House to vote on impeachment

[Pete F.]

"It's ironic that Ukraine's "Anti-Corruption Bureau" was established with he assistance of Quid Pro Joe Biden."

What's ironic is that the only corruption the Trump administration is concerned with involves political opponents.

Since its first days in office, the Trump administration has exhibited indifference—and at times hostility—toward anti-corruption efforts in U.S. foreign policy. Less than a month after his inauguration, for example, President Trump signed into law a measure repealing a 2010 Obama-era regulation that imposed transparency on the oil and gas industry, a sector that has historically been at very high risk for graft. In the lead-up to the passage of this measure, former Sen. #^&#^&#^&#^& Lugar (R-IN)—a sponsor of the 2010 law authorizing the regulation—warned that repeal would mean “undoing a clear act of moral leadership, turning our back on corruption. This would betray our own principles and severely undercut our allies in Europe and Canada. It would cost countless lives over the long run and harm our security.”

Trump’s early action was a portent of things to come. Over the past three years, the White House has slashed funding for vital foreign assistance programs, allowed strongmen to quash popular anti-corruption initiatives, and either ignored or threatened to undercut multilateral transparency initiatives. Even worse, officials have actively ignored massive corruption when politically convenient, such as when Secretary of State Mike Pompeo praised the government of Guatemala despite its recent expulsion of an anti-corruption body or when Trump commended the corrupt governments of Egypt, Turkey, Russia, and Honduras. The administration has even sought to cut the budget of the critical State Department’s Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, which is tasked with anti-corruption policy, by around 40 percent for the upcoming fiscal year.

This retreat from anti-corruption policies has been paralleled by the president’s unprecedented use of his official position to enrich himself, his family, and his friends. After his election, President Trump refused to divest from his businesses and instead gave control to his sons, a move that transparency advocates question. Foreign officials and corporations have regularly booked rooms in Trump hotels, in what may amount to public attempts to ingratiate themselves with the president. Trump has also used his private properties to conduct official government business, and his administration has announced that the next G-7 summit will be held at Trump’s resort in Doral, Florida, before reversing the decision amid public outcry. He faces three ongoing federal lawsuits for violations of the emoluments clause, which prohibits U.S. officials from receiving gifts or payments from foreign officials. Yet, even U.S. officials have used Trump’s properties for questionable reasons, including up to 40 trips to his Scottish resort taken by members of the U.S. Air Force.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

"It's ironic that Ukraine's "Anti-Corruption Bureau" was established with he assistance of Quid Pro Joe Biden."

What's ironic is that the only corruption the Trump administration is concerned with involves political opponents.

Ironic like the only corruption your concerned with is Trump.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Ironic like the only corruption your concerned with is Trump.

CAN YOU SAY POTUS..

Or all corruption is equal ..
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

CAN YOU SAY POTUS..

Or all corruption is equal ..
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

it’s not all equal, but even non-trump corruption is worth looking at, at least to most people.

WDMSO, they were chanting “impeach the morherf*cker” from day one. i’m not saying he’s innocent, but i’m saying they are never going to stop digging, whether there’s reasonable cause or not.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

it’s not all equal, but even non-trump corruption is worth looking at, at least to most people.

WDMSO, they were chanting “impeach the morherf*cker” from day one. i’m not saying he’s innocent, but i’m saying they are never going to stop digging, whether there’s reasonable cause or not.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That may so . But what has he done . These things aren't made up they actually happened. Hes done it to himself
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

CAN YOU SAY POTUS..

Or all corruption is equal ..
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

We no longer have co-equal branches of government? Corruption in opposition to POTUS is less important than corruption of POTUS? Corruption is not important if it is "not as"?

Are you the judge of what is not as important?

Corruption in our political leaders, whether they are Presidents, Senators, Vice Presidents, judges, bureaucrats, is important to root out and eliminate. President is a temporary office. Career politicians and bureaucrats and judges are here far longer and have a far greater cumulative effect in terms of corruption or otherwise.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by detbuch

We no longer have co-equal branches of government? Corruption in opposition to POTUS is less important than corruption of POTUS? Corruption is not important if it is "not as"?

Are you the judge of what is not as important?

Corruption in our political leaders, whether they are Presidents, Senators, Vice Presidents, judges, bureaucrats, is important to root out and eliminate. President is a temporary office. Career politicians and bureaucrats and judges are here far longer and have a far greater cumulative effect in terms of corruption or otherwise.

right. potential corruption behind efforts to un-do a fair presidential election, nothing to see there.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

right. potential corruption behind efforts to un-do a fair presidential election, nothing to see there.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Impeachment is not undoing an election.

What would the result be if the election was "undone"?

What will the result be when Trump is impeached and tried and convicted in the Senate?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Impeachment is not undoing an election.

What would the result be if the election was "undone"?

What will the result be when Trump is impeached and tried and convicted in the Senate?

"Impeachment is not undoing an election"

It might be, when the losing side has decided on impeachment before the inauguration. It might be, if (big "if") they used the DOJ to improperly violate the rights of a US citizen, for the purposes of hurting the Trump campaign. If Durham and the IG conclude there was noting fishy there, I'm fine with that and can let it go.

"What would the result be if the election was "undone"?"
That the man they hate with irrational intensity (a subject with which we all believe you are familiar), won't be POTUS anymore. But we elected him.

"What will the result be when Trump is impeached and tried and convicted in the Senate?"

Based on what we know at this time? How much would you like to bet that the senate does not convict, not unless another bombshell is revealed? No sane person thinks that will happen.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

right. potential corruption behind efforts to un-do a fair presidential election, nothing to see there.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

More conspiracy theories.

Next phase from Republicans it was quid pro quo. But not an impeachable offense.. as if theres an actual list
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

More conspiracy theories.

Next phase from Republicans it was quid pro quo. But not an impeachable offense.. as if theres an actual list
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

quid pro quo, that’s not what biden did though. withholding aid until
ukraine did what he wanted. that’s not quit pro quo? have fun.

conspiracy theory? amazing you know that, yet neither Durham nor the IG have released a single detail yet. so how do you know it’s an unfounded, baseless theory?

answer- all you care about is politics. facts o key matter when they serve your agenda.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Ironic like the only corruption your concerned with is Trump.

Plenty of it, and it is not hard to find.

All you have to do is look at what Trump whines/projects about and there it is in his administration.

Libertarians, constitutional conservatives, and classical liberals believe in protecting whistleblowers to expose government corruption. Trump Republicans believe in exposing whistleblowers to protect government corruption.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Plenty of it, and it is not hard to find.

All you have to do is look at what Trump whines/projects about and there it is in his administration.

Libertarians, constitutional conservatives, and classical liberals believe in protecting whistleblowers to expose government corruption. Trump Republicans believe in exposing whistleblowers to protect government corruption.

As I said, "Ironic like the only corruption your concerned with is Trump."

[ReelinRod]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

"It's ironic that Ukraine's "Anti-Corruption Bureau" was established with he assistance of Quid Pro Joe Biden."

What's ironic is that . . .

All you can muster in rebuttal to an on-point original post is an unattributed stolen pile of crap from a site where leftists go for their periodic programming -- https://www.americanprogress.org/iss...t-kleptocrats/

All that proves is that you are owed no respect, you have neither the intelligence or the integrity to discuss anything besides cheating in fishing tournaments.

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Libertarians, constitutional conservatives, and classical liberals believe in protecting whistleblowers to expose government corruption. Trump Republicans believe in exposing whistleblowers to protect government corruption.

SMH.

"All of these whistleblowers have axes to grind. [We need] to f--k these guys, . . . we need to get whatever dirt we can on these guys and take them down" -- Scott Thomasson

It's as if you demand we not remember that before there was a fake whistleblower named Eric Ciaramella, there was a real whistleblower by the name of John Dodson.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by ReelinRod

All you can muster in rebuttal to an on-point original post is an unattributed stolen pile of crap from a site where leftists go for their periodic programming -- https://www.americanprogress.org/iss...t-kleptocrats/

All that proves is that you are owed no respect, you have neither the intelligence or the integrity to discuss anything besides cheating in fishing tournaments.



SMH.

"All of these whistleblowers have axes to grind. [We need] to f--k these guys, . . . we need to get whatever dirt we can on these guys and take them down" -- Scott Thomasson

It's as if you demand we not remember that before there was a fake whistleblower named Eric Ciaramella, there was a real whistleblower by the name of John Dodson.

BIOYA

Issa introduced new Whistleblower protection legislation in November 2011. Retaliating against whistleblowers is a crime.

Just what are Floridaman and his Trumplicans doing to this whistleblower?

Two wrongs don't make a right, or perhaps they do in Trumpworld.

Floridaman has no anticorruption agenda for anything other than his political opponents.

He also has no idea how to manage a bureaucracy and therefore can't persuade his administration to push things in the direction he wants them to go.
So he does what he always has, as he was taught by Roy Cohn. Then it was call Michael Cohen, now it's call Rudy Guiliani, and when that falls apart, send Barr and Pompeo to investigate. As they say in Queens: "Just tell em ya ain't getting nuttin unless ya get me da goods"

VEG

Now you can do a round of But Kavanaugh with a chorus of The Economy.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Issa introduced new Whistleblower protection legislation in November 2011. Retaliating against whistleblowers is a crime.

Just what are Floridaman and his Trumplicans doing to this whistleblower?

Retaliation as defined by the whistleblower legislation is some kind of personnel punishment by the employer such as being transferred, denied a raise, have your hours reduced, be fired, blacklisted, demoted, transferred to a less desirable job, failing to rehire, denying benefits or any other act that would be seen as punishment.

Trumplicans have no ability to administer personnel punishment on the whistleblower. The Floridaman is not making a retaliatory personnel punishment.