@averagejoe1 saidUkraine knew in early August that the money was being withheld.
Since the president of Ukraine did not know that the money was being held back, it is impossible to answer this question, because it implies that Trump told Slavinsky that he was holding it back until he performed in the interest of the USA, or as some folks put it, in the interest of Trump. (he did say 'us', meaning our country, when speaking of what he was interested i ...[text shortened]... e Slavinsky wait for the money until an event certain. That is incorrect .
Just using my noggin.
That means they knew the money was being withheld while Giuliani was there in August with two of his henchmen putting more pressure on Zelensky to announce an investigation.
It was not let go until Sept. 11, two days after the whistleblower came forward.
@handyandy saidUkraine president did not know that the money was held back. Study on that for a moment. No harm done.
@AverageJoe1
Come on, Joe! Stop stroking that mink's belly and start using your noggin.
@averagejoe1 saidAre you suggesting that Ukraine, in need of financial help, didn't know the money hadn't arrived?
Since the president of Ukraine did not know that the money was being held back, it is impossible to answer this question, because it implies that Trump told Slavinsky that he was holding it back until he performed in the interest of the USA, or as some folks put it, in the interest of Trump. (he did say 'us', meaning our country, when speaking of what he was interested i ...[text shortened]... are saying that Trump made Slavinsky wait for the money until an event certain. That is incorrect .
And who is Slavinsky?
1 edit
@averagejoe1 saidHe knew in early August, days after the phone call. Stop lying.
Ukraine president did not know that the money was held back. Study on that for a moment. No harm done.
@no1marauder saidHere is the part you are missing. Congress never voted to authorize an impeachment hearing. The intelligence committee would never have impeachment nor subpoena power. The judicial committee has to hold a vote to authorize an impeachment inquiry, they didnt, therefore no subpoena power. They sent request letters and with the help of the complicit media made people thinking they were subpoenas, they were not.
Try #2 for an honest answer from right wingers:
IF a Democratic President refused to turn over any documents or allow Executive Branch employees to testify to Congress by asserting that such oversight was "unconstitutional", you would:
A) Agree that the Congress has no power to actually oversee the Executive Branch in any matter that the President says so; or
B) Scream, stomp your feet and insist the President was violating the Constitution.
When bolton said he would testify if subpoenaed the dems pulled the subpoena (request letter) because they knew Trump was going to the SCOTUS and their game would be exposed.
At this point I am not sure if Trumps impeachment is constitutional..
@mott-the-hoople saidI've debunked these right wing fairy tales before and see no necessity to do so again.
Here is the part you are missing. Congress never voted to authorize an impeachment hearing. The intelligence committee would never have impeachment nor subpoena power. The judicial committee has to hold a vote to authorize an impeachment inquiry, they didnt, therefore no subpoena power. They sent request letters and with the help of the complicit media made people thi ...[text shortened]... heir game would be exposed.
At this point I am not sure if Trumps impeachment is constitutional..
The Constitution is clear: the House has the sole power to impeach and to set its own rules. These right wing rants are legally baseless.
@suzianne said“Ukraine knew in early August that the money was being withheld.”
Ukraine knew in early August that the money was being withheld.
That means they knew the money was being withheld while Giuliani was there in August with two of his henchmen putting more pressure on Zelensky to announce an investigation.
It was not let go until Sept. 11, two days after the whistleblower came forward.
that is a lie...carry on
@no1marauder saidyou havent “debunked” anything. Do you think members of congress just walk around with subpoena power, hand out subpoenas at will?
I've debunked these right wing fairy tales before and see no necessity to do so again.
The Constitution is clear: the House has the sole power to impeach and to set its own rules. These right wing rants are legally baseless.
1 edit
@mott-the-hoople saidDo you think members of congress just walk around with subpoena power, hand out subpoenas at will?
you havent “debunked” anything. Do you think members of congress just walk around with subpoena power, hand out subpoenas at will?
Yes! If their committees wish too. Where have you been all your life? Never-mind, we already know.
@sonhouse saidDon’t write the vituperative Sinhouse after 10AM. And don’t READ him after 11AM.
@Mott-The-Hoople
PROVE IT assshole.
@mott-the-hoople saidA lie is truth, the truth a lie.
“Ukraine knew in early August that the money was being withheld.”
that is a lie...carry on
Where have I heard that before?