| |
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
| |
| Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi: |
12-11-2019, 04:50 PM
|
#61
|
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,068
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
I said the he is ultimately not guilty of withholding the funds. The funds were delivered. If there is still some relatively small amount left, there may still be a reason for that. I don't know.
|
Lots of people have gone been convicted for taking money "temporarily"
Of course Floridaman doesn't believe that attempting to get something for performing an official duty is a crime, or even something you shouldn't do. And you know: "say Norway"
Maybe that's why he is looking at pardoning Blagojevich.
“Lobbyists for a children’s hospital wanted Blagojevich to increase Medicaid reimbursement rates, which meant eight million dollars in revenue to the hospital, But he put out the word through intermediaries that he would only do it if he got fifty thousand dollars in campaign contributions. That quid quo pro was a violation of the Hobbs Act. With Trump, the quid pro quo is taxpayer money in return for political dirt, but the idea is the same.”
By the way, Blagojevich is currently serving time and not just for that. |
Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!
Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?
Lets Go Darwin
|
|
|
|
12-11-2019, 05:38 PM
|
#62
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
Lots of people have gone been convicted for taking money "temporarily"
Of course Floridaman doesn't believe that attempting to get something for performing an official duty is a crime, or even something you shouldn't do. And you know: "say Norway"
Maybe that's why he is looking at pardoning Blagojevich.
“Lobbyists for a children’s hospital wanted Blagojevich to increase Medicaid reimbursement rates, which meant eight million dollars in revenue to the hospital, But he put out the word through intermediaries that he would only do it if he got fifty thousand dollars in campaign contributions. That quid quo pro was a violation of the Hobbs Act. With Trump, the quid pro quo is taxpayer money in return for political dirt, but the idea is the same.”
By the way, Blagojevich is currently serving time and not just for that.
|
Trump didn't take any money. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-12-2019, 04:33 AM
|
#63
|
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,068
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
Trump didn't take any money.
|
The ask is the crime and dirt on an opponent has value
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!
Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?
Lets Go Darwin
|
|
|
|
|
12-12-2019, 05:03 AM
|
#64
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
The ask is the crime and dirt on an opponent has value
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
yawn
Last edited by scottw; 12-12-2019 at 07:18 AM..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-12-2019, 09:47 AM
|
#65
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
The ask is the crime and dirt on an opponent has value
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
Asking for investigation of corruption is not a crime, and Hunter Biden was not running for President, and portraying a search for truth as a search for dirt is spin. What is obviously dirty is a corrupt corporation hiring someone with little, if any, qualifications, paying him more than just about anyone else at his corporate level in the company, in order to have some powerful insurance against an investigation into the company's corruption. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-12-2019, 10:47 AM
|
#66
|
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,068
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
Asking for investigation of corruption is not a crime, and Hunter Biden was not running for President, and portraying a search for truth as a search for dirt is spin. What is obviously dirty is a corrupt corporation hiring someone with little, if any, qualifications, paying him more than just about anyone else at his corporate level in the company, in order to have some powerful insurance against an investigation into the company's corruption.
|
You've made a lot of assumptions there.
Let's get this straight
We are really supposed to believe that Floridaman, who tolerates and even admires some of the most corrupt leaders in the world, suddenly got concerned about corruption just in time to demand an investigation of the Bidens?
Or that it’s a coincidence that the ONLY two corruption investigations Floridaman has ever demanded from a foreign country—a debunked conspiracy theory about Ukrainian interference on behalf of Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election and an investigation of the Bidens—happen to correspond exactly to the baloney Floridaman dishes out at his campaign rallies?
And what about the fact that Floridaman didn’t even really demand an investigation, only a public announcement that one would be conducted? Isn’t that exactly how Trump got elected in the first place? Wasn’t Comey’s last-minute announcement of the reopening of a criminal investigation against Hillary Clinton exactly what handed Trump a comeback victory in 2016?
It worked once for Trump, so why would anybody doubt that he tried to use the same winning formula again, this time with Ukraine? |
Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!
Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?
Lets Go Darwin
|
|
|
|
|
12-12-2019, 11:17 AM
|
#67
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
You've made a lot of assumptions there.
Let's get this straight
We are really supposed to believe that Floridaman, who tolerates and even admires some of the most corrupt leaders in the world, suddenly got concerned about corruption just in time to demand an investigation of the Bidens?
Or that it’s a coincidence that the ONLY two corruption investigations Floridaman has ever demanded from a foreign country—a debunked conspiracy theory about Ukrainian interference on behalf of Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election and an investigation of the Bidens—happen to correspond exactly to the baloney Floridaman dishes out at his campaign rallies?
And what about the fact that Floridaman didn’t even really demand an investigation, only a public announcement that one would be conducted? Isn’t that exactly how Trump got elected in the first place? Wasn’t Comey’s last-minute announcement of the reopening of a criminal investigation against Hillary Clinton exactly what handed Trump a comeback victory in 2016?
It worked once for Trump, so why would anybody doubt that he tried to use the same winning formula again, this time with Ukraine?
|
You've made a lot of assumptions there. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-12-2019, 12:01 PM
|
#68
|
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,068
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
You've made a lot of assumptions there.
|
No, very few
Ukraine got U.S. aid in 2017.
They got U.S. aid in 2018.
Then in 2019, Vice President Biden announced he was running for president, and all of a sudden President Trump held up the aid while asking Ukraine to investigate Biden.
This debunks the false argument that the president simply doesn't like foreign aid.
He gave Ukraine the aid before 2019.
He gave them the aid after getting caught.
The only difference earlier this year is that he knew he had leverage, and he used it for personal gain. |
Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!
Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?
Lets Go Darwin
|
|
|
|
|
12-12-2019, 01:07 PM
|
#69
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
You've made a lot of assumptions there.
Let's get this straight
We are really supposed to believe that Floridaman, who tolerates and even admires some of the most corrupt leaders in the world, suddenly got concerned about corruption just in time to demand an investigation of the Bidens?
It's an assumption that I think you're supposed to believe anything of the sort or anything else. It's an assumption that he asked only for an investigation of the Biden's. And that the investigation was about Hunter Biden's father as well as about him and Burisma. And that Trump "tolerates" somebody or anybody. And that he was only concerned "just in time."
Or that it’s a coincidence that the ONLY two corruption investigations Floridaman has ever demanded from a foreign country—a debunked conspiracy theory about Ukrainian interference on behalf of Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election and an investigation of the Bidens—happen to correspond exactly to the baloney Floridaman dishes out at his campaign rallies?
You're assuming that the notion that Ukrainian interference has actually been "debunked" is absolutely true. Or, at least, that everyone is supposed to accept that it has. You're assuming the Floridaman dishes out baloney at his campaign rallies. Your assuming that I think you should see this all as coincidence. (I don't assume very much at all about what you think.)
And what about the fact that Floridaman didn’t even really demand an investigation, only a public announcement that one would be conducted? Isn’t that exactly how Trump got elected in the first place? Wasn’t Comey’s last-minute announcement of the reopening of a criminal investigation against Hillary Clinton exactly what handed Trump a comeback victory in 2016?
You're assuming that he "demanded" something. He did ask if Ukraine could "help us"--us being more than just him, but, I assume, our country. You're assuming that Comey did hand the victory to Trump.
It worked once for Trump, so why would anybody doubt that he tried to use the same winning formula again, this time with Ukraine?
|
You assume that Trump was using a formula. Everything you said was an assumption.
Last edited by detbuch; 12-12-2019 at 01:30 PM..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-12-2019, 01:24 PM
|
#70
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
No, very few
Ukraine got U.S. aid in 2017.
They got U.S. aid in 2018.
Then in 2019, Vice President Biden announced he was running for president, and all of a sudden President Trump held up the aid while asking Ukraine to investigate Biden.
This debunks the false argument that the president simply doesn't like foreign aid.
He gave Ukraine the aid before 2019.
He gave them the aid after getting caught.
The only difference earlier this year is that he knew he had leverage, and he used it for personal gain.
|
You're assuming that he didn't have "leverage" before. If he didn't, it may well have been due to those in power not being amenable to more American interference in their affairs, and to the possibility that they were also linked to aiding the Clinton campaign against Trump. And he was dealing with a new President in 2019. A Ukrainian President who had run an anti-corruption campaign. The previous administrations had been riddled with corruption. A supposedly corrupt prosecutor had reluctantly been removed by the previous President by the quid pro quo pressure, demand, of Joe Biden. The newly appointed prosecutor, who was also known to be corrupt, stopped the investigation of Burisma, and we are supposed to assume that it was a mere co-incidence that Biden's son had unqualifiedly been hired by them with an unduly high salary. And there was no demand that the new prosecutor be fired even though he too was considered to be corrupt.
The meeting was a recognition of the new President, and it created the occasion to ask him to actually fulfill his promise to clean up the corruption in Ukraine. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-12-2019, 01:36 PM
|
#71
|
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,068
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
You assume that Trump was using a formula. Everything you said was an assumption.
|
And will be until the Senate trial, when unless McConnell conducts a sham trial and allows no testimony, we will see evidence.
Till then I'll make assumptions based on past behavior in which Floridaman never gave a damn about corruption, praised the most corrupt dictators in the world, asked embattled leaders of other countries to announce investigations of his political opponents and obstructed the investigation of his misdeeds.
The Trumplican defense is LOUD and LOUDER or Dumb and Dumber as directed by the Farrelly Brothers and played by the Trumplican Reps, but no substance or exculpatory evidence.
And that's the last choice for defense of the guilty, after you've moved the goalposts to the edge of the ocean.
Other than resigning.......... |
Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!
Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?
Lets Go Darwin
|
|
|
|
|
12-12-2019, 02:58 PM
|
#72
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
And will be until the Senate trial, when unless McConnell conducts a sham trial and allows no testimony, we will see evidence.
|
the case for impeachment is pathetically weak...why waste everyone's time?...though I am rooting for a long process with lot's of witnesses
Last edited by The Dad Fisherman; 12-12-2019 at 03:11 PM..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-12-2019, 03:34 PM
|
#73
|
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,068
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw
the case for impeachment is pathetically weak...why waste everyone's time?...though I am rooting for a long process with lot's of witnesses
|
Pretty good case for one that has been so thoroughly obstructed. |
Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!
Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?
Lets Go Darwin
|
|
|
|
|
12-12-2019, 05:37 PM
|
#74
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 8,718
|
Trust me PeteF., I am willing to match the $100 all of you snowflakes owe JohnR come Election Day in donations to the Republican Party.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-12-2019, 06:18 PM
|
#75
|
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,068
|
Your all set because the GOP position is that, if President Trump thinks he did nothing wrong, he can deny the validity of an impeachment proceeding and refuse to participate at all, because if he ever did commit an impeachable offense he'd recognize the proceeding was valid and cooperate in full.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-12-2019, 07:26 PM
|
#76
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 8,718
|
BINGO!
The real answer comes at the ballot. This election will be more lopsided than the last. Easy
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-12-2019, 08:03 PM
|
#77
|
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,068
|
Keep believing
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-13-2019, 05:07 AM
|
#78
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
Pretty good case for one that has been so thoroughly obstructed.
|
no obstruction...tump is perfectly within his right to not cooperate with the lunatic democrats, if they don't like it they can take him to court...ironically it's the lunatic democrats that are abusing power...no surprise |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-13-2019, 05:09 AM
|
#79
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
he can deny the validity of an impeachment proceeding
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
unless it's valid to impeach a president because your panties are in a bunch this is entirely invalid |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-13-2019, 08:04 AM
|
#80
|
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,068
|
If Trump were to offer a blanket pardon in advance to anybody who kills a member of the Democratic congressional leadership, that would not be a crime. If he were to knowingly and deliberately understate his income by $1,000 on his federal income-tax form in order to reduce his tax burden, that would. But the former would obviously be much stronger grounds for impeachment than the latter.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-13-2019, 03:17 PM
|
#81
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
If Trump were to offer a blanket pardon in advance to anybody who kills a member of the Democratic congressional leadership, that would not be a crime. If he were to knowingly and deliberately understate his income by $1,000 on his federal income-tax form in order to reduce his tax burden, that would. But the former would obviously be much stronger grounds for impeachment than the latter.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
more stupidity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-13-2019, 06:50 PM
|
#82
|
|
Super Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Georgetown MA
Posts: 18,178
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw
more stupidity
|
It’s at epidemic proportions, someone needs to notify the CDC
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
"If you're arguing with an idiot, make sure he isn't doing the same thing."
|
|
|
|
|
12-15-2019, 11:12 PM
|
#83
|
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,068
|
The Fox poll is 54-41 for impeachment. That’s a bigger margin than the Democrats’ victory margin in 2018. In other words, if I can put it this way, impeachment in 2019 is running a bit ahead of House Democrats in 2018.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-16-2019, 05:52 AM
|
#84
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
keep wishing pete....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-16-2019, 06:27 AM
|
#85
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 8,718
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
The Fox poll is 54-41 for impeachment. That’s a bigger margin than the Democrats’ victory margin in 2018. In other words, if I can put it this way, impeachment in 2019 is running a bit ahead of House Democrats in 2018.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
The stupid is strong here.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
PRO CHOICE REPUBLICAN
|
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
Rate This Thread |
 Linear Mode
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:03 PM.
|
| |
