The Deep State War Heats Up :ph34r:

[John Adams]

2 minutes ago, B-Man said:

Also you continue to evade the point.  Trump asked them to look into 2016 corruption.  Biden's name came up AFTER.

 

I'd say you're bad at this, but you have obviously already had too much to drink.

 

 

Maybe you missed this. Joe Biden is running for president. He was leading polls head to head with the president. 

 

Do you somehow think Trump didn't know that and that an investigation could benefit his campaign? 

[B-Man]

6 minutes ago, John Adams said:

 

Maybe you missed this. Joe Biden is running for president. He was leading polls head to head with the president. 

 

Do you somehow think Trump didn't know that and that an investigation could benefit his campaign? 

 

 

Again..................just enough to spin it..................almost lawyer like.

 

 

What he asked in the phone conversation is what I stated.

 

What you are writing is what you want to believe Trump was thinking.

 

 

.

 

 

Edited September 26, 2019 by B-Man

[DC Tom]

25 minutes ago, John Adams said:

 

Maybe you missed this. Joe Biden is running for president. He was leading polls head to head with the president. 

 

Do you somehow think Trump didn't know that and that an investigation could benefit his campaign? 

 

Yes, I somehow think that.  Specifically, I think that because Trump has the self-awareness of a garden snail.

 

Are you somehow think Trump has greater self-awareness than a garden snail?

[Deranged Rhino]

 

************

35 minutes ago, John Adams said:

Did Trump say he withheld the aid? Answer is YES. 

 

... False when used without context. 

 

He said he withheld many countries aid -- at that very same time. And the facts proved he was accurate. This is not the hill to die on, just like "all 17 intelligences agencies agreed with the ICA" wasn't the hill to die on. It's a lie, being spun by the SAME people who tricked you into believing the ICA was legit when it's based on a document/dossier you admit you do not find credible. 

 

They're lying to your face. Over and over again.

 

36 minutes ago, John Adams said:

Are you shitting me? He asked about the Bidens by name! 

 

Based on how wrong you've been about the "transcript" in the last few days (Remember saying Zelensky brought up the funding first? BZZT wrongo), I don't think you actually read it. 

 

He mentioned Biden well after discussing CROWDSTRIKE and the 2016 election. Again, you're snipping/ignoring 500+ words between those statements. 

 

The favor was not connected to 2020. That won't hold up in the eye of public opinion UNLESS you present it dishonestly as CNN, MSNBC and Fox News all did yesterday. 

 

500 words between those statements. You're wrong. Read the transcript and you'll see. 

[John Adams]

2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

He mentioned Biden well after discussing CROWDSTRIKE and the 2016 election. Again, you're snipping/ignoring 500+ words between those statements. 

 

The favor was not connected to 2020. That won't hold up in the eye of public opinion UNLESS you present it dishonestly as CNN, MSNBC and Fox News all did yesterday. 

 

500 words between those statements. You're wrong. Read the transcript and you'll see. 

 

Trump asked a foreign leader to investigate his lead 2020 opponent as a "favor" while he was withholding $400 million in aid to the same country.

 

Is it your position that he didn't know that favor would help the Trump 2020 campaign? 

 

Come on DR. 

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, John Adams said:

 

Trump asked a foreign leader to investigate his lead 2020 opponent as a "favor" while he was withholding $400 million in aid to the same country.

 

He asked a foreign leader to look into the 2016 election, and corruption from 2014 involving a US citizen. That's what the evidence lays out, not this. And there's no evidence other than anonymous speculation any money was withheld because of this. None. Zip. Zero. 

 

Link it if there is, because I'd love to see it.

[Warren Zevon]

tHeYtHiNkYoUrEsTuPiD

[Deranged Rhino]

John Solomon dumping documents re Ukraine/Biden here: 

https://www.scribd.com/user/259237201/JohnSolomon

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[John Adams]

9 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

He asked a foreign leader to look into the 2016 election, and corruption from 2014 involving a US citizen.

 

 

It took 359 times before you admitted Russia ran a campaign to influence our election and the IC report conclusion on that was correct.

 

So there 358 times to go as I ask this again:

 

Is it your position that he didn't know that favor of investigating Biden would help the Trump 2020 campaign? 

 

 

Edited September 26, 2019 by John Adams

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, John Adams said:

 

It took 359 times before you admitted Russia ran a campaign to influence our election and the IC report conclusion on that was correct.

 

Untrue. I said that from day one. 

 

Just now, John Adams said:

 

 

Is it your position that he didn't know that favor of investigating Biden would help the Trump 2020 campaign? 

 

 

Nah, that's not how this works. You stated that things are facts when they're not. Prove they're facts. Show me links of the money being withheld. Show me that Trump DIDN'T talk about the 2016 election well before talking about Biden. 

 

Go.

[John Adams]

Just now, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Nah, that's not how this works. You stated that things are facts when they're not. Prove they're facts. Show me links of the money being withheld. Show me that Trump DIDN'T talk about the 2016 election well before talking about Biden. 

 

Go.

 

Oh my god. You think Trump asked for that favor and didn't believe it would benefit his campaign. Incredible. You love you some Trump. 

 

Everything I stated was a fact. 

 

-Trump withheld aid money from Ukraine

- Trump brought up how much aid the us gives

- Trump asked the president to investigate his lead political rival by name

- Trump released the aid because Congress gave him hell

- Trump's lawyer has been acting to influence Ukraine to investigate Biden

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, John Adams said:

Everything I stated was a fact. 

 

It's not. If it were, it should be easy for you to provide me links and proof that Trump withheld money specifically for the purposes of extorting the Ukraine. 

[John Adams]

8 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

It's not. If it were, it should be easy for you to provide me links and proof that Trump withheld money specifically for the purposes of extorting the Ukraine. 

 

You're an idiot. Yesterday you didn't even think he withheld the money. Now you want me to show where he admitted to extortion. Anyplace else you want to move the goalposts to? 

 

He was leveraging US aid in the call (which is why it was the first thing he brought up) before asking for the favor of investigating his lead rival, but you can't admit he knew that investigating his lead rival would help the Trump 2020 campaign. 

Edited September 26, 2019 by John Adams

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, John Adams said:

 

You're an idiot. Yesterday you didn't even think he withheld the money.

 

That's still my position. And you can prove me wrong easily if it's a fact... yet I still don't see any links to anything making this case? 

 

I wonder why? 

 

The money being withheld was NOT just the Ukrainian money, but MULTIPLE countries. Because it wasn't about Biden a favor, or the Ukraine. It was Trump's policy to get more in return for our aid. 

 

Prove me wrong. 

 

1 minute ago, John Adams said:

He was leveraging US aid in the call (which is why it was the first thing he brought up) before asking for the favor of investigating his lead rival, but you can't admit he knew that investigating his lead rival would help the Trump 2020 campaign. 

 

You still have the order of the call wrong. Which is silly because everyone can read it. He talked about the 2016 election after mentioning the favor. Biden was well after. 

 

This is important context which you are running right past... because you're once again falling for the framing of the story by the IC rather than your own two eyes and brain.

[Numark3]

Brrrrrr, this deep state war sure is hot lol.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

Former Vice President Joe Biden, now a 2020 Democratic presidential contender, has locked into a specific story about the controversy in Ukraine.

 

He insists that, in spring 2016, he strong-armed Ukraine to fire its chief prosecutor solely because Biden believed that official was corrupt and inept, not because the Ukrainian was investigating a natural gas company, Burisma Holdings, that hired Biden's son, Hunter, into a lucrative job.

 

There’s just one problem.

 

Hundreds of pages of never-released memos and documents — many from inside the American team helping Burisma to stave off its legal troubles — conflict with Biden’s narrative.

 

And they raise the troubling prospect that U.S. officials may have painted a false picture in Ukraine that helped ease Burisma’s legal troubles and stop prosecutors’ plans to interview Hunter Biden during the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

 

The WHOLE establishment got their beaks wet in the Ukraine, starting with the US/Soros backed coup in 2014. It exposes a nexus of corruption for, but not limited to:

 

* Victoria Nuland/Clinton and the neoliberal/neocon establishment

* McCain and his crew

* Romney and his crew

* Kerry, Biden, Obama

 

[DC Tom]

2 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

The WHOLE establishment got their beaks wet in the Ukraine, starting with the US/Soros backed coup in 2014. It exposes a nexus of corruption for, but not limited to:

 

* Victoria Nuland/Clinton and the neoliberal/neocon establishment

* McCain and his crew

* Romney and his crew

* Kerry, Biden, Obama

 

 

And Putin, who got the Crimea out of it.  And who's Putin's puppet?  Trump.

 

So this all gets back to Trump's corruption.  Impeach him.

 

[John Adams]

4 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

That's still my position.

 

No, your new position is that I have to prove extortion. Yesterday you said Trump "didn't withhold the funding before the call -- it was being earmarked and in process." 

 

Which is 100% wrong. 

 

Again. 

 

Trump withheld it, with others, and at least with the Ukies, he had an ask. 

 

He got on the phone and before asking for his "favors," reminded Zelensky about how he had $400 million reasons to do him said favors. It was a total power move before asking for the favor. You think Trump hasn't used this tactic before in a negotiation? It's a basic business power move. Not even subtle.

 

4 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

You still have the order of the call wrong. Which is silly because everyone can read it. He talked about the 2016 election after mentioning the favor. Biden was well after. 

 

I don't have the order of the call wrong. 

 

"Let me remind you about all the money we have and give your country."

 

"Let's talk about the server."

 

"Let's talk Bidens."

 

But you think when he brought up the Bidens, that wouldn't bring Trump 2020 any advantage. That he did that in a vacuum where money and his election had NOTHING to do with the Biden ask.

 

Let's not talk about whether it's impeachable, but do you really think Trump wasn't leveraging the withheld money for a couple favors? Not a quid pro quo where releasing the money had anything to do with the ask, but a "we've got you by the balls with this $400 million, now dance for us." 

 

Come on man, really? 

 

[Deranged Rhino]

24 minutes ago, John Adams said:

 

 

And yet you still can't provide me any evidence that the money was withheld. It's not a real part of this story without evidence to support it. I'd love to see it if it exists, you are certain it's real so prove it and show us.

26 minutes ago, John Adams said:

 

 

 

I don't have the order of the call wrong. 

 

 

You do. The "favor" ask was directly tied to 2016. Not Biden. 

 

That's what you're wrong about. Implying that it's connected is not accurate as the transcript shows. 

 

Here's a head start for you: 

 

[LB3]

5 hours ago, Gary Busey said:

tHeYtHiNkYoUrEsTuPiD

IaBANdonThisSCREennameFRequentLYCusIMaPuSSy.

[Taro T]

8 hours ago, John Adams said:

 

Fallen flat. 

 

The president withheld aid.

Brought up how much aid he gives to Ukraine. 

Asked for the favor of investigating his leading rival. 

Has had his lawyer all over Ukraine to investigate Biden. (If Rudy goes under oath and talks, look out. That guy could say anything. He's like Biden but more unpredictable.) 

 

The above statements are true. 

 

Umm, you're kind of stretching several of these points.  Certainly you took as much or more issue with President Obama having more wiggle room with the Russians after he was reelected.  Right?

 

Our President is a tool.  But that was a given prior to him being elected.  Should we still not enter a new war by next year November nor the economy go into the tank he'll win w/ Bush/Dukakis numbers.  Especially if the Dems spend another year+ playing this "I heard he did ____" when it was actually their own buddy that did that &  not Trump.

[John Adams]

6 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

And yet you still can't provide me any evidence that the money was withheld. It's not a real part of this story without evidence to support it. I'd love to see it if it exists, you are certain it's real so prove it and show us.

 

You don't think the money was withheld? Are we really back to this?

 

This is the least controversial of points. Trump admits to withholding the money. 

 

Quote

You do. The "favor" ask was directly tied to 2016. Not Biden. 

 

That's what you're wrong about. Implying that it's connected is not accurate as the transcript shows. 

 

Here's a head start for you: 

 

 

Trump reminds Zelensky about Sid in the opening seconds of the call. Zelensky is a cloying president the whole time.  Because he just loves the guy? Or for 400 million reasons? 

 

He's up Trump's ass he whole call. It's embarrassing but the $400M is the leverage. 

 

Trump then asks for 2 favors. One is Biden. You somehow think Trump cannot be thinking that investigating his top rival Biden assists Trump 2020. 

 

You have got to be joking. 

 

Not talking impeachment here DR. Trump reminds him about his leverage. Trump asks his cloying admirer for a favor. These things you agree with. But here you diverge and think Trump next sees no advantage to his campaign when he asks to investigate Biden. 

 

It's not quite Pro quo. It's leverage for favor. You can admit that. 

Edited September 27, 2019 by John Adams

[ALF]

The timeline of Trump’s decision to withhold aid to Ukraine is increasingly suspicious

Trump ordered the aid held just ahead of a call with Ukraine’s president.  (call on July 25)

 

President Donald Trump reportedly asked his acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney to ensure Ukraine did not receive the $391 million in military aid Congress had approved — at least one week ahead of the phone call he made to that country’s leaders that now sits at the center of a whistleblower’s complaint.

 

According to a report from the Washington Post Monday night, officials at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) told the Pentagon and State Department in mid-July to freeze the aid over “concerns” that the money didn’t need to be spent.

 

The funds were finally released on September 11, but the timing of that request — not to mention Trump’s personal involvement — is drawing extra scrutiny as the whistleblower complaint roils Washington.

 

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/9/24/20881505/donald-trump-withhold-aid-ukraine-timeline-whistleblower

 

While the current OMB Director is Mick Mulvaney, he is currently also the acting White House Chief of Staff.

Edited September 27, 2019 by ALF

[3rdnlng]

Let's look at this from a practical, common sense manner. Trump may not seem it on the surface, but he has shown great patience in keeping quiet regarding criminal activity perpetrated against him. He's allowing LE to make their cases rather than poison the well for his political expediency. If Trump's motivation here was to harm a political opponent wouldn't he have waited until Biden won the nomination? Why knock the guy out now when he could inflict much more damage to the dems if he waited until he was the nominee? John Adams/Ben Franklin/Beginners Mind, wtf is wrong with you? You and your other supporters here all grabbed a chair from the 3rd chair stack and are making the mistake of trying to jam a square peg into a round hole. Even 3rdnlng who you compared to a fifth grader, knows better than that. You guys are so buried into your minutiae that you can't see the big picture. Just wait until my classmates hear all this at recess. We might challenge you pompous horses' asses to a debate. Don't worry, we'll each come with one hand tied behind our back.

[John Adams]

15 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Let's look at this from a practical, common sense manner. Trump may not seem it on the surface, but he has shown great patience in keeping quiet regarding criminal activity perpetrated against him.

 

Willis, what is this about which thou talkest?

 

Quote

 If Trump's motivation here was to harm a political opponent wouldn't he have waited until Biden won the nomination?

 

Stupid-o, he had the leverage in *that* moment. That's why he asked then.

 

He had just withheld the money. He knew Congress would kill him when they got wind of it (and they did). So he asked right then. 

 

Have you ever seen such a sycophantic leader of another country? We learned so much from you. I wish I could keep winning so you would call more. You're so right about everything. Gobble gobble gobble. 

Edited September 27, 2019 by John Adams

[Warren Zevon]

25 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Let's look at this from a practical, common sense manner. Trump may not seem it on the surface, but he has shown great patience in keeping quiet regarding criminal activity perpetrated against him. He's allowing LE to make their cases rather than poison the well for his political expediency. If Trump's motivation here was to harm a political opponent wouldn't he have waited until Biden won the nomination? Why knock the guy out now when he could inflict much more damage to the dems if he waited until he was the nominee? John Adams/Ben Franklin/Beginners Mind, wtf is wrong with you? You and your other supporters here all grabbed a chair from the 3rd chair stack and are making the mistake of trying to jam a square peg into a round hole. Even 3rdnlng who you compared to a fifth grader, knows better than that. You guys are so buried into your minutiae that you can't see the big picture. Just wait until my classmates hear all this at recess. We might challenge you pompous horses' asses to a debate. Don't worry, we'll each come with one hand tied behind our back.

 

Yeah he's the next Ronald Reagan 

[3rdnlng]

8 minutes ago, Gary Busey said:

 

Yeah he's the next Ronald Reagan 

Empty comment but fully worthy of your intellect. Are you hungry? Do you need your diaper changed or do you just need to be held?

[3rdnlng]

29 minutes ago, John Adams said:

 

Willis, what is this about which thou talkest?

 

 

Stupid-o, he had the leverage in *that* moment. That's why he asked then.

 

He had just withheld the money. He knew Congress would kill him when they got wind of it (and they did). So he asked right then. 

 

Have you ever seen such a sycophantic leader of another country? We learned so much from you. I wish I could keep winning so you would call more. You're so right about everything. Gobble gobble gobble. 

Keep trying to jam that square peg into a round hole. Quit trying to win fabricated points although this is what you are wont (learned that word last week in class) to do.

 

The dems know they have jackshit. If they were serious and thought they had proof of anything, why would Adam Schiff come up with an opening statement like he did?

 

I have decades of experience in negotiating small, large and often tricky deals. I don't say this here to fit in the fact that I'm a big time negotiator or that I drive a fancy car. I'll leave that for your other 3rd chair. I say that because I know what part leverage has in making deals. The U.S. didn't just have leverage at "that" moment. We have it all the time as it pertains to most other countries. You're trying too hard to make points rather than viewing the big picture and thinking about what makes sense.

[Deranged Rhino]

3 hours ago, John Adams said:

 

You don't think the money was withheld? Are we really back to this? 

 

I never left it. Still waiting for you to show me evidence the money actually was withheld...

 

3 hours ago, John Adams said:

 

 

This is the least controversial of points.  

 

Then it should be very easy for you to provide me the documentation which shows this money was withheld. 

 

Not an anonymous report or media report citing others discussing it having happened without verification. 

 

Two days later and you still haven’t done it. 

 

Odd, right?

[John Adams]

32 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

I never left it. Still waiting for you to show me evidence the money actually was withheld...

 

 

Then it should be very easy for you to provide me the documentation which shows this money was withheld. 

 

 

 

If I link to Trump admitting he withheld the aid again, will you admit you were wrong again or just go quiet like you have on your assertion that Zelensky raised the European aid first in the call? 

 

Discussing the Ukraine aid, one Donald J. Trump on September 24:

Quote

“But my complaint has always been, and I'd withhold again, and I'll continue to withhold until such time as Europe and other nations contribute to Ukraine. Because they're not doing it. Just the United States. We're putting up the bulk of the money. And I'm asking, why is that?”

 

Better revise your position on this (again). 

 

Imagine if I read you nonsense this closely all the time. Good thing I don't or I'd be calling you on your bull#### even more!

Edited September 27, 2019 by John Adams

[BuffaloHokie13]

11 minutes ago, John Adams said:

 

If I link to Trump admitting he withheld the aid again, will you admit you were wrong again or just go quiet like you have on your assertion that Zelensky raised the European aid first in the call? 

 

Discussing the Ukraine aid, one Donald J. Trump on September 24:

 

Better revise your position on this (again). 

 

Imagine if I read you nonsense this closely all the time. Good thing I don't or I'd be calling you on your bull#### even more!

Is there other context that you're omitting? Because that quote sounds more like we're withholding funds from EU because they aren't contributing enough to Ukraine.

[John Adams]

1 minute ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

Is there other context that you're omitting? Because that quote sounds more like we're withholding funds from EU because they aren't contributing enough to Ukraine.

 

He withheld the money from Ukraine. His rationale in that quote is that he feels like others aren't contributing enough (the EU has made 15B in loans to Ukraine...US had offered 1.5B in aid).

 

DR doesn't believe that reports that he directed the withholding, but he admitted he did, and no doubt more will come on that if people are questioning the president's own admission. This seems like the least controversial part of this. If Trump didn't withhold the aid, he'd have already said it. "I didn't withhold aid from the Ukraine" would not be hard to say. Instead he said he'd do it again!

[BuffaloHokie13]

2 minutes ago, John Adams said:

 

He withheld the money from Ukraine. His rationale in that quote is that he feels like others aren't contributing enough (the EU has made 15B in loans to Ukraine...US had offered 1.5B in aid).

 

DR doesn't believe that reports that he directed the withholding, but he admitted he did, and no doubt more will come on that if people are questioning the president's own admission. This seems like the least controversial part of this. If Trump didn't withhold the aid, he'd have already said it. "I didn't withhold aid from the Ukraine" would not be hard to say. Instead he said he'd do it again!

But didn't he withhold funding for multiple countries in an effort to equalize contributions (to some extent)?

 

And still, that portion of the quote doesn't read the way you're saying it does.

[John Adams]

8 minutes ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

But didn't he withhold funding for multiple countries in an effort to equalize contributions (to some extent)?

 

And still, that portion of the quote doesn't read the way you're saying it does.

 

(moving my reply to the whisteblower thread in the interests of topic management)

[3rdnlng]

Let me start out by saying I have no actual proof of the following: It is looking more and more like an entity (Rose Law Firm?) looked for a possible way to get to new impeachment charges against Trump. I wonder if they held a casting call (such as they did with AOC) to find an appropriate whistleblower.

4 minutes ago, John Adams said:

 

(moving my reply to the whisteblower thread in the interests of topic management)

I agree. We are all over the board. I'll kick your ass over there instead.

[John Adams]

1 minute ago, 3rdnlng said:

We are all over the board.

 

Busey creating 2 new threads today did no one any favors. Idiot (him, not you, in this case. You in most cases.)

[Warren Zevon]

Just now, John Adams said:

 

Busey creating 2 new threads today did no one any favors. Idiot (him, not you, in this case. You in most cases.)

 

Idiot - learn to count

[3rdnlng]

2 minutes ago, John Adams said:

 

Busey creating 2 new threads today did no one any favors. Idiot (him, not you, in this case. You in most cases.)

Hey, it's hard to keep up with school, homework and this place too.

[John Adams]

45 minutes ago, Gary Busey said:

 

Idiot - learn to count

 

Two new threads on the same topic already being discussed moran.