List of Trump's crimes?

[Cow Poke]

Actually it's the reverse of what I said. American League pitchers don't bat unless they're playing an away game against a National League team).

Yeah, I knew whatcha* meant!





*actually had totally forgotten about that exception.

[JimL]

Most of the witnesses were nothing more than links in the gossip train who testified that they had no personal or direct knowledge but were merely passing on hear-say. And those like Sondland who were the origin of some of these "heard it from a friend, who heard it from a friend, who heard it from another" grapevines had to admit that what they said was based on "presumptions," "guesses" and the like.

Not to mention the phone call itself where Trump says to Zelensky "but I need you to do me a favor though." That favor being to investigate Cloudstrike and the Bidens. Can you get any dumber? Not to mention Sondlands call to the president at the restaurant wherein Trump was overheard asking about whether Zelensky was going to carry through with those investigations and Sondlands affirmative response that "yes, he'll do anything you want him to do." Not to mention Trumps chief of staff publicly admitting to it, saying "that's why we withheld the money, we do it all the time." Not to mention Trumps firing of the Ukrainian Ambassadore who was standing in the way of the scheme. That isn't being derived of a presumption, dopey, and as Sondland put it, everybody knew, everybody was in on it. Get yourself out of the bubble and start using your own head.

Worse. Sondland even confirmed that Trump had explicitly and expressly told him that he did not want anything in exchange -- any quid pro quo. He testified that he had directly called Trump in order to find out why the aid was being delayed. "I asked the president, ‘What do you want from Ukraine?’" Sondland declared. "The president responded, ‘Nothing. There is no quid pro.’"

Sondland confirmed that Trump had told him that "I want nothing. I don’t want to give them anything, and I don’t want anything from them."

This is the nature and quality of the "evidence" that you are building this house of cards upon.

For one thing there is no record of any such call, for another Trumps supposed answer to Sondland in that supposed call wasn't even a direct response to the question asked. The question was, why was the military aid being held up? Instead of answering that, Trump goes into a tirade about not wanting anything, not wanting a quid pro quo? Duh! doesn't take a genius to figure out Trump was responding to the whistleblowers claim, which he just found out about, not Sondlands question.

[Mountain Man]

For one thing there is no record of any such call, for another Trumps supposed answer to Sondland in that supposed call wasn't even a direct response to the question asked. The question was, why was the military aid being held up? Instead of answering that, Trump goes into a tirade about not wanting anything, not wanting a quid pro quo? Duh! doesn't take a genius to figure out Trump was responding to the whistleblowers claim, which he just found out about, not Sondlands question.

How about we quote Sondland directly instead of depending on your fanciful "interpretation" of what he said...


and


https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...-quid-pro-quo/

[JimL]

How about we quote Sondland directly instead of depending on your fanciful "interpretation" of what he said...

You can cherry pick all you want, MM, but that's not how a jury comes to its conclusions. Trump was obviously withholding the military aid, so if he wanted nothing in return, no quid pro quo, then why was he withholding the aid you balloon head. Trump didn't answer the question. What he did do was to put up a defense to the just released whistleblower claim.

And

To the best of his recollection he conveniently didn't remember lots of things. You can read right through these guys. You don't forget if you had such an important call or not, which means by his answer, that yeah, he had such a call.

[Cow Poke]

You can cherry pick all you want, MM, but that's not how a jury comes to its conclusions....

In this case, Jim, the "jury" is the American people. And not just any American people, but more specifically, the people in the districts of the politicians who will be voting for or against impeachment.

Even more specifically, the American people in the districts of those politicians who might vote on the basis of their own electability. It is, after all, all about politics.

[JimL]

In this case, Jim, the "jury" is the American people. And not just any American people, but more specifically, the people in the districts of the politicians who will be voting for or against impeachment.

Even more specifically, the American people in the districts of those politicians who might vote on the basis of their own electability. It is, after all, all about politics.

No, the proceedings are not all about politics, CP, that's just what the guilty party would like you to believe. The Impeachment proceedings are about protecting the Constitution from a wannabe dictator and you should stop defending his trampling of it.

[Cow Poke]

No, the proceedings are not all about politics...

Sure, Jim, I have no doubt you believe that. In the end, the decision to move forward will be made on political grounds by politicians who want to keep their own butts in power. You're incredibly naive if you can't see that.

[JimL]

Sure, Jim, I have no doubt you believe that. In the end, the decision to move forward will be made on political grounds by politicians who want to keep their own butts in power. You're incredibly naive if you can't see that.

No, you're incredibly naive if you don't realize that there is a right and a wrong regardless of the politics.

[Mountain Man]

Sure, Jim, I have no doubt you believe that. In the end, the decision to move forward will be made on political grounds by politicians who want to keep their own butts in power. You're incredibly naive if you can't see that.

Give it up, man. You're never going to dissuade Jimmy from his laughable delusion that Democrats are champions of the Constitution.

[JimL]

Give it up, man. You're never going to dissuade Jimmy from his laughable delusion that Democrats are champions of the Constitution.

Well, you, and the republican party, have certainly proven that you're not champions of the Constitution or of democracy. You're champions of dictators, so long as they are your dictators that is,

[Cow Poke]

No, you're incredibly naive if you don't realize that there is a right and a wrong regardless of the politics.

I absolutely know that, Jim -- I just also know that RARE is the politician who puts "right and wrong" above politics. You can pretend otherwise, but the evidence is against you.

[JimL]

I absolutely know that, Jim -- I just also know that RARE is the politician who puts "right and wrong" above politics. You can pretend otherwise, but the evidence is against you.

Well, if you understand that one side is wrong here and the other is right, then you should also understand that it isn't all just politics.

[RumTumTugger]

Well, if you understand that one side is wrong here and the other is right, then you should also understand that it isn't all just politics.

and in this case JimL it is the Democrats who are wrong.

[Starlight]

and in this case JimL it is the Democrats who are wrong.

Wrong to believe a dozen witnesses, and a written confession from the Trump administration in the form of the call transcript?

Or wrong to think trying to hold a Republican President accountable for his crimes was politically a bad idea for their poll numbers?

You might be right about the second one. The Republican base seems to triple-down on defending their own side's criminality when it's pointed out to them.

[rogue06]

Wrong to believe a dozen witnesses, and a written confession from the Trump administration in the form of the call transcript?

Or wrong to think trying to hold a Republican President accountable for his crimes was politically a bad idea for their poll numbers?

You might be right about the second one. The Republican base seems to triple-down on defending their own side's criminality when it's pointed out to them.

Most of the witnesses were nothing more than links in the gossip train who testified that they had no personal or direct knowledge but were merely passing on hear-say. And those like Sondland who were the origin of some of these "heard it from a friend, who heard it from a friend, who heard it from another" grapevines had to admit that what they said was based on "presumptions," "guesses" and the like.

Please Clickinate on Imagification