What's new

The official "let's impeach Trump" thread

I mean, she's clearly passionate about the issue, so of course she would welcome the attention.

I think it's pretty disgusting how many adults (who should know better) have attacked her. Saying she's a Nazi, or mentally ill. It's possibly to disagree with a child and not stoop so low.

As for her dramatics, well the cold hard facts haven't managed to make a difference in the world's response to this existential crisis, so maybe we need someone who is willing to make an emotional appeal.

Gretta is a project, no her own person in any sense. She is told what to say, her speeches are written for her. The boat she sailed wasn't hers, and there were probably some folks alongside helping her all the way.

It is adults who are using a youth in the first place. A young woman with a known problem that affects her cognition.

Despicable.
 
HIllary Clinton used this issue in 2016 against Biden on the 2016 Dem primary trail.....like she use the Birther issue against Obama on the campaign trail in 2008.

The denial schtick has been out there for a long time. Biden's claim that the issue is an old one that has been proven false has that basis.

But the fact is....... Joe is corrupt....... and his son is the bagman with the loot.

The money in the bags is the whole issue. Joe Biden is just so arrogant he believed he could brag about it with impunity, and no amount of "explaining" will work now.

Biden is cooked.

Fact is, this is a non issue. He's not going to be the candidate. There's a perfectly justified reason his son was getting money; he was employed. But it doesn't really matter, does it?
 
Gretta is a project, no her own person in any sense. She is told what to say, her speeches are written for her. The boat she sailed wasn't hers, and there were probably some folks alongside helping her all the way.

It is adults who are using a youth in the first place. A young woman with a known problem that affects her cognition.

Despicable.
 
I feel like at this point it's worth pointing out that the investigation into the Ukrainian company Joe's son was on the board of was dormant at the time the prosecutor was fired, and also that the prosecutor was fired because he was corrupt- allowing those he investigated to pay him off to avoid prosecution.

It's not like Joe Biden was on an island pushing for this, he was part of a multinational effort to oust this guy for his unwillingness to fight corruption, not the opposite as Trump and company have alleged.

I do agree that it bears the appearance of a conflict of interest, but there's been no evidence of any wrong doing on either of the Biden's parts.
It may not be wrong doing in the sense that it's illegal but political corruption takes many forms. Biden’s son sold himself for access, even if it was only the perception of access, something the Clinton’s turned into an art form over that last twenty years and created generational wealth in the process.
 
It may not be wrong doing in the sense that it's illegal but political corruption takes many forms. Biden’s son sold himself for access, even if it was only the perception of access, something the Clinton’s turned into an art form over that last twenty years and created generational wealth in the process.
I agree that Joe Biden ought to have not gotten involved in the process, even if only on account of optics. And I don't think children of powerful politicians ought to be profiting off of their parents position. This is part of why I'm not supporting Biden in the primary.
 
I think the public deserves answers and explanations regarding what Trump actually did in the Ukrainian situation. So far all we really have are allegations from a whistle blower who we have now learned was not even a party to the phone call in question.


So you would agree that Congress is entitled to, and needs to see, the report in question so that they can see the full contents of the allegations and evaluate their merits.

Congrats, you're with US.

I also think the public deserves answers and explanations for why Joe Biden's son was receiving large payments (transfers to his company totaled over $3 million in 18 months) from a Ukrainian Oil Company during the time that Joe Biden was taking the lead on US/Ukrainian policy. It's quite troubling that the prosecutor that Joe Biden admits leveraging the Ukrainian government into firing by threatening to withhold $1 billion in loan guarantees was, at the time, investigating the very company that was paying his son all of this money. Seems like a conflict of interest to say the least.

I'm going to go through this bit by bit, because everything you've heard is pure spin. Please remember, Ukraine/Russia is the part of the world I've been most interested in studying for a couple of years, and I put enough time into it that it's effectively a part time job.

Important background information:

Victor Yanukovych was the Russian backed president of Ukraine from 2010 to 2014. He's an important figure in the US/Ukrainian relationship for a couple reasons.

1. Paul Manafort worked on Yanukovich's political campaigns, funded largely with the help of Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska, including his 2010 Presidential campaign. He did so even though the US government opposed Yanukovich's candidacy - effectively working AGAINST stated US interests in the region. Manafort later was Trump's campaign manager during the critical primary and convention period. (Source: https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/28/politics/mueller-search-warrants-manafort/index.html). Manafort was ultimately convicted of crimes related to this work.

2. Yanukoych's work as President of Ukraine ultimately led to a revolution in the country in the 2014. I've posted pictures of the Maidan before where the revolution happened. The country largely revolted over Yanukovych corruptly turning his back on further integration with the West through a cooperation agreement with the European Union. Yanukovych did so because he was personally profiting by stronger relationships with Europe. He committed treason against his country as president by putting his own financial interests ahead of Ukraine's. Yanukovych has been in exile in Southern Russia for more than five years and was convicted, in absentia, of treason. (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Yanukovych )


These dates, and names are important because Hunter Biden joined the board of Burisma Holdings, a large oil and gas extraction company in Ukraine, approximately two months after the Euromaidan revolution. Further, Burisma was founded by Mykola Zlochevsky, who was a Yanukovich political ally, to the extent that he served as the minister of ecology and natural resources during the early portions of the Yanukovich administration. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mykola_Zlochevsky

The investigation into Burisma holdings was tied to Zlochevsky's position as the minister of ecology and natural resources. This is a position that he held from 2010 -2012. Zlochevksy later had a position on the national security council in Ukraine from 2012, until the government collapsed in February 2014. The allegation (probably true) was that Zlochevksy used his position in the government to grant his own companies, including Burisma, licenses that it would not have otherwise gotten. In effect, self-dealing. (Source: https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/trump-whistleblower-scandal-explained-from-ukraine.html) . No one has EVER alleged that any of those activities occurred after Hunter Biden was named to the board of Burisma - a few months after Zlochevsky and Yanukovich fled the country. As a result, it is completely and utterly incorrect to suggest that any prosecutor in Ukraine was ever looking into Hunter Biden personally. The conduct that Burisma was investigated for happened entirely before he was ever involved with the company.

The Prosecutor:

Viktor Shokin is the former general prosecutor of Ukraine, and was appointed in 2015 - some three years after the investigation into Zlovhevsky's activities had been initiated. After the 2014 revolution, the position of general prosecutor turned over several times. Shokin was the third general prosecutor appointed to the position in twelve months. Several allies of the Yanukovych administration remained in various governmental positions and were frustrating investigations into the previous administration by stonewalling and hiding information. Prosecutors had been sabotaging investigations into Zlochevsky's activities since at least 2014, more than a year before Shokin came into office. (Source (Russian language): https://gordonua.com/news/politics/...r_cju1d0zj90sut8gci7ucvnbxaeb9jqfeas8woba4f30 )

Shokin was prosecutor for barely a year and was INTENSELY unpopular in Ukraine, public protests were held demanding his resignation approximately six months before Joe Biden pushed for his firing. (Source: https://www.unian.info/society/1170...nce-demanding-shokins-resignation-photos.html). The irony here is that the complaint was that Shokin was not doing ENOUGH to prosecute old corruption cases. Shokin was not a anti corruption crusader who was looking into the wrong people. In fact, under Shokin's watch, the Ukrainian government agreed to unfreeze $23.5 million worth of property claimed by Zlochevsky. Shokin was a non-functioning officer in a country with deep seated corruption problems who was not actively prosecuting these cases.

There is also no indication that Shokin took any particular interest in the Burisma case until there was an opportunity for reprisal against Joe Biden. The best English language Kyiv newspaper was unable to find any public statements by Shokin about Burisma or Hunter Biden while in office. ( https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/trump-whistleblower-scandal-explained-from-ukraine.html ). As a result, there's literally no reason for anyone to believe that either Joe or Hunter Biden perceived Shokin as a personal threat. For there to be a conflict of interest, they would have to know that Shokin was actually potentially a detriment to their personal fortunes. There is no evidence that this was true.

Feel free to share with all your conservative friends. And I'm willing to answer follow up questions. Reading the GOP story about this whole thing is beyond frustrating if you follow the local news there.
 
Fact is, this is a non issue. He's not going to be the candidate. There's a perfectly justified reason his son was getting money; he was employed. But it doesn't really matter, does it?

It was not "real" employment. I think you missed the link I gave yesterday from the Washington Times in June 2014 where the hire of Hunter was discussed at that time. Ostensibly, he was hired as a lawyer with international connections..... connections which were actually his father's connections. The company owned assets in Crimea, and the ousted Ukranian Pres Yankovich, a Putin ally. Hunter Biden was hired to help stabilize the company in the political environment by invoking US favors. It was entirely US influence peddling.

Joe Biden put the pressure on the anti-Russian government that was fighting Russia.

We'll see if Trump was still putting US pressure on the Ukranians. I'm looking for SirKickyAss to have some more input here.
 
It was not "real" employment. I think you missed the link I gave yesterday from the Washington Times in June 2014 where the hire of Hunter was discussed at that time. Ostensibly, he was hired as a lawyer with international connections..... connections which were actually his father's connections. The company owned assets in Crimea, and the ousted Ukranian Pres Yankovich, a Putin ally. Hunter Biden was hired to help stabilize the company in the political environment by invoking US favors. It was entirely US influence peddling.

Joe Biden put the pressure on the anti-Russian government that was fighting Russia.

We'll see if Trump was still putting US pressure on the Ukranians. I'm looking for SirKickyAss to have some more input here.

I didn't say it wasn't fishy, I said there could be a very valid, honest reason for it. He is a private citizen.

More importantly, it doesn't matter. He's not going anywhere.
 
So you would agree that Congress is entitled to, and needs to see, the report in question so that they can see the full contents of the allegations and evaluate their merits.

Congrats, you're with US.



I'm going to go through this bit by bit, because everything you've heard is pure spin. Please remember, Ukraine/Russia is the part of the world I've been most interested in studying for a couple of years, and I put enough time into it that it's effectively a part time job.

Important background information:

Victor Yanukovych was the Russian backed president of Ukraine from 2010 to 2014. He's an important figure in the US/Ukrainian relationship for a couple reasons.

1. Paul Manafort worked on Yanukovich's political campaigns, funded largely with the help of Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska, including his 2010 Presidential campaign. He did so even though the US government opposed Yanukovich's candidacy - effectively working AGAINST stated US interests in the region. Manafort later was Trump's campaign manager during the critical primary and convention period. (Source: https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/28/politics/mueller-search-warrants-manafort/index.html). Manafort was ultimately convicted of crimes related to this work.

2. Yanukoych's work as President of Ukraine ultimately led to a revolution in the country in the 2014. I've posted pictures of the Maidan before where the revolution happened. The country largely revolted over Yanukovych corruptly turning his back on further integration with the West through a cooperation agreement with the European Union. Yanukovych did so because he was personally profiting by stronger relationships with Europe. He committed treason against his country as president by putting his own financial interests ahead of Ukraine's. Yanukovych has been in exile in Southern Russia for more than five years and was convicted, in absentia, of treason. (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Yanukovych )


These dates, and names are important because Hunter Biden joined the board of Burisma Holdings, a large oil and gas extraction company in Ukraine, approximately two months after the Euromaidan revolution. Further, Burisma was founded by Mykola Zlochevsky, who was a Yanukovich political ally, to the extent that he served as the minister of ecology and natural resources during the early portions of the Yanukovich administration. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mykola_Zlochevsky

The investigation into Burisma holdings was tied to Zlochevsky's position as the minister of ecology and natural resources. This is a position that he held from 2010 -2012. Zlochevksy later had a position on the national security council in Ukraine from 2012, until the government collapsed in February 2014. The allegation (probably true) was that Zlochevksy used his position in the government to grant his own companies, including Burisma, licenses that it would not have otherwise gotten. In effect, self-dealing. (Source: https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/trump-whistleblower-scandal-explained-from-ukraine.html) . No one has EVER alleged that any of those activities occurred after Hunter Biden was named to the board of Burisma - a few months after Zlochevsky and Yanukovich fled the country. As a result, it is completely and utterly incorrect to suggest that any prosecutor in Ukraine was ever looking into Hunter Biden personally. The conduct that Burisma was investigated for happened entirely before he was ever involved with the company.

The Prosecutor:

Viktor Shokin is the former general prosecutor of Ukraine, and was appointed in 2015 - some three years after the investigation into Zlovhevsky's activities had been initiated. After the 2014 revolution, the position of general prosecutor turned over several times. Shokin was the third general prosecutor appointed to the position in twelve months. Several allies of the Yanukovych administration remained in various governmental positions and were frustrating investigations into the previous administration by stonewalling and hiding information. Prosecutors had been sabotaging investigations into Zlochevsky's activities since at least 2014, more than a year before Shokin came into office. (Source (Russian language): https://gordonua.com/news/politics/...r_cju1d0zj90sut8gci7ucvnbxaeb9jqfeas8woba4f30 )

Shokin was prosecutor for barely a year and was INTENSELY unpopular in Ukraine, public protests were held demanding his resignation approximately six months before Joe Biden pushed for his firing. (Source: https://www.unian.info/society/1170...nce-demanding-shokins-resignation-photos.html). The irony here is that the complaint was that Shokin was not doing ENOUGH to prosecute old corruption cases. Shokin was not a anti corruption crusader who was looking into the wrong people. In fact, under Shokin's watch, the Ukrainian government agreed to unfreeze $23.5 million worth of property claimed by Zlochevsky. Shokin was a non-functioning officer in a country with deep seated corruption problems who was not actively prosecuting these cases.

There is also no indication that Shokin took any particular interest in the Burisma case until there was an opportunity for reprisal against Joe Biden. The best English language Kyiv newspaper was unable to find any public statements by Shokin about Burisma or Hunter Biden while in office. ( https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/trump-whistleblower-scandal-explained-from-ukraine.html ). As a result, there's literally no reason for anyone to believe that either Joe or Hunter Biden perceived Shokin as a personal threat. For there to be a conflict of interest, they would have to know that Shokin was actually potentially a detriment to their personal fortunes. There is no evidence that this was true.

Feel free to share with all your conservative friends. And I'm willing to answer follow up questions. Reading the GOP story about this whole thing is beyond frustrating if you follow the local news there.

Thank you for laying this out. I might have to copy this so I have it handy.
 
I didn't say it wasn't fishy, I said there could be a very valid, honest reason for it. He is a private citizen.

More importantly, it doesn't matter. He's not going anywhere.

It's not just "fishy" it is absolutely corrupt. I imagine we've been using our foreign aid dollars for extortion against political opponents worldwide for a damn long time, and every other outlay on foreign soil is just as "corrupt". Our outlays have always been to buy influence. Americans don't object if it's good for America as they see it, and it's been problematic to get a Press to take it up generally.

But more than that, this is personal profiteering off US taxpayer dollars, not just securing "American Interests".

This is something we need to stop. We need to prosecute cases where individuals hold the bag and collect on US influence.
 
It's not just "fishy" it is absolutely corrupt. I imagine we've been using our foreign aid dollars for extortion against political opponents worldwide for a damn long time, and every other outlay on foreign soil is just as "corrupt". Our outlays have always been to buy influence. Americans don't object if it's good for America as they see it, and it's been problematic to get a Press to take it up generally.

But more than that, this is personal profiteering off US taxpayer dollars, not just securing "American Interests".

This is something we need to stop. We need to prosecute cases where individuals hold the bag and collect on US influence.

Can you prove intent?
 
Can you prove intent?

Asking me for proof is ludicrous. Maybe if I was following the perp around dusting fingerprints and getting footprint casts every step of the way.... oh wait... with brainwave analyzer gizmo, an extremely advanced lie detector thing, and enough data-harvesting on his cell and PC and eye movements, etc etc etc.

But hey, have you heard of "common sense"?
 
Asking me for proof is ludicrous. Maybe if I was following the perp around dusting fingerprints and getting footprint casts every step of the way.... oh wait... with brainwave analyzer gizmo, an extremely advanced lie detector thing, and enough data-harvesting on his cell and PC and eye movements, etc etc etc.

But hey, have you heard of "common sense"?
Then why don't you go ahead and make a case that disputes what kickyass posted earlier?
 
Asking me for proof is ludicrous. Maybe if I was following the perp around dusting fingerprints and getting footprint casts every step of the way.... oh wait... with brainwave analyzer gizmo, an extremely advanced lie detector thing, and enough data-harvesting on his cell and PC and eye movements, etc etc etc.

But hey, have you heard of "common sense"?
One person's common sense is another's idiocy.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 
I really hope the phone call transcript isn’t the Barr memo 2.0. I can see trump releasing this thing tomorrow and defuse the momentum towards impeachment. The call transcript is likely to be not as damaging as the entire whistleblower complaint. Congress deserves to receive the entire whistleblower complaint. Not some lame *** call transcript. Trump is trying to save his own hide by throwing the call transcript and distract from the greater issue; the whistleblower complaint. Nixon to an extent tried this as well. Don’t fall for it
 
Top