And you keep up with the charade. Again the way you look at something are not equal to it being an actual fact and i know for you like with the Mueller report, you still see collusion and i am beginning to get now that you and the left see Trump as Moby dick and you just keep wanting to catch that "whale". And keep up with the bad excuses like "the republicans will not look at "facts" when the issue here is just that everyone won´t see your opinion as the divine truth which explains how you could be so blind and not see why Trump could win.
We literally have the hard evidence in writing now:
Three deeply problematic aspects of newly released text messages centered on the Ukraine scandal
1. There’s an explicitly stated quid pro quo.
A central participant in the messages is Kurt Volker, former special envoy to Ukraine. Until last week, he served in the administration, resigning shortly after he was identified in a complaint filed by a whistleblower in the intelligence community. The whistleblower portrayed Volker as working with European Union Ambassador Gordon Sondland to try to run interference between Ukrainian officials and Trump’s personal attorney Rudolph W. Giuliani, who was pressing for Ukraine to investigate former vice president Joe Biden.
“Heard from White House,” Volker wrote, “assuming President Z convinces trump he will investigate / ‘get to the bottom of what happened’ in 2016, we will nail down date for visit to Washington.”
This is as explicit a quid pro quo as you can get: Promise to get to the bottom of events in 2016 — which could refer to either the hacking or to the firing of a Ukrainian prosecutor targeted by Biden — and you’ll get the validity that comes with a White House visit.
What’s not clear is who Volker spoke with in the White House. In the call between Trump and Zelensky later that day, the meeting was raised, with Trump vaguely suggesting that Zelensky could pick his dates only after the Ukrainian leader had promised to go along with the politically useful investigations Trump wanted to see.
The extent to which that visit was important to Zelensky was highlighted when he and Trump met on Sept. 25 on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly.
2. The U.S. helped shape a statement from Ukraine mentioning the Biden probe.
In a text message exchange with Volker immediately after the call, Zelensky’s aide Yermak suggested Sept. 20 through 22. By early August, though, those dates hadn’t been confirmed.
In an exchange with Volker on Aug. 9, Sondland suggested that dates would be finalized as soon as Yermak confirmed … something. From the context of Sondland’s comments in the thread, it seems that the something is a written statement that would accompany a news conference by Zelensky, presumably to announce the new investigations.
3. There’s a strong suggestion that military aid was used as leverage — and hints at an attempt to hide that.
A bit after noon on that day, Taylor, the U.S. official in Ukraine, texted Sondland.
“Are we now saying that security assistance and WH meeting are conditioned on investigations?” Taylor asked.
“Call me,” Sondland replied. And their conversation on that central point was not recorded.
Taylor’s question is a central one to the Trump-Ukraine interaction. There are significant problems that arise if Trump tried to leverage his position and America’s interests to get Ukraine to investigate his political opponents. There are larger problems that arise if Trump halted congressionally approved funding to use it as leverage.
On Sept. 8, Volker, Taylor and Sondland tried to get on the phone, but Volker couldn’t hear the conversation.
“Gordon [Sondland] and I just spoke,” Taylor texted Volker. “I can brief you if you and Gordon don’t connect.” Taylor continued: “The nightmare is they give the interview and don’t get the security assistance. The Russians love it. (And I quit.)”
Taylor’s reference to “the interview” isn’t clear, but he probably means the press announcement about imminent investigations. Taylor was apparently worried that Ukraine would give the interview but the United States would still withhold aid, to Russia’s glee.
Early the next morning, Taylor again raised his concerns with Sondland.
“The message to the Ukrainians (and Russians) we send with the decision on security assistance is key,” he said. “With the hold [on the assistance], we have already shaken their faith in us. Thus my nightmare scenario.”
Sondland replied, saying that he “believe[s] we have identified the best pathway forward.”
“As I said on the phone,” Taylor replied, apparently referring to the failed three-way call on Sept. 8, “I think it’s crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign.”
Five hours later, Sondland replies — using very pointed language.
“Bill, I believe you are incorrect about President Trump’s intentions,” he wrote. “The President has been crystal clear no quid pro quo’s of any kind. The President is trying to evaluate whether Ukraine is truly going to adopt the transparency and reforms that President Zelensky promised during his campaign.”
It’s hard to read that reply, with its unusual formality and detail, as anything other than an attempt to establish a particular argument for the written record.
“I suggest we stop the back and forth by text,” he added, reinforcing that interpretation. “If you still have concerns I recommend you give Lisa Kenna” — the State Department’s executive secretary — “or S” — perhaps the secretary of state — “a call to discuss them directly. Thanks.”
No further text messages were shared.
Man you extreme far right tribals are living in an alternate reality. No wonder most Americans disagree with you guys.