What the WH released was not favorable to their cause. The point still remains that somebody held up the money and Trump wanted a press conference about Biden.
Impeachment Thread: Trump retaliating at anyone who wasn't willing to commit criminal obstruction
- Thread starter fried-chicken
- Start date
What the WH released was not favorable to their cause. The point still remains that somebody held up the money and Trump wanted a press conference about Biden.
FYI - You're right that it is not technically a word-for-word transcript, but I do believe this is the official record. At least one person testified that these "mem-com's" are preserved per requirements in Presidential Record's Act. No one has really dug into the technicalities of why we do it this way, but I do not believe there has been any testimony or evidence that suggest there is another record. Tim Morrison was responsible for taking edits and approving the final mem-com.
Vindman testified that, per his notes, Zelensky mentioned Burisma but it made the transcript as "company."
Williams also testified that she heard "Burisma" but I don't recall in what context. No one has contested that Trump explicitly mentioned Biden as recorded in the "transcript."
ha, only a pathetic trumpkin could continue to buy into his racist, homphobic lies.
fukn inbreds.
Nunes was in on it the whole time and hasn't mentioned it at all during the hearings.
Oops.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/11/22/...or-biden/index.html?__twitter_impression=true
Oops.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/11/22/...or-biden/index.html?__twitter_impression=true
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/tr...achment-hearing-invites-trump-attend-n1091861
Next committee starts up December 4th. Going to outline congressional responsibility.
Next committee starts up December 4th. Going to outline congressional responsibility.
via facebook group unbiased america.
DEMOCRATS RELEASE RESULT OF IMPEACHMENT INVESTIGATION, SAY PRESIDENT TRUMP IMPROPERLY WITHHELD UKRAINE AID AND OBSTRUCTED THE HOUSE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY
by Kevin Ryan
The Democratic-led House Intelligence Committee released a report Tuesday containing a summary of the evidence it has collected in the impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump.
The report cites two instances of “improper conduct”:
1. Obstruction of the House inquiry
2. Withholding the aid from Ukraine on the condition of investigating a Trump political rival.
"No other President has flouted the Constitution and power of Congress to conduct oversight to this extent," the report said, concluding the president obstructed the House impeachment inquiry. "If left unanswered, President Trump's ongoing effort to thwart Congress' impeachment power risks doing grave harm to the institution of Congress, the balance of power between our branches of government, and the Constitutional order that the President and every Member of Congress have sworn to protect and defend."
The entire investigation consisted of testimony by 17 witnesses, 12 of which were held public.
Republicans on the committee released a 123-page minority report last night that argues that Democrats have failed to establish any impeachable offenses by Trump, and that there was no quid pro quo.
“The Democrats’ impeachment inquiry, led by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, is merely the outgrowth of their obsession with re-litigating the results of the 2016 presidential election,” the Republicans said in their report. “Despite their best efforts, the evidence gathered during the Democrats’ partisan and one-sided impeachment inquiry does not support that President Trump pressured Ukraine to investigate his political rival to benefit the President in the 2020 presidential election. The evidence does not establish any impeachable offense.”
The committee will vote on adopting the report this evening. The report, along with views provided by the Republicans in the minority, will then be sent to the House Judiciary Committee, which is expected to hold its first impeachment hearing tomorrow, chaired by Rep. Jerrold Nadler, (D-NY).
DEMOCRATIC REPORT: https://intelligence.house.gov/uplo...rt___hpsci_impeachment_inquiry_-_20191203.pdf
REPUBLICAN REPORT: https://apps.npr.org/documents/docu...019-12-02-Report-of-Evidence-in-the-Democrats
SOURCES: https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2019-12-03/house-committee-votes-impeachment-report
https://www.wsj.com/articles/house-democrats-impeachment-report-11575399225
https://thehill.com/policy/national...release-ukraine-findings-ahead-of-impeachment
DEMOCRATS RELEASE RESULT OF IMPEACHMENT INVESTIGATION, SAY PRESIDENT TRUMP IMPROPERLY WITHHELD UKRAINE AID AND OBSTRUCTED THE HOUSE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY
by Kevin Ryan
The Democratic-led House Intelligence Committee released a report Tuesday containing a summary of the evidence it has collected in the impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump.
The report cites two instances of “improper conduct”:
1. Obstruction of the House inquiry
2. Withholding the aid from Ukraine on the condition of investigating a Trump political rival.
"No other President has flouted the Constitution and power of Congress to conduct oversight to this extent," the report said, concluding the president obstructed the House impeachment inquiry. "If left unanswered, President Trump's ongoing effort to thwart Congress' impeachment power risks doing grave harm to the institution of Congress, the balance of power between our branches of government, and the Constitutional order that the President and every Member of Congress have sworn to protect and defend."
The entire investigation consisted of testimony by 17 witnesses, 12 of which were held public.
Republicans on the committee released a 123-page minority report last night that argues that Democrats have failed to establish any impeachable offenses by Trump, and that there was no quid pro quo.
“The Democrats’ impeachment inquiry, led by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, is merely the outgrowth of their obsession with re-litigating the results of the 2016 presidential election,” the Republicans said in their report. “Despite their best efforts, the evidence gathered during the Democrats’ partisan and one-sided impeachment inquiry does not support that President Trump pressured Ukraine to investigate his political rival to benefit the President in the 2020 presidential election. The evidence does not establish any impeachable offense.”
The committee will vote on adopting the report this evening. The report, along with views provided by the Republicans in the minority, will then be sent to the House Judiciary Committee, which is expected to hold its first impeachment hearing tomorrow, chaired by Rep. Jerrold Nadler, (D-NY).
DEMOCRATIC REPORT: https://intelligence.house.gov/uplo...rt___hpsci_impeachment_inquiry_-_20191203.pdf
REPUBLICAN REPORT: https://apps.npr.org/documents/docu...019-12-02-Report-of-Evidence-in-the-Democrats
SOURCES: https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2019-12-03/house-committee-votes-impeachment-report
https://www.wsj.com/articles/house-democrats-impeachment-report-11575399225
https://thehill.com/policy/national...release-ukraine-findings-ahead-of-impeachment
Hate to break it to you, but all politicians are liars. and to a lesser degree all humans are liars.
It is in the official politician handbook. The first 4 of the 10 commandments.
#1 Thall shalt lie
#2 Thall shalt steal
#3 Thall shalt lie to cover #2.
#4 Thall shalt lie and say you tell the truth.
Last edited:
I'd like to see how Schiff was able to retrieve the call logs that show Nunes was talking to Giuliani. There should have been a criminal investigation in place that led to a subpoena but has there been any talk about criminal activity?
I think Nunes was using his congressional phone for some of the calls. Why aren't we questioning why Guilani has anything to do with foreign policy? What does he do?
who is excited to advance the impeachment process to the senate where they will be able to create their own rules and subpoena whoever they want and draw the process out as long as they want?
In the world I grew up in, honesty and integrity mattered. In the world I grew up in, Trump would have resigned from office in disgrace by now.
Where have the people of character gone?
Why aren't people cringing in embarrassment at the knowledge our President paid off a porn star to stay quiet about their sex?
Why aren't people who truly care about our country alarmed at the way we've allowed a puppet of Russia to be our Commander in Chief?
Why the "nothing to see here" attitude by Congressional Republicans regarding Trump's well-documented efforts to put the squeeze on Ukraine's President in exchange for an announcement of a Biden investigation?
Has our country lost every shred of its moral authority?
Where have the people of character gone?
Why aren't people cringing in embarrassment at the knowledge our President paid off a porn star to stay quiet about their sex?
Why aren't people who truly care about our country alarmed at the way we've allowed a puppet of Russia to be our Commander in Chief?
Why the "nothing to see here" attitude by Congressional Republicans regarding Trump's well-documented efforts to put the squeeze on Ukraine's President in exchange for an announcement of a Biden investigation?
Has our country lost every shred of its moral authority?
Any idea what crime was being investigated? Or why this wasn't brought up in the hearing for cross examination?
integrity went out the window a long time ago. the media and hollywood decided they could go after conservatives at will. making them out to be terrible people for having basic conservative views. trump was the first conservative candidate to no give a sh;t about those attacks from the media/hollywood and even go after them.
that is why we are here. i would like to have integrity make a comeback, but i dont see it for the foreseeable future.
I don't know all the details but it was possibly due to Lev Parnas, who is under criminal investigation. And when his records were obtained it showed a connection be Guiliani and Nunes, but I don't know for sure.
That's a little disconcerting if true. I could see there being a subpoena for Parnas' phone records but should that extend to everyone who he has spoken to? Going one step further, why did these records find their way to Schiff?
They found their way to Schiff because he subpoenaed them. And no if true, it isn't disconcerting a bit. People are subpoenaed all the time who might not be targets of the investigation, but might know things. Well, pretty weird coincidence that Nunes was talking to both Rudy and Parnas at the exact same time they were starting propaganda theories with John Soloman of The Hill, to smear Ambassador Yovanovitch. Any comments on a ranking member of the House Intelligence committee investigating an event he now appears to be directly involved in? Or are we just going to ignore that and make this about Adam Schiff too?
Does Schiff have the authority to subpoena phone records? He isn't an investigator and they would have to provide proof that a crime has been committed to get the subpoena. This whole thing seems odd.
Of course he has the authority to subpoena. Congress has subpoena power. The only thing that seems odd about it is that is Devin Nunes was conversing with a known criminal at the exact time a lot of this was going down. Do you not think that at least looks pretty damn bad?
Yeah, this is really a media and Hollywood thing. God forbid an entire political party looks the other way at Trump's crimes and corruption.
I don't know enough to say either way. So far all I've heard is that he played phone tag with Rudy one day and had a 2 minute conversation. Do phone records show that nunes was talking to Parnas?
Yes they showed he was talking to Parnas, and he was interviewed on Hannity last night and didn't even deny it, only that he didn't remember it (which we know what that means).
https://www.thedailybeast.com/devin...arnas-and-rudy-giuliani-calls-to-sean-hannity
So if what I read from Reuters is correct, schiff could only subpoena phone records if he had already gotten a vote to hold a witness in contempt of court. CNN says that the subpoena came from a 3rd party. It probably had to be a domestic investigative entity since all of the parties are us citizens, possibly the FBI but certainly not from the CIA. Basically, someone had to voluntarily feed this to Schiff because he doesnt have the authority himself to attain it. Parnas talking to Nunes looks pretty bad unless that is his local congressman, Rudy not so much.
This is pretty interesting.
This is pretty interesting.
Doesnt look very good, but only one of those calls looks like an actual conversation. Are there more records that show any kind of back and forth between the parties?
The fact that they spoke at all (let alone several times in rapid succession) is an issue.
They didn't speak in rapid succession. Look at the call timelines. Yes, it looks suspicious that he was calling those 3 people in such a short period of time but most of the calls look like phone tag. Take out the 8 minute conversation with Nunes and this doesn't look like much other than a guy who had access to phone numbers.
We should be much more interested in how and why the records were obtained, and how/when those records found their way to Schiff.
The next question is why would it be a problem that Nunes had conversations with Parnas and Giuliani? At the end of the day he really isn't worth more than a single vote because he had no authority over how the hearing was conducted. It might paint a picture of Republican corruption but it's pretty inconsequential unless they charge him with something. The same can be said for Schiff as well. If Schiff received information from the CIA, it may undermine his position but the person providing it may have committed a crime, not Schiff.
This whole thing seems like a soap opera level of politics.
4 calls in a few hours is rapid succession. One looks like a missed call, but the point stands.
AT&T claims they were "bound by law" to hand the records over. I'm sure we'll find out who requested them soon.
It's a problem because Parnas is currently an indicted man and is central to the extortion scheme Trump was running on Ukraine. Nunes claims to not be involved, but he clearly is. This dude is Ghouliani's muscle and has a history of shady shit, including trying to flee the country. Why is one of the ranking members presiding over the impeachment hearings talking to this guy and lying about it to our faces?
Yes, he was a single vote, but he had more time on the floor than anyone other than Schiff and he spent entire hearings spewing bogus conspiracy theories. The dude is crooked and he had a major impact on how the impeachment hearings proceeded. To argue anything less is disingenuous.
They were obtained through a subpoena, I am not sure why you are rejecting that. The records literally say they are from AT&T. You are trying to create a deep state conspiracy that simply doesnt exists.
I'm not rejecting anything, I just asked the question of who was subject to the subpoena. It looks like it was on Parnas, which is totally legit. How/why/when Schiff received the copy of the subpoena is my question. If he received it before the hearing then he should have brought it up. If he received it afterwards, I'm not sure that it is appropriate to use it as evidence in his impeachment recommendation. Would you want to have evidence presented against you that your defense would have no opportunity to address? If it existed during the trial but the prosecution waited until final statements to produce it, should it be admissible?
FWIW, I am off the fence about this and believe that yes, Trump is guilty of what he is accused of due to his associations with people who are pretty questionable. I'm more interested in talking about the process and the legality of it. This isn't a matter of a singular innocent/guilty ruling, this is about how many people are guilty and whether or not it sets a precedent that we may not want.
