Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 57 of 93 FirstFirst ... 747555657585967 ... LastLast
Results 841 to 855 of 1390
  1. #841
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    11,916
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    What relevance does Trump wanting to do this against most people have here? Are you saying that because Trump would do it to anyone that makes it OK?

    Regardless, it seems here you agree that he attempted a Quid Pro Quo agreement with Ukraine where they would not receive military aid unless Biden was investigated (or as you call it, negotiating). So you do not doubt that he committed the underlying offense, your only question is to what purpose? Because you seemed to have been arguing that Trump hasn't committed the underlying offenses in your earlier posts.

    As for Obama, what specifically are you referring to that Obama did during Benghazi? I'll say this, I'm going to require you prove what Obama did to the absurd lengths you are demanding in this hearing, specifically unless anyone heard Obama say he lied about it, how can we know? We only have 3rd and 4th hand accounts...

    As for Biden, let's be clear, it's his son who got the job. So even if his son is corrupt that doesn't mean Biden is. Unless you are talking about something else besides his son getting a job with a Ukrainian energy company? As for the abstract, has Biden ever done something corrupt? IDK, probably. I'td be very hard for me to believe someone who has been a politician as long as Biden hasn't done something corrupt at some point in his career. The only thing I do question though is how you are so readily to believe Biden is corrupt without any specific proof when you demand such exacting proof of Trump's corruption (despite stating you believe Trump is corrupt).
    If trumps intention was to fight corruption in Ukraine (which has a history of corruption) and Biden was a part of that, itís different than trump targeting Biden with the Ukrainian President. From the testimony so far, it seems that both were in play.

    I agree with your perception of Obamaís actions with Benghazi. I donít believe it has been proven Obama ďliedĒ about the reason for the Benghazi attack for his personal/political gain. It is proven that the information he provided was false. It has been substantiated that Obama and his administration had real time -up to date info that contradicted it being from a civilian protest. At the time, I thought it should be investigated. It wasnít.

    As far as Biden, Iím not sure if heís corrupt. Furthermore, personally I donít care how his son got the job. The only reason I believe itís relevant is because I believe this is being used as an election enhancer by the Dems. So if we can prove Biden is corrupt, the American people can make up their own minds.

    The problem with your assertion about the quid pro quo is 1) Ukraine received the aide 2) there was no investigation 3) neither the Ukraine president or officials thought there was a quid pro quo or bribery or extortion. One of those things would have to go the other way. Also, you keep asking what I think. The only way to show what we think is through our votes. I didnít vote for trump. I probably wonít vote for him in 2020 (unless Dems irritate me enough). I want to know what you think of Obama/Benghazi? Did you vote for Obama? Will you vote for Biden? Or any of the dem candidates?

  2. #842
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    72,989
    Quote Originally Posted by joeyc77 View Post
    If trumps intention was to fight corruption in Ukraine (which has a history of corruption)
    Come on dude. We know Trump. We know he doesn't give a **** about the corruption in Ukraine
    Hello there! Welcome to ManRam v8.00.
    Patch notes: This version is nice, funny, cool & goodô now

  3. #843
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    11,916
    Quote Originally Posted by ManRam View Post
    Come on dude. We know Trump. We know he doesn't give a **** about the corruption in Ukraine
    As long as manram knows....do we even need court cases or juries or can we just ask manram? Is this like a Bo Jackson thing?

  4. #844
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,013
    Quote Originally Posted by joeyc77 View Post
    As long as manram knows....do we even need court cases or juries or can we just ask manram? Is this like a Bo Jackson thing?
    Ah yes, the noble act of corruptly extorting for the sake of fighting corruption by one of the most corrupt figures in American political history lol

  5. #845
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    72,989
    Quote Originally Posted by joeyc77 View Post
    As long as manram knows....do we even need court cases or juries or can we just ask manram? Is this like a Bo Jackson thing?
    What about Trump lends you to believe that he would care about corruption in Ukraine?

    You don't have to play dumb.
    Hello there! Welcome to ManRam v8.00.
    Patch notes: This version is nice, funny, cool & goodô now

  6. #846
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    11,916
    Quote Originally Posted by ManRam View Post
    What about Trump lends you to believe that he would care about corruption in Ukraine?

    You don't have to play dumb.
    I donít know...maybe that he ran on anti corruption and thought Ukraine had something to do with the 2016 election

  7. #847
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    90,704
    Quote Originally Posted by joeyc77 View Post
    I donít know...maybe that he ran on anti corruption and thought Ukraine had something to do with the 2016 election
    Every item of corruption that he attacked Hillary with was prophetic about what he actually did. For example, said she was running a corrupt charity. Her charity has been rated with an A meanwhile his was just shut down for fraud.

    He didnít run an anti-corruption campaign. He ran an anti-Hillary campaign.

    Ukraine didnít have jack **** to do with attacking our election. That was...and I canít stress this enough...the RUSSIANS!

  8. #848
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    11,916
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    Every item of corruption that he attacked Hillary with was prophetic about what he actually did. For example, said she was running a corrupt charity. Her charity has been rated with an A meanwhile his was just shut down for fraud.

    He didnít run an anti-corruption campaign. He ran an anti-Hillary campaign.

    Ukraine didnít have jack **** to do with attacking our election. That was...and I canít stress this enough...the RUSSIANS!
    While i agree the majority of his attacks were anti Hillary since that was his opponent, he ran anti corruption/clean the swamp even in the primary. Part of the reason he was elected was that he was anti establishment thus anti corruption.

    The charity stuff is stupid. I donít even want to discuss it.

  9. #849
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    90,704
    Why because it shows that Trump doesnít give one single, solitary **** about fighting corruption? It dispatches that ridiculous talking point.

  10. #850
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,013
    Quote Originally Posted by joeyc77 View Post
    While i agree the majority of his attacks were anti Hillary since that was his opponent, he ran anti corruption/clean the swamp even in the primary. Part of the reason he was elected was that he was anti establishment thus anti corruption.
    And it's been shown that that stance was a total farce and anyone who bought into it totally divorced from reality, as his Presidency and administration has been incredibly corrupt and uh, "swampy". So why the **** would anyone think he was legitimately trying to fight corruption in Ukraine, especially by extorting them?

    I mean, other than brain worms.

  11. #851
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    11,962
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...e-impeachment/

    ...While people are flipping out over changing the use of the phrase quid-pro-quo to bribery we have this. The Republican's defenses have been shredded time and time again and then they just move on to the next one. So it's really quite absurd that people were trying to use this benign change of wording as an indictment on Dems.
    Yankees Farm System

  12. #852
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    11,916
    Quote Originally Posted by browski234 View Post
    And it's been shown that that stance was a total farce and anyone who bought into it totally divorced from reality, as his Presidency and administration has been incredibly corrupt and uh, "swampy". So why the **** would anyone think he was legitimately trying to fight corruption in Ukraine, especially by extorting them?

    I mean, other than brain worms.
    So I imagine you didnít vote for trump and were expecting him to lose the 2016 election?

  13. #853
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    parts unknown
    Posts
    42,293
    Quote Originally Posted by joeyc77 View Post
    While i agree the majority of his attacks were anti Hillary since that was his opponent, he ran anti corruption/clean the swamp even in the primary. Part of the reason he was elected was that he was anti establishment thus anti corruption.

    The charity stuff is stupid. I donít even want to discuss it.
    Heís anti-establishment lol


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Rep Power: 0




    Quote Originally Posted by Raps08-09 Champ View Post
    My dick is named 'Ewing'.

  14. #854
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,013
    Quote Originally Posted by joeyc77 View Post
    So I imagine you didnít vote for trump and were expecting him to lose the 2016 election?
    Do you think this is a particularly clever way of deflecting?

  15. #855
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    8,767
    Quote Originally Posted by SpecialFNK View Post
    the context is actual Biden corruption and something that should not have happened. Hunter Biden even admitted this himself.
    If Trump has such context/reasoning he can provide it but until then it is just a distraction away from the evidence we do have. As Dew Star notes above the ones whining about political distractions often do the same thing with obvious double standards. That is what Obama/Biden/Whistelblower identity all are at this point yet are the key talking points somehow throughout.

    What matters right now are the facts/evidence provided including the transcript and testimony all pointing to a quid pro quo. Those who can 100% confirm this or give reasons as to why this was not the case or a necessary move (by providing evidence not just pointing fingers) are not providing anything or testyifing. That is to say we don't have much contradictory evidence even if we also don't have 100% definitive proof due to not having said confirmation (which isn't something you always get from corrupt people which is why we rely on evidence we do have).

Page 57 of 93 FirstFirst ... 747555657585967 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •