Transcript released - WH - No quid pro quo

originally posted by: RalagaNarHallas
a reply to: Wayfarer

its a short video do i have to transcribe it for you>? he brags about saying hey fire this guy or else you dont get loans in the amount of 1 billion dollars ,they say hey your not the president biden says call him , then he smugly laughs about them firing the prosecutor because they wanted a billion dollars in American loans . its literally his own words no spin and its from a CFR meeting. you know threatening another country as VP that if they dont do exactly what he asks of them they loose a billion dollars

No no you misunderstand me. I watched the video again (I've seen it before). You are mistaken that its the coercion itself thats illegal. The act itself isn't, and as others arguing against me have already mentioned we've done it before so its not new. The illegality stems from the President seemingly using the US government to eliminate his political rivals.

lol
the transcript has nothing
the guy at a press conference says there was no pressure
that is not good enough for some
trump is still guilty

hillaryious

some of you people are too funny

You really believe that Biden is a threat? He was already on his way down. Trump has nothing to fear from sleepy, hair sniffing, Joe.

originally posted by: MrRCflying

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Wayfarer

No. Biden specifically stated he told the Ukrainian government that they had six hours (when he was scheduled to depart) to fire the prosecutor if they wanted the $1 billion. He stated it himself in a tone that indicated pride in the fact that he had made the Ukraine fire the prosecutor.

I have to run soon, but I'll try to find a video.

Now, some have said that this was because the prosecutor was dirty; I do not know. But that does not change the fact that Biden has admitted openly to threatening to withhold aid to Ukraine unless a specific prosecutor was fired.

TheRedneck

Oh I see, the confusion you're expressing is the difference between coercing a foreign official into doing something beneficial to the country, vs coercing a foreign official into helping you eliminate your political rivals.

Or... Forcing a foreign official into doing something beneficial for his and his son's wallets, vs a chat about corruption of a former VP and his son, swindling millions.

That's the rub though. Biden got the prosecutor fired, and in essence made his son's life more tenuous since the guy running the company Biden's son was working for was himself pretty corrupt and being protected by the prosecutor Biden got fired. In essence, Biden acted against his family in the best interest of the country (though of course you and many others won't see it that way) by eliminating a prosecutor who was protecting his son's boss in favor of putting a prosecutor who was actually going to start going after corruption.

a reply to: Wayfarer

eliminate

it is create your own story Wednesday apparently
when was anyone "eliminated"
or is that another of your "friends" theories?

lol

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: MrRCflying

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Wayfarer

No. Biden specifically stated he told the Ukrainian government that they had six hours (when he was scheduled to depart) to fire the prosecutor if they wanted the $1 billion. He stated it himself in a tone that indicated pride in the fact that he had made the Ukraine fire the prosecutor.

I have to run soon, but I'll try to find a video.

Now, some have said that this was because the prosecutor was dirty; I do not know. But that does not change the fact that Biden has admitted openly to threatening to withhold aid to Ukraine unless a specific prosecutor was fired.

TheRedneck

Oh I see, the confusion you're expressing is the difference between coercing a foreign official into doing something beneficial to the country, vs coercing a foreign official into helping you eliminate your political rivals.

Or... Forcing a foreign official into doing something beneficial for his and his son's wallets, vs a chat about corruption of a former VP and his son, swindling millions.

That's the rub though. Biden got the prosecutor fired, and in essence made his son's life more tenuous since the guy running the company Biden's son was working for was himself pretty corrupt and being protected by the prosecutor Biden got fired. In essence, Biden acted against his family in the best interest of the country (though of course you and many others won't see it that way) by eliminating a prosecutor who was protecting his son's boss in favor of putting a prosecutor who was actually going to start going after corruption.

Funny... then why was the investigation dropped as soon as he was fired and the new guy put in?

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Wayfarer

eliminate

it is create your own story Wednesday apparently
when was anyone "eliminated"
or is that another of your "friends" theories?

lol

I don't get it? Are you suggesting I'm making this up?

I've already linked the explanation to Redneck so I assumed you had read it to.

a reply to: Wayfarer

No, no, no. The problem is withholding something of great value to a country for not acquiescing to one's demands. The US has no right to tell Ukraine who they can and cannot have as a prosecutor, any more than the Ukraine can tell the US to fire someone. Biden did that, specifically.

You cannot twist the law to only affect those you choose to believe are the bad guys. The law either applies or it doesn't.

TheRedneck

a reply to: Wayfarer

I don't get it? Are you suggesting I'm making this up?

no
but your "friend" may be
who was eliminated?
by whom?

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Wayfarer

No, no, no. The problem is withholding something of great value to a country for not acquiescing to one's demands. The US has no right to tell Ukraine who they can and cannot have as a prosecutor, any more than the Ukraine can tell the US to fire someone. Biden did that, specifically.

You cannot twist the law to only affect those you choose to believe are the bad guys. The law either applies or it doesn't.

TheRedneck

Not only did he do it, but by doing it the investigation into the company that his son works for was dropped. Not coincidence.

a reply to: Wayfarer

and who pray tel in the us government is removing trumps rivals? and which of those rivals were removed again? as his only opponents that have been "removed" did it them selves by dropping out of the 2020 race (not sure on the count but i think 4 or 5 have dropped out?)

i again assume your confused and meant to say Ukrainian officials to interfere with a us election? well in the video of trump and the Ukrainian president today he said there was no such pressure

or did you mean Giuliani who is trumps personal lawyer and not a member of the us government any more (he was a Governor of ny for a good time)

originally posted by: MrRCflying

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: MrRCflying

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Wayfarer

No. Biden specifically stated he told the Ukrainian government that they had six hours (when he was scheduled to depart) to fire the prosecutor if they wanted the $1 billion. He stated it himself in a tone that indicated pride in the fact that he had made the Ukraine fire the prosecutor.

I have to run soon, but I'll try to find a video.

Now, some have said that this was because the prosecutor was dirty; I do not know. But that does not change the fact that Biden has admitted openly to threatening to withhold aid to Ukraine unless a specific prosecutor was fired.

TheRedneck

Oh I see, the confusion you're expressing is the difference between coercing a foreign official into doing something beneficial to the country, vs coercing a foreign official into helping you eliminate your political rivals.

Or... Forcing a foreign official into doing something beneficial for his and his son's wallets, vs a chat about corruption of a former VP and his son, swindling millions.

That's the rub though. Biden got the prosecutor fired, and in essence made his son's life more tenuous since the guy running the company Biden's son was working for was himself pretty corrupt and being protected by the prosecutor Biden got fired. In essence, Biden acted against his family in the best interest of the country (though of course you and many others won't see it that way) by eliminating a prosecutor who was protecting his son's boss in favor of putting a prosecutor who was actually going to start going after corruption.

Funny... then why was the investigation dropped as soon as he was fired and the new guy put in?

Because that was a lie that has been propagated, and keeps being propagated just as you are doing now. The article I linked mentioned that obviously.


"In fact, Kasko and Kaleniuk noted, Shokin (the prosecutor) had undermined efforts to investigate the company (that Biden's son worked for) and its owner."

Biden: That’s a nice billion dollars. Pity if something were to happen to it.

a reply to: Agit8dChop

Something like this.....

'Leftist social media is lighting up, Sir. Pelosi just accused you of high crimes and misdemeanors without even reading it and her blue check mark base is backing her and are very energized'

'Good, that means we're over the target - proceed to full-steam-ahead and prepare battle stations'

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Biden: That’s a nice billion dollars. Pity if something were to happen to it.

quid pro quo
/ˌkwid ˌprō ˈkwō/

it appears some of the media is in meltdown
false stories of the dni resigning ect...

interesting day

Where's the promise?

originally posted by: RalagaNarHallas
a reply to: Wayfarer

and who pray tel in the us government is removing trumps rivals? and which of those rivals were removed again? as his only opponents that have been "removed" did it them selves by dropping out of the 2020 race (not sure on the count but i think 4 or 5 have dropped out?)

i again assume your confused and meant to say Ukrainian officials to interfere with a us election? well in the video of trump and the Ukrainian president today he said there was no such pressure

or did you mean Giuliani who is trumps personal lawyer and not a member of the us government any more (he was a Governor of ny for a good time)

Well the theory in a nutshell: Trump wanted Biden gone. Trump himself worked (and tried to employ the assistance of Giuliani) to coerce Ukraine to investigate Biden to drum up bad PR that would hurt Biden's campaign. The fact that he tried to do it and failed doesn't make it less illegal.

a reply to: Agit8dChop

LOL
In the hours since this info has been disseminated I have seen about 5 or 7 (a lot) of headlines on my news feed go from 'Trump threatened to withhold aid' and 'Trump will be impeached with this' to have them all deleted and now it' changed to 'Trump Pressured Ukraine on biden' lol I saw no Pressure there either! Do these reporters even know how to read transcripts anymore?

Another win for America

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Biden: That’s a nice billion dollars. Pity if something were to happen to it.

quid pro quo
/ˌkwid ˌprō ˈkwō/

Countries coercing other countries in the best interest of their respective leaders directions aren't illegal.

Presidents coercing other countries with US Sovereign money/power into working for him to discredit/hurt his political rivals is.

Its pretty simple.