“One of the Florida businessmen who worked with Rudy Giuliani on his hunt for Ukrainian dirt on Democrats has turned over a trove of ‘hard evidence’ to impeachment investigators — including photos and videos,” the New York Daily News reports. “Lev Parnas, who was criminally charged last month in a sweeping campaign finance scheme that overlaps with the House impeachment inquiry, had so much evidence it had to be sent to House probers in several batches.”
Photos and videos? Sounds damn damning. Photos and videos of the room next door to where the hearsay was heard?
So what was Ghouliani doing in Ukraine? Why did Trump hire the two Ukrainian criminals? Why was the aide to Ukraine held up? Why was the transcript of the call that is being hidden moved to a secret server? Why won't Trump allow WH officials to testify? It's very to clear things up if these were hearsay or not, just release the evidence and testify under oath. Can't have it both way.
Your post has been reformatted to facilitate my response, item by item. Reply is inline, below: ="exGOPer, post: 4967429, member: 327981"] So what was Ghouliani doing in Ukraine? I don’t know what roles a Presidential attorney might play. Trump does not have a legal background and it would seem reasonable to have an attorney advise the President on legal issues concerning treaties, agreements, and the like. This does not seem as sinister as under Bush or Obama where these Presidents seemed to legally isolate themselves through various people that would carry out their dirty work. At least Trump, through Twitter and press conferences has directly let his opinions and policy stances known. Seems to me it takes someone of high integrity and belief in what they are doing to be so transparent. Why did Trump hire the two Ukrainian criminals? I don’t know who you are referring to or why you characterize them as criminals, especially if you are implying they are more corrupt than usual by Ukraine standards. Are you talking about diplomats? Are you talking about some people in an advisory capacity? When you say “hire”, are you talking about Trump personally paying for Ukrainian services? From what I hear, it is not easy to find non corrupt individuals in Ukraine. Why was the aide to Ukraine held up? If the Ukrainian aid was held up, could it not been related to the recent change in political control in Ukraine? Would it not be prudent for the President to consult, review, and determine if Russian attempts to influence Ukraine’s election were successful? Is not being sure $400,000,000,000 in aid, including US military technology would not be likely to directly benefit the Russians be considered responsible governance? Are we really talking about Trump “interfering” with Biden and friends money tree? Why was the transcript of the call that is being hidden moved to a secret server? How would you know about a hidden call if it was hidden? How would you know if this call was moved to a secret server? Although you need to do better than this, I’ll still entertain this thought. If there was a change in the status quo of how relevant data was stored without reasonable justification where legal requirements apply, there should be an investigation. If a investigation on this is warranted, perhaps Hillary can assist. Why won't Trump allow WH officials to testify? I would imagine to minimize legal exposure. Given the prior conduct of the Democrats of using prior witness statements and a loose interpretation of what they say to craft perjury changes, I would say this is sound policy. It appears the impeachment proceedings are more about looking for a crime rather than about an actual crime being committed. Congress appears to be abusing its power for political gain. The Democratic controlled Congress appears to be trying to diminish the checks and balances put forth by this country’s founders by minimizing the role of the Executive Branch. The Democrats appear to be attempting to circumvent our Constitution and individual rights to create an environment where unjustified charges could thrive and normal legal defenses moot. It's very to clear things up if these were hearsay or not, just release the evidence and testify under oath. The reason there is a legal requirement that search and seizure require probable cause is to avoid the hunting expedition that Congress seems to be employing now. Our laws must be respected and applied consistently and evenly. This includes Trump and the Office of the Presidency. Can't have it both way. False equivalence; ridiculous characterization. Try again.
So many headlines... One of Rudy Giuliani's bungling 'fixers' is 'prepared to tell Congress that Republican Rep. Devin Nunes met with fired Ukrainian prosecutor to try and get dirt on Joe Biden' Attorney for Lev Parnas said on Friday that he is willing to testify in Congress Parnas says that Devin Nunes met with former Ukraine prosecutor Victor Shokin Shokin was fired in early 2016 after Biden threatened to withhold loan guarantee Nunes was trying to dig dirt that Biden acted corruptly, according to Parnas Trump ally Nunes is the Republican ranking member on the Intel Committee Allegation throws a new twist in House impeachment proceedings Nunes blasts the claim as 'demonstrably false and scandalous' and vows to sue Haha, he is suing the cow and his Alt-mom too even though he has absolutely no legitimate chance (as said in obvious parody you can legally say anything) beyond intimidating them in a slap-suit.
Whatever happened to 'I will hire the best people'? https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/10/us/politics/lev-parnas-igor-fruman-arrested-giuliani.html Why was the aide to Ukraine held up? And magically the day after the whistleblower report became public, all those concerns went away? Can you explain how that worked? I didn't say any of it was illegal, I am saying that they had something to hide, something as simple as a transcript of an innocent phone call. Why? Yes, the guy who won't make his finances public, guy who ran a scam university and recently admitted to running a laundering scheme will never commit a crime. No sir, Democrats are crazy to look into this saint of a man. The probable cause was extorting a foreign nation with taxpayer money appropriated by Congress to - and listen to this part clearly - that they ANNOUNCE an investigation into Joe Biden, did you get that? Not actually do an investigation but just ANNOUNCE. Tell me the logic of that. All you did was claim ignorance and gave bullshit deflection defending a man who can't even count on his wife for support without paying her off. Must be that conservative men of character you keep talking about.