|
Post by Kzach on Oct 24, 2019 23:05:21 GMT
Quid pro quo on behalf of the People, the Nation, or the World are all justifiable. Quid pro quo for the President' political benefit? Using tax dollars to lean on another world leader for a "favor" to Individual One? Fuck no. Stop posting, Max. We don't know, yet, whether Trump actually believes the conspiracy theories that have been put forward. If he does, he might well have believed that what was in his interest was also in the interests of the Nation. Personally, I find it hard to believe that he could believe something that has been so thoroughly debunked, but it is in the realm of possibility, considering how long he pushed the Obama birth certificate bullshit. What you believe doesn't exonerate you from criminal activities. Like ignorance of the law doesn't protect you from the law.
|
|
|
Post by kirinke on Oct 25, 2019 0:09:28 GMT
...considering how long he pushed the Obama birth certificate bullshit. So, you never did figure out why he pushed that for so long did you? Hint, Trump is a Blue Dog Democrat and (was/is) best friends with the Clintons... Trump doesn't have friends.
|
|
|
Post by cyphersmith on Oct 25, 2019 21:11:23 GMT
We don't know, yet, whether Trump actually believes the conspiracy theories that have been put forward. If he does, he might well have believed that what was in his interest was also in the interests of the Nation. Personally, I find it hard to believe that he could believe something that has been so thoroughly debunked, but it is in the realm of possibility, considering how long he pushed the Obama birth certificate bullshit. What you believe doesn't exonerate you from criminal activities. Like ignorance of the law doesn't protect you from the law. In this case, it's pertinent. Using funds to push the USA's agenda is how business is done. Using those funds to push his personal agenda is a different story entirely.
|
|
|
Post by Maxperson on Oct 26, 2019 1:25:00 GMT
We don't know, yet, whether Trump actually believes the conspiracy theories that have been put forward. If he does, he might well have believed that what was in his interest was also in the interests of the Nation. Personally, I find it hard to believe that he could believe something that has been so thoroughly debunked, but it is in the realm of possibility, considering how long he pushed the Obama birth certificate bullshit. What you believe doesn't exonerate you from criminal activities. Like ignorance of the law doesn't protect you from the law. Unless it does. The courts have rules that police officers can be ignorant of the law and get away with it, and of course some laws like the campaign finance laws deliberately build in ignorance as an excuse.
|
|
|
Post by Kzach on Oct 26, 2019 2:59:09 GMT
What you believe doesn't exonerate you from criminal activities. Like ignorance of the law doesn't protect you from the law. In this case, it's pertinent. Using funds to push the USA's agenda is how business is done. Using those funds to push his personal agenda is a different story entirely. And this is about Trump furthering his personal agenda. How is this not obvious? How have Cuntmancer and Nazi Bunny made you dumb?
|
|
|
Post by Kzach on Oct 26, 2019 3:00:07 GMT
What you believe doesn't exonerate you from criminal activities. Like ignorance of the law doesn't protect you from the law. Unless it does. The courts have rules that police officers can be ignorant of the law and get away with it, and of course some laws like the campaign finance laws deliberately build in ignorance as an excuse. Good thing impeachment has nothing to do with those laws.
|
|
|
Post by Maxperson on Oct 26, 2019 4:26:53 GMT
Unless it does. The courts have rules that police officers can be ignorant of the law and get away with it, and of course some laws like the campaign finance laws deliberately build in ignorance as an excuse. Good thing impeachment has nothing to do with those laws. Impeachment has nothing to do with any law, really. It's extraordinarily vague. If the Senate decides that ignorance is an excuse, then it is.
|
|
|
Post by 3catcircus on Oct 26, 2019 22:05:58 GMT
In this case, it's pertinent. Using funds to push the USA's agenda is how business is done. Using those funds to push his personal agenda is a different story entirely. And this is about Trump furthering his personal agenda. How is this not obvious? How have Cuntmancer and Nazi Bunny made you dumb? Proof that he was furthering his personal agenda? Cite, muthafucka!
|
|
|
Post by Kzach on Oct 26, 2019 23:06:37 GMT
And this is about Trump furthering his personal agenda. How is this not obvious? How have Cuntmancer and Nazi Bunny made you dumb? Proof that he was furthering his personal agenda? Cite, muthafucka! His agenda is getting re-elected, moron.
|
|
|
Post by Maxperson on Oct 26, 2019 23:15:58 GMT
Proof that he was furthering his personal agenda? Cite, muthafucka! His agenda is getting re-elected, moron. That's not the question. The question is WHY he engaged in the Quid Pro Quo, and there is no hard evidence the election is the reason. We have soft evidence in the timing, but Trump is an idiot and has had bad timing before. We have stronger soft evidence in his hiding the verbatim transcript, but that isn't enough to prove the election as the reason. Can you show any hard evidence of your claim?
|
|
|
Post by kirinke on Oct 27, 2019 0:13:19 GMT
The inquiry is all about investigation and the gathering of evidence. So that alone tells me they don't have enough concrete evidence yet. Personally, I think he's guilty as sin, but the reality is, it has to be proven.
We're not there yet.
Like I said before.... Part of me hopes he gets convicted and tossed out of office. The other, practical part is saying fuck no. Because... Pence is the worse option. Pence is the Palpatine to Trump's Jar Jar Binks.
|
|
|
Post by Kzach on Oct 27, 2019 3:03:32 GMT
His agenda is getting re-elected, moron. That's not the question. The question is WHY he engaged in the Quid Pro Quo, and there is no hard evidence the election is the reason. We have soft evidence in the timing, but Trump is an idiot and has had bad timing before. We have stronger soft evidence in his hiding the verbatim transcript, but that isn't enough to prove the election as the reason. Can you show any hard evidence of your claim? CM and I aren't courts, and neither are you. Arguements that apply to courts do not apply here (or for impeachment as you recognized earlier). I know why Trump called Ukraine. The real question is why do you, and so many others, refuse to awknowledge why he called Ukraine.
|
|
|
Post by Maxperson on Oct 27, 2019 6:36:02 GMT
That's not the question. The question is WHY he engaged in the Quid Pro Quo, and there is no hard evidence the election is the reason. We have soft evidence in the timing, but Trump is an idiot and has had bad timing before. We have stronger soft evidence in his hiding the verbatim transcript, but that isn't enough to prove the election as the reason. Can you show any hard evidence of your claim? CM and I aren't courts, and neither are you. Arguements that apply to courts do not apply here (or for impeachment as you recognized earlier). I know why Trump called Ukraine. The real question is why do you, and so many others, refuse to awknowledge why he called Ukraine. Unless you have the verbatim transcripts and/or had Trump himself tell you, you do not KNOW why he called Ukraine. You are making assumptions plain and simple. What I think is that he PROBABLY did it for political gain, but probably isn't sufficient for impeachment.
|
|
|
Post by Kzach on Oct 27, 2019 12:57:30 GMT
CM and I aren't courts, and neither are you. Arguements that apply to courts do not apply here (or for impeachment as you recognized earlier). I know why Trump called Ukraine. The real question is why do you, and so many others, refuse to awknowledge why he called Ukraine. Unless you have the verbatim transcripts and/or had Trump himself tell you, you do not KNOW why he called Ukraine. You are making assumptions plain and simple. What I think is that he PROBABLY did it for political gain, but probably isn't sufficient for impeachment. That isn't your call to make. It is up to the House and Senate to determine that. They can impeach a ptez jusy for sneezing the wrong way. What you feel about it is irrelevant.
|
|
|
Post by Maxperson on Oct 27, 2019 14:55:31 GMT
Unless you have the verbatim transcripts and/or had Trump himself tell you, you do not KNOW why he called Ukraine. You are making assumptions plain and simple. What I think is that he PROBABLY did it for political gain, but probably isn't sufficient for impeachment. That isn't your call to make. It is up to the House and Senate to determine that. They can impeach a ptez jusy for sneezing the wrong way. What you feel about it is irrelevant. No, you can't impeach him for sneezing. Sneezing the wrong way clearly isn't "treason, bribery or high crimes or misdemeanors." Impeaching a president for sneezing the wrong way or "something he did might or might not be bad, but we just don't like him." is an abuse of authority and unconstitutional.
|
|