That's what Biden was pushing for as well. The prosecutor he wanted removed, which was also the official position of Canada, the USA, the World Bank and the EU, was removed precisely for not seriously pursuing the problems of corruption in the Ukraine. For instance, he had closed the investigation against Burisma.
The thing is, you do this through official channels, using the state department, the FBI and perhaps even the CIA.
You don't do it by getting the president of another country on the phone and ask him to cooperate with your personal lawyer in investigating specifically named political opponents of yours, or else he won't get the military aid he sorely needs to defend his country against Russian aggression.
1) why else would he withhold the aid? It had been approved by congress when the President suddenly intervened and froze it before getting Zelensky on the phone. Connect the dots.There was a delay in granting foreign aid. There is no evidence of a connection between the two events. There is only conjecture and presumption.
2) When Zelensky starts talking about their wish to buy javelins, Trump immediately says "I would like you to do us a favour though..." Connect the dots. I think most people who are not within the autism spectrum would interpret that as posing the latter as a condition for the former.
3) Several people, both some who listened in on the conversation and some who were on the ground in Ukraine, have testified that it was clear to them that the president asked for an investigation of Biden in exchange for the aid. No need to connect any dots here. Eg, the ambassador to Ukraine, a republican donor appointed by Trump, specifically confirmed that, yes, there was a quid pro quo.
They are actually following the procedures of impeachment outlined in the constitution.This investigation and evidence procedures of the Democrat controlled process mirrors those of despots not democracies.
This is mob justice, not jurisprudence.
Mob justice?! They will hand the decision of the verdict over to a republican controlled senate.
That hardly constitutes a lynching imho!
And Ken Starr's witch hunt against Clinton was no t in any way any gentler.
Some of his best evidence was acquired through illegal wire tapping of Lewinsky.
Tripp should have been prosecuted for this, but received immunity from Starr.
And then she had the nerve to sue the government for infringing on her privacy!
There were signs of Russians interfering with the election. The FBI looked into it, as is their job.Being a political rival is not a get out of jail free card. The Obama administration was investigating Trump for Russian collusion during the last campaign. Was he not a political rival? In fact the kept up the secret investigation of Trump and lied to obtain FISA authorizations in that investigation even after he became President.
There were traces that lead to the Trump campaign.
People involved in that campaign have been arrested, prosecuted, convicted and are serving time for crimes committed while they were working for the Trump campaign, so it could hardly be considered a witch hunt.
Obama did not have his private lawyer talk to foreign governments about getting dirt on Trump.
There is a difference. Perhaps too subtle for you to discern, but there is a difference.
Beck!
