The Impeachment Show

Ahso!
Posts: 10215
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:38 pm

The Impeachment Show

Post by Ahso! »

Or, as I like to call it, The Sins Against Capitalism (Rabid Capitalism, as is customarily referred to as, The Moderate Middle.)

Ladies and Gentlemen, in the blue corner, we have the rabid capitalists who identify as Democrats, and in the red corner, we have the rabid capitalists who identify as Republicans. Together they identify as neoliberals, or favored politicians by most Americans.

What we are featuring is a sideshow (or circus, as some like to say) of whether or not the current president of the US is fit to be leading this capitalist movement we so earnestly, though unwittingly, support. The questions are as follows;1 - Has the President been fair to the economist elites as a whole or just in part?

2 - Has He played by the rules of capitalism as outlined by convention?

3 - Will Trump eventually learn to support capitalism to the extent of promoting and engaging in new wars?

4 - Will Trump learn to submit to the US intelligence agencies, or will he continue to circumvent that process by communicating directly with Israel and Saudi Arabia for his orders? The middlemen are justifiably angry at being shut out. They put a lot of effort in being the snobs they've become.Those are some questions I believe need to be answered in order for Trump to not be impeached.

We can discuss them perhaps?
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,”

Voltaire



I have only one thing to do and that's

Be the wave that I am and then

Sink back into the ocean

Fiona Apple
User avatar
spot
Posts: 39226
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

The Impeachment Show

Post by spot »

Oddly enough I'm forbidden by British law from watching these live impeachment broadcasts, on pain of a £1,000 fine plus the prosecution and court cost (which can easily run to ten times that). "This applies to any device or provider you use, including a TV, desktop computer, laptop, mobile phone, tablet, games console, digital box or DVD/Blu-Ray/VHS recorder".

I still think the only team looking to benefit from a successful outcome is that of the vice-President.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
Ahso!
Posts: 10215
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:38 pm

The Impeachment Show

Post by Ahso! »

What would a "successful outcome" look like? Would Pence favor the exoneration of a President that has given the religious right everything it wants via his willingness to fight dirty? Or would Pence prefer to get into the mix himself as just another neutered occupant?
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,”

Voltaire



I have only one thing to do and that's

Be the wave that I am and then

Sink back into the ocean

Fiona Apple
User avatar
spot
Posts: 39226
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

The Impeachment Show

Post by spot »

Ahso!;1527441 wrote: What would a "successful outcome" look like? Would Pence favor the exoneration of a President that has given the religious right everything it wants via his willingness to fight dirty? Or would Pence prefer to get into the mix himself as just another neutered occupant?


I guarantee Mr Pence is absolutely gagging for a shot at the top job.

The only way a candidate for the Presidency can avoid being plotted against by his running mate is to demand, before pairing up, cast-iron evidence of imprisonable wrong-doing from his selected partner. Nothing short of that is going to result in loyalty.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
Ahso!
Posts: 10215
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:38 pm

The Impeachment Show

Post by Ahso! »

spot;1527443 wrote: I guarantee Mr Pence is absolutely gagging for a shot at the top job. No question about that. I'm wondering how practical that is considering the neutering that would absolutely take place. Unlike tRump, Pence is a conventional politician subject to all the restraints and demands the intelligence agencies and war department would place on him. IOW, he's a lackey, whereas tRump is capable of skirting that label.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,”

Voltaire



I have only one thing to do and that's

Be the wave that I am and then

Sink back into the ocean

Fiona Apple
User avatar
spot
Posts: 39226
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

The Impeachment Show

Post by spot »

What you need in this thread is someone who disapproves of the Trump Presidency and has a preference for one of the existing feasible alternatives. Lord knows why anyone would want that.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
Ahso!
Posts: 10215
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:38 pm

The Impeachment Show

Post by Ahso! »

spot;1527446 wrote: What you need in this thread is someone who disapproves of the Trump Presidency and has a preference for one of the existing feasible alternatives. Lord knows why anyone would want that.They're all watching the show.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,”

Voltaire



I have only one thing to do and that's

Be the wave that I am and then

Sink back into the ocean

Fiona Apple
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 12517
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

The Impeachment Show

Post by LarsMac »

Well, I was watching the beginning while having breakfast at a hotel yesterday morning.

One comment from Mr Nunez stood out.

He said that it will take years to repair the damages done by all of this.

That pretty well summed it all up.

This thing will simply succeed at rousing the rabble for the coming election, and we will be too busy for the next few decades sorting through the debris to actually accomplish anything useful.
Control is an illusion. The Chaos is all part of the fun.
-Susan Hattie Steinsapir
User avatar
tude dog
Posts: 5121
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 11:48 am

The Impeachment Show

Post by tude dog »

It is hard to take impeachment seriously. The day Don was elected there were calls for impeachment.

Then there is the search for a plausible reason to justify impeachment. It is a political exercise so any reason will do.

What does impeachment accomplish? Ask Shifty.

Of course, Don will never be convicted and removed by the Senate as well they shouldn't.

Maybe the Democrats ought to win elections rather than embarrass themselves by all the crying and whining.
What happened to Kamala Harris' campaign?
She had the black vote all locked up.
User avatar
spot
Posts: 39226
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

The Impeachment Show

Post by spot »

tude dog;1527477 wrote: Maybe the Democrats ought to win elections rather than embarrass themselves by all the crying and whining.


Had that dreadful little con-man in the White House offered to stand as a Democrat instead of a Republican, the Democrats would joyfully have taken him to their bosom and the Republicans would have been up in arms about him from the day he was elected. You would now be writing of him as you once wrote about President Obama.

America is tribally partisan, there is no objectivity left in the country.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
Ahso!
Posts: 10215
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:38 pm

The Impeachment Show

Post by Ahso! »

I think I'm objective when it comes to politics.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,”

Voltaire



I have only one thing to do and that's

Be the wave that I am and then

Sink back into the ocean

Fiona Apple
User avatar
spot
Posts: 39226
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

The Impeachment Show

Post by spot »

Ahso!;1527480 wrote: I think I'm objective when it comes to politics.


I'll settle for "there's little objectivity left in the country" then.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 12517
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

The Impeachment Show

Post by LarsMac »

These days, it's about which con-man is better at telling the story you want to hear.
Control is an illusion. The Chaos is all part of the fun.
-Susan Hattie Steinsapir
Ahso!
Posts: 10215
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:38 pm

The Impeachment Show

Post by Ahso! »

LarsMac;1527485 wrote: These days, it's about which con-man is better at telling the story you want to hear.I'd like to know how you're defining "con-man". Not that I necessarily disagree. Like all consumer goods, marketing is the name of the game in retail politics.

I think there are a few things the tRump presidency has illuminated, which he stumbled upon quite accidentally (not that he doesn't belong behind bars). One is that some (not tRump, mind you) probably do go into the office with intentions of what they ran on, but what appears to happen is that the first intelligence briefing goes something like this;

"Congratulations on a well-deserved win, Sir/Madam, and thank you for affording us your undivided attention.

As you know, we have the pulse of all the underlying energy within the country as well as the entire world - that's our job - to know things.

That said, we need to inform you of some information we are privy to regarding your (insert relative here along with indiscretion) that we've been keeping under wraps and feel we can continue to control with some hard work and dedication.

Sir/Madam, it is so vital to your presidency and the nation that we form an alliance and dedication to work together for the good of national security purposes.

The daily briefings we will be providing you are of the utmost importance."

And down the toilet goes a whole bunch of good intentions.

My guess is that this is, affording him the benefit of the doubt, what happened to Obama, and why he seemed to become a coward almost overnight. He tried to do some good towards the end of his term, but too little, too late.

tRump, on the other hand, had too many friends in the media and other places that owed him favors. He apparently told Comey, Brenner and the rest (albeit four months after his first briefing because it took him that long to figure it out_ to go screw themselves. Intelligence had already been spying on tRump's campaign (as I'm sure it does to all campaigns) (they must have had a library on the Clintons by then).
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,”

Voltaire



I have only one thing to do and that's

Be the wave that I am and then

Sink back into the ocean

Fiona Apple
User avatar
tude dog
Posts: 5121
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 11:48 am

The Impeachment Show

Post by tude dog »

spot;1527479 wrote: Had that dreadful little con-man in the White House offered to stand as a Democrat instead of a Republican, the Democrats would joyfully have taken him to their bosom and the Republicans would have been up in arms about him from the day he was elected. You would now be writing of him as you once wrote about President Obama.

America is tribally partisan, there is no objectivity left in the country.


You're entitled to your opinion.
What happened to Kamala Harris' campaign?
She had the black vote all locked up.
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 12517
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

The Impeachment Show

Post by LarsMac »

spot;1527479 wrote: Had that dreadful little con-man in the White House offered to stand as a Democrat instead of a Republican, the Democrats would joyfully have taken him to their bosom and the Republicans would have been up in arms about him from the day he was elected. You would now be writing of him as you once wrote about President Obama.

America is tribally partisan, there is no objectivity left in the country.


Given his history since the 2008 election, I do not see the Dems bringing him in. His treatment of Obama, and his Birther bullsht pretty much set him up for the tRumper Room.
Control is an illusion. The Chaos is all part of the fun.
-Susan Hattie Steinsapir
User avatar
tude dog
Posts: 5121
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 11:48 am

The Impeachment Show

Post by tude dog »

LarsMac;1527499 wrote: Given his history since the 2008 election, I do not see the Dems bringing him in. His treatment of Obama, and his Birther bullsht pretty much set him up for the tRumper Room.


I love this.

Trump at the 2011 White House Corres...
What happened to Kamala Harris' campaign?
She had the black vote all locked up.
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 12517
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

The Impeachment Show

Post by LarsMac »

tude dog;1527502 wrote: I love this.

Trump at the 2011 White House Corres...


Priceless
Control is an illusion. The Chaos is all part of the fun.
-Susan Hattie Steinsapir
User avatar
spot
Posts: 39226
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

The Impeachment Show

Post by spot »

LarsMac;1527499 wrote: Given his history since the 2008 election, I do not see the Dems bringing him in. His treatment of Obama, and his Birther bullsht pretty much set him up for the tRumper Room.


Clearly they wouldn't, not after 2008. On the other hand he was a registered Democrat for the seven years before then.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political ... nald_Trump

Since my suggestion involves changing history I think I ought to be able to say which smidgeon of history gets changed. Had he remained a Democrat instead of reverting to the Republican party I suggest he might have succeeded President Obama anyway, just for the different party, at which point each tribe would be shouting in the other direction. The observation is more about the tribes than the man.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
Ahso!
Posts: 10215
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:38 pm

The Impeachment Show

Post by Ahso! »

tude dog;1527477 wrote: It is hard to take impeachment seriously. The day Don was elected there were calls for impeachment. Your bias is showing. Simply because there were some who verbalized early on that given enough rope tRump would hang himself and then impeachment would follow, doesn't offer a legitimate excuse to turn a blind eye to his many transgressions. Try following the evidence instead and make an informed decision. Clearly tRump is guilty of what he's being investigated for, he even admitted to it, as did Mulvany. It doesn't get any more clear than that. The claim of tRump and the Republicans is that everyone does it, though more discretely and through back channels instead of openly as tRump did, and that since a sitting President can't be indicted, he's above the law while in the office anyway.

All that said, not only should tRyno be impeached, but his claims about Biden & Son should be investigated as well because it appears there are some good reasons to do so. Both are probably guilty of abuse of power. This I know you are but what am I? game being played by both sides is the spectacle that makes this entire charade the embarrassment it is.

Neither tRump or Biden are deserving of the title of POTUS.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,”

Voltaire



I have only one thing to do and that's

Be the wave that I am and then

Sink back into the ocean

Fiona Apple
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 12517
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

The Impeachment Show

Post by LarsMac »

Ahso!;1527492 wrote:

I'd like to know how you're defining "con-man". Not that I necessarily disagree. Like all consumer goods, marketing is the name of the game in retail politics.


Sometimes, keeping it simple is the best plan:

con man

/ˈkän man/

nounINFORMAL

a man who cheats or tricks someone by gaining their trust and persuading them to believe something that is not true.

That has been the name of the game in Politics since at least the beginning of the 19th Century, I think.

Ahso!;1527492 wrote:

I think there are a few things the tRump presidency has illuminated, which he stumbled upon quite accidentally (not that he doesn't belong behind bars). One is that some (not tRump, mind you) probably do go into the office with intentions of what they ran on, but what appears to happen is that the first intelligence briefing goes something like this;

"Congratulations on a well-deserved win, Sir/Madam, and thank you for affording us your undivided attention.

As you know, we have the pulse of all the underlying energy within the country as well as the entire world - that's our job - to know things.

That said, we need to inform you of some information we are privy to regarding your (insert relative here along with indiscretion) that we've been keeping under wraps and feel we can continue to control with some hard work and dedication.

Sir/Madam, it is so vital to your presidency and the nation that we form an alliance and dedication to work together for the good of national security purposes.

The daily briefings we will be providing you are of the utmost importance."

And down the toilet goes a whole bunch of good intentions.

My guess is that this is, affording him the benefit of the doubt, what happened to Obama, and why he seemed to become a coward almost overnight. He tried to do some good towards the end of his term, but too little, too late.

tRump, on the other hand, had too many friends in the media and other places that owed him favors. He apparently told Comey, Brenner and the rest (albeit four months after his first briefing because it took him that long to figure it out_ to go screw themselves. Intelligence had already been spying on tRump's campaign (as I'm sure it does to all campaigns) (they must have had a library on the Clintons by then).


That makes a great 'story' for some sort of Whole World Domination Plot movie, but I don't think it really plays well on the stage.

All Prez candidates make big promises about what they will do, that might get them in the door, and yes, reality sets in about ten minutes into that first meeting, but the gnomes in the intel closet probably aren't really running the show.



tRump and his buffoon army don't really care if they offend people. It's probably that simple.
Control is an illusion. The Chaos is all part of the fun.
-Susan Hattie Steinsapir
Ahso!
Posts: 10215
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:38 pm

The Impeachment Show

Post by Ahso! »

LarsMac;1527510 wrote: Sometimes, keeping it simple is the best plan:

con man

/ˈkän man/

nounINFORMAL

a man who cheats or tricks someone by gaining their trust and persuading them to believe something that is not true.

That has been the name of the game in Politics since at least the beginning of the 19th Century, I think.





That makes a great 'story' for some sort of Whole World Domination Plot movie, but I don't think it really plays well on the stage.

All Prez candidates make big promises about what they will do, that might get them in the door, and yes, reality sets in about ten minutes into that first meeting, but the gnomes in the intel closet probably aren't really running the show.



tRump and his buffoon army don't really care if they offend people. It's probably that simple.I'd like to learn of you're reasoning why each successive president has, in the course of breaking each of their promises, continued in the course of each of their predecessors? If it isn't being directed somehow, how could that be possible?
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,”

Voltaire



I have only one thing to do and that's

Be the wave that I am and then

Sink back into the ocean

Fiona Apple
User avatar
spot
Posts: 39226
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

The Impeachment Show

Post by spot »

LarsMac;1527510 wrote: a man who cheats or tricks someone by gaining their trust and persuading them to believe something that is not true.

That has been the name of the game in Politics since at least the beginning of the 19th Century, I think.


As an alternative comparison I quite like https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/tr ... -problems/

You might enjoy reading it.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
Raphael
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Oct 19, 2019 11:10 am

The Impeachment Show

Post by Raphael »

This is why the impeachment has as much chance of succeeding as any of you have for breaking Bolt's 100 metre world record .

The DNC are finished forever and don't yet know it . You lot obviously have no inkling

If Horowitz reports on Monday --- my latest top intel --- , you can kiss goodbye to the Communist Left Wing traitors .
Raphael
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Oct 19, 2019 11:10 am

The Impeachment Show

Post by Raphael »

SEE ABOVE

The Washington Post provided a timeline of the 2015/206 intervention by then-Vice President Joe Biden against the then-General Prosecutor of Ukraine, Viktor Shokin. Shokin was investigating Mykola Zlochevsky, the owner of the gas company Burisma Holdings which paid Joe Biden's son Hunter Biden at least $50,000 per month for being on its board.

We used that timeline to show that Biden's intervention reached its height shortly after the prosecutor confiscated Zlochevsky houses.

A new report by John Solomon, based on released State Department emails, supports the suspicion that Joe Biden and others intervened against Shokin on behalf of Burisma and on request of his son:

Hunter Biden and his Ukrainian gas firm colleagues had multiple contacts with the Obama State Department during the 2016 election cycle, including one just a month before Vice President Joe Biden forced Ukraine to fire the prosecutor investigating his son’s company for corruption, newly released memos show.

During that February 2016 contact, a U.S. representative for Burisma Holdings sought a meeting with Undersecretary of State Catherine A. Novelli to discuss ending the corruption allegations against the Ukrainian firm where Hunter Biden worked as a board member, according to memos obtained under a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit.

Just three weeks before Burisma’s overture to State, Ukrainian authorities raided the home of the oligarch who owned the gas firm and employed Hunter Biden, a signal the long-running corruption probe was escalating in the middle of the U.S. presidential election.

Solomon points to the same Interfax-Ukraine report about the prosecutor's action against Burisma owner Zlochevsky that we have used to make our case against Biden. Other media have so far ignored that report and several have falsely claimed that the case against Burisma was "dormant" when Biden intervened to get the Prosecutor General fired.

Below is an integrated timeline which combines the one WaPo provided with the new dates from Solomon's reporting and from additional sources. It is intended as a working reference that can be updated when new details come to light.





Jul 2010-Apr 2012 Mykola Zlochevsky heads the Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources in Ukraine. Several oil and gas companies owned by Zlochevsky receive lucrative special drilling permits.

Feb 23 2014 The U.S. supported Maidan 'regime change' coup overthrows the elected government of Ukraine.

Mar 2014 The EU blocks funds of several Ukrainian oligarchs including Zlochevsky's. RFERL

Mar 11 2014 Britain blocks the transfer of $23 million owned by Mykola Zlochevsky companies and opens an investigation against him. Guardian

Spring 2014 Burisma hires Devon Archer and Hunter Biden as members of its board. Archer and Biden together own a firm called Rosemont Seneca Partners. Guardian

May 2014 Rosemont Seneca Partners starts to receive monthly checks of $166,000 from Burisma. JS

Nov 24 2014 U.S. government organ RFERL publishes a video report showing one of Zlochevsky's palaces near Kiev. It notes the Hunter Biden connection. RFERL

Dec 2 2014 Unknown Ukrainian prosecutor writes letter saying that Zlochevsky is not under suspicion. Guardian

Late 2014 Zlochevsky is put on Ukraine's most-wanted list for alleged economic crimes. RFERL

Late 2014 Zlochevsky leaves the Ukraine. Interfax

Jan 21 2015 Referring to the letter by the unknown Ukrainian prosecutor a British court orders the closure of the British case against Zlochevsky and to release the $23m. Guardian

Feb 10 2015 Victor Shokin nominated as Prosecutor General of Ukraine Interfax

Mar 2015 EU lifts blocking of funds of several Ukrainian oligarchs including Zlochevsky RFERL

May 27 2015 Hunter Biden meets then-Deputy Secretary of State Tony Blinken, a former national security adviser to Joe Biden who was promoted to the No. 2 job at State under then-Secretary John Kerry. JS

July 22 2015 Hunter Biden again meets with the State Department No. 2 Tony Blinken. JS

July 31 2015 Ukraine's prosecutor general issues an arrest warrant against Zlochevsky. RFERL

Sep 2015 Referring to the closed British case then-U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt gives a speech urging Ukrainian prosecutors to do more against corruption. Guardian

Oct 8 2015 Then-Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland testifies in Congress: “The Prosecutor General’s Office has to be reinvented as an institution that serves the citizens of Ukraine, rather than ripping them off.” WaPo

Oct 17 2015 Shokin announces a joint investigation with Britain of the Zlochevsky case. Interfax

Dec 7 2015 Joe Biden holds a press conference in Kiev and announces $190 million to “fight corruption in law enforcement and reform the justice sector.” WaPo

Dec 7/8 2015 According to his then-National Security Advisor Colin Kahl VP Biden withholds the announcement of a $1 billion loan guarantee Ukraine was supposed to receive. WaPo

Dec 8 2015 Joe Biden speaks in the Ukrainian parliament and decried the “cancer of corruption” in the country. “The Office of the General Prosecutor desperately needs reform,” he noted. WaPo

End of 2015 Shokin hands one case on Zlochevsky to the U.S. supported National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) Interfax

Jan 20 2016 Biden meets Poroshenko in Davos, Switzerland, when he also presses “the need to continue to move forward on Ukraine’s anti-corruption agenda,” according to a White House statement. Kahl said Biden at that meeting reinforced the linkage between the loan guarantee and the necessary reforms. WaPo

Feb 2 2016 Shokin confiscates several large properties and a Rolls-Royce Phantom owned by Zlochevsky. Interfax

Feb 4 2016 First public announcement of the confiscation of Zlochevsky's properties. Interfax

Feb 4 2016 Hunter Biden starts following Deputy Secretary of State Tony Blinken on Twitter. JS

Feb 12 2016 Biden speaks to Poroshenko by phone. “The two leaders agreed on the importance of unity among Ukrainian political forces to quickly pass reforms in line with the commitments in its IMF program, including measures focused on rooting out corruption,” the White House said. WaPo

Feb 16 2016 Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko says that he had advised Shokin to step down. Interfax

Feb 16 2016 Poroshenko announced he had asked Shokin to resign. WaPo

Feb 17 2016 Shokin goes on paid leave. Interfax

Feb 18 2016 Another call takes place between Biden and Poroshenko. WaPo

Feb 19 2016 The presidential press secretary Sviatoslav Tseholko says that Shokin's letter of resignation had arrived at the presidential administration. On the same day, Poroshenko tables a motion in parliament to dismiss Shokin. Interfax

Feb 19 2016 Poroshenko announces he has received Shokin’s resignation letter. It still required parliamentary approval, and Shokin did not go away quietly. WaPo

Feb 19 2016 Biden speaks separately with Poroshenko and Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk. WaPo

Feb 22/23 2016 Karen Tramontano of Blue Star Strategies, a U.S. representative for Burisma Holdings, seeks a meeting with then-Undersecretary of State Catherine A. Novelli who oversees international energy issues to discuss ending the corruption allegations against Burisma. JS

Feb 24 2016 A State Department email exchange under the subject line "Burisma" notes that Karen Tramontano especially mentioned Hunter Biden while she tried to get the meeting. JS

Mar 1 2016 Tramontano is scheduled to meet Novelli and that State Department officials are scrambling to get answers ahead of time from the U.S. embassy in Kiev. JS

Mar 2 2016 Hunter Biden’s fellow board member at Burisma, Devon Archer, has a meeting with Secretary of State John Kerry. Secretary Kerry’s stepson, Christopher Heinz, had earlier been a business partner with both Archer and Hunter Biden at the Rosemont Seneca investment firm. JS

Mar 3 2016 Shokin is back at work. Interfax

Mar 16 2016 Reports emerged that Shokin was back at work after having been on vacation. WaPo

Mar 22 2016 Biden and Poroshenko speak again by phone. WaPo

Mar 29 2016 The Ukrainian parliament, in a 289-to-6 vote, approves Shokin’s dismissal. WaPo

undated "Mr. Zlochevsky’s allies were relieved by the dismissal of Mr. Shokin, the prosecutor whose ouster Mr. Biden had sought, according to people familiar with the situation." NYT

Mar 31 2016 Poroshenko meets with Biden during a trip to Washington, and Biden emphasizes that the loan guarantee was contingent on further reform progress beyond Shokin’s removal. WaPo

Apr 14 2016 Biden and Poroshenko have another call. Biden congratulates the president on his new cabinet and “stressed the urgency of putting in place a new Prosecutor General." WaPo

May 12 2016 Poroshenko nominated Yuriy Lutsenko as the new prosecutor general. WaPo

May 13 2016 In a phone call, Biden told Poroshenko he welcomed Lutsenko’s appointment. WaPo

Undated "Mr. Zlochevsky’s representatives were pleased by the choice, concluding they could work with Mr. Lutsenko to resolve the oligarch’s legal issues, according to the people familiar with the situation." NYT

Jun 2016 Hunter Biden joins Zlochevsky at a Burisma organized event in Morocco. Guardian

Aug 22 2016 Joe Biden tells the Atlantic how he blackmailed Poroshenko into firing the "corrupt" Shokin. Atlantic

Sep 2016 Ukraine cancels arrest warrant against Zlochevsky and closes the case against him. Guardian

Jan 12 2017 Ukraine's prosecutor closes the case against Burisma after the company agrees to pay UAH 180 millions of tax liabilities. Interfax

Jan 19 2017 Burisma announces a donation of between $100,000 and 249,999 to the Atlantic Council Guardian

Aug 2017 U.S. supported National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) closes its case against Zlochevsky Interfax

Oct 27 2017 Zlochevsky is estimated to have $535 million in assets, more than double than a year earlier. Interfax

Jan 23 2018 Joe Biden brags publicly how he blackmailed Poroshenko into firing Shokin. CFR

Feb 1 2018 After more than three years abroad Zlochevsky returns to Ukraine. Interfax

May 14 2019 Ukrainian Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko says that the Zlochevsky case was reopened "several months ago". Interfax

Jul 2019 Shokin maintains his suspicions about the vice president's motives, accusing Biden of promoting his dismissal for personal reasons. He insists he had "no doubt" Biden wanted him gone in an effort to protect his son's new employer. ABCNews
Ahso!
Posts: 10215
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:38 pm

The Impeachment Show

Post by Ahso! »

Johnathan Turley gave the democrats and the public a bit of a lesson on how to conduct an impeachment yesterday. The Dems should heed his counsel. They are going about this too quickly, but that, I believe, is because they want to tie up Warren and Sanders to prevent them from campaigning once the senate hearings begin. Also, the more they can focus the attention now on impeachment, the less we're going to hear or read of much-needed dialogue on healthcare (Medicare For All), taxes on extreme wealth, endless wars and the fact that Sanders and Warren are doing better than establishment Democrats had hoped.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,”

Voltaire



I have only one thing to do and that's

Be the wave that I am and then

Sink back into the ocean

Fiona Apple
Ahso!
Posts: 10215
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:38 pm

The Impeachment Show

Post by Ahso! »

Raphael;1527526 wrote: This is why the impeachment has as much chance of succeeding as any of you have for breaking Bolt's 100 metre world record .

The DNC are finished forever and don't yet know it . You lot obviously have no inkling

If Horowitz reports on Monday --- my latest top intel --- , you can kiss goodbye to the Communist Left Wing traitors .Raffy had neither the date or the information right on Horowitz's report, but that was expected because of he took his news cues from a right-wing site. As expected, Horowitz straddled the fence, offering crumbs to both sides.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,”

Voltaire



I have only one thing to do and that's

Be the wave that I am and then

Sink back into the ocean

Fiona Apple
User avatar
Saint_
Posts: 3323
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:05 pm
Location: The Four Corners

The Impeachment Show

Post by Saint_ »

spot;1527440 wrote: Oddly enough I'm forbidden by British law from watching these live impeachment broadcasts


Britain is North Korea? Astonishing. Sorry you're not free...
User avatar
spot
Posts: 39226
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

The Impeachment Show

Post by spot »

Saint_;1528635 wrote: Britain is North Korea? Astonishing. Sorry you're not free...


It's the inadequacy of half of the US news websites, that they can't be bothered to comply with the European privacy regulations so they just put up a block on all European access with a message that says Sorry Europeans We're Working On It.

What they really mean is that they won't just let you see their pages without gathering your personal data, that gathering personal data is embedded in their every page, and that the European regulations say they can't gather your personal data without active prior consent, otherwise they can be fined by the European courts. Their decision to block European access to their news site is driven by corporate greed, who would have ever thought any American website could be so shallow.

The Washington Post, for instance, has actually bothered. It puts up an agreement tick-box labelled " The new European data protection law requires us to inform you of the following before you use our website:

We use cookies and other technologies to customize your experience, perform analytics and deliver personalized advertising on our sites, apps and newsletters and across the Internet based on your interests. By clicking “I agree” below, you consent to the use by us and our third-party partners of cookies and data gathered from your use of our platforms. See our Privacy Policy and Third Party Partners to learn more about the use of data and your rights. You also agree to our Terms of Service. "

Others are merely uninformative, like "Access Denied

You don't have permission to access "http://www.wfaa.com/article/news/crime/ ... e190ec94c3" on this server."

Or "Sorry, this content is not available in your region."

Or "Our European visitors are important to us. This site is currently unavailable to visitors from the European Economic Area while we work to ensure your data is protected in accordance with applicable EU laws."

The North Korea is yours, dear boy, not mine. There's a sample with just one wording here on the Google search engine. The tendency of comments is that Americans are incapable of organizing a pleasant evening in a distillery.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
spot
Posts: 39226
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

The Impeachment Show

Post by spot »

I've often said America is a place where being born-again into the Living Arms of Christ the Saviour is a requirement for public office.

Hence Republican Barry Loudermilk: "Pontius Pilate afforded more rights to Jesus than the Democrats have afforded this president". And, no doubt, a thousand other such observations.

For the record, Pontius Pilate actually gave judgement with due legal process that Jesus was to be put to death by his own guard ("the governor's soldiers") after ordering a preparatory judicial flogging, though I agree with Representative Loudermilk if he's suggesting none of Jesus' rights were thereby infringed. Rome was not strong on rights for non-citizens[1], a position adopted with enthusiasm by America itself from the moment it declared Independence.

Facing impeachment charges will do President Trump no electoral harm whatever, it is a blunder on the part of his detractors. Though on a more positive note we can definitely refer to Pontius Pelosi[2] and her Pharisaic supporters from now on.



[1]: As demonstrated, for example, by Paul's complaint that “They beat us publicly without a trial, even though we are Roman citizens". Public beatings were an early form of waterboarding employed throughout the Empire when controlling subject peoples.



[2]: 18 Google hits and counting.

Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
Ahso!
Posts: 10215
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:38 pm

The Impeachment Show

Post by Ahso! »

spot;1528876 wrote: Bringing impeachment charges against the President will do him no electoral harm whatever, it was a blunder. On a more positive note though, we can definitely refer to Pontius Pelosi from now on.It looks to me like they don't care. If Jonathan Turley can't convince grandma Nance, then there's something else to it. I think that something else is a distraction of news away from Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren and medicare for all, while the insurance and medical industries flood the airways with ads intended to sabotage the idea.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,”

Voltaire



I have only one thing to do and that's

Be the wave that I am and then

Sink back into the ocean

Fiona Apple
User avatar
tude dog
Posts: 5121
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 11:48 am

The Impeachment Show

Post by tude dog »



What happened to Kamala Harris' campaign?
She had the black vote all locked up.
User avatar
spot
Posts: 39226
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

The Impeachment Show

Post by spot »

So, now that the impeachment attack has been and gone and posed no political or reputational hazard at all to President Trump, do we finally accept that the impeachment process itself has increased the likelihood of his re-election this year to a second term? That his base will now come out in even greater numbers because of the process, and that the man is going to harp on about it with a delighted grin from now until his inaugural address next January?

What possible benefit has anyone derived.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
Ahso!
Posts: 10215
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:38 pm

The Impeachment Show

Post by Ahso! »

I don't think there's any increasing tRump's base or their turnout. I think it's maxed. That's not to say he won't be re-elected - he might be. What I do think is that if the democrats through their media arm continue to sabotage Sanders and alienate his very large following tRump wins hands down because we will either remain home or vote Green. Sanders will be the Democratic nominee if the process is allowed to continue without interference. However, we now see the DNC has stacked its panel with Obama and Clinton supporters and surrogates who are bent on maintaining the status quo of unfettered capitalism that only benefits affluent people, keeps the promise of healthcare just an arm's length away, allow environmentally healthy policies to languish and, keep the employment numbers up by maintaining war.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,”

Voltaire



I have only one thing to do and that's

Be the wave that I am and then

Sink back into the ocean

Fiona Apple
User avatar
magentaflame
Posts: 2931
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 4:11 pm
Location: Victoria, Australia

The Impeachment Show

Post by magentaflame »

You all poo pooed me when I mentioned Sanders in the past. ...stick with me lads im a futurist lol
The 'radical' left just wants everyone to have food, shelter, healthcare, education and a living wage. Man that's radical!....ooooohhhh Scary!
User avatar
magentaflame
Posts: 2931
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 4:11 pm
Location: Victoria, Australia

The Impeachment Show

Post by magentaflame »

spot;1529988 wrote: So, now that the impeachment attack has been and gone and posed no political or reputational hazard at all to President Trump, do we finally accept that the impeachment process itself has increased the likelihood of his re-election this year to a second term? That his base will now come out in even greater numbers because of the process, and that the man is going to harp on about it with a delighted grin from now until his inaugural address next January?

What possible benefit has anyone derived.


Im not sure it hasnt damaged them. Trump at the moment is doing a scorched earth exercise at the moment. I can't see Americans putting up with that for much longer.
The 'radical' left just wants everyone to have food, shelter, healthcare, education and a living wage. Man that's radical!....ooooohhhh Scary!
User avatar
spot
Posts: 39226
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

The Impeachment Show

Post by spot »

magentaflame;1530254 wrote: Im not sure it hasnt damaged them. Trump at the moment is doing a scorched earth exercise at the moment. I can't see Americans putting up with that for much longer.


They might just have to. President Trump seems to have got religion this last few days, it's more nauseating than anything that went before. Vengeance will be mine, and suchlike. They have sown the wind and they shall reap the whirlwind. Don't start me, I could go on like that for pages.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
tude dog
Posts: 5121
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 11:48 am

The Impeachment Show

Post by tude dog »

What happened to Kamala Harris' campaign?
She had the black vote all locked up.
User avatar
spot
Posts: 39226
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

The Impeachment Show

Post by spot »

I know that a mule and an elephant denote the two American parties, but I have no idea which is which.

Why on earth can't you just use words to say what you're trying to convey, instead of opaque graphics? Then we could have conversations.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
magentaflame
Posts: 2931
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 4:11 pm
Location: Victoria, Australia

The Impeachment Show

Post by magentaflame »

In my experience Trumpests don't converse a hell of a lot. They blow a lot of hot air though.



Sorry ....did I say that?
The 'radical' left just wants everyone to have food, shelter, healthcare, education and a living wage. Man that's radical!....ooooohhhh Scary!
Ahso!
Posts: 10215
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:38 pm

The Impeachment Show

Post by Ahso! »

spot;1530285 wrote: I know that a mule and an elephant denote the two American parties, but I have no idea which is which.

Why on earth can't you just use words to say what you're trying to convey, instead of opaque graphics? Then we could have conversations.Good luck with that. The fact that a person needs to communicate with cartoons should say all that's needs to be said about their communicative abilities. As Dirty Harry said; 'a man needs to know his limitations'.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,”

Voltaire



I have only one thing to do and that's

Be the wave that I am and then

Sink back into the ocean

Fiona Apple
Ahso!
Posts: 10215
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:38 pm

The Impeachment Show

Post by Ahso! »

Ahso!;1530320 wrote: Good luck with that. The fact that a person needs to communicate with cartoons should say all that's needs to be said about their communicative abilities. As Dirty Harry said; 'a man needs to know his limitations'.This does not apply to people who post cartoons and have shown an ability to post coherent text.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,”

Voltaire



I have only one thing to do and that's

Be the wave that I am and then

Sink back into the ocean

Fiona Apple

Return to “Societal Issues News”