What’s Putin’s Puppet hiding?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

No collusion that Mueller could state definitely between Trump and Russia, yet here the collusion is clear and in your face. He has reached multiple criteria for impeachment as defined by numerous founding fathers, or because this means you loose power, you suddenly aren’t interested in the constitution?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

i think it’s a stretch. he’s allowed to ask other governments to do him favors. did FDR commit an impeachable offense by colluding with england to win WWII?

this isn’t that obviously. but what’s also in our faces, is the likelihood that hunter biden profited handsomely from his father’s position.

again, if we could
have one standard that applies to both parties, that would be very helpful.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

i think it’s a stretch. he’s allowed to ask other governments to do him favors. did FDR commit an impeachable offense by colluding with england to win WWII?

I can't believe you said this.

this isn’t that obviously. but what’s also in our faces, is the likelihood that hunter biden profited handsomely from his father’s position.

Based on what exactly? A conspiracy theory.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

i think it’s a stretch. he’s allowed to ask other governments to do him favors. did FDR commit an impeachable offense by colluding with england to win WWII?

this isn’t that obviously. but what’s also in our faces, is the likelihood that hunter biden profited handsomely from his father’s position.

again, if we could
have one standard that applies to both parties, that would be very helpful.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

1. The emoluments clause prohibits the President from receiving personal favors of value. “And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.” Feel free to look at a definition of emoluments, preferably from before 1800, we are originalists I suppose, though Trump’s violations of the emoluments clause extends further than that and is evident in the telecom released today.
2. You have bought into Trump’s narrative re Biden and his son. If Trump wants to claim that others profited, he should start by not doing the thing he denigrates with his family. 666 West Avenue and it’s refinancing would be a good start. Ivankas trademarks, Don Jr’s deal in Indonesia, etc.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

1. The emoluments clause prohibits the President from receiving personal favors of value. “And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.” Feel free to look at a definition of emoluments, preferably from before 1800, we are originalists I suppose, though Trump’s violations of the emoluments clause extends further than that and is evident in the telecom released today.

The DOJ determined that what was asked for was not considered a thing of value. You're stretching here. Otherwise, an overbroad definition of "value" as relates to the emoluments clause would mean that no requests could be made.

2. You have bought into Trump’s narrative re Biden and his son. If Trump wants to claim that others profited, he should start by not doing the thing he denigrates with his family. 666 West Avenue and it’s refinancing would be a good start. Ivankas trademarks, Don Jr’s deal in Indonesia, etc.

The Biden and his son narrative does not require buying into. The connections are obvious. What you mention about Trump and his family are not about foreign influencing of our elections.