The Impeachment Trial

[Watermelon]

Apparently the defense just shredded Hunter Biden and made a strong case that Trump had good reason to ask Ukraine to take a look at his dirty deals. As one commentator put it:

"Are Democrats really going to want to call witnesses, including Hunter Biden, after that presentation from Bondi? Yikes."

https://townhall.com/liveblog/2020/0...nald-trump-n89

And this brings up a good point. The Democrats might get Bolton, but reciprocity rules allow the defense to call whoever they want in return. Do Democrats really want to poke that bear?

What Bondi didn’t say in her presentation was:

- shokin was considered corrupt by the international community
- shokin deputy claimed there was no actual investigation into Burisma
- the 1 billion loan guarantee was always conditioned on Ukraine’s commitment to remove corruption in the prosecutors office
- US congress with bipartisan support also requested shokin be removed
- Ukrainians protested outside shokins office calling for his removal
- IMF also conditioned loan to Ukraine on shokins firing
- despite the appearance of a conflict in interest, there’s no evidence indicating Bidens were corrupt

why didn’t she?

[Sparko]

Apparently he used to be a prosecutor. I'd be surprised if lawyers aren't pouring through old cases he prosecuted looking for maleficence given his performances over the past couple years

I think after his opening we know why he isn't a prosecutor any more.

[Mountain Man]

I think after his opening we know why he isn't a prosecutor any more.

To be fair, he may have been a competent prosecutor at one time, but he certainly isn't any more.

[Mountain Man]

What Bondi didn’t say in her presentation was:

- shokin was considered corrupt by the international community
- shokin deputy claimed there was no actual investigation into Burisma
- the 1 billion loan guarantee was always conditioned on Ukraine’s commitment to remove corruption in the prosecutors office
- US congress with bipartisan support also requested shokin be removed
- Ukrainians protested outside shokins office calling for his removal
- IMF also conditioned loan to Ukraine on shokins firing
- despite the appearance of a conflict in interest, there’s no evidence indicating Bidens were corrupt

why didn’t she?

Where's the evidence that Shokin was actually corrupt? I know that's a favorite liberal talking point, but I have yet to see any actual evidence.

Also, official Ukraine records show that Shokin's investigation into Burisma was active at the time he was fired. In fact, just a month before, he had executed a raid on the property of the president of Burisma. Shortly after, Hunter Biden made overtures to the Obama administration which eventually led to the infamous "You're not getting the money until Shokin is fired" incident.

You can find a detailed timeline here:

https://johnsolomonreports.com/the-u...merica-to-see/

Furthermore, there are a number of memos and communications between Hunter and the Burisma board of directors, and the Obama administration begging them to get Shokin off their backs:

https://johnsolomonreports.com/hunte...ns-memos-show/

You say there's no evidence the Biden's were corrupt? Great! Then let's borrow a page from the Democrat playback: Surely they won't mind being investigated if it can only clear their names, right?

[demi-conservative]

Time to fix that, Watermelon.

What Bondi didn’t do in her presentation was to parrot Fake News

Shocking.

[Cow Poke]

If the Repubs vote to dismiss or acquit without Bolton’s evidence...

If the Republicans sincerely believe that what Trump did was not impeachable, then no more evidence that he actually did something that is not impeachable matters at all.

You did X!
Well, yeah, but X is not impeachable.
Yeah, but we got MORE witnesses that say you did X.

[firstfloor]

If the Republicans sincerely believe that what Trump did was not impeachable, then no more evidence that he actually did something that is not impeachable matters at all.

You did X!
Well, yeah, but X is not impeachable.
Yeah, but we got MORE witnesses that say you did X.

I wouldn’t credit the Repubs with as much as an ounce of sincerity, between the whole lot of them.

[JimL]

Where's the evidence that Shokin was actually corrupt? I know that's a favorite liberal talking point, but I have yet to see any actual evidence.

Also, official Ukraine records show that Shokin's investigation into Burisma was active at the time he was fired. In fact, just a month before, he had executed a raid on the property of the president of Burisma. Shortly after, Hunter Biden made overtures to the Obama administration which eventually led to the infamous "You're not getting the money until Shokin is fired" incident.

You can find a detailed timeline here:

https://johnsolomonreports.com/the-u...merica-to-see/

Furthermore, there are a number of memos and communications between Hunter and the Burisma board of directors, and the Obama administration begging them to get Shokin off their backs:

https://johnsolomonreports.com/hunte...ns-memos-show/

You say there's no evidence the Biden's were corrupt? Great! Then let's borrow a page from the Democrat playback: Surely they won't mind being investigated if it can only clear their names, right?

Biden was sent to Ukraine on behalf of the U.S. as well as the rest of the democratic west to get the corrupt Prosecutor General, Shokin, out, not for personal reasons. Hunter Biden is just another diversion.

[JimL]

If the Republicans sincerely believe that what Trump did was not impeachable, then no more evidence that he actually did something that is not impeachable matters at all.

You did X!
Well, yeah, but X is not impeachable.
Yeah, but we got MORE witnesses that say you did X.

Which is why the defense changed the argument from he didn't do anything wrong, to, okay, so he he did wrong, but it's not impeachable. Follow the bouncing ball!

[Cow Poke]

Biden was sent to Ukraine on behalf of the U.S. as well as the rest of the democratic west to get the corrupt Prosecutor General, Shokin, out, not for personal reasons. Hunter Biden is just another diversion.

So, lemme get this straight... Biden went to root out corruption, and his son benefited mightily therefrom, but that doesn't matter?

[Cow Poke]

Which is why the defense changed the argument from he didn't do anything wrong, to, okay, so he he did wrong, but it's not impeachable. Follow the bouncing ball!

Actually, I think it's more like --- EVEN IF he did what you said he did, it's not impeachable.

I'm just amazed that people think that, even though the House acted incredibly partisan and vindictively on this, it's somehow "bad" for the Senate to act in a partisan manner and say "oh, no you don't!".

But, still the rotund female has not yet harmoniously vocalized, so we'll see.

[Cow Poke]

I wouldn’t credit the Repubs with as much as an ounce of sincerity, between the whole lot of them.

So, they're pretty much like the Democrats on this. Imagine that. Politicians acting like politicians.

[JimL]

So, lemme get this straight... Biden went to root out corruption, and his son benefited mightily therefrom, but that doesn't matter?

First off, there is no evidence that Hunter Biden did anything illegal, second, Shokin's corruption extended throughout Ukraine which is why the entire democratic west, the west which Ukraine is uniting with, wanted Shokin out before sending aid to the struggling democracy. Btw, the bi-partisan U.S. Congress wanted Shokin out as well. And you need to ask yourself, being that the republicans had the majority at the time, why didn't they demand an investigation into the Hunter Biden at the time?

[Cow Poke]

First off, there is no evidence that Hunter Biden did anything illegal,

First off, how do you know that? Has there actually been an investigation into his dealings?

second, Shokin's corruption extended throughout Ukraine which is why the entire democratic west, the west which Ukraine is uniting with, wanted Shokin out before sending aid to the struggling democracy.

Second, gonna get another cup of coffee --- want some?

Btw, the bi-partisan U.S. Congress wanted Shokin out as well. And you need to ask yourself, being that the republicans had the majority at the time, why didn't they demand an investigation into the Hunter Biden at the time?

Actually, I don't need to ask. I have an answer! (are you surprised?)

The Republicans weren't so absolutely desperate to prevent their guy from losing that they had to start an incredibly partisan witch hunt, because there ware a lot more important things going on.

[Cow Poke]

First off, there is no evidence that Hunter Biden did anything illegal....

From another thread...

In case anyone missed the Biden last nail in the coffin...