Impeachment hearings

[_Jersey Girl]

Wait staff at IHOP: What would you like for lunch today?

Markk: What's the established and accepted answer to that question?

We guys weren't going anywhere with anything. There is no we guys.

There are individual posters on this thread trying to squeeze a simple answer out of you in response to a simple question. And, the vortex you create just continues to spin.

LOL...what you guys drinking while you are snowed in?

That's the second time you've recently insinuated that I am drinking. I don't drink.

[_Jersey Girl]

I can only ask you one more time to do your homework (that's a hint) and quite being a follower, repeating talking points, and maybe re-read your question and think about what you wrote. I am trying to help you out here Jersey Girl.

Who do you think you're talking to here? I've repeated exactly no "talking points". I've repeatedly posed a question to you and I haven't been alone in that effort.

If I needed help of some sort, do you really see yourself as in a position to help someone else when you can't make rational sense?

In the mean time, why do you't re-read my questions and think about what you wrote? Because you're in the almighty self-generated vortex here.

[_Jersey Girl]

Able to engage in a two-way verbal question and answer exchange with an adult appears on a 4 year old developmental assessment.

Given your stated reasons, why didn’t Trump order the DoJ to investigate the Bidens?

- Doc

LOL...Because I stated my reasons when I answered the question in 5 different ways, and opined to both Tish and canpakes when they finally stated their answers to the question you just asked.

Markk can't do that.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

He's not the only one. I've engaged several other Conservos throughout the Interwerldz and not a one seems to be able to answer the question, but they all sound the same when they go off the rails. It's almost as if they're getting their talking points from the same or similar sources.

Anyway.

It's clear to me they have essentially zero concept of how the federal government functions, and why the President would use the DoJ apparatus to investigate a US citizen suspected of using US funds and influence in a massive corruption scheme.

- Doc

[_MissTish]

But yes, he had every right as President to ask another "president " to investigate what he saw as corruption. He was setting the table for the DoJ, and getting a possible investigation going...so yes that is my general answer. I have commented a lot on some of the specifics for why he felt their was corruption.

He was setting the table for the DOJ by asking a government that was too corrupt to give money to, to conduct an investigation?

How could any investigation from such a corrupt place be trusted? Why wouldn't he go straight to the DOJ?

How do Giuliani, Parnas and Fruman fit into your stance that Ukraine should conduct the investigation?

HUH? They would supply information to the DOJ, so we could prosecute if the evidence was valid? That is just nonsense.

Yes, it is nonsense. You're sooo close to getting it. The DOJ would have to do their own investigation in order to prosecute anyway, so why not just go to them first.

Show me anything that remotely indicates Trump was going to hand Biden over to the Ukraine Goverment...that is nothing but conjecture.

I was making a point. I don't think he was going to be handed over. Just as i don't think Trump really gave an eff about 'fighting corruption'. He hired Manafort, who was neck deep in Ukrainian corruption for 10 years, to manage his campaign.

[Guest]

by the way...cancakes gave me what he perceived was the correct answer, which was “because there was not enough evidence”...which is 180 to my answer that there was enough evidence so, there was not need to Ask the DOJ.

Markk, so what you are saying is that Trump believed that his own knowledge of the claimed corruption was sufficient to determine veracity, and that he needed no verification from our own DoJ to confirm his unerring conclusion... and that reliance on this assumption of personal inerrancy is a sound way to craft foreign policy.

Then, Trump attempted to take control of the checkbook of monies authorized by Congress (as you’ve so often characterized JB having done previously) and decided to try for coercing a foreign nation into publicly announcing ‘investigations’ that would be sourced from the same government and infrastructure that Trump claims was corrupt and in cahoots with his political rivals.

Now, none of this sounds sensible, smart, or ‘above board’ to me, but how say you? Does any of this make sense to you? If so, why?

Why didn’t Trump just ask his own DoJ to look into this alleged corruption, as opposed to asking the nation that he was accusing of corruption?

(By the way, please be sure to wear comfortable clothes when answering, so that you don’t sprain anything. )

[_canpakes]

cancakes

Like I'm going to accept direction and insults from someone who can't even accurately reproduce a simple screen name when it's passed by his face hundreds of times.



You've done that repeatedly throughout the thread. Fix yourself.

In fairness, I receive hundreds of hate emails a day from pancake lovers everywhere regarding my intentional misspelling of such a venerable and delicious breakfast food.
: D

[_Icarus]

Trump all but admits Vindman was fired because of his testimony. I guess his brother was fired by guilt of association.

https://www.channelstv.com/2020/02/08/i ... tly-trump/

[_Markk]

canpakes wrote...

Why didn’t Trump just ask his own DoJ to look into this alleged corruption, as opposed to asking the nation that he was accusing of corruption?

The question just expanded a bit...see bold, but the answer remains the same.

Anyways the answer remains basically the same, Trump did not have to ask the DOJ to go ask the President, in that he has that authority, and in my opinion duty, to do so if he see's there is corruption...whether the goverment is corrupt or not is a non sequitur, Trump obviously believed he could get information from Z. so the DoJ could further the investigation and analyze the information to see if the information is valid or pertinent.

How does this not answer you question, are you saying Trump was out of bound for setting the table for an investigation?

[_Markk]

In fairness, I receive hundreds of hate emails a day from pancake lovers everywhere regarding my intentional misspelling of such a venerable and delicious breakfast food.
: D[/quote]

I though she was drunk, but I guess she just needs another reason to nag at me. I'm in deep yogurt if she bitches at me for my typing skills.