The Impeachment Thread

#31,980
#31,980
NCFisher said:
There's no doubt Trump is entirely within his powers to bring the 2016 election concerns up; Ukrainians have been convicted of meddling in it, whether his basis for doing so is completely accurate, partially, or not at all (assuming he's unaware of it). And unless we're to say that running for office exempts one from scrutiny - which we know NOT to be the case of candidate Trump - then a president can certainly voice that concern. Prominent concerns of potential impropriety have shadowed the Bidens for years; no one has really looked into it.

I don't think it provides an excuse because he doesn't require one, and seemed to understand the AG would be the point man should such investigation occur. He acknowledges the AG's necessity by mentioning Barr three times, strange behavior for a man alleged to be pursuing self-interest.

"making it up" is a satirical comment reflecting the ludicrous state of virtually every talking head's breathless exclamations while unaware of or ignoring the treaty. Then, OTOH, seizing on Mulvaney's comments as incriminating when, in fact, presidents do qpq over aid, in the national interest, ALL the time. He said nothing wrong. It's an Orwellian era.

I think Giuliani has been terrible for Trump, is the flashpoint for the 'Crowdstrike server' and Burisma fascination, and for Sondland assuming a Zelensky meeting/aid were predicated on publicly announcing investigations. And Sondland appears the flashpoint for most all the foreign service bureaucrats' mirroring assumptions and alarm.
Click to expand...

He absolutely has. Trump is bad enough with his imprecise language; the last think he needs is a senile loose cannon running around adding to the circus-like confusion. Rudy needs to be put out to pasture in a land far far away; I'd propose one of those melting chunks of Arctic ice we keep hearing about.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol and NCFisher
#31,987
#31,987
Orangeburst said:
And I will further state that your belief in the bureaucracy setting policy over an elected executive is disturbing. They are advisors.
Click to expand...

With the exception of bought and sold ambassadorships and cabinet positions, foreign policy bureaucrats are there for life and outlive presidents and appointed bosses. Never underestimate the power of entrenched bureaucracies. Bureaucratic DC has a life of its own ... and it's generally liberal - just like the voting habits that include and surround DC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NCFisher and Orangeburst
#31,993
#31,993
AM64 said:
He absolutely has. Trump is bad enough with his imprecise language; the last think he needs is a senile loose cannon running around adding to the circus-like confusion. Rudy needs to be put out to pasture in a land far far away; I'd propose one of those melting chunks of Arctic ice we keep hearing about.
Click to expand...

Ice floe him...dang, you hard, man!
But yeah, Trump should have shed him several missteps prior.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#31,998
#31,998
lawgator1 said:
Weak.

He has been impeached!!! That will be on his record in history FOREVER !!!
Click to expand...

Yeah, it really turned Bill into a pauper and social outcast. No one cares that he was impeached.
And that was for a guy who committed actual crimes such as perjury, obstruction via witness tampering, conspiring with witness to lie, destroy and hide evidence.

TRUMP! - impeached by the House radical House Democrats on some day, back then for having the temerity of defeating the bestest, most qualified candidate with breasts, ever.

TRUMP! - acquitted by the Senate, constitutionally established as a check to keep radical House factions from destroying the country.

yawn
 
  • Like
Reactions: hjeagle1vol, NurseGoodVol, Orangeburst and 4 others
#32,000
#32,000
NCFisher said:
There's no doubt Trump is entirely within his powers to bring the 2016 election concerns up; Ukrainians have been convicted of meddling in it, whether his basis for doing so is completely accurate, partially, or not at all (assuming he's unaware of it). And unless we're to say that running for office exempts one from scrutiny - which we know NOT to be the case of candidate Trump - then a president can certainly voice that concern. Prominent concerns of potential impropriety have shadowed the Bidens for years; no one has really looked into it.

I don't think it provides an excuse because he doesn't require one, and seemed to understand the AG would be the point man should such investigation occur. He acknowledges the AG's necessity by mentioning Barr three times, strange behavior for a man alleged to be pursuing self-interest.

"making it up" is a satirical comment reflecting the ludicrous state of virtually every talking head's breathless exclamations while unaware of or ignoring the treaty. Then, OTOH, seizing on Mulvaney's comments as incriminating when, in fact, presidents do qpq over aid, in the national interest, ALL the time. He said nothing wrong. It's an Orwellian era.

I think Giuliani has been terrible for Trump, is the flashpoint for the 'Crowdstrike server' and Burisma fascination, and for Sondland assuming a Zelensky meeting/aid were predicated on publicly announcing investigations. And Sondland appears the flashpoint for most all the foreign service bureaucrats' mirroring assumptions and alarm.
Click to expand...

If he doesn’t need an excuse, what was your purpose in bringing up the treaty in the first place?

I’m not saying Biden can’t be investigated and presenting that as a binary is a logical fallacy. It’s spin.

The political operatives who sign the investigators’ checks (i.e. the president) don’t need to be looking over the investigators’ shoulders and don’t need to have a hands-on role in that investigation.

That’s not just my opinion. It’s a long-standing policy at the WH and DOJ and it is why the treaty doesn’t contemplate the President’s involvement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: luthervol
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top