the Department of Justice.
• Trump associates repeatedly lied to investigators about their contacts with Russians, and President Trump refused to answer questions about his efforts to impede federal proceedings and influence the testimony of witnesses.
• A statement signed by over 1,000 former federal prosecutors concluded that if any other American engaged in the same efforts to impede federal proceedings the way Trump did, they would likely be indicted for multiple charges of obstruction of justice.

Russia engaged in extensive attacks on the U.S. election system in 2016

• Russian interference in the 2016 election was “sweeping and systemic.”[1]
• Major attack avenues included a social media “information warfare” campaign that “favored” candidate Trump[2] and the hacking of Clinton campaign-related databases and release of stolen materials through Russian-created entities and Wikileaks.[3]
• Russia also targeted databases in many states related to administering elections gaining access to information for millions of registered voters.[4]

The investigation “identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump Campaign” and established that the Trump Campaign “showed interest in WikiLeaks's releases of documents and welcomed their potential to damage candidate Clinton” 

• In 2015 and 2016, Michael Cohen pursued a hotel/residence project in Moscow on behalf of Trump while he was campaigning for President.^[5] Then-candidate Trump personally signed a letter of intent.
• Senior members of the Trump campaign, including Paul Manafort, Donald Trump, Jr., and Jared Kushner took a June 9, 2016, meeting with Russian nationals at Trump Tower, New York, after outreach from an intermediary informed Trump, Jr., that the Russians had derogatory information on Clinton that was “part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.”^[6]
• Beginning in June 2016, a Trump associate “forecast to senior [Trump] Campaign officials that WikiLeaks would release information damaging to candidate Clinton.”[7] A section of the Report that remains heavily redacted suggests that Roger Stone was this associate and that he had significant contacts with the campaign about Wikileaks.[8]
• The Report described multiple occasions where Trump associates lied to investigators about Trump associate contacts with Russia. Trump associates George Papadopoulos, Rick Gates, Michael Flynn, and Michael Cohen all admitted that they made false statements to federal investigators or to Congress about their contacts. In addition, Roger Stone faces trial this fall for obstruction of justice, five counts of making false statements, and one count of witness tampering.
• The Report contains no evidence that any Trump campaign official reported their contacts with Russia or WikiLeaks to U.S. law enforcement authorities during the campaign or presidential transition, despite public reports on Russian hacking starting in June 2016 and candidate Trump’s August 2016 intelligence briefing warning him that Russia was seeking to interfere in the election.
• The Report raised questions about why Trump associates and then-candidate Trump repeatedly asserted Trump had no connections to Russia.[9]

Special Counsel Mueller declined to exonerate President Trump and instead detailed multiple episodes in which he engaged in obstructive conduct

• The Mueller Report states that if the Special Counsel’s Office felt they could clear the president of wrongdoing, they would have said so. Instead, the Report explicitly states that it “does not exonerate” the President[10] and explains that the Office of Special Counsel “accepted” the Department of Justice policy that a sitting President cannot be indicted.[11]
• The Mueller report details multiple episodes in which there is evidence that the President obstructed justice. The pattern of conduct and the manner in which the President sought to impede investigations—including through one-on-one meetings with senior officials—is damning to the President.
• Five episodes of obstructive conduct stand out as being particularly serious:
  • In June 2017 President Trump directed White House Counsel Don McGahn to order the firing of the Special Counsel after press reports that Mueller was investigating the President for obstruction of justice;[12] months later Trump asked McGahn to falsely refute press accounts reporting this directive and create a false paper record on this issue – all of which McGahn refused to do.[13]
  • After National Security Advisor Michael Flynn was fired in February 2017 for lying to FBI investigators about his contacts with Russian Ambassador Kislyak, Trump cleared his office for a one-on-one meeting with then-FBI Director James Comey and asked Comey to “let [Flynn] go;” he also asked then-Deputy National Security Advisor K.T. McFarland to draft an internal memo saying Trump did not direct Flynn to call Kislyak, which McFarland did not do because she did not know whether that was true.[14]
  • In July 2017, the President directed former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski to instruct the Attorney General to limit Mueller’s investigation, a step the Report asserted “was intended to prevent further investigative scrutiny of the President’s and his campaign’s conduct.”[15]
  • In 2017 and 2018, the President asked the Attorney General to “un-recuse” himself from the Mueller inquiry, actions from which a “reasonable inference” could be made that “the President believed that an unrecused Attorney General would play a protective role and could shield the President from the ongoing Russia Investigation.”[16]
  • The Report raises questions about whether the President, by and through his private attorneys, floated the possibility of pardons for the purpose of influencing the cooperation of Flynn, Manafort, and an unnamed person with law enforcement.[17]

Congress needs to continue investigating and assessing elements of the Mueller Report

• The redactions of the Mueller Report appear to conceal the extent to which the Trump campaign had advance knowledge of the release of hacked emails by WikiLeaks. For instance, redactions conceal content of discussions that the Report states occurred between Trump, Cohen, and Manafort in July 2016 shortly after Wikileaks released hacked emails;[18] the Report further notes, “Trump told Gates that more releases of damaging information would be coming,” but redacts the contextual information around that statement.[19]
• A second issue the Report does not examine is the fact that the President was involved in conduct that was the subject of a case the Special Counsel referred to the Southern District of New York – which the Report notes “ultimately led to the conviction of Cohen in the Southern District of New York for campaign-finance offenses related to payments he said he made at the direction of the President.”[20]
• The Report also redacts in entirety its discussion of 12 of the 14 matters Mueller referred to other law enforcement authorities.[21]
• Further, the Report details non-cooperation with the inquiry by the President, including refusing requests by the Special Counsel for an interview; providing written responses that the Office of the Special Counsel considered “incomplete” and “imprecise” and that involved the President stating on “more than 30 occasions that he ‘does not recall’ or ‘remember’ or ‘have an independent recollection.’”[22]

https://www.acslaw.org/projects/the-presidential-investigation-education-project/other-resources/key-findings-of-the-mueller-report/

 

 

 

[homersapien 11,387]

22 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

I have no problem investigating Russian interference. This has been an ongoing task for decades. They aren't going to stop.

The intentional investigative leaks and media hyperbole were unnecessary. I mean, look how it's affected you.

How many presidential candidates have we had that publicly solicited/welcomed Russian interference during those "decades"?

Another example of how Trump has lowered the standard of behavior and you're just fine with that.

Edited March 23 by homersapien

[AUFAN78 3,911]

59 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

did you ride the short bus to school? just asking for a friend.

You know, you don't have to like Trump much less vote for him, but that shouldn't prevent one from offering factual information. Well, not according to the TDS crowd. It's sad really.

[aubiefifty 16,807]

1 minute ago, AUFAN78 said:

You know, you don't have to like Trump much less vote for him, but that shouldn't prevent one from offering factual information. Well, not according to the TDS crowd. It's sad really.

Please do not hurt me................

[AUFAN78 3,911]

32 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Note the highlighted parts of your own reference.

And keep in mind what happened a week before:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/trump-ordered-hold-on-military-aid-days-before-calling-ukrainian-president-officials-say/2019/09/23/df93a6ca-de38-11e9-8dc8-498eabc129a0_story.html

Trump ordered hold on military aid days before calling Ukrainian president, officials say

And then consider testimony from the diplomatic corps:

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry/u-s-diplomat-bill-taylor-who-called-trump-s-ukraine-n1069941

Top diplomat Bill Taylor says Ukraine aid was linked to Trump demands of Biden, 2016 probes

Taylor drew a "direct line" between Trump's demand that Ukraine investigate his political rivals and distribution of U.S. military aid, Democrats said.

 

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/diplomat-who-raised-concerns-about-withholding-ukraine-aid-set-to-testify

 

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/22/politics/bill-taylor-deposition-text-messages/index.html

 

Trump was leaning on Zelensky and Ukraine like a mafia mobster running a protection racket.

 

You are contorting yourself trying to deny it.

I'm not denying anything. I posted the transcript. I'm simply stating that asking for a foreign leader to investigate corruption isn't impeachable. And at the end of the day, Zelensky got the aid and stated he felt no pressure. Case closed.

[AUFAN78 3,911]

31 minutes ago, homersapien said:

How many presidential candidates have we had that publicly solicited/welcomed Russian interference during those "decades"?

 "the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities".

31 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Another example of how Trump has lowered the standard of behavior and you're just fine with that.

If I was fine with it I'd vote for him and support his candidacy. 

[AUFAN78 3,911]

26 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

Please do not hurt me................

I wouldn't think of it. BTW, how's your recovery going?

[aubiefifty 16,807]

8 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

I wouldn't think of it. BTW, how's your recovery going?

it is slow but steADY. I GO April 1st toseeif i need chemo. what an odd day to have it land on...........

[homersapien 11,387]

15 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

 "the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities".

If I was fine with it I'd vote for him and support his candidacy. 

Not true.  Go back and re-read the list of Mueller's findings.

You are defending Trump while trying to avoid the responsibility for doing do.

[homersapien 11,387]

38 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

I'm not denying anything. I posted the transcript. I'm simply stating that asking for a foreign leader to investigate corruption isn't impeachable. And at the end of the day, Zelensky got the aid and stated he felt no pressure. Case closed.

Whereas, leaning on a foreign power - over whom you have leverage - for domestic political reasons most definitely is.

And I seriously doubt Zelensky got the aid because Trump wanted him to. Trump at that point did not possess absolute dictatorial power.  He plans to rectify that if he wins in '24. 

[AUFAN78 3,911]

11 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

it is slow but steADY. I GO April 1st toseeif i need chemo. what an odd day to have it land on...........

Stay strong brother. You got this!

[AUFAN78 3,911]

8 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Not true.  Go back and re-read the list of Mueller's findings.

You are defending Trump while trying to avoid the responsibility for doing do.

It's absolutely true. You have no say in my thoughts. 🤡

I'm not defending Trump. I am however presenting facts. That you can't handle the truth isn't my concern.

[homersapien 11,387]

2 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

It's absolutely true. You have no say in my thoughts. 🤡

I'm not defending Trump. I am however presenting facts. That you can't handle the truth isn't my concern.

No, you're cherry-picking factual minutiae - like whether or not Trump "ordered" or "offered" troops - while overlooking/ignoring other essential facts relating to the overall situation that more accurately portray the truth of the matter. 

It's weird. 

[AUFAN78 3,911]

Just now, homersapien said:

No, you're cherry-picking factual minutiae - like whether or not Trump "ordered" or "offered" troops - while overlooking/ignoring other essential facts relating to the overall situation that more accurately portray the truth of the matter. 

It's weird. 

That's not cherry-picking. The two terms have different meanings and are critical to the truth. What essential facts have I overlooked/ignored?

[I_M4_AU 7,857]

I bet this news will not be forthcoming at NPR anytime soon.

In a bombshell accusation, Joe Biden’s very own former stenographer unleashed a devastating critique of the president, alleging deep-seated corruption tied to a Ukrainian energy giant.

In a new publication, Mike McCormick, a former stenographer for Biden, presented a scathing indictment of the president’s involvement in criminal activities, specifically focusing on a purported kickback scheme with Ukrainian energy company Burisma. McCormick, who traveled globally with Biden, including trips to Ukraine, has released a book titled “The Case to Impeach and Imprison Joe Biden,” offering a comprehensive account to date of the allegations.

https://trendingpoliticsnews.com/new-bidens-own-stenographer-calls-for-his-imprisonment-mace/?utm_source=proude&utm_medium=twitter#google_vignette

Of course, this really isn’t *evidence*; its news because he wants to sell his book, just like Biden stole the classified documents so he could write a book and make money.

[AU9377 4,967]

40 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

I bet this news will not be forthcoming at NPR anytime soon.

In a bombshell accusation, Joe Biden’s very own former stenographer unleashed a devastating critique of the president, alleging deep-seated corruption tied to a Ukrainian energy giant.

In a new publication, Mike McCormick, a former stenographer for Biden, presented a scathing indictment of the president’s involvement in criminal activities, specifically focusing on a purported kickback scheme with Ukrainian energy company Burisma. McCormick, who traveled globally with Biden, including trips to Ukraine, has released a book titled “The Case to Impeach and Imprison Joe Biden,” offering a comprehensive account to date of the allegations.

https://trendingpoliticsnews.com/new-bidens-own-stenographer-calls-for-his-imprisonment-mace/?utm_source=proude&utm_medium=twitter#google_vignette

Of course, this really isn’t *evidence*; its news because he wants to sell his book, just like Biden stole the classified documents so he could write a book and make money.

Eagerly awaiting for just ONE of those "bombshells" to explode and not turn out to be a dud.