Quote :

"If BanjoMan offered a cop a beejay to get out of a speeding ticket, but the cop refused, BanjoMan would still be charged with bribing a cop."

the accurate comparison would be if you went to a cop and said "hey this brother BanjoMan wants a blowjob on the condition that you get 100K"

[Edited on November 9, 2019 at 12:05 PM. Reason : f]

11/9/2019 12:05:04 PM

Should president’s be able to use congressionally appropriate funds to specifically target political opponents?

Of course not … this is against every principle of a functioning democracy.

The fact trump was doing this, and still might be doing this, after he was found to be obstructing justice in a conspiracy case, after copious reporting of him using the office to try and boost his personal business, after his kids used the office to cash in, after kushner (who couldn’t even get a security clearance) backdoor deal’s with the Saudis... we’re well past the threshold of high crimes and misdemeaning by a president laid out in the constitution for impeachment.

Imagine future politics where the government offices are free to use taxpayer resources to fund political activity for a single party. This would be fatal to the country.

11/9/2019 12:54:46 PM

You're talking to a guy who thinks this never left the water-cooler-bullshit-session stage.

11/9/2019 12:57:03 PM

https://www.rawstory.com/2019/11/john-bolton-went-around-mick-mulvaney-and-released-aid-to-ukraine-before-resigning-report/

Bolton is saying he authorized the release of the aid before resigning

11/9/2019 9:44:09 PM

No offense, but unless it comes from cbs, nbc, abc, nytimes, washingtonpost, or wsj, its just some partisan hackery. Rawstory.com? Gtfo. Might as well be motherjones or mark levin.

11/9/2019 10:55:20 PM

Lmao at that post

A) that you think those are the only sources of good journalism
B) that you think those arent sources of partisan hackery

11/9/2019 11:21:52 PM

I agree that it's not the most impressive source for a story like that. It seems a bit odd, suspicious, or fishy. One of those three.

11/10/2019 12:44:46 AM

The story was originally reported by Bloomberg News.

11/10/2019 1:20:37 AM

Still waiting for someone to articulate how 400 million dollars of aid to Ukraine benefits the lives of American workers.

11/11/2019 7:12:46 PM

sTiLl wAiTinG

11/11/2019 7:32:36 PM

That 400 mil was for dirt on the dems, and then trump just said fuck it

11/11/2019 8:20:26 PM

Quote :

"Still waiting for someone to articulate how 400 million dollars of aid to Ukraine benefits the lives of American workers."

This is a strawman and irrelevant.

He used congressionally appropriated money essentially as blackmail to further his political goals. Whether or not you agree with the appropriation is meaningless.

[Edited on November 12, 2019 at 7:53 AM. Reason : But earl thinks that Trump really cares about corruption because the federalist says so]

11/12/2019 7:52:46 AM

Devin Nunes sounds like such a joke.

11/13/2019 10:26:49 AM

Nunes, and not for the first time, talking about Trump nudes.

What a fascinatingly weird guy he is.

11/13/2019 10:30:02 AM

i can't watch, are the democrats using an attorney?

11/13/2019 10:37:43 AM

So far, there's been opening comments from the Chair and Minority Leader, and witness testimony is occurring now. Counsel for both sides are sitting next to the Chair and Minority Leader, but they haven't yet spoken.

11/13/2019 11:04:25 AM

11/13/2019 11:22:34 AM

BuT hOw DoEs ThE fOrEiGn AiD hElP tAxPaYeRs

11/13/2019 11:24:42 AM

https://twitter.com/rebeccaballhaus/status/1194630098315399169?s=21

The country and its institutions are, possibly irreparably, broken. Probably have been for a long time but at least any past judiciary chair wouldn’t outright say it.

This is disgraceful and he is a huge piece of shit.

11/13/2019 11:34:39 AM

very cool for the republican talking point to be, “lol that was soooooo boring” after some legit bombshells

11/13/2019 12:28:59 PM

republicans write rules
republicans get mad at democrats for following rules
republicans say transcripts should be released
republicans get mad that transcripts are released
republicans say closed door testimony is bad, call for transparency
republicans ignore open testimony

thank god biden is going to bring these people back to their senses after trump is gone

11/13/2019 12:35:07 PM

Nunes and the entire GOP are batshit crazy. This is Alex Jones stuff that only people very, very online or boomers have heard of.

Good job Roger Ailes, you did it! Hope it’s not too hot down there..

[Edited on November 13, 2019 at 12:57 PM. Reason : Also, shoutout to Ken Vogel for getting Nunes to launder his propoganda]

11/13/2019 12:52:57 PM

^^^Who's calling it boring?

11/13/2019 1:10:05 PM

Jim Jordan always seems to think he has some gigantic bomb to drop and it ends up being a feather.

11/13/2019 1:43:34 PM

what happened to the kickstarter to get jim jordan a jacket?

also, i applaud mr. kent's nalgene bottle color choice.

[Edited on November 13, 2019 at 1:51 PM. Reason : ....]

11/13/2019 1:45:07 PM

^^^

http://twitter.com/EricTrump/status/1194660527856902144

Quote :

" This is horribly boring... #Snoozefest"

http://twitter.com/WindsorMann/status/1194688122807836673

Quote :

" Eric Trump: “horribly boring” WH press secretary: “boring” Rep. Mark Meadows: “It’s hard for me to stay awake and listen to all of this.” Tucker Carlson: “Impeachment is not only dumb; it’s boring.” Translation: DON’T WATCH!"

11/13/2019 1:58:22 PM

Damn, holy shit, that guy from Texas just tried to bate Ambassador Taylor into saying that he believed that Trump should be impeached, and he almost bit on that.

Reminds me of



[Edited on November 13, 2019 at 2:00 PM. Reason : a]

11/13/2019 1:59:52 PM

Republicans are obviously aware that the facts of the testimony don't bode well for the Trump administration, which is why every question follows the format of either stating that the quid pro quo didn't happen (which it didn't, but that's not what this about) or information about how corrupt Ukrainian bureaucrats are (which is also not what this is about).

11/13/2019 2:22:12 PM

wHiCh iT dIdN'T

11/13/2019 2:41:44 PM

what the hell is Castro doing?

11/13/2019 2:52:19 PM

Just because no one investigated Biden and no money was withheld doesn't mean democratic lawmakers can rest easy about the futures of their children holding jobs obtained through political connections.

11/13/2019 3:05:07 PM

Would be a good point for them to take, but they are not focusing on that as much as they should.

Kent clearly said that an attack on the Bidens, or at least taking an interest in Biden, was clearly not an anti-corruption act. It would have been very prudent of the dems to focus on developing the concept towards it being an attack on american political opponents to the president, but they didn't hit that point strongly enough in my opinion.

They have been using a ton of time to bash trump, but that's not really gonna change anybody's mind.

[Edited on November 13, 2019 at 3:12 PM. Reason : f]

11/13/2019 3:07:58 PM

you can acknowledge that obviously they offered the position to hunter for influence, and obviously it's bad optics to take the job and he shouldn't have done it (especially if biden had plans to run, but even without), and still acknowledge that this wasn't illegal


and obviously none of this makes trump's actions less illegal and worthy of impeachment

11/13/2019 3:20:28 PM

No one, anywhere, is defending Hunter Biden or Burisma. If anyone is arguing that it’s a strawman. Literally the US policy that Joe Biden was pushing was that Ukraine needed to investigate more seriously companies exactly like Burisma.

Quote :

" Just because no one investigated Biden and no money was withheld"

How is this any different than Jim Jordan? Anyone?

[Edited on November 13, 2019 at 4:01 PM. Reason : X]

11/13/2019 3:59:51 PM

I listened to part of it, and Jim Jordan actually had Taylor in a somewhat vulnerable position at times. He kept insisting that 'hearsay' was inadmissible in court (not that it matters) and harping on the fact that the Ukrainian president 'never felt pressured', which will make for good sound bytes for the Fox News crowd.

It's really sad that this is basically going to be the Dems trying to ask questions that relate to quite a bit of damning evidence, while the GOP is only going to repeat talking points that are easy for dumb people to remember.

I wish Giuiliani would testify since he can't help but out himself whenever he starts ranting, but I doubt it'll happen.

11/13/2019 4:34:14 PM

It's not the strong argument that you think because the next step is to subpoena the first parties (whom Republicans would have called as fact witnesses except that know everything is true)

[Edited on November 13, 2019 at 5:01 PM. Reason : .]

11/13/2019 5:00:56 PM

Maybe I missed something but I haven’t seen any evidence hunter Biden has done anything wrong. GOP has attacked him as unqualified but I haven’t seen any justification for this allegation.

His salary was high but that’s how the energy industry is. I’ve seen mid level petroleum engineers in Colorado making $400k, I can easily see an executive somewhere making more.

None of this stopped joe from pushing for a less corrupt prosecutor who was more likely to look into Burisma. This whole thing is complete a red herring designed to deflect the trump family’s own massive corruption, and it’s partially worked.

[Edited on November 13, 2019 at 5:22 PM. Reason : ]

11/13/2019 5:19:44 PM

^^ I'm not saying I personally buy any of it, but it's enough to generate GOP talking points and stupid people who are blindly loyal will believe all of it. The Dems want to treat this matter seriously, while the GOP is doing everything it can to turn it into a circus and bait people into testifying into "gotcha" moments.

I think some of you seriously underestimate how delusional and fanatical ardent Trump supporters are. Facts don't matter one bit if you can trot out quips/one-liners loudly and repeatedly.

11/13/2019 6:21:55 PM

no amount of anything will appease trump fans, for example banjoman still doesn't think there was quid quo pro

11/13/2019 7:00:04 PM

there was no actual quid pro quo, that is a fact. And if you're honestly still not up to date on that, then you are very uninformed.

Conspiracy sure, but the actual quid pro quo never happened.

And I am certainly not a trump fan. I am just up to date about the problems with this impeachment. There is no smoking gun directly linked to Trump.

[Edited on November 13, 2019 at 7:33 PM. Reason : k]

11/13/2019 7:30:00 PM

tHiS iS a fAcT

11/13/2019 7:33:27 PM

Quote :

"None of this stopped joe from pushing for a less corrupt prosecutor who was more likely to look into Burisma."

What? How do you know this presecutor was less likely to look into Burisma?

I don't know but I"m asking because it sounds really naive that you think Joe's handpicked prosecutor would be more likely to prosecute his son's company just because he has a cleaner reputation.

Quote :

"and obviously none of this makes trump's actions less illegal and worthy of impeachment"

Does there need to be intent for it to be illegal or is a president not allowed to do anything that also happens to benefit him. Now, obviously, we all know Trump knew it would benefit him but plausible deniability is on his side. It seems like you would need evidence of him projecting intent that it was for personal benefit to say what he did was illegal. ie a recording of trump saying "i'm going to get ukraine to help me investigate biden to help out my 2020 campaign

Another question, would this be completley fine if either Biden or Trump wasn't runnig at the time?

11/13/2019 7:36:41 PM

Quote :

"tHiS iS a fAcT"

it is, there was no release of foreign aid contingent upon Ukraine publicly announcing an investigation into Biden. That is a fact, that's the quid pro quo. It didn't happen. Let that sink in.

Honestly, the dems don't realize that this "whistleblower" did trump a huge favor. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if it were somebody from his own administration.

If the aid was released and the president of Ukraine then immediately made a formal announcement on CNN about the Bidens, and THEN Taylor testified, that would be certainly almost immediate impeachment for Trump.

But, obviously, that didn't happen. So now we are having proceedings about "conspiracy" and not an actual crime, because Trump did not commit the actual crime in question here.


[Edited on November 13, 2019 at 7:41 PM. Reason : a]

11/13/2019 7:39:29 PM

^^it literally doesnt even need to be a crime for impeachment

It is tho

11/13/2019 8:09:57 PM

Quote :

"Honestly, the dems don't realize that this "whistleblower" did trump a huge favor. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if it were somebody from his own administration."

If you're looking for a real rabbit hole, entertain the idea that Trump created the whole mess because he wants it and knew exactly how democrats would respond. He needs it.

He gets impeached and uses it to fire up the base just in time for election while simultaneously making the biden story big and further dividing the country. Its exactly the type of thing Trump would do to avoid policy. win win.

11/13/2019 8:21:07 PM

Ah, yes. The ol' Nth dimensional chess.

11/13/2019 8:31:55 PM

Support from trump among independents has slowly eroded since the mueller report dropped… makes no sense to say he wants this.

11/13/2019 8:43:16 PM

I wonder what the odds are that Kent is a former CIA spy in eastern Europe.

11/13/2019 9:01:26 PM

tRuMp cReATeD tHiS wHoLe mESs oN pUrPoSe

is peak galaxy brain

11/13/2019 9:43:50 PM

This whole thing will prolly end up being in the plus for trump, so it makes you wonder. And again, without the whistleblower, he would for sure be sweating bullets right now, might have even already resigned.

I actually watched all of the testimony today, and it was incredibly revealing. But out of all of those tid bits that I saw, I find it very interesting that Taylor testified to raising red flags about Trump's involvement with Ukraine to the DoJ before the Impeachment proceedings were even announced.

Somebody in DC would have picked up on that, and ol' Orange Man would have been in REAL trouble had he gone through his initial scheme.

[Edited on November 13, 2019 at 9:53 PM. Reason : k]

11/13/2019 9:48:57 PM