Posted on 10/23/2019 7:25:24 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
I don’t recall hearing any testimony.
BS. I have known sleazy West Point grads. Wesley Clark comes to mind.
Bookmark
Anybody who didn’t care about Hillary, but cares about this is a useless piece of crap. That is my standard.
Secret meetings kept from the public because they’re crooked and fabricate “facts” is a loser’s way.
Else where, this same author writes:
Byron York (Washington Examiner) identifies five possible explanations for the temporary withholding of military aid to Ukraine that have been put forth by one party or another. The first three are:
(1) Trump’s general dislike of foreign aid,
(2) his concern that other countries aren’t doing enough,
(3) his general concern about corruption in Ukraine.
All are legitimate, perfectly non-corrupt reasons for withholding aid. However, Trump’s enemies insist they are not the real reasons or, at a minimum, that additional reasons were also in play.
The alleged additional reasons are:
(4) Trump’s desire to see Ukraine assist in an inquiry into matters relating to the investigation of Russia interference in the 2016 campaign and
(5) Trump’s desire to see Ukraine investigate the business dealings of Hunter Biden and actions by Joe Biden to further these interests.
That Trump had these desires seems evident from the unofficial transcript of his famous phone conversation with Ukraine’s president. Whether they were the reasons for the temporary withholding of aid is less clear.
Byron York agrees that motive (5) would be an improper reason for withholding aid. But he disputes that Motive 4 would be the case.
Trump’s desire to see Ukraine assist in the 2016 “investigation of the investigation” was entirely reasonable. . .In fact, some part of the U.S. government has been investigating the 2016 election since at least mid-2016.
There is still an investigation going on — Durham’s — and it would not be unusual for the government to want Ukraine to cooperate. After all, Robert Mueller’s special counsel investigation sought and received the cooperation of several foreign countries. Investigating 2016 is something that has been standard procedure for the last few years.
As to motive (5) — Trump’s desire to investigate the Bidens — Byron makes an important point: Mick Mulvaney unequivocally denied that it factored into the decision to withhold aid. The mainstream media, though, has suggested otherwise.
So, does the evidence so far establish that aid was conditioned on Ukraine investigating the Bidens?
If so, IS THIS IMPEACHABLE?
These are distinctions that have to be made.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXA--dj2-CY&feature=youtu.be
Else where, this same author writes:
Byron York (Washington Examiner) identifies five possible explanations for the temporary withholding of military aid to Ukraine that have been put forth by one party or another. The first three are:
(1) Trump’s general dislike of foreign aid,
(2) his concern that other countries aren’t doing enough,
(3) his general concern about corruption in Ukraine.
All are legitimate, perfectly non-corrupt reasons for withholding aid. However, Trump’s enemies insist they are not the real reasons or, at a minimum, that additional reasons were also in play.
The alleged additional reasons are:
(4) Trump’s desire to see Ukraine assist in an inquiry into matters relating to the investigation of Russia interference in the 2016 campaign and
(5) Trump’s desire to see Ukraine investigate the business dealings of Hunter Biden and actions by Joe Biden to further these interests.
That Trump had these desires seems evident from the unofficial transcript of his famous phone conversation with Ukraine’s president. Whether they were the reasons for the temporary withholding of aid is less clear.
Byron York agrees that motive (5) would be an improper reason for withholding aid. But he disputes that Motive 4 would be the case.
Trump’s desire to see Ukraine assist in the 2016 “investigation of the investigation” was entirely reasonable. . .In fact, some part of the U.S. government has been investigating the 2016 election since at least mid-2016.
There is still an investigation going on — Durham’s — and it would not be unusual for the government to want Ukraine to cooperate. After all, Robert Mueller’s special counsel investigation sought and received the cooperation of several foreign countries. Investigating 2016 is something that has been standard procedure for the last few years.
As to motive (5) — Trump’s desire to investigate the Bidens — Byron makes an important point: Mick Mulvaney unequivocally denied that it factored into the decision to withhold aid. The mainstream media, though, has suggested otherwise.
So, does the evidence so far establish that aid was conditioned on Ukraine investigating the Bidens?
If so, IS THIS IMPEACHABLE?
These are distinctions that have to be made.
It is imperative that the trump hold aid in order to insure a corruption investigation. Of Biden in Ukraine.
Biden is not only the next rival for trump he was the enforcer of a corrupt uktrainian Obama alliance to destroy credible American policies.
To not allow and even require this investigation is to institutionalize Democrat party sabotage dating back at least to clinton gore China corruption.
OMG, the McCain/Kristol Atlantic Council Deep State endless war purveyor, war with Russia is good, enemy of the people BELIEVED something. We are to remove the President because a piece of excrement believed something.
The troubling part of his testimony for me was when he admitted to years of child sex trafficking.
It’s looking like this -— This matter boils down to
(1) whether Trump temporarily withheld aid because he ONLY wanted Ukraine to pledge to investigate the Bidens
and
(2) if so, whether this is a grounds for impeachment where the aid was given to Ukraine and Ukraine did not launch such an investigation.
To the number 1 question the answer is -— is there evidence that Biden used his position as VP to leverage US aid to Ukraine in order to help his son monetarily?
If so, I don’t see what the problem is. That is simply enforcing the law. That Biden HAPPENED to be running for President is not relevant and such an investigation HELPS Trump’s re-election campaign is a big — SO WHAT?. The evidence is the most important issue here.
My answer to the second question is: No.
RE: The troubling part of his testimony for me was when he admitted to years of child sex trafficking.
Are you serious, or are you just saying this for the heck of it?
“Taylor is a West Point grad. He served in Vietnam. He was appointed ambassador to Ukraine by George W. Bush and asked to return to the diplomatic corps as charge d’affaires in Ukraine by Mike Pompeo.”
A classic POS deep state resume. F him...
What testimony is he talking about? We haven’t seen any testimony.
Or maybe not.
Well I get it - it’s the motivation that counts.
If you’re funneling money to your son then it’s ok to leverage “foreign aid” but if you’re trying to get to the bottom of corruption then ...it’s corrupt to look for corruption.
RE: What testimony is he talking about? We haven’t seen any testimony.
Well, at least we have the transcript of his opening statement.
See here: https://time.com/5707713/bill-taylor-opening-statement-impeachment-inquiry/
The author of this steaming pile of crap neglects to point out that this person is in the Atlantic Council (which supports war everywhere, and especially with Russia) & is connected to Burisma, the outfit that paid the Biden family for influence. As biased a witness as you can get except for the Bidens themselves.
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.