is it impeachable to ask ukraine to investigate political adversaries?

[Pete F.]

Trump tweeted today

A whistleblower with second hand information? Another Fake News Story! See what was said on the very nice, no pressure, call. Another Witch Hunt!

Odd that the whistleblower got the details close without seeing the memo, it would be close to impossible to make them up months ago and have them match a document released today and be FAKE
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

These are the kind of mistakes you make when your world is starting to implode.

https://theweek.com/speedreads/86764...s-nancy-pelosi

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by spence

These are the kind of mistakes you make when your world is starting to implode.

https://theweek.com/speedreads/86764...s-nancy-pelosi

Unless the whistle blower wants to see mike pence president. Maybe that whistle blower is mike pence.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Here's Trump roping Mike Pence into the Ukraine scandal: "I think you should ask for VP Pence's conversation, b/c he had a couple of conversations also. I could save you a lot of time -- they're all perfect." 👀

When Trump goes down and takes everyone in his cabinet with him, we might get our first female President

Nancy Pelosi


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Here's Trump roping Mike Pence into the Ukraine scandal: "I think you should ask for VP Pence's conversation, b/c he had a couple of conversations also. I could save you a lot of time -- they're all perfect." 👀

When Trump goes down and takes everyone in his cabinet with him, we might get our first female President

Nancy Pelosi


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

trump is going down? two thirds of the senate is going to vote to remove him? that’s what you’re saying?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Sea Dangles]

Sailor👍🏽
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

Sailor👍🏽
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Easy there Chief
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

right out of the democrap play book....I wonder what they will pull next in their 4 year long hissy fit

VDH
"Contrary to suggestions by some, most Trump supporters are not automatons or blind supporters. What bothers them, and should bother others, about the latest Ukraine hysterias is the familiar monotony of this latest scripted psychodrama.

The whistleblower admits to hearsay (“I was not a direct witness to most of the events described”). His term-paper report is laden with anonymously sourced rumors, e.g., “According to multiple White House officials I spoke with,” “I was told by White House officials,” “Based on my understanding,” “I learned from multiple officials,” “I do not know whether similar measures were taken,” “I do not know whether those officials spoke with or met with . . . ”


Between references to Internet news accounts and “I heard from” and “I learned from” and “I do not know” anonymous officials, there is nothing here to launch an impeachment of any president.

In the complaint are all the now-familiar tell-tale signs of pseudo-exactness, in the form of Mueller-report-like footnotes and page references to liberal media outlets such as Bloomberg, ABC, and the New York Times. There is the accustomed Steele-dossier scare bullet points. We see again Comey-memo-like disputes over classification status with capital letters UNCLASSIFIED stamped as headers and footers and TOP SECRET lined out.

Scary references abound to the supposed laws that the legal-eagle whistleblower believes were violated. In sum, there is all the usual evidence of an administrative-state bureaucrat, likely to be some third-tier Brennan or Clapper-like intelligence operative, who is canvassing disgruntled White House staffers, writing a report that imitates intelligence-department formats, combing the Internet, in “dream-team” and “all-star” footnote fashion, for scare quotes and anti-Trump stories, and then likely having it dressed up in legalese by an activist lawyer. Take all that away, and one is left with “I heard.”

After nearly three years of this, we know the delivery system that ensues. Along with the sensationalized initial media hype, the promised “smoking gun” leak usually follows. But when the “overwhelming” evidence or “walls are closing in” documents are released, there is no criminal act to be found other than occasional art-of-the-deal bluster from Trump. And then on to the next crude coup attempt"

[scottw]

Originally Posted by scottw

right out of the democrap play book....I wonder what they will pull next in their 4 year long hissy fit

VDH
"Contrary to suggestions by some, most Trump supporters are not automatons or blind supporters. What bothers them, and should bother others, about the latest Ukraine hysterias is the familiar monotony of this latest scripted psychodrama.

The whistleblower admits to hearsay (“I was not a direct witness to most of the events described”). His term-paper report is laden with anonymously sourced rumors, e.g., “According to multiple White House officials I spoke with,” “I was told by White House officials,” “Based on my understanding,” “I learned from multiple officials,” “I do not know whether similar measures were taken,” “I do not know whether those officials spoke with or met with . . . ”


Between references to Internet news accounts and “I heard from” and “I learned from” and “I do not know” anonymous officials, there is nothing here to launch an impeachment of any president.

In the complaint are all the now-familiar tell-tale signs of pseudo-exactness, in the form of Mueller-report-like footnotes and page references to liberal media outlets such as Bloomberg, ABC, and the New York Times. There is the accustomed Steele-dossier scare bullet points. We see again Comey-memo-like disputes over classification status with capital letters UNCLASSIFIED stamped as headers and footers and TOP SECRET lined out.

Scary references abound to the supposed laws that the legal-eagle whistleblower believes were violated. In sum, there is all the usual evidence of an administrative-state bureaucrat, likely to be some third-tier Brennan or Clapper-like intelligence operative, who is canvassing disgruntled White House staffers, writing a report that imitates intelligence-department formats, combing the Internet, in “dream-team” and “all-star” footnote fashion, for scare quotes and anti-Trump stories, and then likely having it dressed up in legalese by an activist lawyer. Take all that away, and one is left with “I heard.”

After nearly three years of this, we know the delivery system that ensues. Along with the sensationalized initial media hype, the promised “smoking gun” leak usually follows. But when the “overwhelming” evidence or “walls are closing in” documents are released, there is no criminal act to be found other than occasional art-of-the-deal bluster from Trump. And then on to the next crude coup attempt"

[Pete F.]

Can you tell me whether soliciting or accepting foreign election assistance is illegal?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Can you tell me whether soliciting or accepting foreign election assistance is illegal?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

you mean when Hillary did it and paid for it? or when Bill was shaking down the Communist Chinese?....or all the questionable money that flowed into Obamas campaign from overseas?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Can you tell me whether soliciting or accepting foreign election assistance is illegal?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

i honestly don’t know. but since i presume you’re saying it was illegal, why wasn’t it illegal when obama asked russia to postpone missile policy until after his re election, and he pushed them to do so by saying once his last election was behind him, he’d “have more flexibility “ to work with them. that’s a quid quo pro - do what i ask, and then i’ll help you in ways i wouldn’t be able to do, if i had to worry about getting elected again.

Make that wrong. You can’t.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

i honestly don’t know. but since i presume you’re saying it was illegal, why wasn’t it illegal when obama asked russia to postpone missile policy until after his re election, and he pushed them to do so by saying once his last election was behind him, he’d “have more flexibility “ to work with them. that’s a quid quo pro - do what i ask, and then i’ll help you in ways i wouldn’t be able to do, if i had to worry about getting elected again.

Make that wrong. You can’t.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Saying I don't want to negotiate that now is not the same as saying: We have a good relationship, not equal and you want more missiles (I know the survival of your country depends on them, and both of us know I'm holding them hostage) but do me a favor and investigate my political opponent.

That's the ask and the get. Then they hid it in a different server so others in the government could not see it. What else they buried, will be the next thing to come out.

I don't have to make what Trump did wrong, it is and it is a violation of his oath of office. He is exactly who I have said he is all along.

Putin's Puppet

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Saying I don't want to negotiate that now is not the same as saying: We have a good relationship, not equal and you want more missiles (I know the survival of your country depends on them, and both of us know I'm holding them hostage) but do me a favor and investigate my political opponent.

That's the ask and the get. Then they hid it in a different server so others in the government could not see it. What else they buried, will be the next thing to come out.

I don't have to make what Trump did wrong, it is and it is a violation of his oath of office. He is exactly who I have said he is all along.

Putin's Puppet

"Saying I don't want to negotiate that now"

Funny how you left out the part where Obama said he'd have "more flexibility" to work with them on missile policy, after his re election. He told them that if they waited, he could do more for them.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"Saying I don't want to negotiate that now"

Funny how you left out the part where Obama said he'd have "more flexibility" to work with them on missile policy, after his re election. He told them that if they waited, he could do more for them.

And when someone asks me to negotiate a price for a project and I am in the middle of another one, I say I need to wait until I am done, then we can sit down and figure something out. I have not asked for anything or received anything and have made no commitment to anything. I am not foolish enough to not put the required amount of attention into it and yes, I too would say I can do a better job later when it suits my interests and I need or want to delay.

Donald Trump thinks L’etat, c’est moi and this is obvious in almost all his speech. He is not King, Prince or anything other than the chief administrative officer of a republic. He can and should pursue corruption as other presidents have, but not for his personal gain.

He did, and the rest of the story is not out yet.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Can you tell me whether soliciting or accepting foreign election assistance is illegal?

He didn't solicit election assistance. He sought help in determining if there was illegal activity between Ukraine and various Americans. If that investigation ultimately provides collateral damage to election possibilities for Dems, too bad. ANY agreement with a foreign power that eventually makes it better for America would provide "assistance," if you must frame it that way, for Trump's re-election.

There's nothing in the released phone transcript that directly asks for election assistance. Spinning it as if it somehow amounted to election assistance is evidence of nothing more than duplicity on the part of the spinner.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

He didn't solicit election assistance. He sought help in determining if there was illegal activity between Ukraine and various Americans. If that investigation ultimately provides collateral damage to election possibilities for Dems, too bad. ANY agreement with a foreign power that eventually makes it better for America would provide "assistance," if you must frame it that way, for Trump's re-election.

There's nothing in the released phone transcript that directly asks for election assistance. Spinning it as if it somehow amounted to election assistance is evidence of nothing more than duplicity on the part of the spinner.

Dream on
If this was a corruption case and the Citrus Caligula was the Mayor of a city, he would be indicted for corruption. He has the permit Zelensky needs and asked for, he is holding it for a favor that benefits him, that is the get. Many Dons have gone to prison for less.

[Got Stripers]

Whataboutism at its finest. Let’s look at the past a different way, maybe regardless of you two trying to make it the same, it really isn’t and for the sake of argument let’s say it’s close; I guess your party was asleep at the wheel and the evil dems aren’t.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

Whataboutism at its finest. Let’s look at the past a different way, maybe regardless of you two trying to make it the same, it really isn’t and for the sake of argument let’s say it’s close; I guess your party was asleep at the wheel and the evil dems aren’t.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Whataboutism...so there's no valid argument to be mad in pointing to examples of obama and senate democrats doing what you want to impeach trump for?

As detbuch said, youve never heard of the concept of precedent?

[Got Stripers]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Whataboutism...so there's no valid argument to be mad in pointing to examples of obama and senate democrats doing what you want to impeach trump for?

As detbuch said, youve never heard of the concept of precedent?

I don't see them as anyway close to the same and trying to debate that point is a circular discussion, so I'm not going to attempt it. As for Detbuch's claim a previous precedent makes this a nothing burger I find that to be so hypocritical, when FOREVER he falls back on the constitution and the intent of the founding fathers. Well I'm pretty sure they would see this as an impeachable offense, as they specifically wrote it to prevent a foreign power from interfering in our democratic process and elections and to seek political advantage or personal gains was against the rules. I know you three or four can spin this until you fingers hurt, but even if they don't get the votes in the senate and I"m not so sure some Republicans not in a strong position moving forward might not flip; this will not help Trump moving forward.

I maintain, this is the most corrupt president and administration of our life time, I think history will see it that way and if you don't; it's ok because I know in your minds the means justify the end. Trump island isn't a place I want to live and his complete disregard for the environment for another four years would do serious harm long term. I suspect our allies and foes are not to happy with where the leading nation of the free world is and I have no doubt they know the blame lies at the top of this corrupt food chain.

But hey keep circling the wagons, get those MAGA hats washed and ready, buckle up it's going to be a bumpy ride into 2020.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

I don't see them as anyway close to the same and trying to debate that point is a circular discussion, so I'm not going to attempt it. As for Detbuch's claim a previous precedent makes this a nothing burger I find that to be so hypocritical, when FOREVER he falls back on the constitution and the intent of the founding fathers. Well I'm pretty sure they would see this as an impeachable offense, as they specifically wrote it to prevent a foreign power from interfering in our democratic process and elections and to seek political advantage or personal gains was against the rules. I know you three or four can spin this until you fingers hurt, but even if they don't get the votes in the senate and I"m not so sure some Republicans not in a strong position moving forward might not flip; this will not help Trump moving forward.

I maintain, this is the most corrupt president and administration of our life time, I think history will see it that way and if you don't; it's ok because I know in your minds the means justify the end. Trump island isn't a place I want to live and his complete disregard for the environment for another four years would do serious harm long term. I suspect our allies and foes are not to happy with where the leading nation of the free world is and I have no doubt they know the blame lies at the top of this corrupt food chain.

But hey keep circling the wagons, get those MAGA hats washed and ready, buckle up it's going to be a bumpy ride into 2020.

^^^^^^ This

PENCE 2020!

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

As for Detbuch's claim a previous precedent makes this a nothing burger I find that to be so hypocritical,

I find that what you say destroys any credibility in any of your comments here. I did not say that precedent "makes this a nothingburger". Putting words in my mouth in order to debunk what I said is a form of lying that debunks whatever you say. Precedent is meaningful, calling something "whataboutism" is meaningless. It is a copout from acknowledging any importance in a statement you would rather not discuss.

when FOREVER he falls back on the constitution and the intent of the founding fathers. Well I'm pretty sure they would see this as an impeachable offense, as they specifically wrote it to prevent a foreign power from interfering in our democratic process and elections and to seek political advantage or personal gains was against the rules.

If you're so "pretty sure" then point out in the Constitution how asking for assistance from a foreign power which has information that could clarify whether or not Americans had done something criminal or unconstitutional.

[Got Stripers]

Originally Posted by detbuch

If you're so "pretty sure" then point out in the Constitution how asking for assistance from a foreign power which has information that could clarify whether or not Americans had done something criminal or unconstitutional.

Boy are you naive if you think that's what Trump was doing, but hey I get it, the right needs to spin this now and it's going to be very hard to do. Let's even assume for a minute those where Trump's noble intentions, which based on history of behavior is a stretch on it's own, what about holding up tax payer paid for, bipartisan military funds until the leader of a foreign government agree's to give him a favor? You keep spinning baby, you guys are good at it, I"m going to enjoy the show.

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

If you're so "pretty sure" then point out in the Constitution how asking for assistance from a foreign power which has information that could clarify whether or not Americans had done something criminal or unconstitutional.

Yea, asking to investigate something where there's no evidence of wrongdoing, subject just happens to be the leading political opponent and you're only interested in corruption that benefits you personally.

Right.

[Pete F.]

"Total panic as the reality of the jeopardy for President Trump begins to set in... The panic within the White House comes as we learn new details about the impeachment inquiry on Capitol Hill. Democrats signaling they're poised to move fast" Nicole Wallace



Rudy Giuliani is now saying he knew Joe Biden and associates would kill him for investigating Ukrainian situation.

Tulsi Gabbard is now the first Republican sitting member of Congress to support Impeachment.

Secretary of State POMPEO has been subpoenaed by House committees to produce Ukraine documents.

And the committees have set a schedule of 5 depositions:

October 2: Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch
October 3: Ambassador Kurt Volker
October 7: Deputy Assistant Secretary George Kent
October 8: Counselor T. Ulrich Brechbuhl
October 10: Ambassador Gordon Sondland


Lindsey Graham
@LindseyGrahamSC
If we nominate Trump, we will get destroyed.......and we will deserve it.
5:03 PM · May 3, 2016

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

If you're so "pretty sure" then point out in the Constitution how asking for assistance from a foreign power which has information that could clarify whether or not Americans had done something criminal or unconstitutional.

Start with the Constitution for Dummies version of Art. II Section 4

The President, the Vice President, and other officers of the United States, can be kicked out of office (impeached) if they are found guilty of double-crossing (betraying) the country, offering people money or getting money to do something dishonest, or other really big crimes.

But if your reading comprehension level is higher than that you could move on to this explanation of how Trump’s conduct vis-à-vis Ukraine does rise to the level of a high crime or misdemeanor under Art. II, § 4 of the Constitution written by Neal Katyal and George Conway and excerpted from WAPO

“The ... phrase ... ‘high Crimes and Misdemeanors’ ... was a historical term of art, derived from impeachments in the British Parliament. ... The framers ... knew what it meant. It meant, as Alexander Hamilton later phrased it, ‘the abuse or violation of some public trust.’”

“The framers viewed the president as a fiduciary, the government of the United States as a sacred trust and the people of the United States as the beneficiaries of that trust.”

”They believed that a president would break his oath if he engaged in self-dealing — if he used his powers to put his own interests above the nation’s. That would be the paradigmatic case for impeachment.”

“That’s exactly what appears to be at issue today. ... It appears that the president might have used his official powers ... to leverage a foreign government into helping him defeat a potential political opponent in the United States.”

“If Trump did that, it would be the ultimate impeachable act. Trump has already done more than enough to warrant impeachment ... with his relentless attempts ... to sabotage the Mueller investigation ....”

“The president’s efforts were impeachable because, in committing those obstructive acts, he put his personal interests above the nation’s: He tried to stop an investigation into whether a hostile foreign power, Russia, ....”

“... tried to interfere with our democracy — ... because he found it personally embarrassing. Trump breached his duties... not only because he likely broke the law but also because, through his disregard for the law, he put his self-interest first.”

“The current whistle=blowing allegations ... are even worse. Unlike the allegations of conspiracy with Russia in 2016 ..., these concern Trump’s actions as president ... and his exercise of presidential powers over foreign policy ....”

“It is high time for Congress to do its duty .... Given how Trump seems ... bent on putting himself above the law, something like what might have happened with Ukraine — abusing presidential authority for personal benefit — was almost inevitable.”

“Yet if that is what occurred, part of the responsibility lies with Congress, which has failed to act on the blatant obstruction ... detailed months ago.

“Congressional procrastination has probably emboldened Trump, ....”

“... and it risks emboldening future presidents who might turn out to be of his sorry ilk. To borrow John Dean’s ... metaphor once again, there is a cancer on the presidency, and cancers, if not removed, only grow.”

”Congress bears the duty to use the tools provided by the Constitution to remove that cancer now, before it’s too late.”

“As Elbridge Gerry put it at the 1787 Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, ‘A good magistrate will not fear impeachments. A bad one ought to be kept in fear of them.’ By now, Congress should know which one Trump is.”

or this:
https://fedsoc.org/commentary/public...h-misdemeanors

or this:
https://t.co/jh8leocLkk?amp=1

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

Whataboutism

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

how do you get the tough ones right?

[Sea Dangles]

Trump 2020
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

What will happen when people realize Ukraine was part of a multinational pre-election "grand bargain" that required Ukraine to approve Russian sanctions relief to get a massive new Middle East contract for Turboatom. You should wonder why Trump sent Rick Perry to Zelensky's inauguration?

[spence]

Soon Trump is going to be claiming he couldn't have violated the Constitution because he's never read it