WATCH LIVE: Public Impeachment Hearings (Vindman/Williams)

Hahaha...a good question for him will be: As Ambassador to the EU, who did you report to on Ukrainian matters? Was it to the State Department or directly to the President of the United States?

 

Schiff tends to ask questions that seem to be directed to both witnesses, without clarifying who should go first.... they both looked at each other, then Vindman nodded for Williams to answer first... Just awkward when you have 2 witnesses at the same time.. Probably not the last time we'll see this happen..

 

As testified today the EU is also an important part of Ukraine policy.

 

And an ambassdor who knew nothing about Biden and Burisma, but had a giant binder on how to answer questions from the Obama administration on Biden and Burisma.

 

Military officers do not pledge their allegiance to the President of the United States. It's to the Constitution. You lied.

 

Yes it was you misquoted him, why?

 

My guess?? Bribery polls better than extortion and it's in the constitution, whereas extortion isn't... But as I understand what happened, based on the general current definition of those words, I have to think extortion fits better..

As I see bribery, somebody get money/value up front for a future action. As I see extortion, somebody withholds something valuable until they get what they want.

It's splitting hairs, I know...

 

Yovanovitch was surprised the investigation into Burisma was dropped but we all know why.

 

However, I do know a place and time where the military had to pledge allegiance to the leader of the state...

 

TRUTH:

These impeachment proceedings are occurring because Alex Vindman, an insubordinate mid-level military officer who had a snit fit about not being in charge of American foreign policy decided to collude with a CIA operative to overthrow the Commander-in-Chief of the United States. -Sean Davis

 

Yet as testified today Ukraine didn’t even know about it other than a media leak, probably by a democrat trying to make trouble.

 

False. Why do you guys feel the need to continually repeat fabrications?

https://www.axios.com/ukraine-trump-pressure-military-aid-fb86bc7a-87a8-40a3-8f60-13c8bfc7eb12.html

https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/18/politics/ukraine-zelensky-pressure-trump-investigations/index.html

 

No testimony or other evidence supports that histrionic screed.

 

To their knowledge... I don't suppose either speaks for "Ukraine"

 

Nunes couldn't catch a buzz.

 

I love that picture of Zelensky in the axios link.... We should hold a caption contest for that one...

 

Same facts different day....

Still not one person has any knowledge of Trump saying the money is on hold until an investigation of Biden begins.

Everyone and their brother knows what Biden did was a conflict of interest and most definitely deserves to be investigated.

The Lt Col. saw it as demand because of his military background the women saw it as a favor, different folks different strokes.

The money was released.

Trump has helped Ukraine more than Obama and indeed per the LT Col. gave Ukraine the best possible weapon against Russia.

We did learn from their testimony that the call wasn't secretly hidden and this was standard procedure to insure no leaks and that the money hold was consistent with our laws surrounding Ukraine.

 

Yet Vindman told someone in intelligence that Schiff for brains would not let him testify to because of Schiff’s rule not to out the whistleblower yet Schiff for brains AND Vindman both say they don’t know who the whistleblower is.

 

Vindman is an active duty Army officer. Court-martial under UCMJ Acticle 131

 

Good job. You stumbled into me being wrong and confusing my oath I took as an enlisted with an officer's oath.

I did get them switched.

It still doesn't help you, as the Constitution gives foreign policy to the POTUS....not a random Lt. Col.

I'd love to hear your theory on how he was "defending the Constitution" against itself though.

 

You keep saying that, and I agree it's not on the record yet, but you cannot say "not one person has any knowledge". As several of us have pointed out on this very thread, the people most likely to have heard that directly (other than Sondland) are being directed not to appear...

 

I believe they were actually referencing the appearance of a conflict of interest problem in regards to Hunter Biden.

 

Who happens to be the one person they won't name but don't know who the whistleblower is.

 

In the 3,500 pages of transcripts released so far, there was only one reference to bribery. Ironically to describe Vice President Biden’s conduct, not President Trump’s. Why did we go from quid pro quo to extortion now to bribery? The answer is polling. - John Ratcliffe

 

This is not a Congressional investigation it is an inquiry and if they had a charge it would be Obstructing of Congress. There is no law enforcement issue here, there is not crime being alleged here, this is not a judicial proceeding. If Schiff wants the testimony issue a subpoena and go to court.