No quid pro quo
It wasn’t Donald Trump who released the promised military aid to Ukraine, but the State Department, after lawyers determined that the White House freeze on the funds was illegal, several sources have told Bloomberg.
Trump has claimed he released the aid on September 11. But five sources told Bloomberg that $141 million of the money was actually authorized to be released several days earlier after lawyers determined that the White House Office of Management and Budget and, therefore, the president, had no legal standing to block the funds. The decision was outlined in a classified memo to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, according to Bloomberg.
https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/ukraine-aid-state-department-donald-trump-illegal-012318334.html
Comments
-
Life is quid pro quo
But I’ll play that game.
Trump asked for Ukraine to investigate and threatens to withhold funds.
Ukraine doesn’t do anything and still gets paid.
That doesn’t sound like ‘something for something’ or ‘this for that’ which is the literal translation of ‘quid pro quo’. In fact, the payment was something for nothing - the exact opposite of ‘quid pro quo’
Progressives trying to coopt the definition of ancient Latin like they do with English words - ‘liberal’ comes to mind.
-
I hope they look into north Korea we offered a bunch of stuff if they dump their nukes and we're punishing them until they do. HTH
-
#TDSskrong #aclockworkshill2001400ex said:Of course the narrative now is quid pro quo isn't a crime. Lol
It wasn’t Donald Trump who released the promised military aid to Ukraine, but the State Department, after lawyers determined that the White House freeze on the funds was illegal, several sources have told Bloomberg.
Trump has claimed he released the aid on September 11. But five sources told Bloomberg that $141 million of the money was actually authorized to be released several days earlier after lawyers determined that the White House Office of Management and Budget and, therefore, the president, had no legal standing to block the funds. The decision was outlined in a classified memo to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, according to Bloomberg.
https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/ukraine-aid-state-department-donald-trump-illegal-012318334.html -
You are smarter than that. If what is reported is true, Trump said he wouldn't give them money already promised unless they investigated a political opponent.PurpleThrobber said:Life is quid pro quo
But I’ll play that game.
Trump asked for Ukraine to investigate and threatens to withhold funds.
Ukraine doesn’t do anything and still gets paid.
That doesn’t sound like ‘something for something’ or ‘this for that’ which is the literal translation of ‘quid pro quo’. In fact, the payment was something for nothing - the exact opposite of ‘quid pro quo’
Progressives trying to coopt the definition of ancient Latin like they do with English words - ‘liberal’ comes to mind. -
Lol. Are you really trying to equate investigating a political opponent to trying to trying to end a nuclear risk?Sledog said:I hope they look into north Korea we offered a bunch of stuff if they dump their nukes and we're punishing them until they do. HTH
-
I am smarter than 'that'. "That' being "you".2001400ex said:
You are smarter than that. If what is reported is true, Trump said he wouldn't give them money already promised unless they investigated a political opponent.PurpleThrobber said:Life is quid pro quo
But I’ll play that game.
Trump asked for Ukraine to investigate and threatens to withhold funds.
Ukraine doesn’t do anything and still gets paid.
That doesn’t sound like ‘something for something’ or ‘this for that’ which is the literal translation of ‘quid pro quo’. In fact, the payment was something for nothing - the exact opposite of ‘quid pro quo’
Progressives trying to coopt the definition of ancient Latin like they do with English words - ‘liberal’ comes to mind.
Did or did not the Ukraine get the money?
-
According to this report, much later and only with State department intervention.PurpleThrobber said:
I am smarter than 'that'. "That' being "you".2001400ex said:
You are smarter than that. If what is reported is true, Trump said he wouldn't give them money already promised unless they investigated a political opponent.PurpleThrobber said:Life is quid pro quo
But I’ll play that game.
Trump asked for Ukraine to investigate and threatens to withhold funds.
Ukraine doesn’t do anything and still gets paid.
That doesn’t sound like ‘something for something’ or ‘this for that’ which is the literal translation of ‘quid pro quo’. In fact, the payment was something for nothing - the exact opposite of ‘quid pro quo’
Progressives trying to coopt the definition of ancient Latin like they do with English words - ‘liberal’ comes to mind.
Did or did not the Ukraine get the money? -
The answer is either "yes" or "No".2001400ex said:
According to this report, much later and only with State department intervention.PurpleThrobber said:
I am smarter than 'that'. "That' being "you".2001400ex said:
You are smarter than that. If what is reported is true, Trump said he wouldn't give them money already promised unless they investigated a political opponent.PurpleThrobber said:Life is quid pro quo
But I’ll play that game.
Trump asked for Ukraine to investigate and threatens to withhold funds.
Ukraine doesn’t do anything and still gets paid.
That doesn’t sound like ‘something for something’ or ‘this for that’ which is the literal translation of ‘quid pro quo’. In fact, the payment was something for nothing - the exact opposite of ‘quid pro quo’
Progressives trying to coopt the definition of ancient Latin like they do with English words - ‘liberal’ comes to mind.
Did or did not the Ukraine get the money?
Also acceptable would be "They Did" or "They Didn't".
-
Still to be established: is the investigation happening BECAUSE its a political opponent? or because actual corruption?2001400ex said:
Lol. Are you really trying to equate investigating a political opponent to trying to trying to end a nuclear risk?Sledog said:I hope they look into north Korea we offered a bunch of stuff if they dump their nukes and we're punishing them until they do. HTH
This entire thing is presupposed by the idea that Trump is remotely concerned by running against Sleepy Joe Biden. Everyone with a half-brain understands Trump will wipe his ass with Biden in a general. ZERO need for Primary subterfuge.
But please, feel free to go fuck yourself. -
I don't like Biden and I won't really have a vote in the process as it'll be decided before Washington has the primaries. But if Biden gets the nod, he'll have a better chance against Trump than pence. I think Democrats would rather run against Trump really. But if he committed an impeachable offense so be it.pawz said:
Still to be established: is the investigation happening BECAUSE its a political opponent? or because actual corruption?2001400ex said:
Lol. Are you really trying to equate investigating a political opponent to trying to trying to end a nuclear risk?Sledog said:I hope they look into north Korea we offered a bunch of stuff if they dump their nukes and we're punishing them until they do. HTH
This entire thing is presupposed by the idea that Trump is remotely concerned by running against Biden. Everyone with a half-brain understands Trump will wipe his ass with Biden in a general. ZERO need for Primary subterfuge.
But please, feel free to go fuck yourself. -
Learn some nuance. You sound like Race.PurpleThrobber said:
The answer is either "yes" or "No".2001400ex said:
According to this report, much later and only with State department intervention.PurpleThrobber said:
I am smarter than 'that'. "That' being "you".2001400ex said:
You are smarter than that. If what is reported is true, Trump said he wouldn't give them money already promised unless they investigated a political opponent.PurpleThrobber said:Life is quid pro quo
But I’ll play that game.
Trump asked for Ukraine to investigate and threatens to withhold funds.
Ukraine doesn’t do anything and still gets paid.
That doesn’t sound like ‘something for something’ or ‘this for that’ which is the literal translation of ‘quid pro quo’. In fact, the payment was something for nothing - the exact opposite of ‘quid pro quo’
Progressives trying to coopt the definition of ancient Latin like they do with English words - ‘liberal’ comes to mind.
Did or did not the Ukraine get the money?
Also acceptable would be "They Did" or "They Didn't". -
We've read the transcript. The only one who tried to alter it is the supposed whistleblower. I guess the deep state operative didn't manage to plant false evidence and Schitt is pissed the plan didn't work so he is doing everything he can to hide the whistleblower if he even exists.
-
So you have have nothing. Again.2001400ex said:
I don't like Biden and I won't really have a vote in the process as it'll be decided before Washington has the primaries. But if Biden gets the nod, he'll have a better chance against Trump than pence. I think Democrats would rather run against Trump really. But if he committed an impeachable offense so be it.pawz said:
Still to be established: is the investigation happening BECAUSE its a political opponent? or because actual corruption?2001400ex said:
Lol. Are you really trying to equate investigating a political opponent to trying to trying to end a nuclear risk?Sledog said:I hope they look into north Korea we offered a bunch of stuff if they dump their nukes and we're punishing them until they do. HTH
This entire thing is presupposed by the idea that Trump is remotely concerned by running against Biden. Everyone with a half-brain understands Trump will wipe his ass with Biden in a general. ZERO need for Primary subterfuge.
But please, feel free to go fuck yourself.
All of you should fuck right off.
-
So you aren't going to answer the question. It's barely multiple choice.2001400ex said:
Learn some nuance. You sound like Race.PurpleThrobber said:
The answer is either "yes" or "No".2001400ex said:
According to this report, much later and only with State department intervention.PurpleThrobber said:
I am smarter than 'that'. "That' being "you".2001400ex said:
You are smarter than that. If what is reported is true, Trump said he wouldn't give them money already promised unless they investigated a political opponent.PurpleThrobber said:Life is quid pro quo
But I’ll play that game.
Trump asked for Ukraine to investigate and threatens to withhold funds.
Ukraine doesn’t do anything and still gets paid.
That doesn’t sound like ‘something for something’ or ‘this for that’ which is the literal translation of ‘quid pro quo’. In fact, the payment was something for nothing - the exact opposite of ‘quid pro quo’
Progressives trying to coopt the definition of ancient Latin like they do with English words - ‘liberal’ comes to mind.
Did or did not the Ukraine get the money?
Also acceptable would be "They Did" or "They Didn't".
-
The answer is in the quote in the OP. HTHPurpleThrobber said:
So you aren't going to answer the question. It's barely multiple choice.2001400ex said:
Learn some nuance. You sound like Race.PurpleThrobber said:
The answer is either "yes" or "No".2001400ex said:
According to this report, much later and only with State department intervention.PurpleThrobber said:
I am smarter than 'that'. "That' being "you".2001400ex said:
You are smarter than that. If what is reported is true, Trump said he wouldn't give them money already promised unless they investigated a political opponent.PurpleThrobber said:Life is quid pro quo
But I’ll play that game.
Trump asked for Ukraine to investigate and threatens to withhold funds.
Ukraine doesn’t do anything and still gets paid.
That doesn’t sound like ‘something for something’ or ‘this for that’ which is the literal translation of ‘quid pro quo’. In fact, the payment was something for nothing - the exact opposite of ‘quid pro quo’
Progressives trying to coopt the definition of ancient Latin like they do with English words - ‘liberal’ comes to mind.
Did or did not the Ukraine get the money?
Also acceptable would be "They Did" or "They Didn't". -
But Hondo doesn’t know if Trump committed an impeachable action.2001400ex said:Of course the narrative now is quid pro quo isn't a crime. Lol
It wasn’t Donald Trump who released the promised military aid to Ukraine, but the State Department, after lawyers determined that the White House freeze on the funds was illegal, several sources have told Bloomberg.
Trump has claimed he released the aid on September 11. But five sources told Bloomberg that $141 million of the money was actually authorized to be released several days earlier after lawyers determined that the White House Office of Management and Budget and, therefore, the president, had no legal standing to block the funds. The decision was outlined in a classified memo to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, according to Bloomberg.
https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/ukraine-aid-state-department-donald-trump-illegal-012318334.html -
So you concur Ukraine received money as authorized by the State Department.2001400ex said:
The answer is in the quote in the OP. HTHPurpleThrobber said:
So you aren't going to answer the question. It's barely multiple choice.2001400ex said:
Learn some nuance. You sound like Race.PurpleThrobber said:
The answer is either "yes" or "No".2001400ex said:
According to this report, much later and only with State department intervention.PurpleThrobber said:
I am smarter than 'that'. "That' being "you".2001400ex said:
You are smarter than that. If what is reported is true, Trump said he wouldn't give them money already promised unless they investigated a political opponent.PurpleThrobber said:Life is quid pro quo
But I’ll play that game.
Trump asked for Ukraine to investigate and threatens to withhold funds.
Ukraine doesn’t do anything and still gets paid.
That doesn’t sound like ‘something for something’ or ‘this for that’ which is the literal translation of ‘quid pro quo’. In fact, the payment was something for nothing - the exact opposite of ‘quid pro quo’
Progressives trying to coopt the definition of ancient Latin like they do with English words - ‘liberal’ comes to mind.
Did or did not the Ukraine get the money?
Also acceptable would be "They Did" or "They Didn't".
-
Huffpo.........................all you need to know. Their history is, well, full of proof of hookers peeing on Trump.
