Trump’s New Ukraine Defense Is Crumbling

Given the damning detail in Ambassador Taylor’s description of how Trump withheld military aid to force the Ukraine to assist Trump politically, the White House’s defense this morning was to concede most of the matter but then insist that there could not have been a quid pro quo because the Ukrainians were unaware that military aid was being withheld.

That seemed like a weak argument. Given that Ukrainian commanders are operating in active war zone, one would think they might notice if their supply lines were disrupted. Running out of anti-tank missiles is something of a dead giveaway that something is up with the supply.

Now the New York Times is out with evidence that the Ukrainians were fully aware that the aid pipeline was being squeezed.

Time for Team Trump to retreat to a new line of defense. Any ideas about what they will come up with? There other defense this morning was the Taylor, among others, were “radical unelected bureaucrats”. Given that Taylor was appointed to the Ukraine post twice – first by George W. Bush and second by Donald John Trump that is laughable.

Trump needs a better defense. Can anyone help him out?

1 Like

Yawn.

1 Like

I believe that was Putin’s response as well.

2 Likes

Trump/Pence 2020 - So What?

:ru::ukraine::tr::north_korea:

Trump lied.

Get over it.

OBAMMMMMMMMAAAAAAAAA!

This is nothing!
Ukraine is pissed at the DNC and Biden.

Little problem with this conspiracy theory. The Whistleblower Report was released to Congress on Sept. 24th of this year. The article you posted has as its lead that Adam Schiff sent someone to Ukraine in response to the Whistleblower Report but the Schiff “signature” approving the trip is dated July 22nd of this year.

So unless you are suggesting that Congressman Schiff is using a time machine, you are presenting an article that makes no pretense to developing facts.

So which is it Weedhopper: BS or Schiff has a time machine?

8 Likes

This seemed like an appropriate place to drop this. The NY Bar Association is calling for Barr’s recusal in the Ukraine scandal.

3 Likes

Making Corruption Great Again

2 Likes

We won in 2016 libz!

Yes you did. But that provides no defense against High Crimes and Misdemeanors committed in office.

I know, im being sarcastic

Well we know that the first new line of defense is to disrupt the process… and Bloomberg is reporting that is happening with Trump’s approval.

1 Like

It is probably a very good maxim to live by that if a company needs to include truth in their name it may be reasonable to question the veracity of same.

Certainly the Melbourne Truth was the antithesis of truth.

1 Like

When I asked Weedhopper for a comment on the obvious contradiction in the article he posted, he declined to comment.

But there will be another conspiracy source to cite soon. There always is.

1 Like

Don’t you get sacked if you recuse yourself?

No. See Jeff Sessions…although eventually he was replaced as well.

Yeah like Nebraska said, you don’t get fired. You just get whined about by a little girl on twitter. While the little girl complains about how she made a mistake picking you to be her friend.

When are the Democrats going to question the Ukraine Prosecutor Biden purchased with tax dollars?

I hear he has questions also.:rofl: