Pelosi to Announce Trump Impeachment Inquiry

 

Speaker Nancy Pelosi late Tuesday said that she supports a formal impeachment inquiry into President Trump, according to a Democratic lawmaker. The purported reason is the allegation that Trump pressured Ukraine to investigate Hunter Biden. No actual evidence has been released of any wrongdoing in this matter. From The Hill:

Pelosi is expected to make her announcement at 5 p.m. on the House floor after meetings with Democratic chairmen of six committees investigating Trump and his administration and with the full Democratic Caucus.

“As soon as we have the facts, we’re ready,” Pelosi said Tuesday at The Atlantic Festival. “Now we have the facts, we’re ready … for later today.”

More than two-thirds of House Democrats publicly support launching an impeachment inquiry. Pelosi has not been among those backing an inquiry.

On Tuesday alone, more than a dozen lawmakers — including close Pelosi ally Rep. Lois Frankel (D-Fla.) — have come out in support of an impeachment inquiry in the aftermath of reports about the phone call with Zelensky.

Earlier Tuesday, Trump acknowledged he had withheld about $400 million in U.S. military aid for Ukraine just days ahead of the July 25 phone call.

Democrats have demanded the release of the call’s transcript, which Trump already cleared for distribution. “You will see it was a very friendly and totally appropriate call,” Trump said on Twitter Tuesday morning. “No pressure and, unlike Joe Biden and his son, NO quid pro quo! This is nothing more than a continuation of the Greatest and most Destructive Witch Hunt of all time!” .

Published in General
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 163 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Jeff Hawkins Inactive
    Jeff Hawkins
    @JeffHawkins

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Delay only helps the Democrats. Nixon resigned in August 1974. In the 1974 elections, the Democrats won 4 Senate seats to take a 71-39 lead in the Senate, and 49 seats in the House to take a 291-144 lead in the House. The GOP lost 4 governorships and the Democrats had a 36-13-1 lead with Governors, with one independent governor in Maine

    the Delay is the point….in case you haven’t noticed the whole outrage thing is performative.

    • #61
  2. Jason Obermeyer Member
    Jason Obermeyer
    @JasonObermeyer

    It’s gonna be lit, y’all:

     

    https://twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2019/09/24/white-house-now-says-it-will-release-transcript-and-whistleblower-complaint-this-week/

    • #62
  3. philo Member
    philo
    @philo

    A few words from a lawyer-type who has proven to be more reliable than others over the years:

    The Ukraine “scandal,” whatever it proves to be, has serious potential to boomerang on the Democrats, since we know for sure that Joe Biden, as vice president, did precisely the worst thing that Trump can be accused of. By his own account, he pulled a $1 billion loan guarantee to force Ukraine’s government to fire a prosecutor who was investigating a company that paid Biden’s son Hunter $600,000 a year for…what? Influence, presumably. Hunter had nothing else to sell.

    I think there is no chance that Trump did anything comparable. To the extent that he urged Ukraine’s president to reopen the investigation that Biden squashed, I have a hard time finding fault. It is possible that the exchange between Trump and Zelensky could contain a discussion of Biden’s history that the Democrats will not enjoy reading.

    • #63
  4. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    DrewInWisconsin, Thought Leader (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Thought Leader (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    It might surprise people to hear that I have a different point of view.

    Not at all. Also, you’re a Weld-supporter — do you support his call to have the President executed?

    I am a ARBT supporter, “Any Republican But Trump.” My preferences are Sanders, Weld, and Walsh all over Trump. I hope that Romney or Haley jump in.

    So, you support Weld’s call to have the President executed?

    No.  I think Weld was having a Trumpian moment.

    • #64
  5. Jason Obermeyer Member
    Jason Obermeyer
    @JasonObermeyer

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    Delay only helps the Democrats.

    Br’er Democrats: We’re gonna get you this time.

    Br’er Trump: Whatever you do, don’t throw me into that Br’er patch.

    Br’er Democrats: We’re gonna throw you into that Br’er patch so hard.

    Br’er: Trump: Please, no!

    I never say that Trump plays 26 dimensional chess or whatever, but this rope-a-dope thing with Democrats really is his wheelhouse. 

    • #65
  6. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Jeff Hawkins (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Delay only helps the Democrats. Nixon resigned in August 1974. In the 1974 elections, the Democrats won 4 Senate seats to take a 71-39 lead in the Senate, and 49 seats in the House to take a 291-144 lead in the House. The GOP lost 4 governorships and the Democrats had a 36-13-1 lead with Governors, with one independent governor in Maine

    the Delay is the point….in case you haven’t noticed the whole outrage thing is performative.

    So Trump can call their bluff by releasing the whistle-blower referral to the House and Senate Committee, along with a copy of the recording.

    • #66
  7. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Jason Obermeyer (View Comment):

    It’s gonna be lit, y’all:

     

    https://twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2019/09/24/white-house-now-says-it-will-release-transcript-and-whistleblower-complaint-this-week/

    Will that be before or after Trump releases his taxes?  I am reminded that Trump also said that he wanted to be interviewed by Mueller.  

    I don’t want a promise from Trump, I want specific performance.  

    • #67
  8. Ray Kujawa Coolidge
    Ray Kujawa
    @RayKujawa

    philo (View Comment):

    A few words from a lawyer-type who has proven to be more reliable than others over the years:

    The Ukraine “scandal,” whatever it proves to be, has serious potential to boomerang on the Democrats, since we know for sure that Joe Biden, as vice president, did precisely the worst thing that Trump can be accused of. By his own account, he pulled a $1 billion loan guarantee to force Ukraine’s government to fire a prosecutor who was investigating a company that paid Biden’s son Hunter $600,000 a year for…what? Influence, presumably. Hunter had nothing else to sell.

    I think there is no chance that Trump did anything comparable. To the extent that he urged Ukraine’s president to reopen the investigation that Biden squashed, I have a hard time finding fault. It is possible that the exchange between Trump and Zelensky could contain a discussion of Biden’s history that the Democrats will not enjoy reading.

    I think it’s likely that reopening the discussion of Biden’s history will have deep ramifications for Biden, but not so much for Trump, and I think this is intentional. I’m tending to believe the people laying out this narrative for the press think they’re getting a two-fer. From my standpoint, Biden is too compromised with China to be President.

    • #68
  9. Jason Obermeyer Member
    Jason Obermeyer
    @JasonObermeyer

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Will that be before or after Trump releases his taxes? I am reminded that Trump also said that he wanted to be interviewed by Mueller.

    I don’t want a promise from Trump, I want specific performance.

    Fair enough. But I think a specific promise to release by the end of the week is more likely to be acted on than a non-specific promise to do something at some random point in the future. To much attention on the matter at the moment.

    • #69
  10. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Jason Obermeyer (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Will that be before or after Trump releases his taxes? I am reminded that Trump also said that he wanted to be interviewed by Mueller.

    I don’t want a promise from Trump, I want specific performance.

    Fair enough. But I think a specific promise to release by the end of the week is more likely to be acted on than a non-specific promise to do something at some random point in the future. To much attention on the matter at the moment.

    Fair enough.

    • #70
  11. Columbo Inactive
    Columbo
    @Columbo

    Valiuth (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Thought Leader (View Comment):

    Meanwhile, Bill Weld decides to out-do Nancy, and suggests that Trump should be executed.

    You can’t take Bill Weld literally, but you do have to take him seriously.

     

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Can somebody explain to me in very short words of one or two syllables why, even if Trump did what they say he did, it’s a bad thing?

    I honestly don’t see the problem.

     

     

    If Trump was using distribution of appropriated funds as a bargaining chip to force the Ukrainian government to launch an investigation into an active political opponent and his family it would be an abuse of his power, for his personal gain. On top of just being a dereliction of duty, as it would be his job to execute the will of the Congress in the distribution of those funds. It would be like Trump refusing to release education department funds allocated by Congress to the City of New York unless the local DA started an investigation into Bill DeBlasio. I mean there isn’t any difference in the circumstance.

    But any way. Yay Trump Impeachment. Go DEEP STATE!!! Hope they nail the S.O.B. to a wall (well an artistically designed steel slat fence at least).

    If … if … if …

    Top Ukraine Official: “I think there was no pressure.”

    NPR: “I said, ‘You’re not getting the [$1 billion]. I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money.’ Well, son of a b****. He got fired,” Biden said.

    • #71
  12. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    DrewInWisconsin, Thought Leader (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    It might surprise people to hear that I have a different point of view.

    Not at all. Also, you’re a Weld-supporter — do you support his call to have the President executed?

    Also, you’re a Trump-supporter — do you support his call to have Biden face the electric chair?

    • #72
  13. Roosevelt Guck Inactive
    Roosevelt Guck
    @RooseveltGuck

    House Democrats are going to look like the partisan hacks they are.

    • #73
  14. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Roosevelt Guck (View Comment):

    House Democrats are going to look like the partisan hacks they are.

    It depends.  What if Trump doesn’t release the recording?  What if Trump defies the Courts?  

    • #74
  15. Joseph Stanko Coolidge
    Joseph Stanko
    @JosephStanko

    Jason Obermeyer (View Comment):
    Br’er Trump: Whatever you do, don’t throw me into that Br’er patch.

    I think that should be “briar patch,” the “Br’er” in “Br’er Rabbit” is short for “Brother Rabbit,” not “Briar Rabbit.”

     

    • #75
  16. RightAngles Member
    RightAngles
    @RightAngles

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Roosevelt Guck (View Comment):

    House Democrats are going to look like the partisan hacks they are.

    It depends. What if Trump doesn’t release the recording? What if Trump defies the Courts?

    He’d already said he was releasing the transcript BEFORE the Dems “demanded” it. Spartacus Moment there.

    • #76
  17. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    RightAngles (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Roosevelt Guck (View Comment):

    House Democrats are going to look like the partisan hacks they are.

    It depends. What if Trump doesn’t release the recording? What if Trump defies the Courts?

    He’d already said he was releasing the transcript BEFORE the Dems “demanded” it. Spartacus Moment there.

    Will that be before or after Trump releases his taxes?

    • #77
  18. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    The wonder of impeachment proceedings in an election year. Or will they get it all done in 2019?

    If the Democrats were smart, they would focus on a laser beam about just this one issue and not all of the rest of the stuff about Trump. They would send out a subpoena for the tape, go to court if it isn’t produced, and then go through the Federal Courts asap. If you will recall, Nixon didn’t want to release the Watergate tapes but wanted to give transcripts instead. Nixon lost before the Supreme Court in a 8-0 vote.

    I don’t think that the Democrats are that smart. I think that they will want to throw in the kitchen sink. But the kitchen sink didn’t get traction after the Mueller Report came out.

    You so missed my point.

    Why impeach when you can vote out of office? 

    • #78
  19. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    The wonder of impeachment proceedings in an election year. Or will they get it all done in 2019?

    If the Democrats were smart, they would focus on a laser beam about just this one issue and not all of the rest of the stuff about Trump. They would send out a subpoena for the tape, go to court if it isn’t produced, and then go through the Federal Courts asap. If you will recall, Nixon didn’t want to release the Watergate tapes but wanted to give transcripts instead. Nixon lost before the Supreme Court in a 8-0 vote.

    I don’t think that the Democrats are that smart. I think that they will want to throw in the kitchen sink. But the kitchen sink didn’t get traction after the Mueller Report came out.

    You so missed my point.

    Why impeach when you can vote out of office?

    Before Ukraine came up, I would have preferred to simply vote Trump out of office.  But, if literally, Trump doesn’t turn over the whistle-blower’s referral, and/or the recordings, and defies a court order, what choice does Congress have?

    I note that Jim Geraghty agreed that this could be impeachable at the 9 minute point on today’s Three Martini Lunch.

    • #79
  20. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Thought Leader (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    It might surprise people to hear that I have a different point of view.

    Not at all. Also, you’re a Weld-supporter — do you support his call to have the President executed?

    I am a ARBT supporter, “Any Republican But Trump.” My preferences are Sanders, Weld, and Walsh all over Trump. I hope that Romney or Haley jump in.

    Ergo you want Trump executed because you have to sign on to 100% to any candidate,  since you hod us Trump supporters to that standard. 

    • #80
  21. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    The wonder of impeachment proceedings in an election year. Or will they get it all done in 2019?

    If the Democrats were smart, they would focus on a laser beam about just this one issue and not all of the rest of the stuff about Trump. They would send out a subpoena for the tape, go to court if it isn’t produced, and then go through the Federal Courts asap. If you will recall, Nixon didn’t want to release the Watergate tapes but wanted to give transcripts instead. Nixon lost before the Supreme Court in a 8-0 vote.

    I don’t think that the Democrats are that smart. I think that they will want to throw in the kitchen sink. But the kitchen sink didn’t get traction after the Mueller Report came out.

    You so missed my point.

    Why impeach when you can vote out of office?

    What a novel idea for Democrats. How about you win an election fair and square, jacka–es. 

    • #81
  22. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    The wonder of impeachment proceedings in an election year. Or will they get it all done in 2019?

    If the Democrats were smart, they would focus on a laser beam about just this one issue and not all of the rest of the stuff about Trump. They would send out a subpoena for the tape, go to court if it isn’t produced, and then go through the Federal Courts asap. If you will recall, Nixon didn’t want to release the Watergate tapes but wanted to give transcripts instead. Nixon lost before the Supreme Court in a 8-0 vote.

    I don’t think that the Democrats are that smart. I think that they will want to throw in the kitchen sink. But the kitchen sink didn’t get traction after the Mueller Report came out.

    You so missed my point.

    Why impeach when you can vote out of office?

    Before Ukraine came up, I would have preferred to simply vote Trump out of office. But, if literally, Trump doesn’t turn over the whistle-blower’s referral, and/or the recordings, and defies a court order, what choice does Congress have?

    You have yet to call for Biden to drop out of the race.

     

    Until you do, you are showing your hypocritical approach to all things Trump.

    • #82
  23. Columbo Inactive
    Columbo
    @Columbo

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    (1) Joe Biden’s son, Hunter, did take consulting work for a Ukrainian oil company, Burisma, that was under investigation by a Ukrainian prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, for the work under the prior Russian-allied regime. This is where the true part of the Trump disinformation comes to an end.

    (2) The problem was that Shokin actively stood in the way of international investigations that the U.S. and other democratic reformers were pursuing.

    (3) Vice President Biden, U.S. diplomats, and our E.U. allies all called on the prosecutor to be fired so the corrupt oligarchs could be investigated MORE AGGRESSIVELY. This includes the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine calling out by name Mykola Zlochevsky, the oligarch who ran the company Hunter Biden worked for, as someone this prosecutor was letting off the hook.

    (4) Donald Trump was allegedly pressuring the Ukrainian government to investigate a domestic political foe on a bogus conspiracy for personal gain. Joe Biden was pressuring the Ukrainian government to root out corruption in their own country and bring about democratic reforms.

    (5) For the kids in the back:

    PRESSURING A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT TO INTERFERE ON YOUR BEHALF IN DOMESTIC ELECTIONS = VERY BAD.

    PRESSURING A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT TO INVESTIGATE CROOKS = GOOD.

    Your points 2 and 3 are flat out lies. Read award-winning investigative journalist John Solomon at The Hill (no Trump-supportive site):

    Most of the general prosecutor’s investigative work on Burisma focused on three separate cases, and most stopped abruptly once Shokin was fired. The most prominent of the Burisma cases was transferred to a different Ukrainian agency, closely aligned with the U.S. Embassy in Kiev, known as the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU), according to the case file and current General Prosecutor Yuriy Lutsenko.

    As a result, the Biden family appeared to have escaped the potential for an embarrassing inquiry overseas in the final days of the Obama administration and during an election in which Democrat Hillary Clinton was running for president in 2016.

    But then, as Biden’s 2020 campaign ramped up over the past year, Lutsenko — the Ukrainian prosecutor that Biden once hailed as a “solid” replacement for Shokin — began looking into what happened with the Burisma case that had been shut down.

    Lutsenko told me that, while reviewing the Burisma investigative files, he discovered “members of the Board obtained funds as well as another U.S.-based legal entity, Rosemont Seneca Partners LLC, for consulting services.”

    Lutsenko said some of the evidence he knows about in the Burisma case may interest U.S. authorities and he’d like to present that information to new U.S. Attorney General William Barr, particularly the vice president’s intervention.

    A closed probe is revived … by the “solid” Ukrainian prosecutor.

    • #83
  24. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Thought Leader (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    It might surprise people to hear that I have a different point of view.

    Not at all. Also, you’re a Weld-supporter — do you support his call to have the President executed?

    I am a ARBT supporter, “Any Republican But Trump.” My preferences are Sanders, Weld, and Walsh all over Trump. I hope that Romney or Haley jump in.

    Ergo you want Trump executed because you have to sign on to 100% to any candidate, since you hod us Trump supporters to that standard.

    No, no, no.  First I don’t want Trump to be executed.  Second, I do not condemn or  hold Trump Supporters like my sainted mother to such a standard.

    • #84
  25. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    The wonder of impeachment proceedings in an election year. Or will they get it all done in 2019?

    If the Democrats were smart, they would focus on a laser beam about just this one issue and not all of the rest of the stuff about Trump. They would send out a subpoena for the tape, go to court if it isn’t produced, and then go through the Federal Courts asap. If you will recall, Nixon didn’t want to release the Watergate tapes but wanted to give transcripts instead. Nixon lost before the Supreme Court in a 8-0 vote.

    I don’t think that the Democrats are that smart. I think that they will want to throw in the kitchen sink. But the kitchen sink didn’t get traction after the Mueller Report came out.

    You so missed my point.

    Why impeach when you can vote out of office?

    Before Ukraine came up, I would have preferred to simply vote Trump out of office. But, if literally, Trump doesn’t turn over the whistle-blower’s referral, and/or the recordings, and defies a court order, what choice does Congress have?

    You have yet to call for Biden to drop out of the race.

     

    Until you do, you are showing your hypocritical approach to all things Trump.

    It appears that Trump and Biden are opposite situations.  But I would be open to disqualifying both Trump and Biden! 

    • #85
  26. Jager Coolidge
    Jager
    @Jager

    Columbo (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    (1) Joe Biden’s son, Hunter, did take consulting work for a Ukrainian oil company, Burisma, that was under investigation by a Ukrainian prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, for the work under the prior Russian-allied regime. This is where the true part of the Trump disinformation comes to an end.

    (2) The problem was that Shokin actively stood in the way of international investigations that the U.S. and other democratic reformers were pursuing.

    (3) Vice President Biden, U.S. diplomats, and our E.U. allies all called on the prosecutor to be fired so the corrupt oligarchs could be investigated MORE AGGRESSIVELY. This includes the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine calling out by name Mykola Zlochevsky, the oligarch who ran the company Hunter Biden worked for, as someone this prosecutor was letting off the hook.

    (4) Donald Trump was allegedly pressuring the Ukrainian government to investigate a domestic political foe on a bogus conspiracy for personal gain. Joe Biden was pressuring the Ukrainian government to root out corruption in their own country and bring about democratic reforms.

    (5) For the kids in the back:

    PRESSURING A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT TO INTERFERE ON YOUR BEHALF IN DOMESTIC ELECTIONS = VERY BAD.

    PRESSURING A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT TO INVESTIGATE CROOKS = GOOD.

    Your points 2 and 3 are flat out lies. Read award-winning investigative journalist John Solomon at The Hill (no Trump-supportive site):

    Most of the general prosecutor’s investigative work on Burisma focused on three separate cases, and most stopped abruptly once Shokin was fired. The most prominent of the Burisma cases was transferred to a different Ukrainian agency, closely aligned with the U.S. Embassy in Kiev, known as the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU), according to the case file and current General Prosecutor Yuriy Lutsenko.

    As a result, the Biden family appeared to have escaped the potential for an embarrassing inquiry overseas in the final days of the Obama administration and during an election in which Democrat Hillary Clinton was running for president in 2016.

    But then, as Biden’s 2020 campaign ramped up over the past year, Lutsenko — the Ukrainian prosecutor that Biden once hailed as a “solid” replacement for Shokin — began looking into what happened with the Burisma case that had been shut down.

    Lutsenko told me that, while reviewing the Burisma investigative files, he discovered “members of the Board obtained funds as well as another U.S.-based legal entity, Rosemont Seneca Partners LLC, for consulting services.”

    Lutsenko said some of the evidence he knows about in the Burisma case may interest U.S. authorities and he’d like to present that information to new U.S. Attorney General William Barr, particularly the vice president’s intervention.

    A closed probe is revived … by the “solid” Ukrainian prosecutor.

    If this is turns out to be what is in the transcript it would seem Trump did nothing and the will all hit Biden. Making the Dems look foolish 

    • #86
  27. Jon1979 Inactive
    Jon1979
    @Jon1979

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    cirby (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    I think that there is a strong argument that the two scenarios are opposite each other. https://thebulwark.com/truth-lies-and-the-nonsense-trump-biden-ukraine-false-equivalency/ Its bottom line is as follows:

    (snip)

    Sorry, but relying on such a deeply anti-Trump source as The Bulwark isn’t the slam-dunk you suggest.

    The core concept is that Biden was fighting against corruption by demanding that the prosecutor in charge of investigating his son be fired, and that it was a good, successful Obama administration effort to do so.

    The one unanswered question is then “if they were going after corruption, then why was Hunter Biden and the company that hired him left alone after this event?”

    …and then they try to blame Trump for Hunter Biden not being prosecuted!

    If the fix was in by Trump, then why hasn’t Biden’s kid been brought up on charges by Ukrainian prosecutors?

    Nope, your whole scenario makes zero sense.

    If I accept your premise, would that lead to the conclusion that both Trump and Biden should be disqualified from election as president in 2020?

    That was the point I was making in my original post on this thread — you take out Trump on this via impeachment, and you’re not going to be able to turn around and tell swing voters what wacky-but-lovable Uncle Joe did in forcing the Ukrainians to can the prosecutor that was investigating Hunter Biden’s company is no big deal. If Hunter had some type of business history in the private sector, the Biden backers might be able to push that line, but he was getting busted in your neck of the woods for drug possession at the time of the 2016 election, and was known to have drug issues prior to that.

    No foreign company hires Hunter for $600,000 a year if his last name isn’t Biden. And that’s a point not just Trump backers will make, but also Warren and Sanders supporters.

    • #87
  28. Fake John/Jane Galt Coolidge
    Fake John/Jane Galt
    @FakeJohnJaneGalt

    I love the paradigm the anti orange league is supporting.

    Biden and Obama withhold necessary military aid in a war time situation until the Ukrainian government fires its prosecutor that is investigating corruption of a company that just happens to hire Biden’s son.  While also forcing upon them a list of people that can do no wrong.  This is considered a good thing for the Democrats to do.  

    Trump supplies military aid in a much more peaceful time and also lets it be known that the US government is no longer protecting the corrupt company, its consultant and its consultants family from any corruption investigation.  This is considered a bad thing since Democrat corruption must be protected and hid at all times.

    All in all it looks like Burisma got a good deal on their money since it got the full protection of the US government by hiring Biden’s son.  Of course that is just normal business for the Democrats.

    • #88
  29. DonG Coolidge
    DonG
    @DonG

    What a crappy precedent.  Anytime a Democrat mole files a complaint based on “rumor”, the president has to release the transcript of a call with a foreign leader?  That should make for poor negotiations and cooperation on security going forward. This is a disaster for America.

    I guess if Trump is going to release this transcript, I want to see all the transcripts between Team Obama and Iran.  I heard a rumor there were some promises made in exchange for a plane-load of cash.  Just saying.

    • #89
  30. Jager Coolidge
    Jager
    @Jager

    DonG (View Comment):

    What a crappy precedent. Anytime a Democrat mole files a complaint based on “rumor”, the president has to release the transcript of a call with a foreign leader? That should make for poor negotiations and cooperation on security going forward. This is a disaster for America.

    I guess if Trump is going to release this transcript, I want to see all the transcripts between Team Obama and Iran. I heard a rumor there were some promises made in exchange for a plane-load of cash. Just saying.

    Trump should declassify and release just about everything he can about this, about Muller and FISA stuff. Any problematic conversations with world leaders by Obama, Bush and Clinton 

    • #90
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.