The Hunter Biden Thread

#2,001
#2,001
BowlBrother85 said:
This didn't concern foreign policy. It concerned the rights of an American citizen and a very obvious conflict of interest on Trump's part.
Click to expand...
This didnt have anything to do with foreign policy, except for the fact that Trump made it about foreign policy.

It concerned:

1. Ukrainian sovereignty to investigate its own crimes, according to Ukrainian law, which has nothing to do with our constitution.

2. The decision as to whether the US will invest US aid $$$ into countries and systems that are corrupt, or that do not act according to US interests. It's foreign policy.
 
#2,002
#2,002
Orange_Crush said:
Yep. It's funny because, as mentioned, the accusations are by-def foreign policy questions--who, when, how, and when not to give foreign aid.
Click to expand...
It is not the job of the President of the United States to enforce Ukrainian law. Trump was guilty of a conflict of interest in soliciting an investigation into Joe Biden. If Biden was guilty of breaking U.S. law? Then that determination and any such investigation into Biden, should have been under the purview of the U.S. Department of Justice... not the President. Biden has the right to equal protection under the law.

The foreign aid had already been authorized by Congress... Trump was attempting to leverage that aid against Zelensky's willingness to announce an investigation into a political opponent. Trump's motive behind withholding the aid was clearly to encourage a self-serving investigation of Biden. I can't believe anyone is actually arguing this. This was highly improper.
 
#2,003
#2,003
dovervolz said:
That’s what I’m guessing too. By December Harris will be president
Click to expand...
But if Biden and Harris are never sworn in will she President. I think only Joe is actually on the ballot, that’s what makes me think that Nancy is behind this. If Biden is toast before the electoral college meets who do they vote as president
 
#2,004
#2,004
Orange_Crush said:
This didnt have anything to do with foreign policy, except for the fact that Trump made it about foreign policy.

It concerned:

1. Ukrainian sovereignty to investigate its own crimes, according to Ukrainian law, which has nothing to do with our constitution.

2. The decision as to whether the US will invest US aid $$$ into countries and systems that are corrupt, or that do not act according to US interests. It's foreign policy.
Click to expand...
But Trump solicited them for an investigation... not the other way around. The decision to hold the foreign aid was contingent upon this self-serving investigation. Hence: Trump's conflict of interest.
 
#2,005
#2,005
Orange_Crush said:
Whether or not to invest US money as aid to corrupt countries and systems is by-def foreign policy. It's malpractice not to take those things into consideration.

Concerning "...the rights..." of American citizens? What rights? Constitutional, as you've claimed and retreated from? Or the rights of an American citizen per their actions in another country? An American somehow has the right not to be investigated by a foreign country, by that countries laws? Again... Can you reference the international code that specifies that?

Those poor guys that got caned in the Philippines for vandalism should have made that appeal.
Click to expand...

TIL that we can force other countries to recognize American constitutional rights.
TIL Ukraine's investigative bodies are part of the constitution of the US.
TIL the Ukrainian government is covered under the US constitution.
 
#2,008
#2,008
BowlBrother85 said:
It is not the job of the President of the United States to enforce Ukrainian law. Trump was guilty of a conflict of interest in soliciting an investigation into Joe Biden. If Biden was guilty of breaking U.S. law? Then that determination and any such investigation into Biden, should have been under the purview of the U.S. Department of Justice... not the President. Biden has the right to equal protection under the law.

The foreign aid had already been authorized by Congress... Trump was attempting to leverage that aid against Zelensky's willingness to announce an investigation into a political opponent. Trump's motive behind withholding the aid was clearly to encourage a self-serving investigation of Biden. I can't believe anyone is actually arguing this. This was highly improper.
Click to expand...
Trump wasn't enforcing Ukrainian law. He encouraged Ukraine to.

What's with the continual side track to US law and the Constitution? I still don't see where the heck that even fits into the discussion. It was a question of Ukrainian law, crimes and investigation. You've been off the rails with this.

You're literally back to the purview of US DoJ for Ukrainian crimes? That's ridiculous.

As I've asked before. You're posting a lot of "should-haves". Get down to the nitty gritty of the legality of it.

Constitutionally:

The Constitution assures our rights as US citizens under US law, on US soil. After that, all bets are off.

Federal law enforcement has jurisdiction over US law, on US soil.

The President has right to implement foreign policy, which includes decisions per foreign aid money. See sanctions and withholding f aid to other countries per nuclear programs, corruption, etc...
 
#2,009
#2,009
Orange_Crush said:
Trump wasn't enforcing Ukrainian law. He encouraged Ukraine to.

What's with the continual side track to US law and the Constitution? I still don't see where the heck that even fits into the discussion. It was a question of Ukrainian law, crimes and investigation. You've been off the rails with this.

You're literally back to the purview of US DoJ for Ukrainian crimes? That's ridiculous.

As I've asked before. You're posting a lot of "should-haves". Get down to the nitty gritty of the legality of it.

Constitutionally:

The Constitution assures our rights as US citizens under US law, on US soil. After that, all bets are off.

Federal law enforcement has jurisdiction over US law, on US soil.

The President has right to implement foreign policy, which includes decisions per foreign aid money. See sanctions and withholding f aid to other countries per nuclear programs, corruption, etc...
Click to expand...
He had no business doing that if it involved an investigation into a political opponent of his. The conflict of interest is clear. Trump had too much to gain professionally from the outcome of such an investigation. Trump could have worked through his Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, to discuss any such concerns with Zelensky over Biden's alleged criminal activity, but he didn't do that. Instead, Trump directly solicited a foreign leader for a self-serving investigation into the most likely opponent in his next election. It was inappropriate.
 
#2,010
#2,010
BowlBrother85 said:
But Trump solicited them for an investigation... not the other way around. The decision to hold the foreign aid was contingent upon this self-serving investigation. Hence: Trump's conflict of interest.
Click to expand...

So?

I'll ask again. Law? You're full of "should haves" and completely ridiculous assertions about some globally-enforced US constitution, global jurisdiction for US law enforcement, and hurt feelings that a Dem would be hurt by a corruption investigation.

That seems to be the sum total of your argument.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tennvols77
#2,012
#2,012
VolStrom said:
I had 3 blind companies come by my current house and only one was willing to measure close enough to mount the blinds inside the window opening. I recall him saying, "you paid a lot of money for the trim on your windows, why cover it up?"
Click to expand...
They stay up all day long, so you can see the wood trim then. We only close them when it gets dark outside.
 
#2,013
#2,013
BowlBrother85 said:
He had no business doing that if it involved an investigation into a political opponent of his. The conflict of interest is clear. Trump could have worked through his Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, to discuss any such concerns over Biden's activity, but he didn't do that. Instead, Trump directly solicited a foreign leader for a self-serving investigation into his most likely opponent in his next election. It was inappropriate.
Click to expand...
Law? Legal references instead of your "should haves"?

Trump's administration should have done it, but not the President? Well, at least you're not claiming the FBI and DoJ should be crowding Ukraine out.

"Most likely opponent..."

You know what that is? It's a blatant and accidental admission that Biden wasn't his political opponent. Heck. It wasn't anywhere near an election year. There was no political opponent.
 
Last edited:
#2,014
#2,014
Orange_Crush said:
So?

I'll ask again. Law? You're full of "should haves" and completely ridiculous assertions about some globally-enforced US constitution, global jurisdiction for US law enforcement, and hurt feelings that a Dem would be hurt by a corruption investigation.

That seems to be the sum total of your argument.
Click to expand...
The sum of my argument is the blatant conflict of interest displayed by Donald Trump. He should not have been party to any investigation of Joe Biden last year. Period.
 
#2,015
#2,015
Orange_Crush said:
Law? Legal references instead of your "should haves"?

Trump's administration should have done it, but not the President? Well, at least you're not claiming the FBO and Doj should be crowding Ukraine out.

"Most likely opponent..."

You know what that is? It's a blatant and accidental admission that Biden wasn't his political opponent. Heck. It wasn't anywhere near an election year. There was no political opponent.
Click to expand...
LOL. It was a year away from an election year and Biden was the clear front runner for the Democratic Party nomination - which he did eventually secure. You are not this naive. Nobody is. Trump's motive behind wanting Joe Biden investigated, was to damage him politically and in doing so, enhance his own chances of being re-elected.
 
#2,025
#2,025
ButchPlz said:
Boy that's not got any basis in anything but how you feel.
Click to expand...
It's basis is in the U.S. Constitution. As an American citizen, Joe Biden is entitled to equal protection under the law. Trump was effectively trying to tip the scales against him. An investigation into criminal activity by an American citizen, should be left under the purview of the U.S. Department of Justice; not the President of the United States. If it involves alleged crimes committed overseas? Then the foreign government with jurisdiction should be the one to lead that investigation: once again, not the President of the United States.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top