Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
betsy

America under President Trump

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

He didn't say why. You have wishful thinking.

At the 53 second mark. 

Reporter asks "So the demand for an investigation into the Democrats was part of the reason he ordered to withhold funding to Ukraine."

Mulvaney responds. "When you look back to 2016 (What Trump mentions in the July 25th call) certainly was part what he was worried about with corruption with that nation. 

When told that he's describing a Quid Pro Quo. Funding will not flow without an Investigation into the Democratic Server.

He responds. "We do that all the time in regards to foreign policy"

 

Edited by Boges

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Boges said:

At the 53 second mark. 

Reporter asks "So the demand for an investigation into the Democrats was part of the reason he ordered to withold funding to Ukraine."

Mulvaney responds. "When you look back to 2016 (What Trump mentions in the July 25th call) certainly was part of this thing, he was worried about with corruption with that nation. 

When told that he's describing a Quid Pro Quo. Funding will not flow without an Investigation into the Democratic Server.

He responds. "We do that all the time in regards to foreign policy"

 

Any Quid Pro Quo is not a crime. Quid Pro Quo's are how foreign policy is done. You need to prove that the Quid Pro Quo only benefited Trump and Trump actively hurt the United States intentionally to do so, and that is a bar that the evidence doesn't even come close to clearing. You have no proof the Quid Pro Quo is only about Biden, you have no proof it wasn't just standard negotiations.

Do you really think that Trump and Trudeau never asked each other for favors or asked for Quid Pro Quo's when negotiating the USMCA? That's not a crime, that's diplomacy, you moron.

You simply know nothing about diplomacy and are easily brainwashed into believing absolute nonsense just because the press spins things in a ridiculous manner that fits your Orange Man Bad confirmation bias. You are such a rube.

Edited by Yzermandius19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Any Quid Pro Quo is not a crime. Quid Pro Quo's are how foreign policy is done. You need to prove that the Quid Pro Quo only benefited Trump and actively hurt the United States, and that is a bar that the evidence doesn't even come close to clearing. You have no proof the Quid Pro Quo is only about Biden, you have no proof it wasn't just standard negotiations.

Ahhh so now that the Quid Pro Quo has been established, the goalposts get moved further. Not it has to benefit Trump. Well who else would it have benefitted?

The picture can easily be drawn. You have Trump publicly saying Ukraine should investigate the Democrats and Biden. And you have the Chief of Staff admitting it was in exchange for military funding. 

What other national security purposes would there be in another country looking into Joe Biden or the Democrats? It's for political purposes and Mulvaney admits it plain as day. 

Quote

Do you really think that Trump and Trudeau never asked each other for favors when negotiating the USMCA? That's not a crime, that's diplomacy, you moron.

Do you have evidence that Trudeau asked for political dirt on Andrew Scheer or the CPC when negotiating the USMCA?

I'm sure Trump could have dug up some dirt on the Fords. :lol:

Edited by Boges

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Boges said:

Do you have Evidence that Trudeau asked for political dirt on Andrew Scheer or the CPC when negotiating the USMCA?

I'm sure Trump could have dug up some dirt on the Fords. :lol:

Opposition research is not illegal. Neither are Quid Pro Quo's, which are the basis of diplomatic negotiations.

Edited by Yzermandius19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Opposition research is not illegal.

It is when you link the investigation/research to government funded Military aide. A Quid Pro Quo! 

Edited by Boges

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Boges said:

It is when you link the investigation/research to government funded Military aide. A Quid Pro Quo! 

Quid Pro Quo's are how international diplomacy works.
/shrugs

Welcome to foreign affairs, noob. You being totally ignorant doesn't mean Trump committed a crime.

Edited by Yzermandius19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Quid Pro Quo's are how international diplomacy works.
/shrugs

Welcome to foreign affairs, noob.

So on to the next plank of the Trump playbook. 

Deny, Deny again, Admit, then say it was always OK. "GET OVER IT". 

Why deny in the first place? 

Quid Pro Quo's in regards to National Security and Trade may be explainable.

But looking into Crowd Strike and the Biden's is 100% for political gain. Mulvaney admitted as much. 

Edited by Boges

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Boges said:

So on to the next plank of the Trump playbook. 

Deny, Deny again, Admit, then say it was always OK. "GET OVER IT". 

Why deny in the first place? 

Quid Pro Quo's in regards to National Security may be explainable. But looking into Crowd Strike and the Biden's is 100% political, gain Mulvaney admitted as much. 

He denied a Quid Pro Quo conspiracy theory that it was all about Biden. That's why he denied, because the media was spinning nonsense they had no proof of. Even if they had that proof, it's not a crime, it just looks bad from an optics point of view. Opposition research is not illegal, whether it is in the form of a quid pro quo, or it isn't.

Edited by Yzermandius19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Yzermandius19 said:

He denied a Quid Pro Quo conspiracy theory that it was all about Biden. That's why he denied, because the media was spinning nonsense they had no proof of.

It was about Biden and Crowdstrike. The July 25th call Memo says it for everyone to see. 

The question was whether you could prove that those investigations were tied to the Military funding. Well Mulvaney and several US diplomats have provided clarity on that matter. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Boges said:

It was about Biden and Crowdstrike. The July 25th call Memo says it for everyone to see. 

The question was whether you could prove that those investigations were tied to the Military funding. Well Mulvaney and several US diplomats have provided clarity on that matter. 

That memo is proof of nothing. The phone call does not show that memo speculation is what happened on the call, it's all just political spin.

Mulvaney did not say the Quid Pro Quo was about Biden and Crowdstrike, you are making shit up. Mulvaney said Quid Pro Quo's are standard in negotiations with foreign nations, so stop with the much ado about nothing. You simply believe the media spin about what Mulvaney said, instead of actually listening to what he actually said.

Wishful thinking is a helluva drug.

Edited by Yzermandius19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Yzermandius19 said:

That memo is proof of nothing. The phone call does not show that memo speculation is what happened on the call, it's all just political spin.

So you're saying...

Quote

I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike... I guess you have one of your wealthy people... The server, they say Ukraine has it.

Quote

There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it... It sounds horrible to me.

. . . is just political spin?

Trump is clearly asking the President to look into these things. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Boges said:

So you're saying...

. . . is just political spin?

Trump is clearly asking the President to look into these things. 

You have no proof that looking into corruption was only about the Biden's and nothing else. Asking someone to look into corruption is not a crime, whether Biden is wrapped up in it, or not. Can't prove the money was only being held up only because of the Biden angle.

Edited by Yzermandius19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Yzermandius19 said:

You have no proof that looking into corruption was only about the Biden's and nothing else. Asking someone to look into corruption is not a crime, whether Biden is wrapped up in it, or not. Can't prove the money was only being held up only because of the Biden angle.

Well if there was other pressing levels of corruption, I would assume Trump and his team would be mentioning it.

Just saying generic corruption doesn't cut it when you're on tape imploring Ukraine to look into the Biden's and Chief of Staff specifically saying the money was withheld because of Crowdstrike. 

It's ironic because the conventional thought on why Biden stepped in to get a Ukrainian prosecutor fired was because he was soft on corruption. And NOT to protect his son. But I'm not going down that rabbit hole again, we can't agree on what facts are actually facts. 

Apparently Rudy tried to get him the same Prosecutor a US Visa. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry/giuliani-asked-visa-ousted-ukraine-prosecutor-n1068961

Edited by Boges

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One more time people....impeachment by the House and trial in the Senate is purely a political process having nothing to do with criminal liability.

Just ask Bill Clinton, who was never charged for his federal "crimes".

The Democrats are afraid to vote on the impeachment inquiry because it comes with significant POLITICAL cost(s).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

The Democrats are afraid to vote on the impeachment inquiry because it comes with significant POLITICAL cost(s).

That was true with the Mueller Report. 

Not so, it seems, with the Ukraine Affair. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Boges said:

That was true with the Mueller Report. 

Not so, it seems, with the Ukraine Affair. 

 

Remains to be seen...the GOP impeached President Bill Clinton a few months after the Starr Report.

Democrats are dragging this out because they may lose seats in vulnerable districts.

The Bidens have already been effectively slimed politically...no matter what happens.

Edited by bush_cheney2004

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Democrats are dragging this out because they may lose seats in vulnerable districts.

From what I'm hearing, he'll be impeached by Thanksgiving. Then next year they'll have the Trial. Trump's State of the Union will be fascinating. 

 

Quote

The Bidens have already been slimed politically...no matter what happens.

I'd like to think that it has more to do with the fact that Biden presents really poorly. If I was a Democrat, I wouldn't want to support him. 

As a centrist, I really like Mayor Pete. But can a Gay person win in Murika? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Boges said:

From what I'm hearing, he'll be impeached by Thanksgiving. Then next year they'll have the Trial. Trump's State of the Union will be fascinating.

 

From what you are hearing ?    Is Trump a big topic in Canada ?  

They don't even have articles of impeachment drafted yet.

 

Quote

I'd like to think that it has more to do with the fact that Biden presents really poorly. If I was a Democrat, I wouldn't want to support him. 

As a centrist, I really like Mayor Pete. But can a Gay person win in Murika? 

 

You are not a Democrat.

When has a "Gay person" become Prime Minister of Kanaduh ?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

From what you are hearing ?    Is Trump a big topic in Canada ?  

They don't even have articles of impeachment drafted yet.

I'm not sure if you're aware, but the Internet has allowed Canadians access to US content. So even if it wasn't a big topic, it's Election Day after all, I can make it a big deal if I want. 

Quote

You are not a Democrat.

Which is why I said "If"

Quote

When has a "Gay person" become Prime Minister of Kanaduh ?

No, But Ontario had a Gay premiere recently. 

The question still stands. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Boges said:

I'm not sure if you're aware, but the Internet has allowed Canadians access to US content. So even if it wasn't a big topic, it's Election Day after all, I can make it a big deal if I want.

 

Canada has demanded access to US content long before the Internet.   US Thanksgiving is about five weeks from now, and includes a Congress break.   I seriously doubt that the Democrats can get their poop in a group to impeach by 11/28.

 

Quote

No, But Ontario had a Gay premiere recently. 

The question still stands. 

 

That's nice....everybody just loved Kathleen Wynne !

Here is the USA list...it's a bit longer than one premier:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_first_LGBT_holders_of_political_offices_in_the_United_States

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

From what you are hearing ?    Is Trump a big topic in Canada ?  

They don't even have articles of impeachment drafted yet.

 

 

You are not a Democrat.

When has a "Gay person" become Prime Minister of Kanaduh ?

 

 

Articles of impeachment can be drafted in minutes, just like trump's letter to Erdogan.  

Will be way more articulate too.  ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Cannucklehead said:

Articles of impeachment can be drafted in minutes, just like trump's letter to Erdogan.  

Will be way more articulate too.  ^_^

 

Nope...that's not how it works.    Guess again.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Cannucklehead said:

Does it work like this? :lol:

 

It is a sad fact that you know so little about your own country.  

 

Keep guessing...and keep using America's Google...like you always do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Keep guessing...and keep using America's Google...like you always do.

Err that was google.ca but whatever.  

Drafting an impeachment letter is not that complicated, I dont know why you think that it is.  

 

No typing skills?  :mellow:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...