Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #5951  
Old 12-06-2019, 08:44 AM
Hamlet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Where the Wild Things Are
Posts: 14,669
I will be (and odds are looking like it will happen) furious if the House only goes forward with impeachment based on the Ukraine bribery/request to tamper with elections, and ignores the myriad of other impeachable offenses Trump has committed.

I completely understand the desire to keep impeachment simple and easy to understand, but I also think the more hearings you hold, the more evidence you present about this administrations' blatant corruption, the better chance you have to convince some Republican Senators to actually uphold their constitutional duties.

I want evidence of the obstruction of justice of the Mueller probe. I want witnesses to testify about tampering. I want each and every situtation where this conman made money off the Presidency (Saudi's, China's trademarks, $100 million taxpayer money he spends on himself, his fueling near his Scotland property). I want election officials describing his requests to interfere in our elections. I want campaign finance violations for paying off porn stars. I want evidence of the abuse and denial of due process in his immigration crackdown.

There should be a way to present all that evidence to the House without taking up months of hearings.

I get the desire to avoid allegations of "throwing everything against the wall", but the more evidence they present in public hearings about how corrupt this administration is, the better. If not only to convince the "party before country" crowd of Senators, but to make a record of the multiple crimes and other constitutional violations this administration has done.

I also want a pony.

Last edited by Hamlet; 12-06-2019 at 08:45 AM.
  #5952  
Old 12-06-2019, 08:47 AM
DesertDog is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Mesa, Ariz.
Posts: 6,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fair Rarity View Post
I think about this a lot. Not in regards to Ukraine specifically, but his crap in general all along. He's gotten away with EVERYTHING his entire life. How has he not faced any criminal charges or lost business licenses? He lies, he threatens, he pays his way out of things. To be held accountable after 7+ decades must actually, from his shriveled little brain's perspective, be stunning and hard to comprehend. It probably DOES feel like a witch hunt or he's being persecuted. Why should he get in trouble now for what he's done all along? Why aren't the things he normally does allowed now of all times?

He's not smart enough to realize that this time he has 300 million bosses and that he is more visible. Keeping his head down and just being a FOX news guest wouldn't have invited this level of scrutiny. And the options of crimes? They've expanded so he's doing more of them.
This, as I've said before, is why I don't want him dead. I want him in a prison cell for a long, long time contemplating* how he could have continued his life-long career as a (relatively) small-time grifter, squeezing a couple hundred grand out here, maybe a million there but then decided to run for President as a vanity project.

Even then he could have ridden that horse until shortly before the Republican convention, then withdrawn with a statement that it would have interfered with his business interests too much and the Deep State would have put his beloved family in danger. Then he could have gone the Trump Butt Hurt tour telling all his followers that they couldn't have the President they wanted because "they" interfered in the democratic process.

But no, he went all the way and now suddenly this fetid, gilded pile of his life is being scrutinized and every time another pitchfork is jammed in more vermin scurry away and the unbelievable stench makes everyone gag -- except those who breathe deep and say, "Smells like money!"

*Yes, I know Donny Two-scoops contemplating anything is a reach but it's my fantasy, dammit!

Last edited by DesertDog; 12-06-2019 at 08:48 AM.
  #5953  
Old 12-06-2019, 10:42 AM
Ann Hedonia's Avatar
Ann Hedonia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by DesertDog View Post
This, as I've said before, is why I don't want him dead. I want him in a prison cell for a long, long time contemplating* how he could have continued his life-long career as a (relatively) small-time grifter, squeezing a couple hundred grand out here, maybe a million there but then decided to run for President as a vanity project.

Even then he could have ridden that horse until shortly before the Republican convention, then withdrawn with a statement that it would have interfered with his business interests too much and the Deep State would have put his beloved family in danger. Then he could have gone the Trump Butt Hurt tour telling all his followers that they couldn't have the President they wanted because "they" interfered in the democratic process.

But no, he went all the way and now suddenly this fetid, gilded pile of his life is being scrutinized and every time another pitchfork is jammed in more vermin scurry away and the unbelievable stench makes everyone gag -- except those who breathe deep and say, "Smells like money!"

*Yes, I know Donny Two-scoops contemplating anything is a reach but it's my fantasy, dammit!
Iíve said this before, but once he got settled in, Trump would absolutely LOVE prison. Iíve read a lot about what prison was like Jordan Belfort ( The Wolf of Wall Street ) and Bernie Madoff, and I imagine Trumpís experience would be something like that on steroids.

Trump would literally be treated like a king. Heís the Ultimate Criminal of Criminals, the King Pin of the World, crimewise. And he never showed a lick of remorse. The other inmates at federal prison would worship at his feet. They would wait on him hand and foot. If the prison tried to make him do some actual work, there would be a line of people begging for the honor of doing it for him. The inmates would fight over who got to do his laundry.

No shit, Trump would LOVE prison.
  #5954  
Old 12-06-2019, 11:08 AM
ThelmaLou's Avatar
ThelmaLou is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 17,109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ann Hedonia View Post
Iíve said this before, but once he got settled in, Trump would absolutely LOVE prison. Iíve read a lot about what prison was like Jordan Belfort ( The Wolf of Wall Street ) and Bernie Madoff, and I imagine Trumpís experience would be something like that on steroids.

Trump would literally be treated like a king. Heís the Ultimate Criminal of Criminals, the King Pin of the World, crimewise. And he never showed a lick of remorse. The other inmates at federal prison would worship at his feet. They would wait on him hand and foot. If the prison tried to make him do some actual work, there would be a line of people begging for the honor of doing it for him. The inmates would fight over who got to do his laundry.

No shit, Trump would LOVE prison.
Well, let's make his dream come true! Now!
  #5955  
Old 12-06-2019, 12:01 PM
JKellyMap's Avatar
JKellyMap is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 9,968
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThelmaLou View Post
Well, let's make his dream come true! Now!
Itís generally known that Obama HATES prison.
  #5956  
Old 12-06-2019, 12:17 PM
Bijou Drains is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 10,253
I can believe if Trump really feared going to prison he would head to Russia or some other place where they won't send him back .
  #5957  
Old 12-06-2019, 12:28 PM
Defensive Indifference is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 7,444
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bijou Drains View Post
I can believe if Trump really feared going to prison he would head to Russia or some other place where they won't send him back .
I think it would be hilarious if he tried that and every other country said, "Nope, we don't want you." Putin could say, "We're done with you. Enjoy the Crowbar Hotel".

I know, I know, Russia would probably take him just to piss off the US. But I can dream, can't I?
  #5958  
Old 12-06-2019, 12:36 PM
elucidator is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Further
Posts: 60,368
There's a wrinkle here worth exploring. A reason why it might be best to let the case simmer rather than boil.

The best of the Ukraine approach is that it is so provable. The downside is that it is not as dramatic, the ordinary citizen is not impressed. We pretty much know about Citizen Trump's financial chicanery, how a property is valued just below the Taj Mahal when applying for a loan, and is worth a pack of gum for tax purposes. These lines of inquiry are slow, there's a lot of shit still working its way through the courts.

So....what if the impeachment inquiry is kept open and then the extent of his fiscal corruption becomes clear? So clear the Trump becomes toxic, the Senate shield dissipates. A situation arises wherein Il Douche would be convicted. Now, for questions of tax fraud, etc., a lot of courtly meandering could be expected, so that an impeachment attempt would be forestalled well into next year.

The only thing that is going to shake and frighten the Pubbie Senators is the prospect of a cessation of incumbency, the bums get thrown out. If such investigations render him so unpopular that defending him is a threat to their sacred asses.....they might bail, they might be willing, however reluctantly, to convict on the "lesser" charge. To git while the gitting is still good.

The tactic then would be to allow the Republicans to slow the process to a crawl and allow this factor to ripen and bloom. The best tactic might be to move ahead with all deliberate speed, as in slow and steady. Keep all options open. Just let the Republican Senators know that the parachutes are ready and waiting.
__________________
Law above fear, justice above law, mercy above justice, love above all.

Last edited by elucidator; 12-06-2019 at 12:38 PM.
  #5959  
Old 12-06-2019, 02:21 PM
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 6,538
Quote:
Originally Posted by elucidator View Post
There's a wrinkle here worth exploring. A reason why it might be best to let the case simmer rather than boil.

The best of the Ukraine approach is that it is so provable. The downside is that it is not as dramatic, the ordinary citizen is not impressed. We pretty much know about Citizen Trump's financial chicanery, how a property is valued just below the Taj Mahal when applying for a loan, and is worth a pack of gum for tax purposes. These lines of inquiry are slow, there's a lot of shit still working its way through the courts.

So....what if the impeachment inquiry is kept open and then the extent of his fiscal corruption becomes clear? So clear the Trump becomes toxic, the Senate shield dissipates. A situation arises wherein Il Douche would be convicted. Now, for questions of tax fraud, etc., a lot of courtly meandering could be expected, so that an impeachment attempt would be forestalled well into next year.

The only thing that is going to shake and frighten the Pubbie Senators is the prospect of a cessation of incumbency, the bums get thrown out. If such investigations render him so unpopular that defending him is a threat to their sacred asses.....they might bail, they might be willing, however reluctantly, to convict on the "lesser" charge. To git while the gitting is still good.

The tactic then would be to allow the Republicans to slow the process to a crawl and allow this factor to ripen and bloom. The best tactic might be to move ahead with all deliberate speed, as in slow and steady. Keep all options open. Just let the Republican Senators know that the parachutes are ready and waiting.
You are getting at something here: The Rs have a problem with truth, and their ethical behaviors. It looks like a monumental vulnerability to me. The point going forward is not to wish for better outcomes and lament they won't cooperate, but to damage them as much as you can using as many tools as are available.

We have to ask ourselves what would they do with our vulnerability if they got ahold of it?
  #5960  
Old 12-06-2019, 02:55 PM
Mr. Duality is offline
Luminary
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: The High Plains
Posts: 1,592
It should be timed so as to peak right before the election, as I've been saying ever since it began.
__________________
America- Fuck yeah!
  #5961  
Old 12-06-2019, 03:21 PM
Akaj's Avatar
Akaj is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: In the vanishing middle
Posts: 908
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ann Hedonia View Post
Iíve said this before, but once he got settled in, Trump would absolutely LOVE prison. Iíve read a lot about what prison was like Jordan Belfort ( The Wolf of Wall Street ) and Bernie Madoff, and I imagine Trumpís experience would be something like that on steroids.

Trump would literally be treated like a king. Heís the Ultimate Criminal of Criminals, the King Pin of the World, crimewise. And he never showed a lick of remorse. The other inmates at federal prison would worship at his feet. They would wait on him hand and foot. If the prison tried to make him do some actual work, there would be a line of people begging for the honor of doing it for him. The inmates would fight over who got to do his laundry.

No shit, Trump would LOVE prison.
Trump isn't afraid of prison. Haven't you ever seen a mob movie? He's afraid of what Putin's thugs will do to him and/or his family if it looks like he's heading to prison, because they know he's spineless enough to rat them out.
__________________
I'm not expecting any surprises.
  #5962  
Old 12-06-2019, 03:32 PM
jsc1953 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 10,841
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Duality View Post
It should be timed so as to peak right before the election, as I've been saying ever since it began.
There is something to this approach. Assuming Trump doesn't get caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy (as the saying goes), he'll escape conviction by the Senate.

So the second-best outcome is to make him and his congressional supporters so toxic, that November 2020 is a Republican bloodbath. It seems like the best way to do that is to drag out the hearings for another 6-8 months, and pile on more and more charges before they ever go to trial (if at all).
  #5963  
Old 12-06-2019, 04:17 PM
Akaj's Avatar
Akaj is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: In the vanishing middle
Posts: 908
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsc1953 View Post
There is something to this approach. Assuming Trump doesn't get caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy (as the saying goes), he'll escape conviction by the Senate.

So the second-best outcome is to make him and his congressional supporters so toxic, that November 2020 is a Republican bloodbath. It seems like the best way to do that is to drag out the hearings for another 6-8 months, and pile on more and more charges before they ever go to trial (if at all).
I've also advocated for this strategy, but the objection makes a lot of sense: a prolonged inquiry with multiple accusations eventually just becomes background noise, and actually plays into the GOP narrative that Dems care more about smearing Trump than offering any ideas of their own.

So, unless something truly nasty arises, we're screwed either way.
__________________
I'm not expecting any surprises.
  #5964  
Old 12-06-2019, 04:55 PM
Bijou Drains is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 10,253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ann Hedonia View Post
Iíve said this before, but once he got settled in, Trump would absolutely LOVE prison. Iíve read a lot about what prison was like Jordan Belfort ( The Wolf of Wall Street ) and Bernie Madoff, and I imagine Trumpís experience would be something like that on steroids.

Trump would literally be treated like a king. Heís the Ultimate Criminal of Criminals, the King Pin of the World, crimewise. And he never showed a lick of remorse. The other inmates at federal prison would worship at his feet. They would wait on him hand and foot. If the prison tried to make him do some actual work, there would be a line of people begging for the honor of doing it for him. The inmates would fight over who got to do his laundry.

No shit, Trump would LOVE prison.
Madoff got beat up in prison so it's not all fun for him. He knows he will die there unless he gets pardoned or his sentence commuted. Also remember Trump may to go a NY state prison instead of a federal lockup.
  #5965  
Old 12-06-2019, 06:00 PM
MulderMuffin is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Buckle of the bible belt
Posts: 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by elucidator View Post
There's a wrinkle here worth exploring. A reason why it might be best to let the case simmer rather than boil.

The best of the Ukraine approach is that it is so provable. The downside is that it is not as dramatic, the ordinary citizen is not impressed. We pretty much know about Citizen Trump's financial chicanery, how a property is valued just below the Taj Mahal when applying for a loan, and is worth a pack of gum for tax purposes. These lines of inquiry are slow, there's a lot of shit still working its way through the courts.

So....what if the impeachment inquiry is kept open and then the extent of his fiscal corruption becomes clear? So clear the Trump becomes toxic, the Senate shield dissipates. A situation arises wherein Il Douche would be convicted. Now, for questions of tax fraud, etc., a lot of courtly meandering could be expected, so that an impeachment attempt would be forestalled well into next year.

The only thing that is going to shake and frighten the Pubbie Senators is the prospect of a cessation of incumbency, the bums get thrown out. If such investigations render him so unpopular that defending him is a threat to their sacred asses.....they might bail, they might be willing, however reluctantly, to convict on the "lesser" charge. To git while the gitting is still good.

The tactic then would be to allow the Republicans to slow the process to a crawl and allow this factor to ripen and bloom. The best tactic might be to move ahead with all deliberate speed, as in slow and steady. Keep all options open. Just let the Republican Senators know that the parachutes are ready and waiting.


This would defeat the purpose of at least trying to make sure that Trump isn't around come the 2020 election to continue meddling in it. I don't believe anymore that anything will make the Republicans admit out loud how badly he has suborned the office of the President. Right now they're complaining the House is moving to fast, and if becomes more deliberate they will complain that the House is dragging its collective feet. It doesn't matter, whatever is said or however it is accomplished, it will have been done wrong in their eyes because the point is not whether or not he's guilty. It beggars belief that they don't know that he is. It's throwing as many spanners into the works as they can because they have decided as a group that it doesn't even matter, and they plan to have his back no matter what.

We know about Russia, though there can be some debate about whether the interference from Russia was sought or merely accepted; there's little doubt that it occurred. We've learned about Ukraine, with only specious doubts from Republican ostriches that interference was sought and would have been eagerly accepted if Ukraine had caved to his pressure campaign. I have strong suspicions that there are more plots and schemes rolling around in the background that we know nothing about as of yet.

North Korea? They have a robust hacking underground, as does China. Russia isn't definitely out of the picture. The point is, Trump has been credibly accused twice of involvement in varying degrees with foreign countries helping him by meddling in our elections (one willingly, one under duress). Aside from the fact that he's a detestable human being and a waste of good oxygen, aside from his politics and policies, his actions show him to be a real danger to the democracy of the United States.

I don't foresee a future where there are enough votes to remove him from office in the Senate, either with the evidence we have now or with anything that might come out if the House keeps investigating. The sad fact is that the people who can be convinced have been convinced. If what has already been uncovered hasn't moved the needle, and for many it hasn't, then I don't see what might change their minds.

There is one way that waiting and keeping the investigation in the House until closer to the election would be beneficial: as soon as the Senate doesn't convict, Trump will be crowing about being completely exonerated just like he did after the Mueller report came out. Gah! Minimizing that as much as possible would be good.

Though this is a good point:
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsc1953 View Post
There is something to this approach. Assuming Trump doesn't get caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy (as the saying goes), he'll escape conviction by the Senate.

So the second-best outcome is to make him and his congressional supporters so toxic, that November 2020 is a Republican bloodbath. It seems like the best way to do that is to drag out the hearings for another 6-8 months, and pile on more and more charges before they ever go to trial (if at all).

Last edited by MulderMuffin; 12-06-2019 at 06:02 PM.
  #5966  
Old 12-06-2019, 06:32 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 7,453
Quote:
Originally Posted by Akaj View Post
I've also advocated for this strategy, but the objection makes a lot of sense: a prolonged inquiry with multiple accusations eventually just becomes background noise, and actually plays into the GOP narrative that Dems care more about smearing Trump than offering any ideas of their own.

So, unless something truly nasty arises, we're screwed either way.
Like you, I'm on record as saying impeachment should be carried over until next November. But I've reconsidered in view of the certainty that Republicans will crow about 'Democrats are obsessed' to the many voters who rate the impeachment issue as being of low importance.

John Dean said something yesterday on CNN that I can't (yet) find online: he said that the House could indeed vote on the articles of impeachment in the next few weeks----but then hold off on sending them to the Senate. Hold off for as many months as seems effective to them. And there would be nothing that Mitch McConnell could do about it---nothing at all.

That would withhold from Trump his Acquittal/Exoneration/Full-Declaration-of-Innocence.

Which has a certain appeal.
  #5967  
Old 12-06-2019, 06:36 PM
Dinsdale is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 19,129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamlet View Post
I will be (and odds are looking like it will happen) furious if the House only goes forward with impeachment based on the Ukraine bribery/request to tamper with elections, and ignores the myriad of other impeachable offenses Trump has committed.

...
Yeah - so long as there is NO CHANCE of the Senate convicting lacking anything short of a televised murder by Trump, I'd like the House to set out as much damning evidence and as many charges as possible.

I also don't understand the timing. Why a rush to impeach before the end of the year? How has that been calculated to have the greatest impact? Is the Dems' goal removal from office, or preoccupying Trump as much as possible while maximizing the potential for electoral gains next year? IMO, the first is a nonstarter...
__________________
I used to be disgusted.
Now I try to be amused.
  #5968  
Old 12-06-2019, 07:04 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,507
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dinsdale View Post
Yeah - so long as there is NO CHANCE of the Senate convicting lacking anything short of a televised murder by Trump, I'd like the House to set out as much damning evidence and as many charges as possible.

I also don't understand the timing. Why a rush to impeach before the end of the year? How has that been calculated to have the greatest impact? Is the Dems' goal removal from office, or preoccupying Trump as much as possible while maximizing the potential for electoral gains next year? IMO, the first is a nonstarter...
Obviously no one knows for sure, but I have some notions.

Despite Trump Republicans pushing a narrative to the contrary, people are paying attention to this impeachment process. They are uneasy. They are worried. I think Pelosi's calculation is to have this all wrapped up with a big red bow in time for the holiday recess -- when Congress must go back to their home states/districts and face the voters.

I know MoveOn and Indivisible are (rightly) spinning up public demonstrations in support of impeachment during the holiday recess for those who want a way to express their agreement. I suggest this may be one of the most effective times in history to share a bit of holiday camaraderie with friends and family to express the Will of the People. Public pressure has never been more important, in my view. Representatives/Senators do respond to it.

As for the rest of the year in the run-up to the election, Trump is going to be plenty busy with what Dems and others have already sought. Those court rulings are beginning to come home to roost, and the investigations will be ongoing, irrespective of what happens with this impeachment effort. If the Senate fails to remove Trump from office, it's very likely House Dems will get his tax returns as well as those Deutsche Bank/Mazars records -- and Cy Vance's New York City Office, will, too. SDNY's cases against Lev and Igor will proceed and Rudy is almost assuredly going to get scooped up. Will Rudy go to prison to protect The Donald?

By next November, anyone paying even minimal attention should grasp that Trump is a crook and a traitor to his oath of office and the nation. Let's just hope we can protect the integrity of our elections till then.
  #5969  
Old 12-07-2019, 01:33 AM
PatrickLondon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: London
Posts: 3,761
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defensive Indifference View Post
I think it would be hilarious if he tried that and every other country said, "Nope, we don't want you." Putin could say, "We're done with you. Enjoy the Crowbar Hotel".
Perhaps his on-off man-crush (blubber-crush?) Kim Jong-Un might take him in.
  #5970  
Old 12-07-2019, 07:31 AM
Dinsdale is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 19,129
Decent analysis, Aspen. Makes more sense than anything I was able to come up w/.
__________________
I used to be disgusted.
Now I try to be amused.
  #5971  
Old 12-07-2019, 07:51 AM
MulderMuffin is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Buckle of the bible belt
Posts: 117
CNN: Supreme Court puts temporary hold on House subpoenas to banks for Trump's financial documents.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/06/polit...ena/index.html

Ruth Bader Ginsburg temporarily blocked subpoenas for Trump's financials until December 13th.

Quote:
In the latest petition, lawyers for Trump argue that the Supreme Court should treat him differently from ordinary plaintiffs and agree to the emergency petition because he is entitled to the "high degree of respect due the President of the United States."
emphasis mine

In America, where we're all equal, but some people are more equal than others.
  #5972  
Old 12-07-2019, 09:16 AM
DesertDog is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Mesa, Ariz.
Posts: 6,060
Quote:
...because he is entitled to the "high degree of respect due the President of the United States."
I think I just threw up in my mouth a little. It should have been slapped down with a terse, "When he starts acting like a President, he will get the respect a President deserves."

Last edited by DesertDog; 12-07-2019 at 09:17 AM.
  #5973  
Old 12-07-2019, 10:33 AM
elucidator is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Further
Posts: 60,368
That's kinda the point. That's why comparisons with a criminal trial are specious, because the condition of being President is a high honor and privilege. It is not a question of whether or not the President deserves the rights and protections afforded a common criminal, but whether or not the President deserves the enhanced state of honor and privilege an election affords him. Impeachment isn't about whether or not he is a criminal, but whether or not he can be trusted with the position. I assert that he does not "with the calm confidence of a Methodist with four aces".

People change, often in an avalanche. All too often, the alpha lemming screams "Follow me!" and we do. But sometimes it changes the other way. Like when a futile and expensive war becomes too unpopular to defend with patriotic anthems and flags waving.

He's getting a lot more pushback. High military men resent his bullying. A Governor refuses his demand for a Senate seat. Romney dips his toe into resistance as delicately as one might dip a toe into a pond full of snap-turtles. Is Romney suddenly wildly unpopular in Utah?

Going slow to gather more ammunition is sensible, especially if the alternative option is glorious but certain failure. Bonus, it can be sold as a calm and measured respect for the majesty of the office. If nothing else, we encourage resistance to his more ham-fisted stupidities.

Am I optimistic? No. Am I giving up? Oh, Hell, no!
  #5974  
Old 12-07-2019, 02:29 PM
str8cashhomie is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 155
I think it makes sense to keep the impeachment limited, wrap it up this or next month and just stick to obstruction and the Ukraine extortion in the articles of impeachment, rather than other shady, unethical things they can pin on Trump.

Dragging it out forever is essentially the way the GOP handled Benghazi, and IMO trying to use that same blueprint would be a mistake because Trump has a very different public perception to Hillary or Obama, and because in Benghazi there was no actual smoking gun, so getting lost in the noise didn't really matter.

If they wrap up the hearings now, the only testimony came a handful of policy/legal experts and people who are direct witnesses to Trump's crime. The longer they drag it out, the more they have to find some reason to bring forward random witnesses who aren't as clearly connected to the scandal.

Just having more hearings about tangentially related things worked for Benghazi because the best they could do is muddy the waters. In this case, you have Trump who is already highly distrusted by most of the public, and have more to gain by trying to hammer home a few points and make them stick.
  #5975  
Old 12-07-2019, 07:53 PM
dropzone's Avatar
dropzone is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Bedlam
Posts: 30,334
I'm going to blow the impeachment case wide open! Has nobody else noticed that during her press conference Nancy Pelosi was standing in front of a line of flags with gold fringe? The Admiralty has no standing in the US Congress, especially since we don't have an Admiralty, so the Dems can't go forward with it!
  #5976  
Old 12-07-2019, 08:23 PM
MaxTheVool is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Posts: 11,968
Quote:
Originally Posted by DesertDog View Post
Quote:
...because he is entitled to the "high degree of respect due the President of the United States."
I think I just threw up in my mouth a little. It should have been slapped down with a terse, "When he starts acting like a President, he will get the respect a President deserves."
There's an important difference between "this case involves the president... so we're going to be extra careful to make sure we do everything exactly right, take our time, make sure all the i's are dotted and the t's are crossed" vs "this case involves the president, so he has extra rights and any close decision will go in his favor". Hopefully, if any court treats cases involving Trump specially, they will do so in the former fashion.
__________________
This post is merely corroborative detail, intended to add artistic verisimilitude to an otherwise bald and unconvincing narrative
  #5977  
Old 12-07-2019, 11:48 PM
kenobi 65's Avatar
kenobi 65 is offline
Corellian Nerfherder
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brookfield, IL
Posts: 16,645
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dinsdale View Post
I also don't understand the timing. Why a rush to impeach before the end of the year? How has that been calculated to have the greatest impact? Is the Dems' goal removal from office, or preoccupying Trump as much as possible while maximizing the potential for electoral gains next year? IMO, the first is a nonstarter...
I believe that at least part of the Democratic goal behind the timing is to get the proceedings done before the primaries begin in earnest. I think that part of this is to allow the Democratic candidates to actually be able to have some press coverage, given how much the news is currently dominated by the impeachment proceedings, as well as to make sure that the Senators who are running for the nomination aren't stuck in Washington for the trial during the height of the primaries.
  #5978  
Old 12-08-2019, 01:16 AM
elucidator is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Further
Posts: 60,368
I have seen the Dems to have any number of reliable characteristics. Often, I have wished that "crafty" and "cunning" might be among them. Alas.
  #5979  
Old 12-08-2019, 07:38 AM
John_Stamos'_Left_Ear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,912
Quote:
Originally Posted by str8cashhomie View Post
I think it makes sense to keep the impeachment limited, wrap it up this or next month and just stick to obstruction and the Ukraine extortion in the articles of impeachment, rather than other shady, unethical things they can pin on Trump.



Dragging it out forever is essentially the way the GOP handled Benghazi, and IMO trying to use that same blueprint would be a mistake because Trump has a very different public perception to Hillary or Obama, and because in Benghazi there was no actual smoking gun, so getting lost in the noise didn't really matter.



If they wrap up the hearings now, the only testimony came a handful of policy/legal experts and people who are direct witnesses to Trump's crime. The longer they drag it out, the more they have to find some reason to bring forward random witnesses who aren't as clearly connected to the scandal.



Just having more hearings about tangentially related things worked for Benghazi because the best they could do is muddy the waters. In this case, you have Trump who is already highly distrusted by most of the public, and have more to gain by trying to hammer home a few points and make them stick.
Your analogy is wrong which is why your analysis is wrong. If the Democrats did nothing but speak about Ukraine, Ukraine, Ukraine and drag that on for months and years, then it would be Benghazi.

This is the opposite of that. This is finding new avenues of corruption, incompetence, High crimes and misdemeanors. This is taking to the Senate an ironclad case. This is making it so if Senate Republicans continue to ignore this information, the Fallout for Trump and Republicans on the national stage will be heard in the voting booths and in the streets.

Republicans kept going back to Benghazi because that's all they had. When Trump's Financial records come out, there's going to be a lot more then just Ukraine and it would be stupid of Democrats to rush through this process and ignore other avenues.

Think about it. Who are the people who want to rush this through? Donald Trump. Mitch McConnell. Republicans in the Senate.

If I'm watching the sporting event and my team has a decision to make, I almost never want them to make the decision that the other team prefers.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Last edited by John_Stamos'_Left_Ear; 12-08-2019 at 07:42 AM.
  #5980  
Old 12-08-2019, 09:38 AM
MulderMuffin is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Buckle of the bible belt
Posts: 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by dropzone View Post
I'm going to blow the impeachment case wide open! Has nobody else noticed that during her press conference Nancy Pelosi was standing in front of a line of flags with gold fringe? The Admiralty has no standing in the US Congress, especially since we don't have an Admiralty, so the Dems can't go forward with it!
This made me chuckle. Quite a few times I've watched the president bluster about his "executive privilege" and "presidential immunity" means that Congress has no power over him and been reminded of sovereign citizens raging about how the US government has no power over them.
  #5981  
Old 12-08-2019, 10:17 AM
elucidator is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Further
Posts: 60,368
The white man's version of the Ghost Dance.
  #5982  
Old 12-08-2019, 10:37 AM
elucidator is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Further
Posts: 60,368
OK, so there's the prospect of uncovering some more crap, tax avoidance, shit like that.

Won't matter, I hear the cry. They are absitively posolutely committed to complete and utter vindication and acquittal. 'Course, that gets somewhat harder as the evidence piles up. (I'm assuming it will, the possibility that there isn't any ranks about the same level as my really being the Queen of Romania....)

So, what if some moderate menshevik Dem offers "censure" instead, a Congressional "tut-tut" and "tsk-tsk". Cat meets pigeons. Il Douche is not thrown out of office, but is firmly scolded. A bit of political judo. Will the Forces of Darkness remain utterly solid in their rejection of this repulsively moderate action? The pro-censure side could say, Hey! This works, gets the shit off the screen, over and done, time to move on.

The absolute Trumpiviks will reject it out of hand, natch. Nothing less but total purity and exoneration will do for them. Even more crunchy goodness if the Dems promise to line up behind a motion of censure and drop impeachment if enough Pubbies openly declare their support, enough to ensure passage. Might need quite a few, some of our guys in the Sane Caucus are pretty pissed off...

Confusion to our enemies, as the old toast has it.... Not the best civics, being crafty, cunning and insincere. I'll get over it.
  #5983  
Old 12-08-2019, 11:12 AM
Johnny L.A. is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: NoWA
Posts: 62,168
Quote:
Originally Posted by elucidator View Post
The absolute Trumpiviks will reject it out of hand, natch. Nothing less but total purity and exoneration will do for them.
The absolute Trumpniks will see censure as total exoneration. 'See? See? They couldn't prove The Messiah did anything wrong! That's why they gave up trying to get Him out of office! They couldn't do anything, so they just scolded Him for things He didn't do! TOTAL EXONERATION!'
  #5984  
Old 12-08-2019, 12:15 PM
John_Stamos'_Left_Ear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,912
Quote:
Originally Posted by elucidator View Post
OK, so there's the prospect of uncovering some more crap, tax avoidance, shit like that.



Won't matter, I hear the cry. They are absitively posolutely committed to complete and utter vindication and acquittal. 'Course, that gets somewhat harder as the evidence piles up. (I'm assuming it will, the possibility that there isn't any ranks about the same level as my really being the Queen of Romania....)



So, what if some moderate menshevik Dem offers "censure" instead, a Congressional "tut-tut" and "tsk-tsk". Cat meets pigeons. Il Douche is not thrown out of office, but is firmly scolded. A bit of political judo. Will the Forces of Darkness remain utterly solid in their rejection of this repulsively moderate action? The pro-censure side could say, Hey! This works, gets the shit off the screen, over and done, time to move on.



The absolute Trumpiviks will reject it out of hand, natch. Nothing less but total purity and exoneration will do for them. Even more crunchy goodness if the Dems promise to line up behind a motion of censure and drop impeachment if enough Pubbies openly declare their support, enough to ensure passage. Might need quite a few, some of our guys in the Sane Caucus are pretty pissed off...



Confusion to our enemies, as the old toast has it.... Not the best civics, being crafty, cunning and insincere. I'll get over it.
The idea is that with the information they get, there's a chance that it will all come out that Ukraine is just one part of Trump owned by the Russians and completely compromised. The actions of more than a few Republican Senators make it very possible that they are Domino's that will fall as well.

That's a lot bigger than simple tax evasion or the like.

Also, nobody should care what Trump supporters feel about this or anything. If we listened to that Minority, there would be no impeachment hearings. And Donald Trump would be made King. Pandering to that group of people who will never be swayed no matter what is a Fool's errand.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
  #5985  
Old 12-08-2019, 12:51 PM
elucidator is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Further
Posts: 60,368
Quote:
Originally Posted by John_Stamos'_Left_Ear View Post
....Pandering to that group of people who will never be swayed no matter what is a Fool's errand....
Actually, the plan pretty much depends upon them. Sensible ones will be tempted, even eager, to accept such a plan precisely because they would fully intend to present censure as exoneration.

The truly deep-dish batshit pizza Trumpists will not, of course, just as you say. Even the hint of disapproval carried in the word "censure" will set them off.

I accept that this is not in the finest traditions of civic virtue. If this sets the Republican Senators into internecine rage and fury, I will be repentant. I stand ready.
  #5986  
Old 12-08-2019, 02:52 PM
sfriver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: The IL Corn Desert
Posts: 19
Why doesn't Biden just let them investigate if there's nothing to hide? Back when Clinton was president we signed a special treaty with Ukraine to allow investigations for this exact thing.

Biden is just using his 'presidential run' to protect himself from investigation. The investigation into Hunter Biden had started before he announced his candidacy. Joe's not even in the top 5 democratic hopefuls.
  #5987  
Old 12-08-2019, 03:37 PM
bobot's Avatar
bobot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago-ish
Posts: 9,549
Investigate what? What allegation?
This is like when Republicans got the chance to finally repeal and replace the ACA. When the time came they were like: Huh? Now? What?
(ETA: and let WHO investigate? Ukraine? Jay-sus already.
(ETA ETA: And about this: Have Biden "let them" investigate? Biden is stopping "them" Jay-sus Jay-sus already already.)

Last edited by bobot; 12-08-2019 at 03:42 PM.
  #5988  
Old 12-08-2019, 03:43 PM
str8cashhomie is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by John_Stamos'_Left_Ear View Post
Your analogy is wrong which is why your analysis is wrong. If the Democrats did nothing but speak about Ukraine, Ukraine, Ukraine and drag that on for months and years, then it would be Benghazi.

This is the opposite of that. This is finding new avenues of corruption, incompetence, High crimes and misdemeanors. This is taking to the Senate an ironclad case. This is making it so if Senate Republicans continue to ignore this information, the Fallout for Trump and Republicans on the national stage will be heard in the voting booths and in the streets.

Republicans kept going back to Benghazi because that's all they had. When Trump's Financial records come out, there's going to be a lot more then just Ukraine and it would be stupid of Democrats to rush through this process and ignore other avenues.
The GOP did use the Benghazi hearings to "investigate" the Clinton Foundation, Media Matters, the private email server and any other thing they could try to use to drag things out. It was a successful strategy because they had no individual thing they needed to hammer home to the public because nothing they were investigating was actually a crime, and because the main goal was just to sow doubt, not to actually convince most of the public that Clinton or Obama were criminals.

The Dems have the opportunity to convince some independent voters that Trump committed a crime. The witnesses they've called gave as crystal clear an explanation as we'll ever get that Trump directed a straightforward abuse of power. In a normal criminal trial in front of a jury, it would be all well and good to prove your most solid case, and then spend a bunch of time using other charges to reduce the chances of the defendant getting off. However in this case the goal is to get the distracted public to have the best chance possible of focusing on something simple enough for them to see Trump's wrongdoing. If the impeachment trial is also about Trump paying off Stormy Daniels, his knowledge of Russia's hack on the DNC in 2016, his extortion of other countries, etc., all of which are serious charges that would make a great case in a normal trial, the public will just get more confused. If the Dems put everything in their impeachment articles it just allows the GOP to muddle the issues together and the most of the public will think (as I think they already do) "something sure seems fishy but I don't know who to trust."

Additionally, court cases involving Trump's hiding of his tax returns and financial statements and other related matters will continue to go on regardless. I think the Dems definitely need a media strategy for late in the election to try to tie some of these things together at the end as well as a strategy to make it look as bad as possible for GOP senators who vote to acquit, but making the thing that a lot of people tune into on C-SPAN now needs to be as simple as possible for the public to grasp IMO.
  #5989  
Old 12-08-2019, 03:51 PM
John_Stamos'_Left_Ear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,912
Quote:
Originally Posted by str8cashhomie View Post
The GOP did use the Benghazi hearings to "investigate" the Clinton Foundation, Media Matters, the private email server and any other thing they could try to use to drag things out. It was a successful strategy because they had no individual thing they needed to hammer home to the public because nothing they were investigating was actually a crime, and because the main goal was just to sow doubt, not to actually convince most of the public that Clinton or Obama were criminals.



The Dems have the opportunity to convince some independent voters that Trump committed a crime. The witnesses they've called gave as crystal clear an explanation as we'll ever get that Trump directed a straightforward abuse of power. In a normal criminal trial in front of a jury, it would be all well and good to prove your most solid case, and then spend a bunch of time using other charges to reduce the chances of the defendant getting off. However in this case the goal is to get the distracted public to have the best chance possible of focusing on something simple enough for them to see Trump's wrongdoing. If the impeachment trial is also about Trump paying off Stormy Daniels, his knowledge of Russia's hack on the DNC in 2016, his extortion of other countries, etc., all of which are serious charges that would make a great case in a normal trial, the public will just get more confused. If the Dems put everything in their impeachment articles it just allows the GOP to muddle the issues together and the most of the public will think (as I think they already do) "something sure seems fishy but I don't know who to trust."



Additionally, court cases involving Trump's hiding of his tax returns and financial statements and other related matters will continue to go on regardless. I think the Dems definitely need a media strategy for late in the election to try to tie some of these things together at the end as well as a strategy to make it look as bad as possible for GOP senators who vote to acquit, but making the thing that a lot of people tune into on C-SPAN now needs to be as simple as possible for the public to grasp IMO.
None of that changes the fact that this is not at all remotely close to Benghazi what the Democrats are trying to do. Taking articles impeachment to the Senate that are not Ironclad, or at least as close to Ironclad as they can be, is foolish. They will not get a second chance. Do this right.

The only people who want to rush are Republicans and you. There's a reason for the Republicans wanting to rush things. Not so sure about you.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
  #5990  
Old 12-08-2019, 04:01 PM
str8cashhomie is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by John_Stamos'_Left_Ear View Post
None of that changes the fact that this is not at all remotely close to Benghazi what the Democrats are trying to do. Taking articles impeachment to the Senate that are not Ironclad, or at least as close to Ironclad as they can be, is foolish. They will not get a second chance. Do this right.

The only people who want to rush are Republicans and you. There's a reason for the Republicans wanting to rush things. Not so sure about you.
I don't actually know what the GOP wants the Dems to do. I think they've said that the Dems should make this quick, but obviously no one should believe them.

Making an expansive case maximizes chances of conviction in a normal trial, but when someone is basically being tried in front of the public in can just further muddy the waters and make the clear reality that Trump has committed extortion beyond a reasonable doubt unclear to voters with low information and a low attention span.
  #5991  
Old 12-08-2019, 04:03 PM
sfriver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: The IL Corn Desert
Posts: 19
Investigate possible kickbacks Biden and others have received from Ukraine.

Biden has taken $900,000 from Ukraine lobbyists. Is that no concern to you?

Im sure you have heard Biden tell the story of how he used a billion dollars in taxpayer aid to get a prosecutor fired. That would be fine if it were for American interests, but they seem like personal interests when it happens to be the prosecutor investigating his son's company in Ukraine.

There should be a joint investigation between the FBI and Ukraine federal police. That's beyond my understanding of the treaty, but you can't avoid the situation just because logistics of the investigation are difficult.

There are more politicians involved besides Biden.
  #5992  
Old 12-08-2019, 04:12 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,507
Quote:
Originally Posted by sfriver View Post
Investigate possible kickbacks Biden and others have received from Ukraine.

Biden has taken $900,000 from Ukraine lobbyists. Is that no concern to you?

Im sure you have heard Biden tell the story of how he used a billion dollars in taxpayer aid to get a prosecutor fired. That would be fine if it were for American interests, but they seem like personal interests when it happens to be the prosecutor investigating his son's company in Ukraine.

There should be a joint investigation between the FBI and Ukraine federal police. That's beyond my understanding of the treaty, but you can't avoid the situation just because logistics of the investigation are difficult.

There are more politicians involved besides Biden.
Your posts are so full of Russian/Fox "News" propaganda talking points, they'd be amusing if they weren't so sad. I'd personally be embarrassed to display such ignorance.

Educate yourself with this little primer. (Axios)
  #5993  
Old 12-08-2019, 04:38 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,483
Quote:
Originally Posted by sfriver View Post
Investigate possible kickbacks Biden and others have received from Ukraine.

Biden has taken $900,000 from Ukraine lobbyists. Is that no concern to you?
It's a concern for the FBI as Joe Biden is not immune from prosecution and anyone having evidence of such a crime should and probably will have already delivered that source material to the FBI to investigate.

At that point, the FBI would tell the person who brought them the information to be quiet about the matter.

If the FBI then determined that Joe was guilty, then they would arrest him.

At no point would any of this render Donald Trump innocent. Finding a different guilty person does not make you innocent. Trying to track down criminals, when you're not a professional and impartial investigator, is called vigilantism and it is a crime. Using political force to make a foreign party conjure up allegations and evidence of criminal activities by people who you hate is called extortion and that is a crime. When you extort someone into "generating evidence" it is fair to say that the evidence is not trustworthy. You have just made the job of an actual, professional investigator more difficult by convincing a nation state to manufacture possibly false information - these are people who can make fake passports and stuff. And if your chosen method of extortion is to withhold funds that your job description says you had to give to that foreign person, and you choose not to do so because it wouldn't serve your personal interests, then that is the solicitation of a bribe - which is a crime.

And let's not forget that we currently have 5? 6? different people affiliated with fundraising for the Trump campaign and Trump Inauguration Fund who have been legitimately arrested by the FBI. That ain't no conspiracy theory. If you don't know their names then you might want to ask yourself if you're reading news sources that you can trust. The President regularly calls one guy who was arrested and convicted for taking Russian-backed Ukrainian money and who tried to launder it back into the United States. Does that not concern you that the President gives no flying fucks that he's taking advice from a convicted felon, in jail, who factually committed the crime that Trump is blaming his political opponent of committing? And you believe him when he tells you that he's really really concerned about stopping people from doing the same thing? Do you want to add in the people in Trump's circle who have been arrested for acting as foreign lobbyists as well?

Maybe Biden took money that he shouldn't have. I don't know. I leave that to the FBI.

Last edited by Sage Rat; 12-08-2019 at 04:39 PM.
  #5994  
Old 12-08-2019, 04:51 PM
Ludovic is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: America's Wing
Posts: 30,720
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
You have just made the job of an actual, professional investigator more difficult by convincing a nation state to manufacture possibly false information - these are people who can make fake passports and stuff.
Yeah, as it stands, if, on the extremely slim chance that law enforcement did announce that they were indicting Biden on something related to Ukraine, it would be extremely difficult to take their allegations seriously.
  #5995  
Old 12-08-2019, 05:25 PM
Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 27,495
Quote:
Originally Posted by sfriver View Post
Investigate possible kickbacks Biden and others have received from Ukraine.

Biden has taken $900,000 from Ukraine lobbyists. Is that no concern to you?

Im sure you have heard Biden tell the story of how he used a billion dollars in taxpayer aid to get a prosecutor fired. That would be fine if it were for American interests, but they seem like personal interests when it happens to be the prosecutor investigating his son's company in Ukraine.

There should be a joint investigation between the FBI and Ukraine federal police. That's beyond my understanding of the treaty, but you can't avoid the situation just because logistics of the investigation are difficult.

There are more politicians involved besides Biden.
How about we start the investigation with Rudy?

Oh wait, real U.S. Attorneys are already investigating his criminal acts with respect to Ukrainian mobsters.

Serious question: how long do you think it will be before Trump's personal lawyer is indicted?
  #5996  
Old 12-08-2019, 05:35 PM
sfriver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: The IL Corn Desert
Posts: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
Your posts are so full of Russian/Fox "News" propaganda talking points, they'd be amusing if they weren't so sad. I'd personally be embarrassed to display such ignorance.

Educate yourself with this little primer. (Axios)
Burisma paid Joe Biden $900,000 for lobbying Ė Ukrainian MP

Adam Schiff Implicated in Bursima Investigation

Mitt Romney's 2012 national security advisor on board of Bursima

I am only trying to get the facts. Your words are hollow and worthless if all you have is to call me sad and embarrassing without presenting anything besides bullying.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
It's a concern for the FBI as Joe Biden is not immune from prosecution and anyone having evidence of such a crime should and probably will have already delivered that source material to the FBI to investigate.
Trump, chief law enforcer of the U.S., has tried to get an investigation underway but the democrats all cry Trump is only targeting political opponents. Biden is using running for office to shield an investigation.
  #5997  
Old 12-08-2019, 05:51 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 36,517
Quote:
Originally Posted by sfriver View Post
Burisma paid Joe Biden $900,000 for lobbying – Ukrainian MP



Adam Schiff Implicated in Bursima Investigation



Mitt Romney's 2012 national security advisor on board of Bursima



I am only trying to get the facts. Your words are hollow and worthless if all you have is to call me sad and embarrassing without presenting anything besides bullying.







Trump, chief law enforcer of the U.S., has tried to get an investigation underway but the democrats all cry Trump is only targeting political opponents. Biden is using running for office to shield an investigation.
If Trump was truly concerned that Biden might have broken the law, he would have referred any evidence to US law enforcement officials. He didn't - he asked another country to do it. That's because he had no evidence and is only worried about politics. If he had evidence, he'd present it, and law enforcement would be investigating.
__________________
My new novel Spindown
  #5998  
Old 12-08-2019, 06:12 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,507
Quote:
Originally Posted by sfriver View Post
Burisma paid Joe Biden $900,000 for lobbying Ė Ukrainian MP

Adam Schiff Implicated in Bursima Investigation

Mitt Romney's 2012 national security advisor on board of Bursima

I am only trying to get the facts. Your words are hollow and worthless if all you have is to call me sad and embarrassing without presenting anything besides bullying.



Trump, chief law enforcer of the U.S., has tried to get an investigation underway but the democrats all cry Trump is only targeting political opponents. Biden is using running for office to shield an investigation.
Sure thing, comrade.

Your first link is from Interfax. From Wikipedia:

Quote:
Interfax Ltd. (Russian: Интерфакс) is a privately-held independent major news agency in Russia (along with state-operated TASS and RIA Novosti) and information services company headquartered in Moscow.
Your second link, Investment Watch Blog, appears to be nothing but click bait.

Your third link, California Political News, operated by Stephen Frank, who hopes to be California's Republican party chair, caused my virus protection to warn me off it.

Real great news sources you got. I presented you with facts. You responded with garbage.
  #5999  
Old 12-08-2019, 06:14 PM
Moriarty's Avatar
Moriarty is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Posts: 3,129
Your first two cites come from Interfax, a Russian news source headquartered out of Moscow; literally Russian propaganda.

And your third link cites ď American ThinkerĒ, a right wing conspiracy blog.

Thereís a lot of stuff on the Internet. Itís not all reliable.

And, as has been pointed out, it is incredulous to believe that the US President had to go behind official law enforcement channels in order to investigate an American crime, instead needing to require ďquestionableĒ foreign governments to initiate an investigation to demonstrate ďthat they were sufficiently anti-corruptionĒ as a condition of receiving congressionally approved military funding while fighting against Russian invasion.
  #6000  
Old 12-08-2019, 06:15 PM
Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 27,495
Quote:
Originally Posted by sfriver View Post
Trump, chief law enforcer of the U.S., has tried to get an investigation underway ....
Wow! Did Trump hold up military aid until Ukraine started an investigation into his personal lawyer's business with the Ukrainian mob? Now that's front page news!
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:20 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017