# The Trump Impeachment Inquiry **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [September 24, 2019, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771 "2019-09-24T20:23:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 85
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1681 "2019-10-03T17:11:52Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Besides, what’s Rudy’s legitimate involvement in a legitimate investigation by a legitimate government he isn’t employed by? Presidential Consigliere. It’s a new cabinet position. ---
**Author:** ![drad\_dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1682 "2019-10-03T17:16:16Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > I think that’s reasonable, but it doesn’t advance conviction as a goal. Assuming conviction is the goal, taking that path means you would have to convince Republicans that the appearance of impropriety is itself impeachable. I don’t think that’s a winning strategy, because I myself disagree. > > ~Max Do you know the difference between “appearance of impropriety” and “impropriety”? The phone call was improper. There is no legit investigation into Biden that you can point to to explain your position. Biden has been cleared. This we can point to. That the pres has a justice dept and has to let them do their jobs without interference, well we can point to that too. What are you pointing at? That you, personally, have “no knowledge of impropriety”? You are only a population of one, and if we have already heard the impropriety wtih our own ears, your case suffers. You cannot listen to fox news and take it seriously though. We know that right? ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1683 "2019-10-03T17:18:00Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > There’s no reason to believe that there is any legitimate reason for an investigation into this issue. And that’s the message that I am saying Democrats should get out there. I can’t argue against it because I agree. > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > There’s no reason for you to carry this kind of water for the administration. The other member who normally represents Republicans is suspended. I can’t totally fill in because I think there’s no legitimate reason to investigate the Bidens. But I can present the standard Republican viewpoint, up to that point, supported by a USA Today poll linked on the previous page. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1684 "2019-10-03T17:20:21Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > And that’s the message that I am saying Democrats should get out there. I can’t argue against it because I agree. Their message appears to be working already – most Americans agree asking another country to try to harm one’s political rivals is wrong. > [@](#): > > The other member who normally represents Republicans is suspended. I can’t totally fill in because I think there’s no legitimate reason to investigate the Bidens. But I can present the standard Republican viewpoint, up to that point, supported by a USA Today poll linked on the previous page. Okay, so you’re just playing devil’s advocate. Fair enough. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1685 "2019-10-03T17:21:10Z")
Headline on CNN: > [@](#): > > Trump says he’ll consider asking China to investigate Bidens > > Trump alleged without evidence the Bidens engaged in wrongdoing and received millions from China I am really getting tired of this bullshit “alleged without evidence” that the press is currently using to tiptoe around what is actually happening. I’d rather see: TRUMP LIED AGAIN TODAY IN ORDER TO SPREAD FALSEHOODS AND SMEAR HIS OPPONENTS. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1686 "2019-10-03T17:21:21Z")
> [@drad\_dog](#): > > What? See [POST=21895770]post #1675[/POST]. > [@Max S](#): > > … Assuming conviction is the goal, taking that path means you would have to convince Republicans that the appearance of impropriety is itself impeachable. I don’t think that’s a winning strategy, because I myself disagree. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![bobot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bobot/32/21622_2.png) [@bobot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bobot)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1687 "2019-10-03T17:21:54Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > OK then… > > But but but… What if aliens landed, and were taking over the planet? Wouldn’t it be OK then for Trump to call a foreign leader and ask them for favors? Hmmmmm? What about then? That’s reasonable, considering Trump’s America. But what if Fox news reported that Hunter Biden got paid a lot of money. Certainly, then, the so-called President could ask the Ukrainian government to look into things, and report back to Rudy and Barr. I mean, they’re just trying to get to the bottom of…something. ---
**Author:** ![drad\_dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1688 "2019-10-03T17:21:57Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > Assuming conviction is the goal, are you implying that Senate Republicans _right now_ will vote to convict because they don’t want to end up on the wrong side of history? > > ~Max No. There is no vote before an investigation of all the wrongdoings and it is public. The rebupkis are not going to play socratic games. They are going to lie and troll and obfuscate. There is no convincing them, without the rod of reality forcing them to recognize that impeachment is history. You are acting like the Rs are a real party arguing out of ethical values in this situation. Do you believe that? ---
**Author:** ![drad\_dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1689 "2019-10-03T17:24:48Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > See [POST=21895770]post #1675[/POST]. > > ~Max I was referring to your dismissal of the appearance of impropriety as a thing. It’s not a little thing. Making devils advocate arguments you really don’t have to account for things I suppose. ---
**Author:** ![steronz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steronz/32/11765_2.png) [@steronz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steronz)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1690 "2019-10-03T17:31:24Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > Agreed, however I simply don’t know whether Mr. Trump exhausted other options first. Even if he didn’t, I hesitate to consider it an abuse of power if we legitimately needed Ukrainian cooperation for a law enforcement operation. > > The withholding of aid adds another element of disbelief, but if that was tied to alleged Ukrainian election interference I would hold a similar opinion. It so happens that I believe both supposed investigations are baseless, therefore Mr. Trump probably abused his power, but I am not in a position to conclusively make that judgement. > > ~Max I’m all for chucking this at the Senate. Should be a short trial if _anything_ exists to show that there was an ongoing legitimate investigation. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1691 "2019-10-03T17:36:28Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Barr didn’t know about the phone call. You can’t spin this into a legitimate investigation. I’ll refer you to [POST=21892045]post #1446[/POST]: > [@Max\_S](#): > > If “dozens” of staffers disagreed with the president, it’s not a stretch to think they slow-walked the followup with Mr. Barr. Maybe Mr. Barr himself knew early on but plays deaf because he is a little more aware of the political and legal implications than the president claims to be. > [@Ravenman](#): > > Besides, what’s Rudy’s legitimate involvement in a legitimate investigation by a legitimate government he isn’t employed by? The president designated him as a point man. I don’t see why he needs to be a federal employee - the other point man (U.S. Special Representative Kurt Volker) wasn’t a federal employee either. Mr. Guiliani wasn’t officially a special representative but it would appear that he acted in that capacity, officially at the request of the State department (at the president’s request). ~Max ---
**Author:** ![steronz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steronz/32/11765_2.png) [@steronz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steronz)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1692 "2019-10-03T17:43:37Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > The president designated him as a point man. I don’t see why he needs to be a federal employee Protections are afforded to both investigators and US persons based on official duty. Private citizens can do things that the police can’t. If you feel your rights have been violated by Rudy Giuliani, who do you go to to report your grievances? Straight to Trump? ---
**Author:** ![Fiveyearlurker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/da6949/32.png) [@Fiveyearlurker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiveyearlurker)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1693 "2019-10-03T17:45:29Z")
At what point should Democratic candidates ask our allies to investigate the Trump businesses? ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1694 "2019-10-03T17:52:32Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > The president designated him as a point man. What USG position is “point man?” > [@](#): > > I don’t see why he needs to be a federal employee - the other point man (U.S. Special Representative Kurt Volker) wasn’t a federal employee either. Volker was appointed to an actual position in the government. Your attempt to confuse the issue is obvious. Is this really the debate style you want to portray yourself as adopting? [https://ru.usembassy.gov/secretary-tillerson-appoints-ambassador-kurt-volker-special-representative-ukraine-negotiations/](https://ru.usembassy.gov/secretary-tillerson-appoints-ambassador-kurt-volker-special-representative-ukraine-negotiations/) ---
**Author:** ![Airbeck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/airbeck/32/6574_2.png) [@Airbeck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airbeck)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1695 "2019-10-03T17:56:50Z")
> [@Fiveyearlurker](#): > > At what point should Democratic candidates ask our allies to investigate the Trump businesses? Yeah I don’t think the right has really thought through the can of worms they are trying to open up here. Unless they are assuming that if they survive this it will allow them to hold permanent power so nobody could ever use this kind of malfeasance against them. ---
**Author:** ![raventhief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/raventhief/32/4_2.png) [@raventhief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raventhief)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1696 "2019-10-03T17:57:46Z")
Ok, so what was/is Volker’s position if he is not any kind of federal employee? This article from 5 days ago said he resigned from the State Department. > **[Implicated Ukraine Special Envoy resigns from State Dept](https://www.msnbc.com/hardball/watch/implicated-ukraine-special-envoy-resigns-from-state-dept-70125125602)** > > According to the Arizona State Press, Ambassador Kurt Volker, a "Special Envoy" to Ukraine, resigned from the State Department. It was Volker who introduced Rudy Giuliani to a key Ukrainian official as Giuliani sought dirt on Joe Biden. (Video) and I’ll be honrst, I just read snippets, didn’t watch the whole thing) Is special envoy a federal position? Never mind, already answered. ---
**Author:** ![Lance\_Turbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lance_turbo/32/6156_2.png) [@Lance\_Turbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lance_Turbo)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1697 "2019-10-03T18:40:08Z")
> [@JohnT](#): > > No, these quotes were in a presser held by Trump earlier this morning. They’re of the spoken variety, not the tweeted kind. Trump said those things on the south lawn of the White House as a result, [‘South lawn,’ is trending on Twitter](https://twitter.com/search?q=%22South%20Lawn%22&src=trend_click&pt=1179794925090680833). ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1698 "2019-10-03T18:56:23Z")
> [@drad\_dog](#): > > There is no legit investigation into Biden that you can point to to explain your position. Admitted, I am in no position to point to a potential ongoing investigation. Neither are you in a position to say there isn’t an investigation. > [@drad\_dog](#): > > Biden has been cleared. This we can point to. Then that’s what you should be doing: convincing Republicans that there are no grounds for an investigation of Joe and Hunter Biden. Pressuring foreign governments to cooperate with a baseless investigation of a political rival is an impeachable abuse of power, I hope that much is admitted when Republicans say the president is not above the law. > [@drad\_dog](#): > > What are you pointing at? That you, personally, have “no knowledge of impropriety”? Yes, that is what I am pointing at. > [@drad\_dog](#): > > You are only a population of one, and if we have already heard the impropriety wtih our own ears, your case suffers. The Democrats are a minority in the Senate, so ignore the Republicans at your own peril. If conviction is a goal, just sitting back satisfied that you have convinced yourself will not advance the goal. Whereas Republicans can sit back satisfied that they have convinced themselves because they have the numerical superiority. The burden falls on Democrats. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1699 "2019-10-03T19:03:09Z")
> [@steronz](#): > > Protections are afforded to both investigators and US persons based on official duty. Private citizens can do things that the police can’t. If you feel your rights have been violated by Rudy Giuliani, who do you go to to report your grievances? Straight to Trump? You sue the individual who actually violated your rights, and all of the people involved in such a violation, just as you would if the individual worked for the government. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1700 "2019-10-03T19:04:43Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > Then that’s what you should be doing: convincing Republicans that there are no grounds for an investigation of Joe and Hunter Biden. Pressuring foreign governments to cooperate with a baseless investigation of a political rival is an impeachable abuse of power, I hope that much is admitted when Republicans say the president is not above the law. This presumes there are enough Republican Senators who are rational actors rather than knee-jerk or brainless partisans. I’m not sure why we should make this assumption. What would you advocate the Democrats do if you believed the Republicans in the Senate didn’t care about the facts at all? In such a case, I’d advocate that the Democrats make convincing the public their priority. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771.md?page=84) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771.md?page=86)