Information is also not interference, in any legal document.
the impeachment inquiry is a witch hunt
Posts
Total:
225
-->
@Greyparrot
FBI doesn't do diplomacy.
No is claiming that they do. The FBI does investigations. Asking a foreign government to assist in an ongoing investigation would be fine. Asking a foreign government to investigate your political opponents is a crime.
Nobody is prohibited from informing the FBI. Not even the president.
No one has ever claimed that this was the case. I don't know what you are talking about. The issue is not about talking to the FBI. The issue is about trump asking a foreign country to dig up dirt on his political rivals. That happens to be a crime.
So the moment Trump decides to inform the FBI then it's no longer a "crime"
No. If trump had asked the justice department to do an investigation, then asked Ukraine to assist with that investigation, that would not be a crime. Trump did not do that. He asked a foreign government to dig up dirt on biden. That is a crime. It doesn't matter what he does now. He already committed the crime.
Information is also not interference, in any legal document.
I don't know where you are getting your legal documents. Information can easily be interference. For example, if I told a witness to a crime "if you testify we will leak proof of a crime you committed" that would be information, it would also be interference. Any attempt to get a witness not to testify is interference, no matter what form that takes.
Any attempt to get a thing of value from a foreigner that would help you in an election is a crime. The moment he asked them for that favor, he committed a crime.
What you do with information may or may not be a crime but simply asking for information is NEVER a crime in itself.
You can't conveniently separate national interests to uncover wasteful corruption from Trump's personal political gain from uncovering corruption. The president will always have that obligation as the head of law enforcement, no matter what the political implications may be.
-->
@Greyparrot
This is obviously not true. For example, there are laws around what information an employer can ask their employee for. If the employer asks for information they are not legally to permitted to ask for, that is a crime.What you do with information may or may not be a crime but simply asking for information is NEVER a crime in itself.
It is illegal to ask for a thing of value from a foreigner. The language was left open so that it could apply to as many things as possible. Dirt on a political opponent has value. Therefore it is illegal to ask for it from a foreigner.
You can't conveniently separate national interests to uncover wasteful corruption from Trump's personal political gain from uncovering corruption.
You just want to muddy the water. You want to pretend like asking a foreign government to find dirt on your political opponents is somehow normal or part of the president's job. It is not. Trump is the head of law enforcement agencies. If he wanted a specific case investigated he would send it to them. It is incredibly abnormal, as well as illegal, for him to ask a foreign government to investigate his political rivals.
If the employer asks for information they are not legally to permitted to ask for, that is a crime.
Cite law please.
If the employer asks for information they are not legally to permitted to ask for, that is a crime.
Cite law please.
If the employer asks for information they are not legally to permitted to ask for, that is a crime.
Cite this law, please.
From the laws I have seen, employers may not require certain information but there are no laws on simply asking.
-->
@Greyparrot
Here is an article citing 8 things an employer cannot legally ask. There are several laws around this. Asking any of these questions would be against the law.
some of the laws which prohibit these questions are:
The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
Civil Rights Act of 1964
-->
@HistoryBuff
the thing of value has to be of financial value, according to the law. getting information, on it's face doesn't have financial value. it's possible to say that it does, but it's not the most straightforward interpretation of the situation. also, anything could be said to have financial value. so you are basically arguing that a candidate cannot ask for anything at all from a foreign national that helps his campaign. .
-->
@HistoryBuff
the thing of value has to be of financial value, according to the law. getting information, on it's face doesn't have financial value. it's possible to say that it does, but it's not the most straightforward interpretation of the situation. also, anything could be said to have financial value. so you are basically arguing that a candidate cannot ask for anything at all from a foreign national that helps his campaign. .
-->
@n8nrgmi
the thing of value has to be of financial value, according to the law. getting information, on it's face doesn't have financial value
Patent lawyers, investment bankers, etc would all be shocked to find out that information has no financial value. If information has no financial value, then why did trump pay all that money to stormy daniels to get her to sign an NDA? Trump clearly believed that her information had financial value.
you are basically arguing that a candidate cannot ask for anything at all from a foreign national that helps his campaign.
Yes. That is what the law says. If you ask a foreigner for anything to help you win an election, you are committing a crime.
-->
@HistoryBuff
Did you read the laws? I have. It says you can't ask those questions as a requirement for hiring. Simply asking the questions out of context is never illegal. Nothing like this happened with Ukraine.
-->
@Greyparrot
Are you aware of how fast and frequently you move goalposts? If you feel the need to move the goalposts this many times, that might be a sign that you are lying to yourself to try to justify the things you want to believe rather than accepting the things that are true.Did you read the laws? I have. It says you can't ask those questions as a requirement for hiring. Simply asking the questions out of context is never illegal. Nothing like this happened with Ukraine.
Your previous sentence was "asking for information is NEVER a crime in itself". I provided specific examples where asking for information is a crime in itself and you immediately changed the question.
you are now saying out of context, asking for information isn't a crime. And sure, with no context at all that might be true. But luckily, we have context. The context is that trump is a politician and he asked for a thing of value from a foreigner that would help him win an election. Thus he has committed a crime. Context is important.
Simply asking a person for information is never a crime. If you then use that information to make a decision to hire or not hire a person, then it may or may not be a crime.
We don't know what Trump would or would not have done with the information because he hasn't gotten the info yet.
You're jumping the gun while the House continues to jump the shark.
-->
@Greyparrot
You literally just saw the laws that prove that isn't true. Asking someone certain questions in an interview is a crime. It doesn't matter if it affects whether or not you hire them. Asking the question is, in and of itself, illegal.Simply asking a person for information is never a crime.
The context of what you are asking for and your relationship to the person you are asking is what determines if it is a crime. But asking a question can certainly be a crime all on it's own.
When trump asked for a thing of value from a foreigner to help him in an election, he committed a crime.
-->
@HistoryBuff
You're just a layperson so you probably don't understand how civil law works. You can't go pick up an application from somewhere and then sue a person for asking a certain question on an application. You have to go to court and prove you were harmed or discriminated against. Simply having the question on an application is not sufficient in a civil court.
In fact, if Biden were to go in front of a civil court Judge to explain why Trump asking Ukraine for information on corruption violated Biden somehow, the Judge would immediately laugh at him.
I really don't have much more to say about this because Biden will probably drop out of the race as his numbers drop, making all of this moot.
House GOP is now demanding a vote on the floor, which is the last thing the Dems want. So it's not clear there will even be a discussion on this knowing that it will ultimately lead to a vote in the House.
Dems really have no easy way out of this. They can't vote and they also can't allow GOP to push for a vote and be caught resisting a vote.
The things trump did may have been illegal but there's no way it's worthy of impeachment.
-->
@HistoryBuff
i didn't say no information has financial value. but intellectual property only has value because we passed laws that said they do. the presumption should be that information has no financial value unless the market says so or we find a way to make it so. the only reason information on biden has financial value, is because you, historybuff, asserts that it does.
you dont have much wiggle room in your approach. so you think there is no room for interpretation here? you think the justice department irrationally is siding with trump? you think if this were put in front of a jury, that the only valid or reasonable conclusion they could draw is your position? if you were a judge, you would over ride the jury if they didn't do as you wished?
-->
@Greyparrot
Simply having the question on an application is not sufficient in a civil court.
Who is talking about a civil court? It is a crime to ask those questions. This is does not require a civil suit to be punishable. It varies depending on which law they have broken, but punishment for these can be carried out by bodies such as the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, or by the criminal justice system.
We are not talking about civil cases that need to show harm.
Much like trump's crimes don't need to show harm. He committed a crime the moment he asked them to dig up dirt on biden. He doesn't need to have had a quid pro quo (although it is looking more like there was), he doesn't have to have received anything. Asking was, in and of itself, a crime.
OF COURSE its a witcthunt ,its bidens scandal
-->
@n8nrgmi
this information would help him win an election. Winning an election comes with significant financial rewards. Therefore anything that helps him towards that reward has financial value.the presumption should be that information has no financial value unless the market says so or we find a way to make it so.
you think the justice department irrationally is siding with trump?
The justice department isn't siding with trump. The people Trump appointed are siding with him. You haven't heard from anyone else at the justice department because trump appointees have ordered them not to talk.
you think if this were put in front of a jury, that the only valid or reasonable conclusion they could draw is your position?
If they judged it based on emotion, as you appear to be doing, then that would complicate things. If the evaluated it strictly on the facts of the case, then it is remarkably straight forward. Trump asked for a thing of value. end of case.
-->
@Dr.Franklin
OF COURSE its a witcthunt ,its bidens scandal
Biden carried out an action that was supported by the US government as well as the EU, the UK, etc. The person Biden pushed out was actively avoiding investigating corruption. After he was removed a new investigation started on the company hunter was on the board of.
So biden did what everyone agreed needed to be done and actually caused an investigation of his own son. The idea that this is somehow a scandal for biden is just sad.
And just to add to this, here is a link to an article which shows that having the prosecutor removed had bipartisan support. Those are republicans asking to have the prosecutor removed as well. Are they also part of the cover up?
-->
@n8nrgmi
Exactly. Information on its own is meaningless. It's what you DO with the information that matters to the law.
-->
@HistoryBuff
i would say you are basing your position on a political bias, and it is more a matter of emotion to say all information has financial value than to generally presume that it doesn't. but that reasonable people can come to different conclusions..... and any other approach than that, is irrational.
yes, you are being irrational in thinking only you can possibly be right here.
-->
@HistoryBuff
They might be. GOP isn't immune to corruption, neither is Biden.
Guess we will find out when the GOP subpoenas Shokin when the Dems finally hold a vote.
-->
@Greyparrot
Exactly. Information on its own is meaningless. It's what you DO with the information that matters to the law.
It isn't about the information. The act of asking for it was the crime. Whether he was going to get it or not is irrelevant.
it is more a matter of emotion to say all information has financial value than to generally presume that it doesn't.
That information would help him win a political contest. He is planning to spend 10's or 100's of millions of dollars to try to win that election. Why would you think information that would help him accomplish something is will to spend 100's of millions of dollars on is worthless? It seems quite reasonable to believe that is valuable.
yes, you are being irrational in thinking only you can possibly be right here.
It isn't my opinion. It is the opinion of a very large number of people. Hell, even legal analysts on fox news have said that this is a crime.
Republicans are working overtime trying to muddy the water. They are trying very hard to make it look like a very simple issue is really complicated so that people don't have to think about it very hard. The question is, Did trump ask a foreign government for dirt on a political rival. if the answer to that question is yes, then he committed a crime. And since he has admitted to that already, there is nothing that is likely to stop his impeachment.
-->
@Greyparrot
They might be. GOP isn't immune to corruption, neither is Biden.
Lol you think republican senators, democratic senators, the UN, the EU and UK all got together to protect Joe Biden's son? But you don't believe that trump is guilty of the things he has released transcripts admitting he did? Man, republicans really do disconnect from reality.
-->
@HistoryBuff
Just the ones that stood to profit, like Hunter Biden.
-->
@Greyparrot
I'm not going to pretend that Biden is 100% clean. He has engaged in the same kind of general corruption that most long serving politicians have. If we got rid of all of them I would be fine with that.
But Trump is absolutely guilty of the same things. He brought his children with him on state trips, and they got business contracts shortly after the trip. That is exactly what trump accuses Biden of, but he did the same thing with Ivanka. The difference being that Ivanka is actually using a semi-official position to profit herself. At least hunter wasn't a government official trying to cash in.
If you want to go after all corruption, i am absolutely on board with that. But if you aren't willing to include Trump in that, then it isn't corruption you want to go after. You are just looking for an excuse to target your enemies, just like trump was.