Vid of Biden admit bribe of Ukrainian Pres. to fire prosecutor investigating son

[TwitchySeal]

He's proud of getting the guy fired because it was something that the rest of the G8 and most of our allies were already pushing for.  It was a victory for us and a defeat for Russia.

For the sake of argument, lets assume that is true. Does this exclude the possibility he did this primarily for self serving reasons?

No.

Then why make a non-sequitur argument to begin with?

I doubt we'll ever have enough to conclude that Biden definitely didn't push Obama to have the Ukraine prosecutor to be fired to protect his son.  I think coming to conclusions on things like this with the evidence we have is a mistake.  

[Viper1]

....
He's proud of getting the guy fired because it was something that the rest of the G8 and most of our allies were already pushing for.  It was a victory for us and a defeat for Russia.

If that's true, then that's exactly what Zelensky will report to Trump or Guiliani.

Fine with me.

But I certainly wouldn't take your word for it. I think I'd like to hear it from Zelensky.

Zelensky will say whatever they want him to in order to not tick them off and keep getting aid. Then when Trump is gone he could say something different. But then you all would claim the new government forced him to say it for the exact same reasons. Throw in there that so many of the players have corrupt pasts and say one thing one day and something else another that there's no way we can ever believe anything that would come out from any investigation. So we're all stuck with opinions and feelings revolving around what our bias says we should believe. They're all lying self serving scum bags.

[TwitchySeal]

....
He's proud of getting the guy fired because it was something that the rest of the G8 and most of our allies were already pushing for.  It was a victory for us and a defeat for Russia.

If that's true, then that's exactly what Zelensky will report to Trump or Guiliani.

Fine with me.

But I certainly wouldn't take your word for it. I think I'd like to hear it from Zelensky.

Zelensky will say whatever they want him to in order to not tick them off and keep getting aid. Then when Trump is gone he could say something different. But then you all would claim the new government forced him to say it for the exact same reasons. Throw in there that so many of the players have corrupt pasts and say one thing one day and something else another that there's no way we can ever believe anything that would come out from any investigation. So we're all stuck with opinions and feelings revolving around what our bias says we should believe. They're all lying self serving scum bags.

Yeah.  I feel like this goes without saying.  What would happen if Zelensky was like "yeah, Trump totally pressured me into investigating Biden."  Trump would have a tantrum and Ukraine would suffer.


Nothing to do with this conversation, but have you guys seen Zelensky play piano?  If you haven't, you should check it out.



President of Ukraine plays piano for 5 minutes

[TECSHARE]

Yeah.  I feel like this goes without saying.  What would happen if Zelensky was like "yeah, Trump totally pressured me into investigating Biden."  Trump would have a tantrum and Ukraine would suffer.

Of course, this goes without saying, but when Biden explicitly says he did it on camera, well lets not jump to conclusions...

[TwitchySeal]

Yeah.  I feel like this goes without saying.  What would happen if Zelensky was like "yeah, Trump totally pressured me into investigating Biden."  Trump would have a tantrum and Ukraine would suffer.

Of course, this goes without saying, but when Biden explicitly says he did it on camera, well lets not jump to conclusions...

He was explicit in saying Ukraine wouldn't get the loan if they didn't fire their prosecutor.

That's what you're saying right?

I totally agree with you if so.  It was definitely explicit.  If Ukraine didn't fire their 'AG', the US would not be loaning them a billion+ dollars.

[TECSHARE]

"BREAKING: Burisma Paid Former Ukrainian President Poroshenko $100mm To Suppress Hunter Biden Investigation in 2017, Bribed FBI agents Ignored Evidence, US Embassy In Kyiv Neck Deep In Corruption"

https://creativedestructionmedia.com/investigations/2019/10/18/breaking-burisma-paid-former-ukrainian-president-poroshenko-100mm-to-suppress-hunter-biden-investigation-in-2017-bribed-fbi-agents-ignored-evidence-us-embassy-in-kyiv-neck-deep-in-corruption/

[bluefirecorp_]

creativedestructionmedia.com

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epik_(domain_registrar)

Ahahaha. The trash source is trash.

Loonies grasping at straws. Can't wait for Trump to be impeached over all this bullshit

[Spendulus]

creativedestructionmedia.com

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epik_(domain_registrar)

Ahahaha. The trash source is trash.

Loonies grasping at straws. Can't wait for Trump to be impeached over all this bullshit

Yeah, that could be garbage. Might not be, but could be.

Hey, I've got a great idea! How about if Trump just asks Zelensky politely to look into the whole thing a bit?

We'd get the straight story then.

[TwitchySeal]

creativedestructionmedia.com

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epik_(domain_registrar)

Ahahaha. The trash source is trash.

Loonies grasping at straws. Can't wait for Trump to be impeached over all this bullshit

Yeah, that could be garbage. Might not be, but could be.

Hey, I've got a great idea! How about if Trump just asks Zelensky politely to look into the whole thing a bit?

We'd get the straight story then.

Calling it the "Hunter Biden investigation" is the trash part.  They probably did bribe the prosecutor to not investigate them.  

We've already looked into it though.

Ukraine has already looked into it, at least twice by two different president/prosecutors.

Now, apparently Ukraine is looking into it again.  If nothing comes back, will you believe we've got the story straight and nothing happened?  I doubt it.

[Spendulus]

creativedestructionmedia.com

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epik_(domain_registrar)

Ahahaha. The trash source is trash.

Loonies grasping at straws. Can't wait for Trump to be impeached over all this bullshit

Yeah, that could be garbage. Might not be, but could be.

Hey, I've got a great idea! How about if Trump just asks Zelensky politely to look into the whole thing a bit?

We'd get the straight story then.

Calling it the "Hunter Biden investigation" is the trash part.  They probably did bribe the prosecutor to not investigate them.  

We've already looked into it though.

Ukraine has already looked into it, at least twice by two different president/prosecutors.

Now, apparently Ukraine is looking into it again.  If nothing comes back, will you believe we've got the story straight and nothing happened?  I doubt it.

Ah, a "Hunter Biden investigation" wasn't exactly what Trump requested of Zelensky, and I rather doubt that's what this is really about.

But regardless of that detail, I'm good with whatever Zelensky's investigators come up with. And it's nice to know that you agree there's nothing wrong with Trump's request.

Unlike the Dems who would impeach him for such a request.

[Viper1]

And it's nice to know that you agree there's nothing wrong with Trump's request.

Unlike the Dems who would impeach him for such a request.

It's not that the request was made, it's how he did it and that he tied aid to it. If he had gone through official channels and made it about corruption in general, none of this would be happening now.

[Spendulus]

And it's nice to know that you agree there's nothing wrong with Trump's request.

Unlike the Dems who would impeach him for such a request.

It's not that the request was made, it's how he did it and that he tied aid to it. If he had gone through official channels and made it about corruption in general, none of this would be happening now.

Really. You know, the transcript is public, and there is nothing there to support your claim (bolded).

Perhaps you are implying that his mentioning Biden was inappropriate because Biden is a potential adversary in the upcoming election?

Well, maybe all his conversations with foreign leaders should be secret, fully encrypted, and with no ability for them to be decoded. Would that work?

[Viper1]

And it's nice to know that you agree there's nothing wrong with Trump's request.

Unlike the Dems who would impeach him for such a request.

It's not that the request was made, it's how he did it and that he tied aid to it. If he had gone through official channels and made it about corruption in general, none of this would be happening now.

Really. You know, the transcript is public, and there is nothing there to support your claim (bolded).

Someone says they'd like to buy something from you and you immediately tell them you want them to do a favor for you though. If you have a problem comprehending how that isn't a quid pro quo, then I feel sorry for you cause you must be damn easy to manipulate and take advantage of.

If Trump had just said he'd like a favor and didn't say "though", then maybe (although it's still a stretch to not see what's there unless you support dear leader in all things regardless) one could try and make the argument it wasn't.

Here's something I noted that I haven't seen anyone clue into yet. When it comes to manipulating the media, he's brilliant. One day he said the transcript was an exact word for word record of the call or something like that. Of course all the media jumped on that and pointed out it's not. And they've kept doing that since then. It wouldn't surprise me if, assuming the "real" one gets released, it turns out to be a bit different and it's different enough that it muddies the water. Course with Trump I wouldn't past him to forge some transcript but I guess we'll see what happens.

[Spendulus]

And it's nice to know that you agree there's nothing wrong with Trump's request.

Unlike the Dems who would impeach him for such a request.

It's not that the request was made, it's how he did it and that he tied aid to it. If he had gone through official channels and made it about corruption in general, none of this would be happening now.

Really. You know, the transcript is public, and there is nothing there to support your claim (bolded).

Someone says they'd like to buy something from you and you immediately tell them you want them to do a favor for you though. If you have a problem comprehending how that isn't a quid pro quo, then I feel sorry for you cause you must be damn easy to manipulate and take advantage of.

If Trump had just said he'd like a favor and didn't say "though", then maybe (although it's still a stretch to not see what's there unless you support dear leader in all things regardless) one could try and make the argument it wasn't....

It would be interesting to take 100 random recorded conversations between national leaders and tabulate how often each mentioned things he would like the other to help him with. Basically, it would be every single conversation, wouldn't it?

[TECSHARE]

creativedestructionmedia.com

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epik_(domain_registrar)

Ahahaha. The trash source is trash.

Loonies grasping at straws. Can't wait for Trump to be impeached over all this bullshit

Attacking a source is not a valid form of debate when you refuse to address any of the content. Independent news media is far more reliable than CNN, ABC, etc. I hear ABC just released new footage of the Kurds being slaughtered in Syria though.

Someone says they'd like to buy something from you and you immediately tell them you want them to do a favor for you though. If you have a problem comprehending how that isn't a quid pro quo, then I feel sorry for you cause you must be damn easy to manipulate and take advantage of.

If Trump had just said he'd like a favor and didn't say "though", then maybe (although it's still a stretch to not see what's there unless you support dear leader in all things regardless) one could try and make the argument it wasn't.

Here's something I noted that I haven't seen anyone clue into yet. When it comes to manipulating the media, he's brilliant. One day he said the transcript was an exact word for word record of the call or something like that. Of course all the media jumped on that and pointed out it's not. And they've kept doing that since then. It wouldn't surprise me if, assuming the "real" one gets released, it turns out to be a bit different and it's different enough that it muddies the water. Course with Trump I wouldn't past him to forge some transcript but I guess we'll see what happens.

Only one problem with your fairy tale. Ukraine first of all reopened the investigation in like April. Second Ukraine was not even informed the funds were being held up, thus it is literally impossible for there to have been a quid pro quo, implied or otherwise. Also the transcript is fake now? What part of your cavernous anus did you pull that from? Do you really think Trump was able to get dozens of people across several agencies to lie for him to cover up "the real transcript? I hear Tony The Tiger is opening a whistle blower filing too.

[Viper1]

Only one problem with your fairy tale. Ukraine first of all reopened the investigation in like April. Second Ukraine was not even informed the funds were being held up, thus it is literally impossible for there to have been a quid pro quo, implied or otherwise. Also the transcript is fake now? What part of your cavernous anus did you pull that from? Do you really think Trump was able to get dozens of people across several agencies to lie for him to cover up "the real transcript? I hear Tony The Tiger is opening a whistle blower filing too.

Talking about the phone call being a quid pro quo. Pay attention. I know it's hard for you but I was talking about the phone call which is what triggered all this. As for Ukraine not knowing, that's certainly debatable unless you've been in a cave and not paying attention to what's been coming out about what was going on prior to the phone call.

The transcript says right on it that it's not completely accurate so once again you show your ignorance of the facts. I'm coming to the conclusion you don't know what's going on at all but just parrot talking points like a good little sheep.

[Spendulus]

Only one problem with your fairy tale. Ukraine first of all reopened the investigation in like April. Second Ukraine was not even informed the funds were being held up, thus it is literally impossible for there to have been a quid pro quo, implied or otherwise. Also the transcript is fake now? What part of your cavernous anus did you pull that from? Do you really think Trump was able to get dozens of people across several agencies to lie for him to cover up "the real transcript? I hear Tony The Tiger is opening a whistle blower filing too.

Talking about the phone call being a quid pro quo. Pay attention. I know it's hard for you but I was talking about the phone call which is what triggered all this. As for Ukraine not knowing, that's certainly debatable unless you've been in a cave and not paying attention to what's been coming out about what was going on prior to the phone call.

The transcript says right on it that it's not completely accurate so once again you show your ignorance of the facts. I'm coming to the conclusion you don't know what's going on at all but just parrot talking points like a good little sheep.

Usually when someone says "the transcript is not completely accurate" it's for practical reasons like people talking over each other, words that are not clear, etc. Nothing to get paranoid about, standard phrases.

When Trump says in that phone call "I'd like to ask you a favor..." that just plain does not come across like strong arming the other person. The Ukraine president has confirmed this.

But you say you know better. Thanks for your concern, but I'll take the word of the Ukraine president over your word.

[TECSHARE]

Talking about the phone call being a quid pro quo. Pay attention. I know it's hard for you but I was talking about the phone call which is what triggered all this. As for Ukraine not knowing, that's certainly debatable unless you've been in a cave and not paying attention to what's been coming out about what was going on prior to the phone call.

The transcript says right on it that it's not completely accurate so once again you show your ignorance of the facts. I'm coming to the conclusion you don't know what's going on at all but just parrot talking points like a good little sheep.

If you weren't too broke to, I would tell you to pay closer attention. I am talking about the phone call. No, it isn't debatable, here are the documents:

https://www.scribd.com/user/259237201/JohnSolomon/uploads

'“The U.S. government had open-source intelligence and was aware as early as February of 2019 that the Ukrainian government was planning to reopen the Burisma investigation,” Solomon said.

This is long before the president ever imagined having a call with President [Volodymyr] Zelensky,” he added, calling the development a “significant shift in the factual timeline.”'

https://www.westernjournal.com/document-shows-ukraine-reopened-probe-hunter-bidens-company-trump-phone-call-report/

Again, are you trying to say Trump some how got high level officials from several agencies to lie for him and cover up some other transcript you claims exists? You just got done arguing a subpoena is not the same as a legal document, but I am ignorant eh? HAHA!

Also I love the fact that you mirror my language calling you a parrot as you literally accuse me of being a parrot in the same breath. Very convincing cupcake.

[Viper1]

If you weren't too broke to, I would tell you to pay closer attention. I am talking about the phone call. No, it isn't debatable, here are the documents:

You're not talking about the phone call specifically. You're putting up a smoke screen for the sheep.

'“The U.S. government had open-source intelligence and was aware as early as February of 2019 that the Ukrainian government was planning to reopen the Burisma investigation,” Solomon said.

Given his past and the "quality" of what he writes in terms of misleading, obfuscating the like, I don't put much credence in what Solomon may say all on it's own. He's just the typical "fake news" person who's intent is to convince sheep to a certain bias. Like you apparently.

Besides that, it's all just a smoke screen to try and distract from what was said in the phone call. Trump clearly said if you want more stuff, you need to do this for me/us. So none of what you're saying or posting is applicable. Even his own spokesperson said it was a quid pro quo and he also said they held back aid by the way. Until it can at least be agreed on that Trump's call was a quid pro quo, the discussion cannot move onto the other issue of whether or not it was specifically for political gain or for other interests.

Again, are you trying to say Trump some how got high level officials from several agencies to lie for him and cover up some other transcript you claims exists?

I said if they produce a 100% "accurate" one, then one has to wonder if it's been "faked" or not given all the lies and crap that's been going on in the WH. But until it happens, if ever, it's a moot point. Are you so derange in your worship of dear leader that you have reading comprehension issues?

You just got done arguing a subpoena is not the same as a legal document

I'm not done but I don't have the time right now to respond to your long drivel that contained nothing factual. Despite all the documentation I've given you that explains congressional subpoenas, you've shown yourself to either be too dense to get it, or you simply want to spread bullshit for the sheep.

Also I love the fat that you mirror my language calling you a parrot as you literally accuse me of being a parrot in the same breath.

I figure that one needs to use you're own form of discussion for it to ever sink into your head.

[Viper1]

but I'll take the word of the Ukraine president

That's a good little sheep. I love how you guys that tend to believe conspiracy theories pick and choose who you'll believe to just fit what you want to be true. Of course he's going to agree with that. That's what you do when you're being "strong armed". You really have to be naive if you can't see that. I also note you left out the "though" word. Nice attempt at trying to misleading others.