THE LINCOLN PROJECT

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

it’s going to be a badge of honor for him spence. and he’s probably correct to think of it that way.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think he's referring to the use of "combat with" versus "combat against"...he's reaching these days

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by scottw

I think he's referring to the use of "combat with" versus "combat against"...he's reaching these days

their desperation couldn’t be more obvious. That’s all this is.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

He's guilty, the evidence clearly shows it.
You're assuming and Floridaman's defense is that he actually cares about corruption.
If Floridaman truly was a corruption fighter, he would not have cut funding for corruption and instead attacked corruption in the world. If Biden was caught up in one of the many corruption investigations who could have complained.

That's not what happened.

Let’s imagine that investigating “corruption” isn’t just a convenient excuse for Floridaman to extort Ukraine’s new president into interfering in our elections by staining the character of his potential political rival Joe Biden, and absolving Russia of guilt for the 2016 hacks of the Democratic National Committee — possibly so Vladimir Putin will conspire to elect him, again.

Let’s take Floridaman at his word that he’s very concerned about even the appearance of family members wringing cash from a president or vice president who shares their name.

Let’s pretend that the man going to the Supreme Court to hide tax returns he promised to reveal dozens of times actually cares about unethical behavior. Because if he did, he’d be so busy investigating his own administration that he’d have to give up all his favorite pastimes — being the friend in "Fox and Friends," yelling at women on Twitter and helping Republicans lose governorships in red states.

Where would Floridaman begin if he were truly bothered by the corruption closest to him?

For the sake of his marriage, let’s dismiss the fact that he has never explained how his wife became a citizen after working in this country without a visa and got an Einstein visa without a college degree. And let’s suppose that getting his daughter and son-in-law security clearances over the objection of almost everyone who cares about national security was an act of fatherly love.

Let’s skip his campaign, after noting that his former campaign chair and co-chair, along with two of his closest advisers, have been convicted of multiple crimes. And we’ll just submit for the record that he shut down his foundation after New York state filed a lawsuit charging "extensive and persistent" illegal conduct, including holding a political fundraising rally for veterans under the auspices of the foundation and he paid a fine of $2 million.

Let’s begin with Floridaman’s grown sons, the ones he didn’t want working in the White House.

“I wish my name was Hunter Biden," Jr. recently said. "I could go abroad, make millions off of my father's presidency. I would be a really rich guy.”

Don Jr. may not be aware of this, or of anything that requires self-awareness, but the company he allegedly runs is still owned by his father, who refused to clearly divest from it, in violation of 19 promises to do so.

The Scam Floridaman Organization has been implicated in money laundering, tax scams and the rampant hiring of undocumented workers.

You could make the case that a president's sons should not even get near a “corrupt company,” as Rep. Stefanik, did during impeachment hearings last week.

Of course, Stefanik was talking about Hunter Biden’s work on the board of the Ukrainian company Burisma — not Jr. and his brother’s employment at a company whose two biggest growth areas are generating conflicts of interest and using their dad’s influence to fuel a fundraising pyramid scheme. But boys in their mid 30s and early 40s will be boys.

Let’s move on to the strange case of Floridaman’s 75-year-old lawyer, former U.S. attorney and New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani.

First of all, since Floridaman isn't paying Rudy, who is? The onetime American hero needs the cash, if you believe his butt dials.

Floridaman also should find out what Rudy was doing with Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, who were trying to leave the country when they were arrested on charges of conspiring to violate bans on foreign and straw donors. Why did Parnas get a million dollars from a Russian Oligarch and just who else is he funding? Contributions from his corporation to many Republicans.

Floridaman also needs to examine what appears to be Rudy’s attempt to use connections to the president to cash in on the Ukrainian energy sector (in other words, exactly what Republicans accuse Hunter Biden of doing). Federal prosecutors looking into the scheme would surely appreciate the help.

Impeachment was made for Floridaman

Finally, if Trump truly cared about corruption, he could spend the next thousand years investigating Floridaman.

To do this properly, he would welcome an investigation into the vast allegations of tax fraud against him and his family that led his sister, a former federal judge, to resign rather than face an inquiry. At the very least, he should figure out why he owes $50 million to a business he owns, because it looks a lot like a tax dodge.

Then there are his possible mafia ties, his strange relationship to a very generous Russian oligarch, and his obvious conflicts of interest with Turkey and Saudi Arabia.

The truth is that if Floridaman cared about corruption, he would be a huge fan of impeachment. As House Intel Chairman Schiff said, the Founders put impeachment in the Constitution "because they wanted a powerful anti-corruption mechanism when that corruption came from the highest office in the land."

But Floridaman’s concerns here are far more sinister and obvious. If he’s looking into corruption, it’s for one simple reason. He wants to do more of it.

You said, in another post: "The line on prayer in Trump’s letter was such an insight into his psyche, not that we needed more at this point. He absolutely can’t envision even the idea of praying for someone with whom you disagree . SAD"

Here, you "absolutely can't envision even the idea" of someone who supposedly has done corrupt things being interested in fulfilling his Presidential duty to make sure that our money is not being spent on maintaining corruption in another country.

It is "an insight," as you put it, into your "psyche . . .not that we needed more at this point "

SAD.

[Pete F.]

On the day the House of Representatives impeached Bill Clinton, his approval rating hit its presidential peak, 73%

Big differences between Clinton impeachment and this one. Clinton at this point was publicly contrite and partisans supporting him mostly argued that what he did was wrong, just not impeachable. This president is on the attack and his partisans deny facts and any wrongdoing.

Clinton lied about having an affair. Floridaman both admitted to and publicly asked multiple foreign governments to interfere in our elections. They are not the same thing and shouldn’t be treated as such. One was improper and embarrassing. The other was a threat to our democracy.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

On the day the House of Representatives impeached Bill Clinton, his approval rating hit its presidential peak, 73%

Big differences between Clinton impeachment and this one. Clinton at this point was publicly contrite and partisans supporting him mostly argued that what he did was wrong, just not impeachable. This president is on the attack and his partisans deny facts and any wrongdoing.

Clinton lied about having an affair. Floridaman both admitted to and publicly asked multiple foreign governments to interfere in our elections. They are not the same thing and shouldn’t be treated as such. One was improper and embarrassing. The other was a threat to our democracy.

Your psyche is showing.

[Pete F.]

"Dec. 6, 2018 — At the White House annual Hannukah party, Parnas and Fruman hold a private meeting with President Trump and Giuliani, where Trump tasks Parnas and Fruman to pressure the Ukrainian government to investigate the Bidens, according to associates Parnas told.."

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

"Dec. 6, 2018 — At the White House annual Hannukah party, Parnas and Fruman hold a private meeting with President Trump and Giuliani, where Trump tasks Parnas and Fruman to pressure the Ukrainian government to investigate the Bidens, according to associates Parnas told.."

You gotta watch out for those associates told stuff. It could be a threat to our democracy.

[Pete F.]

We went from a Republican "I'm not a crook" president to a "I'm a crook, so what?" Trumplican president.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

You gotta watch out for those associates told stuff. It could be a threat to our democracy.

It always traces back to Putin

Last week, prosecutors asked U.S. District Judge Paul Oetken in Manhattan to revoke Parnas' bail. They said he had concealed information about his finances, including a $1 million payment he had received from an account in Russia in September.
The account into which the payment was deposited was in the name of Parnas' wife, Svetlana Parnas, government and defense lawyers said.
On Tuesday, U.S. Attorney Rebekah Donaleski said that the source of the payment was Firtash's lawyer. She said it was not plausible the payment was a loan to Parnas's wife, as he had said.

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

On the day the House of Representatives impeached Bill Clinton, his approval rating hit its presidential peak, 73%

Big differences between Clinton impeachment and this one. Clinton at this point was publicly contrite and partisans supporting him mostly argued that what he did was wrong, just not impeachable. This president is on the attack and his partisans deny facts and any wrongdoing.

Clinton lied about having an affair. Floridaman both admitted to and publicly asked multiple foreign governments to interfere in our elections. They are not the same thing and shouldn’t be treated as such. One was improper and embarrassing. The other was a threat to our democracy.

Impeach the partisans!!!
🤡❄️🤡
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

We went from a Republican "I'm not a crook" president to a "I'm a crook, so what?" Trumplican president.

We went from a lot of good founding stuff to a lot of constitutional busting, anti-democratic, authoritarian stuff in the past 100 years. Your twisted fancifully contrived little "we went from" meme pays no attention to that more accurate truth. You have no foundation on which to base your ad hoc and ad hominem accusations and characterizations. Your mind swirls in the midst of conflicting and argumentative suppositions and disjointed "facts" that can be assembled into or forced into various possible jig saw puzzle pictures of "reality."

I realize that this verbiage doe not comport with your psyche. And I realize that you cannot possibly conceive that your self-conceived pristine psyche can have been led astray and corrupted by mere run of the mill, self aggrandizing, politicians.

It might be a SAD thing, but for the larger reality that neither you nor I really matter, except to those few who we love or hate.

[Pete F.]

Just watch the House
At this rate, by the end of this pointless debate, some Republican is going come to the podium with a giant dildo representing Trump’s penis and give their speech with it in their mouth to make sure that the president is particularly impressed by their devotion.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Just watch the House
At this rate, by the end of this pointless debate, some Republican is going come to the podium with a giant dildo representing Trump’s penis and give their speech with it in their mouth to make sure that the president is particularly impressed by their devotion.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You speak of Trump losing it, and of someone else being a morally disordered person and lacking character, then you post something as vile as this? And you have a problem with Trump's letter which can't touch this for crudity or lack of factual basis?

Your psyche seems to be in a morally depraved, self-inflicted shambles.

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Just watch the House
At this rate, by the end of this pointless debate, some Republican is going come to the podium with a giant dildo representing Trump’s penis and give their speech with it in their mouth to make sure that the president is particularly impressed by their devotion.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Is this how you show devotion?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

You speak of Trump losing it, and of someone else being a morally disordered person and lacking character, then you post something as vile as this? And you have a problem with Trump's letter which can't touch this for crudity or lack of factual basis?

Your psyche seems to be in a morally depraved, self-inflicted shambles.

I found it quite Trumpian, sort of like grabbing body parts, teeth, choking and other covfefe said by the manboy who reminds me of a spoiled brat without a properly functioning brain.
It’s time Americans say “You’re Fired” to Floridaman.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

Is this how you show devotion?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Funny you showed up.
There's always this weird, barely-repressed homosexuality thing going on with MAGA trolls like you.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

I found it quite Trumpian, sort of like grabbing body parts, teeth, choking and other covfefe said by the manboy who reminds me of a spoiled brat without a properly functioning brain.
It’s time Americans say “You’re Fired” to Floridaman.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You're the one who posted it. You own the vileness in it. It is you.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

On the day the House of Representatives impeached Bill Clinton, his approval rating hit its presidential peak, 73%

Big differences between Clinton impeachment and this one. Clinton at this point was publicly contrite and partisans supporting him mostly argued that what he did was wrong, just not impeachable. This president is on the attack and his partisans deny facts and any wrongdoing.

Clinton lied about having an affair. Floridaman both admitted to and publicly asked multiple foreign governments to interfere in our elections. They are not the same thing and shouldn’t be treated as such. One was improper and embarrassing. The other was a threat to our democracy.

Your saying that by asking Ukraine to investigate into meaningful
evidence of Biden corruption there, that’s asking a foreign power to interfere with our elections?

Using that logic, isn’t it also asking a foreign power to interfere in our elections, when Obama asked a Russian official to postpone missile talks until after his 2012 re election? We all know that conversation, we all
know exactly what it meant, Obama didn’t want to have to answer to voters what he was planning on doing with Russia and missiles.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

I can't come close to Floridaman's actions and words.

If Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell succeeds in his public promise to ensure Trump’s acquittal regardless of the facts, the law, and the survival of our republic, we as Americans need to be prepared for a new normal, colored by a few de facto amendments to the U.S. Constitution:

When Electoral College votes are tallied, we can no longer be sure that the final count represents the will of the people, as we will have condoned the possibility of elections rigged by incumbents using their official powers to threaten foreign governments into interfering on their behalf.

If the president calls out troops to squelch a peaceful protest, deports American citizens because they were born in another country, or directs that certain people be arrested or imprisoned because of their political or religious views, we cannot turn to the U.S. Congress for consequences and accountability. Only the federal courts will remain as a branch with oversight over the executive, and even that recourse assumes that the president continues to honor the legitimacy of the judicial branch as a check on the presidency.

If the president employs the U.S. military abroad, we cannot be sure that he is doing it to serve the interests of the United States instead of his personal interests or those of a personal “ally,” such as Russian president Vladimir Putin. We must accept that our service members who take an oath to defend the Constitution could die defending a would-be monarch or his foreign ally whose interests conflict with those of the United States.

If the president taps a private lawyer, lobbyist, or corporation to undertake work as a substitute for official channels, and if that person or entity takes actions that harm Americans while serving the president’s personal interests, we will have no recourse through the Constitution, federal statutes imposing oversight on federal employees, or the Senate’s advice and consent authority for presidential appointees. We will have sanctioned a shadow government detached from legal oversight and electoral accountability, and there will be nowhere to turn within the confines of the law and the separation of powers if things go awry (which they will).

For federal employees, keeping their jobs and avoiding public humiliation and potential ruin will require abject loyalty to the man in office rather than to the rule of law. The same goes for our military.
If you think this is all hyperbole, read the report for yourself.

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Funny you showed up.
There's always this weird, barely-repressed homosexuality thing going on with MAGA trolls like you.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You say that like homosexuality is a bad thing. There is nothing weird about it,unless you feel it threatens your overflowing masculinity.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Your saying that by asking Ukraine to investigate into meaningful
evidence of Biden corruption there, that’s asking a foreign power to interfere with our elections?
As i've said before.
If Floridaman had mounted an aggressive campaign against corruption in countries that we give foreign aid to and Biden had fallen into that web, it would be hard to make the case that Floridaman was targeting his political opponent. Floridaman is not smart enough to do that and has consistently cut funding for anti-corruption efforts. But Biden was also just an unlucky byproduct of Floridaman's attempt to blame Russian interference on Ukraine per his orders. His interference in Ukraine started prior to Biden's announcement and was initially an attempt to clear or at a minimum protect Manafort (remember the Senators letter and date predates Biden's announcement by almost a year) and provide cover for the Russian attempts to interfere in our elections.

Using that logic, isn’t it also asking a foreign power to interfere in our elections, when Obama asked a Russian official to postpone missile talks until after his 2012 re election? We all know that conversation, we all
know exactly what it meant, Obama didn’t want to have to answer to voters what he was planning on doing with Russia and missiles.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Not negotiating is like asking for something?

But actually if you look into it you'll find that both countries were in an election cycle and agreed to have the discussions continue. These things do take years even without the added pressure of elections and who knew ----------- would be so hard.

You better tell Floridaman that you think it's an impeachable offense, cause he just told China that he can't cut a deal to end his trade war till after the election, though as anyone knows that could change at any minute.

[Jim in CT]

“the survival of our republic.”

despite the fact that you couldn’t name a
single core part of our republic, which is in danger thanks to Trump.

No hyperbole there, nope.

“president calls out troops
to squelch peaceful protests.”

When did he do anything like that?


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

But actually if you look into it you'll find that both countries were in an election cycle and agreed to have the discussions continue. These things do take years even without the added pressure of elections and who knew ----------- would be so hard.

.

So now you’re saying it’s ok to ask a foreign power to influencemour elections, as long as they’re in an election cycle too?

Pete, you can’t win. You’re trying to juggle too many dishes in the air.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Not negotiating is like asking for something?

But actually if you look into it you'll find that both countries were in an election cycle and agreed to have the discussions continue. These things do take years even without the added pressure of elections and who knew ----------- would be so hard.

There is no actual "cycle." Elections don't end campaigning. Winning or losing them does not put a stop on campaigning for the next election. Every bill that is passed, every carefully selected word in a speech, statement, or response to questions, every action taken whether in public or in private is tempered by the specter of the next election, either of oneself or of the Party.

So there is no action taken by Trump that cannot be considered an influence on the next election. Saying that something Trump does is asking for interference in the next election is superfluous verbiage. It's a political talking point, which is concocted exactly to influence the next election, as are all political talking points.

The question is, was the action in itself illegal, not whether it would interfere with the next election. Was it illegal for Trump to ask Ukraine, with which we have a treaty covering what is asked, to investigate the corruption that has been a feature of its government, and to look into American citizens that have been a part of that corruption?

[Pete F.]

TRUMP ON UKRAINE

2016: no aid unless Ukraine agrees to peace with Putin

2017: no aid unless Poroshenko takes Manafort case from NABU

2018: no aid unless Poroshenko agrees not to work with Mueller

2019: no aid until Zelensky agrees to Clinton/Crowdstrike & Biden/Burisma probes
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

TRUMP ON UKRAINE

2016: no aid unless Ukraine agrees to peace with Putin

2017: no aid unless Poroshenko takes Manafort case from NABU

2018: no aid unless Poroshenko agrees not to work with Mueller

2019: no aid until Zelensky agrees to Clinton/Crowdstrike & Biden/Burisma probes
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Zelensky says there was no quid pro quo. No pressure. And the aid was given.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Zelensky says there was no quid pro quo. No pressure. And the aid was given.

What would you say if you were he?
He knows Floridaman can throw him to the bear.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

What would you say if you were he?
He knows Floridaman can throw him to the bear.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You are conjecturing. The fact is that Zelensky said that there was no quid pro quo. There was no pressure. He said so after he got the money. He knows that Trump cannot stop the money. Trump cannot throw him anywhere.

You post article after article, opinion after opinion, conjecture after conjecture, hearsay after hearsay, all manner of second hand testimony as if they were the truth. But direct disclosure from the actual source you dismiss as a lie.

This whole impeachment thing, the Russian "collusion" thing, the obstruction of justice thing were all driven by the same piling on of conjectures driven by inconclusive circumstantial evidence as well as many so called "mistakes" (all against Trump and no "mistakes" in his favor) as well as withholding exculpatory evidence and actual falsifying of a document. It all has been a bunch of manufactured smoke with no actual fire.

And the so-called obstruction of Congress bit is total nonsense. Executive privilege has not been decided as unconstitutional. If the House wanted to challenge that in SCOTUS they could. But to assume (there's that assumption, conjecture, thing again) that the President asserting his rights is obstruction is turning the law and the Constitution on its head. The whole notion of separation of powers is exactly to create a tension between the branches of the federal government which prevents one from overpowering the other.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by detbuch

You are conjecturing.

everyone is lying except pelosi, schiff, comey, schumer, nadler, blumenthal, waters, etc......you know...those pillars of honesty and bi-partisan virtue that the democrats have so much faith in

[scottw]

Originally Posted by detbuch

The fact is that Zelensky said that there was no quid pro quo.

and his aide insisted he never had the conversation that sondland claimed after revising his testimony that all of this hinges on...soooo

most pathetic impeachment ever but it's really what you'd expect from this bunch of democraps

it will get much worse for them before it gets better