|
"A comprehensive, collaborative elections resource."
|
Tulsi Gabbard: Transcript doesn't show 'compelling' case for impeachment
|
Parent(s) |
Candidate
|
Contributor | WA Indy |
Last Edited | WA Indy Sep 25, 2019 04:56pm |
Logged |
0
|
Category | News |
Author | Tess Bonn |
News Date | Wednesday, September 25, 2019 10:55:00 PM UTC0:0 |
Description | Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii) said Wednesday that the partial transcript of President Trump's call with Ukraine’s president released by the Trump administration doesn’t show a “compelling” case for impeachment.
“Most people reading through that transcript are not going to find that extremely compelling cause to throw out a president that won an election in 2016,” the Democratic presidential candidate told Hill.TV during an appearance on “Rising.” |
Share |
|
2¢
|
|
Article | Read Full Article |
|
Date |
Category |
Headline |
Article |
Contributor |
DISCUSSION |
[View All 10 Previous Messages] |
|
Who thinks Tulsi endorses Trump after she and Bernie drop out of the Presidential race?
Who thinks Tulsi endorses Trump after she and Bernie drop out of the Presidential race?
|
|
|
D:7 | CA Pol Junkie ( 4947.9873 points)
|
Thu, September 26, 2019 06:29:33 AM UTC0:00
|
Very tame transcript with things people might disagree with, but not impeachable. IF there is nothing more all Dems did on this was awaken the Trump base.
It had what was expected, which was Trump asking a foreign government for help with his re-election campaign. It also had something not expected from earlier reports: an implicit linkage to the military aid. In combination with Trump holding up delivery of the military aid a week before, we know what happened. To prove it will require additional documentation, but reports are that the whistle-blower report will provide more documentation and witnesses.
BrentinCO: Very tame transcript with things people might disagree with, but not impeachable. IF there is nothing more all Dems did on this was awaken the Trump base.
It had what was expected, which was Trump asking a foreign government for help with his re-election campaign. It also had something not expected from earlier reports: an implicit linkage to the military aid. In combination with Trump holding up delivery of the military aid a week before, we know what happened. To prove it will require additional documentation, but reports are that the whistle-blower report will provide more documentation and witnesses.
|
|
|
D:7 | CA Pol Junkie ( 4947.9873 points)
|
Thu, September 26, 2019 06:31:40 AM UTC0:00
|
I really feel bad for Ukrainian President Zelensky. I can't even imagine the embarrassment of having the world reading about how he completely sucked up to Trump.
I really feel bad for Ukrainian President Zelensky. I can't even imagine the embarrassment of having the world reading about how he completely sucked up to Trump.
|
|
|
I:1038 | WA Indy ( 1790.9733 points)
x2
|
Thu, September 26, 2019 05:46:59 PM UTC0:00
|
So, I'm not quite sure what people were expecting. The memo isn't a Nixon tape, no. But the memo does show that Trump encourages the President of Ukraine to look into Biden's son and Trump's theory that Joe Biden had a Ukrainian prosecutor fired to stop an investigation. At the same time, he draws in the AG and his personal attorney into this. And President Trump has admitted as much. If you were expecting an explicit quid pro quo, you watch too many movies. This is worth investigation.
And the line between investigation/oversight and impeachment is negligible. There's no need for the Speaker to say there's now an inquiry, the House doesn't have to authorize one, any member can offer an impeachment resolution at any time. I don't care what it's called by the legislative branch, but that branch does have a duty to protect against an executive that has grown accustomed to crossing lines. Though, I'm sure even if the memo had had that explicit line some were expecting, certain people still would say it's a nothing burger.
So, I'm not quite sure what people were expecting. The memo isn't a Nixon tape, no. But the memo does show that Trump encourages the President of Ukraine to look into Biden's son and Trump's theory that Joe Biden had a Ukrainian prosecutor fired to stop an investigation. At the same time, he draws in the AG and his personal attorney into this. And President Trump has admitted as much. If you were expecting an explicit quid pro quo, you watch too many movies. This is worth investigation.
And the line between investigation/oversight and impeachment is negligible. There's no need for the Speaker to say there's now an inquiry, the House doesn't have to authorize one, any member can offer an impeachment resolution at any time. I don't care what it's called by the legislative branch, but that branch does have a duty to protect against an executive that has grown accustomed to crossing lines. Though, I'm sure even if the memo had had that explicit line some were expecting, certain people still would say it's a nothing burger.
|
|
|
D:1 | RP ( 5506.7227 points)
x4
|
Thu, September 26, 2019 06:51:33 PM UTC0:00
|
"The nice Italian man was merely saying he hoped nothing bad happened to your family. It wasn't an explicit threat."
"The nice Italian man was merely saying he hoped nothing bad happened to your family. It wasn't an explicit threat."
|
|
|
D:1 | RP ( 5506.7227 points)
|
Fri, September 27, 2019 08:11:07 PM UTC0:00
|
Reversal:
Tulsi Gabbard backs Trump impeachment inquiry - https://www.axios.com/tulsi-gabbard-trump-impeachment-inquiry-support-db098b36-7af1-4f73-8d3e-feb68e295c59.html
Reversal:
Tulsi Gabbard backs Trump impeachment inquiry - [Link]
|
|
|
|
|