Nice link to the trial & conviction of the Chinese spy who crashed Spy-a-Lago in March!
Nice link to the trial & conviction of the Chinese spy who crashed Spy-a-Lago in March!
Only the best security at Mar-a Lago. That is also the place where Trump introduced a 15 year old girl he had hired to Epstein because she was beautiful. Epstein recruited her with Trump's permission.
Half-way there wrote:
all the way there wrote:
You sound like you just entered middle school.
Thanks!
My English class is fun. :-)
celery wrote:
Trollminator wrote:
Ok so here’s the basic summary for anyone willing to just look at trump’s action and nothing else. He called the Ukrainian President and specifically asked him do him a favor and look into his political rival. He then used as leverage taxpayer funded military aid to pressure Ukraine to comply with his personal request. Then, the conversation incorrectly filed away in an attempt to hide it - a clear abuse of the classified system. It’s very hard not to see this as clear and unconstitutional abuse of power.
The whistle blower did their job. Anyone who comes across criminal activity must report it through the right channels, which is exactly what this individual did. It’s of course concerning that the dozen or so other people that were aware of the conversation never raised the issue.
I will happily respond to any poster who can argue how trump can be deemed innocent in this incident. For everyone else pointing fingers at irrelevant people, conspiracies and blaming the system - you’ve got nothing. If you don’t like this rule of law country, feel free to GTFO.
Here is a my reply to your arguments; I'm not trying to convince you to agree with these arguments, I'm just telling you how the pro-Trump people see things.
Trump and his team genuinely think something corrupt might have happened in Ukraine when the Prosecutor was fired at the behest of Biden and the Obama team. So Trump, acting in what he though was the benefit of the country and justice, asked the Ukraine President to investigate it.
At the same time, Trump believes the government is inundated by people who are surreptitiously working to undermine him. So a few days after the phone conversation, he chose to limit who had access to it because he knows people would get the wrong impression from the phone call. Further, if he thinks there really is corruption by Obama/Biden, he would want to have this investigation kept on the down low so the anti-Trump, pro-Biden/Obama people within the government can't start undermining it. The fact that a whistle blower drafted up a 5 page hypothesis trying to prove Trump should be impeached, is evidence that Trump is correct in thinking there are people working to undermine him within the "deep state."
The withholding of aid money to Ukraine could be from two motivations, that are not mutually exclusive. The first motivation is in line with Trump's often stated goal of paying less money for European security when the other rich nations of Europe are capable of doing it themselves. There is explicit evidence for the first motivation.
A second motivation could be to encourage the Ukraine President to investigate the crowdstrike and Biden issues. There is implied evidence for this second motivation, but as yet, there is no explicit evidence for this quid pro quo.
Even if the second motivation is true, this is exactly the same thing as what Biden already bragged about doing, so it is not illegal in and of itself. It would only be illegal if Trump knows there was no corruption by Obama/Biden, but asked anyway for an investigation. A sort of "show me the person and I'll find the crime" sort of thing. But if Trump genuinely believes there was past corruption, then asking for Ukraine to keep investigating is in line with what Trump thinks is good for the country and is what his supporters want him to do. He sees it as him trying to "drain the swamp."
In the same way, if Biden asked for Ukraine to fire the Prosecutor because he genuinely thought the Prosecutor was corrupt, then there was nothing illegal about Biden using the US money as a quid pro quo in 2016. But if Biden's real motivation for having the Prosecutor fired was to protect his son, then that would be an illegal use of taxpayer money. Those who like Obama/Biden assume he was working for the best interest of the country and not for personal gain. Just the same, the Trump supporters see all his activity as him trying to drain the swamp.
So that explains what the Trump supporters are thinking, here is my personal take;
None of us really knows what's going on, because we can't see inside Trump's and Biden's head. Secondly, we don't really know what's going on in the Ukraine government so how could any of us really know if the Prosecutor should have been fired or not. Various government agencies or media outlets will try to say things one way or another, but since they all have an agenda, there is no way to know who is and isn't spinning the facts. Likely, they all are.
The use of tax payer money to induce foreign governments to do our bidding is a practice that creates moral hazard for our politicians and we should all be outraged that there is any foreign aid whatsoever. When our politicians use foreign aid as a quid pro quo, they might be genuinely operating in a way that they think is good for the country, but on the other hand, they might be also seeking something of personal benefit. Since we elect our leaders, they will always have a mixed motivation to be doing what is good for the country, and good for re-election. Whether you think a particular politician committed treason, or acted as a faithful public servant, is entirely determined by what you already think of that politician.
The bottom line is that all foreign aid is a betrayal of the citizens of this country. Under the constitution, all foreign treaties and aid was supposed to go through congress as a ratified treaty. This would keep it in the public eye and lessen the opportunity for personal gain for the politicians. This is why early in the republic, foreign entanglements where understood to be a bad thing. But that ship sailed a long time ago, to all of our detriment.
So what the Trump haters are outraged by in the Ukraine phone call is just the normal modus operandi of our broken government. When a person they hate takes part in this activity, they see it as treason. The same thing happens with Republicans who despised Obama. They thought the hot mic to Russia "I'll have more flexibility after the election" was treasonous, when of course it wasn't. Each side selectively applies the Constitution and wails in outrage when they are talking about the other team. It's all a joke. And if you are cheering on the other side's guy going to prison, and ignoring that your own guy should also probably be executed, then you are just as caught up the corruption as the politicians you hate.
Thanks for this. Regardless of bias, there is no equivalence between trump and any other politician. He can’t have it both ways. He came in pretty much selling himself as a dirty player who doesn’t stick by the rules and can’t possibly expect that the extra scrutiny he’s receiving isn’t warranted. He is no victim and if this kind of conduct isn’t fiercely attacked we stop being a rule of law country.
Stark differences between he and Biden. Biden was publicly pressuring the Ukraine to get rid of a corrupt prosecutor with the backing of Congress. This issue with Biden has been looked into, they found nada. Compare that to Trump, who secretly asked the Ukrainian President to do him a favor and look into the Biden issue. The Biden issue is not a national security risk or priority. He didn’t ask the President to look into corruption in general, he asked him to look into Biden, this during a discussion about aid. By the way, Giuliani was openly boasting about working with Ukraine to look into Biden to help Trump. Yes, those words came out of his mouth, and that was in May. It boils down to Trump openly abusing his power for personal gain. All the elements are present, there is no way to argue that is not abuse of power at the very least.
We have a situation whereby Trump’s definition of ethical conduct has extended to his party and base, so that he gets shielded for committing a crime just because his supporters have a different set of standards for him.
Step back and think about this - what would the general reaction be if this it was Obama or Bush doing this? If you can’t say that it would have been the most scandalous thing ever you are just completely disconnected from reality. Trump and the truth don’t live on the same planet... he is a walking lie and he gets a pass. I agree with some your arguments, but will say that there are degrees of good and bad ethics and there has to be a firm threshold for that. Nixon got impeached for arguably something less serious than what has already been proven about Trump. If you look at the underlying behavior, Clinton’s sleeping around and small time real estate dealings (unproven of course) was small potatoes. Was the standard for those presidents different? Apparently so. I say absolutely not and we all need to wake back up to the reality of the damage that is being done to the office if we keep pretending Trump’s conduct is equivalent to anything before him.
Btw US Special Envoy to the Ukraine resigned.
Trollminator wrote:
Btw US Special Envoy to the Ukraine resigned.
Who just happened to be the person who, along with Giuliani, set up the call with the Ukrainian President Zelensky during Trump tried to make his illegal "deal".
One big difference is that asked the Ukraine for interference to help him get elected and he payed for it with taxpayer money. That's illegal. He also attempted to use our attorney General for a partisan dirt digging mission.
You know it's bad when even Never Trumper John Kasich is warning the Dems about this impeachment inquiry. He said "no one in Ohio is even talking about this (Ukraine)"
In other news, $13M raised for Trump's reelection campaign since Botox Pelosi's impeachment announcement.
KAG2020
Lindsey Graham used to be a never-trumper, too. Ah, the good ol’ days, when the GOP wasn’t 100% traitors.
Conundrum wrote:
One big difference is that Trump asked (no "the") Ukraine for interference to help him get elected and he payed for it with taxpayer money. That's illegal. He also attempted to use our attorney General for a partisan dirt digging mission.
Fixed that up for you.
Also, you are CORRECT!
jesseriley wrote:
Lindsey Graham used to be a never-trumper, too. Ah, the good ol’ days, when the GOP wasn’t 100% traitors.
Shouldn’t we wait to charge Donald until after the election so Pence can’t pardon him? He’s going to spend the rest of his life in jail, it’s really obvious to me.
jesseriley wrote:
Lindsey Graham used to be a never-trumper, too. Ah, the good ol’ days, when the GOP wasn’t 100% traitors.
I agree with you . . . BUT a reasonable hypothesis is that ALL national level politicians are essentially the same (here, "ALL" should be taken to mean something like 99%). All Republican AND all Democrat national level politicians are spineless, self-serving worms.
That is not to say that how the Dems are acting is the same as how the Republicans are acting. That is also not to say that anything that Obama did (or Bush did or . . . ) is at all comparable to what Trump does on a daily basis. It is simply to say that all of these national level politicians will do whatever it takes to get re-elected. Cross Trump and you are out of office if you are a GOP senator, representative, or administration official. So, nobody crosses Trump.
This is not so much party over country as self over country. Are the Democrats any different? How many would fight the good fight against the mainstream of their own party, knowing it was political suicide?
Perhaps this hypothesis is true. Perhaps not. Either way, it is reasonable to ask what any of this implies about two things:
A) The American electorate
B) The American electoral system
Why do we elect spineless, self-serving worms? (a complementary hypothesis is that many Americans - both conservatives and progressives - are not spineless, self-serving worms - why do they never seem to get into national level political positions?)
Rigged for Hillary wrote:
You know it's bad when even Never Trumper John Kasich is warning the Dems about this impeachment inquiry. He said "no one in Ohio is even talking about this (Ukraine)"
https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/463367-kasich-warns-democrats-on-impeachment-its-not-a-light-matterIn other news, $13M raised for Trump's reelection campaign since Botox Pelosi's impeachment announcement.
https://www.boston25news.com/news/trump-raises-13m-after-pelosi-announces-impeachment-inquiry/990725255KAG2020
Why would anyone talk to Kasich? He is not in office. Trumpers don't like him because he has long been critical of Trump. Democrats don't like him because he's a conservative. You do not know anything, dumb dumb.
There’s actually an article in the Guardian about Fox. They’re struggling with internal divisions over their coverage of the call to Ukraine. Even some of their analysts admit it was a crime. Oh, no!
He sold his soul to keep his senate seat. Was very unpopular with his voters when he was anti-Trump, but gained them back by converting. Guessing he wouldn't have become a Trump stooge if McCain was still alive.
Let me add two things which I havent see stated above:
(1) The single biggest issue for Trump--from my reading of the Complaint and the Transcript--is his advocacy for his personal attorney on an official State call. There is no way around that.
(2) When Joe Biden publicly pressured for the removal of a prosecutor, it was NOT so he would drop a prosecution against the company that son had a board seat on. It was because the prosecutor WASN'T going after that company (who was corrupt). If anything, Joe Biden--and our EU allies--were lobbying for something that would hurt Hunter Biden. That's a major difference.
P wrote:
jesseriley wrote:
Lindsey Graham used to be a never-trumper, too. Ah, the good ol’ days, when the GOP wasn’t 100% traitors.
I agree with you . . . BUT a reasonable hypothesis is that ALL national level politicians are essentially the same (here, "ALL" should be taken to mean something like 99%). All Republican AND all Democrat national level politicians are spineless, self-serving worms.
That is not to say that how the Dems are acting is the same as how the Republicans are acting. That is also not to say that anything that Obama did (or Bush did or . . . ) is at all comparable to what Trump does on a daily basis. It is simply to say that all of these national level politicians will do whatever it takes to get re-elected. Cross Trump and you are out of office if you are a GOP senator, representative, or administration official. So, nobody crosses Trump.
This is not so much party over country as self over country. Are the Democrats any different? How many would fight the good fight against the mainstream of their own party, knowing it was political suicide?
Perhaps this hypothesis is true. Perhaps not. Either way, it is reasonable to ask what any of this implies about two things:
A) The American electorate
B) The American electoral system
Why do we elect spineless, self-serving worms? (a complementary hypothesis is that many Americans - both conservatives and progressives - are not spineless, self-serving worms - why do they never seem to get into national level political positions?)
Interesting thoughts. Although you briefly address Trump's situation as being worse, most of your post points to a hypothetical false equivalency. If democrats were in this position they would do the same thing and support a lying law breaking president.
I have two issues with that. (1) It seems to be the defense that yeah it's not right but everybody does it so It's no big deal. With the logical implication, so lets not be shocked or outraged or have significant punishment. It's just politics.
(2) Democrats are known to "eat their own" and do not follow lockstep with leaders as much as republicans. You don't know what democrats would do in this situation. But we do know how republicans responded to this abuse of power.
Your question about why we readily elect ask serving worms is a good one. Here's my take on that. A politician who is not a self serving worm will be honest with the electorate and tell them both the things they want to hear and the truthful but difficult things to hear. We won't elect that person. The person who tells us how great and easy things will be is the person we elect. We will always chose lies that make us feel good over honesty.
These fools let Rigged change the subject line and kept posting it.
More news about Dan Coats firing at an earlier stage of the Ukraine coverup. Normally zero news on Saturday.
Conundrum wrote:
P wrote:
I agree with you . . . BUT a reasonable hypothesis is that ALL national level politicians are essentially the same (here, "ALL" should be taken to mean something like 99%). All Republican AND all Democrat national level politicians are spineless, self-serving worms.
That is not to say that how the Dems are acting is the same as how the Republicans are acting. That is also not to say that anything that Obama did (or Bush did or . . . ) is at all comparable to what Trump does on a daily basis. It is simply to say that all of these national level politicians will do whatever it takes to get re-elected. Cross Trump and you are out of office if you are a GOP senator, representative, or administration official. So, nobody crosses Trump.
This is not so much party over country as self over country. Are the Democrats any different? How many would fight the good fight against the mainstream of their own party, knowing it was political suicide?
Perhaps this hypothesis is true. Perhaps not. Either way, it is reasonable to ask what any of this implies about two things:
A) The American electorate
B) The American electoral system
Why do we elect spineless, self-serving worms? (a complementary hypothesis is that many Americans - both conservatives and progressives - are not spineless, self-serving worms - why do they never seem to get into national level political positions?)
Interesting thoughts. Although you briefly address Trump's situation as being worse, most of your post points to a hypothetical false equivalency. If democrats were in this position they would do the same thing and support a lying law breaking president.
I have two issues with that. (1) It seems to be the defense that yeah it's not right but everybody does it so It's no big deal. With the logical implication, so lets not be shocked or outraged or have significant punishment. It's just politics.
(2) Democrats are known to "eat their own" and do not follow lockstep with leaders as much as republicans. You don't know what democrats would do in this situation. But we do know how republicans responded to this abuse of power.
Your question about why we readily elect ask serving worms is a good one. Here's my take on that. A politician who is not a self serving worm will be honest with the electorate and tell them both the things they want to hear and the truthful but difficult things to hear. We won't elect that person. The person who tells us how great and easy things will be is the person we elect. We will always chose lies that make us feel good over honesty.
You appear to have reading comprehension problem. That is a shame, but it is not something that I can help you with.