trump Inpeachment...............

The timeline you posted doesnt show any link to Hunter Biden and corruption. What that shows is that he was hired by a company that was being investigated for corruption before he was hired.

You say "Hunter Biden is the source of the corruption" .. but have 0 facts or evidence to point. Who did Hunter Biden collude with? what was he after? ... theres nothing except he was hired by a company accused of corruption before he got there.

If there is something more, Id love to see it.

Trump: "I want you to announce that you are investigating Hunter Biden."

Ukraine: "Yes sir, ... for what exactly?"

Trump: "I dont care make it up, just say the words 'Hunter Biden' and 'corruption' and 'investigation' in the same sentence."

I suppose that would be why Hunter Biden, Joe Biden would be effective witnesses.

Failure to properly investigate Burisma Holdings

In 2012, the Ukrainian prosecutor general Viktor Pshonka began investigating Ukrainian oligarch Mykola Zlochevsky, owner of the natural gas company Burisma Holdings, over allegations of money laundering, tax evasion, and corruption during 2010–2012.[33][34]

In 2015, Shokin became the prosecutor general, inheriting the investigation. The Obama administration and other governments and non-governmental organizations soon became concerned that Shokin was not adequately pursuing corruption in Ukraine, was protecting the political elite, and was regarded as "an obstacle to anti-corruption efforts".[22] Among other issues, he was slow-walking the investigation into Zlochevsky and Burisma and using the threat of prosecution to try to solicit bribes from Mr. Zlochevsky and his team – to the extent that Obama officials were considering launching their own criminal investigation into the company for possible money laundering.[33]

While visiting Kiev in December 2015, then-U.S. Vice President Joe Biden warned Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko that, if he did not fire Shokin, the Obama administration was prepared to withhold $1 billion in loan guarantees. Biden later said: "I looked at them and said, 'I'm leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you're not getting the money.' [...] He got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time."[35][36] Shokin was dismissed by Parliament in late March 2016.

In a sworn affidavit dated 4 September 2019,[37] for a European court, Shokin testified that "On several occasions President Poroshenko asked me to have a look at the criminal case against Burisma and consider the possibility of winding down the investigative actions in respect of this company, but I refused to close this investigation."[38] Shokin wrote the affidavit in support of Ukrainian oligarch Dmytro Firtash.[39] John Herbst, the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine during the George W. Bush administration, said that Shokin's support of Firtash, who had been arrested for bribery in 2014, undercuts Shokin's claims to be motivated by transparency.[40][41]

Shokin claimed in May 2019 that he had been investigating Burisma Holdings.[29][42][43] However, Vitaly Kasko, who had been Shokin's deputy overseeing international cooperation before resigning in February 2016 citing corruption in the office, provided documents to Bloomberg News indicating that under Shokin, the investigation into Burisma had been dormant.[44][45]

The investigation into Burisma only pertained to events happening before[46] Joe Biden's son, Hunter Biden, joined the board of directors of Burisma Holdings in 2014.[47] US President Donald Trump's subsequent bid to pressure Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to announce an investigation of Joe Biden in relation to Burisma led to the December 2019 impeachment of Trump.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Shokin

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/22/us/politics/biden-ukraine-trump.html

I suppose that would be why Hunter Biden, Joe Biden would be effective witnesses.

Wanting the Bidens to testify is just a ploy to muddy the waters and steer this farther in the absurd, imo.

Ive spent a good bit on this thread today .... and have achieved absolutely zero. We are all tribal.

Wanting the Bidens to testify is just a ploy to muddy the waters and steer this farther in the absurd, imo.



Ive spent a good bit on this thread today .... and have achieved absolutely zero. We are all tribal.Here is the thing, maybe it does muddy the waters but as the defense/accused the president should be given every opportunity to defend himself and call witnesses that make his case, and part of his case includes whether or not it can be legitimately argued that Biden and Burisma have direct relevance to Trump's asking Ukraine to investigate.

Rights of the ACCUSED are what fair trials are supposed to preserve and safeguard.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Here is the thing, maybe it does muddy the waters but as the defense/accused the president should be given every opportunity to defend himself and call witnesses that make his case, and part of his case includes whether or not it can be legitimately argued that Biden and Burisma have direct relevance to Trump's asking Ukraine to investigate.

Rights of the ACCUSED are what fair trials are supposed to preserve and safeguard.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Im with you ... Im 100% fine with Bidens, Trump, Mulvaney, Blair, Bolton testifying under oath.

Im with you ... Im 100% fine with Bidens, Trump, Mulvaney, Blair, Bolton testifying under oath.

Edit: i realize this is a little moving the bars fallacy, but it is extending the thought of what is a "fair trial"

- in a "real trial"(which this is not) suppose the ACCUSED(president) feels that the STATE(house managers) did not meet their burden of proof and rejects additional witnesses, in a regular trial a JUDGE/JURORS (senators) can't and would not ask for more prosecution witnesses, that would be generally seen as an unfair trial.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Look, like I said before, I kept quiet and waited for the house investigation but when the articles were draft without a crime...then I absolutely knew this entire thing was bullshit. Nancy knew she had gone too far and couldn't turn around so she had to do something.

Im not yelling, but I'm sorry, you cant circumvent the Constitution and electoral process because of partisanship. The threshold of crime was not met.

What is... ignoring your Constitutional duty to act as an impartial juror so you can join the POTUS defense team for 1000 Alex?

I'm not gonna defend Hunter Biden, but your nepotism argument on the Bidens rings hollow when multiple Presidential advisors got their positions due to nepotism, and Trump had to override the intelligence community giving them the veto on the background check to get there.

And I can only agree with Sunnyside so much, I am happily bringing in the Bidens if it means members of the EO have to testify too.

The timeline you posted doesnt show any link to Hunter Biden and corruption. What that shows is that he was hired by a company that was being investigated for corruption before he was hired.

You say "Hunter Biden is the source of the corruption" .. but have 0 facts or evidence to point. Who did Hunter Biden collude with? what was he after? ... theres nothing except he was hired by a company accused of corruption before he got there.

If there is something more, Id love to see it.

Trump: "I want you to announce that you are investigating Hunter Biden."

Ukraine: "Yes sir, ... for what exactly?"

Trump: "I dont care make it up, just say the words 'Hunter Biden' and 'corruption' and 'investigation' in the same sentence."

Go back now and look at testimony as well as interviews within the Obama administration that had serious problems with hunter Biden involved in a corrupt oligarchs company who came to the executive branch from the state department and were told to fuck off.

Hunter Biden is the guy liberals want don Jr to be...but look at the track record.

What a piece of shit, garbage human being.

What is... ignoring your Constitutional duty to act as an impartial juror so you can join the POTUS defense team for 1000 Alex?

I'm not gonna defend Hunter Biden, but your nepotism argument on the Bidens rings hollow when multiple Presidential advisors got their positions due to nepotism, and Trump had to override the intelligence community giving them the veto on the background check to get there.

And I can only agree with Sunnyside so much, I am happily bringing in the Bidens if it means members of the EO have to testify too.

Mooby, you seriously gonna play this card? You think the house was impartial on the dems side? Please. Especially since many since have commented this is about the election and not impeachment. It’s all bullshit and political theater

Mooby, you seriously gonna play this card? You think the house was impartial on the dems side? Please. Especially since many since have commented this is about the election and not impeachment. It’s all bullshit and political theater

How about this Chico. We settle, and allow the Presidential defense to call any witnesses they'd like, and subpoena any documents they'd like, to use in their defense.

In return, the prosecution also gets to subpoena their witnesses and documents, and the Executive Office can't hide behind whatever bullshit excuse they have not to produce the documents or the people that will supposedly prove their innocence.

And the entire Senate has to uphold their commitment to be impartial jurors. That seems fair, right?