The insistence that any investigation by the Ukrainians be made known was made several times.
One doesn’t need just CNN to do it.
At the beginning of this process, you speculated that Trump’s motivation for all of this may have been to clear Biden’s name. Do you remember that? Respectfully, that couldn’t be taken seriously then, and now looks hopelessly naive.
2 Likes
See the words “was told”?
These are rumors at this point. We need testimony from principles.
Where did you see transcripts of the call? (You didn’t since no one has).
I do remember that. No, that was not intended as a serious statement even then.
1 Like
Oh, that actually makes sense. Are your statements about today’s testimony intended to be serious?
1 Like
It’s what the person on the other side of the call said to him directly. It was an order given to him on policy, not in anyway a rumor
He heard it from a coffee boy or he is a coffee boy. I get so confused.
Taylor is largely relying on information from Sondland, directly or indirectly (as through Morison). We already have the direct statements from Sondland. That would be the obvious source to resolve what was said, awaiting documentation or other evidence as may appear.
"First, I knew that a public embrace of anti-corruption reforms by Ukraine was one of the pre-conditions for securing a White House meeting with President Zelensky. My view was, and has always been, that such Western reforms are consistent with U.S. support for rule of law in Ukraine going back decades, under both Republican and Democrat administrations. Nothing about that request raised any red flags for me, Ambassador Volker, or Ambassador Taylor.
Consequently, I supported the efforts of Ambassador Volker to encourage the Ukrainian government to adopt a public statement setting out its reform priorities. My recollection is that the statement was written primarily by the Ukrainians with Ambassador Volker’s guidance, and I offered my assistance when asked. This was the “deliverable” referenced in some of my messages – a deliverable/public statement that President Trump wanted to see or hear before a White House meeting could occur. The fact that we were working on this public statement was not a secret. More broadly, such public statements are a common and necessary part of U.S. diplomacy."
Bill Taylor is a principle in this.
He’s the acting Ambassador to Ukraine.
On most critical issues, he is relating what Sondland or someone else told him that Sondland said.
They were directions given to him to take on policy. Policy decisions that he was in turn to relay to the Ukrainians
Unfortunately for Trump nobody but his staunchest supporters are buying that
1 Like
The insanity begins. 
“Abuse of power is not a crime”
-trump boot licker
3 Likes
Well then was Sondland acting on his own or at the direction of the President?
And some people were wondering why he was given his past job
1 Like
We got there faster than I thought we would.
The President doesn’t have to commit a “crime” to be impeached.
It is all so stupid.
1 Like
You can see this ■■■■ a mile away.
https://twitter.com/teri_kanefield/status/1186843953095561216?s=21
It’s pretty much to the point where unless there is a video of Trump yelling “I want quid pro quo,” followed by a signed confession written in his own blood and notarized by the entire Republican House and Senate, it will all be just second hand, inconsequential hearsay to Trump supporters. Even then it wouldn’t matter though. To them Trump can’t commit a crime because a president (at least a Republican one named “Trump”) can’t commit crimes.
5 Likes
Is this it?
Are we really down to only one single person willing to read the statement and put up a coherent defense of trump?
Where is the energy?
5 Likes
