Donald Trump impeachment investigation over Ukranian phone call...

[Hanafuda]

 

[Foxi4]

I have a slightly more on-the-nose video metaphor to describe the current situation.

 

[Xzi]

If anything, America is currently regaining its foothold as a world leader after years of pushover politics and promises of "flexibility" made to strategic enemies to foster some support from superpowers with interests diametrically opposed to those of the western world (during an election year I might add - I'm looking at you, Barack).

Rofl, multiple countries are committing genocide, the Amazon rainforest is burning, and Trump's only concern is sending more troops to Saudi Arabia to protect their oil. How is that not "supporting superpowers with interests diametrically opposed to those of the Western world?" War with Iran seems almost inevitable at this point, and would prove unequivocally that the US military is Israel's/Saudi Arabia's bitch. I'm sure Russia wouldn't be too broken up about it, either.

The US has no moral authority left on the world stage whatsoever. Even if Trump wanted to chastise another country for genocide, it would only be laughed off given that the US is currently maintaining concentration camps for children. Of course, he wouldn't care to chastise them anyway because Trump is in support of neither democracy nor human rights.

 

[billapong]

Please see my prior post. But I will concede there is a specific reason I haven't mentioned the 'can you do me a favor' line and then mentions CrowdStrike and a potential Ukrainian Server. I'm only presenting something that is pretty black and white. Not to run wild with speculation. I appreciate your point as it is credible. Just not with Trump's request regarding Biden.

I read your previous post, but that doesn't change the fact that Biden is currently not Trump's political opponent or that we know what the information requested would have been used for, if it was used at all.

If Biden was currently involved in direct competition with Trump for something then he would be Trump's opponent. If per say, Biden is picked to run against Trump for President after the Democratic primaries then yes, he would be Trump's opponent, but even if that was the case Trump never stated his motivations for asking about Biden's past or even hinted let alone directly stated he's going to use any information against Biden in an election.

Just because Biden might win the Democratic primary doesn't cut it. Hey, I have an idea, I want to buy your Switch and since I might send you the money for it why don't you mail it to me first, but please understand that I might not : )

 

[Xzi]

that Biden is currently not Trump's political opponent

I've already explained this to you, there should be no room for misinterpretation by now. ALL Democrats are political opponents of Trump, not even just those running for president. If it helps to clarify for you, we can refer to Biden and other Democrats as Trump's 'political opposition' rather than his 'political opponents,' but these are essentially synonyms. If the argument you're making requires feigned ignorance as a cornerstone, then it's no argument at all.

 

[billapong]

I've already explained this to you, there should be no room for misinterpretation by now. ALL Democrats are political opponents of Trump, not even just those running for president. If it helps to clarify for you, we can refer to Biden and other Democrats as Trump's 'political opposition' rather than his 'political opponents,' but these are essentially synonyms. If the argument you're making requires feigned ignorance as a cornerstone, then it's no argument at all.

So, every single Democrat is in direct competition with Trump for President? Exactly, what are they in competition over? What's the name of the competition, the prize? What's the rules? Having opposing views than someone else doesn't make them your opponent. You'd have to be directly involved in competition for something. Isn't generalizing something you Liberals look down on?

"Who are the 49'ers playing to today?"

- "The bucks"

"So their opponents are the Dolphins"?

(You can see how retarded your stretch of a justification sounds from someone who was taught independent thinking skills pre-dating critical thinking skills. I really think they should bring back that basic 4th grade education. Sorry you missed out!)

 

[Foxi4]

Rofl, multiple countries are committing genocide, the Amazon rainforest is burning, and Trump's only concern is sending more troops to Saudi Arabia to protect their oil. How is that not "supporting superpowers with interests diametrically opposed to those of the Western world?" War with Iran seems almost inevitable at this point, and would prove unequivocally that the US military is Israel's/Saudi Arabia's bitch. I'm sure Russia wouldn't be too broken up about it, either.

The US has no moral authority left on the world stage whatsoever. Even if Trump wanted to chastise another country for genocide, it would only be laughed off given that the US is currently maintaining concentration camps for children. Of course, he wouldn't care to chastise them anyway because Trump is in support of neither democracy nor human rights.

Touting a potential war with Iran as immoral is a ridiculous premise - Iran is ruled by an extremist regime, they're most well-known for their particular brand of state-sponsored terrorism. I wouldn't shed a tear if there was a confrontation between Iran and the United States, however I find it unlikely - compared to his predecessor Trump comes across as a peacenik. I have no doubt that under different leadership the U.S. would already be involved in yet another needless large-scale conflict, meanwhile under Trump relations with North Korea have improved dramatically and Iran is doing "just Iran things" by posturing as usual. I understand that carpet bombing weddings used to be an American pass time, but it's nice to see the U.S. take a short break from committing genocide and letting the smaller players have their turn - you're not the world's police men, and you don't have to be.

I've already explained this to you, there should be no room for misinterpretation by now. ALL Democrats are political opponents of Trump, not even just those running for president. If it helps to clarify for you, we can refer to Biden and other Democrats as Trump's 'political opposition' rather than his 'political opponents,' but these are essentially synonyms. If the argument you're making requires feigned ignorance as a cornerstone, then it's no argument at all.

TIL Democrats can't be investigated because a Republican is President. Nice one.

 

[Xzi]

So, every single Democrat is in direct competition with Trump for President? Exactly, what are they in competition over? What's the name of the competition, the prize? What's the rules? Having opposing views than someone else doesn't make you them your opponent. You'd have to be directly involved in competition for something. Isn't generalizing something your Liberals look down on?

This is the saddest attempt at gaslighting I've ever seen. All you need to understand is that Trump asked a foreign power for a favor to benefit his campaign. The fact that it might harm the campaign of another potential presidential candidate is incidental at best, completely irrelevant to the law we're discussing at worst. If he had asked Ukraine to dig up dirt on AOC or another Democratic member of the House, it would be illegal all the same.

 

[billapong]

This is the saddest attempt at gaslighting I've ever seen. All you need to understand is that Trump asked a foreign power for a favor to benefit his campaign. The fact that it might harm the campaign of another potential presidential candidate is incidental at best, completely irrelevant to the law we're discussing at worst. If he had asked Ukraine to dig up dirt on AOC or another Democratic member of the House, it would be illegal all the same.

Not only is Biden not in direct competition with Trump, but Trump never stated why he wanted the information or what he was going to do with it. It's pure speculation that he was going to use against Biden in an election that might or might not take place. I also see you've learned about gaslighting and use it as loosely as the word racist. I really hope someone that has been gaslighted in real life finds you and teaches you a lesson.

 

[Xzi]

TIL Democrats can't be investigated because a Republican is President. Nice one.

You're smarter than this. Trump is free to ask the DOJ or any other branch of the American government to investigate anybody he pleases. That doesn't mean they'll comply, but it would be entirely lawful to do so. If he's turning to a foreign government for that assistance, it's because he knows he's doing something shady and doesn't want it on the record. Also the reason he wanted the phone logs moved to a more secretive server.

Not only is Biden not in direct competition with Trump

If the argument you're making requires feigned ignorance as a cornerstone, then it's no argument at all.

 

[billapong]

You're smarter than this. Trump is free to ask the DOJ or any other branch of the American government to investigate anybody he pleases. That doesn't mean they'll comply, but it would be entirely lawful to do so. If he's turning to a foreign government for that assistance, it's because he knows he's doing something shady and doesn't want it on the record. Also the reason he wanted the phone logs moved to a more secretive server.

Or he could be investigating the cause of the Mueller issue himself. I wonder if I should rewrite the Adam Sandler "Mop the floor" song to "Let's speculate all day long, while I sing this song". You're pretty boring to debate with when you base everything on "what if's" or "we interpreted this way by cherry picking and leaving out these parts or these facts". It's no wonder the Liberal congress never gets anything done or done right. I also see you're all about whataboutism (when you can't seem to use those other petty tactics to come up with a valid reason for your obsession with Trump).

 

[Foxi4]

You're smarter than this. Trump is free to ask the DOJ or any other branch of the American government to investigate anybody he pleases. That doesn't mean they'll comply, but it would be entirely lawful to do so. If he's turning to a foreign government for that assistance, it's because he knows he's doing something shady and doesn't want it on the record. Also the reason he wanted the phone logs moved to a more secretive server.

No, you're smarter than this. If he was doing something shady that he wanted off the record, he wouldn't do it in a room with a dozen witnesses taking official notes, also known as *a record*, he would probably start a private server at home and then smash it with a hammer, if the need arised.

 

[Xzi]

No, you're smarter than this. If he was doing something shady that he wanted off the record, he wouldn't do it in a room with a dozen witnesses taking official notes, he would probably start a private server at home and then smash it with a hammer, if the need arised.

He was stupid enough to believe that everyone in the room had pledged "absolute loyalty" to him. He's since implied that the people who were in the room who talked to the whistleblower should be executed for "treason." Stupid is as stupid does, and that will ultimately be Trump's downfall.

 

[RationalityIsLost101]

No, you're smarter than this. If he was doing something shady that he wanted off the record, he wouldn't do it in a room with a dozen witnesses taking official notes, also known as *a record*, he would probably start a private server at home and then smash it with a hammer, if the need arised.

You are projecting what you would do. He's lived a pretty untouchable life. He was born into wealth. I'm not sure if you've ever been around the inherited wealthy before. Actually held dinner conversations at length. They expect the world to bend to their will as that is what they've experienced throughout their life. Trump especially. Obviously not everyone born into wealth is corrupt, but it does often breed a level of entitlement. However, that's just my perspective and it carries some bias of personal history. So feel free to object.

Back to the constant defense over something I can't imagine we really are discussing...

Trump is seeking re-election. Biden is an aspiring political rival. There is discussion whether Biden is a political rival within the upcoming election? Really?!? You don't think if dirt was released prior to the DNC primary election that it wouldn't effect the Presidential Election? This paper thin defense just shows how black and white it is and how far one has to reach to try to explain away this fragrant break of the law as innocent. Intent doesn't actually matter. The fact is he requested an investigation involving a political rival with a foreign national. -- If he was doing it to give Biden a heads up saying 'Hey Biden, they actually have dirt on you, be careful!' doesn't matter! It interferes and influences an american election. Law is pretty clear about this.

What if he became VP from one of the other candidates? Does it not count then? Seriously... I can't even believe I'm having to debate this of all things??? I'm up for discussing things that are more speculative once we all get around to facing the reality. This law was broken. Is it worth impeaching? Who knows? That's debatable, and an interesting conversation I'm open to entertain. But Trump's conduct in this specific instance is not.

 

[Hanafuda]

You're smarter than this. Trump is free to ask the DOJ or any other branch of the American government to investigate anybody he pleases. That doesn't mean they'll comply, but it would be entirely lawful to do so. If he's turning to a foreign government for that assistance, it's because he knows he's doing something shady and doesn't want it on the record. Also the reason he wanted the phone logs moved to a more secretive server.

Or maybe it's because we have a mutual legal assistance treaty for criminal law enforcement with Ukraine, where each country can ask the other for help with investigation into suspicious circumstances in the others' country that impacts a citizen or other interest of the requesting country.

 

[IncredulousP]

Hmm...I really shouldn't make threads when I've got barely time to read, let alone respond, to everyone.

Nothing wrong with a little kindle

As a result, countries like China and India, currently in the middle of committing their own acts of genocide for those unaware,

Interesting, I haven't heard of this. At risk of derailing the thread (lol), could you link sources? Or pm, whichever works.

 

[RationalityIsLost101]

Or maybe it's because we have a mutual legal assistance treaty for criminal law enforcement with Ukraine, where each country can ask the other for help with investigation into suspicious circumstances in the others' country that impacts a citizen or other interest of the requesting country.

This is a talking point I've seen circulating now. The treaty is valid, but the US method of initiating an investigating into a previous administration is not conducted with a private lawyer mediating directly with a foreign national/government. The proper way is to start an investigation on actions of a former US administration is through a congressional bipartisan committee. Please refer to my earlier posts where congressional checks/balances are described.

Something I can't understand if this has nothing to do with influencing the election... Why wait until now? Why not do this legit with a bipartisan committee when republicans held the majority of both the house and the senate? Even then his lawyers know the Legislative branch is the proper channel for executive oversight. They could have pushed back so hard against the Russian meddling by launching their own investigations. Change the narrative that they were the ones fighting to uproot corruption. There is a serious deficit in policy and strategy. It's a missed opportunity really.

Off-topic:
All we have is the one call where the only corruption discussed by trump is related to a DNC hack w/ CrowdStrike and Biden's pressure on Ukraine to fire a prosecutor. Both which matter to Trump. I could have entertained some argument of legitimate pursuit of US National Interest if both cases weren't matters that impacted Trump in some fashion and he wasn't directly involving a personal lawyer as if he was a legitimate government official within the State Department.

Just to be clear, I'm not dismissing these things as not important or not worth investigating. Do it the right way.
----

So I went and read the treaty referenced. This is the Ukraine/US Treaty that was put in effect during the Clinton Administration.
https://www.congress.gov/106/cdoc/tdoc16/CDOC-106tdoc16.pdf

I actually concede that Attorney General can and shall conduct an inquiry with Ukraine over the DNC CrowdStrike matter. Great I actually learned something today. Thanks. This explains why Barr was mentioned. I read the rest and below are three articles that seemed to be pretty important pertaining to the transcript. I encourage others to read the entirety of the Treaty as it provides some interesting information. The most notable I listed below. Just for those who aren't sure requested state-US -requesting state / Ukraine -requested state (if the treaty was called upon)

-------
Article 1 sets forth a non-exclusive list of the major types of assistance to be provided under the Treaty, including taking the testimony or statements of persons; providing documents, records and other items of evidence; locating or identifying persons or items; serving documents; transferring persons in custody for testimony or other purposes; executing requests for searches and seizures; assisting in proceedings related to immobilization and forfeiture of assets, restitution, and collection of fines; and, rendering any other form of assistance not prohibited by the laws of the Requested State. The scope of the Treaty includes not only criminal offenses, but also proceedings related to criminal matters, which may be civil or administrative in nature. Article 1(3) states that assistance shall be provided without regard to whether the conduct involved would constitute an offense under the laws of the Requested State. Article 1(4) states explicitly that the Treaty is not intended to create rights in private parties to obtain, suppress, or exclude any evidence, or to impede the execution of a request.

Article 2 provides for the establishment of Central Authorities and defines Central Authorities for purposes of the Treaty. For the United States, the Central Authority shall be the Attorney General or a person designated by the Attorney General. For Ukraine, the Central Authority shall be the Ministry of Justice and the Office of the Prosecutor General. The article provides that the Central Authorities shall communicate directly with one another for the purposes of the Treaty.

Article 3 sets forth the circumstances under which a Requested State’s Central Authority may deny assistance under the Treaty. A request may be denied if it relates to a military offense that would not be an offense under ordinary criminal law. A further ground for denial is that the request relates to a political offense (a term expected to be defined on the basis of that term’s usage in extradition treaties). In addition, a request may be denied if its execution would prejudice the security or similar essential interests of the Requested State, or if it is not made in conformity with the Treaty. Before denying assistance under Article 3, the Central Authority of the Requested State is required to consult with its counterpart in the Requesting State to consider whether assistance can be given subject to such conditions as the Central Authority of the Requested State deems necessary. If the Requesting State accepts assistance subject to these conditions, it is required to comply with the conditions. If the Central Authority of the Requested State denies assistance, it is required to inform the Central Authority of the Requesting State of the reasons for the denial.

Article 13 requires the Requested State to use its best efforts to ascertain the location or identity of persons or items specified in a request.
-----

There is alot to unpack here. I'm done for the night but an interesting read. Biggest takeaway is Barr is legit to be involved Rudy... ehh... no further comment.

 

[Xzi]

Interesting, I haven't heard of this. At risk of derailing the thread (lol), could you link sources? Or pm, whichever works.

http://theconversation.com/despite-...be-called-what-it-is-cultural-genocide-120654

https://www.genocidewatch.com/single-post/2019/08/15/Genocide-Alert-for-Kashmir-India

Being targeted are the Uyghurs (Muslims) in China and Hindu population in Kashmir, India. Unsurprisingly, both China and India want to avoid as much media attention being drawn to these events as possible, and they've been mostly successful in those efforts.

 

[Lacius]

I don't have the time these days to get sucked into a long-winded debate that goes nowhere, but I just want to say that watching conservatives attempt to defend the indefensible has been quite enjoyable.

 

[PrincessLillie]

It's finally happening. We're in the endgame now.
Remember, there have only ever been two presidents impeached in U.S. history. Soon to be three.
#DonaldTrumpIsOverParty

 

[IncredulousP]

http://theconversation.com/despite-...be-called-what-it-is-cultural-genocide-120654

https://www.genocidewatch.com/single-post/2019/08/15/Genocide-Alert-for-Kashmir-India

Being targeted are the Uyghurs (Muslims) in China and Hindu population in Kashmir, India. Unsurprisingly, both China and India want to avoid as much media attention being drawn to these events as possible, and they've been mostly successful in those efforts.

Damn. Humanity truly is despicable.