(11-13-2019, 06:00 PM)mikesez Wrote: I thought Schiff and Jordan both made their cases pretty well.  Nunes was pretty ineffective.
I wonder if the Democrats can show that Ukraine knew aid was being withheld prior to the July 25th call.  I think the Democrats' accusations become less serious, but still very serious, if Ukraine did not know.  It would show Trump's people to be corrupt but incompetent, which I suppose is less serious than corrupt and competent.
For their part, Republicans could show that Trump was pursuing "corruption in general" in Ukraine as they allege.  The transcript that we have, which is not complete, only mentions crowdstrike and Burisma.  And it only mentions Burisma in connection with Biden - not in general.  If they can show that Trump's interests were actually broad, they could justify that more easily as being "national interest".  But I doubt they have the evidence for that.  We would have seen it by now.

There u go again...

U can't have an extortive act if the alleged target of said act was unaware of it.  This whole "well they wanted to but they're incompetent" idea is word salad for the #orangemanbad crowd.  Either they pressured the ukrainians or they didnt.  

Moreover, the key to an extortive act is the pressure or lack thereof interpreted by the target.  Zollensky already stated publicly he felt no pressure.  Case closed.  Moreover the aid was released without any of the alleged preconditions being met.  

Most alarming Bill Taylor, as the ambassador to the Ukraine, had DIRECT ACCESS to the Ukrainian president including three face to face meetings during the 55 day hold on the aid.  Not ONE TIME did the president mention any linkage or pressure in correlation to aid, investigations or anything of the sort.  Instead Mr. Taylor based his "clear uneerstanding" on what someone told someone who told someone else that President Trump might have been thinking (not making this up.  The clip Is spectacular.

The phone call does not mention Burisma.  It mentions a.)  Election interference in 2016.  B.) Alleged obstruction of justice.  Any potential crime or corrupt act by an Americam citizen in public office meets the definition of the national interest.  There is no such requirement that it must be part of a broader or general investigative package. The only question is whether the request or suspicion is properly predicated.

---