Impeachment hearings

[_Markk]

There's what, 25 pages of nonsense and ____ generated by your stupidity and you still don't know what the hell you're talking about here. You just keep pathologically whacking out even more ____.





I am significantly stupider from reading your posts and I don't know about anyone else here but I can't afford that ____.

You are stupid, becasue you offer no objectivity at all.

Please offer something to the thread beyond your ad hom parroting, it seems you even parrot the ad hom's also.

Start with Joe's Quid Pro Quo in his quest to root out corruption. And then expound on was it legal or was he breaking a law worthy of at the least an investigation, especially given his son was receiving monies from the very goverment his father was assigned to help root out that corruption and offer a Billion plus is aid to.

This is why you are a followers Jersey Girl...you have nothing to offer and you follow those that are simply partisan hacks with TDS, who are lost out side the standard talking points.

Think for yourself, you can do it.

[_Markk]

My position is easy to defend, your answer is just a nuh uh, that you refuse to even elaborate on...it is that telling.

BS is always easy to defend. Just spoon out more BS. It's why you can't answer the question of why Trump didn't ask the DoJ to investigate with anything other than, "he didn't have to!!1!" ... that sure is some sad BS you're spooning out.

And now, it's why you can't make enough sense of your parroted list of disparate bad-faith claims to even tell me details of Burisma's supposed connection to the US assistance effort for Ukraine.

Maybe you should look into that; it'll help you to admit to yourself the actual reason why Trump didn't ask the DoJ to investigate. ; )

See my post to Honor...and defend you assertion there is not enough evidence, compared to my assertion, and pages of back up that there is.

[Guest]

Why did Obama ask Biden to investigate the Ukraine...

Why did Obama ask Biden to investigate the Ukraine...

He didn't. He asked Vice-President Biden to handle the executive branch's diplomatic and foreign relations with the Ukraine. He was not investigating anything. Not was he given judiciary responsibilities for the Ukraine. It is a bad faith statement you keep making that needs corrected.

(My bold.)

I'm not sure where to start in that there is so many things to touch on with your post.

I'll start here...

Like I wrote umpteen times, Biden was given the task of handing out aid to the Ukraine. With that comes the responsibility of making sure the the corruption that was rampant does not divert the aid to where it was intended to go. Obama, knew this, the European countries also offering aid knew this, as did Biden. He wrote in his memoir...

President Obama was always mindful of the concerns of the Big Four in Europe—Britain, Germany, France, and Italy—whose leaders he was in touch with constantly. The senior member of the quartet, Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany, was on record with her worry about “a confrontation [in Ukraine] which risks spiraling out of control.” She and the others were even more worried about the political backlash they would face at home when the economic sanctions and embargoes on Russia started to pinch their own business communities. And none of them were hot to spend their political capital to save an emerging democracy whose leaders had exhibited a penchant for corruption, self-dealing, and self-destructive behavior. I was probably swayed in my own thinking by my frequent contacts with the leaders of our more recent allies in Europe—in Poland, Romania, the Baltic states, the Balkans. Putin’s move in Ukraine felt like the canary in the coal mine to them. They were afraid that if the West didn’t stand firm there, Putin might start carving off pieces of their territory near the Russian border. Or more.

It was almost ten at night when Finnegan and the staff and I finally settled into our rooms at the Westin, but I wasn’t ready to sleep. I looked over the briefing materials again and started gaming out the next few days. I was going to be giving a speech at the Munich conference Saturday afternoon and had more than half a dozen formal meetings scheduled that weekend. The most important was a trilateral talk just before noon on Saturday with Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko and Chancellor Merkel. Merkel and French president François Hollande were in the middle of a tense negotiation with Putin about defining and implementing a new and improved version of the shaky Minsk cease-fire. Merkel had a phone call with Putin scheduled for the next day, so I wanted to be there at Poroshenko’s side in our three-way meeting to make sure Merkel understood that the United States remained ready to stand tough for him and his nation’s borders. But before any of that, I wanted to make sure to be in the audience for Merkel’s own address to the security conference. So that was the first thing up on my public calendar—less than ten hours away.

The chancellor was strong in her speech that next morning. Ukraine was “seeing both its territorial integrity and sovereignty disregarded,” she said. “International law is being violated.” But she was not strong enough for my taste; the passive voice weakened her statement. And I was disappointed when, after her speech, she flatly refused to consider providing any real weaponry to Ukraine’s overmatched military. “The progress that Ukraine needs cannot be achieved by more weapons,” she said. She seemed to have the sympathy of the crowd on that point.

I left the Merkel event and told my staff we had to revise my own remarks. My words needed to be as direct and declarative as possible. We had less than four hours to fix the speech, and I had to do the meeting with Merkel and Poroshenko first. I instructed my team to start un-lawyering the language of the speech. I wanted them to make absolutely sure that the plain meaning could not be missed, and told them I would be back to help with rewrites as soon as I could.


The room for the meeting with President Poroshenko and Chancellor Merkel was nothing fancy. We sat at a relativelysmall table in the corner of a conference room, which meant it was an intimate talk. Poroshenko seemed relieved I was there. He knew I was committed to Ukraine’s success for its own sake and also as a proof to Russia of European resolve. I thought the outcome of the Ukraine crisis would set the tone for central and eastern Europe for decades, for good or for ill. I had been hard on Poroshenko since his election nine months earlier. I’d made it clear to him that he could not afford to give the Europeans any excuse for walking away from the sanctions regime against Russia. He had to continue to fight the elements of corruption that were embedded in the political culture of Ukraine’s Soviet and post-Soviet governance—both in Yatsenyuk’s rival party and in Poroshenko’s own. But the Ukrainian president also knew I had gone to bat for him to get aid packages from the International International Monetary Fund and loan guarantees from the United States. That I had been pushing hard at the Principals Committee meetings to provide training for his military, and had already been able to get him nonlethal equipment like the special radars Ukraine’s military needed to identify the location of Russian mortars. Poroshenko could not have missed my own sense of urgency where the future of Ukraine was concerned.


Biden, Joe. Promise Me, Dad (pp. 101-104). Flatiron Books. Kindle Edition.

The American press certainly understood this...

KYIV, Ukraine —

Four days before President Trump was inaugurated in January 2017, the outgoing vice president, Joe Biden, was in Ukraine — his sixth visit in seven years — to deliver a rousing farewell speech.

“You’re fighting both against the cancer of corruption, which continues to eat away at Ukraine’s democracy within, and the unrelenting aggression of the Kremlin,” he told local leaders, politicians and parliamentarians in Kyiv, the capital


“It’s imperative that you continue to strengthen all of your anti-corruption institutions to root out those who would return Ukraine to rule by cronyism and kleptocracy,” he added.

The rousing speech reflected not only Biden’s focus on driving out entrenched corruption in Ukraine, but also the Obama White House efforts to help the former Soviet republic on its difficult path to democracy.

https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/ ... r-scrutiny

His infamous Quid pro quo, was claimed to be, by Joe, because Shokin was not going after corruption, in which Joe did the following...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QE7PwqmzSu0


More later

Markk, where in this wall of text you pasted does anyone (but you) say that Obama asked Biden to investigate Ukraine? I couldn't find it.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Morley,

Welcome to the last 25 pages.

- Doc

[_Morley]

yeah.

[_canpakes]

BS is always easy to defend. Just spoon out more BS. It's why you can't answer the question of why Trump didn't ask the DoJ to investigate with anything other than, "he didn't have to!!1!" ... that sure is some sad BS you're spooning out.

And now, it's why you can't make enough sense of your parroted list of disparate bad-faith claims to even tell me details of Burisma's supposed connection to the US assistance effort for Ukraine.

Maybe you should look into that; it'll help you to admit to yourself the actual reason why Trump didn't ask the DoJ to investigate. ; )

See my post to Honor...and defend you assertion there is not enough evidence, compared to my assertion, and pages of back up that there is.

There is no need to ‘defend a lack of evidence’. No grown person demands such a thing. Rather, it’s up to you, as the one claiming that there’s evidence, to provide it. So far, you haven’t done that.

Tell me details of Burisma's supposed connection to the US assistance effort for Ukraine. What is the cash connection?

Then, tell me why Trump didn’t ask the DoJ to investigate anything.

You’re still dead in the water at the starting line.

[_Markk]

Markk, where in this wall of text you pasted does anyone (but you) say that Obama asked Biden to investigate Ukraine? I couldn't find it.

Then are you saying he just did this on his own? And that Obama was ignorant and oblivious to what he was doing and saying...? You guys are so predictable.

okay...Obama was clueless and Joe was just cowboying his way through all this with over a billon dollar check book in his pocket. The Ukraine knew about it, Trump knew about it, I knew about it, the media knew about it, and was warning Obama about the way it all looked...and yet Obama was clueless or just let Joe run wild against his policy goals.

Joe was assigned, among others things, the Northern Triangle, the Ukraine and China, by Obama...are you really going to imply making sure taxpayer congress approved monies were not going to corrupt governments, was not part of Bidens assigned duties and goals.


I know you guys hate me...but use your heads and do just a little objective reading.


So which is it Morley? Joe was just doing what he wanted to do? Or was his documented goals, of rooting out corruption and making sure our money went to where it was intended, part of Obama’s policy goals? If Obama was not aware, what does that say about his Quid Pro Que?

This is where you guys bail out typically, when you see you are just arguing talking points and don’t really understand what the facts and implications are, and simply did not think your argument out.

[_Morley]

Markk, where in this wall of text you pasted does anyone (but you) say that Obama asked Biden to investigate Ukraine? I couldn't find it.

Then are you saying he just did this on his own? And that Obama was ignorant and oblivious to what he was doing and saying...? You guys are so predictable.

okay...Obama was clueless and Joe was just cowboying his way through all this with over a billon dollar check book in his pocket. The Ukraine knew about it, Trump knew about it, I knew about it, the media knew about it, and was warning Obama about the way it all looked...and yet Obama was clueless or just let Joe run wild against his policy goals.

Joe was assigned, among others things, the Northern Triangle, the Ukraine and China, by Obama...are you really going to imply making sure taxpayer congress approved monies were not going to corrupt governments, was not part of Bidens assigned duties and goals.


I know you guys hate me...but use your heads and do just a little objective reading.


So which is it Morley? Joe was just doing what he wanted to do? Or was his documented goals, of rooting out corruption and making sure our money went to where it was intended, part of Obama’s policy goals? If Obama was not aware, what does that say about his Quid Pro Que?

This is where you guys bail out typically, when you see you are just arguing talking points and don’t really understand what the facts and implications are, and simply did not think your argument out.

You made a statement that you're passing off as an objective fact not a pull-it-out-of-your-sphincter type conjecture. If you want to discuss your conjecture, own it as such.

[Guest]

Markk,

Biden wasn't investigating corruption. His job was as an official representative of the executive branch of government and he was engaged in foreign relations policy. That isn't the same as investigating nor is it comparable to Rudy's non-official behavior on behalf of his private client, Donald Trump. Was part of that a concern regarding corruption? Absolutely. But you are being very sloppy in use if language or you don't express an understanding of critical differences here.

Clarity on this matters. It matters a lot.

[_Markk]

Did you read what I have written? Again as predicted this is where you bail out. You are stuck with talking point narratives that can’t stand up to common sense and documented factual evidences.

I will touch on this later after work.