Political Discussions for "Adults"

Anteater · 01-31-2020, 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwb

you don't sound like you even know what the alleged offense is

If you bothered checking out what Parnas said, Trump called for the firing of his Ukrainian ambassador months before Biden even announced he was running, and wanted to look into Ukraine because of a Politico article published in 2017 that showcased the DNC"s efforts to gather dirt on him and Manafort in 2016. He was talking about Burisma way back in early 2018.

The Democrats are making the case that somehow Trump knew Joe Biden was going to run for POTUS before anyone else did...including Biden himself. Bizarre.

Mindfulness · 01-31-2020, 04:19 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxT8CM8XntA

Quote:

LastWeekTonight
Jun 17, 2019

With a national conversation underway about the possibility of impeachment, John Oliver discusses whether the benefits outweigh the potential risks.

~~jwb~~ · 01-31-2020, 04:45 PM

Sorry but this defense is complete utter nonsense. First of all, he knew Biden would likely be running. Everybody did. Acting like it couldn't possibly be political before Biden announced is at best naive and at worst dishonest.

Second, the Ukraine hacking the DNC instead instead of Russia is a piece of Russian propaganda. The motives don't line up at all. The hacks were clearly designed to hurt Hilary. Yet Trump takes the Kremlin at his word that Russia didn't interfere. But for some reason Ukrainian corruption is the issue. And not all corruption. Just Biden's son. Yea, nothing personal or political about that.

Third, cooperating with Ukraine to get them to investigate Biden as "punishment" for the govt supposedly hacking our elections makes 0 sense.

If Ukraine did something that he legit thought needed "punishing"there are official channels for doing so. If he really thought there was a worthwhile investigating to carry out on the Biden's that was not personal or political but based on US strategic interests and national security, there are official channels for doing so.

Instead he sent his goons and worked through back channels. You don't associate with a guy like Lev Parnas unless you are doing some dirt. You don't send your personal lawyer to do the work of the justice dept. And you don't keep everyone else in govt in the dark in the meantime, unless once again you're doing something shady.

People from the OMB have said the freeze on the aid is clearly illegal. Bolton called the whole thing a drug deal in a text message that was released in the transcripts, which he didn't even intend for public consumption. And there have been various others who reportedly sounded the alarm during the whole transaction that they were concerned they were doing something illegal.

As soon as Trump got caught, he released the aid. He claimed not to know Lev Parnas after he got nabbed, now there audio of him ordering Parnas to get rid of the ambassador. He's used to surrounding himself with criminals but they have always fallen on their sword in the past. He finally found one that would stab him in the back after being stabbed in the back himself. Everything points to not only that he's guilty but that he knows it and has acted as such from the beginning. I would honestly respect the Republicans more if that just said yes he's guilty but we got the votes so **** off

Maajo · 01-31-2020, 05:03 PM

If there's one positive that I hope to take away from the Trump Administration, it's that it exposed a lot of flaws in the Democratic establishment and brought them to the forefront. Problem is, people are so partisan that they're ignoring it to essentially defend Biden just because they want to see Trump impeached so bad. He's a bad president who doesn't care about anyone, but not everything or anybody is an upgrade just because of that. I wish that people would forget about impeachment for the most part and focus their efforts on getting someone like Bernie Sanders nominated, who would almost certainly beat Trump in an election but who the DNC establishment is working against because they know he's going to hold guys like Warren Buffett (big DNC donor) responsible.

**Frownland** · 01-31-2020, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anteater

And? If he isn't removed (the crux of the impeachment process) what's the point? "High crimes and misdemeanors" but no Bribery? It's stupid.

It's still impeachment whether he's removed from office or not

Mindfulness · 01-31-2020, 05:34 PM

trump doesnt even understand that^

Anteater · 01-31-2020, 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwb

Sorry but this defense is complete utter nonsense. First of all, he knew Biden would likely be running. Everybody did. Acting like it couldn't possibly be political before Biden announced is at best naive and at worst dishonest.

Second, the Ukraine hacking the DNC instead instead of Russia is a piece of Russian propaganda. The motives don't line up at all. The hacks were clearly designed to hurt Hilary. Yet Trump takes the Kremlin at his word that Russia didn't interfere. But for some reason Ukrainian corruption is the issue. And not all corruption. Just Biden's son. Yea, nothing personal or political about that.

Third, cooperating with Ukraine to get them to investigate Biden as "punishment" for the govt supposedly hacking our elections makes 0 sense.

If Ukraine did something that he legit thought needed "punishing"there are official channels for doing so. If he really thought there was a worthwhile investigating to carry out on the Biden's that was not personal or political but based on US strategic interests and national security, there are official channels for doing so.

Instead he sent his goons and worked through back channels. You don't associate with a guy like Lev Parnas unless you are doing some dirt. You don't send your personal lawyer to do the work of the justice dept. And you don't keep everyone else in govt in the dark in the meantime, unless once again you're doing something shady.

People from the OMB have said the freeze on the aid is clearly illegal. Bolton called the whole thing a drug deal in a text message that was released in the transcripts, which he didn't even intend for public consumption. And there have been various others who reportedly sounded the alarm during the whole transaction that they were concerned they were doing something illegal.

As soon as Trump got caught, he released the aid. He claimed not to know Lev Parnas after he got nabbed, now there audio of him ordering Parnas to get rid of the ambassador. He's used to surrounding himself with criminals but they have always fallen on their sword in the past. He finally found one that would stab him in the back after being stabbed in the back himself. Everything points to not only that he's guilty but that he knows it and has acted as such from the beginning. I would honestly respect the Republicans more if that just said yes he's guilty but we got the votes so **** off

Eh?

1. I'm not talking about any kind of hacking. The DNC paid third party consultants to investigate Paul Manafort with the express purpose of digging up dirt on the Trump campaign. They also, along with some Never-Trumper Republicans, were responsible for paying Fusion GPS to compile the infamous dossier. Both of these activities constitute actual election meddling and make all this outrage at Trump's Ukrainian phone call more than a little funny. I don't recall anyone going to prison, being arrested, removed from office or getting in trouble over that, otherwise you would have already known what I was talking about.

That's why I've said before that impeachment has to be more than a political process. Telling America "there's nothing to see here" in regards to Joe and Hunter Biden isn't a compelling message. They could have focused in on potential conflicts of interest related to his businesses, profiting from the Presidency, his taxes, countless other things....and they chose Ukraine of all things as the hill they wanted to die on.

2. John Solomon already made a good case for why the Bidens should be investigated. There's a wonderful timeline going back to 2014, fully documented. Especially in regards to Burisma around 2016. Ukraine Timeline 2014-2019

3. At the time and date Parnas mentioned, there was no way Trump or anyone else could have known Biden was going to run. Zero. Trump's motivations for looking into the Bidens, Burisma, CrowdStrike and Ukraine itsself are based around what I've outlined in points 1 and 2. Joe Biden didn't even make it known he was going to run until late March 2019. Is he psychic?

~~jwb~~ · 02-01-2020, 07:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anteater

Eh?

1. I'm not talking about any kind of hacking. The DNC paid third party consultants to investigate Paul Manafort with the express purpose of digging up dirt on the Trump campaign. They also, along with some Never-Trumper Republicans, were responsible for paying Fusion GPS to compile the infamous dossier. Both of these activities constitute actual election meddling and make all this outrage at Trump's Ukrainian phone call more than a little funny. I don't recall anyone going to prison, being arrested, removed from office or getting in trouble over that, otherwise you would have already known what I was talking about.

I'm not positive but I don't think paying a third party to dig up dirt is actually illegal in any way.

But it's an abuse of power as president to use your powers to extort a foreign govt to smear a political rival for personal gain. It's that simple. Freezing the aid in the manner which he did for leverage was also illegal.

Quote:

That's why I've said before that impeachment has to be more than a political process. Telling America "there's nothing to see here" in regards to Joe and Hunter Biden isn't a compelling message. They could have focused in on potential conflicts of interest related to his businesses, profiting from the Presidency, his taxes, countless other things....and they chose Ukraine of all things as the hill they wanted to die on.

I agree that he's done worse. Nixon also did worse than Watergate. A lot of it is a political calculus.

Quote:

2. John Solomon already made a good case for why the Bidens should be investigated. There's a wonderful timeline going back to 2014, fully documented. Especially in regards to Burisma around 2016. Ukraine Timeline 2014-2019

I agree Biden being on the board of that company seems like classic nepotism and even corruption. That doesn't actually justify what Trump did. That's what you're missing. If he launched an official investigation through the justice dept that would have its own sort of political implications and obstacles, but it would not have been the subject of an impeachment trial. When you send your thugs to do your dirty work covertly and then lie about it and try to cover it up every step along the way, that's something different.

As for this alternative history narrative that this whole thing was to punish the Ukraine for meddling in our elections while basically ignoring the Russians who did the actual hacking, what is the direct connection between Hunter Biden being on Burisma and this supposed interference by the Ukrainian government?

Quote:

3. At the time and date Parnas mentioned, there was no way Trump or anyone else could have known Biden was going to run. Zero. Trump's motivations for looking into the Bidens, Burisma, CrowdStrike and Ukraine itsself are based around what I've outlined in points 1 and 2. Joe Biden didn't even make it known he was going to run until late March 2019. Is he psychic?

like I said this is beyond naive. Are you under the impression that Biden would decide to run and then announce it the next day or something? It was well known he would most likely be running. It was well known Sanders and most likely Warren would also be running. The announcement just marks the official start of the campaign. ****, i knew Hilary would be running in 2016 since she lost to Obama in 08. I should start some sort of psychic hotline I guess.

Anteater · 02-01-2020, 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwb

I'm not positive but I don't think paying a third party to dig up dirt is actually illegal in any way.

But it's an abuse of power as president to use your powers to extort a foreign govt to smear a political rival for personal gain. It's that simple. Freezing the aid in the manner which he did for leverage was also illegal.

The DNC aren't a government entity, an extension of the Justice Department, or anything of the sort. What they did was clearly illegal. At least if you are telling me that what Giuliani did was wrong.

Secondly, if you actually dive into the specifics of the timeline regarding the aid, it's been documented that over half of it was actually released to them on July 31st (to the tune of around 125 million), The second half of it, which was called Tranche 2, was released on September 12th. So was anything actually "held up" or did the media just run with the story based on hearsay from a lot of people who didn't actually know?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwb

I agree that he's done worse. Nixon also did worse than Watergate. A lot of it is a political calculus.

We can actually thank Nixon for Trump's acquittal in some ways. He resigned and then was subsequently pardoned before Articles could actually be passed against him. The ambiguity that situation created has benefited Clinton and now Trump.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwb

I agree Biden being on the board of that company seems like classic nepotism and even corruption. That doesn't actually justify what Trump did. That's what you're missing. If he launched an official investigation through the justice dept that would have its own sort of political implications and obstacles, but it would not have been the subject of an impeachment trial. When you send your thugs to do your dirty work covertly and then lie about it and try to cover it up every step along the way, that's something different.

So are you saying that utilizing third parties to gather dirt on your behalf is an impeachable offense and but not illegal?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwb

As for this alternative history narrative that this whole thing was to punish the Ukraine for meddling in our elections while basically ignoring the Russians who did the actual hacking, what is the direct connection between Hunter Biden being on Burisma and this supposed interference by the Ukrainian government?

It isn't alternative history. Russia just wasn't the only country that tried to meddle in our election process in 2016. Their motivations were to prop themselves up for leverage with Russia, since Clinton looked like she would win in a landslide.

However, Russia has already been punished by the Trump administration with nastier sanctions (among other things). If your curious about some of those specifics, Noam Chomsky has been interviewed a few times on the subject and talks extensively about it.

The DNC digging around in Ukraine and Hunter Biden / Joe Biden using Burisma as a way to launder government money back into the U.S. are separate incidents that occurred in the same general window of time.

Mykola Zlochevsky, Burisma's CEO (who was also one of the former government officials approached by Chalupa when she was digging around for the DNC) also happens to be the guy who personally appointed Hunter Biden to his board of directors to "protect" the company from prying eyes. It was only after he was appointed that Burisma's lawyers got to meet with the State Department and then Shokin got fired.

There are other people that serve as intersection points between these two different series of events, but either way it justifies the idea that there was more to look into, corruption-wise, than what actually was done back in 2016.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwb

like I said this is beyond naive. Are you under the impression that Biden would decide to run and then announce it the next day or something? It was well known he would most likely be running. It was well known Sanders and most likely Warren would also be running. The announcement just marks the official start of the campaign. ****, i knew Hilary would be running in 2016 since she lost to Obama in 08. I should start some sort of psychic hotline I guess.

Nobody in early 2018 knew if he was actually going to run or not. There was a CNN poll in late 2017 where people were asked how they felt about him as a potential candidate, but it got mixed results. At the same timeframe your talking about, Trump was tweeting about Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz and his potential presidential run.

When I saw what Parnas wrote about that early 2018 dinner they had, like why Trump decided to fire his Ukrainian ambassador ("she's a holdover from the Clinton administration"), it made it look like that Biden's name came up afterward when Trump was already looking into Ukraine prior to learning about Hunter Biden's ties with Burisma.

~~jwb~~ · 02-01-2020, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anteater

The DNC aren't a government entity, an extension of the Justice Department, or anything of the sort. What they did was clearly illegal. At least if you are telling me that what Giuliani did was wrong.

I'm not even defending the DNC really but what Giuliani did was wrong not because he was seeking dirt on a rival but because he was helping abuse the power of the office of the president to do so.

Quote:

Secondly, if you actually dive into the specifics of the timeline regarding the aid, it's been documented that over half of it was actually released to them on July 31st (to the tune of around 125 million), The second half of it, which was called Tranche 2, was released on September 12th. So was anything actually "held up" or did the media just run with the story based on hearsay from a lot of people who didn't actually know?

you mean hearsay from people on Trump's team and in the OMB? Now you're denying the aid was even held up??

Quote:

So are you saying that utilizing third parties to gather dirt on your behalf is an impeachable offense and but not illegal?

If you abuse the power your office grants you to dig up the dirt, it can be both impeachable and illegal.

Quote:

However, Russia has already been punished by the Trump administration with nastier sanctions (among other things). If your curious about some of those specifics, Noam Chomsky has been interviewed a few times on the subject and talks extensively about it.

Why would they punish them if the Russia thing is a big hoax like Trump claims?

Quote:

The DNC digging around in Ukraine and Hunter Biden / Joe Biden using Burisma as a way to launder government money back into the U.S. are separate incidents that occurred in the same general window of time.

So why would Biden be an "obvious" place to exact revenge for their supposed meddling? Wouldn't you start with the people directly responsible and branch out from there? Seems like you are bending over backwards rationalize how Trump could be innocent.

Quote:

Nobody in early 2018 knew if he was actually going to run or not. There was a CNN poll in late 2017 where people were asked how they felt about him as a potential candidate, but it got mixed results. At the same timeframe your talking about, Trump was tweeting about Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz and his potential presidential run.

If you don't think Biden was on Trump's radar as a very likely (probably the most likely) political opponent even back in 2018 you're crazy. Whether he could be 100% certain is honestly besides the point.

01-31-2020, 05:34 PM	#4656 (permalink)
Mindfulness Be aware of the psyop Join Date: Oct 2016 Location: Milky Way Galaxy Posts: 9,999	trump doesnt even understand that^ __________________ YouTube Videos The Discord Server February 28th, 2024

01-31-2020, 04:45 PM	#4653 (permalink)
~~jwb~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 4,403	Sorry but this defense is complete utter nonsense. First of all, he knew Biden would likely be running. Everybody did. Acting like it couldn't possibly be political before Biden announced is at best naive and at worst dishonest. Second, the Ukraine hacking the DNC instead instead of Russia is a piece of Russian propaganda. The motives don't line up at all. The hacks were clearly designed to hurt Hilary. Yet Trump takes the Kremlin at his word that Russia didn't interfere. But for some reason Ukrainian corruption is the issue. And not all corruption. Just Biden's son. Yea, nothing personal or political about that. Third, cooperating with Ukraine to get them to investigate Biden as "punishment" for the govt supposedly hacking our elections makes 0 sense. If Ukraine did something that he legit thought needed "punishing"there are official channels for doing so. If he really thought there was a worthwhile investigating to carry out on the Biden's that was not personal or political but based on US strategic interests and national security, there are official channels for doing so. Instead he sent his goons and worked through back channels. You don't associate with a guy like Lev Parnas unless you are doing some dirt. You don't send your personal lawyer to do the work of the justice dept. And you don't keep everyone else in govt in the dark in the meantime, unless once again you're doing something shady. People from the OMB have said the freeze on the aid is clearly illegal. Bolton called the whole thing a drug deal in a text message that was released in the transcripts, which he didn't even intend for public consumption. And there have been various others who reportedly sounded the alarm during the whole transaction that they were concerned they were doing something illegal. As soon as Trump got caught, he released the aid. He claimed not to know Lev Parnas after he got nabbed, now there audio of him ordering Parnas to get rid of the ambassador. He's used to surrounding himself with criminals but they have always fallen on their sword in the past. He finally found one that would stab him in the back after being stabbed in the back himself. Everything points to not only that he's guilty but that he knows it and has acted as such from the beginning. I would honestly respect the Republicans more if that just said yes he's guilty but we got the votes so **** off

01-31-2020, 05:03 PM	#4654 (permalink)
Maajo Music Addict Join Date: Nov 2017 Location: Colorado Posts: 513	If there's one positive that I hope to take away from the Trump Administration, it's that it exposed a lot of flaws in the Democratic establishment and brought them to the forefront. Problem is, people are so partisan that they're ignoring it to essentially defend Biden just because they want to see Trump impeached so bad. He's a bad president who doesn't care about anyone, but not everything or anybody is an upgrade just because of that. I wish that people would forget about impeachment for the most part and focus their efforts on getting someone like Bernie Sanders nominated, who would almost certainly beat Trump in an election but who the DNC establishment is working against because they know he's going to hold guys like Warren Buffett (big DNC donor) responsible.