Same Party, Different House
https://fanlax.com/forum/
Obama didn't have to ask or send an emissary. The Ukrainians were anxious to sabotage Trump.a fan wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 4:24 pm
Nope. Not even close.
Did Biden or Obama call the Ukrainian President and ask him to investigate Trump? Nope.
Or send (and again, I can't believe Republicans are acting like this is no big deal) Trump's personal lawyer to a foreign country, acting like he has some State sanction authority....and looking to gin up dirt on Biden.
You know all this, and are just having fun with me here. Which is fine.
But the only thing of real value they provided was the exposure of the _corrupt_ ties between Manafort and a host of bad guys from a Russian leaning and quite corrupt prior Ukrainian government. They did not fabricate anything about Manafort - the information was borne out and eventually was a large part of what put Paulie in the hoosegow.old salt wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 8:17 pmObama didn't have to ask or send an emissary. The Ukrainians were anxious to sabotage Trump.a fan wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 4:24 pm
Nope. Not even close.
Did Biden or Obama call the Ukrainian President and ask him to investigate Trump? Nope.
Or send (and again, I can't believe Republicans are acting like this is no big deal) Trump's personal lawyer to a foreign country, acting like he has some State sanction authority....and looking to gin up dirt on Biden.
You know all this, and are just having fun with me here. Which is fine.
They saw Clinton as even more pro-Ukrainian & anti-Russian than Obama.
They were confident Clinton would win & wanted the brownie points.
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/ ... ire-233446
The President used extortion to cheat in the 2020 presidential election. He used military aid dollars meant to aid an ally against his Russian patrons in order to force Ukraine to intervene in the 2020 elections, in order to remain in office by corrupt means.
There are various crimes that get committed along the way. But that is the core of it. The President is delegated vast powers to act in the national interest and he has vast discretion to determine what he or she believes the national interest is. But when he uses those powers for his own personal or financial gain they are illegitimate on their face, abuses of power and merit impeachment. The fact that he was doing so to sabotage a national election makes it vastly worse. And the fact that he was getting a foreign power to sabotage a US election makes it worse still.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/so ... nts-crimesWe don’t even need to get into the other crimes involved, having a crooked lawyer taking over US foreign policy in a critical part of the world and sidelining professional diplomats. We just focus on the core thing. The President is given tremendous power to advance the national interest, see that the laws are enforced, preserve the national welfare. These aren’t powers that he owns personally. They are delegated for these ends. Your banker has great power to act on your behalf. They have no right to steal your money. A doctor has vast powers to cut your body, make decisions when you are unconscious. They no right to kill you or sell your organs or fondle you for their personal satisfaction. It’s all the same thing. Stop saying quid pro quo or getting lost in the details. The crimes are clear. Use language that accurately describes them.
What does that have to do with the whistle blower filing a complaint and the Inspector General finding it credible?old salt wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 8:17 pmObama didn't have to ask or send an emissary. The Ukrainians were anxious to sabotage Trump.a fan wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 4:24 pm
Nope. Not even close.
Did Biden or Obama call the Ukrainian President and ask him to investigate Trump? Nope.
Or send (and again, I can't believe Republicans are acting like this is no big deal) Trump's personal lawyer to a foreign country, acting like he has some State sanction authority....and looking to gin up dirt on Biden.
You know all this, and are just having fun with me here. Which is fine.
They saw Clinton as even more pro-Ukrainian & anti-Russian than Obama.
They were confident Clinton would win & wanted the brownie points.
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/ ... ire-233446
I'm just answering afan's questions. Maybe the WB doesn't read POLITICO,Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 8:28 pmWhat does that have to do with the whistle blower filing a complaint and the Inspector General finding it credible?old salt wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 8:17 pmObama didn't have to ask or send an emissary. The Ukrainians were anxious to sabotage Trump.a fan wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 4:24 pm
Nope. Not even close.
Did Biden or Obama call the Ukrainian President and ask him to investigate Trump? Nope.
Or send (and again, I can't believe Republicans are acting like this is no big deal) Trump's personal lawyer to a foreign country, acting like he has some State sanction authority....and looking to gin up dirt on Biden.
You know all this, and are just having fun with me here. Which is fine.
They saw Clinton as even more pro-Ukrainian & anti-Russian than Obama.
They were confident Clinton would win & wanted the brownie points.
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/ ... ire-233446
I also told you everything that comes out of Ukraine is dubious.
The Inspector General part of the plot? The White House’s summary of the phone call was doctored? The text messages with Sondland Taylor Et al were doctored? All the testimony reflected in the transcripts was also doctored?old salt wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 8:41 pmI'm just answering afan's questions. Maybe the WB doesn't read POLITICO,Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 8:28 pmWhat does that have to do with the whistle blower filing a complaint and the Inspector General finding it credible?old salt wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 8:17 pmObama didn't have to ask or send an emissary. The Ukrainians were anxious to sabotage Trump.a fan wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 4:24 pm
Nope. Not even close.
Did Biden or Obama call the Ukrainian President and ask him to investigate Trump? Nope.
Or send (and again, I can't believe Republicans are acting like this is no big deal) Trump's personal lawyer to a foreign country, acting like he has some State sanction authority....and looking to gin up dirt on Biden.
You know all this, and are just having fun with me here. Which is fine.
They saw Clinton as even more pro-Ukrainian & anti-Russian than Obama.
They were confident Clinton would win & wanted the brownie points.
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/ ... ire-233446
...or he's so far in the tank for Ukraine that he was willing to use the WB process to pass along hearsay to former coworkers who are now Schiff staffers. We now know he had advice from them on how to proceed & he used a lawyer, as they recommended.
Read his lawyer's tweets for the game plan.
I understand that.
Good place to start. Were any of the others paying Hunter Biden $50k/mo ?ggait:
I'm sure there were dozens of corrupt Uke companies that merited investigation. Yet Burisma is the ONLY company that was targeted. And a key piece was that Burisma had to be publicly announced. It really wasn't so much about the investigation -- it was about the announcement. That is very telling.
Trump has Zelensky on tape.old salt wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 9:00 pmGood place to start. Were any of the others paying Hunter Biden $50k/mo ?ggait:
I'm sure there were dozens of corrupt Uke companies that merited investigation. Yet Burisma is the ONLY company that was targeted. And a key piece was that Burisma had to be publicly announced. It really wasn't so much about the investigation -- it was about the announcement. That is very telling.
Trump didn't ask them to limit anti-corruption investigations to Burisma.
And what other companies pay board members in Ukraine is absolutely immaterial to whether the President corruptly asked a foreign government to intercede in our next presidential election. Extortion/bribery is what happened here. Criminal and impeachable.old salt wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 9:00 pmGood place to start. Were any of the others paying Hunter Biden $50k/mo ?ggait:
I'm sure there were dozens of corrupt Uke companies that merited investigation. Yet Burisma is the ONLY company that was targeted. And a key piece was that Burisma had to be publicly announced. It really wasn't so much about the investigation -- it was about the announcement. That is very telling.
Trump didn't ask them to limit anti-corruption investigations to Burisma.
There was a specific conflict of interest with the son of a US govt official who wielded overwhelming influence over Ukraine.RedFromMI wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 9:14 pmAnd what other companies pay board members in Ukraine is absolutely immaterial to whether the President corruptly asked a foreign government to intercede in our next presidential election. Extortion/bribery is what happened here. Criminal and impeachable.old salt wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 9:00 pmGood place to start. Were any of the others paying Hunter Biden $50k/mo ?ggait:
I'm sure there were dozens of corrupt Uke companies that merited investigation. Yet Burisma is the ONLY company that was targeted. And a key piece was that Burisma had to be publicly announced. It really wasn't so much about the investigation -- it was about the announcement. That is very telling.
Trump didn't ask them to limit anti-corruption investigations to Burisma.
Like Ivanka and Jared.old salt wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 9:32 pmThere was a specific conflict of interest with the son of a US govt official who wielded overwhelming influence over Ukraine.RedFromMI wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 9:14 pmAnd what other companies pay board members in Ukraine is absolutely immaterial to whether the President corruptly asked a foreign government to intercede in our next presidential election. Extortion/bribery is what happened here. Criminal and impeachable.old salt wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 9:00 pmGood place to start. Were any of the others paying Hunter Biden $50k/mo ?ggait:
I'm sure there were dozens of corrupt Uke companies that merited investigation. Yet Burisma is the ONLY company that was targeted. And a key piece was that Burisma had to be publicly announced. It really wasn't so much about the investigation -- it was about the announcement. That is very telling.
Trump didn't ask them to limit anti-corruption investigations to Burisma.
How much were they paid ?Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 9:39 pmLike Ivanka and Jared.old salt wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 9:32 pmThere was a specific conflict of interest with the son of a US govt official who wielded overwhelming influence over Ukraine.RedFromMI wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 9:14 pmAnd what other companies pay board members in Ukraine is absolutely immaterial to whether the President corruptly asked a foreign government to intercede in our next presidential election. Extortion/bribery is what happened here. Criminal and impeachable.old salt wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 9:00 pmGood place to start. Were any of the others paying Hunter Biden $50k/mo ?ggait:
I'm sure there were dozens of corrupt Uke companies that merited investigation. Yet Burisma is the ONLY company that was targeted. And a key piece was that Burisma had to be publicly announced. It really wasn't so much about the investigation -- it was about the announcement. That is very telling.
Trump didn't ask them to limit anti-corruption investigations to Burisma.
2 and 20old salt wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 10:29 pmHow much were they paid ?Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 9:39 pmLike Ivanka and Jared.old salt wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 9:32 pmThere was a specific conflict of interest with the son of a US govt official who wielded overwhelming influence over Ukraine.RedFromMI wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 9:14 pmAnd what other companies pay board members in Ukraine is absolutely immaterial to whether the President corruptly asked a foreign government to intercede in our next presidential election. Extortion/bribery is what happened here. Criminal and impeachable.old salt wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 9:00 pmGood place to start. Were any of the others paying Hunter Biden $50k/mo ?ggait:
I'm sure there were dozens of corrupt Uke companies that merited investigation. Yet Burisma is the ONLY company that was targeted. And a key piece was that Burisma had to be publicly announced. It really wasn't so much about the investigation -- it was about the announcement. That is very telling.
Trump didn't ask them to limit anti-corruption investigations to Burisma.