Hot Take on Impeachment

Author: ResurgetExFavilla

Posts

Total: 43
Topic's author
#1
ResurgetExFavilla
ResurgetExFavilla's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 627
3
2
7
ResurgetExFavilla's avatar
ResurgetExFavilla
3
2
7
I've come around to the opinion that impeachment is political theatre which has been drafted and put into motion by Trump himself. The first part is simple cui bono. The impeachment hearings aren't heavily impacting Trump in the polls, are rallying his base, and are tanking Biden, who was one of his most threatening foes electorally. The timing is suspicious: right before an election year. It also lines up with some of Trump's earlier moves, like releasing the John Miller tape or picking a fight with the Pope, meant to strategically suck the oxygen out of the news cycle to weaken his adversary's media reach at critical moments.

Then there's the testimony. If my theory were true, then Trump would have sent State Department people who are loyal to him and directed them to both feed the media 'bombshell' lines that they could breathlessly report on while AT THE SAME TIME completely discrediting the investigation among his base and independents. So who is the star witness? Ambassador Gordon Sondland. Sondland is not part of the 'permanent government', he's a hotel mogul and political donor who was put into his position personally by Donald Trump. If you're looking for the profile of a guy who is personally loyal to Trump and willing to pull this off, you can't find a better candidate than this guy. And what has he done? He's fed the media lines about how there was a clear quid pro quo, going on and on about it, but once pressed on the issue he instantly folded and his argument collapsed to the open admission that his only source was 'his own presumption'. The other guy who testified, Ambassador Taylor, ultimately based everything he was saying on things told to him by Sondland. I wouldn't be surprised if the leaker was ordered by Trump himself to set this firestorm off.
#2
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
The impeachment hearings aren't heavily impacting Trump in the polls, are rallying his base, and are tanking Biden, who was one of his most threatening foes electorally.
Trump was going to rally his base no matter what so I don't think that helps him there. It isn't tanking Biden either. Outside of right wing nuts who weren't likely to vote democrat anyway, no one thinks biden has done anything wrong, because he hasn't. I haven't seen any evidence impeachment has had a significant effect on Biden. 

The timing is suspicious: right before an election year. It also lines up with some of Trump's earlier moves, like releasing the John Miller tape or picking a fight with the Pope, meant to strategically suck the oxygen out of the news cycle to weaken his adversary's media reach at critical moments.
I agree that trump does this alot. But usually it is saying something rude or picking a fight. He has actually committed crimes here. It is unlikely he will pay for them while in office but there is the very real risk he could go to prison when he leaves office. He has also put other people in jeopardy as well. Giuliani might go to prison over this. Not to mention that he pretty much guaranteed that he is going to be impeached which trump himself has said in the past would be a bad thing that no one would want. 

 And what has he done? He's fed the media lines about how there was a clear quid pro quo, going on and on about it, but once pressed on the issue he instantly folded and his argument collapsed to the open admission that his only source was 'his own presumption'.
Sondland tied trump and multiple other people in the administration to crimes. People who only watch fox news might believe the spin that sondland's testimony meant nothing. But in a court of law that would be extremely damaging. And this may very well end up in a court room for people. If trump had wanted to cause the issue then discredit it, he would never have wanted sondland to say that. He would have wanted the whole thing to stall out and have little to no evidence of wrong doing. But we now have transcripts showing a crime as well as multiple witnesses backing it up. 

I think it is highly unlikely trump wanted this to happen. Trump likes controversy so he can steal the spotlight from other people. But all he has done is hand the spotlight to other people. Basically, no one has really been paying all that much attention to what trump says and does the last few weeks. They have been focusing on the impeachment inquiry, not on him personally. That is the opposite of what trump wants. He wants the spotlight on him personally. 

Given that this scheme was very, very close to succeeding as planned, I think it is much more likely to be exactly what it looks like. Trump wanted to get the ukranians to smear biden by saying they were investigating him. So he extorted them into doing it. He would then have been able to campaign against him by saying he is just as corrupt as "crooked hilary". That was his plan to win re-election. But it all went wrong and he got caught. He didn't get the smear he wanted and now is spending weeks having his crimes examined publicly instead of people paying attention to him. 
#3
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
impeachmnet stupid
Topic's author
#4
ResurgetExFavilla
ResurgetExFavilla's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 627
3
2
7
ResurgetExFavilla's avatar
ResurgetExFavilla
3
2
7
-->
@HistoryBuff
The impeachment hearings aren't heavily impacting Trump in the polls, are rallying his base, and are tanking Biden, who was one of his most threatening foes electorally.
Trump was going to rally his base no matter what so I don't think that helps him there. It isn't tanking Biden either. Outside of right wing nuts who weren't likely to vote democrat anyway, no one thinks biden has done anything wrong, because he hasn't. I haven't seen any evidence impeachment has had a significant effect on Biden. 
Secular Talk, Jimmy Dore Show, Krystal Ball. Anyone with two braincells to rub together can see that it's an obvious case of corruption. I live in an area that's pretty non-partisan and everyone I know who isn't a neoliberal rolls their eyes at the frantic 'NOTHING TO SEE HERE' from the corporate media.

The timing is suspicious: right before an election year. It also lines up with some of Trump's earlier moves, like releasing the John Miller tape or picking a fight with the Pope, meant to strategically suck the oxygen out of the news cycle to weaken his adversary's media reach at critical moments.
I agree that trump does this alot. But usually it is saying something rude or picking a fight. He has actually committed crimes here.
It is unlikely he will pay for them while in office but there is the very real risk he could go to prison when he leaves office. He has also put other people in jeopardy as well. Giuliani might go to prison over this. Not to mention that he pretty much guaranteed that he is going to be impeached which trump himself has said in the past would be a bad thing that no one would want.
 And what has he done? He's fed the media lines about how there was a clear quid pro quo, going on and on about it, but once pressed on the issue he instantly folded and his argument collapsed to the open admission that his only source was 'his own presumption'.
Sondland tied trump and multiple other people in the administration to crimes. People who only watch fox news might believe the spin that sondland's testimony meant nothing. But in a court of law that would be extremely damaging. And this may very well end up in a court room for people. If trump had wanted to cause the issue then discredit it, he would never have wanted sondland to say that. He would have wanted the whole thing to stall out and have little to no evidence of wrong doing. But we now have transcripts showing a crime as well as multiple witnesses backing it up. 

I think it is highly unlikely trump wanted this to happen. Trump likes controversy so he can steal the spotlight from other people. But all he has done is hand the spotlight to other people. Basically, no one has really been paying all that much attention to what trump says and does the last few weeks. They have been focusing on the impeachment inquiry, not on him personally. That is the opposite of what trump wants. He wants the spotlight on him personally. 

Given that this scheme was very, very close to succeeding as planned, I think it is much more likely to be exactly what it looks like. Trump wanted to get the ukranians to smear biden by saying they were investigating him. So he extorted them into doing it. He would then have been able to campaign against him by saying he is just as corrupt as "crooked hilary". That was his plan to win re-election. But it all went wrong and he got caught. He didn't get the smear he wanted and now is spending weeks having his crimes examined publicly instead of people paying attention to him. 


I'll just post the entire questioning by Schiff here. People can watch it themselves. Only someone whose completely delusional (or  a mouth-breather who only reads headlines) can walk away from this thinking that this was a slam dunk against Trump:


https://youtu.be/uWEDhTwEUsg?t=446 At this time stamp, Sondland admits that there was no explicit quid pro quo and that any quid pro quo existing is (HIS WORDS) 'due to his presumption' (16:15). So lets look at the bigger question. The original charge was that Trump was withholding military aid in order to have corruption investigations which targetted the Bidens. So Sondland explicitly says at several points that the Bidens were never mentioned, only Burisma. If Hunter Biden did nothing wrong (which dolts like you maintain) nothing would have come of an investigation. Also, there is the fact that the aid in question was delivered with no press conference announcement (which Trump supposedly demanded as a condition of aid).

So in order for your case to hold water:

- A Ukrainian Gas Company putting a man who was just dishonorably discharged from the US Navy for doing coke, had no experience in petrobusiness, and no experience in Ukraine, into a lucrative board position at 50k USD a month had NOTHING to do with access that it might afford to his father, who was the Vice President of the world's sole super power. ANY discharged drug addict with no experience could have picked out of the blue from some US slum and placed on the board of this important company in a foreign country with a notoriously corrupt government. Just yesterday there were Burisma headhunters snooping around under the overpass, looking for a new board member by following a trail of burnt spoons and discolored urine. The fact that Hunter Biden is the Vice President's son is just a bizarre twist of fate. To suggest that it played ANY roll is an insane, fringe conspiracy theory, you'd have to be an absolute lunatic to do that. The news corporations, who are owned by the same people who own the oil companies and defense contractors who regularly profit from graft in situations like this, make that very, very clear: it's beyond the pale to even suggest that something is amiss. And affluent young suburban 'leftists' everywhere bob their heads in agreement! There's nothing at all shady about Uncle Kevin's K Street gig!

- The request for investigation into this is therefore COMPLETELY unjustified, and could ONLY be motivated by political machinations against the boy's innocent father. There was a quid pro quo at the bottom of this; Trump was holding back military aid to frame this poor young man who had just gotten a real honest windfall and tar and feather his lovely father, who would NEVER hold back aid as a precondition to, for example, firing a prosecutor who was disliked by prominent interests in the US and Western Europe (https://youtu.be/vCSF3reVr10?t=110). That that military aid was released without an announcement into the investigation that was supposedly the 'quid' to the aid's 'quo' is irrelevant. The testimony of the main witness, Sondland, who admitted flat out that he had no hard evidence of this Quid Quo Pro aside from his 'presumption', stated TWICE in the course of his questioning, is irrelevant. It happened.

- The fact that THIS is being investigated and prosecuted. as opposed to illegal wars, illegal spying, illegal torture, the assassination of sovereign presidents, of archbishops, of activists, journalists, and organizers, is completely sane and unremarkable. It has nothing to do with the fact that the entire political class, the financial elites, and the corporate world is awash in corruption and so cannot risk a populist movement exposing them to well-deserved criticism.

- Lastly, that the WALLS ARE CLOSING IT. That's it. We got him folks. The WRITING IS ON THE WALL. He's CORNERED. This is the end of the Trump presidency. Instead of criticizing his policies or exposing the ruling class, our circus has FINALLY caught him because Ambassador Flurdelfloo says that Ambassador Dinglefor got a strong impression (ultimately born of a 'presumption' on his part) and that filtered down the grapevine. The little people who have been ignored by both parties while their kids die with a needle in their arm and grandma goes bankrupt paying for chemo can finally heave a sigh of relief, knowing the people like Hunter Biden will be free from persecution when they engage in painfully obvious graft. There's no way that this is another Trump-motivated psyop to keep the opposition barking at shadows like a bunch of deranged birthers. He has no experience with manipulating that sort of mass psychology, and definitely isn't distracting people while he enriches his donors and betrays half of his campaign promises.


#5
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
Secular Talk, Jimmy Dore Show, Krystal Ball. Anyone with two braincells to rub together can see that it's an obvious case of corruption. I live in an area that's pretty non-partisan and everyone I know who isn't a neoliberal rolls their eyes at the frantic 'NOTHING TO SEE HERE' from the corporate media.
I will re-phrase. What the hunter biden did is corrupt. But it was in no way illegal or even out of the norm of standard behavior. It is the same thing the clintons or the trumps have and continue to do. And while that is obviously bad, the people who will actually care about that are the same people who wouldn't vote for biden anyway. I don't think it has any meaningful impact. 

  - A Ukrainian Gas Company putting a man who was just dishonorably discharged from the US Navy for doing coke...
what hunter did was corruption. It was in no way illegal. There is no evidence Joe Biden was in any way involved in that. And even if he was, it also isn't illegal. I agree this stuff should be illegal but it isn't. pretending like it is a scandal is a stretch. Pretending like most people care is also a stretch. 

- The request for investigation into this is therefore COMPLETELY unjustified, and could ONLY be motivated by political machinations against the boy's innocent father.
There is literally no evidence that either joe or hunter did anything illegal. Asking a foreign leader to investigate them, by name, is obvious corruption. 

- The fact that THIS is being investigated and prosecuted. as opposed to illegal wars, illegal spying, illegal torture, the assassination of sovereign presidents, of archbishops, of activists, journalists, and organizers, is completely sane and unremarkable.
Those things are entirely unrelated. Trump asking was a crime. full stop. all those other things can also be investigated, but it is completely irrelevant to this discussion. 

- Lastly, that the WALLS ARE CLOSING IT. That's it. We got him folks. The WRITING IS ON THE WALL. He's CORNERED. This is the end of the Trump presidency.
I think everyone understands that the senate wont convict. but that isn't because trump is innocent. The evidence pretty conclusively proves he is guilty. It is because the republicans in the senate are too afraid of trump's cultish base to actually uphold the law. 
#6
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,969
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
The whole thing definitely seems fabricated and manufactured against Biden, but I can't figure out for certain who.

I mean Biden has created a LOT of enemies.
#7
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,969
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
Also, you forgot the tax return he trolled Rachel Maddow with live and in real-time on her own show...
#8
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,969
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@HistoryBuff
Trump asking was a crime. 

Gossip isn't a crime. All of DC would be in jail.
#9
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Greyparrot
Gossip isn't a crime. All of DC would be in jail.
Of course gossip isn't a crime. if the president of ukraine had told trump out of the blue something about biden that wouldn't be a crime.

But an elected official asking for a foreign leader to announce an investigation of his political rival is 100% a crime. Dangling aid money and a white house visit in order to get it is a 2nd crime. Threatening witnesses and ordering people not to co-operate are 2 more crimes.    
#10
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,969
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
This CNN article is 3 years old...

Before Zucker ordered everyone to do exactly what this article was warning about.
#11
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,969
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@HistoryBuff
Gossip about your political rival is 100% not a crime. All elections would be declared null and void.


That is some serious MSM gaslighting if MSM mouthbreathers are actually believing that.
#12
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Greyparrot
Gossip about your political rival is 100% not a crime. All elections would be declared null and void.
What trump did wasn't gossip though. Gossip is 2 people chatting about things they know. Trump called a foreign leader and directly asked him to investigate (and publicly announce that he was investigating) a political rival. The ukranians didn't know that biden had done anything criminal (because he didn't). Trump wanted them to go digging for it so he could slander biden with it. That is not gossip. That is a crime. 

So to reiterate: 1) asking them to investigate was a crime
2) exchanging aid and a white house visit in exchange for it was a crime
3) threatening witnesses was a crime
4) ordering people not to co-operate with an impeachment inquiry is a crime. 

Trump is going to be impeached for these reasons.


#13
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,969
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
Gossip is 2 people chatting about things they know. 

Lol, it most certainly is not. Go brush up.
#14
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Greyparrot
Lol, it most certainly is not. Go brush up.
"Gossip is idle talk or rumor, especially about the personal or private affairs of others; the act is also known as dishing or tattling."

That is the definition of gossip. Trump was not gossiping. The President of Ukraine didn't know anything about Biden. Trump was asking him to start an investigation and to publicly announce it so that trump could use it to smear his political opponent. That is not, in any way, gossiping.  

If trump had said something like "do you know anything about biden" and the ukranians said "I heard he did (insert thing here", that would be gossip. Asking them to publicly investigate biden is most certainly not gossiping. 
#15
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,969
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
If Trump had said something like "do you know anything about Biden" and the Ukrainians said "I heard he did (insert thing here", that would be gossip. Asking them to publicly investigate Biden is most certainly not gossiping. 

Lol, literally WTF.
#16
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Greyparrot
Lol, literally WTF.
I have no idea what you are trying to say. I gave an example of what gossip would look like and explained why what trump did was in no way gossip, it was a crime. You responded with nothing. 


#17
Imabench
Imabench's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 934
3
4
9
Imabench's avatar
Imabench
3
4
9
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
Considering that Trump can barely plan out a tweet on twitter correctly, I highly doubt he is even capable of masterminding a grand scheme to use his own impeachment talks to his favor, let alone actually doing it and somehow succeeding. 


#18
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,969
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Imabench
At least he talks better off teleprompter than some other presidents we had.
#19
Imabench
Imabench's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 934
3
4
9
Imabench's avatar
Imabench
3
4
9
-->
@Greyparrot
Not really... The majority of 6th grade students I have worked with on average can articulate thoughts better and more clearly than Trump can....

Actually Im pretty certain that an iPhone auto-fill text function could formulate a speech that is almost on par with what Trump comes up with if you give it the first three words to get things going. 

#20
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,969
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Imabench
Have you seen Obama off teleprompter?


We haven't seen a good candidate off prompter since Bill Clinton. His wife is terrible.
#21
TheRealNihilist
TheRealNihilist's avatar
Debates: 44
Posts: 4,920
4
9
11
TheRealNihilist's avatar
TheRealNihilist
4
9
11
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
Trump is stupid. See his appointee Giuliani. A clever person would eventually know the loose cannon is Rudy Giuliani and would remove him from his position yet he still keeps him. That alone shows how stupid he is. Here is a great video. It took him 30 seconds to fuck up. If you want to say after this that Trump is playing 25D chess then go ahead. I don't think there is anything I can do to tell you he is stupid. 

Biden is not failing. He is still number 1.

The reason why the impeachment doesn't actually matter is because no gives a flying shit about justice, just if it helps them. If you were going to jail I bet you would do anything to try to avoid it. The very few who have "morals" would be too gullible or wouldn't even be in that position. Most people posture like they care but they don't. They only care about their happiness and that can be lying to save face whether it be intentionally or unintentionally. People can realize the very thing they use to declare the Bible is true is testimony yet when it comes to Trump's impeachment we are going to reject it. People do this all the time. It would take great effort on your part to realize your faults and change and majority of people don't even want to bother to actually critique the very positions they hold and know when a position they hold cannot be held anymore. 
#22
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,969
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@TheRealNihilist
I bet I could get you to fuck up if you were on CNN for over 100 hours of airtime.
#23
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
Where do you people get your reality? Trump did not ask for dirt on Biden. That is how your interpret what he did, but your spin is different from reality.

Trump asked for an investigation. There is nothing wrong with that. An investigation could have cleared Biden.

Why are you all trying to frame Trump with your assumption?

#24
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
What sort of stupidity does it take to be a Trump supporter/defender?
#25
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@ethang5
Where do you people get your reality? Trump did not ask for dirt on Biden. That is how your interpret what he did, but your spin is different from reality.
The exact quote from the transcript is:

"There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it... It sounds horrible to me."

Trump explicitly asks a foreign leader to dig up dirt on his political rival, by name. That is a crime. Also, please notice the ellipsis (the three dots) near the end. That means something was omitted. They cut something out of the transcript there. So while what we know he said is already a crime, we don't know the full extent of what he asked for. 
 

Trump asked for an investigation. There is nothing wrong with that. An investigation could have cleared Biden.
No, if he wanted an investigation he would have referred it to the FBI or to congress to look into. The president is not supposed to get foregin leaders to investigate his political rivals. 

Why are you all trying to frame Trump with your assumption?
Asking a foreigner for something of value in an election is a crime. That transcript confirms he did that. So we already know he committed that crime. We also now know he is guilty of bribery because he held back aid and offered a white house visit in exchange for the dirt. We know he is guilty of witness tampering and obstruction of justice when he threatened witnesses and ordered people not to testify. 

It's hard to frame someone for crimes they are doing in public for all to see. 
#26
Swagnarok
Swagnarok's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 1,250
3
2
6
Swagnarok's avatar
Swagnarok
3
2
6
-->
@HistoryBuff
No, if he wanted an investigation he would have referred it to the FBI or to congress to look into.
Yes, well, the FBI and Congress haven't exactly been keen on doing whatever the President asks. He's had 2+ years of experience now in trying to deal with them. If he had asked the FBI to investigate Hunter Biden, they would've made the request public knowledge and accused him of corruption all the same. He can't win by trying to work within the confines of a system that's rigged against him and hellbent on undermining him at every turn.

And given the deep connections and leverage that members of the Establishment have among each other, even if they had complied with his request their ability/willingness to conduct such impartially would've been sorely compromised from the onset. The only way to ensure an actual investigation would've been to ask somebody who didn't already have a stake in the investigation's final outcome, such as a newly elected, anti-establishment Ukrainian president.
#27
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Swagnarok
He can't win by trying to work within the confines of a system that's rigged against him and hellbent on undermining him at every turn.
The argument you appear to be making is that he wouldn't have gotten his way if he followed the law, so he decided to commit a crime. That is not a defense. Asking the ukranian president to look up dirt on Biden is a crime. Why he decided to commit that crime is useful info, but it certainly doesn't excuse the crime. 

The only way to ensure an actual investigation would've been to ask somebody who didn't already have a stake in the investigation's final outcome, such as a newly elected, anti-establishment Ukrainian president.
Let me get this straight, you think the only way to get an unbiased investigation is to extort the president of a country known for corruption into investigating trump's political rivals? if you think that is unbiased, i'm not sure you know what bias means. 
Topic's author
#28
ResurgetExFavilla
ResurgetExFavilla's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 627
3
2
7
ResurgetExFavilla's avatar
ResurgetExFavilla
3
2
7
-->
@HistoryBuff
Asking a foreigner for something of value in an election is a crime. That transcript confirms he did that. So we already know he committed that crime. We also now know he is guilty of bribery because he held back aid and offered a white house visit in exchange for the dirt. We know he is guilty of witness tampering and obstruction of justice when he threatened witnesses and ordered people not to testify. 

It's hard to frame someone for crimes they are doing in public for all to see. 

That's absurd. If that were the case, the Steele Dossier would be illegal and 90% of congress would be in jail for accepting free trips and other kickbacks from the Israelis. It's illegal for them to take bribes, and it's a rule which isn't consistently enforced (see: Israel). In this situation, we're talking about information, not money and not a free vacation to Kiev. Presidents ask foreign powers for information all the time. We work closely, for example, with British intelligence and Mossad.

Your whole argument is convoluted. Hunter Biden did something wrong, but it wasn't illegal so it can't be investigated. Since graft and naked corruption apparently don't disgust you enough, would you apply this argument if concerning evidence of Biden's son killing and raping children existed? If Trump said 'hey, can we get this investigated?' after he was cleared by a predecessor who depended on his father for political support, would you flip out and say that he's receiving 'something of value' from a foreign country? Maybe you would, if enough headlines were passed in front of yours eyes at a rapid pace.

Or another one. If it came out that George Senior had been bribed by an Iraqi oil magnate during the Gulf War and Gore won the election, would it be beyond the pale for Gore to request an investigation from the Iraqis if he was running against Bush Jr? It's not as if the FBI can waltz into Iraq and start thumbing through their files. You act as if it's either impossible for a politically connected US figure to commit crimes in another country, OR that those crimes should always go unpunished because it might benefit politically the person who starts the investigation. My position is simple: if someone powerful does something wrong, they should be held to a STRICTER standard due to the power given to them, not given a pass. What Hunter Biden did in accepting a nakedly corrupt position is magnitudes worse than what Trump did in requesting an investigation into it, and however much you repeat your mantras to yourself that is how it will look to your average independent voter.

The irony of all of this is that Trump HAS done something that violates the emoluments clause: the booking of empty rooms in his hotels by Saudis. But Congress will NEVER investigate that because then they'd have to apply the same standard to themselves (a standard they would almost all fail). And you will never demand that they investigate that instead, because you will be swept up in the next media firestorm about how the walls are closing in and Trump is going to go away. It's how you cope with the fact that your party is corrupt and that you were all outmaneuvered by someone like Donald Trump. Just like deranged Republicans were convincing themselves ten years ago that Obama was a secret Kenyan Muslim married to a tranny, you've plunged yourself into this fever dream where sinister Bond villains with Russian accents are hiding around every corner, the heroic CIA and FBI hot on their heels. The collapse of the progressive dogma is so traumatic that you've regressed to a simpler, cold war us vs. them mentality to shelter your lizard brains from harsh reality: temporal politics has no arc that bend towards justice, humanity, or good. Trump isn't some interlude or a bump on the road to utopia. He's a sign of a very sick society that's falling apart.
Topic's author
#29
ResurgetExFavilla
ResurgetExFavilla's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 627
3
2
7
ResurgetExFavilla's avatar
ResurgetExFavilla
3
2
7
And, of course, this thread is replete with people who were beaten by Trump assuring themselves that he's too stupid to do it again. When your ego is so fragile that you can't seriously address a threat that has already beaten you once without loosing your ill-gotten sense of superiority, you deserve to lose again.
#30
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
That's absurd.
It's the law. You can argue that you don't agree with the law, but saying that it is absurd seems to be denying reality. 

the Steele Dossier would be illegal
Steele was never paid a dime by any elected official. He was contracted by an american company. So no elected official every got information from a foreigner. 

90% of congress would be in jail for accepting free trips and other kickbacks from the Israelis
This specific law is things of value to an election. A trip to Israel is not of value to an election. 

Presidents ask foreign powers for information all the time. We work closely, for example, with British intelligence and Mossad.
True, on issues of national security. Investigating your political rivals (which he asked them to do by name) is not a national security issue. It is a personal benefit. 

Your whole argument is convoluted. Hunter Biden did something wrong, but it wasn't illegal so it can't be investigated.
False, no one has ever alleged Hunter did anything illegal. The company he was on the board for was investigated for things that happened before he was on the board. Other than vague speculation, I have never heard anyone say any crime he even could have broken. Also, it has been investigated already. 

Since graft and naked corruption apparently don't disgust you enough, would you apply this argument if concerning evidence of Biden's son killing and raping children existed?
Why would it? Hunter is not the same person as Joe. The sins of the son are not the sins of the father. If hunter were a criminal, that wouldn't change my opinion of Joe. And to be clear, I don't like joe. And also to be clear, I think the kind of corruption engaged in by the bidens should be illegal. But unfortunately, it is perfectly legal and fairly normal for most politicians.

If Trump said 'hey, can we get this investigated?' after he was cleared by a predecessor who depended on his father for political support, would you flip out and say that he's receiving 'something of value' from a foreign country?
A president asking a foreign leader to look into a specific allegation that has to do with his rival should concern anyone. Trump didn't ask them to look into just anyone. He specifically, and only, asked them to look into things that would personally benefit trump. 

If it came out that George Senior had been bribed by an Iraqi oil magnate during the Gulf War and Gore won the election, would it be beyond the pale for Gore to request an investigation from the Iraqis if he was running against Bush Jr?
Yes, that would be incredibly wrong. The proper channel would be to send that to the FBI or congress to investigate. Asking a foreign leader to investigate your political rivals is a crime. 

The irony of all of this is that Trump HAS done something that violates the emoluments clause
You do realize that the emoluments clause and federal campaign finance laws are 2 separate laws he has broken right? Asking for a thing of value that helps in an election is a violation of the federal campaign finance law. Accepting gifts and money from foreign leaders violates the emoluments clause. Trump has done both. 

But Congress will NEVER investigate that because then they'd have to apply the same standard to themselves (a standard they would almost all fail)
Agreed. Most of the establishment dems and republicans are dirty as hell. That is why I think Sanders needs to win because he doesn't have those corrupt ties. 

you've plunged yourself into this fever dream where sinister Bond villains with Russian accents are hiding around every corner, the heroic CIA and FBI hot on their heels.
Oh god no. The national security state are not heroes. I mean, some of them might be. But on the whole the national security apparatus is contemptible. But it is proven that the russians hacked the DNC to benefit trump. Pretending like the Russians didn't break laws to help trump get elected is incredibly naive. 

The collapse of the progressive dogma is so traumatic that you've regressed to a simpler, cold war us vs. them mentality to shelter your lizard brains from harsh reality
To be clear this isn't about russians per se. This is about rich, powerful assholes working together to make themselves richer, more powerful assholes. Those assholes could be russian, ukranians or american, trump doesn't care. He will work with anyone, no matter how corrupt, as long as it benefits him personally. So it might be an us VS them mentality, but it is more about class and power than nationality.

Trump isn't some interlude or a bump on the road to utopia. He's a sign of a very sick society that's falling apart.
Agreed. And until all that corrupt money is taken out of politics, things will continue to get worse. But luckily, left wing ideas are on the rise.