-->
@Mharman
right
Be honest, and I will be, Do you think Trump abused his power in ways that rise to impeachment?
Posts
Total:
94
-->
@billbatard
Is there anything about the U.S. political system that is not corrupt?
Isn't it just par for the course?
What was it that Lord Acton said?
The thing about the Trump Presidency is that it has been immensely entertaining for the rest of the World to watch. Even more so than George Dubya's antics.
At the moment we have Boris Johnson. He is also great entertainment.
-->
@zedvictor4
vey little but your attitude is part of the problem you look for moral relativism to justify immorality, corruption spreads like a cancer and all you can do is point fingers
-->
@billbatard
I like the phrase vey little. It's sounds like you've had a heavy session.
Nonetheless.
I think that Lord Acton was right, in that corruption is an inevitable consequence of power and power seekers.
And moral relativism is a pretty vague philosophy, that sort of states the obvious really.
And one points a finger at things that are relatively humorous in the context of the proposition.
-->
@Greyparrot
I seriously doubt Congress has the power to prevent Giuliani from going to Ukraine and getting the info from the Crowdstrike server along with anything else that Zelensky wants to offer him.
Asking a foreigner for dirt on a political opponent is a crime. Sending your personal lawyer, who is not a government employee, on a diplomatic mission to further that crime, is also a crime. Giuliani is in danger at this point. He has assisted his client in carrying out a crime. He could be disbarred or charged with a crime himself. Not to mention the potential consequences if he refuses to obey the subpoenas. They might not be able to indict Trump, but they could indict Giuliani.
-->
@HistoryBuff
No it isn't lol. Let's make a checklist here.
1) Hillary asking GPS fusion to put together a pee tape to smear Trump with the help of foreign assets.
choose 1
a) illegal
b) not illegal
2) Hillary asking Crowdstrike to hide her server from the FBI in Ukraine.
choose 1
a) illegal
b) not illegal
3) Trump asking for the Crowdstrike server.
choose 1
a) illegal
b) not illegal
4) Trump asking Zelensky to look into corruption involving Biden.
choose 1
a) illegal
b) not illegal
Scoring: 1 point for every "a" answer.
Results:
0: you are very savvy with the law, probably watches all media sources biased and unbiased.
1-2: You are a partisan hack with an agenda, probably watches nothing but biased media.
3-4: You are a complete idiot.
-->
@Greyparrot
Hillary asking GPS fusion to put together a pee tape to smear Trump with the help of foreign assets.
1) She didn't. That was funded by republicans. The Clinton then continued funding it later.
2) Fusion GPS is an american company. They are not, by definition, a foreigner.
That is not a crime. If you believe it is, then please tell me what crime was committed.
Hillary asking Crowdstrike to hide her server from the FBI in Ukraine.
I'm not aware of any evidence that she did this. However her emails were thoroughly investigated by the FBI.
Trump asking for the Crowdstrike server.
I haven't heard anyone saying this was a crime. It was stupid, but not a crime as far as I know. He was asking them to look into a conspiracy theory that has been debunked.
Trump asking Zelensky to look into corruption involving Biden.
This is indisputably a crime. Asking a foreigner for any "thing of value" to help you in an election is a crime. The only people pretending like this isn't a crime are people like Sean Hannity. Most republican members of government just keep repeating it isn't worth impeaching over. Most aren't really denying it is wrong or a crime.
And that is just if he did this as a private citizen, it would be a crime. As president it is worse. He is using the power of his office to help him commit what i have already established is a crime. So you are now talking about a president abusing the power of his office to him commit and then cover up a crime.
Here are the facts. The decision of Joe Biden, while vice president, to facilitate his son Hunter’s international business dealings presents, minimally, the appearance of a conflict of interest. Indeed, anything that Hunter Biden touched that intersected, however tangentially, with the official doings and responsibilities of his father can be presumed to be a worthy subject of investigation unless and until proven otherwise. The younger Biden’s shady dealings with his uncle dating at least to 2008, his absurd (and absurdly lucrative) board post on the Ukrainian energy firm Burisma, his massive financing rounds in China, and his travel to these countries along with his father, the latter acting in his official capacity — all raise significant questions.
Information is not interference. Based on the call transcript, Trump asked Zelensky to get to the bottom of whether Ukraine or Ukrainians interfered in the 2016 election. One may consider Trump’s concerns absurd or silly. Alternatively, one may suspect Ukrainian involvement. I do not know and will not pretend to know, because whether Ukraine was actually involved is irrelevant. The request for information that the Ukrainian president may be uniquely positioned to offer is fair and does not, in and of itself, constitute election interference.
The president is well within his rights to seek information from his counterparts abroad. He can ask Zelensky if the Dodgers will make the World Series, or who Zelensky thinks is the most formidable Democratic candidate. Soliciting information, in the form of facts or opinion, does not constitute election interference. It does not constitute having a foreign head of state do opposition research for the Trump campaign. It is not some of in-kind contribution.
While the seeking of information does not intrinsically constitute a problem — indeed, it’s exactly the sort of thing we want the president doing in exchanges with foreign heads of state — what Trump chooses to do with the information he receives matters immensely. Were Trump to pass documents to his campaign, that would blend his official powers with his electioneering apparatus, which is against campaign-finance law. Were Trump to tell Zelensky to leak whatever damaging information he might find about Biden, that too would constitute election interference. Obviously, if Trump asked Zelensky to target Biden or his campaign with hacking, it would be a crime. If he asked Zelensky to fabricate information and leak it to the public, this impeachment talk would be completely justified.
But what if we were to treat the request for information as tantamount to interference? Let us trace this line of thinking to its absurd conclusion. If Trump cannot ask anyone, foreign or domestic, about the obviously dubious behavior of a political rival, then we have created a de facto immunity for anybody running for president, an immunity that extends to their family if they mix family with previous public-office holding. So long as American officials and private citizens misbehave abroad and then run for president, they cannot be investigated legitimately, so this line of thinking goes.
As a historical matter, this would mean that the Benghazi and Clinton Foundation investigations undertaken by Congress were illegitimate the day they began because they had political consequences for presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. They would similarly mean that the Russiagate investigation was wrong the day it began. And while many people can justifiably point to misbehavior by Russiagate investigators, it cannot reasonably be said that Donald Trump’s words, deeds, and associates made that investigation unreasonable from the get-go. Indeed, we can go still further back.
Going back further still, if targeting a political opponent for investigation is illegitimate under any circumstances, then FDR was wrong to direct the FBI to work with friendly European governments to investigate Charles Lindbergh and the German American Bund.
Clearly, creating an effective blanket immunity for those powerful enough to run for president is truly the stuff of banana republics. Indeed, if it achieved anything, it would only encourage well-heeled rascals to run for office while simultaneously encouraging the politically connected to engage in international graft. I, for one, think America has enough of both already.
Opponents of the president have elevated his person above his position, deciding that the practice of executive power itself is illegitimate because of who has been elected to wield it. That is the very kind of institutional nihilism many of these same people claim to fear most about this presidency.
-->
@Greyparrot
Well put.
-->
@Greyparrot
If Trump cannot ask anyone, foreign or domestic
The law says you cannot ask for or receive a thing of value from a foreigner to help you in an election. Not domestic. If you want to hire Americans to investigate that is legal.
the obviously dubious behavior of a political rival
What he was asking about wasn't even "dubious". Several western governments wanted that prosecutor gone. The staff on the ground in Ukraine wanted him gone because he wasn't investigating corruption. Biden was the guy tasked with going to Ukraine and getting it done, but it wasn't his idea. It wasn't his policy. And it didn't benefit him. His son was not being investigated by the corrupt official. Once biden had successfully gotten him removed, the next appointee did investigate the company Hunter worked for. If anything Biden pushed to have his son investigated.
his travel to these countries along with his father, the latter acting in his official capacity — all raise significant questions
sort of. I agree that is the sort of scummy thing that all elected politicians end up doing and it is despicable. Which is why we need a real progressive to become president and put a stop to it. It is not however illegal to do this stuff. Most of the members of Trump's government are doing similar things as well. That is not to forgive others for their shitty behavior, but if you are going to point fingers at dems for this behavior, you should be willing to accept the Trump and his team are just as dirty.
the Benghazi and Clinton Foundation investigations undertaken by Congress were illegitimate the day they began because they had political consequences
No. Part of the duties of congress is to provide oversight. They have the power to investigate. If trump had gotten the senate or congress to open an official inquiry into it and they had asked for information, that would be legal. No one has ever questioned congress' right to investigate. Trump asking ukraine to dig up dirt on his rivals is still illegal.
it cannot reasonably be said that Donald Trump’s words, deeds, and associates made that investigation unreasonable from the get-go.
Of course it can. He asked for a thing of value from a foreigner to help him in an election. That is a crime from the get-go. The president is not supposed to be investigating people. That is what law enforcement agencies are for.
Opponents of the president have elevated his person above his position, deciding that the practice of executive power itself is illegitimate because of who has been elected to wield it.
There is no executive investigative power. That is why we have congress and law enforcement. If trump had gone to one of them and asked for an official investigation, then we wouldn't be having this conversation. That would be totally normal. We are having it because trump broke the law and asked a foreign government to dig up dirt on his political rival.
When trump asked them for that "favor" he broke the law.
-->
@HistoryBuff
If Trump cannot ask anyone, foreign or domestic, about the obviously dubious behavior of a political rival, then we have created a de facto immunity for anybody running for president, an immunity that extends to their family if they mix family with previous public-office holding. So long as American officials and private citizens misbehave abroad and then run for president, they cannot be investigated legitimately, so this line of thinking goes.
-->
@DBlaze
How did you score on the quiz?
-->
@Greyparrot
If trump actually wanted this investigated legally, he would have referred it to the justice department. They could have had law enforcement look into this. He could have pushed the senate or congress to look into it. He didn't do either of those things.
What he did do, was potentially illegally order that aid money approved by congress not be given to ukraine. He then got on a call with them and when they brought up getting more defensive weapons, he asked them to do him a favor.
That is not a legitimate investigation. That is an abuse of power. He is using the power and influence of his office to coerce a foreign government into helping him win an election.
They had access to ways to get an investigation legally. Bill Bar, Giuliani and Mike Pompeo were all in on this. They must have told him what the normal or legal methods were. But he still went with the illegal one. This should tell you that he never wanted a real investigation, because it would show there was nothing there and Biden could use that conclusion to defend himself. Trump wanted just enough info to smear Biden, but no investigation to determine there was nothing there.
But ultimately, his motives for choosing the illegal path are irrelevant for the base question. Asking a foreign government to look into dirt on his political opponent is a crime. Why, when, and how he chose to do this could very easily open him up to more crimes, but asking was, all on it's own, a crime.
-->
@HistoryBuff
If trump actually wanted this investigated legally, he would have referred it to the justice department. They could have had law enforcement look into this. He could have pushed the senate or congress to look into it. He didn't do either of those things.
Look into what? Doesn't he have to listen to the info first before he can then pass said info onto the DOJ?
Mind you, Congress and the DOJ have zero jurisdiction in the Ukraine, so it falls upon diplomacy to get the information about corruption harming the nation, not law. You can't just pick up the phone and ask the FBI to get information from the Ukraine. Using the CIA to spy on an ally is worse.
That is an abuse of power.
Subjective opinion. Orangemanbad isn't a felony.
If trump actually wanted this investigated legally, he would have referred it to the justice department. They could have had law enforcement look into this. He could have pushed the senate or congress to look into it. He didn't do either of those things.
And every politician involved in any election of a potential president or wishing to potentially run for the presidency will never be able to ask for information or even listen to information that can then be passed along to the DOJ or FBI.
That's banana republic territory, to be jailed for simply listening to information.
-->
@Greyparrot
Listen to what info? The Ukrainians didn't come up to him out of the blue and say they had information they wanted to give him. He is the one asking them to look into it. That is a crime. If he wanted it investigated that is a matter for the justice department or congress. It is not a matter for the president of Ukraine. The moment he asked them to look into it instead of the justice department, he committed a crime.Look into what? Doesn't he have to listen to the info first before he can then pass said info onto the DOJ?
And every politician involved in any election will never be able to ask for information that can then be passed along to the DOJ or FBI.
Why would a politician need to ask a foreign government for this info? If they suspect a crime has occurred they would ask law enforcement to investigate. Then the law enforcement agency can perform the investigation. Outside of a congressional investigation, no politician should be asking foreigners for dirt on their opponent.
If you allow foreign governments to interfere in elections in that way, then you are enabling politicians with corrupt contacts with those countries to have an advantage over honest politicians who don't have close contacts with potentially hostile foreign powers.
-->
@HistoryBuff
Why would a politician need to ask a foreign government for this info?
Because using espionage over diplomacy isn't smart.
I don't know why you have this weird idea that the FBI or Congress has jurisdiction in Ukraine to investigate anything. How did you ever get that idea?
Was that on any of the fake news outlets? Someone's opinion about what the FBI can or cannot do?
-->
@HistoryBuff
If you allow foreign governments to interfere in elections in that way, then you are enabling politicians with corrupt contacts with those countries to have an advantage over honest politicians who don't have close contacts with potentially hostile foreign powers.
Pure Balderdash. If Hillary asked Putin to fabricate a story implicating Trump, it's literally no different of an outcome than if Hillary asked a friendly Domestic news agency to fabricate the same exact story.
People can figure out the bullshit on their own, that is the responsibility of the voter in a Democracy. When people are not allowed to figure out what is bullshit because of censoring and legalese crap, then democracy dies.
-->
@Greyparrot
Because using espionage over diplomacy isn't smart.
Who said anything about espionage? The FBI is allowed to request documents from other governments for the purposes of an official investigation. A politician is not allowed to go digging for political dirt from foreigners. I'm not sure how this is confusing you.
I don't know why you have this weird idea that the FBI or Congress has jurisdiction in Ukraine to investigate anything. How did you ever get that idea?
Again, who said anything about having jurisdiction over them? if the allegation is that Joe Biden acted inappropriately in his use of his position of VP, then that is a matter for american law enforcement and congress. Law enforcement or congress can request co-operation from Ukraine to assist in their investigation. What you can't do is have a politician abuse their office and try to get a foreign government to dig up dirt on his opponent.
Trump controls the DOJ. He could have asked them to open a formal investigation if he felt it was warranted. But that would open them up to a level of scrutiny they clearly wanted to avoid. They knew that there would be no evidence of wrong doing. So they just tried to coerce Ukraine to suggest there might be evidence, which would be enough to smear Joe Biden.
-->
@Greyparrot
I'm not too familiar with Crowdstrike. Is that the third party company hired to go through the information on the server for the Government? or for Hillary?
-->
@HistoryBuff
The FBI is allowed to request documents from other governments for the purposes of an official investigation.
Do you even know what the word Jurisdiction means?
They are most certainly not "allowed" to do this by every nation. The only thing they are "allowed" to do is abide by extradition treaties regarding criminals in foreign nations. They are most certainly not allowed to hop a plane to Ukraine and start an investigation and ask for evidence in Ukraine. Ukraine has zero reason to hand a damn thing over to the FBI.
Again, this is a matter of diplomacy. You don't conduct diplomacy with alphabet agencies. That's fucking retarded to think that's how diplomacy is done.
Where are you getting this nonsense?
-->
@DBlaze
Is that the third party company hired to go through the information on the server for the Government? or for Hillary?
Yes.
The FBI never got to look at the actual hacked DNC servers.
Basically all info from the DNC servers was legally "hearsay" since it was all taken from the source by Crowdstrike and then passed on as 2nd hand info to the FBI.
There were rumors that there was at least one of the DNC servers in the Ukraine. Trump was asking Zelensky to verify this if he could with the purpose of handing the server over to the FBI.
-->
@Greyparrot
Do you even know what the word Jurisdiction means?
Yes, do you? It is the official power to make legal decisions and judgments. It means that inside the borders of Ukraine, they have the power to investigate. Trump is trying to pretend that Joe Biden acted improperly. That would be a crime against america. Ukraine would have no jurisdiction over that. If Hunter had somehow committed a crime and Joe Biden acted perfectly within his bounds, then this would in no way be a scandal for Joe Biden. The truth is Ukraine already investigated and determined no crimes were committed. The most charitable reading I can see is that Trump is just such a vengeful dick that he wanted to try to have Biden's son imprisoned to spite Joe.
They are most certainly not "allowed" to do this by every nation. The only thing they are "allowed" to do is abide by extradition treaties regarding criminals in foreign nations.
That isn't true at all. Law enforcement agencies fairly regularly request documents or additional evidence from foreign law enforcement agencies. They are not required to comply if they don't want to. But in order to conduct an investigation legally in america, you have to go through congress or a law enforcement agency. Coercing a foreign leader into digging up dirt on your opponent is a crime.
Again, this is a matter of diplomacy. You don't conduct diplomacy with alphabet agencies. That's fucking retarded to think that's how diplomacy is done.
No one is talking about diplomacy. We are talking about law enforcement. Law enforcement is done via agencies or congress. It is most certainly not done by pressuring foreign leaders to go after your enemies. And if it were diplomacy they would have sent a diplomat, not personal attorneys to the president with no legal connection to the US government. I mean Trump literally said he wanted the Attorney General of the US to call the President of Ukraine about this. AGs do not engage in diplomacy. That is not diplomacy, that is conspiracy to commit a crime.
-->
@HistoryBuff
That isn't true at all. Law enforcement agencies fairly regularly request documents or additional evidence from foreign law enforcement agencies.
This is clearly and verifiably not true. Russia does NOT allow requests of any kind from the FBI.
Please prove me wrong on this, please do.
-->
@Greyparrot
This is clearly and verifiably not true. Russia does NOT allow requests of any kind from the FBI.
Are you actually reading what I write fully? The very next line was "They are not required to comply if they don't want to."
No Russia isn't going to comply with requests from the FBI. But they are one of america's greatest enemies in the world. They aren't going to comply with anything america asks for unless it benefits Putin. Ukraine is relying on american assistance to fight off Russia. Do you really think they would refuse to cooperate with the justice department when america could cut off vital assistance they need? And even if they did, a foreign government refusing to do what you want them to, is not grounds to commit crimes in America.
Trump asking for a favor from a foreign country to help him in an election is a crime. Full stop. Nothing anyone says from this point on can change that. The memo they released confirms he is guilty of that crime.
Now moving on from that irrefutable fact, we can try to establish exactly if and how he misused the power of his office to help him in the commission of that crime. But asking for a thing of value, in this case dirt on a political opponent, is a crime. No matter how much you try to muddy the water to avoid that fact, I will keep reminding you.
-->
@HistoryBuff
But asking for a thing of value, in this case dirt on a political opponent, is a crime.
It's not a crime when it's also of value to the entire nation. That is a diplomatic trade on behalf of America.
It's not Trump's fault Biden screwed himself.
Same thing goes for the Crowdstrike server alleged to be in Ukraine.
It is a thing of value to the entire nation, not just Trump.
-->
@Greyparrot
It's not a crime when it's also of value to the entire nation.
two things
1) it is not of value to the entire nation. He is asking them to dig into something that has already been investigated. It was determined there was nothing criminal.
2) it absolutely is a crime even if it were of value to the entire nation. If he thought that this was worthy of investigating, he would have sent it to congress or to the FBI. They could request assistance from the Ukrainian government in their investigation. That would be totally legal. He did not do that. He held back their aid money, then called them and asked them to do him a favor. That's a crime.
Trump had legal paths to request an investigation into this. These sorts of requests are not uncommon. And since the secretary of state, attorney general and Trump's personal attorney were involved, he must have known what those paths were. He instead chose to ask the president of the country to force an investigation into a political rival, which is illegal.
-->
@HistoryBuff
He is asking them to dig into something that has already been investigated.
There is no statute of limitations on corruption.
They could request assistance from the Ukrainian government in their investigation.
To who? The ambassador? We don't use the FBI or Congress to talk to Ambassadors.
At best they could request the President to ask the ambassador for them.
We really shouldn't be surprised at this though. The left has been using the Alphabet agencies to deliver a soft coup against Trump since he came down the escalator. 6 ways till Sunday and all that mess according to Schumer.
So suggesting the Alphabet agencies should be in charge of foreign relations and foreign requests is just an extension of that soft coup to weaken the presidency to spite Orangemanbad.
It's an impeachable offense for sure, but I don't think he is going to be impeached in his first term. Second term (if) I think he will