Donald Trump

Status
Not open for further replies.
Trusty said:
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.




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.



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.
Click to expand...
Accept for Trump doesn’t have the same rights as MI5 the law is very clear on that. When it involves a political opponent in an upcoming race the rules change. What Trump should have done is handed everything to the FBI and took a step back. Under no circumstances should Trump be investigating political opponents himself. They can be investigated but not by the president.

You keep ignoring the whistle-blowers combined with the people working directly for Trump who take orders directly from Trump having put out a statements saying Trump did commit a crime. You acting like everything is about one phone call it’s not. There was multiple phone calls and other events over a 1+ year timeframe. 1 heavily edited transcript doesn’t clear Trump for the entire year or the other phone calls.

I don’t recall saying recently that I think the transcripts prove Trump commented a crime. What I said is the transcript in the current state does not prove that Trump is innocent. Only a full transcript could do that and not just off the 1 call from the other call(s) would need to be fully transcript as well. .


“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. “
More then one person has come forward to say Trump is guilty. One of which says he was trying to use back channels to arrange meetings with Zelensky for Trump, before the phone call to explained how the aid and other things where being withhold pending the investigation. We have no reason to believe those people are not telling the truth and if they are that means Trump commented a crime. Remember when this all started there was there was talk of Whitehouse staff becoming aware of unofficial back-channels that shouldn’t be there bypassing them and main channel? The person involved in that unofficial backchannel said he was under Trump’s orders soliciting foreign aid against a political rival.
 
Squark said:
Deuse, in your opinion, how does that information you've linked to prove possible wrongdoing by either Joe or hunter Biden?
Click to expand...


Did you not read the links?
It's all there that's why I posted them.

And people going on about Bolton is telling the truth.

Don't forget that in 2006 Obama had a go at Bolton for not telling the facts.
 
deuse said:
Did you not read the links?
It's all there that's why I posted them.

And people going on about Bolton is telling the truth.

Don't forget that in 2006 Obama had a go at Bolton for not telling the facts.
Click to expand...
I did read them, they were about the suspected whistle blower and a possible link to a meeting with Obama.
In my mind that did not make a mental link to possible wrong doing by the Bidens which your post suggested; I was hoping you could help me see the link.
 
@Pottsey

How's your Lev Parnas CT coming along.

I heard chuckie schumer say they don't think mr parnas can enter the senate due to some sort of electronic tag. Sounds like your guy is a bit of a criminal or a fashionista.
 
plasmahal said:
@Pottsey

How's your Lev Parnas CT coming along.

I heard chuckie schumer say they don't think mr parnas can enter the senate due to some sort of electronic tag. Sounds like your guy is a bit of a criminal or a fashionista.
Click to expand...

You are aware he has been in the employ of the Trump clan for years and most recently working for Trump / Giuliani. You must be also aware he is only ratting out his current employers due to being arrested for "complex web of financial and political interactions linking diplomacy to alleged violations of campaign finance law," plus he was personally invloved in trying to oust Marie Yovanovitch.

This is also the same person who donated to the Trump campaign.

Are you now pushing that Parnas became a criminal after speaking to Schumer ?
 
The Geezer said:
You are aware he has been in the employ of the Trump clan for years and most recently working for Trump / Giuliani. You must be also aware he is only ratting out his current employers due to being arrested for "complex web of financial and political interactions linking diplomacy to alleged violations of campaign finance law."
Click to expand...

Not relevant to the impeachment which this thread is about.

The Geezer said:
This is also the same person who donated to the Trump campaign.
Click to expand...

Again not relevant.

The Geezer said:
Are you now pushing that Parnas became a criminal after speaking to Schumer ?
Click to expand...

Nope.
 
Pottsey said:
... What Trump should have done is handed everything to the FBI and took a step back. Under no circumstances should Trump be investigating political opponents himself. They can be investigated but not by the president...
Click to expand...

Of course we know the real reason he'd never hand it over to the FBI. There'd be a very good chance of them finding no wrong doing which would be a disaster for him.
All he was after was the announcement from the Ukraine of an investigation. One he'd hope to influence in a best case scenario. Worst case he could just use it to make the Bidens look bad.
 
plasmahal said:
Not relevant to the impeachment which this thread is about.

Again not relevant.

Nope.
Click to expand...

@The Geezer - In other words, blah blah blah, i am not listening to what you are saying because i cant answer or refute any of your points. So in other words. yes he abuse power and he broke laws but its not relevant to impeachment which is the whole defense of Trump's Lawyers in the trial. LoL
 
Squark said:
I did read them, they were about the suspected whistle blower and a possible link to a meeting with Obama.
In my mind that did not make a mental link to possible wrong doing by the Bidens which your post suggested; I was hoping you could help me see the link.
Click to expand...


Well no.
You would have known about the emails and the press reporting it in emails and burisma.

I see that Schiff got caught out telling lies under oath again.

He said that he and his committee had never met the whistleblower. Wrong.

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/...chiff-wrong-whistleblower-contact/4180342002/

How do they get away with this? Justice Roberts is not doing his job. In my opinion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom