The smoking quid pro quo

[KenH]

“Goodness knows what excuses Republicans will come up with next, but we know now there is substantial evidence of the worst-case scenario: An American president tried to extort a foreign government into injecting itself into our election by finding dirt on a political opponent, using as leverage essential aid to an ally fighting against Russian aggression. That is what Republicans are being asked to defend.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/10/23/smoking-quid-pro-quo/

 

[InTheLight]

We understand you think this is a big issue. You've started several threads on it, just today, never mind in the past week or so. The fact is that no one really knows what's being said behind the closed doors except the people in that room.

Let me ask you this--Supposing this story broke in March 2017. Would this be Trump trying to extort a foreign government into injecting itself into our election?

If you say no, just where is the line drawn on the calendar?
If you say yes, how could it be an attempt to interfere in our election, since it wouldn't happen for 3 1/2 years?

 

[KenH]

Would this be Trump trying to extort a foreign government into injecting itself into our election?

Regardless of the nearness of an election, unless the appropriation bill passed by the Congress places conditions on the funds, then the president has no warrant to impose conditions on the funds. The president is to execute what the Congress legislates - nothing more, nothing less. I do not approve of presidents of either party of the duopoly not following the Congress’ legislation.

 

[Revmitchell]

The washington post is an opinion piece and the piece is a lie.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

“Goodness knows what excuses Republicans will come up with next, but we know now there is substantial evidence of the worst-case scenario: An American president tried to extort a foreign government into injecting itself into our election by finding dirt on a political opponent, using as leverage essential aid to an ally fighting against Russian aggression. That is what Republicans are being asked to defend.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/10/23/smoking-quid-pro-quo/

Hearsay “testimony” is the kind of “evidence” that goes up in smoke.

Don’t drink the Coup-aid, or inhale its fumes, unless you want brain damage.

 

[carpro]

“Goodness knows what excuses Republicans will come up with next, but we know now there is substantial evidence of the worst-case scenario: An American president tried to extort a foreign government into injecting itself into our election by finding dirt on a political opponent, using as leverage essential aid to an ally fighting against Russian aggression. That is what Republicans are being asked to defend.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/10/23/smoking-quid-pro-quo/

You're a willing victim of Schiff's selective leaks. Democrats have no evidence of a quid pro quo.

Schiff is making fools of their lapdog media with his selective leaks. Don't let him do the same to you. Or is it already too late?

They have nothing or they would be bumping each other aside to get to the nearest microphone.

Be patient. Trump will be impeached and you'll feel all better. But he will stay in office for the next 5 years.

 

[KenH]

But he will stay in office for the next 5 years.

I wouldn’t be surprised in the least.

 

[Adonia]

Regardless of the nearness of an election, unless the appropriation bill passed by the Congress places conditions on the funds, then the president has no warrant to impose conditions on the funds. The president is to execute what the Congress legislates - nothing more, nothing less. I do not approve of presidents of either party of the duopoly not following the Congress’ legislation.

Well then, I assume that you would also agree that former VP Biden was in the wrong when he attempted to leverage our taxpayer dollars earmarked for Ukraine to get their chief prosecutor fired, right?

 

[KenH]

Well then, I assume that you would also agree that former VP Biden was in the wrong when he attempted to leverage our taxpayer dollars earmarked for Ukraine to get their chief prosecutor fired, right?

I am not going to defend Biden. I will not vote for Biden for president in 2020. I will turn 65 years old, the Lord willing, a few days after the 2020 general election and I am not going to vote for anyone who is older than me for president any more.

 

[Adonia]

I do not know the details. I am not going to defend Biden. I will not vote for Biden for president in 2020. I will turn 65 years old, the Lord willing, a few days after the 2020 general election and I am not going to vote for anyone who is older than me for president any more.

You sure seem willing to accept all the details that Schiff and the Democrats are peddling against President Trump that's for sure. Makes me think you are more of a Democrat than a Libertarian.

 

[KenH]

Well then, I assume that you would also agree that former VP Biden was in the wrong when he attempted to leverage our taxpayer dollars earmarked for Ukraine to get their chief prosecutor fired, right?

My knowledge of Biden regarding Ukraine is pretty much limited to this:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...hecking-president-trumps-wild-jabs-joe-biden/

Biden is not president. I don't think he will be president. I don't think he will win the Democratic presidential nomination. He has already had two previous presidential runs crash and burn. I see no reason why his third attempt will end differently.

 

[KenH]

you are more of a Democrat than a Libertarian

Being anti-Trump does not make one a Democrat.

 

[Revmitchell]

The only thing that is smoking is the Democrats who are smoking dope

 

[InTheLight]

I am not going to defend Biden. I will not vote for Biden for president in 2020. I will turn 65 years old, the Lord willing, a few days after the 2020 general election and I am not going to vote for anyone who is older than me for president any more.

So, does that mean you're not voting for Trump?

Just checking.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

[KenH]

So, does that mean you're not voting for Trump?

Unless he finds what Ponce de Leon, mythically, did not.

 

[InTheLight]

Unless he finds what Ponce de Leon, mythically, did not.

So you're saying there's a chance...

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

[HankD]

I wouldn’t be surprised in the least.

and you may see the 22nd amendment rescinded and Donald Trump serve a third term or better yet the beginning of the Trump dynasty of a series of Trump presidents. (Jr, Eric, Barron, etc...).

Easy now, take a few deep breaths...

 

[KenH]

Easy now, take a few deep breaths...

That would be quite the show.

 

[KenH]

and you may see the 22nd amendment rescinded

I seriously doubt that two-thirds of the House, two thirds of the Senate, and 38 states will go along with that.

 

[KenH]

or better yet the beginning of the Trump dynasty

Or maybe this.