One inherent difference is that, even if Biden did so something inappropriate, he wasn’t doing it as a method of discrediting a potential campaign opponent. It’s one thing to try to protect your family. It’s something else entirely to do it as a means of keeping yourself in office. Biden’s son wasn’t running for PotUS. It attacks the integrity of the voting process to have a foreign power attempt to sway the election in your favor.
I don’t think this is somehow disingenuous on HD’s part. If a president is convinced by evidence that former government officials committed crimes while dealing with a foreign power, and the foreign power attempted to cover it up, I think the president is perfectly within his power to withhold funds until demands for a fair investigation are met. The fact that the former government official happens to be a political rival is just coincidental.
Of course, that narrative hinges upon the president actually getting real intelligence that crimes were committed, and not just pizza-gate level nonsense fed to someone easily persuaded by conspiracy theories.
You should watch the video I linked above. The point is that you helped him change the subject by talking about what he wanted to talk about instead of the actual matter at hand. Jump to 3:12 to get right to the relevant part.
Ultimately - whatever people think Biden did is completely irrelevant to this issue. The issue here is that the President of the United States used our nations foreign policy not to advance the best interests of our country, but to advance his own personal best interests. Quite frankly, it’s astounding to me that this isn’t universally seen as a bad thing. I guess I should stop being so naive . . .
We’re shown, again and again, that millions of Americans value harming migrants, angering liberals, and other grievance-based values far, far more than “traditional” American values like patriotism, equality, common welfare, and even common decency.
Two things:
- What evidence?
- An investigation… by a foreign country?
Seriously??
If only we had a group that could investigate possible crimes committed by Americans. It’d probably need to be Federal so it could investigate Americans from any State. What to call this group? I don’t know - maybe Federal Group of Investigators, or FGI for short? I don’t know - the name needs work. But the idea is solid . . .
There’s a group like that in Grand Theft Auto V. They call it the F.I.B.
Thanks for the link, but I’m well aware of this practice. In any case, if *you *choose to let someone get away with something you know, or seriously believe, to be false, fine. I don’t like to do that. Hence my response. And why is HurricaneDitka being singled out? I just took a cursory glance at the first page. It took me all of 30 seconds to see numerous other posts not directly related to the OP. Finally, these threads always go off on tangents. Keeps 'em interesting.
I haven’t read most of the other responses, but I think it’s a big deal because I think it’s going to push Pelosi to reluctantly pull the trigger on impeachment. From what I was reading earlier, she is on the brink now, and the pressure is to the point I don’t think she can refrain. Whether it amounts to anything is another matter, but the Dems will finally pull the trigger on it (assuming what I’ve read is correct) and that IS a big deal. And why this is different than all the other shady stuff he’s done. Think of this more like a camel, and this is not a straw but as a cinder block and the back breaking is Pelosi pulling the trigger on impeachment proceedings.
Me, I think Trump has had his Nixon moment with this one. It might not seem like a big deal compared to all the other shady shit he and his administration has done, but it might be the final cinder block…
One story is consistent with the conclusion of pretty much every significant Western government that the Ukranian prosecutor was corruptly slow-walking or outright squelching investigations; the other is consistent with… well, a few partisan hacks who rant about the Deep State dumping chemtrails that turn their grass brown.
This.
On one side John Solomon wanted to give Sean Hannity a reason to invite him on his show so he made up a fairy tale about Ukraine. Rudy has been on this like a dog with a bone ever since. This story falls apart with even the slightest scrutiny and doesn’t even make sense if you believe everything they are claiming.
On the other side we have facts and reality.
The two sides are not remotely comparable in credibility.
Might want to go back and re-read the post you were quoting from.
Adam Schiff, 30 minutes ago:
[We have been informed by the whistleblower’s counsel that their client would like to speak to our committee and has requested guidance from the Acting DNI as to how to do so.
We‘re in touch with counsel and look forward to the whistleblower’s testimony as soon as this week.](https://twitter.com/RepAdamSchiff/status/1176564220407767042)
How likely is it that Trump issues some kind of phony baloney privilege, and the whistleblower dummies up?
Conversations are fluid. If you suspect there is a hijacking of a thread, report it rather than this type of actual hijacking.
[/moderating]
Jake Sherman, Politico:
“Hotlining” is bypassing usual Senate rules. Here’s a definition:
So:
- MoscowMitch is moving soon as to make sure the Repubs don’t break on this and he can get this voted down, or…
- MoscowMitch is beginning the dance of separation
Time will tell…
Looks like my question is answered – this was the straw (or cinderblock :)) that broke the camel’s back.
I guess it was the brazenness, the recency, and the obvious malfeasance that made it a winner for the House Democrats. Also, Barr didn’t have a chance to inoculate the public before the story blew up.
If I understand the implication of 1., MoscowMitch will hotline this so that another subhuman, er, Republican senator, can immediately object, thereby creating a delay so that the acting DNI director, Joseph Maguire, won’t have to worry about answering questions about it in his scheduled testimony on Thursday. Or am I off base?