Zontar Posted January 28, 2020 Report Posted January 28, 2020 (edited) 9 hours ago, 17to85 said: What the **** do the Bidens have to do with Trump obstructing congress or his abuse of power? Legal rational is POTUS has a right to investigate corruption by an american politician in a foreign country. Biden somehow got his unemployed unskilled son on a ukranian energy company BOD. Trump defense wants it explained. A legal rebuttal to the "abuse of power" prosecution theory. Edited January 28, 2020 by Zontar
Mark F Posted January 28, 2020 Report Posted January 28, 2020 (edited) dershewtiz .... loves seeing his ugly mug on tv, and doesn't care what he needs to say to get that camera on him. Probably also really enjoys demonstrating how briliant he is. Smartest guy around, just ask him. Edited January 28, 2020 by Mark F
Wanna-B-Fanboy Posted January 28, 2020 Report Posted January 28, 2020 1 hour ago, Zontar said: Legal rational is POTUS has a right to investigate corruption by an american politician in a foreign country. Biden somehow got his unemployed unskilled son on a ukranian energy company BOD. Trump defense wants it explained. A legal rebuttal to the "abuse of power" prosecution theory. yet Joseph Cofer Black is on the board @ burisma with little to no experience or qualifications and he's not being investigated... oh right, because his dad isn't running against trump... JCB is also the business partner of Erik Prince... that might also be why he's untouched... Wideleft 1
Zontar Posted January 28, 2020 Report Posted January 28, 2020 10 minutes ago, wanna-b-fanboy said: yet Joseph Cofer Black is on the board @ burisma with little to no experience or qualifications and he's not being investigated... oh right, because his dad isn't running against trump... JCB is also the business partner of Erik Prince... that might also be why he's untouched... Is he running for president ? Not really the same thing, is it ?
Wanna-B-Fanboy Posted January 28, 2020 Report Posted January 28, 2020 3 minutes ago, Zontar said: Is he running for president ? Not really the same thing, is it ? Thank you? For proving my Point?
Zontar Posted January 28, 2020 Report Posted January 28, 2020 I 1 minute ago, wanna-b-fanboy said: Thank you? For proving my Point? Is the point that there is selective ethics and morality in politics applied to some people but not others ? Then ,youre welcome.
do or die Posted January 28, 2020 Report Posted January 28, 2020 (edited) 38 minutes ago, wanna-b-fanboy said: yet Joseph Cofer Black is on the board @ burisma with little to no experience or qualifications and he's not being investigated... oh right, because his dad isn't running against trump... JCB is also the business partner of Erik Prince... that might also be why he's untouched... Edited January 28, 2020 by do or die
Wanna-B-Fanboy Posted January 28, 2020 Report Posted January 28, 2020 12 minutes ago, Zontar said: I Is the point that there is selective ethics and morality in politics applied to some people but not others ? Then ,youre welcome. We are in agreement with that. I was pointing out the JCB connection as a counter argument to the while corruption thing.
17to85 Posted January 28, 2020 Report Posted January 28, 2020 2 hours ago, Zontar said: Legal rational is POTUS has a right to investigate corruption by an american politician in a foreign country. Biden somehow got his unemployed unskilled son on a ukranian energy company BOD. Trump defense wants it explained. A legal rebuttal to the "abuse of power" prosecution theory. That's not a legal rebuttal, it's an attempted distraction. Biden and his son have zero to do with Trump and his obstruction of congress or abuse of power. Investigating Biden isn't the issue, it's the how he went about it and as always, the cover up is worse than the crime. So really what is either biden going to bring as a witness? They are irrelevant in terms of the articles trump was impeached under. The only reason you bring up Biden is to distract from the real issue. Trump would be proud but people here aren't dumb enough to buy that crap. blue_gold_84 1
do or die Posted January 28, 2020 Report Posted January 28, 2020 2 hours ago, Zontar said: Legal rational is POTUS has a right to investigate corruption by an american politician in a foreign country. Biden somehow got his unemployed unskilled son on a ukranian energy company BOD. Trump defense wants it explained. A legal rebuttal to the "abuse of power" prosecution theory. Well, first off....I am pretty suspicious of "connections" when it comes to long time, high profile politicians, of any stripe. Including Biden. If he and his son have done anything shady, the US has their law enforcement agencies, House and Senate, as tools to initiate investigation and should do so. But blackmailing a foreign government, by withholding aid already approved and passed by Congress, to have them initiate an investigation into a domestic political opponent (or any US citizen, for that matter).....has no moral or legal rational and sets a terrible precedent, regardless of who is in the White House, now or later. Having a back channel process and bypassing official channels, with Uncle Rudy (and Panas) smearing a US ambassador and engineering her removal, to smooth their path, adds even more odium. Of course Trump and Rudy could have been simply selflessly battling corruption, as they see it. If anyone really believes that.....please contact me, to obtain some outstanding real estate opportunities blue_gold_84, bb.king, Wideleft and 1 other 4
Zontar Posted January 28, 2020 Report Posted January 28, 2020 4 minutes ago, 17to85 said: That's not a legal rebuttal, it's an attempted distraction. Biden and his son have zero to do with Trump and his obstruction of congress or abuse of power. Investigating Biden isn't the issue, it's the how he went about it and as always, the cover up is worse than the crime. So really what is either biden going to bring as a witness? They are irrelevant in terms of the articles trump was impeached under. The only reason you bring up Biden is to distract from the real issue. Trump would be proud but people here aren't dumb enough to buy that crap. Shrug. You asked how they thought Biden was relevent. And I answered.
Zontar Posted January 28, 2020 Report Posted January 28, 2020 12 minutes ago, wanna-b-fanboy said: We are in agreement with that. I was pointing out the JCB connection as a counter argument to the while corruption thing. Which is "whataboutism" so I'm told.
Wanna-B-Fanboy Posted January 28, 2020 Report Posted January 28, 2020 3 minutes ago, Zontar said: Which is "whataboutism" so I'm told. Not really in this case... it's more "why Biden and not JCB if corruption was the issue" and less "it's fine because Obama did it too"
Zontar Posted January 28, 2020 Report Posted January 28, 2020 (edited) 5 minutes ago, wanna-b-fanboy said: Not really in this case... it's more "why Biden and not JCB if corruption was the issue" and less "it's fine because Obama did it too" But it is . Youre asking what about JCB and why isnt that being investigated if WH is so worried about corruption. "Whataboutism" is a weasel term anyway. If there is a lack of consistency it should be pointed out every time. Edited January 28, 2020 by Zontar
Wanna-B-Fanboy Posted January 28, 2020 Report Posted January 28, 2020 6 minutes ago, Zontar said: But it is . Youre asking what about JCB and why isnt that being investigated if WH is so worried about corruption. "Whataboutism" is a weasel term anyway. If there is a lack of consistency it should be pointed out every time. "Whataboutism, also known as whataboutery, is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument. It is particularly associated with Soviet and Russian propaganda" I am not saying you are a hypocrite- I am saying that trump's corruption angle is not consistent and thus more about the target than the cause. blue_gold_84 and Wideleft 1 1
The Unknown Poster Posted January 28, 2020 Report Posted January 28, 2020 30 minutes ago, 17to85 said: That's not a legal rebuttal, it's an attempted distraction. Biden and his son have zero to do with Trump and his obstruction of congress or abuse of power. Investigating Biden isn't the issue, it's the how he went about it and as always, the cover up is worse than the crime. So really what is either biden going to bring as a witness? They are irrelevant in terms of the articles trump was impeached under. The only reason you bring up Biden is to distract from the real issue. Trump would be proud but people here aren't dumb enough to buy that crap. Biden adheres to an international effort to clean up corruption by pushing out a guy who would *not* investigate Burisma. If Biden did anything, it actually was to the detriment of his kid's company. Trump loves stomping out corruption so much he surrounds himself with criminals and fraudsters and seeks to investigate ONE thing he considers corrupt that happens to impact his likely opponent who he thinks can beat him. Everything Trump did was so on the up and up he proceeds to lie, cover it up, refuse to let anyone involved explain it. Trump doesnt want the children of politicians trading on their parents fame and positions....ummmmm yeah. lol I mean...its absurd right? Anyone arguing this is a troll. Its not about whether Trump did it, its about whether he should be removed. Its a fact he did it. They admitted it!
do or die Posted January 28, 2020 Report Posted January 28, 2020 (edited) New Republican containment plan: Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) on Monday night said the White House should give senators access to Bolton’s draft book, which claims President Trump linked security assistance for Ukraine with an investigation of former Vice President Joe Biden. Lankford said the manuscript could be viewed in the Senate’s Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF). The highly secure room located in the basement level of the Capitol Visitors Center is usually used for classified briefings or to review sensitive intelligence and national security documents. We are talking about a book, that will be available to everybody on the planet, within months. But the contents need to be hidden for now......or will be "interpreted" in the proper fashion. Perhaps they could get Barr or Nunes...simply to issue a "summary" Really. Edited January 28, 2020 by do or die JCon, blue_gold_84, The Unknown Poster and 1 other 3 1
The Unknown Poster Posted January 28, 2020 Report Posted January 28, 2020 8 minutes ago, do or die said: New Republican containment plan: Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) on Monday night said the White House should give senators access to Bolton’s draft book, which claims President Trump linked security assistance for Ukraine with an investigation of former Vice President Joe Biden. Lankford said the manuscript could be viewed in the Senate’s Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF). The highly secure room located in the basement level of the Capitol Visitors Center is usually used for classified briefings or to review sensitive intelligence and national security documents. We are talking about a book, that will be available to everybody on the planet, within months. But the contents need to be hidden for now......or will be "interpreted" in the proper fashion. Perhaps they could get Barr or Nunes...simply to issue a "summary" Really. I wonder if they would mind a bunch of Dems storming the SCIF. And yeah, the book will be public so whats to hide? They clearly want to preview it before they decide if it will hurt Trump (or how much). The fact the White House kept it a secret should tell that tale. The fact Trump publicly called Bolton a liar should lift any gags.
17to85 Posted January 28, 2020 Report Posted January 28, 2020 1 hour ago, Zontar said: Shrug. You asked how they thought Biden was relevent. And I answered. So if you can see that it is irrelevant why bring it up like it means anything? Why defend this so hard when the slightest bit of scrutiny makes it fall apart? The Unknown Poster 1
JCon Posted January 28, 2020 Report Posted January 28, 2020 1 minute ago, 17to85 said: So if you can see that it is irrelevant why bring it up like it means anything? Why defend this so hard when the slightest bit of scrutiny makes it fall apart? Troll. That's why. blue_gold_84, bustamente, Mark F and 2 others 2 3
The Unknown Poster Posted January 28, 2020 Report Posted January 28, 2020 Who is this guy? Surely trump doesn’t know him. Never met him. Wanna-B-Fanboy, Mark F, bustamente and 1 other 2 2
Wideleft Posted January 28, 2020 Report Posted January 28, 2020 Former Trump Chief of Staff John Kelly tells Sarasota crowd ‘I believe John Bolton’ "Asked if Bolton - Trump’s former national security adviser - should testify at Trump’s impeachment trial, Kelly said he supports calling witnesses. President Donald Trump is denying that he told former National Security Advisor John Bolton he wanted to withhold military aid from Ukraine until the country launched investigations into Joe Biden and his son, allegations that Bolton levies in his new book, according to news reports. But one of Trump’s former top aides told a Sarasota audience Monday evening that if the reporting on what Bolton wrote is accurate, he believes Bolton. “If John Bolton says that in the book, I believe John Bolton,” said retired Gen. John Kelly, who served as Trump’s chief of staff for 18 months." https://www.heraldtribune.com/news/20200128/former-trump-chief-of-staff-john-kelly-tells-sarasota-crowd-rsquoi-believe-john-boltonrsquo
Wideleft Posted January 28, 2020 Report Posted January 28, 2020 1 minute ago, The Unknown Poster said: Who is this guy? Surely trump doesn’t know him. Never met him. Beat me to the punch
do or die Posted January 28, 2020 Report Posted January 28, 2020 John Kelly? Some guy who polished up the brass.....
Recommended Posts