dubs Posted November 21, 2019 Posted November 21, 2019 3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: If you think Tom is defending Trump, you should read more of his stuff. the reality is, no one is defending Trump, “per se”, but rather exposing this charade because they know the damage from letting the establishment maintain status quo is far more damaging than anything they are arguing for. 2
jrober38 Posted November 21, 2019 Posted November 21, 2019 Just now, DC Tom said: He solicitred? I thought this was a quid pro quo. Or extortion. Or bribery. Now it's solicitation? We're back to extortion again? What happened to quid pro quo? Or let me put this more simply: it's not a campaign finance violation to offer to pay for a service. Actually it is. You can't accept anything of value from a foreign government that could help you in a political election in the United States.
Deranged Rhino Posted November 21, 2019 Author Posted November 21, 2019 Just now, billsfan89 said: Someone isn't immune from prosecution because they are running against them, no one is defending Biden on my end. But you can't extort a foreign power to do an investigation that would help you politically. That is a violation of the law. So -- because Joe is running, and because an investigation into Ukraine corruption MIGHT involve Biden's own corruption -- it's illegal? Come on, you don't buy that. Do you?
billsfan89 Posted November 21, 2019 Posted November 21, 2019 1 minute ago, DC Tom said: He solicitred? I thought this was a quid pro quo. Or extortion. Or bribery. Now it's solicitation? We're back to extortion again? What happened to quid pro quo? Or let me put this more simply: it's not a campaign finance violation to offer to pay for a service. When people mention quid pro quo, extortion, bribery is all describing the same action of using the governments resources that you are not authorized to have digression over to gain a political favor from a foreign entity. You are being purposefully obtuse and dense. 1
DC Tom Posted November 21, 2019 Posted November 21, 2019 1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said: Investigating corruption in Ukraine, especially that involving the 2016 election, is entirely appropriate and within his scope as POTUS. The only way this argument holds water is if you take the position that any investigation which might involve a person running for office is verboten. Or if you make the a priori assumption that Trump used foreign policy for his campaign benefit. Which does nothing more than build an impeachment case on the worst example of the "begging the question" fallacy in the history of philosophy. It's 9/11 conspiracy theories writ large: if you assume malfeasance, and interpret every shred of evidence as support of that assumption, you prove your assumption. 3
Deranged Rhino Posted November 21, 2019 Author Posted November 21, 2019 Just now, billsfan89 said: When people mention quid pro quo, extortion, bribery is all describing the same action of using the governments resources that you are not authorized to have digression over to gain a political favor from a foreign entity. You are being purposefully obtuse and dense. Honest question: what is your opinion on the Obama administration's pressuring of foreign governments (multiple foreign governments) to spy on their political opponents for them, so they can work around that pesky constitution which forbids domestic spying on political opponents?
dubs Posted November 21, 2019 Posted November 21, 2019 2 minutes ago, jrober38 said: Actually it is. You can't accept anything of value from a foreign government that could help you in a political election in the United States. read the treaty between the Ukraine and US from 1999 and get back to me on that statement. 5
Buffalo_Gal Posted November 21, 2019 Posted November 21, 2019 Just now, Deranged Rhino said: What exactly does Schiffy think is gonna happen if this moves to the Senate? 2
DC Tom Posted November 21, 2019 Posted November 21, 2019 1 minute ago, billsfan89 said: When people mention quid pro quo, extortion, bribery is all describing the same action of using the governments resources that you are not authorized to have digression over to gain a political favor from a foreign entity. You are being purposefully obtuse and dense. No, you're being purposefully vague and inconsistent, because you can't even define the crime that occurred without making a circular argument to an a priori assumption that a crime occurred. 2
billsfan89 Posted November 21, 2019 Posted November 21, 2019 Just now, Deranged Rhino said: So -- because Joe is running, and because an investigation into Ukraine corruption MIGHT involve Biden's own corruption -- it's illegal? Come on, you don't buy that. Do you? NO ONE IS SAYING BIDEN IS IMMUNE. Are you being purposefully dense? The validity of what Trump wanted to investigate is completely irrelevant to wither or not he used funds he had no digression over to extort a foreign power for a political favor. Many have testified that the Trump administration had no other corruption inquiries in Ukraine. This wasn't a large part of a general crackdown on corruption that Biden happened to be a part of. This was a politically motivated action. Just now, DC Tom said: No, you're being purposefully vague and inconsistent, because you can't even define the crime that occurred without making a circular argument to an a priori assumption that a crime occurred. I literally defined the specific criminal code he violated by any number of means. This is a message board not a court of law.
dubs Posted November 21, 2019 Posted November 21, 2019 It truly amazes me that there are people who deny the information available to them and would rather get their programming downloaded to them from their masters. you people can think for yourself you know! It’s freedom! 2
Buffalo_Gal Posted November 21, 2019 Posted November 21, 2019 Just now, billsfan89 said: NO ONE IS SAYING BIDEN IS IMMUNE. Are you being purposefully dense? The validity of what Trump wanted to investigate is completely irrelevant to wither or not he used funds he had no digression over to extort a foreign power for a political favor. Many have testified that the Trump administration had no other corruption inquiries in Ukraine. This wasn't a large part of a general crackdown on corruption that Biden happened to be a part of. This was a politically motivated action. Again, why was it a-ok to examine the Trump campaign and President Trump in alleged election interference in 2016 (ie the Russian hoax), but it is not ok to examine the Obama administration, and Joey-B (the dumbass on tape extolling how well he extorted the Ukraine) for corruption and 2016 election interference? 3
DC Tom Posted November 21, 2019 Posted November 21, 2019 4 minutes ago, jrober38 said: Actually it is. You can't accept anything of value from a foreign government that could help you in a political election in the United States. No, you can't accept donations from foreign sources. You can purchase services...say, purchasing a salacious dossier from British private investigation service on your political opponent. 1 1
Deranged Rhino Posted November 21, 2019 Author Posted November 21, 2019 1 minute ago, billsfan89 said: NO ONE IS SAYING BIDEN IS IMMUNE. You did though, you might not realize it, but that's what you just wrote: 6 minutes ago, billsfan89 said: Someone isn't immune from prosecution because they are running against them, ... But you can't extort a foreign power to do an investigation that would help you politically. That's literally what you wrote. It's a logical mess. 2 minutes ago, billsfan89 said: Many have testified that the Trump administration had no other corruption inquiries in Ukraine. This wasn't a large part of a general crackdown on corruption that Biden happened to be a part of. This was a politically motivated action. Trump literally RAN on ending corruption in 2016. So you're wrong. There's a LONG record, and action in policy matters, of him fighting corruption, not just in Ukraine, but elsewhere.
dubs Posted November 21, 2019 Posted November 21, 2019 2 minutes ago, billsfan89 said: NO ONE IS SAYING BIDEN IS IMMUNE. Are you being purposefully dense? The validity of what Trump wanted to investigate is completely irrelevant to wither or not he used funds he had no digression over to extort a foreign power for a political favor. Many have testified that the Trump administration had no other corruption inquiries in Ukraine. This wasn't a large part of a general crackdown on corruption that Biden happened to be a part of. This was a politically motivated action. there are two events that specifically pertain to the US. The events preceding the 2016 election and potential corruption from a sitting Vice President. That’s far more important to the US than internal Ukrainian corruption. That’s our priority, bozo!! This isn’t a political hit job. It’s literally investigating serious crimes. How doesn’t that get through people’s think skulls?
jrober38 Posted November 21, 2019 Posted November 21, 2019 2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Trump literally RAN on ending corruption in 2016. So you're wrong. There's a LONG record, and action in policy matters, of him fighting corruption, not just in Ukraine, but elsewhere. This is a joke right?
billsfan89 Posted November 21, 2019 Posted November 21, 2019 2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: You did though, you might not realize it, but that's what you just wrote: That's literally what you wrote. It's a logical mess. Trump literally RAN on ending corruption in 2016. So you're wrong. There's a LONG record, and action in policy matters, of him fighting corruption, not just in Ukraine, but elsewhere. Every politician runs on ending corruption your using a very vague and unrelated matter to justify a narrative the facts do not support. There were no other far reaching investigations into Ukranian corruption Many have testified that he only cared about Biden in regards to Ukraine. 2 minutes ago, dubs said: there are two events that specifically pertain to the US. The events preceding the 2016 election and potential corruption from a sitting Vice President. That’s far more important to the US than internal Ukrainian corruption. That’s our priority, bozo!! This isn’t a political hit job. It’s literally investigating serious crimes. How doesn’t that get through people’s think skulls? Biden was the only corrupt America in Ukraine? Literally anyone testifying on the matter says that Trump cared only about Biden when it came to Ukraine, this idea that there was a widespread corruption probe is nonsense. And guess what it doesn't matter he had no digression over the funds and clearly was using them to gain a favor he thought was by his own admission politically valuable to him thus violating the law.
DC Tom Posted November 21, 2019 Posted November 21, 2019 3 minutes ago, billsfan89 said: NO ONE IS SAYING BIDEN IS IMMUNE. Actually, you are. The entire premise of the "quid pro quo" being a criminal act is that Trump was asking for an investigation in to a political rival. Except THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT THIS WAS A POLITICAL REQUEST AND NOT A NORMAL FOREIGN POLICY REQUEST. The only - only - evidence that this was for political gain is "Because Biden is the biggest threat to his reelection." Period. Or, to put it another way, you can't argue that Biden is open to investigation and simultaneously argue that an otherwise legitimate course of investigation is illegal because Biden is a presidential candidate. 8 minutes ago, billsfan89 said: I literally defined the specific criminal code he violated by any number of means. This is a message board not a court of law. You literally misunderstood the specific criminal code you posted. Trump never asked for a campaign donation. 2
Recommended Posts