Impeaching Trump: Make America Sane Again

[creekster]

No. It's using the Office of President to ask a foreign head of state for a personal favor for personal/political gain absent a national policy consideration/benefit. The quid pro quo is certainly an aggravating factor, but that is not the minimal standard. Heck, Madison believed incompetence was grounds for impeachment. Get this guy outta here.

You're just talking about the quid half the quid pro quo, which is a distinction without a difference, but surprisingly (to me) suggest that if there is a simultaneous national policy 'consideration' or benefit that even that wouldn't be a problem. If you apply the standard you urge I think the Senate will have a hard time convicting, unless they act from a purely political basis, which they might.

That said, the specific quid pro quo involved here, if proven, is sufficient basis for impeachment, in my eyes, especially when combined with some of his increasingly bizarre pronouncements.

[creekster]

Cult 45 going bonkers over Adam Schiff right now. It's like the Orange Zombiemaster pointed his tiny little craw and said "sick em!"

You missed creeks wisdom, Schiff is just as big of a clown as Trump. Of course creek was glad Trump won the election, lest we forget.

A stunning feature of a lot of Trump fans is their little poker face. Many don't openly admit they like him, but defend him like Cap'n Save A Ho every time he does something indefensible.

Cult 45. I like that.

Schiff is a little worm and has acted in a manner deserving criticism and, but for Trump's daily histrionics, this would be very obvious. For more than a year, Schiff was on TV almost every day claiming that he was aware of (and later that he actually possessed) clear evidence of Trump's obvious collusion with Russia and he was only waiting for Mueller to release his report and then he would share it all. Except that wasn't true. It was apparently just an effort to guide the investigation to a conclusion he preferred. It was not, however, based on any documents he possessed or facts he knew.

Now Schiff demands that Trump release the transcript of a phone call and the text of a whistleblower complaint, that he states publicly he knew nothing about, only to later be forced to concede that in fact the 'whistleblower' came to his staff first and they assisted him in taking the information and putting it in a complaint.

I do not like Trump and I did not vote for him and I am unclear why Frank claims I was happy he won. I also do not defend him and think that if the Ukraine situation is supported in fact as has been alleged (and it appears to be) it is worthy of impeachment. But I also find Schiff to be a reprehensible liar. I also think that only those who are rabidly and maybe irrationally opposed to Trump fail to see Schiff's perfidy.

BTW Frank, I am still waiting to hear why you think Schiff is in a tough spot. Maybe because he has to keep explaining his lies?

[SeattleUte]

Once again, there is no current evidence that this is true. There was no active investigation into Biden's son at the time.

This says nothing of the ethics or sleaziness of what Biden or his son did. It's just that the talking point that he went after a prosecutor who was investigating his son is not true.

The Ukrainian prosecutor was investigating the oligarch who owned the oil company that was paying Hunter $50k a month to sit on its board, and was investigating said company which had Biden on his board. Hunter of course was trading on his father’s name and power. He had no prior experience in oil and he’s shamelessly traded on his father’s name and position. Note he transferred from Georgetown to Yale law, and was not a scholar at Georgetown. He’s a coke addict who has failed at everything.

You’re splitting hairs. Biden was in conflict of interest position.

[PaloAltoCougar]

I’m not a Trump defender, but your post begs a few questions. The problem isn’t with children of politicians doing business in foreign countries. Nor, by the way, is the problem per se Trump asking foreign countries to investigate his political enemies—see, e.g., the Steele dossier.

Biden’s problem is that he demanded Ukraine to fire a prosecutor who was investigating his son Hunter, a sleazy fellow, for possible criminal activities. And as lawyers, we know that a conflict of interest is radioactive regardless of intent. He shouldn’t have been in the middle of that. I tend to agree with Bill Maher that Joe Biden should withdraw because of this, particularly to lend credibility to the effort to impeach Trump.

Trump’s problem is that he may have used taxpayer money as quid pro quo to induce Ukraine to investigate Hunter Biden.

I do think there is at least a potential problem with children of politicians doing business in foreign countries if those politicians are in a policy-making role with respect to those countries, but let's move on to your second paragraph.

As NWC indicates, there's no evidence the prosecutor whose ouster Biden sought was investigating Hunter or Burisma (the Ukrainian company in question) at that time. Lacking UT's formidable linking skills, I can't find my source on this, but I believe the corrupt prosecutor hadn't done anything on the case for nearly two years at the time Biden (and the IMF, and the EU, and other U.S. politicians) pushed Ukraine to get rid of the bum.

But sure, appearances mean a lot and Biden and his kid should have been far more attentive to such things (Caesar's wife and all that). So should the Trumps.

[Eddie]

...I do not like Trump and I did not vote for him and I am unclear why Frank claims I was happy he won. I also do not defend him and think that if the Ukraine situation is supported in fact as has been alleged (and it appears to be) it is worthy of impeachment. But I also find Schiff to be a reprehensible liar. I also think that only those who are rabidly and maybe irrationally opposed to Trump fail to see Schiff's perfidy...

I think this is the thing that gets me about all of this. I'm sure I'm officially a "Trump supporter" too, according to some here. I don't like and didn't vote for him either.

I just try to call out the irrational rants when I see them.

I know Trump is a bad dude. I know he's irrational. I know he will say and do dumb things. But when hyperbole is overused, "facts" are overstated, and conclusions are reached by stretching the tiniest bit of corroborating evidence...it begins to cast doubt on the credibility of the person ranting.

[Northwestcoug]

The Ukrainian prosecutor was investigating the oligarch who owned the oil company that was paying Hunter $50k a month to sit on its board, and was investigating said company which had Biden on his board. Hunter of course was trading on his father’s name and power. He had no prior experience in oil and he’s shamelessly traded on his father’s name and position. Note he transferred from Georgetown to Yale law, and was not a scholar at Georgetown. He’s a coke addict who has failed at everything.

You’re splitting hairs. Biden was in conflict of interest position.

Educate yourself:

https://www.axios.com/joe-hunter-bid...51759063c.html

[SeattleUte]

Educate yourself:

https://www.axios.com/joe-hunter-bid...51759063c.html

Haha. This is entirely consistent with what I just said in every detail. It even concludes that Joe Biden was in a conflict of interest.

[SeattleUte]

I do think there is at least a potential problem with children of politicians doing business in foreign countries if those politicians are in a policy-making role with respect to those countries, but let's move on to your second paragraph.

As NWC indicates, there's no evidence the prosecutor whose ouster Biden sought was investigating Hunter or Burisma (the Ukrainian company in question) at that time. Lacking UT's formidable linking skills, I can't find my source on this, but I believe the corrupt prosecutor hadn't done anything on the case for nearly two years at the time Biden (and the IMF, and the EU, and other U.S. politicians) pushed Ukraine to get rid of the bum.

But sure, appearances mean a lot and Biden and his kid should have been far more attentive to such things (Caesar's wife and all that). So should the Trumps.

The prosecutor was investigating Burisma and it’s owner. Ergo, he was investigating the board including notably Biden’s son who was being paid 50k a month for just the kind of influence that is at issue here. Maybe $50k a month well spent!

Regardless, everyone should agree Joe Biden was in a conflict of interest.

[Northwestcoug]

Haha. This is entirely consistent with what I just said in every detail. It even concludes that Joe Biden was in a conflict of interest.

So when you said:

Biden’s problem is that he demanded Ukraine to fire a prosecutor who was investigating his son Hunter, a sleazy fellow, for possible criminal activities.

that's entirely consistent with the Axios article?!? Which expressly said that the prosecutor was not investigating his son?!?

I'm no lawyer, but I think my reading comprehension is at least average.

[frank ryan]

What do you guys think about Trump hiding details of his conversations with Putin and the Saudis?

[SeattleUte]

So when you said:



that's entirely consistent with the Axios article?!? Which expressly said that the prosecutor was not investigating his son?!?

I'm no lawyer, but I think my reading comprehension is at least average.

For the non-lawyers here (and apparently some of the lawyers): A corporation is an not a natural person. It acts through its directors and officers. If the corporation is being investigated for corruption, ineluctably so is the board. The board’s activities are closely scrutinized.

Also, an investigation is not an indictment, so to say that the prosecutor was investigating the company but not the board, begs the question: who says? Was there an announcement that the prosecutor was investigating the corporation but not the board?

Some people here need to be disciplined about not believing every argument they hear on CNN.

[SeattleUte]

But, again, the essential point is that Biden was in a conflict of interest position. Axios agrees with my reasoning and conclusion. It’s indubitable.

[creekster]

What do you guys think about Trump hiding details of his conversations with Putin and the Saudis?

Hiding? Do you mean the claim that the administration tightly controlled access to records of some conversations? None of those records are ever made public except under extraordinary circumstances so the only people he was hiding them from were his own staff. Or is there something else to which you refer?

[beefytee]

For the non-lawyers here (and apparently some of the lawyers): A corporation is an not a natural person. It acts through its directors and officers. If the corporation is being investigated for corruption, ineluctably so is the board. The board’s activities are closely scrutinized.

Also, an investigation is not an indictment, so to say that the prosecutor was investigating the company but not the board, begs the question: who says? Was there an announcement that the prosecutor was investigating the corporation but not the board?

Some people here need to be disciplined about not believing every argument they hear on CNN.

Help this non-lawyer understand, is the reverse is true? i.e. the company not being investigated means the board isn't being investigated.

European countries and international bodies had accused Shokin of failing to pursue corruption, including in the Burisma case, and wanted him fired.

Where are people saying that the company was being investigated but not the board?

[falafel]

I think this is the thing that gets me about all of this. I'm sure I'm officially a "Trump supporter" too, according to some here. I don't like and didn't vote for him either.

I just try to call out the irrational rants when I see them.

I know Trump is a bad dude. I know he's irrational. I know he will say and do dumb things. But when hyperbole is overused, "facts" are overstated, and conclusions are reached by stretching the tiniest bit of corroborating evidence...it begins to cast doubt on the credibility of the person ranting.

100% agree with this post Eddie. There is value in maintaining counterbalances in the system.