we should stop calling it a 'quid pro quo'.....try EXTORTION

Not facts. Arguments. Learn what the word 'fact' means.

Void argument fallacy.

Void argument fallacy.

Void argument fallacy.

Void argument fallacy.

When?

When?

When?

When did he try to fire the special council?

Void argument fallacy.

Void argument fallacy.


All you have are general accusations, no specifics, and some lies. You're going to have to do better than that!

Mueller, cunt. The report you ignorant fucks never read.

A. The Campaign's Response to Reports About Russian Support for Trump
B. The President's Conduct Concerning the Investigation of Michael Flynn
C. The President's Reaction to Public Confirmation of the FBl's Russia Investigation
D. Events Leading Up To and Surrounding the Termination of FBI Director Corney
E. The President's Efforts to Remove the Special Counsel
F. The President's Efforts to Curtail the Special Counsel Investigation
H. The President's Further Efforts to Have the Attorney General Take Over the Investigation
I. The President Orders McGahn to Deny that the President Tried to Fire the Special Counsel
J. The President's Conduct Towards Flynn, Manafort,
K. The President's Conduct Involving Michael Cohen

“Our investigation found multiple acts by the President that were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations, including the Russian-interference and obstruction investigations. The incidents were often carried out through one-on-one meetings in which the President sought to use his official power outside of usual channels. These actions ranged from efforts to remove the Special Counsel and to reverse the effect of the Attorney General's recusal; to the attempted use of official power to limit the scope of the investigation; to direct and indirect contacts with witnesses with the potential to influence their testimony. Viewing the acts collectively can help to illuminate their significance. For example, the President's direction to McGahn to have the Special Counsel removed was followed almost immediately by his direction to Lewandowski to tell the Attorney General to limit the scope of the Russia investigation to prospective election-interference only-a temporal connection that suggests that both acts were taken with a related purpose with respect to the investigation.”
____________

Obstruction of justice - 18 USC 1501-1521
Witness intimidation 18 USC 1512
Emoluments - US Constitution
Abuse of power - no statute. Merely reason to be removed from office
Extortion – 18 USC 112
Solicitation of something of value from a foreign entity - 11CFR 110.2 and 11 CFR 300.2

______________

Extortion – 4 elements
Threat – withholding $400 million
Intent – Forcing public announcement of investigations
Fear – of loss of funding for defensive weapons against the Russians
Property – the thing of value is the investigations of 2016 tampering and the Bidens
 
well you can't have a quid pro quo, when the person supposedly being extorted is claiming their was no "quid pro quo"

so there's that little obstacle :rofl2:
 
Find it. Post it, lying cunt

Tick tock, motherfucker.

1c5dhw.jpg
 
AMRF. You're going to have to do better than general accusations and void arguments.

AMRF, third grader.

Specific, dumbfuck.

FACTUAL RESULTS OF THE OBSTRUCTION INVESTIGATION

A. The Campaign's Response to Reports About Russian Support for Trump
B. The President's Conduct Concerning the Investigation of Michael Flynn
C. The President's Reaction to Public Confirmation of the FBl's Russia Investigation
D. Events Leading Up To and Surrounding the Termination of FBI Director Corney
E. The President's Efforts to Remove the Special Counsel
F. The President's Efforts to Curtail the Special Counsel Investigation
H. The President's Further Efforts to Have the Attorney General Take Over the Investigation
I. The President Orders McGahn to Deny that the President Tried to Fire the Special Counsel
J. The President's Conduct Towards Flynn, Manafort,
K. The President's Conduct Involving Michael Cohen

“Our investigation found multiple acts by the President that were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations, including the Russian-interference and obstruction investigations. The incidents were often carried out through one-on-one meetings in which the President sought to use his official power outside of usual channels. These actions ranged from efforts to remove the Special Counsel and to reverse the effect of the Attorney General's recusal; to the attempted use of official power to limit the scope of the investigation; to direct and indirect contacts with witnesses with the potential to influence their testimony. Viewing the acts collectively can help to illuminate their significance. For example, the President's direction to McGahn to have the Special Counsel removed was followed almost immediately by his direction to Lewandowski to tell the Attorney General to limit the scope of the Russia investigation to prospective election-interference only-a temporal connection that suggests that both acts were taken with a related purpose with respect to the investigation.”
____________

Obstruction of justice - 18 USC 1501-1521
Witness intimidation 18 USC 1512
Emoluments - US Constitution
Abuse of power - no statute. Merely reason to be removed from office
Extortion – 18 USC 112
Solicitation of something of value from a foreign entity - 11CFR 110.2 and 11 CFR 300.2

______________

Extortion – 4 elements
Threat – withholding $400 million
Intent – Forcing public announcement of investigations
Fear – of loss of funding for defensive weapons against the Russians
Property – the thing of value is the investigations of 2016 tampering and the Bidens
 
AMRF, third grader.

Specific, dumbfuck.

FACTUAL RESULTS OF THE OBSTRUCTION INVESTIGATION

A. The Campaign's Response to Reports About Russian Support for Trump
B. The President's Conduct Concerning the Investigation of Michael Flynn
C. The President's Reaction to Public Confirmation of the FBl's Russia Investigation
D. Events Leading Up To and Surrounding the Termination of FBI Director Corney
E. The President's Efforts to Remove the Special Counsel
F. The President's Efforts to Curtail the Special Counsel Investigation
H. The President's Further Efforts to Have the Attorney General Take Over the Investigation
I. The President Orders McGahn to Deny that the President Tried to Fire the Special Counsel
J. The President's Conduct Towards Flynn, Manafort,
K. The President's Conduct Involving Michael Cohen

“Our investigation found multiple acts by the President that were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations, including the Russian-interference and obstruction investigations. The incidents were often carried out through one-on-one meetings in which the President sought to use his official power outside of usual channels. These actions ranged from efforts to remove the Special Counsel and to reverse the effect of the Attorney General's recusal; to the attempted use of official power to limit the scope of the investigation; to direct and indirect contacts with witnesses with the potential to influence their testimony. Viewing the acts collectively can help to illuminate their significance. For example, the President's direction to McGahn to have the Special Counsel removed was followed almost immediately by his direction to Lewandowski to tell the Attorney General to limit the scope of the Russia investigation to prospective election-interference only-a temporal connection that suggests that both acts were taken with a related purpose with respect to the investigation.”
____________

Obstruction of justice - 18 USC 1501-1521
Witness intimidation 18 USC 1512
Emoluments - US Constitution
Abuse of power - no statute. Merely reason to be removed from office
Extortion – 18 USC 112
Solicitation of something of value from a foreign entity - 11CFR 110.2 and 11 CFR 300.2

______________

Extortion – 4 elements
Threat – withholding $400 million
Intent – Forcing public announcement of investigations
Fear – of loss of funding for defensive weapons against the Russians
Property – the thing of value is the investigations of 2016 tampering and the Bidens

AMRF.
 
Tom Fitton
Verified account @TomFitton
Obama WH conspired with Ukraine to target @realDonaldTrump, help Hillary Clinton, and protect Biden. https://thehill.com/opinion/white-h...ouse-engaged-ukraine-to-give-russia-collusion
8:20 PM - 3 Nov 2019
Looks like the usual right-wing propaganda. For one thing, the "now-debunked Trump-Russia collusion narrative" was never actually debunked, except in the wishful thinking of the right. Mueller documented plenty of collusion. It's just that none of it amounted to criminal conspiracy, though it could be argued that it violated campaign finance laws.
*****

Tom Fitton
‏Verified account @TomFitton

Obama admin pressed Ukraine to drop probe of George Soros group during 2016 election
9:11 AM - 27 Mar 2019

D8flhK50


1,049 Retweets
1,421 Likes


US Embassy pressed Ukraine to drop probe of George Soros group during 2016 election
03/26/19 06:00 PM EDT

While the 2016 presidential race was raging in America, Ukrainian prosecutors ran into some unexpectedly strong headwinds as they pursued an investigation into the activities of a nonprofit in their homeland known as the Anti-Corruption Action Centre (AntAC).

The focus on AntAC — whose youthful street activists famously wore “Ukraine F*&k Corruption” T-shirts — was part of a larger probe by Ukraine’s Prosecutor General’s Office into whether $4.4 million in U.S. funds to fight corruption inside the former Soviet republic had been improperly diverted.

The prosecutors soon would learn the resistance they faced was blowing directly from the U.S. Embassy in Kiev, where the Obama administration took the rare step of trying to press the Ukrainian government to back off its investigation of both the U.S. aid and the group.

“The investigation into the Anti-Corruption Action Center (sic), based on the assistance they have received from us, is similarly misplaced,” then-embassy Charge d’ Affaires George Kent wrote the prosecutor’s office in April 2016 in a letter that also argued U.S. officials had no concerns about how the U.S. aid had been spent.

At the time, the nation’s prosecutor general had just been fired, under pressure from the United States, and a permanent replacement had not been named.

A few months later, Yuri Lutsenko, widely regarded as a hero in the West for spending two years in prison after fighting Russian aggression in his country, was named prosecutor general and invited to meet new U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch.

Lutsenko told me he was stunned when the ambassador “gave me a list of people whom we should not prosecute.” The list included a founder of the AntAC group and two members of Parliament who vocally supported the group’s anti-corruption reform agenda, according to a source directly familiar with the meeting.

It turns out the group that Ukrainian law enforcement was probing was co-funded by the Obama administration and liberal mega-donor George Soros. And it was collaborating with the FBI agents investigating then-Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort’s business activities with pro-Russian figures in Ukraine.

The implied message to Ukraine’s prosecutors was clear: Don’t target AntAC in the middle of an America presidential election in which Soros was backing Hillary Clinton to succeed another Soros favorite, Barack Obama, Ukrainian officials said.

“We ran right into a buzzsaw and we got bloodied,” a senior Ukrainian official told me.


Lutsenko suggested the embassy applied pressure because it did not want Americans to see who was being funded with its tax dollars. “At the time, Ms. Ambassador thought our interviews of the Ukrainian citizens, of the Ukrainian civil servants who were frequent visitors in the U.S. Embassy, could cast a shadow on that anti-corruption policy,” he said.

State officials told me privately they wanted Ukraine prosecutors to back off AntAC because they feared the investigation was simply retribution for the group’s high-profile efforts to force anti-corruption reforms inside Ukraine, some of which took authorities and prestige from the Prosecutor General’s Office.

But it was an unusual intervention, the officials acknowledged. “We’re not normally in the business of telling a country’s police force who they can and can’t pursue, unless it involves an American citizen we think is wrongly accused,” one official said.

In the end, no action was taken against AntAC and it remains thriving today. Nonetheless, the anecdote is taking on new significance.

First, it conflicts with the State Department’s official statement last week after Lutsenko first mentioned the do-not-prosecute list. The embassy responded that the claim was a fabrication and a sign that corruption is alive and well inside Ukraine.

But Kent’s letter unequivocally shows the embassy did press Ukrainian prosecutors to back off what normally would be considered an internal law enforcement matter inside a sovereign country. And more than a half-dozen U.S. and Ukrainian sources confirmed to me the AntAC case wasn’t the only one in which American officials exerted pressure on Ukrainian investigators in 2016.

When I asked State to explain the letter and inclusion of the Soros-connected names during the meeting, it demurred. “As a general rule, we don’t read out private diplomatic meetings,” it responded. “Ambassador Yovanovitch represents the President of the United States in Ukraine, and America stands behind her and her statements.”

Second, the AntAC anecdote highlights a little-known fact that the pursuit of foreign corruption has resulted in an unusual alliance between the U.S. government and a political mega-donor.

After the Obama Justice Department launched its Kleptocracy Asset Recovery Initiative a decade ago to prosecute corruption in other countries, the State Department, Justice Department and FBI outsourced some of its work in Ukraine to groups funded by Soros.

The Hungarian-American businessman is one of the largest donors to American liberal causes, a champion of the U.S. kleptocracy crackdown and a man with extensive business interests in Ukraine.

One key U.S. partner was AntAC, which received 59 percent (or $1 million) of its nearly $1.7 million budget since 2012 from U.S. budgets tied to State and Justice, and nearly $290,000 from Soros’s International Renaissance Foundation, according to the group’s donor disclosure records.

The U.S.-Soros collaboration was visible in Kiev. Several senior Department of Justice (DOJ) officials and FBI agents appeared in pictures as participants or attendees at Soros-sponsored events and conferences.


One attendee was Karen Greenaway, then the FBI supervisor in charge of international fraud cases and one of the lead agents in the Manafort investigation in Ukraine. She attended multiple such events and won glowing praise in a social media post from AntAC’s executive director.

In one event during 2016, Greenaway and Ambassador Yovanovitch participated alongside AntAC’s executive director, Daria Kaleniuk, and Lutsenko was present. The message was clear: The embassy supported AntAC.

The FBI confirmed Greenaway’s contacts with the Soros group, saying they were part of her investigative work: “In furtherance of the FBI’s mission and in the course of their duties, FBI employees routinely travel and participated in public forums in an official capacity. At a minimum, all such travel and speaking engagements are authorized by the employee’s direct supervisor and can receive further authorization all the way up to the relevant division head, along with an ethics official determination.”

Greenaway recently retired, and Soros’s AntAC soon after announced she was joining its supervisory board.

Internal memos from Soros’s umbrella charity organization, Open Society Foundations, describe a concerted strategy of creating friendships inside key government agencies such as State, DOJ and the FBI that can be leveraged inside the countries Soros was targeting for anti-corruption activism.

“We have broadly recognized the importance of developing supportive constituencies in order to make headway in tightening the global web of anti-corruption accountability,” a Feb. 21, 2014, memo states. “We first conceived of this in terms of fostering and helping to build a political environment favorable to high-level anti-corruption cases.”

That same memo shows Soros’s organization wanted to make Ukraine a top priority, starting in 2014, and planned to use the Anti-Corruption Action Centre as its lead.

“Ukraine: Behind the scenes advice and support to Ukrainian partner Anti-Corruption Action Centre’s efforts to generate corruption litigation in Europe and the U.S. respecting state assets stolen by senior Ukrainian leaders,” the memo states.

The memo included a chart of Ukrainians the Soros team wanted to have pursued, including some with ties to Manafort.

Senior U.S. law enforcement officials confirmed to me that the early kleptocracy collaborations inside Ukraine led to highly visible U.S. actions against the oligarch Dmitri Firtash, a major target of the Soros group, and Manafort. Firtash is now represented by former Hillary Clinton lawyer Lanny Davis and former U.S. Attorney Dan Webb.

Documents posted online by Open Society Foundations show that after U.S. officials scored some early successes in corruption cases in Ukraine, such as asset forfeitures, AntAC requested to receive some of the seized money.

“Ukrainian NGO Anticorruption Action Centre (AntAC) petitioned the United States Justice Department on behalf of Ukrainian civil society to dedicate the nearly $3 million in forfeited and seized assets allegedly laundered by former Ukrainian Prime Minister Pavlo Lazarenko, to creating an anti-corruption training facility,” a 2015 foundation document stated.

Spokespersons for AntAC and Open Society Foundations did not respond to repeated requests for comment.

Michael Vachon, a spokesman for Soros, deferred any comment about AntAC to the group. But he did he confirm his boss supported the continued investigation of Russia collusion allegations against Trump well past 2016.

Vachon said Soros wrote a sizable check from his personal funds in fall 2017 to a new group, Democracy Integrity Project, started by a former FBI agent and Senate staffer Daniel Jones to continue “investigation and research into foreign interference in American elections and European elections.”

Vachon said the group asked Soros not to divulge the size of his contribution, and Soros later learned the group hired Fusion GPS, the same firm that was paid by Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic Party to create the infamous “Steele dossier” alleging Trump-Russia collusion.

The he said-she said battle playing out between Ukraine’s chief prosecutor and the American ambassador doesn’t benefit either side, but an honest, complete and transparent account of what the embassy communicated to Ukraine’s law enforcement does.

And the tale of AntAC raises some cogent questions:

Why would the U.S. Embassy intervene on a Ukrainian internal investigation and later deny it exerted such pressure?

Did Soros’s role as a major political funder have any impact?

Do Americans want U.S. tax dollars commingled with activists’ private funds when it comes to anti-corruption probes?

Someone in State and Congress should try to get the answers.

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaig...-soros-group-during-2016#.XJugslL9a1R.twitter



Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
Trump advocates have begun to move beyond attacking the process and are now taking on a new rationale, they'll admit it was quid pro quo, and it is wrong, but not serious enough to impeach the President. Just Trump being Trump, an admitted error of judgement on his part due to his spontaneous style

Which is just an admission that Trump is not sane enough to be the President.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
Daffy threatened to withhold the aid that Congress had passed . It was not his to play with. As usual,he saw a chance to gain something and could not help himself. He sees everything in that light. It is all about personal gain. What kind of person would luck into the presidency and see it as a instrument of personal gain? He is despicable. We have never had such a low life in office.
That's putting it mildly.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
This is about quid pro quo and it is way beyond question. That line was shredded quickly,.. so they changed to it is not impeachable. Well not anymore. It was when it first came up. Now it a nothing booger. Almost every single transcript and witness has simply stated that he did it. Trump had an illegal and unethical group trying to get a foreign nation to help him in the 2020 election. No Repugs, that is not OK. He used the power of his office to try and force the leaders of foreign countries to help him win. How fucking low is he? And when will the Reds understand and realize the president is a crook.
Couldn't Trump just try and play fairly?
 
no one is getting impeached, that's just silly

what is happening is desperation, and ultimately 4 more years of Trump with a GOP house and Senate. but that's a good thing right? :rofl2:

Only to those who truly hate America and everything that it stands for. The current administration is the most corrupt in American history. Trump openly flaunts both the law and the Constitution. The true desperation is being felt by those who are trying to defend Trump's behavior.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
it's looking more and more like Trump WILL actually bring down the entire GOP...……..every single last repub Rep and Senator is standing by him repeating the daily liefest, or making up new ones...……….that party is so toast
Except that their base has been happily eating and breathing their lies and propaganda for decades. They have no grip on reality anymore.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
well you can't have a quid pro quo, when the person supposedly being extorted is claiming their was no "quid pro quo"

so there's that little obstacle :rofl2:
He's just still hoping to get what he was promised. Unfortunately for him, Trump isn't real good at keeping promises.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top