Where TF is the Impeachment Inquiry Thread?

[twocoach]

LOL

So because Biden might be the Democratic nominee he can't be investigated for wrong doing because then it's ONLY for trumps personal gain. Got it.

Your post makes zero sense in relation to what I posted. You clearly dont understand the point. It has not been proven AT SLL that what Biden did was to insulate himself from his son's role with Burisma. The facts seem to to support that this alleged "imvestigation" into Burisma by this Ukrainian prosecutor wasn't actually active and happening.

And it hasn't been proven AT ALL that trump asking Ukraine to look into the Bidens was ONLY for trumps personal gain and had NOTHING to do with protecting the interests of the US.

Oh, my.

Have a good day and go Jayhawks.

[Deleted User 295]

LOL you're the best

[Deleted User 295]

Your post makes zero sense in relation to what I posted. You clearly dont understand the point. It has not been proven AT SLL that what Biden did was to insulate himself from his son's role with Burisma. The facts seem to to support that this alleged "imvestigation" into Burisma by this Ukrainian prosecutor wasn't actually active and happening.

And it hasn't been proven AT ALL that trump asking Ukraine to look into the Bidens was ONLY for trumps personal gain and had NOTHING to do with protecting the interests of the US.

Oh, my.

Have a good day and go Jayhawks.

I know you're the Nebraska knowitall, but if there were improper things going on between Ukraine and Joe Biden/Hunter Biden then investigating that is not solely for the benefit of trump. If a former US politician did something improper that's a valid reason for an inquiry...but you know that.

[seahawk]

We'll add this to the list of insults that seahawk can fling while telling everyone else what they can and cannot say. If youre gonna dish it, be able to take it.

Precisely why I keep her on IGNORE. This bored is an infinitely more bearable place when you aren’t subjected to that level of psychotic vitriol.

Absolutely not Psychotic Vitriol. "That’s really what it boiled down to: a fat, ugly, mean, obstreperous, diaper-wearing corrupt old lady..."

[Deleted User 62]

LOL

So because Biden might be the Democratic nominee he can't be investigated for wrong doing because then it's ONLY for trumps personal gain. Got it.

Your post makes zero sense in relation to what I posted. You clearly dont understand the point. It has not been proven AT SLL that what Biden did was to insulate himself from his son's role with Burisma. The facts seem to to support that this alleged "imvestigation" into Burisma by this Ukrainian prosecutor wasn't actually active and happening.

And it hasn't been proven AT ALL that trump asking Ukraine to look into the Bidens was ONLY for trumps personal gain and had NOTHING to do with protecting the interests of the US.

JFC

[Deleted User 295]

Your post makes zero sense in relation to what I posted. You clearly dont understand the point. It has not been proven AT SLL that what Biden did was to insulate himself from his son's role with Burisma. The facts seem to to support that this alleged "imvestigation" into Burisma by this Ukrainian prosecutor wasn't actually active and happening.

And it hasn't been proven AT ALL that trump asking Ukraine to look into the Bidens was ONLY for trumps personal gain and had NOTHING to do with protecting the interests of the US.

JFC

“Was he asking for an investigation of a political rival? Or was he asking for an investigation of possible corruption by someone who happens to be a political rival? There’s a big difference,” Kennedy said.

[Geezer]

LOL

So because Biden might be the Democratic nominee he can't be investigated for wrong doing because then it's ONLY for trumps personal gain. Got it.

Your post makes zero sense in relation to what I posted. You clearly dont understand the point. It has not been proven AT SLL that what Biden did was to insulate himself from his son's role with Burisma. The facts seem to to support that this alleged "imvestigation" into Burisma by this Ukrainian prosecutor wasn't actually active and happening.

And it hasn't been proven AT ALL that trump asking Ukraine to look into the Bidens was ONLY for trumps personal gain and had NOTHING to do with protecting the interests of the US.

How naive are you anyway?

[Shirley]

Charlie Kirk is at least as reliable as any of the tweets Feral posts from countless people.....and yet you've never complained about hers.

How convenient.

I invite you to post the evidence for your assertion. I mean it. Accuracy means everything to me, so either take back what you said, or back it up.

I believe it was only yesterday that I posted:

To your credit, not infrequently you confess that you're not very well informed and not very bright. Then, sadly, you login and go about proving it on a nearly daily basis.

And sure enough, in today latest installment of the apparently never-ending tale of just how unaware you are of what you don't know, you post a tweet by a rabid supporter of Trump, Charlie Kirk, (a well known purveyor of lies), that's specifically designed to deceive you and any other people too uninformed to know better. And then, to make it even worse, you get on here and will not let it go even tho twocoach and Geezer and Jeepin' tryed to tell you better...

So...You're obviously passionate about this subject, it's just that your passion is misdirected. But, if you want to know what actually happened, here's an article about it in USA Today, which as far as I know, is "reliable":

Biden, allies pushed out Ukrainian prosecutor because he didn't pursue corruption cases

A whistleblower complaint centering on President Donald Trump's phone call with the Ukrainian president has spurred a number of allegations and counterallegations as Republicans and Democrats jockey for position amid an impeachment inquiry.

At the heart of Congress' probe into the president's actions is his claim that former Vice President and 2020 Democratic frontrunner Joe Biden strong-armed the Ukrainian government to fire its top prosecutor in order to thwart an investigation into a company tied to his son, Hunter Biden.

But sources ranging from former Obama administration officials to an anti-corruption advocate in Ukraine say the official, Viktor Shokin, was ousted for the opposite reason Trump and his allies claim.

It wasn't because Shokin was investigating a natural gas company tied to Biden's son; it was because Shokin wasn't pursuing corruption among the country's politicians, according to a Ukrainian official and four former American officials who specialized in Ukraine and Europe.

Shokin's inaction prompted international calls for his ouster and ultimately resulted in his removal by Ukraine's parliament.

Without pressure from Joe Biden, European diplomats, the International Monetary Fund and other international organizations, Shokin would not have been fired, said Daria Kaleniuk, co-founder and executive director of the Anti Corruption Action Centre in Kiev.

[...]

[Deleted User 295]

Tldr (got any of that in meme form?)

...but I was truly unaware that "letting things go" was something that we do around here.

All the LOLs @ you lefties today. Tiger is on TV and in the hunt. Jayhawks coming up shortly. It's going to be a good day!

[Shirley]

Tldr (got any of that in meme form?)

...but I was truly unaware that "letting things go" was something that we do around here.

All the LOLs @ you lefties today. Tiger is on TV and in the hunt. Jayhawks coming up shortly. It's going to be a good day!

In other words, despite your outrage, you don't actually give a damn what really happened.

What a surprise.

[Deleted User 295]

Tldr (got any of that in meme form?)

...but I was truly unaware that "letting things go" was something that we do around here.

All the LOLs @ you lefties today. Tiger is on TV and in the hunt. Jayhawks coming up shortly. It's going to be a good day!

In other words, despite your outrage, you don't actually give a damn what really happened.

What a surprise.

[Deleted User 89]

like i said yesterday...dolt

[Deleted User 295]

Is that an actual word?

Thanks google!...what a weird way to call someone stupid. You're so intellectual for using fancy words to insult me! It makes me feel so bad about myself. Now my day is ruined.

[Deleted User 89]

Is that an actual word?

Thanks google!...what a weird way to call someone stupid. You're so intellectual for using fancy words to insult me! It makes me feel so bad about myself. Now my day is ruined.

while you’re googling, check out the definition of ignorant as well

[Deleted User 295]

Is that an actual word?

Thanks google!...what a weird way to call someone stupid. You're so intellectual for using fancy words to insult me! It makes me feel so bad about myself. Now my day is ruined.

while you’re googling, check out the definition of ignorant as well

Sick burn bruh!

[DCHawk1]

Oh.

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com ... 21701.html

Barely two weeks after Donald Trump took office, Eric Ciaramella – the CIA analyst whose name was recently linked in a tweet by the president and mentioned by lawmakers as the anonymous “whistleblower" who touched off Trump's impeachment – was overheard in the White House discussing with another staffer how to remove the newly elected president from office, according to former colleagues.

Sources told RealClearInvestigations the staffer with whom Ciaramella was speaking was Sean Misko. Both were Obama administration holdovers working in the Trump White House on foreign policy and national security issues. And both expressed anger over Trump’s new “America First” foreign policy, a sea change from President Obama’s approach to international affairs.

“Just days after he was sworn in they were already talking about trying to get rid of him,” said a White House colleague who overheard their conversation.

“They weren’t just bent on subverting his agenda,” the former official added. “They were plotting to actually have him removed from office.”

Misko left the White House last summer to join House impeachment manager Adam Schiff’s committee, where sources say he offered “guidance” to the whistleblower, who has been officially identified only as an intelligence officer in a complaint against Trump filed under whistleblower laws. Misko then helped run the impeachment inquiry based on that complaint as a top investigator for congressional Democrats.

[Deleted User 295]

Hmmm....

[Mjl]

Oh.

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com ... 21701.html

Barely two weeks after Donald Trump took office, Eric Ciaramella – the CIA analyst whose name was recently linked in a tweet by the president and mentioned by lawmakers as the anonymous “whistleblower" who touched off Trump's impeachment – was overheard in the White House discussing with another staffer how to remove the newly elected president from office, according to former colleagues.

Sources told RealClearInvestigations the staffer with whom Ciaramella was speaking was Sean Misko. Both were Obama administration holdovers working in the Trump White House on foreign policy and national security issues. And both expressed anger over Trump’s new “America First” foreign policy, a sea change from President Obama’s approach to international affairs.

“Just days after he was sworn in they were already talking about trying to get rid of him,” said a White House colleague who overheard their conversation.

“They weren’t just bent on subverting his agenda,” the former official added. “They were plotting to actually have him removed from office.”

Misko left the White House last summer to join House impeachment manager Adam Schiff’s committee, where sources say he offered “guidance” to the whistleblower, who has been officially identified only as an intelligence officer in a complaint against Trump filed under whistleblower laws. Misko then helped run the impeachment inquiry based on that complaint as a top investigator for congressional Democrats.

Even if this were true, does it matter?
You can't hold back appropriated funds solely to get a foreign power to help you personally/politically. How it was discovered is, for the sake of the impeachment itself, irrelevant.

[Shirley]

Assuming what DC is alleging about the whistleblower is true, and s/he is biased, how does that change the evidence compiled during the investigation that proves the crime?

Answer: It doesn't.

Here's a list I stole:

People who are not on trial in the Senate, whose alleged misbehaviors are not relevant to the question of whether Trump abused his office:

Hunter Biden
Joe Biden
Adam Schiff
The whistleblower
Alexander Vindman
Jimmy Hoffa

[DCHawk1]

Even if this were true, does it matter?
You can't hold back appropriated funds solely to get a foreign power to help you personally/politically. How it was discovered is, for the sake of the impeachment itself, irrelevant.

In terms of actual behavior? Nope.

In terms of public opinion? You bet.