Donald Trump
- Thread starter wez130
- Start date
- Status
That's cos Trump took all the best words already.There are no words.......
Oops! I thought he went back to being a senator after leaving office as VP. My mistake.
The Sanders thing is still nonsense, though.
No, all the evidence is absolute guff. The recent Bolton evidence is a potential smoking gun, he needs to testify in congress. It will be interesting to see what the democrats do, whether they prioritise keeping Biden safe or not. If the Republicans want a witness exchange, Bolton for Biden, and the democrats say no. Then it's over, simple as. It's obvious what has been happening.
Thought experiment, if it turns out Biden was laundering money in Ukraine, is Trump innocent in your eyes? Or is he still guilty?
Its not what i read, i have subs to many financial websites, its not the general consensus at all. It seems like you are getting confused with debt and deficit. The deficit is near a trillion, it was 650b under Obama. When you have a debt of 20 trillion, it pales in comparison.
You obviously read headlines like "1 trillion deficit....omg" and think the worst.
I'm sorry, but you sound incredibly ignorant here.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 23 Apr 2014
- Posts
- 23,553
- Location
- Hertfordshire
Biden has no real relevance to the impeachment.
The Bolton "evidence" just corroborates the massive piles of other evidence.
The Bolton "evidence" just corroborates the massive piles of other evidence.
That depends on the motivations behind Trump actions. If its true what the people who worked directly with Trump said and Trumps motivation was to seek foreign aid against a political appointment for the 2020 then both of them are guilty.
Its not just the goal and motivation but how he went about the goal and how he blocked Congress. As it has been pointed out before if Trump was innocent and just let a small team with security clearance read the full transcript and didn't block white house staff from speaking to Congress he could have cleared his name and stopped all this months back. Congress have a duty to look into reports of illegal activity and given Trumps history of corruption when a report comes out on him then he shouldn't be given free rain to do what he wants. Congress have to look into it.
As for China I think its your who is ignorant on Trumps actions but as I said before this is not the thread to go deeply into that. Lets stay on topic. This thread already takes up enough time without us both going off on another sub subject. I do appreciate that you are putting in effort for a real debate unlike Plasmahal. But I do not want to get sidetracked on China in an impeachment thread.
Bigly.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 30,777
Covfefe
What 'Evidence' has Bolton personally given to the impeachment?
If he has not said it under oath, then it has NO real relevance to the impeachment.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 23 Apr 2014
- Posts
- 23,553
- Location
- Hertfordshire
Cant reply, ignoring your guff. 
Even then, he'll still be guilty potentially. wow! I don't see how considering the transcripts between Trump & Zelensky.
He's allowed to do that, if there are matters of national security, then its obvious that he would do that. As Plasmahal has said previously, there is a legal way to get round that, you go through the courts. It might take a bit longer but at least you'll have done it properly, if Trump were to win in 2020, he could still be removed with the potential evidence through the courts, it's not like Trump gets a new life and everything is scrubbed from the previous term.
I'm really not, i'm no expert but i'll know more than your average punter, i was born in Hong Kong, lived in Beijing for many years. I speak to friends who are directly involved in western companies who have had IP stolen from them from the CCP, even the thought of Trump imposing tariffs has rattled cages.
It's not evidence yet, its a claim, a claim which Bolton has not denied or acknowledged yet.
Need to wait for Bolton to do that.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 23 Apr 2014
- Posts
- 23,553
- Location
- Hertfordshire
Considering we have not seen the full transcript between Trump & Zelensky that means nothing and doesn’t clear Trump.
As for how it’s simple, using your position of power to seek foreign aid against a political opponent in an upcoming race is not only an impeachable offense but its also listed as a crime. Its flat out not allowed for good reason.
How ever you look at it soliciting foreign aid against political rivals is illegal. It doesn't matter if that political rival has done something wrong or not you still cannot seek foreign aid against them without committing a crime yourself.
Easy.
If Trump can prove that at the time of carrying out his scheme (to withhold aid and a White House meeting until Ukraine investigated Biden), he had concrete evidence of Biden's wrong doing and shared it with and went through the correct channels and he can prove that all those testifying under oath about the complete shadyness of it all are lying, then yes Trump is innocent of one of the articles of impeachment. Oh, it would also have to be shown that he did in fact want an investigation and not just the announcement of one.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 23 Apr 2014
- Posts
- 23,553
- Location
- Hertfordshire
Biden is only relevant in that he was the target of trumps indiscretion otherwise he is irrelevant. Trump was using pressure on a foreign power to solicit aid in discrediting a political rival to help in the 2020 elections. Doesnt matter if Biden was corrupt or not.
We do have the full transcripts, you do realise the transcripts that are available are the recollections of the room duty officers and NSC policy staff, which there are many of, who corroborate with each other.
Yes you can. That's like saying that MI5 are not allowed to hack into someone's computer who they think is plotting a terrorist attack.
The crime of hacking itself is illegal, but not when considered against the backdrop of finding a potential crime.
You and your correct channels, i don't know how many times i have to say this, the president is an enforcer, he's doesn't have to go through the correct channels all the time.
Especially with something potentially as sensitive as a president running for office who's son was laundering money in a foreign country.
Lets just see what the democrats do, how they play the witness exchange between Biden and Bolton. If the democrats protect Biden over calling Bolton, then you have your answer. i don't think i need to explain what that means.
Last edited:
- Status