List of Trump's crimes?

[Mountain Man]

By this you mean we have no-one testifying that Trump told them directly he would not release the aid until they committed to the investigations - which is not something Trump is likely to have done regarding any of his 'questionable' requests. And yet we have a large amount of testimony that was what was understood by everyone around Trump. Sondland, Taylor, Volker, etc. But we do have testimony of statements from him that indicate undue concern over Zelensky being willing to investigate Biden and Burisma as part of the 'favor'. And - in fact - we have Mulveny, in a press conference, stating that the aid was in the fact tied to the investigations. So you have effectively played calvinball here by defining the only acceptable evidence Trump was holding the aid for the investigations as whatever particular sort of evidence might exist for that which we don't, at the current time, have. To say there is 'no evidence' then is simply false. There just isn't the specific evidence you require to be convinced.



No - we know for a fact they did know about it in early august:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/23/u...peachment.html

or earlier:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKBN1XU2VX



A statement that falls under duress and is countered by their inquiries trying to understand why the aid was delayed

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/20/ukra...testimony.html



An action which did not take place until and immediately following knowledge of the whiste-blower. Further, we also know that Giulianni was heavily involved in helping Ukraine craft the 'announcement' that would have been forthcoming - excepting of course that there was this pesky whistleblower.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/26/polit...int/index.html



No, we have a whole lot more facts to work with than this MM. And they all show, when taken together and not in isolation as you are prone to do, exactly what Trump was trying to do. Which was to use the congressionally allocated aid as leverage to force Ukraine to announce publicly on CNN an investigation into corruption that had to include Burisma and Biden in the text.

ETA: Although trump supporters will look the other way, it is painfully obvious that

Aid tied to the investigations + investigations must include Burisma and Biden = Aid tied to investigation of Burisma and Biden. Any logical, objective person knows that is what it means.

A quote from the Reuters article, which, naturally, is buried all the way at the bottom of the story, the very last sentence, in fact: "Cooper also said she had never discussed a hold on security assistance for Ukraine with Trump and never heard from him directly on the matter."

So once again, we have another person who can't testify as to Trump's thinking or motives. Sondland claims that "everybody was in the loop", yet nobody can seem to put any damning words in Trump's mouth, and in fact, the only direct quote we have from Trump was him telling Sondland in no uncertain terms that he didn't want anything from Ukraine, no quid pro quo.

You claim that Zelensky's statements were made "under duress", which is of course absurd and would have to be proven rather than assumed. Same with your insinuation that Trump only released the aid because he learned of the whistle blower.

You see the problem here? You're taking the facts and adding the most negative spin possible to reach the conclusion you want instead of simply looking at the matter objectively.

[rogue06]

Again, they did not 'fail'. That they could not convince people like you and MM is not a 'failure' on their part, or of the evidence itself.

Nor could they convince any of the independents. The fact is that if anything fewer people support impeachment after the circus than before it. You may not like that but it is the truth.

[rogue06]

Again, they did not 'fail'.

Correct. "Fail" is far too generous a term for their abject flop.

IMHBAO, Schiff persuaded Pelosi to give him this shot because both were convinced that Trump would never release the transcript of the call so they thought that they were free to grossly misrepresent what took place -- which was exactly what Schiff did with his "parody" of it. But with the release of the transcript things started falling apart but for Schiff there was no turning back.

[Teallaura]

Trump, the criminal president, and the party of the wealthy, are shattering all fundraising records. Not surprising, Tea. What's surprising is some of the people, like yourself, who still support him.

No, Jim - he's receiving a LOT of mid to low end donations - far outstripping the Dems total efforts.

You're deluding yourself into believing everyone else is deluded - the facts and this insane show 'inquiry' flat out don't prove squat. Trump couldn't be convicted of jaywalking with the kind of crap the Dems were touting as 'blockbuster' evidence.

The 'walls are closing in' alright - on this whole idiotic charade.

[Cow Poke]

No, Jim - he's receiving a LOT of mid to low end donations - far outstripping the Dems total efforts.

You're deluding yourself into believing everyone else is deluded - the facts and this insane show 'inquiry' flat out don't prove squat. Trump couldn't be convicted of jaywalking with the kind of crap the Dems were touting as 'blockbuster' evidence.

The 'walls are closing in' alright - on this whole idiotic charade.

PLEASE allow Jim to continue his delusion.

[Mountain Man]

The 'walls are closing in' alright - on this whole idiotic charade.

walls_closing_in_trump_censored.jpg

[Teallaura]

If it's not about what you think happened, but what you can prove, then none of your "facts" are anything of the sort, since they are based solely on testimony, and testimony is not necessarily truthful. We do not know any of those things, we only know that we have been told them.

It's astonishing how you elevate statements made in court to 'knowledge' while simultaneously rejecting statements made in press conferences.

Er, no. You can be a pure empiricist if you want - but you're gonna have a heck of a time proving the existence of France...

FYI: appealing to empiricism or worse, 100% certitude, throws out ACC on its face - with quite a number of science facts following right behind. Apply rational standards of evidence to both and the problem disappears.

Last I looked, press conferences aren't sworn in.

[Teallaura]

PLEASE allow Jim to continue his delusion.

Be nice - he's gotta come in out of the rain sometime.

You're not trying to convince him he's a chicken again, are you? We have plenty of eggs!

[rogue06]

Be nice - he's gotta come in out of the rain sometime.

You're not trying to convince him he's a chicken again, are you? We have plenty of eggs!

Given as much as little jimmy squawks we should get enough eggs to start selling them.

[firstfloor]

Two associates of Rudy Giuliani who feature prominently in the Ukraine scandal have been indicted in New York and arrested at an airport outside Washington trying to leave the US. The men, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, along with two others, are charged with breaking campaign finance laws. The story involves six-figure donations, an unnamed Russian, a disliked US ambassador who President Donald Trump later recalled, photos with Trump and a plan to open a marijuana business. You can read the indictment below, along with our explanations of some of its details.

https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/...ent-annotated/

[firstfloor]

So, why didn't the Democrats do all their homework before putting on their show trial*? Who, in their right mind, would "go to trial" in public and fail miserably in their main objective**, only to have back later and add, "oh, and we SHOULD have said...."?

[Cow Poke]

Do you remember the Repubs storming the secret basement place?

I remember the liberals going apoplectic with some drama queen version of such an incident.

Tell me again, why were the cowardly little Democrats hunkered down in a secret basement hideout, anyway?

[JimL]

No, Jim - he's receiving a LOT of mid to low end donations - far outstripping the Dems total efforts.

You're deluding yourself into believing everyone else is deluded - the facts and this insane show 'inquiry' flat out don't prove squat. Trump couldn't be convicted of jaywalking with the kind of crap the Dems were touting as 'blockbuster' evidence.

The 'walls are closing in' alright - on this whole idiotic charade.

Said like a true Trumpster, Tea. What's idiotic is your being blind to Trumps abuse of power, blind to his obstruction of Congress, blind to his extortion, bribery, quid pro quo, emolluments violations, blind to collusion, and blind to his general undermining of democratic institutions.

[JimL]

PLEASE allow Jim to continue his delusion.

No doubt you will continue in yours.

[JimL]

I remember the liberals going apoplectic with some drama queen version of such an incident.

Tell me again, why were the cowardly little Democrats hunkered down in a secret basement hideout, anyway?

Why, did you forget already?