Jump to content

impeachment inquiry hearings thread


henrygandorf

Recommended Posts

39 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Not that facts matter, but Zelensky was elected on an anti-corruption platform.  If ANYTHING, less scrutiny would be warranted, not more.

Most politicians do. Zelensky does have close ties with Ihor Kolomoyskyi, who, yeah, is probably a mobster.  And it's not like Z has a strong resume of fighting crime.  He was a TV star on Kolomoyski's TV station playing the President.  Like Trump, his resume consisted of pretending to be someone important. 

But, the consensus view of the intelligence community and the State department was that Z was someone that was a move in the right direction for fighting corruption.  And Lev/Igor had approached Kolomoyski seeking assistance in digging up dirt on Biden.  Kolomoyski, unlike Firtash, told them to fuck off.  So it's not like the anti-Biden coalition of morons was particularly concerned about Kolomoyski's checkered past. 

It might be a reasonable defense of Trump's actions if Trump had done anything, literally anything, to indicate he was worried about corruption and Zelensky.  There were no inquiries to State or the CIA.  He didn't announce concerns to Congressional committees.  It wasn't mentioned to the OBM, so it wasn't noted in the Congressional notifications on the delay of funds.  He didn't even mention the concern to Z on either of the phone calls, except outside of the very specific concerns about Burisma and Crowdstrike, which there are no indications Z had connections to. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dnaguy said:

Has anyone raised the fact that Turly’s argument against impeachment is only there because the WH is obstructing anyone with 1st hand knowledge  from testifying?

This is why I am wondering why someone isn't trying to hammer him?  I realize the old saw about not asking a question on cross if you don't know the answer, but you have three other lawyers there who will be able to counter whatever he says if you have to go there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, JimmyJames said:

This is actually smart on their part. You usually have to give people visuals to persuade them but often technology comes off as too slick. 

It helps when you’re not corrupt assholes though like the republicans. 

This is true for a jury.  Not sure any of it holds true for this venue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Oh snap, Karlan puts it right back on the Republican committee members.

What did she say this time?

i liked this one- "The Constitution doesn’t allow titles of nobility," she said. "The president can name his son Barron, but he can’t make him a baron."

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...