whistleblower complaint against Trump - Page 108 - Talk About Marriage
Politics This is the place to discuss politics

User Tag List

 2019Likes
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
post #1606 of 2208 (permalink) Old 11-14-2019, 07:15 PM
Member
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 11,252
Re: whistleblower complaint against Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marduk View Post
A $400M bribe using taxpayer money doesn’t count?
I damn well want something for all my tax dollars! But, what exactly is a bribe and how does this qualify?

Even if it was exactly as you believe, that Trump was looking for information on Biden's potential corruption involving his son and using the $400M as a "bribe", the result would be evidence of corruption by a sitting Vice President. If that was the extent of what Trump wanted. Not naked pictures, not a made up dossier about prostitutes peeing on a bed, but evidence of serious high level corruption in the US government. And if no such evidence could be found, that would also be a good outcome.

If it took a little bit of carrot/stick to get to the truth then it isn't a bad thing. In fact, that is how all international politics works. Quid pro quo.

Now if Trump was actually looking for dirt, not evidence of serious corruption but for dirt, then it would be a different story. Was he looking for evidence of drug use, prostitutes, spouse beating, **** pics sent to underage girls? That would be political dirt.

So what did Trump get out of the Ukranians? Where did he ask specifically for something that would enrich him personally? What was it he wanted that wouldn't be in the national interest to find out? Where is the tie in to the monies, who knew about it in Ukraine, when did they know about it? Did Trump get what he wanted? If he did, did he then release the money? If he didn't, did he withhold the money?

I don't believe the answers to the above questions are a roadmap to a bribe.

Thor is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1607 of 2208 (permalink) Old 11-14-2019, 08:11 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 351
Re: whistleblower complaint against Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tasorundo View Post
Thor, that whole thing is great and all, but every single person in here that wants Trump investigated in this, says the same of Biden. They are not protecting anyone, I do not give two turds about Biden. If he is guilty, punish him. No one wants to protect him, Clinton, anyone. If they are guilty, take them down, period.

Here is the thing though, Biden has been investigated, both here and abroad. By governments, by journalists, by international law enforcement agencies, and on it goes. You know what they found? Nothing. He did what he was supposed to do, he did it in the open, and he did it with the backing of the state department as well as other countries.

So, you can whine and cry about wasting billions on stuff, but at least Dems are investigating something that has not already been proven to be true.

Also, if you want to get into who did what first, it goes back for years as to who did what and when. You want to talk about wasted time trying to trash people, Benghazi. Go look at that **** show of wasted time and money to make someone look bad.

As for wasted billions in the Ukraine, also right wing conspiracy like Biden: https://www.politifact.com/punditfac...-anti-governm/

So much of all of this is a giant conspiracy, witch hunt, pile of bull. Trump absolutely used that money to get political advantage. If you cannot see that, then you are a fool. Does that mean that no other politician is corrupt, nope, it doesn't, but there are murderers walking around every day. Does that mean we should let the ones we have caught out of prison?
Please Name the Crime....

The public will not allow DEMs to remove a sitting president without a crime - period.

Legally, President Trump can pressure Ukraine all he wants. President Trump legally sets policy with regards to Ukraine. Presidient Trump can legally fire anyone he wants that serves at his pleasure. By the way - NO funds where withheld. By the way - Ukraine did not investigate.

See the pattern here?

Just because Dems want Trump Gone does not mean they get to call things a Crime - when it is NOT a crime. Sorry.
Aspydad is offline  
post #1608 of 2208 (permalink) Old 11-14-2019, 08:36 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,835
Re: whistleblower complaint against Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspydad View Post
Please Name the Crime....
“The idea behind the case would be Trump conditioned the release of military aid to Ukraine on the President of Ukraine coming across with the dirt on the Biden family,” Buell said, adding, “He’s misusing official power to obtain things of value to him. That’s the heart of what the Hobbs Act is supposed to prohibit.” Buell draws an analogy to the Hobbs Act prosecution of Rod Blagojevich, the former governor of Illinois. “Lobbyists for a children’s hospital wanted Blagojevich to increase Medicaid reimbursement rates, which meant eight million dollars in revenue to the hospital,” Buell said. “But he put out the word through intermediaries that he would only do it if he got fifty thousand dollars in campaign contributions. That quid quo pro was a violation of the Hobbs Act. With Trump, the quid pro quo is taxpayer money in return for political dirt, but the idea is the same.”
Tasorundo is online now  
 
post #1609 of 2208 (permalink) Old 11-14-2019, 09:02 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 351
Re: whistleblower complaint against Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tasorundo View Post
“The idea behind the case would be Trump conditioned the release of military aid to Ukraine on the President of Ukraine coming across with the dirt on the Biden family,” Buell said, adding, “He’s misusing official power to obtain things of value to him. That’s the heart of what the Hobbs Act is supposed to prohibit.” Buell draws an analogy to the Hobbs Act prosecution of Rod Blagojevich, the former governor of Illinois. “Lobbyists for a children’s hospital wanted Blagojevich to increase Medicaid reimbursement rates, which meant eight million dollars in revenue to the hospital,” Buell said. “But he put out the word through intermediaries that he would only do it if he got fifty thousand dollars in campaign contributions. That quid quo pro was a violation of the Hobbs Act. With Trump, the quid pro quo is taxpayer money in return for political dirt, but the idea is the same.”
You must define the value that Trump would have got. How is that defined? $50K in money - yes this has value. Define Poilitical Value and prove it. Are you assuming that Trump would lose to Biden without this? Becaue IF Trump would have won without this - then no value - right??

You acutally say "tax payer money" in return for this "Value" - if you cannot prove the "value" - then NO CRIME.

One more thing: Biden was not named the Democratic Candidate - he was just one of about 30 candidates. Can you prove TRUMP Was convinced that Biden would beat him? If you cannot - then NO CRIME. Get what I am saying?

Did you ever think that TRUMP just wants UKRAINE to weed out coruption? Did you ever think that TRUMP wants those who did actually use Tax Payer Money to obtain REAL MONEY - like Biden's son baking $50K a month for nothing.??? NOW THATS A CRIME!!!! You know who is in charge of weeding out UKRAINE corruption???


TRUMP!!!!
Aspydad is offline  
post #1610 of 2208 (permalink) Old 11-14-2019, 09:08 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,835
Re: whistleblower complaint against Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspydad View Post
You must define the value that Trump would have got. How is that defined? $50K in money - yes this has value. Define Poilitical Value and prove it. Are you assuming that Trump would lose to Biden without this? Becaue IF Trump would have won without this - then no value - right??

You acutally say "tax payer money" in return for this "Value" - if you cannot prove the "value" - then NO CRIME.

One more thing: Biden was not named the Democratic Candidate - he was just one of about 30 candidates. Can you prove TRUMP Was convinced that Biden would beat him? If you cannot - then NO CRIME. Get what I am saying?

Did you ever think that TRUMP just wants UKRAINE to weed out coruption? Did you ever think that TRUMP wants those who did actually use Tax Payer Money to obtain REAL MONEY - like Biden's son baking $50K a month for nothing.??? NOW THATS A CRIME!!!! You know who is in charge of weeding out UKRAINE corruption???


TRUMP!!!!
You might want to wipe that spittle off of the corners of your mouth.
Tasorundo is online now  
post #1611 of 2208 (permalink) Old 11-14-2019, 09:26 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: .
Posts: 1,574
Re: whistleblower complaint against Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thor View Post
Do you understand what happened? Who bought the Steele Dossier?
A conservative think tank, and also the DNC.
Quote:
Who then used it, knowing it to be false and unverifiable yet swearing it was, to obtain a FISA warrant.
Steele himself presented it to the FBI, so it didn't matter if those who bought it did or not. I'm not aware anyone knows any part of it to be false. Neither Steele nor the DNC can obtain a FISA warrant, only law enforcement can.
Quote:
The FISA court was fraudulently presented with DNC/Hillary Campaign material in order to obtain a warrant so that many Democrat loyalists within the DC federal law enforcement structure (and CIA...) could spy on the Trump campaign, the Trump transition team, and the Trump administration.
You are very confused about how law enforcement works. Anyone can submit anything as evidence, and it is the job of law enforcement to evaluate it and take it from there.
Quote:
While your question is patronizing, in fact there was very little separation between the DNC and those in the law enforcement arena who were involved.
Of course, it's not that your guy is guilty, it's just that every human being in the world is in a conspiracy against him. That sounds really plausible. If I sound patronizing it's b/c I have to point out you are conflating law enforcement with a political party.
Quote:
You are presuming to know what Trump's motivations were, and you are ignoring many facts. He was seeking much more than just info on the Bidens' financial enrichment. Were Trump just seeking to gain personally, and had he set up a quid pro quo, and had he actually held back the money, and had the Ukrainians actually done what he asked, and had he then released the money it would indeed have been akin to your simile about stealing from the poor box. What really happened was quite different.
It was different, in that he got caught and couldn't follow through with it. That's how it relates to my example. His motives are as transparent as those of the guy taking money out of the poor box.
Quote:
But not so Joe Biden's quid pro quo, which by all appearances was related to protecting his son. A full investigation is required of the Bidens, and since it is part and parcel to the allegations against Trump then Congress should fully investigate all of it.
I don't doubt there are Democrats who would do exactly what you're accusing Joe Biden of, and I couldn't tell you if he's the kind who would do it or not. But the evidence says that isn't what happened, and that is what matters, and law enforcement has to work on evidence.
SpinyNorman is offline  
post #1612 of 2208 (permalink) Old 11-14-2019, 09:30 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,835
Re: whistleblower complaint against Trump

Here is also a good article about impeachment, what a high crime and misdemeanor means, etc:

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...hment-whitaker
Tasorundo is online now  
post #1613 of 2208 (permalink) Old 11-14-2019, 09:48 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: .
Posts: 1,574
Re: whistleblower complaint against Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thor View Post
Benghazi wasn't impeachment. False equivalence.
What difference does that make?
SpinyNorman is offline  
post #1614 of 2208 (permalink) Old 11-14-2019, 10:00 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: .
Posts: 1,574
Re: whistleblower complaint against Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thor View Post
If there was evidence of wrongdoing which POTUS was investigating then it is legitimate.
Thanks for clarifying, it sounded like you were saying POTUS's wishes were a sound basis for investigation. I think we would agree evidence is essential. I don't think POTUS should try to influence the investigation of US citizens, it creates conflict of interest.
Quote:
In a trial the defendant is allowed to present his side, and while this is a political procedure not a criminal procedure, it would stand to reason that POTUS should be able to present his justification for why he was asking for help investigating the several things he mentioned in his call.
Does this principle extend to other subjects of House investigations?
Quote:
Actually it was at least$1.8B. There is more, possible another $8B.
I believe you are right, I was looking at one particular grant and not all of them in aggregate.
SpinyNorman is offline  
post #1615 of 2208 (permalink) Old 11-14-2019, 10:12 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: .
Posts: 1,574
Re: whistleblower complaint against Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by Always Learning View Post
It is if you have never met or spoken directly with the defendant.
Hearsay simply means taking someone's word for what happened. If someone was listening to the call and heard him say something,
they can report what he said and they aren't engaging in hearsay.

SpinyNorman is offline  
post #1616 of 2208 (permalink) Old 11-14-2019, 11:37 PM
Member
 
VladDracul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Southeast USA
Posts: 3,749
Re: whistleblower complaint against Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thor View Post
Closed mind. Jump to prejudiced conclusions based on assumptions of bad intentions. Inability to consider alternate possibilities.
Don't worry Thor, Shifty Allen Schiff is going to produce conclusive evidence of Trump's high crimes concerning extortion and bribes that he now has on file in the same cabinet as conclusive evidence of Trump's Russian collusion.

"The facts have never mattered less than they do today. We're living in a time where the truth has been so diminished in value, even those at the top of government (and the media) are quite comfortable with the truth being whatever they can convince people to believe",
Raymond Reddington.
VladDracul is offline  
post #1617 of 2208 (permalink) Old 11-15-2019, 08:49 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 402
Re: whistleblower complaint against Trump

TPM article worth reading: https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/z...ything-changed

So, if the reporting is correct the scheme only failed because they got caught before the deal went off. IANAL, but I’m pretty sure attempted bribery is still a crime. As said before, the crime was the ask.
DownButNotOut is offline  
post #1618 of 2208 (permalink) Old 11-15-2019, 08:55 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 402
Re: whistleblower complaint against Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marduk View Post
Still no answer.

And now what Nixon did is OK with you?
Woah. Throttle down, M.

I was pointing out how loyal the GOP was to Nixon even at the last. Today’s GOP is far more polarized than in 1974. I doubt even something like the Nixon tapes would sway enough GOP in Congress to do the right thing.
DownButNotOut is offline  
post #1619 of 2208 (permalink) Old 11-15-2019, 09:08 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 402
Re: whistleblower complaint against Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpinyNorman View Post
Hearsay simply means taking someone's word for what happened. If someone was listening to the call and heard him say something,
they can report what he said and they aren't engaging in hearsay.
In other words:

“I heard Frank say that Sue said she stole the money.” Is Hearsay.

“I heard Sue say she stole the money” is direct witness testimony.
DownButNotOut is offline  
post #1620 of 2208 (permalink) Old 11-15-2019, 10:14 AM
Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Not in the USA
Posts: 929
Re: whistleblower complaint against Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by DownButNotOut View Post
In other words:

“I heard Frank say that Sue said she stole the money.” Is Hearsay.

“I heard Sue say she stole the money” is direct witness testimony.
Neither of those is evidence that Sue stole the money. The second is direct evidence that Sue said she did. The first is evidence that Frank said that Sue said she did.
Laurentium is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on Talk About Marriage, you must first register. Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

Important! Your username will be visible to the public next to anything you post and could show up in search engines like Google. If you are concerned about anonymity, PLEASE choose a username that will not be recognizable to anyone you know.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome