(11-26-2019 09:32 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 08:52 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-25-2019 06:45 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(11-25-2019 03:08 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-25-2019 01:48 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Thanks.

Now, please cite the source proving Schiff knows the identity of the WB. Thanks.

From your link:

You sound confident he doesnt. Let's see what Schiff says when he is placed under oath in front of the Senate.

ps...Schiff knows the identity of the WB.

Of course he does. Anyone believing any different is just lying or not paying attention. I’m not sure which one RWT is. To many of their Star witnesses have close personal ties to the guy. You know, that guy Eric Ciaramella.

Sure, Schiff MAY know who the WB is. GWB MAY have also purposely lied us into a war to avenge a death threat on his daddy. However, I don't post that as a fact because I don't know that it is...just as none of you know Schiff knows the identity of the WB.

He knows the identity. You are insulting our intelligence.

And trump withheld money from Ukraine until they announced an investigation in to the Biden's. You are insulting my intelligence.

(11-26-2019 09:49 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 09:20 AM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 08:52 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-25-2019 06:45 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(11-25-2019 03:08 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  You sound confident he doesnt. Let's see what Schiff says when he is placed under oath in front of the Senate.

ps...Schiff knows the identity of the WB.

Of course he does. Anyone believing any different is just lying or not paying attention. I’m not sure which one RWT is. To many of their Star witnesses have close personal ties to the guy. You know, that guy Eric Ciaramella.

Sure, Schiff MAY know who the WB is. GWB by h MAY have also purposely lied us into a war to avenge a death threat on his daddy. However, I don't post that as a fact because I don't know that it is...just as none of you know Schiff knows the identity of the WB.

What I do know as fact is that Eric Ciaramella hasn’t charged a lawyer to stop being identified all over the media as the WB. And I know that Shiffty abruptly ends questioning that gets near his identity. Hard to do that if you don’t know who he is.

Why is that hard? Schiff firmly believes, as do I and countless others, that regardless of any particular law that says the WB can't be named...that in fact, the guy/gal should not be named. So yeah, he should be shutting down those lines of questioning as he did. Trying to name him is nothing but Republican political theater and it has nothing to do with the impeachment inquiry.

If it has nothing to do with it then why did Shiffty do an about face on him testifying? If he has no value as a witness then how does he have value as a legitimate WB? It was a setup. That is why he can’t let him be publicly identified and questioned. Not to mention their star witness mr Vindman would probably be in legal peril.

(11-26-2019 09:51 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 09:32 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 08:52 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-25-2019 06:45 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(11-25-2019 03:08 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  You sound confident he doesnt. Let's see what Schiff says when he is placed under oath in front of the Senate.

ps...Schiff knows the identity of the WB.

Of course he does. Anyone believing any different is just lying or not paying attention. I’m not sure which one RWT is. To many of their Star witnesses have close personal ties to the guy. You know, that guy Eric Ciaramella.

Sure, Schiff MAY know who the WB is. GWB MAY have also purposely lied us into a war to avenge a death threat on his daddy. However, I don't post that as a fact because I don't know that it is...just as none of you know Schiff knows the identity of the WB.

He knows the identity. You are insulting our intelligence.

And trump withheld money from Ukraine until they announced an investigation in to the Biden's. You are insulting my intelligence.

Have you read the transcript? Fact is the whistleblower is fake and the call was perfect. That's why the fake whistleblower is in hiding and Schitt is losing... and frankly, investigating political corruption at this level is a function of the Executive branch.

(11-26-2019 10:26 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 09:51 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 09:32 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 08:52 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-25-2019 06:45 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  Of course he does. Anyone believing any different is just lying or not paying attention. I’m not sure which one RWT is. To many of their Star witnesses have close personal ties to the guy. You know, that guy Eric Ciaramella.

Sure, Schiff MAY know who the WB is. GWB MAY have also purposely lied us into a war to avenge a death threat on his daddy. However, I don't post that as a fact because I don't know that it is...just as none of you know Schiff knows the identity of the WB.

He knows the identity. You are insulting our intelligence.

And trump withheld money from Ukraine until they announced an investigation in to the Biden's. You are insulting my intelligence.

Have you read the transcript?

To my knowledge no full one has been released.

(11-26-2019 09:49 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 09:20 AM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 08:52 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-25-2019 06:45 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(11-25-2019 03:08 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  You sound confident he doesnt. Let's see what Schiff says when he is placed under oath in front of the Senate.

ps...Schiff knows the identity of the WB.

Of course he does. Anyone believing any different is just lying or not paying attention. I’m not sure which one RWT is. To many of their Star witnesses have close personal ties to the guy. You know, that guy Eric Ciaramella.

Sure, Schiff MAY know who the WB is. GWB by h MAY have also purposely lied us into a war to avenge a death threat on his daddy. However, I don't post that as a fact because I don't know that it is...just as none of you know Schiff knows the identity of the WB.

What I do know as fact is that Eric Ciaramella hasn’t charged a lawyer to stop being identified all over the media as the WB. And I know that Shiffty abruptly ends questioning that gets near his identity. Hard to do that if you don’t know who he is.

Why is that hard? Schiff firmly believes, as do I and countless others, that regardless of any particular law that says the WB can't be named...that in fact, the guy/gal should not be named. So yeah, he should be shutting down those lines of questioning as he did. Trying to name him is nothing but Republican political theater and it has nothing to do with the impeachment inquiry.

We'll remember this when a WB comes forward with information on the left and wants to remain anonymous and your side is screaming for their head.

(11-26-2019 09:55 AM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 09:49 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 09:20 AM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 08:52 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-25-2019 06:45 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  Of course he does. Anyone believing any different is just lying or not paying attention. I’m not sure which one RWT is. To many of their Star witnesses have close personal ties to the guy. You know, that guy Eric Ciaramella.

Sure, Schiff MAY know who the WB is. GWB by h MAY have also purposely lied us into a war to avenge a death threat on his daddy. However, I don't post that as a fact because I don't know that it is...just as none of you know Schiff knows the identity of the WB.

What I do know as fact is that Eric Ciaramella hasn’t charged a lawyer to stop being identified all over the media as the WB. And I know that Shiffty abruptly ends questioning that gets near his identity. Hard to do that if you don’t know who he is.

Why is that hard? Schiff firmly believes, as do I and countless others, that regardless of any particular law that says the WB can't be named...that in fact, the guy/gal should not be named. So yeah, he should be shutting down those lines of questioning as he did. Trying to name him is nothing but Republican political theater and it has nothing to do with the impeachment inquiry.

If it has nothing to do with it then why did Shiffty do an about face on him testifying? If he has no value as a witness then how does he have value as a legitimate WB? It was a setup. That is why he can’t let him be publicly identified and questioned. Not to mention their star witness mr Vindman would probably be in legal peril.

Because the report was verified as true as a result of the released portion of the transcript from the WH as well as through other testimony.

(11-26-2019 02:01 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 09:55 AM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 09:49 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 09:20 AM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 08:52 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Sure, Schiff MAY know who the WB is. GWB by h MAY have also purposely lied us into a war to avenge a death threat on his daddy. However, I don't post that as a fact because I don't know that it is...just as none of you know Schiff knows the identity of the WB.

What I do know as fact is that Eric Ciaramella hasn’t charged a lawyer to stop being identified all over the media as the WB. And I know that Shiffty abruptly ends questioning that gets near his identity. Hard to do that if you don’t know who he is.

Why is that hard? Schiff firmly believes, as do I and countless others, that regardless of any particular law that says the WB can't be named...that in fact, the guy/gal should not be named. So yeah, he should be shutting down those lines of questioning as he did. Trying to name him is nothing but Republican political theater and it has nothing to do with the impeachment inquiry.

If it has nothing to do with it then why did Shiffty do an about face on him testifying? If he has no value as a witness then how does he have value as a legitimate WB? It was a setup. That is why he can’t let him be publicly identified and questioned. Not to mention their star witness mr Vindman would probably be in legal peril.

Because the report was verified as true as a result of the released portion of the transcript from the WH as well as through other testimony.

In the fact that yes there was a call with the Ukraine and Trump asked them to look into the shady dealings of Biden.. That was it..

(11-26-2019 09:51 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 09:32 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 08:52 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-25-2019 06:45 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(11-25-2019 03:08 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  You sound confident he doesnt. Let's see what Schiff says when he is placed under oath in front of the Senate.

ps...Schiff knows the identity of the WB.

Of course he does. Anyone believing any different is just lying or not paying attention. I’m not sure which one RWT is. To many of their Star witnesses have close personal ties to the guy. You know, that guy Eric Ciaramella.

Sure, Schiff MAY know who the WB is. GWB MAY have also purposely lied us into a war to avenge a death threat on his daddy. However, I don't post that as a fact because I don't know that it is...just as none of you know Schiff knows the identity of the WB.

He knows the identity. You are insulting our intelligence.

And trump withheld money from Ukraine until they announced an investigation in to the Biden's. You are insulting my intelligence.

You have no intelligence if you believe the first part of your statement

(11-26-2019 07:27 PM)450bench Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 09:51 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 09:32 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 08:52 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-25-2019 06:45 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  Of course he does. Anyone believing any different is just lying or not paying attention. I’m not sure which one RWT is. To many of their Star witnesses have close personal ties to the guy. You know, that guy Eric Ciaramella.

Sure, Schiff MAY know who the WB is. GWB MAY have also purposely lied us into a war to avenge a death threat on his daddy. However, I don't post that as a fact because I don't know that it is...just as none of you know Schiff knows the identity of the WB.

He knows the identity. You are insulting our intelligence.

And trump withheld money from Ukraine until they announced an investigation in to the Biden's. You are insulting my intelligence.

You have no intelligence if you believe the first part of your statement

that's a given....sometimes, I think he forgets which board he's on....maybe all the water-boarding he's been getting lately has finally knocked his cods back up his throat....

(11-26-2019 02:01 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 09:55 AM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 09:49 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 09:20 AM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 08:52 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Sure, Schiff MAY know who the WB is. GWB by h MAY have also purposely lied us into a war to avenge a death threat on his daddy. However, I don't post that as a fact because I don't know that it is...just as none of you know Schiff knows the identity of the WB.

What I do know as fact is that Eric Ciaramella hasn’t charged a lawyer to stop being identified all over the media as the WB. And I know that Shiffty abruptly ends questioning that gets near his identity. Hard to do that if you don’t know who he is.

Why is that hard? Schiff firmly believes, as do I and countless others, that regardless of any particular law that says the WB can't be named...that in fact, the guy/gal should not be named. So yeah, he should be shutting down those lines of questioning as he did. Trying to name him is nothing but Republican political theater and it has nothing to do with the impeachment inquiry.

If it has nothing to do with it then why did Shiffty do an about face on him testifying? If he has no value as a witness then how does he have value as a legitimate WB? It was a setup. That is why he can’t let him be publicly identified and questioned. Not to mention their star witness mr Vindman would probably be in legal peril.

Because the report was verified as true as a result of the released portion of the transcript from the WH as well as through other testimony.

Provide a link proving this lie. Please.

(11-26-2019 07:38 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 02:01 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 09:55 AM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 09:49 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 09:20 AM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  What I do know as fact is that Eric Ciaramella hasn’t charged a lawyer to stop being identified all over the media as the WB. And I know that Shiffty abruptly ends questioning that gets near his identity. Hard to do that if you don’t know who he is.

Why is that hard? Schiff firmly believes, as do I and countless others, that regardless of any particular law that says the WB can't be named...that in fact, the guy/gal should not be named. So yeah, he should be shutting down those lines of questioning as he did. Trying to name him is nothing but Republican political theater and it has nothing to do with the impeachment inquiry.

If it has nothing to do with it then why did Shiffty do an about face on him testifying? If he has no value as a witness then how does he have value as a legitimate WB? It was a setup. That is why he can’t let him be publicly identified and questioned. Not to mention their star witness mr Vindman would probably be in legal peril.

Because the report was verified as true as a result of the released portion of the transcript from the WH as well as through other testimony.

Provide a link proving this lie [sic]. Please.

Already done it...probably three times now. But here you go. AGAIN.

Quote:As the following analysis clearly demonstrates, an overwhelming percentage of the whistleblower’s complaint in Ukrainegate has been confirmed by U.S. government documents, witness statements, and independent investigative reports. We highlight all the key portions of the complaint that have been confirmed or corroborated, and we include links to the sources confirming or corroborating the information. The most significant sources include the official rough transcript of the July 25 call between President Trump and President Zelenskyy, text messages between three U.S. diplomats and Ukrainian officials, the written testimony of the then-US special envoy to Ukraine Paul Volker, and, finally, reliable news reports. It is also worth noting that the Inspector General for the Intelligence Community concluded the whistleblower’s report appeared credible after conducting a review including interviews with witnesses.

Overwhelming Confirmation of Whistleblower Complaint: An Annotation

Ah yes.. The law school blog at NYU Law.

(11-26-2019 01:07 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 09:49 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 09:20 AM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 08:52 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-25-2019 06:45 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  Of course he does. Anyone believing any different is just lying or not paying attention. I’m not sure which one RWT is. To many of their Star witnesses have close personal ties to the guy. You know, that guy Eric Ciaramella.

Sure, Schiff MAY know who the WB is. GWB by h MAY have also purposely lied us into a war to avenge a death threat on his daddy. However, I don't post that as a fact because I don't know that it is...just as none of you know Schiff knows the identity of the WB.

What I do know as fact is that Eric Ciaramella hasn’t charged a lawyer to stop being identified all over the media as the WB. And I know that Shiffty abruptly ends questioning that gets near his identity. Hard to do that if you don’t know who he is.

Why is that hard? Schiff firmly believes, as do I and countless others, that regardless of any particular law that says the WB can't be named...that in fact, the guy/gal should not be named. So yeah, he should be shutting down those lines of questioning as he did. Trying to name him is nothing but Republican political theater and it has nothing to do with the impeachment inquiry.

We'll remember this when a WB comes forward with information on the left and wants to remain anonymous and your side is screaming for their head.

The idea of anonymity for a whistleblower is beyond moronic. The point is that they are known so they can be protected against retaliation. Anonymity is a contradiction of the whole concept. But the morons in the media lap up whatever dnc says

(11-27-2019 03:07 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 01:07 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 09:49 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 09:20 AM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 08:52 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Sure, Schiff MAY know who the WB is. GWB by h MAY have also purposely lied us into a war to avenge a death threat on his daddy. However, I don't post that as a fact because I don't know that it is...just as none of you know Schiff knows the identity of the WB.

What I do know as fact is that Eric Ciaramella hasn’t charged a lawyer to stop being identified all over the media as the WB. And I know that Shiffty abruptly ends questioning that gets near his identity. Hard to do that if you don’t know who he is.

Why is that hard? Schiff firmly believes, as do I and countless others, that regardless of any particular law that says the WB can't be named...that in fact, the guy/gal should not be named. So yeah, he should be shutting down those lines of questioning as he did. Trying to name him is nothing but Republican political theater and it has nothing to do with the impeachment inquiry.

We'll remember this when a WB comes forward with information on the left and wants to remain anonymous and your side is screaming for their head.

The idea of anonymity for a whistleblower is beyond moronic. The point is that they are known so they can be protected against retaliation. Anonymity is a contradiction of the whole concept. But the morons in the media lap up whatever dnc says

You guys are mad because you can't find out who to send your death threat's to. SAD

(11-26-2019 10:38 AM)JDTulane Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 10:26 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 09:51 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 09:32 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 08:52 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Sure, Schiff MAY know who the WB is. GWB MAY have also purposely lied us into a war to avenge a death threat on his daddy. However, I don't post that as a fact because I don't know that it is...just as none of you know Schiff knows the identity of the WB.

He knows the identity. You are insulting our intelligence.

And trump withheld money from Ukraine until they announced an investigation in to the Biden's. You are insulting my intelligence.

Have you read the transcript?

To my knowledge no full one has been released.

Probably never will be---but every single witness who was actually on the call has indicated that the transcript that was released is completely accurate and does not in any way mis-represent the call. They have all said any redactions or changes were minimal and do not change the substance.

The Whistleblowers claims have been backed by testimony, under oath. So far, no one has been willing to do the same for the President.

Surely Rudy, Pompeo, Pence, McGahn or Mulvaney would be willing to testify on his behalf?

(11-27-2019 10:18 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 07:38 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 02:01 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 09:55 AM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 09:49 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Why is that hard? Schiff firmly believes, as do I and countless others, that regardless of any particular law that says the WB can't be named...that in fact, the guy/gal should not be named. So yeah, he should be shutting down those lines of questioning as he did. Trying to name him is nothing but Republican political theater and it has nothing to do with the impeachment inquiry.

If it has nothing to do with it then why did Shiffty do an about face on him testifying? If he has no value as a witness then how does he have value as a legitimate WB? It was a setup. That is why he can’t let him be publicly identified and questioned. Not to mention their star witness mr Vindman would probably be in legal peril.

Because the report was verified as true as a result of the released portion of the transcript from the WH as well as through other testimony.

Provide a link proving this lie [sic]. Please.

Already done it...probably three times now. But here you go. AGAIN.

Quote:As the following analysis clearly demonstrates, an overwhelming percentage of the whistleblower’s complaint in Ukrainegate has been confirmed by U.S. government documents, witness statements, and independent investigative reports. We highlight all the key portions of the complaint that have been confirmed or corroborated, and we include links to the sources confirming or corroborating the information. The most significant sources include the official rough transcript of the July 25 call between President Trump and President Zelenskyy, text messages between three U.S. diplomats and Ukrainian officials, the written testimony of the then-US special envoy to Ukraine Paul Volker, and, finally, reliable news reports. It is also worth noting that the Inspector General for the Intelligence Community concluded the whistleblower’s report appeared credible after conducting a review including interviews with witnesses.

Overwhelming Confirmation of Whistleblower Complaint: An Annotation

"I was not a direct witness to most of the events described."

All I needed to know, I stopped reading most of it after that since it was full of supposition and not concrete facts.

(11-27-2019 10:18 PM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(11-27-2019 10:18 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 07:38 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 02:01 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 09:55 AM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  If it has nothing to do with it then why did Shiffty do an about face on him testifying? If he has no value as a witness then how does he have value as a legitimate WB? It was a setup. That is why he can’t let him be publicly identified and questioned. Not to mention their star witness mr Vindman would probably be in legal peril.

Because the report was verified as true as a result of the released portion of the transcript from the WH as well as through other testimony.

Provide a link proving this lie [sic]. Please.

Already done it...probably three times now. But here you go. AGAIN.

Quote:As the following analysis clearly demonstrates, an overwhelming percentage of the whistleblower’s complaint in Ukrainegate has been confirmed by U.S. government documents, witness statements, and independent investigative reports. We highlight all the key portions of the complaint that have been confirmed or corroborated, and we include links to the sources confirming or corroborating the information. The most significant sources include the official rough transcript of the July 25 call between President Trump and President Zelenskyy, text messages between three U.S. diplomats and Ukrainian officials, the written testimony of the then-US special envoy to Ukraine Paul Volker, and, finally, reliable news reports. It is also worth noting that the Inspector General for the Intelligence Community concluded the whistleblower’s report appeared credible after conducting a review including interviews with witnesses.

Overwhelming Confirmation of Whistleblower Complaint: An Annotation

"I was not a direct witness to most of the events described."

All I needed to know, I stopped reading most of it after that since it was full of supposition and not concrete facts.

You know how to read?

(11-27-2019 10:18 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 07:38 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 02:01 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 09:55 AM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(11-26-2019 09:49 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Why is that hard? Schiff firmly believes, as do I and countless others, that regardless of any particular law that says the WB can't be named...that in fact, the guy/gal should not be named. So yeah, he should be shutting down those lines of questioning as he did. Trying to name him is nothing but Republican political theater and it has nothing to do with the impeachment inquiry.

If it has nothing to do with it then why did Shiffty do an about face on him testifying? If he has no value as a witness then how does he have value as a legitimate WB? It was a setup. That is why he can’t let him be publicly identified and questioned. Not to mention their star witness mr Vindman would probably be in legal peril.

Because the report was verified as true as a result of the released portion of the transcript from the WH as well as through other testimony.

Provide a link proving this lie [sic]. Please.

Already done it...probably three times now. But here you go. AGAIN.

Quote:As the following analysis clearly demonstrates, an overwhelming percentage of the whistleblower’s complaint in Ukrainegate has been confirmed by U.S. government documents, witness statements, and independent investigative reports. We highlight all the key portions of the complaint that have been confirmed or corroborated, and we include links to the sources confirming or corroborating the information. The most significant sources include the official rough transcript of the July 25 call between President Trump and President Zelenskyy, text messages between three U.S. diplomats and Ukrainian officials, the written testimony of the then-US special envoy to Ukraine Paul Volker, and, finally, reliable news reports. It is also worth noting that the Inspector General for the Intelligence Community concluded the whistleblower’s report appeared credible after conducting a review including interviews with witnesses.

Overwhelming Confirmation of Whistleblower Complaint: An Annotation

I said ‘proves’. Still waiting for it.
And as soon as the Biden crime syndicate gets a little scrutiny the purpose will be clear.

When did the Ukrainians announce investigations so they could get their aide from the US and other countries? Seem to have missed that part of the testimomy. Oh, and while we are at it, when did Zelensky find out aide was being held up and who told him? Missed that in testimony also. But by all means I hope that doesn't keep the Dems from voting on Articles. I'm sure the ads are already cut to run in the Trump Dem Congressional districts.