/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/65664494/1186106603.jpg.0.jpg)
Links to Original Articles:
https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/08/politics/transcripts-released-fiona-hill-alexander-vindman/index.html
https://www.vox.com/2019/11/8/20955480/impeachment-vindman-testimony-trump-demand-quid-pro-quo
It has been made a fact that Trump has asked Ukraine to investigate the Bidens but now that the full transcript of the July 25 phone call has been released, it brings extreme concern regarding Trump's actions. Because of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, President Zelensky had an established desire to meet with the President at the White House to strengthen political ties. Trump promised the meeting on the terms that they deliver an investigation, which seems to be a pretty evident quid pro quo.
Even in the limited release readout from September, it describes Trump pressuring Ukraine to probe into the Bidens in exchange for more US military aid. This added on with the frozen $400 million in security aid for Ukraine that was released with suspicious timing seems to further prove the quid pro quo theory. National Security Council Ukraine expert Lt. Alexander Vindman, who was on the July 25th call, brought up the point that the Ukrainians were unaware of the freezing of the aid, as when learning about said holding of the aid they asked what they needed to do, indicating that the funds were frozen with the intent to pressure Ukraine into an investigation.
This event is a threat to American democracy itself, as the President is involving a foreign power to deal with his political opposition. There is such an excess of incriminating evidence that it seems almost surreal; in what world do we live in where our President is dangling financial aid and political meetings to another country in exchange for boosting his own reelection chances. Anyway this evidence is all out now and will be present at the impeachment inquiry so we'll see how it all plays out.
Should this information be sufficient reasoning for impeaching Trump?
Would Trump's actions here classify as quid pro quo?
How has this information impacted, if at all, your opinions on the impeachment trials?
4 comments:
The July 25 phone call transcript makes it blatantly obvious that Trump proposed a quid pro quo with Ukraine. There isn't much question about it. I don't see how this is couldn't be sufficient evidence to impeach Trump, at least in the House, as it proves corruption.
To be honest, this did not really shift my opinions on the impeachment trails because I thought Trump should get impeached and now there is more concrete evidence that he should. However, I did not know that the Ukraine funds were frozen, but it does, as Ryan mentioned, clearly indicate the quid pro quo among the Trump and Ukraine.
There is so much evidence revealing foul play by Trump that it is almost unbelievable, and I fully believe that this should be enough to get him impeached. There is obvious quid pro quo here, and it amazes and frustrates me that there are so many people who are still calling this impeachment process fake or just a witch hunt. It's hard to understand how anyone can deny the corruption or claim that there is no evidence of it when there is literally a phone call transcript and even Trump basically confirmed his actions in an interview. I think its unfortunate that people can become so blind to the truth just because of selective perception or a refusal to agree with an opposing party, but I hope that the system will prevail in the end and impeach Trump for this extremely undemocratic/unpresidential behavior.
All the evidence regarding Trump's possible impeachment trials is astonishing to me. The phone call transcript with Trump and Ukraine just adds more concrete evidence to impeach Trump. According to the article, the transcript shows that President Trump made a "demand" of Ukrainian President Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden and his son in exchange for a meeting. In addition, President Trump would only give to the meeting if Zelensky's administration consented to open an investigation into Burisma. This clearly shows a quid pro quo. I don't know what others think of this situation but I think this is more than enough evidence to show this informal behavior Trump portrays.
Post a Comment