Donald Trump

Status
Not open for further replies.
There is no evidence of any crime by Biden or his son. Trumps misdemeanours are exactly as laid out by the dems.

A witness exchange is little more than Rep's trying to avoid it/distract/cover it up.

The majority of America wants to hear what Bolton has to say. Would be an extreme cover up to not hear it.
 
chroniclard said:
There is no evidence of any crime by Biden or his son. Trumps misdemeanours are exactly as laid out by the dems.

A witness exchange is little more than Rep's trying to avoid it/distract/cover it up.

The majority of America wants to hear what Bolton has to say. Would be an extreme cover up to not hear it.
Click to expand...

You don't know that, we won't be privy to real evidence, no news network will have that info.

https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-po...-open-criminal-proceedings-against-biden.html

It's simple, if the democrats protect Hunter Biden over Bolton, then something is afoot.
 
Trusty said:
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.
Click to expand...

Trusty said:
You don't know that, we won't be privy to real evidence, no news network will have that info.

https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-po...-open-criminal-proceedings-against-biden.html

It's simple, if the democrats protect Hunter Biden over Bolton, then something is afoot.
Click to expand...

You are being illogical. if there was any real evidence, do you really not think Barr and the DOJ would be all over it?

You are living in an illogical fairy tale land. Just think about it some more. Your version of what you think happened simply makes no sense.

The only logical explanation for Trump's scheme, is that he doesn't actually have any real evidence to get them investigated in the US justice system ,so instead he had to try and force Ukraine to announce an investigation by withholding a meeting and military aid.

There is a reason Bolton called it a "drug deal".

Oh and yes, the president does have to go through official government channels to do things. He is a public servant who has to abide by the law. He is not a king who can do what he likes.
 
The full transcripts of the call has not been published. Even the goof himself says so:

In a claim easily refuted by the calendar, but often repeated by him nonetheless, Trump said he only released a rough transcript of his phone call with Ukraine's president because a Democrat had misstated the content of the call. In fact, Trump released it before that Democrat gave his account of the call.

.....

TRUMP, on Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff, the lead impeachment manager for the Senate trial: “I'd watch his lies. I watch where they've actually played a rerun, which they shouldn't even do, it was so bad, where he goes before Congress, and he makes a statement that I made, and it was a total fraud. I never made it. That's why I released the conversation, because if I didn't release it, people would have said that I made the statement that he made. This guy is a fraud.” — Fox interview.

THE FACTS: No, Schiff spoke after Trump released the rough transcript of his July phone call, not before. Trump's claimed motive for coming out with the transcript is demonstrably untrue.

The White House released the account of the conversation on Sept. 25. Schiff gave his account on Sept. 26, while leading a House Intelligence Committee hearing on the matter, as the panel chairman.
Click to expand...

Source: U.S.News AP Fact Check

But it was already mentioned last year that the transcript omitted key details.

The White House in September released a reconstructed transcription of the July phone conversation and noted that it was not a verbatim transcript and that it represented a record of "the notes and recollections of Situation Room Duty officers and National Security Council policy staff" who listen to official conversations.
Click to expand...

Source: NBCNews National security official tells Congress he tried to add edits to White House memo about Trump Ukraine call

Source: NBCNews Trump asked Ukraine leader to look into why investigation of Biden's son ended, text of call shows

So yeah, if anyone have a link to the Full and Unedited Transcript, please fell free to post it.

And incase someone need a link to the reconstructed transcript, it is here.

Edit. Here is a link from MSNBC as well: White House official: Trump’s ‘exact’ transcript omitted key details
 
Oh my word! White House council Alan Dershowitz is arguing, in the Senate, that if Trump believes that getting re-elected is in the public interest, then any Quid Pro Quo that helps him get elected must also be in the public interest!

Honestly, how can anyone in this thread argue in good faith that Trump is innocent when his legal council are going to these lengths!

“The only way that would make a quid pro quo unlawful is if the quo were in some way illegal,” Dershowitz says.

"If a president does something which he believes will help him get elected in the public interest, that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment," he says.

"Every public official that I know believes that his election is of the public interest," he adds.
Click to expand...

 
cheesyboy said:
Oh my word! White House council Alan Dershowitz is arguing, in the Senate, that if Trump believes that getting re-elected is in the public interest, then any Quid Pro Quo that helps him get elected must also be in the public interest!

Honestly, how can anyone in this thread argue in good faith that Trump is innocent when his legal council are going to these lengths!



Click to expand...

Lol, just lol.

So the president can use his power to try and force other countries into announcing investigations into their political opponents.

Farewell American Democracy/The Republic. It was good while it lasted.
 
chroniclard said:
There is no evidence of any crime by Biden or his son.
Click to expand...

LOL, it's just as evident as the alleged trump corruption. The bidens have made multi-millions over the past 2 decades. Most of it when Biden was VP.

chroniclard said:
A witness exchange is little more than Rep's trying to avoid it/distract/cover it up.
Click to expand...

It would a fair approach though.

chroniclard said:
The majority of America wants to hear what Bolton has to say. Would be an extreme cover up to not hear it.
Click to expand...

And they also want know what the Biden family were up to and how they made multi-millions.

Total Net Worth For Joe Biden

Based on Joe Biden’s real estate holdings and book deal, Joe and Jill Biden have a total net worth of between $7 – 9 million. Depending on how the real estate market and his books sell, the Bidens could be worth substantially more or less in the future.

Estimates now have Joe and Jill Biden earning roughly $15 million total from 2017 – 2019. After tax, the figure amounts to roughly $8 million.

Given Joe has served the US government for decades, he also has a lifetime pension equal to at least 70% of his last three highest paid years, which was $230,700 as a Vice President. Therefore, Middle-Class Joe likely collects a pension of $161,490 for life.

If one were to capitalize the value of his $161,490 annual pension, one would need $3,229,800 in capital at a 5% rate of return. Given Joe Biden was born on November 20, 1942, it is unlikely he will live for more than 20 years.

Therefore, depending on how long Joe lives, his net worth including the value of his pension is likely between $10 – $13 million.
Click to expand...

Would be an extreme cover up to not hear it
 
plasmahal said:
LOL, it's just as evident as the alleged trump corruption. The bidens have made multi-millions over the past 2 decades. Most of it when Biden was VP.


would be an extreme cover up to not hear it
Click to expand...

Just think about this logically.

If it was as simple as this, Biden would have been arrested by Barr months ago. It would be incredibly easy for Barr to get his financial records and investigate.

Instead, Trump had to do this whole shady scheme with Ukraine. Why?

What does that tell you? It is quite obvious there is nothing there for the US justice system to look into it.
 
Trusty said:
“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.”
Click to expand...
How many times do we have to go over this? We don’t have the full transcripts. The heavily edited transcript Trump put had had approx. half the text missing and zero text from the 2nd phone call and entire important sections had been edited out. How on earth can that clear him? How do you know the guilty bit is not in the large section of missing text?

I don’t remember which day it was but a few days back there was a vote to release the transcript and other evidence the vote was 53-47 against.

Do you realize the people directly involved have corroborate with each other that Trump is guilty?



Trusty said:
“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.”
Click to expand...
It’s nothing at all like that and if their version of MI5 or more likely the FBI had done the investigation without Trump being directly or indirectly involved there would not be a problem. The problem is Trump directly got involved which in completely against US law. For good reason they have extremely strict laws and rules when it comes to soliciting foreign aid against political rivals in connection with a Federal, State, or local election even at President level it’s a crime in fact its more of a crime as president's are not allowed to use there position for an political advantage in the next election. In fact, the rules are that stick even indirectly is not allowed.

Its not that the investigation cannot be done. It’s that it has to be done correctly and cannot be done directly or even indirectly by Trump himself if it is in connection with a federal, state or local election.
 
chroniclard said:
There is no evidence of any crime by Biden or his son. Trumps misdemeanours are exactly as laid out by the dems.

A witness exchange is little more than Rep's trying to avoid it/distract/cover it up.

The majority of America wants to hear what Bolton has to say. Would be an extreme cover up to not hear it.
Click to expand...


https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...lower-to-obama-white-house-meeting-on-burisma

Thew same person(whistleblower)

https://www.realclearinvestigations...ing_with_ally_how_to_remove_trump_121701.html

It's all coming out now :)
 
Pottsey said:
How many times do we have to go over this? We don’t have the full transcripts. The heavily edited transcript Trump put had had approx. half the text missing and zero text from the 2nd phone call and entire important sections had been edited out. How on earth can that clear him? How do you know the guilty bit is not in the large section of missing text?

I don’t remember which day it was but a few days back there was a vote to release the transcript and other evidence the vote was 53-47 against.

Do you realize the people directly involved have corroborate with each other that Trump is guilty?
Click to expand...

There is like 5 to 10 room duty officers and NSC policy staff at one time listening to the calls, they would have said had there been the smoking gun in there.

Wouldn't they?

The parts that were left in are the most relevant bits.



Pottsey said:
It’s nothing at all like that and if their version of MI5 or more likely the FBI had done the investigation without Trump being directly or indirectly involved there would not be a problem. The problem is Trump directly got involved which in completely against US law. For good reason they have extremely strict laws and rules when it comes to soliciting foreign aid against political rivals in connection with a Federal, State, or local election even at President level it’s a crime in fact its more of a crime as president's are not allowed to use there position for an political advantage in the next election. In fact, the rules are that stick even indirectly is not allowed.

Its not that the investigation cannot be done. It’s that it has to be done correctly and cannot be done directly or even indirectly by Trump himself if it is in connection with a federal, state or local election.
Click to expand...

OMG, no it's not. Listen to that video from the Hoover institute, read anything Turley says. All of them have said nothing that is in the transcripts is considered abuse of power according to the constitution.
 
Deuse, in your opinion, how does that information you've linked to prove possible wrongdoing by either Joe or hunter Biden?
 
Unproven CT's about Biden's is all they have, after all the CT's about Hilary turned out to be big fat nothings they have moved onto the Biden's.

Nutter: "they are bad mouthing the Donald again!"
Nutjob: "quick, make up a CT!"
 
Trusty said:
“OMG, no it's not. Listen to that video from the Hoover institute, read anything Turley says. All of them have said nothing that is in the transcripts is considered abuse of power according to the constitution.”
Click to expand...
OMG your getting as crazy as Plasmhal. I am not talking about the transcript. I am talking about soliciting foreign aid against political rivals is illegal. Go back and read what I put in regards to your thought experiment. You seem to have got very confused. You said lets assume Biden is guilty does that make Trump guilty. My respond was it depends on the motivation behind why Trump wants the investigation and if his motivation is to gain foreign aid against political rivals it doesn't matter if Biden is guilty or not as as that would make Trump guilty as well.



Trusty said:
“There is like 5 to 10 room duty officers and NSC policy staff at one time listening to the calls, they would have said had there been the smoking gun in there.”
Click to expand...
No they wouldn’t all have first as Trump ordered them directly not to talk. 2nd wasn’t some of them the whistle blowers who did report a smoking gun? 3rd on top of those people you have the people directly involved in the overall illegal scheme making statements that Trump is guilty and they were working under orders directly for Trump.



Trusty said:
“The parts that were left in are the most relevant bits.”
Click to expand...
How do you know? If he is guilty you cannot trust the guilty party to have not edited out the guilty bits. How about this thought experiment? Let’s just assume Trump is guilty. Why wouldn’t he edit out the guilty bits? How can you trust someone who has a history of dishonesty like Trump to to be telling the truth. Trump has a history of making complete lies and false statements. Due to that we cannot take his word or his edits as a valid defense. We have no way to tell if its another one of his lies or the truth.
 
Pottsey said:
OMG your getting as crazy as Plasmhal. I am not talking about the transcript. I am talking about soliciting foreign aid against political rivals is illegal. Go back and read what I put in regards to your thought experiment. You seem to have got very confused. You said lets assume Biden is guilty does that make Trump guilty. My respond was it depends on the motivation behind why Trump wants the investigation and if his motivation is to gain foreign aid against political rivals it doesn't matter if Biden is guilty or not as as that would make Trump guilty as well.
Click to expand...

No i'm not, the reason i brought up the MI5 analogy is because Trump has the right to do what he did in the transcripts, much like the MI5 have the right to hack someones computer if someone is planning a terrorist attack. You think the transcripts prove Trump is guilty of committing a crime, but the commentators who are experts in constitutional law disagree with that.


Pottsey said:
No they wouldn’t all have first as Trump ordered them directly not to talk. 2nd wasn’t some of them the whistle blowers who did report a smoking gun? 3rd on top of those people you have the people directly involved in the overall illegal scheme making statements that Trump is guilty and they were working under orders directly for Trump.
Click to expand...

There were 12 people listening to that call to Zelensky, if there was a smoking gun in there, you would have thought there would be more than 1 whistleblower. Isn't ironic that the whistleblower is the person who welcomed Ukrainian officials into the Whitehouse when Obama was president.

Pottsey said:
How do you know? If he is guilty you cannot trust the guilty party to have not edited out the guilty bits. How about this thought experiment? Let’s just assume Trump is guilty. Why wouldn’t he edit out the guilty bits? How can you trust someone who has a history of dishonesty like Trump to to be telling the truth. Trump has a history of making complete lies and false statements. Due to that we cannot take his word or his edits as a valid defense. We have no way to tell if its another one of his lies or the truth.
Click to expand...

That's not how it works, there is a protocol, if that protocol was broken, there would be a whistleblower saying that parts were edited out. It's literally their job to make sure the transcripts represent what was said, even if its shorter than the actually conversation.

If i assume Trump is guilty, and edited parts out, then we would know, from the 12 people in the room, there would be a lot of people telling us that large swathes of the transcript were edited. Although its pretty much impossible for the President to do, there are too many people involved.
 
Jono8 said:
Lol, just lol.

So the president can use his power to try and force other countries into announcing investigations into their political opponents.

Farewell American Democracy/The Republic. It was good while it lasted.
Click to expand...

Couldn't be more clear now, you can use any means to get re-elected or even seek a seat in one of the House’s.

Whilst our system isn’t perfect our American cousins have handed their system over to any autocrat or dictator desperate enough.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom