Kirk Gallaway Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 (edited) Matt, Biden's cronyism has been going on since the world began. Sports figures and entertainment figures are appointed as members to executive boards as well. Its totally legal, if you want to make a case for tightening of ethics laws. I'm sure we'd all agree. We have a President withholding our taxpayer money to use a foreign power to investigate his own political rivals. And you and apparently a lot of others see no real conflict of interest in that? What crime in your mind , could you hold actually Trump culpable for, outside of say, shooting a baby? Edited January 17, 2020 by Kirk Gallaway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ness Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 1 hour ago, Matt Allison said: Just because Joe Biden is running for President, does not mean he gets to be immune from being investigated. If Biden did not want to be investigated, then his son probably should not have taken that job that he obviously had no reason to get other than to curry influence with his father. Hi Matt, Joe Biden's position on the board of Burisma isn't against the law and neither is his compensation for being on the board. Although it may be unsightly, this is common practice in corporate boards all over the world including Trump's various businesses which has innumerable family and friends that have no qualifications whatsoever. Jared and Ivanka's positions in the Office of the Presidency is another example. It's sort of the way that world works - connections are often times more important in advisory positions than other types of experience. He wasn't there to do engineering on gas plants. Famous people lend their names to start ups and established companies all the time, qualified or not. The Biden's are susceptible to investigations and Trump could have had the DOJ or even the Senate do just that - instead he sent Guilliani on a fishing expedition to conjure up whatever he could. These issues have been looked at in Ukraine and they, for whatever reason, passed on them. Guilliani no doubt could garner false testimony from Ukrainians of ill repute but it doesn't matter because he'd still have to get the imprimatur of the DOJ, which he hasn't to this point. 1 hour ago, Matt Allison said: "He's also being impeached for the wholesale refusal to provide his constitutionally and legally mandated responses for documents and witnesses to allow the House of Representatives (which is you and me) who along with the Senate created the office under article 1, to oversee the Executive branch." Trump by law can claim executive privilege and refuse to do so without a ruling from the judiciary. In your scenario, if the House could actually tell a President what to do like that, he would effectively be powerless. Trump's cabinet and advisors have to claim privilege from the chair not by twitter. They still have to show up physically for subpoenas and then they can claim privilege or the the fifth. The documents subpoenaed from OMB, State, DoD etc don't have executive privilege and that should be obvious to everyone. Communications between and to advisors to Trump and the President himself have some argument to them but there is no privilege between staffers, officials and US Government employees. We paid for that and it isn't the presidents nor his purview to determine whether congress can have access to those records. Congress MUST have access to those records to fulfill it's constitutionally mandated oversight duties. The President blocking access to those records and witnesses by decree should be very scary to you. By doing so he is illegally withholding evidence from Congress that pertains to the accusations against him and is therefore obstructing congress and justice. Done deal. Not even slightly controversial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Allison Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 Hi Kirk- The hard evidence that it was quid pro quo just wasn't there. Honduras, Lebanon, Guatemala, Pakistan, El Salvador, Afghanistan, and Palestine also had their previously granted U.S. aid withheld by Trump. Many people seem to be unable to see this issue through anything but a very partisan lens. The standard for impeachment- undoing an election- needs to be high. But there's another election in 10 months, so how about we tackle this problem the old fashioned way? By voting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ness Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 5 hours ago, Ron Bulman said: Unbelievable yes. But still, in spite of the current president more of an Oligarchy than a Monocracy? Haha debatable I suppose but one way or the other it ain't pretty. 5 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said: What crime in your mind , could you hold actually Trump culpable for, outside of say, shooting a baby? He's either culpable for all crimes that can be proven or none at all. According to Trump and his lawyers he couldn't even be investigated for shooting that baby much less charged, which they have claimed in court. In theory it follows that he could have the Supreme Court summarily executed, replaced by family members and cancel the next election "because of irregularities" which, of course, would be upheld in the new Court. I'm being facetious but let's face it, Kim Jung Un provides him with a excellent example. Mostly, the protections a President are afforded are there to keep political rivalries at bay during the term of a presidency. They were never intended to confer immunity to the office holder and this BS about overturning an election is fatuous jibber jabber for the minions and the otnay ootay ightbray. The removal of the President only results in his Vice President assuming the job. Ask Nixon when you see him haha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dennis Berube Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 Wurmser, former dick cheney advisor, is apparently advising trump and likely championed the recent war crime. https://theintercept.com/2020/01/16/david-wurmser-iran-suleimani-iraq-war/ Would Pence stop these people? Somehow i doubt it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Bauer Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 (edited) 14 hours ago, Matt Allison said: Hi Kirk- The hard evidence that it was quid pro quo just wasn't there. Honduras, Lebanon, Guatemala, Pakistan, El Salvador, Afghanistan, and Palestine also had their previously granted U.S. aid withheld by Trump. Many people seem to be unable to see this issue through anything but a very partisan lens. The standard for impeachment- undoing an election- needs to be high. But there's another election in 10 months, so how about we tackle this problem the old fashioned way? By voting Matt, would you consider the Ukrainian arms hold up being very importantly different than those other countries you mentioned in that there is an "admitted" quid pro quo here ( Michael "Mick" Mulvaney ) and it was all about the Ukrainian leadership doing something to help Trump's presidential election agenda? And that this demand was being presented through a rogue team of facilitators ( not officially authorized ) outside of our normal state department diplomatic channels and process and with our official diplomatic corp being kept in the dark about it? Now, the entire nation has been informed by our own "Government Accountability Office" ( GAO ) that the Ukrainian arms hold up was illegal. “Faithful execution of the law does not permit the president to substitute his own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law,” the GAO concluded. There is a most seriously important difference between any arms deal hold ups with the other countries you mentioned and the Ukraine. That is one of the two reasons why an impeachment charge was initiated over it and we are in the trial phase. And the treatment of a sitting Ambassador (Marie Yovanovitch) is another grave doing by Trump's covert diplomacy "get Yovanovitch" team. If someone high up in the corporate world were fired for the reasons given by Trump's state department for firing Ms. Yovanovitch, they'd be sued for millions, especially if it was found that she was ominously surveilled and tracked without her knowledge and without official authorization. Talk about intimidation? Imagine how Ms. Yovanovitch feels now about what has happened to her in the Ukraine matter? Especially with the possible covert tracking of her? Every U.S. career diplomatic service employee now has to consider similar fears of intimidation and retribution if they do not tow the political line of whoever is President during their service. How disturbingly ominous is that reality? If you cannot clearly see and understand the huge difference between the other arms deal hold ups you mentioned and this Ukrainian one - what can one one say in your defense of Trump here? Edited January 17, 2020 by Joe Bauer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ness Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 7 hours ago, Dennis Berube said: Wurmser, former dick cheney advisor, is apparently advising trump and likely championed the recent war crime. https://theintercept.com/2020/01/16/david-wurmser-iran-suleimani-iraq-war/ Would Pence stop these people? Somehow i doubt it. He's about as useful as any mannequin is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Bauer Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 (edited) Trump's shamelessly bold yet laughably transparent public statement dishonesty is "so aggressively and incessantly exhibited" it can only be properly explained in abnormal pathological deviation terms IMO. I never had sex with porn star Stormy Daniels or Playboy bunny Karen McDougal. Yeah, right! And I never knew anything about any pay-offs to them. According to Trump every woman who has ever accused him of unwanted sexual advances or actual physical contact or other indiscretions is lying and wanting money or attention. Regards the Ukrainian affair and new revelations from Lev Parnas that Trump knew everything, Trump simply says he didn't know those men ( Lev Parnas and his grunting hunchback looking sidekick Igor ) or what they were about or up to. I "don't recall" ever having a conversation with them. And I didn't know what Guilliani was up to or anything about his relationship with those two guys. Hundreds ( if not thousands ) of other false statements and claims. Trump's truth telling integrity is non-existent. And yet our main stream media ( with the exception of MSNBC ) continually refuses to report this outrageous Trump trait in it's true reality obsessive and deviant behavior context. One recent front page editorial article on ABC's main internet news site simply described Trump's obsessive denial leadership actions, words and behavior as ... "unusual!" "Unusual?" Wow, that's pretty harsh and heavy criticism, isn't it? This major main stream news media's downplaying/denial of reality policy regarding Trump and his pathological prevarication behavior enables him to keep doing it and get away with it. Why are they doing this? My common sense guess is that the huge majority of our main stream news media is owned and controlled by those in the wealthiest 1 to 5% class, which is Trump's true base and who is benefitting the most from his wealthiest class tax cuts, economic policies and judicial appointments all the way to the SCOTUS. Edited January 18, 2020 by Joe Bauer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douglas Caddy Posted January 18, 2020 Share Posted January 18, 2020 When Trump's Thugs Turn On Him https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/17/opinion/lev-parnas-maddow-interview.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Bauer Posted January 18, 2020 Share Posted January 18, 2020 (edited) 5 hours ago, Douglas Caddy said: When Trump's Thugs Turn On Him https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/17/opinion/lev-parnas-maddow-interview.html Doug, my guess is that only a handful of members here will even click on the N.Y. Times article link you provide let alone read the article. Trump defending members not at all. It's a massively shared mind set by Trump defenders nation wide ( including our highest elective representative body members who are being asked to look at criminal charges against Trump ) to block out negative Trump information no matter how well researched, documented, reported, analyzed and true. New York Times Op-Ed Columnist Michelle Goldberg's article here is concisely revealing of the true inner workings of not just Trump & Guiliani's Ukraine/Biden/Yovanovitch scheme, but of Trump's life long pattern of using thuggery and mob like tactics to undermine his enemies or anyone who threatens his financial dealings and personal reputation standing. For some sad reason, Rudy Guiliani has chosen to be Trump's latest consigliere / fixer after the imprisonment of Trump's former personal attorney Michael Cohen. Guiliani is Trump's go to guy now in finding, using and managing unsavory characters to carry out thuggish actions if needed to fulfill Trump benefiting agendas. The actions taken against our Ukrainian Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch to get her out of her diplomatic position as reported in Ms. Goldberg's article by Guiliani's associates is so much like a mob movie with physical intimidation including personal tailing and tracking, false story planting, threats and bribes...it is disturbing to a truly sickening and even tragic degree. How could things get so bad within our own government that dedicated long time high standing state department diplomats could be subjected to such brutish and retaliatory personal attacks as Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch has? But Trump's personal attorneys going back to Roy Cohn have always been willing to resort to thuggish tactics in dealing with those who their boss Trump perceives as threats. I wish every Republican senator would be required to read this Michelle Goldberg article. They could trash it as most would. Regardless, there are enough documented and corroborating facts and under oath testimonies by many of the most major players in this whole Ukraine/Biden/Yovanovitch affair that Goldberg lists that bolster her main point assertions and give them way more credibility than not. I would copy and paste this incredibly insightful and revealing article in its entirety here to force Trump defenders on the forum to actually read it...and then give us their reasons for dismissing the assertions Ms. Goldberg makes. However, the link is there for anyone willing to read something other than Trump/Guiliani good will pieces. Edited January 18, 2020 by Joe Bauer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Niederhut Posted January 18, 2020 Share Posted January 18, 2020 The latest revelations from long-time Trump associate Lev Parnas are entirely consistent with the damning Congressional testimony of Ambassador William Taylor, Lt. Col. Vindman, et.al., about Trump's Ukraine-gate extortion scheme last summer. Parnas has filled in some details regarding the complicity of Nunes, Pence, Pompeo, and Barr in the Trump scheme, but the overwhelming evidence of Trump's misconduct has already been presented to the public by the House. Meanwhile, Rupert Murdoch's propaganda empire-- Fox, WSJ, NY Post, Washington Times, etc.-- has been aggressively promoting that false GOP narrative that Trump's historic impeachment is merely a "partisan" political exercise. That's bunk. The only thing "partisan" about Trump's impeachment-- for serious Presidential misconduct -- is the partisan refusal of dishonest Republicans in Congress to acknowledge the overwhelming evidence of Trump's obvious, impeachable offenses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted January 18, 2020 Author Share Posted January 18, 2020 (edited) William, Murdoch does not publish the Washington TImes. That one is owned by the Unification Church. And although the WSJ is owned by Murdoch, the editorial pages were just as rightwing before the purchase. Edited January 18, 2020 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douglas Caddy Posted January 19, 2020 Share Posted January 19, 2020 (edited) From the interview: Bust your ass in the swing states. That’s it. You got to go in the swing states. You’ve got to spend every dime there. You got to put the boots on the ground there. I don’t care if you have one volunteer in California. We know how California is going to vote. Everybody in California wants to support the nominee. Go to Michigan, go to Wisconsin, go to Pennsylvania, go to Ohio, go to Florida, go to North Carolina, go to Arizona. Get to work on the ground. Voter contact still matters more than almost any other thing. A knock on the door, a phone call, a personal outreach on social media. That matters more than almost anything else you can do. And fighting this battle in those swing states is vital. https://www.rawstory.com/2020/01/former-gop-strategist-rick-wilson-hating-trump-is-the-key-to-winning-in-2020/ [Wilson says forget about the national polls. Concentrate primarily on winning the electoral college.] Edited January 19, 2020 by Douglas Caddy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douglas Caddy Posted January 19, 2020 Share Posted January 19, 2020 From the article: Even Trump was appalled. “Starr’s a freak,” the bloviating builder told me back in 1999. “I bet he’s got something in his closet.” In other interviews, he called Starr “a lunatic,” “a disaster” and “off his rocker,” and expressed sympathy for Hillary having to stand by her man when he was “being lambasted by this crazy Ken Starr, who is a total wacko.” Starr, who once clutched his pearls over Bill Clinton’s sexual high jinks, is now going to bat for President “Access Hollywood.” After playing an avenging Javert about foreplay in the Oval, Starr will now do his utmost to prove that a real abuse of power undermining Congress and American foreign policy is piffle. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/18/opinion/sunday/starr-dershowitz-trump-epstein.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Niederhut Posted January 19, 2020 Share Posted January 19, 2020 (edited) On 1/18/2020 at 9:57 AM, James DiEugenio said: William, Murdoch does not publish the Washington TImes. That one is owned by the Unification Church. And although the WSJ is owned by Murdoch, the editorial pages were just as rightwing before the purchase. My bad. Not sure where I got the notion that the Washington Times was a Murdoch propaganda rag. I know that our local Colorado Robber Baron, Phil Anschutz, bought the Washington Examiner. As for the WSJ, I recall reading that a lot of high quality journalists left the WSJ after Murdoch bought it. Edited January 19, 2020 by W. Niederhut Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now