Posted on 11/05/2019 12:16:29 PM PST by yesthatjallen
So what if the whisleblower was hearsay? If the allegation is true, it is true. See call record to deal with inconsistencies.
So what if there was a quid pro quo? It's unusual and borderline impossible to not have a quid pro quo, "conditional," strings attached conduct. Quid pro quo is an ESSENTIAL element in a contract, there MUST be something going in both directions.
On quid pro quo, the question is whether or not the conditions were "legal" or "appropriate" or "sufficient" or whatever you want to call. We'll give you this money IF (quid pro quo coming) you don't lob missiles into the neighbor country.
Trump asked for investigation into the 2016 election, and on allegations that Biden's son was involved in corruption. Neither of those requests is "bad." Plus, the money flowed even though neither of those requests had yet been undertaken - not that the timing is all important.
Biden asked that the prosecutor be fired. Might be a good request (prosecutor was corrupt), might be a corrupt request (prosecutor was closing in on a corrupt practice by Hunter Biden or some other Biden interest).
Well we both know we have to wait for the 9th circuit to weigh in. Or perhaps another federal court will be kind enough to enlighten us on if the President is allowed to conduct foreign policy. After all Powers of the Executive is so passe’.
I am getting fed up with the presumption that there was any wrong doing. All these “Now we’ve got him!” article start out with the false presumption that the President cannot put legitimate conditions on the release of foreign aid.
It’s all hearsay and opinion. Nothing tangible. “What were so-and-so’s reaction to what you said? What did so-and-so say?” Hmmmm very interesting and compelling, damning about Trump’s motives, despite not meaning a thing, or being dispositive of anything except what Volker or Sondland interpreted they might mean. And Volker’s opinion that Biden was honest and above board in his dealings with Ukraine and firing the prosecutor. . . Based on his knowing Biden for 30 years. Right, sure. That’s opinion, not fact, contrary to the reality and known fact of his son being on the board of Burisma.
Sure is tweeted out by Jim Jordan
Have there ever been any international negotiations that didn’t involve any quid pro quo? I mean, that’s sort of the definition of negotiation and compromise, in a sense.
Supposedly, the investigation into corruption with the company that Hunter Biden grafted money from...
Kurt Volker’s transcript reveals no quid pro quo. The Dems are using Gordon Sondland to say otherwise. Being apart of the EU, which hate Trump, may have something to do with this alternative narrative.
Is this guy being blackmailed by Schiff and his reds?
Now Sondland’s statement is “I recall...”. Why didn’t he “recall” during his original statement.
I smell blackmail, extortion, or treason.
But my point was, we gave them the money, and we don’t know if we got an investigation. Although they also say an investigation was already happening. Either way, there really was no Quo.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.