Top diplomat in Ukraine gave "damning" testimony

a reply to: F4guy

Because, as we all know, only the oversampled Democrats who made those polls, are the true Americans. Everyone else is simply a Russian asset as per Hillary.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Entirely different. It was all out in the open and Democrats were allowed to participate in the proceedings. There were also votes to formalize it. It was carried out exactly the same way Nixon's went.

Only this time do we have a Democrat exclusive, closed door proceeding with no votes of any kind called by two individuals, not the whole House or even a committee of the House.

They held closed door testimonies in the Nixon impeachment too. It was closed-door testimony that uncovered the Nixon White House Tapes.

a reply to: Pyle

Not to this extent, Pyle. The secretiveness around this fake impeachment inquiry is unprecedented. It requires the Supreme Court to intercede and say whether it is constitutional or not.

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Entirely different. It was all out in the open and Democrats were allowed to participate in the proceedings. There were also votes to formalize it. It was carried out exactly the same way Nixon's went.

Only this time do we have a Democrat exclusive, closed door proceeding with no votes of any kind called by two individuals, not the whole House or even a committee of the House.

They held closed door testimonies in the Nixon impeachment too. It was closed-door testimony that uncovered the Nixon White House Tapes.

Nixon also had a Grand Jury and Special Prosecutor investigate first.

Witnesses need to be deposed behind closed doors so they can not co-ordinate fake stories and BS.

Prime example is Sondland being called back to clean up his story now that Taylor has testified.

It is also why Pompeo, the WH and everyone else is terrified to go testify and has refused subpoenas, because they don't know what has already been testified to yet.

The third and easiest option for people that are not covering things up is to Just Tell The Truth.

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Pyle

Not to this extent, Pyle. The secretiveness around this fake impeachment inquiry is unprecedented. It requires the Supreme Court to intercede and say whether it is constitutional or not.

Not at all.

Every constitutional scholar that doesn't sideline as Trump's personal Attorney agrees that the House of Representatives has sole discretion over how they run impeachment proceedings.

But you don't even have to be a scholar to understand...Psst...It's in the Constitution.

originally posted by: xuenchen
Have they published a full transcript of the Damning statements and testimonies ? 😎 🦚 😎

The same headlines are spewed by every liberal media outlet while a witness is tortured by Adam Schiff. I think William Taylor is the 5th witness to get this headline, and also an ATS thread, over the past 3 weeks?

After all this "damning testimony" you'd think Pelosi would call for a House Vote on impeachment ASAP. Instead, she's now pushed it back to Christmas...or later. (Congress will be on another LOOOONG vacation at that time.)

a reply to: Extorris

Where does The Constitution give any right to bypass The Constitution ? 😃

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: xuenchen
Have they published a full transcript of the Damning statements and testimonies ? 😎 🦚 😎

After all this "damning testimony" you'd think Pelosi would call for a House Vote on impeachment ASAP. Instead, she's now pushed it back to Christmas...or later. (Congress will be on another LOOOONG vacation at that time.)

You really should Taylor's testimony.
He is a Republican that Pompeo recruited for the job.

He recounts a point where Bolton stood up and said he wanted nothing to do with this "Drug Deal" and directed an aid Fiona Hill to report it to legal counsel immediately.

a reply to: Extorris

Geez , are the Dems Still Trying to Lynch the President ? Better get a Stronger Rope ........

a reply to: Zanti Misfit


www.washingtonpost.com...

a reply to: Extorris

LOL , the Washington Post Again ? You Really are a Sucker for Punishment I see ..........

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: Extorris

LOL , the Washington Post Again ? You Really are a Sucker for Punishment I see ..........

It's a direct quotation (or rather screenshot) from Taylor's opening statement.

But attack the source when you have nothing else.

a reply to: Extorris

Sounds like a bunch of "He said She said" because we have no records of these "phone calls" and "text messages" do we.

Something fishy this is 😃

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Pyle

Not to this extent, Pyle. The secretiveness around this fake impeachment inquiry is unprecedented. It requires the Supreme Court to intercede and say whether it is constitutional or not.

Not at all.

Every constitutional scholar that doesn't sideline as Trump's personal Attorney agrees that the House of Representatives has sole discretion over how they run impeachment proceedings.

But you don't even have to be a scholar to understand...Psst...It's in the Constitution.

The House of Representatives does, yes.

I think you are confusing the House of Representatives with Nancy and Schiff.

The impeachment process was meant to involve the entire House, so that all of America (through thier district representatives) could participate in the process.

Which is why they called it the House of Representatives.

If you wish to attempt to interpret the Constitution perhaps you should read the thoughts of the people that wrote it.

Instead of relying on people pretending to be lawyers on CNN.

a reply to: Extorris

If Taylors statement is true, and I have no doubt that it is, there really isn't an argument anymore about how improper this was. Trump held that aid on the precondition of Zelensky making a public statement about Bidens son. It doesn't seem like Trump even cared about an actual investigation happening. Just that Zelensky made a public statement that Trump could use against Biden. If his opening statement was this damning I can only imagine what came out in the actual testimony.

I think time is running short for the criminal organization occupying the White House.

originally posted by: Liquesence
Read the opening statement (15 pages) here:

Opening statement of Ambassador William B. Taylor

Also:

The senior U.S. diplomat in Ukraine told lawmakers Tuesday that President Trump made the release of military aid contingent on public declarations from Ukraine that it would investigate the Bidens and the 2016 election, contradicting Trump’s denial that he used the money as leverage for political gain.

Thanks for the link

Sorry that beurocrats are unaware who is in charge of diplomacy.
Too bad he didn't speak with trump directly.
2nd and 3rd hand info is bs

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Extorris

Sounds like a bunch of "He said She said" because we have no records of these "phone calls" and "text messages" do we.

Something fishy this is 😃

hear·say /ˈhirˌsā/
noun
information received from other people that one cannot adequately substantiate; rumor.

seems that guy thinks he is much more important than he actually was
too bad he was "embarrassed"

a reply to: Extorris

They've refused subpoenas because this goes against every precedent for how modern impeachment has been carried out. You can check out how it was done for both Nixon and Clinton. Compare apples and oranges all you want, but this is a partisan political lynching. The president is right about that, and no, I'm not following him. I've used the term myself a time or two to describe how the Democrats are handling to whole thing from the Russia hoax on.

a reply to: Extorris

The third and easiest option for people that are not covering things up is to Just Tell The Truth.

lol
joe told me this
jim told me that is now under scrutiny for "the truth"
lol
what color is the sun....
i will wait

am i lying if I say yellow?
are you lying if you say orange?

nothing more than unhappy employee here, because the boss didn't want their idea.....
too bad he was not the boss....

Impeachment proceedings may be commenced in the House of Representatives by a Member declaring a charge of impeachment on his or her own initiative,by a Member presenting a memorial listing charges under oath, or by a Member depositing a resolution in the hopper, which is then referred to the appropriate committee. The impeachment process may be triggered by non-Members, such as when the Judicial Conference of the United States suggests that the House may wish to consider impeachment of a federal judge, where an independent counsel advises the House of any substantial and credible information which he or she believes might constitute grounds for impeachment,by message from the President, by a charge from a state or territorial legislature or grand jury, or by petition.

Impeachment and Removal - Congressional Research Service (Library of Congress)

The Libary of Congress understand the Impeachment process and the Constitution.