Trump

[Kung Wu]

Trump: "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." [quick discussion about Mueller investigation, before saying...] "The other thing, 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."

I don't get your point here. What I read is, "it's possible that the Biden family was potentially illegally colluding with your country's former administration for their own personal gain, and if so the American people want to know that. Please let our Attorney General know if this has legs."

I mean isn't that what the Democrats were foaming at the mouth to catch Trump doing -- colluding with a foreign regime for his own personal gain?

[jdshock]

I do not see how a reasonable person could read the transcript that way.

But to be clear, THIS is exactly what the "Democrats were foaming at the mouth" about. Trump asking foreign governments for dirt on political opponents. And this time he appears to be predicating US aid on the interaction.

[WuDrWu]

I'm trying to be fair and reasonable and I want to know the truth. There's also no chance I'm voting for a Democrat next year. I know that's overstating the obvious.


I can see where a reasonable person could be concerned about how this is being spun. Your comment however about "I do not see how a reasonable person could read the transcript this way" shows your incredible bias. You choose to ignore fact, embrace accusations and build off falsehoods to blame someone you don't like.


This is pure swamp.


Get the whistleblower in chambers now. Name the names of who he heard from, RIGHT FLIPPING NOW. Then get them into Congress and under oath within 24 hours. Don't go on vacation. Impeach him right now. The rest of us will take it from there.

[moshock]

Another Witch Hunt by the Dems. It's gonna backfire with the American public.

[ShockingButTrue]

.. and, therefore, Biden under obama's admin.?

[ShockingButTrue]

I don't get your point here. What I read is, "it's possible that the Biden family was potentially illegally colluding with your country's former administration for their own personal gain, and if so the American people want to know that. Please let our Attorney General know if this has legs."

I mean isn't that what the Democrats were foaming at the mouth to catch Trump doing -- colluding with a foreign regime for his own personal gain?

Remember, this is the Snowflakes (tood-a-loo, you-know-who) we're talking about, who prefer "truth" over facts, err, something like that. This, more than, qualifies as that.


:laugh:

[ShockerPrez]

Eff all of them.

All corrupt MFers and anyone who wants to give them more control is an effing dunce.

[ShockingButTrue]

What a load of bull****! The dems seriously must think the people are blind, stupid, or both... Oh, wait...

Biden.jpg

Spin this one...

[wufan]

Why do you think they rejected the alternate headline of "Barr led DOJ declines to investigate Trump's plea for Ukraine to work with Barr to investigate political opponent"?

In all seriousness, it's not cut and dry whether it is legal. The GOP wants to make it all about whether there is a "quid pro quo," (which... I mean, the guy says in response to a request for aid "I want you to do me a favor, though"). That might not even be the right framework. I haven't seen anything to suggest a quid pro quo would even be necessary to prove wrongdoing.

The more important issue, in my opinion, is that no reasonable person should want their government to work this way. It's bonkers.

I don’t want political corruption. I don’t want our leaders blackmailing or threatening or doing quid pro quo. I don’t want our leaders acting I am immoral fashion.

All of the the above is, unfortunately, the way government works in a capitalist society. It’s also the way it works in a communist, socialist, or fascist society. There is power and money at stake, and it’s a damn shame that all of the options lead to the same thing.

I hate to say it, but turnabout is fair play. I don’t like the rules that have been set, but I hate losing more; not for its own sake, but for the sake of individual liberty. There are things, like legislation that impacts Americans, that would be a step too far, but I am not going to worry about this insignificant drop in an ocean full of bull ****.

What should be done about it? Limit the power of the government.

[jdshock]

I don’t want political corruption. I don’t want our leaders blackmailing or threatening or doing quid pro quo. I don’t want our leaders acting I am immoral fashion.

All of the the above is, unfortunately, the way government works in a capitalist society. It’s also the way it works in a communist, socialist, or fascist society. There is power and money at stake, and it’s a damn shame that all of the options lead to the same thing.

I hate to say it, but turnabout is fair play. I don’t like the rules that have been set, but I hate losing more; not for its own sake, but for the sake of individual liberty. There are things, like legislation that impacts Americans, that would be a step too far, but I am not going to worry about this insignificant drop in an ocean full of bull ****.

What should be done about it? Limit the power of the government.

Well, if you believe that he established a quid pro quo with a foreign government so that it would assist in an investigation against a political opponent, you don't really have much of a leg to stand on when it comes to the high ground about "individual liberty."

Maybe you disagree with the underlying facts, but you don't get to act like you're accepting the facts as presented and then call it an "insignificant drop."

[wufan]

Well, if you believe that he established a quid pro quo with a foreign government so that it would assist in an investigation against a political opponent, you don't really have much of a leg to stand on when it comes to the high ground about "individual liberty."

Maybe you disagree with the underlying facts, but you don't get to act like you're accepting the facts as presented and then call it an "insignificant drop."

One, it’s not clearly anything. Two, even if it is something, it’s not clearly illegal. Three, how dare you suggest that I’m not all about individual liberty just because I disagree with you on the profound significance of this event. THIS IS INSIGNIFICANT. If Biden didn’t do anything then big whoop. If he did, then THAT IS more significant than asking someone to look into it.

[jdshock]

One, it’s not clearly anything. Two, even if it is something, it’s not clearly illegal. Three, how dare you suggest that I’m not all about individual liberty just because I disagree with you on the profound significance of this event. THIS IS INSIGNIFICANT. If Biden didn’t do anything then big whoop. If he did, then THAT IS more significant than asking someone to look into it.

I haven't seen a single person argue that it would be legal if there was a quid pro quo. I believe that would be definitively illegal.

For that reason, if you accept the underlying facts, that would be like saying you're okay with Trump ordering a warrantless search of a political rival. If they did nothing wrong, big whoop. If they did, that's more significant than the invasion of personal liberty. That's my whole point. If you're taking the stance that the ends justify the means, that's DIRECTLY contrary to a position that maximizing personal liberty is important in every instance.

[C0|dB|00ded]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trumps-ukraine-call-transcript-read-the-document

People: Please read the transcript of the ENTIRE phone conversation, not the phony summarized versions being circulated by those who would attempt to manipulate the public's perception of intent.

A very sharp and diplomatic conversation. Makes it tough to run that 25th amendment narrative with public records of high-level discourse such as this circulating...

Pick your poison Dims.


T


...:cool:

[C0|dB|00ded]

What a load of bull****! The dems seriously must think the people are blind, stupid, or both... Oh, wait...

Biden.jpg

Spin this one...

Trump has mentioned several times that he is fully aware that many people are listening in on his calls. Could this have all been a trap? If so they took it hook, line, and sinker...


T


...:cool:

[wufan]

I haven't seen a single person argue that it would be legal if there was a quid pro quo. I believe that would be definitively illegal.

For that reason, if you accept the underlying facts, that would be like saying you're okay with Trump ordering a warrantless search of a political rival. If they did nothing wrong, big whoop. If they did, that's more significant than the invasion of personal liberty. That's my whole point. If you're taking the stance that the ends justify the means, that's DIRECTLY contrary to a position that maximizing personal liberty is important in every instance.

I didn’t argue that a quid pro quo is legal. I argued that if this was something; if this was asking for opposition research, rather than an ask to look into existing allegations of corruption, then it’s not clearly illegal; as demonstrated by Hillary.

The underlying facts are a transcript. Those are the facts I accept. In that transcript he didn’t say, “if you don’t indict Biden, then I won’t release aid.” Trump didn’t order a warrantless search of a political rival. He asked for an end to Ukrainian corruption, even if it means a political rival ends up being the law breaker. Perhaps I wrongly assumed that if he didn’t do anything wrong, then the story and investigation would disappear. Perhaps I should have assumed that Biden would be smeared by MSNBC and CNN, and that the Times would write fake news and retract 24 hours later over and over and over.

Alas, thankfully we live in a world where that would never happen. A world where people are presumed innocent, and a world where the innocent are exonerated when not guilty.

[ShockingButTrue]

Trump has mentioned several times that he is fully aware that many people are listening in on his calls. Could this have all been a trap? If so they took it hook, line, and sinker...


T


...:cool:

They-are-that-stupid; full of pathological hate FULL STOP

[jdshock]

I didn’t argue that a quid pro quo is legal. I argued that if this was something; if this was asking for opposition research, rather than an ask to look into existing allegations of corruption, then it’s not clearly illegal; as demonstrated by Hillary.

The underlying facts are a transcript. Those are the facts I accept. In that transcript he didn’t say, “if you don’t indict Biden, then I won’t release aid.” Trump didn’t order a warrantless search of a political rival. He asked for an end to Ukrainian corruption, even if it means a political rival ends up being the law breaker. Perhaps I wrongly assumed that if he didn’t do anything wrong, then the story and investigation would disappear. Perhaps I should have assumed that Biden would be smeared by MSNBC and CNN, and that the Times would write fake news and retract 24 hours later over and over and over.

Alas, thankfully we live in a world where that would never happen. A world where people are presumed innocent, and a world where the innocent are exonerated when not guilty.

Got it. Just a misunderstanding then. I'd said "Well, if you believe that he established a quid pro quo with a foreign government so that it would assist in an investigation against a political opponent, you don't really have much of a leg to stand on when it comes to the high ground about "individual liberty."" And I believe you argued with that premise. It now sounds like you're not defending a quid pro quo situation, so we're good.

Obviously, I think people are being willfully ignorant to suggest the "I'd like you to do me a favor, though" language is irrelevant. But alas, that's the part I said you might disagree with. And it appears you do. You are in fact suggesting Trump is so altruistic that he wants to personally root out Ukrainian corruption, even if that comes at the high price of incriminating Biden's son.