Jump to content

~~ PRESIDENTIAL HARASSMENT! || Millions of Impeaches, Impeaches for Me || House Impeachment Hearings OT ~~


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, osxmatt said:


 

 

 

Quote

In the Capitol on Nov. 14, as CNN began to ask a question about the trip to Vienna, Nunes interjected and said, "I don't talk to you in this lifetime or the next lifetime."

 

"At any time," Nunes added. "On any question."

 

Asked again on Thursday about his travel to Vienna and his interactions with Shokin and Parnas, Nunes gave a similar response.

 

"To be perfectly clear, I don't acknowledge any questions from you in this lifetime or the next lifetime," Nunes said while leaving the impeachment hearing. "I don't acknowledge any question from you ever."

 

Totally clears the President. Thank you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Firewithin said:

Rico chart?  So we can get all the politicians? 

Knowing him he will show his Rico Chart on some network claiming it shows a corrupt Biden family, but “accidentally” reveals that Trump is linked to everything instead. Seems like we just need to play the waiting game before Rudy reveals his fuckup for all to see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

White House review turns up emails showing extensive effort to justify Trump’s decision to block Ukraine military aid

 

Quote

In the early August email exchanges, Mulvaney asked acting OMB director Russell Vought for an update on the legal rationale for withholding the aid and how much longer it could be delayed. Trump had made the decision the prior month without an assessment of the reasoning or legal justification, according to two White House officials. Emails show Vought and OMB staffers arguing that withholding aid was legal, while officials at the National Security Council and State Department protested. OMB lawyers said that it was legal to withhold the aid, as long as they deemed it a “temporary” hold, according to people familiar with the review.

 

A senior budget lawyer crafted a memo on July 25 that defended the hold for at least a short period of time, an administration official said.

 

https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/24/politics/white-house-review-ukraine-military-aid-trump/index.html

 

Quote

In the August emails, Mulvaney asked acting Office of Management and Budget director Russell Vought to provide him with the legal reasoning for withholding the aid, asking also how much longer it could be paused, according to the Washington Post. Emails also show Vought and OMB staffers argued that it was legal to withhold the aid, while National Security Council and State Department officials objected, the newspaper said.


The Post, citing two White House officials, reports Trump made the decision to withhold the aid in July "without an assessment of reasoning or legal justification."


The White House press office and counsel's office did not provide CNN a comment for this story.


In response to the Post report, an OMB spokeswoman insisted on Sunday that the White House followed "routine practices and procedures" in temporarily freezing security aid to Ukraine.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm confused. There are two cases, this one involving McGahn, and another involving Charles Kupperman, but there are so many people disobeying congressional subpoenas. Are those cases not going through the court system, are their cases just waiting for these to go to SCOTUS, or am I wrong that the house has formally subpoenaed a bunch of other folks?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, TwinIon said:

I'm confused. There are two cases, this one involving McGahn, and another involving Charles Kupperman, but there are so many people disobeying congressional subpoenas. Are those cases not going through the court system, are their cases just waiting for these to go to SCOTUS, or am I wrong that the house has formally subpoenaed a bunch of other folks?

 

It's not uncommon for Congress to not vigorously pursue defiance. Often the subpoena allows them to work out other things that can be done to facilitate oversight. In the case of trump's men, though, they are pursuing only those couple that are both likely to finish soon enough to be useful (a decision in twelve months isn't helpful) and most likely to go their way (withdrawing when they get unfavorable judges).

 

It sucks because I want a more aggressive strategy too but this does seem to be more prudent.

 

Also the defiance is plain obstruction, they don't need to force testimony for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Under the Bus You Go, Rudy

 

Quote

During a radio interview with former Fox News host Bill O’Reilly on Tuesday, President Donald Trump attempted to distance himself from his personal lawyer’s efforts to dig up dirt on 2020 candidate Joe Biden in Ukraine.

 

“What was Rudy Giuliani doing in Ukraine on your behalf?” asked O’Reilly.

 

“Well, you have to ask that to Rudy,” Trump responded. “But Rudy…I don’t even know…I know he was going to go to Ukraine and I think he cancelled the trip.”

 

“But you know, Rudy has other clients other than me,” he continued. “I’m one person-”

 

O’Reilly cut him off: “So you didn’t direct him to go there on your behalf?”

 

“No,” Trump said.

 

Except you know... the transcript that Trump released specifically has Trump telling Zelensky to work with Giuliani.

 

He is truly the dumbest motherfucker alive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...