Author Topic: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation  (Read 20185 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28826
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #315 on: January 30, 2020, 02:50:37 PM »

Adam Schiff critiquing others' arguments as "desperate" is like Trump calling another politician a "liar".  Or Gene Simmons calling another rock star a "manwhore".   Or Barry Bonds calling another baseball player a "cheat".   
And yet he was absolutely correct. As could be Trump, Gene, or Barry Bonds.

And this argument is one of them that really intrigue me. I honestly have to ask, did Nixon do anything to warrant impeachment? Could he have been impeached using the GOP logic presented over the last 2 days?

I gave you the real answer, now the snide one:  he might be correct, but it's no more desperate than ignoring the entire judicial branch of the government to meet your obsessive need to "get" this President.

You know that adage that people see the world through their own lenses?  I don't think it's any coincidence that Schiff is really the only Democrat attacking Trump for being vindictive and spiteful, etc. etc.  I think Schiff is channeling.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28826
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #316 on: January 30, 2020, 02:58:51 PM »
I had a question for the lawyers of the board.

Last night I was watching one of Trump's defense lawyers speak, and it sounded like what he was saying basically boiled down to "The president is legally allowed to do whatever is necessary, including (but not limited to) conspiring with a foreign government to get re-elected, so long as he believes what he is doing is in the best interests of the country".   

How is that not a dictatorship? It sounded like they were making the case that he can basically act and order with immunity so long as he thinks it's for the the betterment of the nation. Was I hearing it wrong, or was that the argument they were making?

I'm going to get pushback for this, I'm sure, but there are components to Dershowitz' argument that are important and crucial and seem to be glossed over.  I understand that Dershowitz tried to clarify after the fact, but I haven't seen it, so if this contradicts, it just means I'm wrong (for now).

I watched it in real time. The argument isn't JUST "if it helps my reelection it's not impeachable" (which is what Dershowitz said). The argument is that "benefit to the country" is not PRECLUDED by "it helps my re-election". I'm not sure I agree with it - if you murdered Ted Bundy, it's still murder, despite the apparent benefit to society - but it does answer the intent question in a much fuller way than the House Managers have, and it also hinges on the "criminality" of the action. Remember, Dershowitz is also arguing that the quid pro quo was not otherwise illegal, whereas the House Managers are, so there is a fundamental disagreement on the underlying assumptions. Dershowitz CLEARLY excluded "corrupt motives" from his example. So, in my reading, if Trump went to Zelensky and said "I need you to plant a kilo of coke on Biden when he hugs you next", that would clearly be impeachable.

Remember what Dershowitz is responding to: the point by the House Managers that "quid pro quo" is enough to show impeachability. I've written about this before. Mulvaney, Trump, and Schiff can all be right IN CONTEXT, they can't all be right AT THE SAME TIME. Mulvaney is right; we DO do quid pro quos all the time. Schiff's argument - unmade if you ask me - is that THIS quid pro quo was for PERSONAL BENEFIT. Dershowitz is trying to make the case - I think it's walking a high-wire and is a great legal argument and a shitty political argument - that because there might be some benefit to a politician's election, it doesn't AUTOMATICALLY become "for personal benefit". 

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28826
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #317 on: January 30, 2020, 03:01:51 PM »
So since that argument by Trump's team was made........assuming he gets off the hook, which I assume he will........won't that argument create a legal precedent?

Isn't that even scarier?

Ostensibly it does, but it's not absolute.  Every case that has ever overturned a previous decision is moving against precedent.   Here, in a political proceeding, it's even more subjective.   If "precedent" really mattered we wouldn't be here right now.   "Precedent" prevents people from being punished for exercising their due process rights under the Constitution, yet here we are with the Second Article of Impeachment.

Online Chino

  • Be excellent to each other.
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 23540
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #318 on: January 30, 2020, 04:27:47 PM »
I had a question for the lawyers of the board.

Last night I was watching one of Trump's defense lawyers speak, and it sounded like what he was saying basically boiled down to "The president is legally allowed to do whatever is necessary, including (but not limited to) conspiring with a foreign government to get re-elected, so long as he believes what he is doing is in the best interests of the country".   

How is that not a dictatorship? It sounded like they were making the case that he can basically act and order with immunity so long as he thinks it's for the the betterment of the nation. Was I hearing it wrong, or was that the argument they were making?

I'm going to get pushback for this, I'm sure, but there are components to Dershowitz' argument that are important and crucial and seem to be glossed over.  I understand that Dershowitz tried to clarify after the fact, but I haven't seen it, so if this contradicts, it just means I'm wrong (for now).

I watched it in real time. The argument isn't JUST "if it helps my reelection it's not impeachable" (which is what Dershowitz said). The argument is that "benefit to the country" is not PRECLUDED by "it helps my re-election". I'm not sure I agree with it - if you murdered Ted Bundy, it's still murder, despite the apparent benefit to society - but it does answer the intent question in a much fuller way than the House Managers have, and it also hinges on the "criminality" of the action. Remember, Dershowitz is also arguing that the quid pro quo was not otherwise illegal, whereas the House Managers are, so there is a fundamental disagreement on the underlying assumptions. Dershowitz CLEARLY excluded "corrupt motives" from his example. So, in my reading, if Trump went to Zelensky and said "I need you to plant a kilo of coke on Biden when he hugs you next", that would clearly be impeachable.

Remember what Dershowitz is responding to: the point by the House Managers that "quid pro quo" is enough to show impeachability. I've written about this before. Mulvaney, Trump, and Schiff can all be right IN CONTEXT, they can't all be right AT THE SAME TIME. Mulvaney is right; we DO do quid pro quos all the time. Schiff's argument - unmade if you ask me - is that THIS quid pro quo was for PERSONAL BENEFIT. Dershowitz is trying to make the case - I think it's walking a high-wire and is a great legal argument and a shitty political argument - that because there might be some benefit to a politician's election, it doesn't AUTOMATICALLY become "for personal benefit".

I feel like we're at the point now where his lawyers (and probably Barr himself at this rate) would say something like "Trump had to do that as a last resort due the security threat that is Joe Biden, and he is fulfilling his duties as president to do what he believe is best for the country" and congress would nod their heads and agree.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28826
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #319 on: January 30, 2020, 06:21:07 PM »
Well, half would. The other half would scream that the republic is falling, "no one is above the law!" and make quips to the camera about the Founding Fathers not wanting a "monarchy" while completely ignoring the Constitution just like Trump.   

It takes different forms, but both sides are playing just as fast and loose. 

I think the saddest thing about all of this is, it won't end tomorrow or next week or whenever.  Schiff didn't make a compelling argument; he just didn't.  Bu there's enough dirt and fluff about the whole thing, that the vote will come down and Trump will scream "vindication" when it's no such thing, and the Democrats will scream that it wasn't a legitimate tribunal, when it was, and the bickering and partisanship will continue unabated.  Yay, us.   :tdwn

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28826
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #320 on: January 30, 2020, 07:03:59 PM »
What's baffling to me is, why DIDN'T Bidens Joe or Hunter testify?  That could have put this whole thing to bed, no?  Of course, they'd be under oath - oops! - but wouldn't that be the nail in the coffin?   Takes away the GOP's witness argument, takes away Trump's defense (if Biden can in fact, either show or project innocence), takes away most - not all, but most - of the Constitutional issues (still doesn't solve the subpoena problem that Trump rightfully raised), takes away any advantage Trump has during the election if Biden gets the nom, takes away any high ground Trump has during the election if Biden doesn't get the nom...  it seems like a no-brainer to me.

(And no, I'm not at all saying "if he's innocent, why not testify?", because I despise that argument.  I'm going to the strategy of the prosecution; I could care less of Biden testifies or not.)

Online TAC

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 49840
  • Gender: Male
  • Kip Rolled
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #321 on: January 30, 2020, 07:44:42 PM »
Can I ask a dumb question though? What do Joe Biden or Hunter Biden have to do at all with the impeachment. I mean, other than the backstory of Hunter being gifted the job.


But what does that have to do with Trump "withholding" aid?

I have no dog in the fight, so I'm not asking with a partisan view. But it seems like calling either of the Bidens would be nothing but an opportunity for Trumps lawyers to smear them, or to create a enough of a diversion for what Trump is accused of doing.
would have thought the same thing but seeing the OP was TAC i immediately thought Maiden or DT related
Winger Theater Forums................or WTF.  ;D

Online El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25830
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #322 on: January 31, 2020, 08:08:00 AM »
Can I ask a dumb question though? What do Joe Biden or Hunter Biden have to do at all with the impeachment. I mean, other than the backstory of Hunter being gifted the job.


But what does that have to do with Trump "withholding" aid?

I have no dog in the fight, so I'm not asking with a partisan view. But it seems like calling either of the Bidens would be nothing but an opportunity for Trumps lawyers to smear them, or to create a enough of a diversion for what Trump is accused of doing.
I agree. The Bidens can't offer anything to demonstrate guilt or innocence for the charges against Trump. 
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28826
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #323 on: January 31, 2020, 09:24:44 AM »
Can I ask a dumb question though? What do Joe Biden or Hunter Biden have to do at all with the impeachment. I mean, other than the backstory of Hunter being gifted the job.


But what does that have to do with Trump "withholding" aid?

I have no dog in the fight, so I'm not asking with a partisan view. But it seems like calling either of the Bidens would be nothing but an opportunity for Trumps lawyers to smear them, or to create a enough of a diversion for what Trump is accused of doing.
I agree. The Bidens can't offer anything to demonstrate guilt or innocence for the charges against Trump.

I respectfully disagree.   An important point is the REASON for any investigation.

If the assertion (by Schiff and others) that the investigation was purely a sham to defame Biden, and there was no other possible rationale, then testimony by the Biden's can go to Schiff's argument of corrupt motive.

If the assertion (by Trump and others, including me) that there is substance to the accusations of corruption by Biden, then testimony by the Biden's can provide another rationale, and minimizes or removes Schiff's allegation of corrupt motive.   If there is corruption, it changes the argument from "is there corrupt motive or not" to "is a person immune to investigation by the existing President as long as they are running FOR President?"  Now, that would not be the case if the corruption was involving Hunter Biden.

Contrary to many Democrats assertions that it is absurd, ridiculous, a farce, or worse, I think the Biden's testimony is as critical if not MORE critical than Bolton's (after all, Bolton is simply a rebuttal witness to several previous witness testimonials.)

This is akin to a defendant in a murder trial being allowed to argue their defense to the mens rea (state of mind) element of murder (self-defense, insanity).

There is little danger of the Biden's being "smeared" by the act of testifying, but certainly there is the risk that the testimony they provide COULD be damaging.  But - and I say this sincerely, with zero snark - if the point is "truth" and "justice" - two things Adam Schiff has repeatedly cited as the rationale for this entire exercise, we shouldn't be worried about that.  If they DID act corruptly, any "smear" would be appropriate, no?   If we're going to impeach this President for corrupt behavior, wouldn't we want to know if a potential next candidate is himself corrupt?

Online El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25830
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #324 on: January 31, 2020, 09:36:37 AM »
Even if the the president was expecting an investigation for lawful reasons, and the evidence is pretty clear that he was not, he still has no legal authority to withhold funding lawfully appropriated by congress.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline The Walrus

  • goo goo g'joob
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 17221
  • PSA: Stairway to Heaven is in 4/4
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #325 on: January 31, 2020, 09:37:43 AM »
Even if the the president was expecting an investigation for lawful reasons, and the evidence is pretty clear that he was not, he still has no legal authority to withhold funding lawfully appropriated by congress.

+1
From a Mega Man Legends island jamming power metal to a Walrus listening to black metal, I like your story arc.
"I don't worry about nothing, no, 'cause worrying's a waste of my time"

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28826
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #326 on: January 31, 2020, 01:56:24 PM »
Even if the the president was expecting an investigation for lawful reasons, and the evidence is pretty clear that he was not, he still has no legal authority to withhold funding lawfully appropriated by congress.
He does, though.  There are limitations in time (memory says 45 days, don't quote me) and scope (can't do it for strictly policy reasons), but he does have that authority. It's called "impoundment".  It's an open question - what isn't an open question with this guy? - as to whether he violated that law here.   The release of the funds quite possibly negated any wrong-doing. 

Online El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25830
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #327 on: January 31, 2020, 03:43:15 PM »
Even if the the president was expecting an investigation for lawful reasons, and the evidence is pretty clear that he was not, he still has no legal authority to withhold funding lawfully appropriated by congress.
He does, though.  There are limitations in time (memory says 45 days, don't quote me) and scope (can't do it for strictly policy reasons), but he does have that authority. It's called "impoundment".  It's an open question - what isn't an open question with this guy? - as to whether he violated that law here.   The release of the funds quite possibly negated any wrong-doing.
He failed to notify congress that he was withholding the money, and he failed to release it with enough time to be disbursed before the authorization expired. All of this was demonstrated in the various emails from people asking how they were supposed to explain being in violation of the relevant act.

But you know what, it honestly doesn't matter. We're here trying to discuss whether or not he's in violation of the law from many different angles. Did he violate this act? Did he abuse his authority? Were his motives sincere or impure? Did he commit a crime? The reality is that it's meaningless outside of our intellectual exercise as the rule of law is null and void. It's strange for me to say this, but I'm kind of with Gary on this one. Not because "the democrats did it too!" Rather because, and I know you're going to hate this, the law simply doesn't matter to these people anymore, and it's not going to.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Online Chino

  • Be excellent to each other.
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 23540
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #328 on: January 31, 2020, 03:45:39 PM »
Letter sent to McConnell this morning:





The last paragraph on the first page could explain why Graham's spine can't be found.

Offline The Walrus

  • goo goo g'joob
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 17221
  • PSA: Stairway to Heaven is in 4/4
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #329 on: January 31, 2020, 03:47:27 PM »
Spineless republicans, every single one of them who voted against bringing in witnesses. Collins and Romney were the only ones who voted yea.
From a Mega Man Legends island jamming power metal to a Walrus listening to black metal, I like your story arc.
"I don't worry about nothing, no, 'cause worrying's a waste of my time"

Online cramx3

  • Chillest of the chill
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28086
  • Gender: Male
    • The Home of cramx3
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #330 on: January 31, 2020, 03:52:30 PM »
I really haven't followed this much, but it was on at the restaurant while I was eating lunch today and I saw they were voting on whether to have witnesses.... I'm not sure I understand at all why you would vote on that?  It seems common sense that if you have witnesses, they testify and if not, then you don't.  What's to vote on?  I may be completely off base here so ignore me if so.

Offline DragonAttack

  • Posts: 2208
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #331 on: February 01, 2020, 11:44:54 AM »
Because, if they were all standing in front of Jack Nicholson, he would be telling them 'YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!'
'Discretionary posting is the better part of valor.'  Falstaff

Offline kaos2900

  • Posts: 2850
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #332 on: February 03, 2020, 07:40:30 AM »
Spineless republicans, every single one of them who voted against bringing in witnesses. Collins and Romney were the only ones who voted yea.

I 100% agree. I assume this is in direct response to the Dem's handling of the House portion of this "process". Another reason why I think this whole thing is a joke and waste of time and money. No one is interested in the truth. The Dems want Trump gone, the Repubs want to stay in "power"/get re-elected. None of these clowns gives one shit about the truth or the country.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28826
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #333 on: February 03, 2020, 09:05:06 AM »
Even if the the president was expecting an investigation for lawful reasons, and the evidence is pretty clear that he was not, he still has no legal authority to withhold funding lawfully appropriated by congress.
He does, though.  There are limitations in time (memory says 45 days, don't quote me) and scope (can't do it for strictly policy reasons), but he does have that authority. It's called "impoundment".  It's an open question - what isn't an open question with this guy? - as to whether he violated that law here.   The release of the funds quite possibly negated any wrong-doing.
He failed to notify congress that he was withholding the money, and he failed to release it with enough time to be disbursed before the authorization expired. All of this was demonstrated in the various emails from people asking how they were supposed to explain being in violation of the relevant act.

But you know what, it honestly doesn't matter. We're here trying to discuss whether or not he's in violation of the law from many different angles. Did he violate this act? Did he abuse his authority? Were his motives sincere or impure? Did he commit a crime? The reality is that it's meaningless outside of our intellectual exercise as the rule of law is null and void. It's strange for me to say this, but I'm kind of with Gary on this one. Not because "the democrats did it too!" Rather because, and I know you're going to hate this, the law simply doesn't matter to these people anymore, and it's not going to.

I hate it, true, but not for the obvious reasons. I tend to agree with you.  The law doesn't apply to ANY of them; that's partly why I get so apoplectic with Adam Schiff for his sanctimonious "no one is above the law" nonsense.   Seriously?  More like "no one I don't support or agree with is above the law".   It's ALL why I get so apoplectic at Adam Schiff ignoring the courts for his own agenda.

Donald Trump is the new OJ.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28826
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #334 on: February 03, 2020, 09:09:03 AM »
Spineless republicans, every single one of them who voted against bringing in witnesses. Collins and Romney were the only ones who voted yea.

Be clear here:  voted against bringing ONE PARTICULAR witness.  ONE PARTICULAR witness.   Let's not pretend even for a second that the Democrats intended or would have allowed a full slate of witnesses.   It was about BOLTON.   Why would you support only allowing information that HURT you, and not allowing information that might HELP you?   I'm a process guy: I think witnesses are crucial, but I don't support that singular request by the House Managers.  You have to take the good with the bad.  Either ALL witnesses, or NO witnesses, not this meally-mouthed, agenda-driving bullshit that was presented. 

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28826
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #335 on: February 03, 2020, 09:10:15 AM »
Spineless republicans, every single one of them who voted against bringing in witnesses. Collins and Romney were the only ones who voted yea.

I 100% agree. I assume this is in direct response to the Dem's handling of the House portion of this "process". Another reason why I think this whole thing is a joke and waste of time and money. No one is interested in the truth. The Dems want Trump gone, the Repubs want to stay in "power"/get re-elected. None of these clowns gives one shit about the truth or the country.

Ding ding ding.  I've been saying this for weeks.   BOTH sides.

Offline The Walrus

  • goo goo g'joob
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 17221
  • PSA: Stairway to Heaven is in 4/4
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #336 on: February 03, 2020, 09:17:31 AM »
Spineless republicans, every single one of them who voted against bringing in witnesses. Collins and Romney were the only ones who voted yea.

Be clear here:  voted against bringing ONE PARTICULAR witness.  ONE PARTICULAR witness.   Let's not pretend even for a second that the Democrats intended or would have allowed a full slate of witnesses.   It was about BOLTON.   Why would you support only allowing information that HURT you, and not allowing information that might HELP you?   I'm a process guy: I think witnesses are crucial, but I don't support that singular request by the House Managers.  You have to take the good with the bad.  Either ALL witnesses, or NO witnesses, not this meally-mouthed, agenda-driving bullshit that was presented.

Appreciate the effort, but you're so staunchly republican and anti-democrat in this that I'm kind of sighing at the idea of replying to this. A trial should have witnesses. That's all.

You're not gonna change my mind on the optics by insisting that the dems have done all sorts of things wrong, and the republicans are trying to respect law, because you said, verbatim, the democrats "aren't interested in truth or justice." Recognize your own bias for a change
From a Mega Man Legends island jamming power metal to a Walrus listening to black metal, I like your story arc.
"I don't worry about nothing, no, 'cause worrying's a waste of my time"

Online Chino

  • Be excellent to each other.
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 23540
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #337 on: February 03, 2020, 09:48:47 AM »
Spineless republicans, every single one of them who voted against bringing in witnesses. Collins and Romney were the only ones who voted yea.

Be clear here:  voted against bringing ONE PARTICULAR witness.  ONE PARTICULAR witness.   Let's not pretend even for a second that the Democrats intended or would have allowed a full slate of witnesses.   It was about BOLTON. 

They also voted against acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, Robert Blair, a Mulvaney adviser, and Michael Duffey.

Quote
Why would you support only allowing information that HURT you, and not allowing information that might HELP you?

A 'yes' vote by the GOP would have allowed them to request witnesses of their choosing as well, no?
« Last Edit: February 03, 2020, 10:02:30 AM by Chino »

Offline gmillerdrake

  • Proud Father.....Blessed Husband
  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 15907
  • Gender: Male
  • 1 Timothy 2:5
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #338 on: February 03, 2020, 10:53:30 AM »
the democrats "aren't interested in truth or justice." Recognize your own bias for a change

But it's not really a bias. It's just stating what is pretty obvious. Even prior to trump being sworn in the most vocal and top Democratic Reps stated time and time again they were going to get trump removed by whatever means necessary. He hadn't even taken office yet and they were talking about impeaching him....simply due to him beating hilary and being an utter dickhead.

As we've seen over the past three years it's been one hail mary after another to try and get something to stick to trump in order to be able to remove him from office. This impeachment was a weak case....the dems knew it....the repubs knew it....everyone knew it. It's always been about the side show and how far 'they' could go to just drag trump through the mud. he makes it easy to do because of who he is....but for Bill to suggest that truth or justice have never been the reason for any of this is spot on.
Without Faith.....Without Hope.....There can be No Peace of Mind

Offline The Walrus

  • goo goo g'joob
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 17221
  • PSA: Stairway to Heaven is in 4/4
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #339 on: February 03, 2020, 10:55:44 AM »
Obvious... to you. Don't speak for me, please. I have a very different perspective than you...
From a Mega Man Legends island jamming power metal to a Walrus listening to black metal, I like your story arc.
"I don't worry about nothing, no, 'cause worrying's a waste of my time"

Offline gmillerdrake

  • Proud Father.....Blessed Husband
  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 15907
  • Gender: Male
  • 1 Timothy 2:5
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #340 on: February 03, 2020, 11:01:56 AM »
Obvious... to you. Don't speak for me, please. I have a very different perspective than you...

And that is the issue, isn't it? We have different perspectives about this.....and both will argue that our perspective is the perspective that sees it correctly
Without Faith.....Without Hope.....There can be No Peace of Mind

Online El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25830
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #341 on: February 03, 2020, 11:14:38 AM »
the democrats "aren't interested in truth or justice." Recognize your own bias for a change

But it's not really a bias. It's just stating what is pretty obvious. Even prior to trump being sworn in the most vocal and top Democratic Reps stated time and time again they were going to get trump removed by whatever means necessary. He hadn't even taken office yet and they were talking about impeaching him....simply due to him beating hilary and being an utter dickhead.

As we've seen over the past three years it's been one hail mary after another to try and get something to stick to trump in order to be able to remove him from office. This impeachment was a weak case....the dems knew it....the repubs knew it....everyone knew it. It's always been about the side show and how far 'they' could go to just drag trump through the mud. he makes it easy to do because of who he is....but for Bill to suggest that truth or justice have never been the reason for any of this is spot on.
I think the problem with the point y'all are both making is that the democrats actually are right here. Incompetent though they may be, and despite being motivated by pure partisan bias, Trump actually did exactly what they say he did, and in a functioning system that would be a problem. That's why I keep bringing up Nixon. Trump's transgressions are no less corrupt, and I think every one of us know that he's guilty. I can agree with Stadler that the democrats are bungling it, and I agree with you that the system is so bungled that criminality is the new normal, but it's still important to remember that Trump is guilty of something that in any functional system would have gotten him thrown out on his fat dumb ass, and rightly so.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline gmillerdrake

  • Proud Father.....Blessed Husband
  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 15907
  • Gender: Male
  • 1 Timothy 2:5
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #342 on: February 03, 2020, 11:23:25 AM »
the democrats "aren't interested in truth or justice." Recognize your own bias for a change

But it's not really a bias. It's just stating what is pretty obvious. Even prior to trump being sworn in the most vocal and top Democratic Reps stated time and time again they were going to get trump removed by whatever means necessary. He hadn't even taken office yet and they were talking about impeaching him....simply due to him beating hilary and being an utter dickhead.

As we've seen over the past three years it's been one hail mary after another to try and get something to stick to trump in order to be able to remove him from office. This impeachment was a weak case....the dems knew it....the repubs knew it....everyone knew it. It's always been about the side show and how far 'they' could go to just drag trump through the mud. he makes it easy to do because of who he is....but for Bill to suggest that truth or justice have never been the reason for any of this is spot on.
I think the problem with the point y'all are both making is that the democrats actually are right here. Incompetent though they may be, and despite being motivated by pure partisan bias, Trump actually did exactly what they say he did, and in a functioning system that would be a problem. That's why I keep bringing up Nixon. Trump's transgressions are no less corrupt, and I think every one of us know that he's guilty. I can agree with Stadler that the democrats are bungling it, and I agree with you that the system is so bungled that criminality is the new normal, but it's still important to remember that Trump is guilty of something that in any functional system would have gotten him thrown out on his fat dumb ass, and rightly so.

100% agree on that. Again, I'm not arguing the legalities of if he's guilty or not. I'm arguing that the Dems have never cared whether or not he was guilty of something before launching their assault. If you look at someone for as long and as hard and as detailed as they have at trump over this three and a half years.....everyone will be found in breaking 'some' law out there. It's the discrimination (for lack of a better word) that they've shown in pursuing the removal of trump that bothers me....and as I've said.....that bothers me more than the apparent dumb a$$ tactic that trump used on Ukraine.
Without Faith.....Without Hope.....There can be No Peace of Mind

Offline hefdaddy42

  • Et in Arcadia Ego
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 43742
  • Gender: Male
  • Postwhore Emeritus
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #343 on: February 03, 2020, 12:42:02 PM »
If you look at someone for as long and as hard and as detailed as they have at trump over this three and a half years.....everyone will be found in breaking 'some' law out there.
No, not everyone.  Only people that do a lot of shady shit. 

Can't get caught if you aren't doing anything wrong.
Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.

Offline gmillerdrake

  • Proud Father.....Blessed Husband
  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 15907
  • Gender: Male
  • 1 Timothy 2:5
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #344 on: February 03, 2020, 12:50:32 PM »
If you look at someone for as long and as hard and as detailed as they have at trump over this three and a half years.....everyone will be found in breaking 'some' law out there.
No, not everyone.  Only people that do a lot of shady shit. 

Can't get caught if you aren't doing anything wrong.

True. But even in the wake of the Patriot Act and all the Freedoms we 'gave' up in pursuit and protection from the bad guys.....I'd be willing to be that every member on this forum is guilty of a Federal crime when it came down to it.

And, your kidding yourself if you don't think 99.9% of our elected officials aren't involved in ' a lot of shady shit' that would qualify as a crime.....including past presidents.
Without Faith.....Without Hope.....There can be No Peace of Mind

Online TAC

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 49840
  • Gender: Male
  • Kip Rolled
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #345 on: February 03, 2020, 01:00:11 PM »
Hmm..trying to figure out what Federal crime I could've committed.. :lol
would have thought the same thing but seeing the OP was TAC i immediately thought Maiden or DT related
Winger Theater Forums................or WTF.  ;D

Offline hefdaddy42

  • Et in Arcadia Ego
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 43742
  • Gender: Male
  • Postwhore Emeritus
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #346 on: February 03, 2020, 01:00:21 PM »
And, your kidding yourself if you don't think 99.9% of our elected officials aren't involved in ' a lot of shady shit' that would qualify as a crime.....including past presidents.
While I think there may be some truth to this, about some elected officials and some Presidents, the belief that it's "99.9%" just seems like a way to justify a certain belief or perception.
Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.

Online El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25830
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #347 on: February 03, 2020, 01:09:27 PM »
If you look at someone for as long and as hard and as detailed as they have at trump over this three and a half years.....everyone will be found in breaking 'some' law out there.
No, not everyone.  Only people that do a lot of shady shit. 

Can't get caught if you aren't doing anything wrong.

True. But even in the wake of the Patriot Act and all the Freedoms we 'gave' up in pursuit and protection from the bad guys.....I'd be willing to be that every member on this forum is guilty of a Federal crime when it came down to it.

And, your kidding yourself if you don't think 99.9% of our elected officials aren't involved in ' a lot of shady shit' that would qualify as a crime.....including past presidents.
Dude, I committed a federal crime before breakfast this morning. That's not really the point, though. I'm not comparable to Trump, nor should I be held to the same standard (though the imbalance is starkly backward from how it should be). The point is whether people in similar situations would behave similarly. You hated Barack Obama. Do you honestly think for a second he would have unlawfully seized funds allocated by congress in an attempt to get dirt on Romney? Bush? Clinton? Bush? None of them would have because they all had a functional understanding of what their official power was. As I've said, this isn't about Trump being crooked or corrupt. This was about Trump having no clue that what he was doing was wrong because he simply doesn't understand his role as head of the executive branch. We kid around about Jack Nicholson and "you can't handle the truth." Donald Trump wants nothing more than to boast that he did it, he's proud of it, and he'd do it again, because in his world there was nothing wrong with it and other presidents were losers for not doing the same thing.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline gmillerdrake

  • Proud Father.....Blessed Husband
  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 15907
  • Gender: Male
  • 1 Timothy 2:5
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #348 on: February 03, 2020, 01:10:05 PM »
And, your kidding yourself if you don't think 99.9% of our elected officials aren't involved in ' a lot of shady shit' that would qualify as a crime.....including past presidents.
While I think there may be some truth to this, about some elected officials and some Presidents, the belief that it's "99.9%" just seems like a way to justify a certain belief or perception.

Could be. I'm under the belief that none of them give a  :censored about Joe Q. Citizen. It's all about them amassing as much wealth and power as possible. I've been given no other reason or evidence to suggest otherwise. Especially over the past 30+ years. Every one of them have an agenda and 'for the good of the American people' is not part of it. 

Some may enter Washington with the best of intentions....but they're soon consumed by it.
Without Faith.....Without Hope.....There can be No Peace of Mind

Online El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25830
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #349 on: February 03, 2020, 01:13:53 PM »
And, your kidding yourself if you don't think 99.9% of our elected officials aren't involved in ' a lot of shady shit' that would qualify as a crime.....including past presidents.
While I think there may be some truth to this, about some elected officials and some Presidents, the belief that it's "99.9%" just seems like a way to justify a certain belief or perception.

Could be. I'm under the belief that none of them give a  :censored about Joe Q. Citizen. It's all about them amassing as much wealth and power as possible. I've been given no other reason or evidence to suggest otherwise. Especially over the past 30+ years. Every one of them have an agenda and 'for the good of the American people' is not part of it. 

Some may enter Washington with the best of intentions....but they're soon consumed by it.
You think Bernie has been consumed by corrupt intent?
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson