Viktor Shokin: Biden outraged we seized Burisma assets

Really... you tell me to my face you approve of corruption when I point out this is wrong you tell me it's bullshit..... uhm NO corruption is wrong no matter which way you turn it. This is your uncomfortable truth, perhaps you need to look at your own moral standards. I'm not surprised you're a liberal democrat...

 

I'll take liberal democrat over willfully-blind, conspiracy-swallowing, name-calling right winger, all day, every day.

P.S. Not a democrat and I don't approve of corruption. When it is shown, like it has been with Trump, I'm all for the appropriate penalties....

 

Yep, sure.

 

So KGB turds put two Ukraine citizens in Ukraine jail?

Can you at least attempt to make sense?

 

(Your quote got mucked up some how. Fixed it here I believe?)

I'm sure you do. But you can either spit it out or play 'vague book' and end up being dismissed without a thought.

 

The ambassador fired was a woman!

 

Whatvare you referring to??

 

My apologies. I thought you meant Sondland.

I same response applies though. If it was just her, I'd probably say 'meh'. But it isn't. It's one individual after another all supporting the same story.

 

Sondland was the only one with any first hand knowledge of what Trump wanted..
And he testified about it during Republican questioning.

Meh. Is exactly what i think of all the testimony so far, much to do about nothing.

 

OJ probably felt the same way at his murder trial.

Back to the OP, I still think that Shokin is just making up stories.

 

He did. Which is why everyone elses second hand info becomes more relevant.

And I'm in semi-agreement with you on the second point. But it's the easiest and clearest example of the last couple of years with Trump on top, so it's the one they went with.

 

The testimony Sondland gave was that Trump told him no quid pro quo, that he wanted nothing from Ukraine except that they do the right think fight corruption..

All the rest of the testimony is speculation and assumptions.

 

Oh. Your one of those who think that the only way a QPQ can be proven is if the guy literally says the words 'I want a QPQ'.

I wonder how many mobsters and mob bosses would be free right now if that were the standard across the board. I mean, seriously. That's patently ridiculous. Rudy's guy said that's exactly what he told the Ukrainians. The only people who aren't admitting to it are the ones under examination and would be arrested for saying so.

 

Well what was in Trump's mind is the only thing that matters. This all hinges on Trump's intentions.
There is a huge difference between investing what happened in 2016 and digging up dirt to use in 2020..

Huge difference! The Democrats have provided nothing indicative of Trump's intentions to influence 2020.

 

You can't even see it when it's spoon fed to you.

 

Joe Biden is "the only one that’s actually threatened a foreign government and yet we’re sitting here pretending this is not happening?"

 

Of course, Biden was outraged. How could Burisma pay Hunter Biden an extravagant salary for being Quid Pro Quo Joe's son if people are seizing their assets? Hunter might actually have to go out and get a job he's actually qualified for, like coke head.

 

No. You can prove intentions by the actions and testimonies of those around him. Most criminals (well, the smart ones anyway) don't straight out ask for something that's illegal.

"Oh won't someone rid me of this meddlesome priest". "well I didn't 'tell anyone to murder him' did I?"

Also, Hunter was on that board when Trump took power. Suddenly he cares about this when Joe is now a candidate? c'mon dude, it's patently obvious, from the admissions of Rudy's henchmen, to the various individuals in and around the call and the subsequent fallout, to all the evidence that has been put forth.

The only ones say it's not are the ones with a vested interest in not going to jail or losing their POTUS to impeachment and/or the campaign.

 

That would be a great question for Don Jr. or Jared Kushner.

 

Maybe, that's why wr need this to go to the Senate where the proceedings will be fair and presided over by better people.
House Democrats are bad people.

 

hahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahaha

I can't believe you were able to get that out with a straight face.

No they wont' be fair, and the Senate Republicans are most assuredly not better then the House. At least the House is able to work together to pass legislation and send it to the Senate on a bi-partisan basis. Mitch McConnell is one of the worst Republicans I've seen since I started getting into Politics. He's a power hungry dirt bag who gums up the machinery and then has the temerity to blame the Dems for it. 400 Bills the House passed and not 1 has seen the inside of the Senate Chamber.

 

Well being a conservative i oppose all new laws ,taxes and all government expansion.

In fact I'd like see repeals of massive amounts of federal laws.

So stopping all legislation is a good thing.

We don't need any more laws.

 

That's not Conservatism, that's Libertarianism.

Not enough Govt is just as bad as too much Govt. 'big or small' adjectives are silly and have no place in discourse. The goal should be an 'efficient' Govt. One that doesn't overburden people, but still protects them from the sociopathic tendencies of capitalism.

 

I have provided the articles before and no matter the source you go on a rant about Putin and then make no sense to later blame your IPAD.