View Full Version : US Politics Thread 2016-2020
FYI, you can open WaPo links in ingognito/private window mode to bypass the paywall. :up:
AVGWarhawk
11-08-19, 01:57 PM
Midnight self-massacre, eh? There seems to be a word for everything.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/07/books/review/a-warning-anonymous-book-review-trump.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage
https://www.washingtonpost.com/gdpr-consent/?destination=%2fpolitics%2fbook-by-anonymous-describes-trump-as-cruel-inept-and-a-danger-to-the-nation%2f2019%2f11%2f07%2fb6b6c6f2-0150-11ea-8bab-0fc209e065a8_story.html%3f
The author seems to have run the bell a year ago already. It is assumed he is an arch-Republican from the inner circle.
For those not having subscriptions for the NYT and WP, its all in the news over here:
https://translate.google.de/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.welt.de%2Fpolitik%2Fausland%2F article203200916%2FDonald-Trump-Mitarbeiter-sollen-ueber-Massenruecktritt-nachgedacht-haben.html
https://translate.google.de/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.spiegel.de%2Fpolitik%2Fausland %2Fdonald-trump-im-weissen-haus-mitarbeiter-dachten-offenbar-ueber-massenruecktritt-nach-a-1295480.html
NYT and WP have it in for Trump and are not ashamed of it. Garbage.
AVGWarhawk
11-08-19, 02:00 PM
Wouldn't those be state charges; unpardonable by Pence. Trump's in big trouble when he steps down, New York especially is out to get him.
If Trump did break campaign laws just as Obama did, pay the fine and move on.
AVGWarhawk
11-08-19, 02:05 PM
Biden's full story has not been told yet (closest left over from Obama era)
Trump is being accused of what Biden actually did! Quid pro qou Joe is as guilty as it gets.
Buddahaid
11-08-19, 02:51 PM
Then stop whining about it and start an investigation.
Then stop whining about it and start an investigation.
Trump tried to start one and now the Democrats are impeaching him for it.
Trump tried to start one and now the Democrats are impeaching him for it.
Did he do it correctly ? As I see it - He tried to act as a tough private eye
Markus
Did he do it correctly ? As I see it - He tried to act as a tough private eye
Markus
Well that's how the blue press portrays it but according to the transcript he only asked that they cooperate with a DoJ investigation.
Mr Quatro
11-08-19, 07:42 PM
I just looked and I don't see any GOP presidential debates scheduled or who even, but surely they won't be friendly.
Same as last year perhaps with Romney already lashing out at Trump and Graham sitting on the fence, Rubio was my favorite last year.
Another circus even if Trump doesn't show up which is possible :yep:
Buddahaid
11-09-19, 01:50 AM
Trump tried to start one and now the Democrats are impeaching him for it.
And that's one of the reasons he's unfit for the job. It's not that I'm against all that he stands for, and good part of it I question, it's because he acts like a spoiled six year old, always! Geez, Bloomberg raises his hand and Trump starts belittling him with his cute playground bully names instead of rising to the challenge like an adult. I have no respect for him and every time he opens his mouth there's less.
Skybird
11-09-19, 02:20 AM
And that's one of the reasons he's unfit for the job. It's not that I'm against all that he stands for, and good part of it I question, it's because he acts like a spoiled six year old, always! Geez, Bloomberg raises his hand and Trump starts belittling him with his cute playground bully names instead of rising to the challenge like an adult. I have no respect for him and every time he opens his mouth there's less.
Little boys do what little boys are. Dont be so strict with him, he is still growing.
Trump is being accused of what Biden actually did! Quid pro qou Joe is as guilty as it gets.
No he isn't for cryin' out loud!
Biden: Acting on behalf of Obama admin, threatened to withold money unless Ukraine got rid of a prosecutor who was seen as corrupt by the Obama admin and other western countries.
Trump: Threatened to withold money unless Ukraine investigates a private US citizen who is the son of one of his possible political rivals.
Jimbuna
11-09-19, 06:22 AM
Billionaire former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has signalled he will join the race to secure the Democratic Party's nomination for US president.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-50355758
Is he the Democrats best chance of defeating Trump?
Dowly you really need to stop drinking the blue medias koolaid.
The facts are that Biden threatened to withhold aid money from Ukraine unless they fired the prosecutor that was investigating his sons company. A son who managed to get an extremely high paying job with that company in spite of the fact that he had absolutely no experience with the nation, it's people, their language or the business of the company that hired him. You tell me why such a person would ever be considered for all that, unless it was to influence his powerful father. I'm sure if you asked the fired prosecutor might have a couple thoughts on the matter.
If you didn't hate Trump so much you'd recognize the obvious fact that Biden is as dirty as they come.
I'd advice you to read articles from 2015-2016 to learn what the deal with Shokin was. He simply was corrupt.
Here's one from October 2015:
Protesters drive to Poroshenko’s mansion to demand dismissal of Shokin
https://www.kyivpost.com/article/content/ukraine-politics/protesters-drive-to-poroshenkos-mansion-to-demand-dismissal-of-shokin-401106.html
From March 2016:
EU hails sacking of Ukraine’s prosecutor Viktor Shokin
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/eu-hails-sacking-of-ukraine-s-prosecutor-viktor-shokin-1.2591190
I'm sure if you asked the fired prosecutor might have a couple thoughts on the matter.
I'm sure of that. Would you be willing to believe him?
Rockstar
11-09-19, 10:44 AM
No he isn't for cryin' out loud!
Biden: Acting on behalf of Obama admin, threatened to withold money unless Ukraine got rid of a prosecutor who was seen as corrupt by the Obama admin and other western countries.
Trump: Threatened to withold money unless Ukraine investigates a private US citizen who is the son of one of his possible political rivals.
Thats too funny. I guess one could then say that corruption is in the eye of the beholder. :har:
So the Obama admin and the 'West' influence and corrupt Ukraine's constitution, elections and political appointments processes. Thats OK, because when they do it that somehow NOT corrupt? Why because freedom and democracy? Or do think we are still on a holy and righteous crusade against the Red Menace? If Biden had nothing to fear he would have remained on the board wouldn't you think? But no, first sign of trouble and 'POOF' he disappears. He's prolly OK though, back to doing a few lines of blow a day to help him get through.
I'm sure of that. Would you be willing to believe him?
Has the Vice President ever threatened to withhold aid appropriated by Congress unless a foreign official is fired? Not just the one investigating his sons oligarch run company but anyone for any reason?
Mr Quatro
11-09-19, 11:06 AM
Is he the Democrats best chance of defeating Trump?
It's not just his age of 77 now, but his orders to NY law enforcement to stop blacks first ask questions later.
This will surely do him in with the black community, plus he's just making noise to run and I do believe he means it
as an independant with 52 billion dollars of wealth he can afford to drop $5 billion on running as an independent candidate,
plus remember Bloomberg was a Republican just last year.
He's running on the "I hate Trump bandwagon too" :yep:
This will surely do him in with the black community
And the hispanic community as well. I have a Puerto Rican friend who grew up in Brooklyn and he hates Bloomberg worse than Pelosi hates Trump. I guess being repeatedly grabbed, thrown against a wall and searched just for walking down the street looking Hispanic is irritating for some reason.
Dowly you really need to stop drinking the blue medias koolaid.
The facts are that Biden threatened to withhold aid money from Ukraine unless they fired the prosecutor that was investigating his sons company. A son who managed to get an extremely high paying job with that company in spite of the fact that he had absolutely no experience with the nation, it's people, their language or the business of the company that hired him. influence his powerful father.
And this is what they also have told us here in Denmark. in the weekly magazine "The world according to President Trump".
(it's a mainstream news channel)
Markus
Re: the Biden vs. Ukraine prosecutor: Biden was acting as the point man on the effort to oust Shokin, not just as a representative of the US Government, but, also, on behalf of the numerous nations who also wanted Shokin out; as in many cases involving joint US and allied nation's interests, the US took the lead, mainly because we have the biggest 'clout' of any single nation or any coalition of nations. Shokin's ouster was not because of any corruption investigations he was conducting; it was just the opposite: he was accused of turning a blind eye and a deaf ear to rampant corruption and doing nothing to address the problem, The US and its allies in the ouster were balking at sending anymore aid because of concerns the funds and materiel would simply vanish into the coffers and pockets of corrupt Ukraine officials or their cronies. Shokin was not ousted because he was he was too good at his job; he was ousted because he wasn't doing his job at all and, more likely, probably profiting from his 'benign neglect'. Shokin was in no way at all a crusading prosecutor; in fact, it wasn't until he was on the cusp of dismissal that he even made any overt moves to do the job for which he was appointed; another fact is, after his dismissal, Shokin tried to shop around various 'scandalous information" to various governments and entities, bot, other than conspiracy theory mills, who will buy and/or swallow almost anything that might get them attention, everybody passed on Shokin's dog and pony show...
At the heart of Congress' probe into the president's actions is his claim that former Vice President and 2020 Democratic frontrunner Joe Biden strong-armed the Ukrainian government to fire its top prosecutor in order to thwart an investigation into a company tied to his son, Hunter Biden.
But sources ranging from former Obama administration officials to an anti-corruption advocate in Ukraine say the official, Viktor Shokin, was ousted for the opposite reason Trump and his allies claim.
It wasn't because Shokin was investigating a natural gas company tied to Biden's son; it was because Shokin wasn't pursuing corruption among the country's politicians, according to a Ukrainian official and four former American officials who specialized in Ukraine and Europe.
Shokin's inaction prompted international calls for his ouster and ultimately resulted in his removal by Ukraine's parliament.
Without pressure from Joe Biden, European diplomats, the International Monetary Fund and other international organizations, Shokin would not have been fired, said Daria Kaleniuk, co-founder and executive director of the Anti Corruption Action Centre in Kiev.
"Civil society organizations in Ukraine were pressing for his resignation," Kaleniuk said, "but no one would have cared if there had not been voices from outside this country calling on him to go."
Trump and his personal attorney Rudy Giuliani claim Biden did this to quash Shokin's investigation into Ukraine's largest gas company, Burisma Holdings, and its owner, oligarch Mykola Zlochevsky.
They say this benefited Biden's son, Hunter Biden, who served on Burisma's board of directors – for which he was paid $50,000 a month.
Their assertion is contradicted by former diplomatic officials who were following the issue at the time.
Burisma Holdings was not under scrutiny at the time Joe Biden called for Shokin's ouster, according to the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, an independent agency set up in 2014 that has worked closely with the FBI.
Shokin's office had investigated Burisma, but the probe focused on a period before Hunter Biden joined the company, according to the anti-corruption bureau.
The investigation dealt with the Ministry of Ecology, which allegedly granted special permits to Burisma between 2010 and 2012, the agency said. Hunter Biden did not join the company until 2014.
Explainer: Biden, allies pushed out Ukrainian prosecutor because he didn't pursue corruption cases --
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/10/03/what-really-happened-when-biden-forced-out-ukraines-top-prosecutor/3785620002/
So, not only was Burisma [I]not under investigation at the time of the Biden call to oust Shokin, the call was made at the backing of and the behest of other allied nations, the IMF, and other concerned entities, not solely by the US via the Obama Administration and not soley by Biden...
One thing I have noticed about Trump, his minions and the Trumpettes as they try to foist their lie on the voters: there has not once been a single shred of evidence that Biden, or anyone else at the time, even brought up Burisma in the course of calling for Shokin's ouster, not even a demand Shokin halt any investigations into Burisma or Hunter Biden specifically. Considering the call(s) made by VP Biden were of an equally official nature as the call made by Trump, there must have been, as in Trump's case, others listening in either in the room with Biden or on extension lines; also, in keeping with the SOP used on those types of calls, and used on Trump;s call, there had to have been notes taken, summaries written, and, quite likely, either a full transcript or digest, as in the case of Trump's call. The documentation of the Biden call must still exist, either in the White House Executive archives, or those of the State Dept, the DNI, NSA, CIA, or any of the agencies and/or other entities that had either participated in the Biden call or who would have had need to access data/info from the interaction. But, interestingly, no one in the Trump camp has come forward with any of that documentation to prove their claims against Biden. Interesting point: don't you think that if there were transcripts or other evidence of the Biden call(s) that, in any way, backed up Trump's claim, they would have been shoved into the sweaty hands of Hannity and/or Fox News for dissemination?...
Trump's really pushing his "read the transcript" mantra, of late, so how's about this: let's also get a reading of the Biden transcript(s) and see if the claims are true or is this just another case of another addition to the collection of the thousands of Trump's bald-faced lies...
Speaking of transcripts, NPR, on 11/09/2019, published a transcript of the Whistleblower's Complaint and has annotated the text with corroborations of the various points in the complaint that have thus far been affirmed, as well as explanations of other issues in the text; if you click on the highlighted texts, dialog boxes will appear with the corroboration/explanation of that section of text:
The Whistleblower Complaint Has Largely Been Corroborated. Here's How --
https://www.npr.org/2019/11/09/776173492/the-whistleblower-complaint-has-largely-been-corroborated-heres-how
<O>
Mr Quatro
11-09-19, 12:40 PM
So all of this impeachment talk by the Democrats is about the phone call Trump made and nothing about what happen after the phone call.
1. Ukraine got it's promised weapons worth more than $400 million usd and Trump got nothing
If the whistle blower had of waited a little longer they would have a much stronger case. :yep:
Rockstar
11-09-19, 12:59 PM
Re: the Biden vs. Ukraine prosecutor: Biden was acting as the point man on the effort to oust Shokin, not just as a representative of the US Government, but, also, on behalf of the numerous nations who also wanted Shokin out; as in many cases involving joint US and allied nation's interests, the US took the lead, mainly because we have the biggest 'clout' of any single nation or any coalition of nations. Shokin's ouster was not because of any corruption investigations he was conducting; it was just the opposite: he was accused of turning a blind eye and a deaf ear to rampant corruption and doing nothing to address the problem,
<O>
Oh boy you and Dowly are too funny. That's not what Shokin himself had said in a written sworn statement. Contrary to what the illustrious folks at USA Today wrote. Shokin believes he was canned on account of his investigation into Burisma and the Bidens. Its my opinion Biden with the blessing of the administration forced him out because of Freedom, Democracy, anti-corruption... err wait I mean he was looking into the Bidens relationship with Bursima.
Then ol' Joe had the gall to brag about it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXA--dj2-CY&feature=youtu.be
Shokins statement
https://www.scribd.com/document/427618359/Shokin-Statement#from_embed
keypoints
https://legalinsurrection.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Screen-Shot-2019-09-27-at-11.26.30-AM-e1569601632711.png
Mr. Quatro it seems to me it goes much deeper then just a phone call. Welcome to the swamp. First step was to brand Shokin (who was actually doing his job) as a useless stooge to get him out of the way and have him sacked. Next step is to impeach Trump. Problem goes away.
Mr Quatro
11-09-19, 01:27 PM
Mr. Quatro it seems to me it goes much deeper then just a phone call. Welcome to the swamp. First step was to brand Shokin (who was actually doing his job) as a useless stooge to get him out of the way and have him sacked. Next step is to impeach Trump. Problem goes away.
Your right Rockstar :up: I just wanted to play with the big boys I'll go back to my Xbox One game:
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81V0XHvC6XL._AC_SX215_.jpg
So all of this impeachment talk by the Democrats is about the phone call Trump made and nothing about what happen after the phone call.
1. Ukraine got it's promised weapons worth more than $400 million usd and Trump got nothing
If the whistle blower had of waited a little longer they would have a much stronger case. :yep:
No, the impeachment hearings are about abuse of power and violation of the Constitution and, quite likely, various Federal laws. It's not just about the call; there are also the matters of obstruction of justice involving coercion of witnesses, subornation of perjury, and other related attempts to avoid taking responsibility for his actions; there are other abuses of power such as violation of the Emoluments Clause of the U Constitution, you know, the one Trump put his hand on a Bible and swore to preserve, protect, and defend, but that he has violated with utter disregard for either the Law or the responsibilities of his office. Then there are the campaign finance law violations, etc. He is in serious Bandini and, when he is out of office, he's going to have to wade through a lot more of his self-inflicted woes on stat and local levels...
...and, again, a crime does not have ti be fully completed to be an actual crime; intent, planning and the attempt at execution are all that is needed to prosecute a criminal act; if a burglar tries to enter your place and sets off an alarm just trying to get in a door or wind, even if he doesn't actually enter your premises and was unable to actually steal anything, he is still liable for prosecution for attempted burglary, attempted criminal trespass, and/or attempted attempted breaking ad entering; if a guy wants to have someone killed and sets in motion a plot by, say, soliciting a hit man, but the plot is foiled and the intended victim is unscathed, the guy who started the plot is still liable for prosecution for criminal conspiracy, solicitation of murder, and/or attempted murder, among other possible charges; the idea that there must be some sort of 'pay-off' to an intended crime in order fo it to be an actual crime is ludicrous and not borne out by letter law or case law; if your assertions were true, then, at there extreme a terrorist or mass shooter who planned and attempted an act of carnage but was found out and stopped just before actual execution would have as their defense "nothing happened" and be set free of charges; its just a plain silly defense and the sort of responsibility dodging seen when guilty criminals are desperately grasping at straws...
BTW, it should be noted Trump only released those funds after he was made aware his quid-pro-quo was mucho illegal and spelled mucho trouble for him...
...it was kinda like a thief who tries to claim innocence once he is caught and ties to claim he shouldn't be charged at all because he gve the loot back; judges and the law still don't look kindly of such pathetically weak ploys...
As far as the Whistleblower's case, he had a strong one the minute Trump said "I would like you to do us a favor though..."; that was the attempt at violating the law and abusing his powers...
Think of it this way: say you decide to ask your bully of a boss for a raise; you go into his office and say "Boss, I'd like to ask for a raise" and he replies "I would like you to do me a favor though..." and then gives you the particulars of the favor; do you not make the connection the implicit nature of his reply is your raise is connected to your execution of his wishes? Do you really think if you don't do the favor, you're still gonna get your raise?...
Quid pro quo: this for that...
<O>
Rockstar
11-09-19, 02:13 PM
Your right Rockstar :up: I just wanted to play with the big boys I'll go back to my Xbox One game:
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81V0XHvC6XL._AC_SX215_.jpg
Get a PS4 and I'll kick your but on Grand Tourismo
Oh boy you and Dowly are too funny. That's not what Shokin himself had said in a written sworn statement. Contrary to what the illustrious folks at USA Today wrote. Shokin believes he was canned on account of his investigation into Burisma and the Bidens. Its my opinion Biden with the blessing of the administration forced him out because of Freedom, Democracy, anti-corruption... err wait I mean he was looking into the Bidens relationship with Bursima.
Then ol' Joe had the gall to brag about it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXA--dj2-CY&feature=youtu.be
Shokins statement
https://www.scribd.com/document/427618359/Shokin-Statement#from_embed
keypoints
https://legalinsurrection.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Screen-Shot-2019-09-27-at-11.26.30-AM-e1569601632711.png
Mr. Quatro it seems to me it goes much deeper then just a phone call. Welcome to the swamp. First step was to brand Shokin (who was actually doing his job) as a useless stooge to get him out of the way and have him sacked. Next step is to impeach Trump. Problem goes away.
Where to start...
The video, which I have seen before, often, starts with a little preamble stating Burisma was under investigation in 2006,,,
Point of fact 1: Hunter Biden did not join Burisma until 2014, eight years later, meaning he was not involved, in any way with the focus o the then investigation, which brings up...
Point of fact 2: Burisma was not under investigation in 2014 and had not been for several years; Burisma probably should have been investigated by the Ukrainian Prosecutor but wasn't, which brings up...
Point of fact 3: There were no investigations of Burisma by the Ukrainian Prosecutor Shokin in 2014 or at anytime prior to his ousting; he was, in fact, ousted for not conducting corruption investigation and dereliction of his responsibilities, which was a source of ire and frustration to the nations and entities the Ukraine was asking for aid, and they were loath to render further aid unless serious and strong effort to eliminate and/or curtail corruption was put in place, which leads to...
Point of fact 4: Joe Biden was not acting on a personal basis to block an investigation because there was no investigation to block; he was acting as a representative of the US, its allies, and international financial entities to force the Ukraine to up its fight against internal corruption, which included the ouster of an ineffective, and probably also corrupt, Shokin...
Point of fact 5: There has been no proof presented Shokin had any ongoing investigations into corruption in the Ukraine related to Burisma since he took office in February of 2015...
This is all facts that can be corroborated by a simple search of the web, ya know, homework; need some more fact checks other than mine? Let me help you:
Fact-checking Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, and Ukraine --
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2019/may/07/viral-image/fact-checking-joe-biden-hunter-biden-and-ukraine/
Our ruling
The viral image said that when Hunter Biden was serving as "a director to Ukraine’s largest private gas producer," his father "threatened to withhold $1 BILLION in U.S. aid to Ukraine if they didn’t fire a prosecutor looking into" the gas company.
The image gets individual pieces of this assertion right -- Hunter Biden was a director of the company, and Joe Biden did leverage U.S. aid to fire a prosecutor. But it overreaches by assuming that Joe Biden acted to protect the company his son was affiliated with. In reality, there was widespread agreement in the West that the existing prosecutor had to go, and it’s not clear that the company would have benefited from his ouster anyway, given evidence that its cases had long been dormant.
That said, experts criticize the Bidens for their arrangement, saying it could have been a significant conflict of interest.
We rate the statement Half True. Fact check: What Joe and Hunter Biden actually did in Ukraine --
https://www.axios.com/joe-hunter-biden-ukraine-corruption-trump-1b031c30-3173-4a45-a6a7-2e551759063c.html
The bottom line:
True: Hunter Biden’s role with Burisma raised conflict-of-interest concerns at the time. The State Department claimed in 2014 that there was no conflict, noting the younger Biden was a “private citizen.”
False: There's evidence Jo e Biden committed "corruption" of any sort in Ukraine, as Trump alleges.
Fact: Trump TV Ad Misleads on Biden and Ukraine --
https://www.factcheck.org/2019/10/fact-trump-tv-ad-misleads-on-biden-and-ukraine/
Initially, Ukraine’s then-president, Poroshenko, resisted pressure to fire Shokin, even after Biden and others demanded it.
“By late fall of 2015, the EU and the United States joined the chorus of those seeking Mr. Shokin’s removal as the start of an overall reform of the Procurator General’s Office,” Herbst testified. “U.S. Vice President Joe Biden spoke publicly about this before and during his December visit to Kyiv; but Mr. Shokin remained in place.”
(Biden did not say when he made the threat to withhold U.S. assistance, but he addressed the Ukrainian Parliament in Kyiv on Dec. 9, 2015, and held out the prospect of future U.S. aid if the country rid itself of the “cancer of corruption.”)
Around this time, the International Monetary Fund also withheld financial assistance from Ukraine until it took steps to tackle corruption, and the anti-corruption group Transparency International Ukraine held Shokin “personally responsible for the breakdown in the fight against corruption in Ukraine.”
Olesia Koval, a spokeswoman for TI Ukraine, told us in an email that her group was “involved in the campaign against Shokin because of his ineffectiveness and sabotage of corruption fight, especially of the cases of grand political corruption and in particular Zlochevskyi’s case” — referring to Mykola Zlochevsky, president of Burisma.
In February 2016, Aivaras Abromavičius, the country’s economic minister, resigned to protest government corruption, prompting the bipartisan Senate Ukraine Caucus to send a letter to Poroshenko urging him “to press ahead with urgent reforms to the Prosecutor General’s office and judiciary.”
A month later, Shokin was removed from office.
We don’t doubt that Shokin believes he was a strong prosecutor who was unjustly removed from office, as his statement says. But he provides no proof.
The TV ad, in short, creates a false narrative about Joe Biden to discredit the impeachment inquiry, but it doesn’t have the “facts” to support its claim....and there are many, many more...
Now I have a few questions for you, Rockstar: you posted that little video clip to support your assertions; I noted the preamble and its statements, one one of which was:
In 2006 Ukraineian Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin, in his investigation of corruption involving Burisma Holdings, a natural gas comapny, identified Hunter Biden as the Recipient of over $3,000,000 from the company...
Shokin didn't take office until 2016, so how did he make his findings in 2006?...
There was no ongoing investigation into Burisma when Hunter Biden joined Burisma in 2014, nor when Shokin took office in 2016, nor during Shokin's tenure, nor when Shokin was ousted, so where did Shokin make his official identification of Hunter Biden?...
The preamble seems to imply Hunter Biden got a bulk payment of over $3,000,000 from Burisma; Biden was being paid $50,000 a month, totaling $600,000 per year which, given he spent a bit over five years on the board, accounts for a total payout of over $3,000,000 from Burisma and not a one time bulk pay out (incidentally, for major firms, getting $600,000 a year to serve on their boards is chump change; there are Directors on other boards who earned more tan Biden)...
So, given all the misstatements and falsely slanted claims in just that bit of video, how can you reasonably use it as a source of fact?
Methinks, someone needs to do a bit of his own homework... :03:
Here's a little clip, just for you... :D :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PjXAxzddS4o
As far as Shokin is concerned, well I ac see where you would blindly believe such a paragon of virtue:
Viktor Shokin: From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia --
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Shokin
Shokin was appointed Prosecutor General of Ukraine on 10 February 2015, replacing Vitaly Yarema. He was a controversial appointee due to his perceived role in blocking prosecutions against those accused of shooting demonstrators in the 2014 Ukrainian revolution. As Prosecutor General, he was accused of blocking major cases against allies and influential figures and hindering the fight against corruption in Ukraine.
Various street protests demanding Shokin's resignation were held. On 2 November 2015, there was an assassination attempt against him when an unidentified sniper fired three shots into his office, but was foiled by the bulletproof glass window. In response to a query from Ukrainian News Agency in late 2019, the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) acknowledged that it is continuing to investigate the attempted assassination of Shokin. In March 2016 his office carried out a raid against one of Ukraine's leading anti-corruption groups, the Anti-Corruption Action Center (AntAC), claiming that it had misappropriated aid money. AntAC was a frequent critic of the Prosecutor General's Office under Shokin. In one notorious case, two of Shokin's prosecutors were caught with stashes of diamonds, cash and valuables in their homes, likely indicating bribery. Prosecutors from another department of Shokin's office were fired or reassigned when they attempted to bring a prosecution against the so-called "diamond prosecutors".
Through 2015 and early 2016, domestic and international pressure (including from the IMF, the EU, and the EBRD) built for Shokin to be removed from office. The Obama administration withheld $1 billion in loan guarantees to pressure the Ukrainian government to remove Shokin from office. His defenders nonetheless argued that he played an important role "balancing competing political interests". His Deputy Prosecutor, Vitaly Kasko, announced his resignation on 15 February 2016 denouncing the corruption and lawlessness of the Prosecutor's office.
On 16 February 2016, Shokin submitted a letter of resignation, although the next day an official of the prosecution office stated, "As far as I know he has taken a paid leave". On 19 February 2016 presidential press secretary Sviatoslav Tsegolko wrote on Twitter that the presidential administration had received an official letter of resignation from Shokin. On 16 March 2016 an official of the prosecution office stated that Shokin had resumed his work. On 28 March, protesters called for Shokin's firing, after his office was authorized by a Kiev court to investigate AntAC. Shokin was formally dismissed in a parliamentary vote on 29 March 2016. The European Union praised Shokin's dismissal due to a "lack of tangible results" of his office's investigations, and also because people in Shokin's office were themselves being investigated. Following his dismissal Shokin went into retirement.
Shokin is a corrupt, self serving liar who would say anything or do anything to keep in power (remind you of anyone?... :hmmm:), so any statement he makes should be taken with a big sack of salt; he lied when he was in office, and is lying now when he tries to rewrite his history to make himself out as a "victim"...
<O>
Rockstar
11-09-19, 10:08 PM
Thats it, just another wall of text of petty arguments and distractions? You want to talk about corruption in 'the' Ukraine start 'the' Ukraine politics thread then. This is the U.S. politics thread.
Let me clarify, My argument has nothing to do with Shokin and allegations of corruption. I posted the video for the sole purpose of showing Joe Biden bragging to an audience that it was he who pressured the Ukraine government to sack Shokin. In my opinion that admission of guilt gives some credence to Shokins sworn statement before a European Court which states he was fired because of Biden/Obama administration threatening to withhold U.S. dollars from 'the' Ukraine if Poroshenko did not bend to their will.
Democrats, in their self-described impeachment inquiry, essentially have accused President Trump of doing what Biden has admitted doing. https://www.wnd.com/2019/09/ukrainian-prosecutor-fired-investigating-hunter/
If you ask me it stinks of hypocrisy,
I'm sure one of you can tell which law(s) Biden broke by threatening to withhold aid from Ukraine unless they sack Shokin.
Thats it, just another wall of text of petty arguments and distractions? You want to talk about corruption in 'the' Ukraine start 'the' Ukraine politics thread then. This is the U.S. politics thread.
Let me clarify, My argument has nothing to do with Shokin and allegations of corruption. I posted the video for the sole purpose of showing Joe Biden bragging to an audience that it was he who pressured the Ukraine government to sack Shokin. In my opinion that admission of guilt gives some credence to Shokins sworn statement before a European Court which states he was fired because of Biden/Obama administration threatening to withhold U.S. dollars from 'the' Ukraine if Poroshenko did not bend to their will.
https://www.wnd.com/2019/09/ukrainian-prosecutor-fired-investigating-hunter/
If you ask me it stinks of hypocrisy,
That's it? Just another dodge to avoid actually giving an answer or defense of your argument(s)? Kinda weak and pathetic... :nope:
Regarding Shokin's 'sworn statement' and its 'credence': I'm sorry, I didn't know you never heard of perjury; Shokin, like Trump, has a long track record of lying and distorting facts, so his probity is next to nil, particularly when he is acting or speaking in his own self-interest...
I also find it interesting you used as cite WND, a website known for conspiracy theories and blatantly false statements; in fact, the article actually cites someone who makes the well-debunked claim there was an active investigation into the Bidens; unless you've got some sort of real-life, provable evidence to back up your citing of an article making that claim, all you've really done is weakly tried to bolster your argument with a severely weak cite...
Regarding this being not being the "Ukrainian Politics Thread", well it should be pointed out you and the other Trump apologists/worshipers are the ones who constantly carp, bitch, moan and groan about the Bidens and the Ukraine as a pathetic effort to deflect from actually addressing the real issue of Trump's equally pathetic and desperate attempt to finagle a reelection win for himself by violating the law and exercising a blatant abuse of Presidential power solely for his own ends. There is a vast difference between using the power to withhold a benefit for the purpose of advancing, in concert with US allies and concerned international economic entities, the cause of eliminating a corrupt prosecutorial system, headed by Shokin, before entrusting any further funds and aid to the Ukraine goverment and abusive and illegal exercise of the same power solely to advance a private, self-interested political goal to try and salvage political survival; so spare us the the faux indignation, man up, and defend your arguments with actual verifiable facts and logic...
Regarding an admission of "guilt", well, to use the argument of some one else on this thread, there is no crime to be guiltyy of since neither Biden actually personally profited from the expulsion of Shokin and, other than the previously established and continuing contractual compensation to Hunter Biden for his position a a Director of Burisma, there is no evidence of either Biden having profited from Shokin's dismissal; there also has been no actual evidence Joe Biden acted solely to derail any investigation of either himself or his son; in true and documented fact, there was no ongoing investigation of the Bidens and there had been no investigation of Burisma in the several years prior to Hunter Biden joining the Board. I defy and challenge you to document, with actual provable facts, your claim there was an actual crime off which either Bide could or would be felling any guilt over or which either the Ukrainian or US legal systems could hvae prosecuted either of the Bidens. I will wait patiently for your reply, although I suspect I will not receive a direct reply to my challenge...
Regarding Joe Biden boasting: Biden was tasked by the White House, in concert with and the backing of US allies, to exercise powr and influence to rid the Ukraine of an existing corrupt, Shokin-led, Prosecutor's office; that he did and with firmness and resolve; he was given a job and he did it to completion and with the desired result; I don't know about other people, but if I were given a high profile, high stakes task and I accomplished it, I think I might want to give myself a pat on the back or take a victory lap. The funny thing about you and others decrying Biden's justified boasting is all of you Trump-Huggers are only too eager to praise Trump when he boasts, even when his boasting is grossly exaggerated, or he boast about accomplishments done by others as his own, or boasts about accomplishments that never really happened, i.e.. he lies; if Trump had achieved the expulsion of corruption in the Ukraine (instead of furthering it with himself and his minions), and then started boasting about it, you guys would be praisng him and singing him hosannas for "standing up for 'Merica" and showing how "powerful" the US is on the world stage...
"If you ask me it stinks of hypocrisy"...
Instead, I guess you have to settle for pathetic little attempts to paint lipstick on the pig that is Trump and his administration...
...not to mention the shambles of his "foreign policy": given what Trump and his minions have "accomplished", a room full of chimps with Ouija boards could have made a more cogent, cohesive, and coherent set of policies than the Ketone Kops of DC currently in the White House...
To summarize:
Biden acted, under White House authorization, to advance the interest and causes of the US' foreign policy, succeeded in doing so, without violating any laws and with out tangible of intangible personal gain (other than bragging rights);
Trump acted, in his own self-interest with only a very thin and highly questionable veneer of "foreign policy" interest, to coerce and strong arm the leader of a foreign country, through an illegal and un-Constitutional exercise of Executive power, solely to buttress his filling reelection campaign and his foundering administration, leaving him, not with bragging rights, but with the right to keep silent, the right to an attorney, etc....
Biden: assigned duty well done
Trump: asinine self-interest very poorly, and illegally executed...
<O>
u crank
11-10-19, 07:49 AM
One does not have to break any laws to be involved in questionable behaviour. Nepotism is not a crime. Optics in politics is everything.
Hunter Biden joined the board of the Ukrainian gas company — headed by a former government minister investigated for possible corruption — in 2014, at the same time his father was leading U.S. efforts to crack down on corruption in that country.
Coincidence? Maybe or perhaps it is exactly what it looks like.
Joe Biden wants to be President. This kind of thing will only get worse for him.
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/26/joe-biden-brother-2020-1475897
https://www.politico.com/news/2019/11/06/joe-biden-frank-biden-horse-meat-ban-066394
But that doesn’t mean the Bidens’ behavior isn’t a legitimate problem for Democrats. Indeed, Biden has been taking political hits over of the intersection of his family’s financial dealings and his own political career for some four decades. Yet he has done nothing publicly to inoculate himself from the charge that his career is corruptly enriching his family, and now that is a serious liability.
https://theintercept.com/2019/10/09/joe-hunter-biden-family-money/
From one of U-Cranks links:
Joe Biden’s younger brother told potential business partners that the former vice president would help their firm land business with court systems and would incorporate their health care model into his 2020 presidential campaign, according to new allegations made in a court filing in Tennessee. The allegations are consistent with others made over the years that relatives of Biden have sought to enrich themselves off of his public service. But they go further, representing the first explicit claims that James Biden offered to have the former vice president use his clout to further private business interests.
No crime huh? What if Joe Biden did actually use his clout to further his families private business interests? Is that a legitimate reason for a sitting administration to investigate a *potential* political opponent?
From one of U-Cranks links:
And the very next paragraph reads:
The allegations come in sworn declarations made by executives at firms suing Biden’s brother that were filed in federal court on Friday. They do not allege any wrongdoing by Joe Biden or indicate that the former vice president had knowledge of his brother’s alleged promises.
Skybird
11-10-19, 09:16 AM
Tit for tat:
Next time a clan boss of organised crime is sued for lets say murder and drug dealing, and appears befor the court, his defender will demand that the son of the police president is to be investigated for alleged - well, for alleged anything. Wrong parking, for example.
Make justice grrreat(tm) again!
And the very next paragraph reads:
Of course not. Such statements are not the objective of the lawsuit and it might open the plaintiffs to charges of attempted bribery of a public official. Doesn't mean it didn't happen and we both know that if this was Don Jr. we're talking about you'd be talking a different tune.
Mr Quatro
11-10-19, 11:06 AM
In a bit of humor this morning:
Breaking News
Mayor of Pocahontas backs Joe Biden, not Elizabeth Warren
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mayor-pocahontas-iowa-backs-joe-biden-elizabeth-warren?fbclid=IwAR3d9ZqxQG2MAQxiOukXGPS2cioO-XkUrpuNG8l9mR60nhl1lgUaSLQkZ7s
The mayor of Pocahontas, Iowa is not backing who you might think.
Dick Gruber, mayor of the northwest city in Iowa, announced this week
that he is backing former Vice President Joe Biden for the 2020, rather than closest rival Sen. Elizabeth Warren.
u crank
11-10-19, 01:21 PM
As the current impeachment story makes its' way to a predictable conclusion the left wing media is once again hyperventilating in their usual well rehearsed manner. Skepticism about all that they have to say is easy to come by. If their past record is any indication you know that they can't be trusted. Like the saying goes..."if you don't feel like you are being manipulated, you are being manipulated".
Matt Taibbi of Rolling Stone lays out a pretty good case for why these people should not be trusted. Ever.
Christopher Steele became famous in the United States as the author of a “dossier” that claimed Russians had been “cultivating, supporting, and assisting” Donald Trump “for at least 5 years.”
Now Steele is back, claiming that the Russians have been cultivating the Tories and Boris Johnson for . . . five years.
You can’t make this stuff up. The only thing comparable would be Iraqi defector Ahmed Chalabi lobbying for a sequel invasion after the WMD hunt came up empty, and having the same humiliated media figures and politicians reach for pompoms all over again.
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/political-commentary/christopher-steele-britain-insanity-909539/
The same type of media echo chamber is likely at it again.
The resulting viral furor spurred Buzzfeed to publish the entire dossier, so Americans could “make up their own minds.”
In this way, the dossier was published without ever going through a vetting process. For all the talk of hacking, this was a true Trojan-horse penetration of the American news media system (not that most media companies minded, of course).
The original source of this madness was Steele, and the media and political figures who leaned with all their might into this phony narrative — especially the ones who knew it originated as Clinton campaign research — should be as embarrassed as the newspapers and news networks who pushed the WMD hunt.
The WMD affair showed what happens when we don’t require sources to show us evidence, when we let political actors use the press to “confirm” their own assertions, when we report on the journey of rumors instead of the rumors themselves, and most especially when we lionize intelligence and law enforcement figures, who usually turn out to be just as craven and unreliable as the rest of us.
When we let stuff like this go, the public sees us as fools, at which point it doesn’t matter whether what we write is for or against any politician, because nobody believes us anyway. Is this really the industry standard we’re gunning for? Are we never going to own up to this one?
Rockstar
11-10-19, 02:20 PM
OK vienna, here's the jist of the matter let e make it easy for you,
1. Shokin in a sworn statement says he was investigating Burisma of which Don Jr. was a board member of.
2. In that sworn statement Shokin says Trump Sr. put pressure on the Ukraine president to sack Shokin.
3. Shokin gets sacked and because of upcoming elections little Don Jr. disappears.
4. New Trump friendly prosecutor in the Ukraine says everyone move along now, nothing to see here!
5. Trump Sr. is video tapped bragging in front of a gathering at the Council of Foreign Affairs how he was the one that got Shokin fired.
6. Now, the admission of Trump Sr. seems to me a need to dismiss the Prosecutor General of Ukraine, V.M. Shokin, as a condition for allocating appropriate financial assistance to Ukraine.
Did I miss something?
In your treasure trove of study, law and facts, besides the underlying stench of hypocrisy, what would you say 6# qualifies as?
As I see it or understand it
it's two different cases
1. Trump Ukraine case
2. The Joe Bidens son case
Both are related to Ukraine.
and in both cases they should be prosecuted if there have been a violation in some of your laws.
Markus
Catfish
11-10-19, 03:34 PM
^ good you did not live through the Nicaragua times.
^ good you did not live through the Nicaragua times.
I guess you mean the famous Iran-Contra affair
I do remember some of it, some from Swedish and Danish news program or documentaries during and after
I do not remember it in detail-mostly because I was a young lad and had some other interest.
Markus
Rockstar
11-10-19, 06:30 PM
As I see it or understand it
it's two different cases
1. Trump Ukraine case
2. The Joe Bidens son case
Both are related to Ukraine.
and in both cases they should be prosecuted if there have been a violation in some of your laws.
Markus
Only one difference between the two that Im aware of. One has only been accused of abuse of power and Quid Pro Quo. The other openly admitted to it when he was caught on tape bragging about.
But yes you are correct, in that both of these braggarts cases ought to be looked into. And the public needs to start holding the elected accountable instead of playing the part of party lap dog defending party talking points.
Mr Quatro
11-10-19, 08:51 PM
OK vienna, here's the jist of the matter let e make it easy for you,
1. Shokin in a sworn statement says he was investigating Burisma of which Don Jr. was a board member of.
2. In that sworn statement Shokin says Trump Sr. put pressure on the Ukraine president to sack Shokin.
3. Shokin gets sacked and because of upcoming elections little Don Jr. disappears.
4. New Trump friendly prosecutor in the Ukraine says everyone move along now, nothing to see here!
5. Trump Sr. is video tapped bragging in front of a gathering at the Council of Foreign Affairs how he was the one that got Shokin fired.
6. Now, the admission of Trump Sr. seems to me a need to dismiss the Prosecutor General of Ukraine, V.M. Shokin, as a condition for allocating appropriate financial assistance to Ukraine.
Did I miss something?
In your treasure trove of study, law and facts, besides the underlying stench of hypocrisy, what would you say 6# qualifies as?
Are you sure of all those facts ... the names seem off a bit :yep:
OK vienna, here's the jist of the matter let e make it easy for you,
1. Shokin in a sworn statement says he was investigating Burisma of which Don Jr. was a board member of.
2. In that sworn statement Shokin says Trump Sr. put pressure on the Ukraine president to sack Shokin.
3. Shokin gets sacked and because of upcoming elections little Don Jr. disappears.
4. New Trump friendly prosecutor in the Ukraine says everyone move along now, nothing to see here!
5. Trump Sr. is video tapped bragging in front of a gathering at the Council of Foreign Affairs how he was the one that got Shokin fired.
6. Now, the admission of Trump Sr. seems to me a need to dismiss the Prosecutor General of Ukraine, V.M. Shokin, as a condition for allocating appropriate financial assistance to Ukraine.
Did I miss something?
In your treasure trove of study, law and facts, besides the underlying stench of hypocrisy, what would you say 6# qualifies as?
Before I start, I would like to address something posted by Mr. Quatro:
Are you sure of all those facts ... the names seem off a bit :yep:
Yes, it does seem there was a bit of a Freudian Slip in regards to the use of the name "Trump" and/or "Don Jr." in #1, #2, #3,#4, #5, and #6...
...and yes, I concur, Rockstar does seem to have difficulty with facts...:03:
Well, I would say#6 qualifies as Joe Biden doing the job he was assigned to do, on behalf of US Foreign Policy, in conjunction with US Allies and international monetary entities, and that job was to pressure the Ukrainian government to get rid of a do-nothing, obstructionist, prosecutor who was refusing to act on legitimate reports and concerns of those Biden was asked to represent; he acted under the laws of the US, in a manner consistent with then US Foreign Policy and was not actively or overtly seeking personal gain; you'll probably bring up that tired old, thoroughly debunked whine of "Biden did it ti stop an investigation of his son, hunter and Burisma!"; yet, there is no so;ind evidence, of any kind that either or both Hunter Biden or Burisma were under active investigation; in fact, the Ukraine government, current prosecutors, Ukrainian anti-corruption watchdog groups, among others have flatly stated there were no active investigations of Biden/Burisma at all and the last known open investigation into Burisma occurred in 2006, eight (8) years before Biden became a board member; "here's the" gist "of the matter let" me "make it easy for you" ( I only put quotes around the non-error portions of your sentence; don't want to be accused of misquoting you :D :
1. There was NO ongoing investigation of Biden/Burisma at the time Shokin was pushed out by the US, its allies and international financial entities
2. Shokin was under fire both internally in the Ukraine and externally by the EU, various other concerned nations, the IMF, and other monetary entities for NOT actively pursing corruption within the Ukraine
3. It would be and is impossible for Joe Biden to have a motive of trying to stop an investigation into Hunter Biden explicitly because there was no on-going Ukrainian investigation at the time of Shokin's ouster, which was part of the reason Shokin was fired
4. Since there was NO investigation to stop and neither Biden would have financially (noting that Hunter was being paid a legitimate compensation for sitting on Burisma's Board of Directors) or politically benefited from Shokin's ouster, the argument of personal gain is moot, unless you can prove otherwise with verifiable facts
5. The argument of the Bidens seeking the ouster of Shokin to block any investigation(s) into Hunter's activities by ousting Shokin defies logic: in ousting a corrupt, ineffectual prosecutor like Shokin, logic says the Ukraine government, in order to comply with the demands of the US/allied nations/international monetary entities, would be required to get an aggressive, proactive, ethical, and honest prosecutor to take Shokin's place and that being the case, the probability of such an honest, dutiful prosecutor launching an investigation into possible corrupt activities of Burisma/Hunter is very substantially increased, not diminished, and illogical on the face of it
...and, yes, you do seem to be missing quite a lot... :haha:
Now let me dig into what you call my "treasure trove of study, law and facts"...
Let's start with the Shokin sworn affidavit you are constantly waving about as gospel truth. Aside from the fact Shokin has a well documented past of corruption, deceit, and criminality and any attorney would drool at the chance to take apart an affidavit from such a sort of 'witness' (perjury, sweet perjury), let's look into why Shokin gave that affidavit. There s currently a trial in Austria for a Ukrainian oligarch by the name of Dmitry Firtash. Firtash fled the Ukraine to avoid charges once the former pre-Russian was ousted and a new pro-Western government was installed. Firtash was/is very closely allied with Vladimir Putin and has been accused in the Ukriane of various corruption charges; he fled the Ukraine and settled in Austria, a big mistake on his part because he is also wanted here in the US on various charges including money laundering, among other felonies; the US has an extradition treaty with Austria and has requested Firtash be extradited to the US for prosecution and Firtash is fighting the request iin Austrian courts. The affidavit you wave about so much was given as a'witness statement by Shokin in support of Firtash's fight to avoid extradition, a seeming odd thing for someone the Trump minions and Trumpettes have bee trying to foist off as a maligned anti-corruption crusader to do and be involved in; to actively be in the defense of someone the US and his own native country of the Ukraine are seeking to prosecute for corruption and other felonies belies and dissolves any pretense or claim Shokin is anything but as corrupt as those he refused to prosecute. Here's a background article on the Firtash/Shokin connection, containg a goodly number of cites and is a good read:
Viktor Shokin Affidavit Mentions Joe Biden, Dmytro Firtash --
https://heavy.com/news/2019/09/viktor-shokin-affidavit-biden/
Labeled a witness statement, the Viktor Shokin affidavit said he was making the statement at the request of lawyers acting for Dmitry Firtash for use in legal proceedings in Austria. In it, he says he was the former General Prosecutor of the Republic of Ukraine who worked in that office from 1980 to 2016 at different times.
According to ABC 7, Firtash is “the subject of a drawn out extradition fight by federal prosecutors in Chicago.” Reuters has reported of Firtash, an oligarch: “His success was built on remarkable sweetheart deals brokered by associates of Russian leader Vladimir Putin, at immense cost to Russian taxpayers.” Firtash then helped a pro Russia/Putin president become elected in Ukraine (Viktor Yanukovich, who is no longer in power and fled to Russia after demonstrations.)
The prosecutor was fired in 2016 “after months of demands from the country’s pro-reform and anti-graft community for his failure to investigate the corruption of fugitive President Victor Yanukovych’s regime. Yanukovych was ousted in the EuroMaidan Revolution in 2014 and fled to Russia,” reported Kyiv Post.
Some allege that Shokin actually stopped investigating Burisma, countering his narrative that he wanted to pursue the probe. Daria Kaleniuk, executive director of the Kyiv-based Anti-Corruption Action Center (AntAC), told Radio Free Europe that Shokin “dumped important criminal investigations on corruption associated with [former President Viktor] Yanukovych, including the Burisma case.” Furthermore, “Ukrainian prosecutors and anti-corruption advocates who were pushing for an investigation into the dealings of Burisma and its owner, Mykola Zlochevskiy, said the probe had been dormant long before Biden leveled his demand,” Radio Free Europe reports.
“Ironically, Joe Biden asked Shokin to leave because the prosecutor failed [to pursue] the Burisma investigation, not because Shokin was tough and active with this case,” Kaleniuk said to Radio Free Europe. “Zlochevsky had been Ukraine’s ecology minister under former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, a pro-Russian leader who had been forced into exile in Russia,” James Risen wrote for Intercept.
Risen added, “The then-vice president issued his demands for greater anti-corruption measures by the Ukrainian government despite the possibility that those demands would actually increase – not lessen — the chances that Hunter Biden and Burisma would face legal trouble in Ukraine.” Read his full report here.
According to Kyiv Post, “The accusations against the Bidens are not supported by any available evidence.” It is true, though, that Hunter Biden was sitting on the Burisma board of directors at the time Joe Biden was pushing for Shokin’s ouster. Kyiv Post called Shokin “a highly unpopular prosecutor general.” Kyiv Post reported: “Firtash was a close ally to Yanukovych and is still a business partner of the ex-president’s chief of staff, Serhiy Lovochkin. In his early days, he allegedly worked with organized crime boss Semyon Mogilevich and profited from a murky scheme to resell Turkmen gas.”
The newspaper also reported, of Firtash, “the oligarch’s defense team has hired two attorneys connected to Trump, Joe DiGenova and Victoria Toensing.” ABC7 says that Firtash is also represented by lawyer Dan Webb, a Chicago attorney and former federal prosecutor. DiGenova and Toensing are conservative lawyers whose backgrounds you can read more about later in this article. According to Daily Beast, Fox News reported that DiGenova and Toensing were “working off the books” to help Rudy Giuliani dig up dirt against Biden. Chris Wallace broke the story on Fox.Shokin seems to run with rather seedy company, for a supposedly 'honest' man...
So, if you really want to use the the affidavit of a proven corrupt and deceitful person used in the defense of another corrupt and deceitful person who is trying to avoid answering for his own crimes as a foundation for your arguments and claims, well, good luck with that...
Regarding the genesis of the whole faux story Trump, his minions, and Trumpettes have been feverishly trying to foist, here's an article written by the reporter who first broke the story and how he feels it has been hijacked by the Trumpers:
I Wrote About the Bidens and Ukraine Years Ago. Then the Right-Wing Spin Machine Turned the Story Upside Down --
https://theintercept.com/2019/09/25/i-wrote-about-the-bidens-and-ukraine-years-ago-then-the-right-wing-spin-machine-turned-the-story-upside-down/
The above article's author, James Risen, makes note of, and prvides a cite link to, the following article which further details the misrepresentations and lies a very desperate Trump and his followers have engaged in:
A Republican Conspiracy Theory About a Biden-in-Ukraine Scandal Has Gone Mainstream. But It Is Not True --
https://theintercept.com/2019/05/10/rumors-joe-biden-scandal-ukraine-absolute-nonsense-reformer-says/
A couple of last bits of actual facts. First, the minioms and Trumpettes have been trying to make it seem that Hunter Biden was being paid an exorbitant wad of cash for sitting on Burisma's Board of Directors, insinuating the compensation was a sort of massive bribe. Biden was on the board about five years and, truth be told, no one has been able to accurately ascertain how much compensation Biden received from Burisma; the Trumpers wail out a figure of some $3,000,000, which works out to about $600,000/year and $50,000/month. However, that figure is not accurate; this artice, by a fact-checking site, details what is known of the Biden/Burisma compensation arrangements:
FACT CHECK: Was Hunter Biden Paid As Much As $50,000 A Month For His Work With Burisma? --
https://checkyourfact.com/2019/10/17/fact-check-hunter-biden-ukraine-burisma-payments/
It would seem no one really knows what Biden was paid. What is known is Biden was on the really low-end of the scale when it comes to corporate board member compensation:
How Much Board of Directors Members Get Paid and What They Do --
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/wealth-management/040416/retired-execs-what-do-corporate-boards-pay.asp
As a retired executive, you could make an encore career out of serving on one or more corporate boards. Board membership can be significantly less stressful and time consuming than earlier positions you might have held—while still offering a six-figure income. You might even earn more doing this part-time work, especially when calculated hourly.
At the high end, you could earn seven figures: Former AOL CEO Jonathan Miller earned more than $1 million in 2015 for sitting on eight corporate boards, and former Merck & Co. CEO P. Roy Vagelos earned more than $20 million, mainly in stock options, as chairman of a single board in 2014, the Boston Globe reports.
...
Responsibilities and Compensation
Only outside directors get compensation specifically for serving on the board. Inside directors, such as C-suite level executives, don’t receive additional compensation. By the Boston Globe’s calculations, the median pay in 2014 for a board seat at a micro-cap company (one with less than $500 million in revenues) was $105,583; pay increases with company size, up to $258,000 for board members of the 200 largest U.S. corporations (those with more than $10 billion in revenues).
So, Biden wasn't getting an outlandish amount of compensation and I've gotta find a way to get one of those board member gigs... :haha:
Lastly, it seems the new Ukrainian government, and its new anti-corruption prosecutors, have no plans to make an investigation into Hunter Biden and his tenure with Burisma since the allegations of corruption against Burisma are for activities that occurred years bfore Biden joined Burisma; there is also the fact that the Ukraine is a sovereign nation and their prosecutors act on information and evidence they themselves uncover and on internal complaints; they do not act on speculative commentsallegations from foreign sources unless there is accompanying compelling evidence:
Ukraine agency says allegations against Burisma cover period before Biden joined --
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-whistleblower-ukraine-buris/ukraine-agency-says-allegations-against-burisma-cover-period-before-biden-joined-idUSKBN1WC1LV
A Ukrainian investigation of gas company Burisma is focused solely on activity that took place before Hunter Biden, son of former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden, was hired to sit on its board, Ukraine’s anti-corruption investigation agency said.
Separately, a senior official at the General Prosecutor’s office said that neither of the Bidens had been called for questioning in relation to this investigation.
Ukraine would open an investigation into the period when Hunter Biden was involved with Burisma if there were compelling new testimony in Ukraine, Nazar Kholodnytsky, the head of anti-corruption investigations at Ukraine’s Prosecutor’s Office, said on Novoye Vremya radio.
But it could not do so on its own initiative, based solely on comments currently being made in the United States, he said.
U.S. President Donald Trump asked Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskiy in July to probe whether Joe Biden tried to block an investigation into his son’s relationship with the company, which was drilling for gas in Ukraine.
I don't really have a "treasure trove of study, law and facts", but I do like to know at least something about what I comment on and what is the truth behind an issue, separating the gist from the garbage. Its like the old X-Files saying: "The Truth Is Out There"; you just have to look for it...
Laws and facts are very, very important: they form part of the basis of a civilized and well-governed society. The greatest damage is done when the law and facts, also known as truth, are distorted, violated, ignored, and corrupted by those who disregard hard facts and have sworn, under oath, to "preserve, protect and defend" the laws and the Constitution...
I know this post is rather long and I do apologize to the other members if they find this tedious, but I'm just trying to give as much evidence as possible to back up my arguments and statement. I wish I could do one of those 'drive-by' posts where a comment is made, presented as being truth , without anything to act as back-up or verification, or regurgitate some slogan or trite bit heard on some media source, but I guess I just don't have that shallowness in me; again, I apologize...
@mapuc:
Your questions a very welcomed and have been very interesting. I have enjoyed seeing our nation and its goings-on through your eyes. If I may suggest: scientists have a practice of asking probing questions, and when they get an answer, they don't just accept the first answer as being THE ANSWER, instead they question the answer they have found and rigorously research and further test its basis in fact and veracity. I know there is a bit of a language difficulty (which you seem to be handling rather well) and a bit of a cultural difference when it comes to understanding the myriad way we Americans seem to complicate our lives, but I ask that you continue to question the answers you get from us and seek out the facts and the truth; not all answers are a final answer, my answers included...
Keep asking questions... :up:
<O>
Mr Quatro
11-11-19, 11:11 AM
I know this post is rather long and I do apologize to the other members if they find this tedious, but I'm just trying to give as much evidence as possible to back up my arguments and statement
That's okay vienna ... it's just that my coffee got cold reading it :D
Rockstar
11-11-19, 01:41 PM
Last time for me.
Biden had boasted publicly about strong-arming the Ukrainian government into firing the prosecutor by threatening to withhold $1 billion in aid.
And of course there's Shokin's sworn affidavit essentially confirming Biden's claim. But I know, Shokin bad, Biden good. :roll:
Also, I think this may shed a little light how the timeline everyone is raving about to explain away allegations against the Bidens doesn't really mean jack squat.
https://thefederalist.com/2019/09/29/timeline-of-the-burisma-investigation-doesnt-exculpate-hunter-biden-it-just-leads-to-more-questions/
In other news: Broadcast, cable news networks to preempt regular programming for Trump impeachment coverage. Seems like a good time to go back country camping. :)
Biden had boasted publicly about strong-arming the Ukrainian government into firing the prosecutor by threatening to withhold $1 billion in aid.So what? This was a recorded event, not some candid secret footage. Did he break any laws or something that would make this in any way comparable to what Trump, allegedly, did?
u crank
11-11-19, 04:52 PM
I'm not sure that anyone is accusing the Bidens of anything illegal. The question is are there things that the VP of the US and his family can do that are improper and unwise? The answer is of course yes they can. Joe Biden must have known for a long time that some day he would try again to be President. A prudent person would not have let any of his immeadiate family any where near the Ukraine or a company like Burisma. It shows a lack of awareness not befitting that high an office. It remains to be seen as to whether he will pay a price for it.
ikalugin
11-11-19, 06:09 PM
https://www.wsj.com/articles/google-s-secret-project-nightingale-gathers-personal-health-data-on-millions-of-americans-11573496790?mod=hp_lead_pos3
This may be of interest.
Sorry if I have missed it...trying to follow as closely as I can what you wright
(even those fine words from vienna)
Some(can't remember if it was the Rep) wanted this whistle blower to take stand and witness in this public hearing and this has, what I understand, been turned down.
It's understandable It could put this person life at stake.
It also made me remember what we have here in Denmark and Sweden
Protected witness hearing(try to remember the exact Danish or Swedish word for it, so I can translate it into English)
Couldn't they not do something similar in your case ?
Having this whistle blower in a separate room where s/he are sitting in front of a microphone and beside him there are some lawyer and some third trusted person.
Thereby this Hearing will have a live witness by this whistle blower and no one will know who it is.
Edit
Have an additional question and it's related to this thread
https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?p=2636171#post2636171
Which I don't want to destroy by my military question.
When did this respect for your military change ?
reason for my question is simple.
In the 80's and in the 90's I saw documentary on Danish and Swedish TV...about Vietnam war and how your soldiers who came home was spit on or treated like trash.
and now the last 10-20 years I have notice this huge respect for your veterans and other military staff.
Markus
Thereby this Hearing will have a live witness by this whistle blower and no one will know who it is.
Markus
Everybody already knows who the whistleblower is. His name is Eric Ciaramella and the only way his life is in danger is if he has incriminating evidence on the Clintons.
https://thefederalist.com/2019/11/10/schiffs-committee-published-name-of-alleged-whistleblower-last-week/
em2nought
11-11-19, 07:47 PM
Everybody already knows who the whistleblower is. His name is Eric Ciaramella and the only way his life is in danger is if he has incriminating evidence on the Clintons.
Psst, I've heard that he has some. :03:
Mr Quatro
11-11-19, 07:58 PM
Everybody already knows who the whistleblower is. His name is Eric Ciaramella and the only way his life is in danger is if he has incriminating evidence on the Clintons.
:haha::yep:
Sorry if I have missed it...trying to follow as closely as I can what you wright
(even those fine words from vienna)
Some(can't remember if it was the Rep) wanted this whistle blower to take stand and witness in this public hearing and this has, what I understand, been turned down.
It's understandable It could put this person life at stake.
It also made me remember what we have here in Denmark and Sweden
Protected witness hearing(try to remember the exact Danish or Swedish word for it, so I can translate it into English)
Couldn't they not do something similar in your case ?
Having this whistle blower in a separate room where s/he are sitting in front of a microphone and beside him there are some lawyer and some third trusted person.
Thereby this Hearing will have a live witness by this whistle blower and no one will know who it is.
Edit
Have an additional question and it's related to this thread
https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?p=2636171#post2636171
Which I don't want to destroy by my military question.
When did this respect for your military change ?
reason for my question is simple.
In the 80's and in the 90's I saw documentary on Danish and Swedish TV...about Vietnam war and how your soldiers who came home was spit on or treated like trash.
and now the last 10-20 years I have notice this huge respect for your veterans and other military staff.
Markus
Some of the options to protect the Whistleblower you mentioned have been floated by various entities and person, such as having the person testify from a secure room or other remote location via closed-circuit, secure broadcast. The problem has been there is no consensus on any one particular solution. Actually, at this point, the need to have the Whistleblower testify is practically a moot point since there has been a preponderate of evidence and testimonies that have backed up virtually all of the major issues raised by the Whistleblower's original complaint. The upcoming pubic hearings later this week will, no doubt, either make a case for having the person testify or obviate the need...
This link gives the guideline for whistleblower protection and requirements from the Office of Personnel Managemant; the same general guidelines, requirements, responsibilities, and rights are in general use throughout the US Government, so this gives you a typical set of rules:
Our Inspector General - Whistleblower Protection Information --
https://www.opm.gov/our-inspector-general/whistleblower-protection-information/
It should be noted these protections not only apply to direct US Government employees, but, also, to employees of contractor perfoming work for the Government...
There was an article published in the New York Times about the backstory of Joe Biden's activities regarding the Ukraine and the ouster of Shokin; it is an interesting read; I have provided this link to a reprint of the article on another site because the NYT site very often blocks a large number of viewers:
What Joe Biden actually did in Ukraine --
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/world-news/what-joe-biden-actually-did-in-ukraine/articleshow/72000925.cms
<O>
ikalugin
11-11-19, 09:05 PM
Is this whistleblower being slapped with the Espionage act?
Is this whistleblower being slapped with the Espionage act?
I see no reason since s/he went through legal channels with the complaint.
Skybird
11-12-19, 05:45 AM
I know a couple of names who dream of having him/her already hanging in a tree. Somebody pretty high at the top of the food chain publicly reasoned about how things were done with such people in the good old times. He did not sound too critical of said practices.
Revenge will be taken, in one way or the other, I unfortunately have little doubt. Retaliating against family members. Disclosing wife's or husband's CIA identity. Where there is a will, there will be ways.
u crank
11-12-19, 07:05 AM
Actually, at this point, the need to have the Whistleblower testify is practically a moot point since there has been a preponderate of evidence and testimonies that have backed up virtually all of the major issues raised by the Whistleblower's original complaint.
There is probably a very good reason why the anti Trump side does not want the Whistleblower to testify. He is a liability. His motivation to do this, his association with other anti Trump people, his past work record and his dealings with Adam Schiff are all going to undercut this guys actions. He went from being a VIP to someone that Schiff does not want to be seen or heard. Wonder Why?
Mr Quatro
11-12-19, 08:13 AM
Shouldn't there be a separation of State between the politics and the CIA? :yep:
It's like having a mole for Russia in your administration :yep:
Same thing to me an enemy is an enemy :yep:
There is probably a very good reason why the anti Trump side does not want the Whistleblower to testify. He is a liability. His motivation to do this, his association with other anti Trump people, his past work record and his dealings with Adam Schiff are all going to undercut this guys actions. He went from being a VIP to someone that Schiff does not want to be seen or heard. Wonder Why?
Well, first of all, what you listed is a collection of claims made by fervid pro-Trump defenders as a means to undercut what has already been an extremely damaging set of testimonies that does not bode well for the Chump-In-Chief. Since the testimonies, and other related data (including Trump's releasing of the Zelensky call transcript/digest, probably the stupidest thing Trump has done so far in this scandal), have done nothing but corroborate the Whistleblower's complaint, any testimony by the WB would be little more than a sworn "I told you so". I have a strong belief that the WB will ultimately testify, but probably towards the end of the House process, after all or most of the testimony and evidence has been presented and who or what the WB is would be irrelevant to the main charges...
Remember, regardless of whether the WB testifies or not, there is a whole lot of evidence, including that provided by the White House, and testimony that backs up the basic charges against Trump and the House really doesn't need the WB. Its sort of like a situation where some one reports a possible crime: the authorities take the report and investigate; they get other witness testimony, fingerprints, evidence (DNA, etc.), and build their their case. At trial, the actual evidence and other testimony is what really holds the weight before the judge and jury. The initial report of a possible crime very often is overshadowed by real evidence. In this case, the building evidence makes the WB little more than a spark to a much greater blaze...
Here's an odd thought that occurred to me as I was watching a Trumpette on TV railing against the alleged Whistleblower: What if the name being bandied about by the minions and the Trumpettes is a red herring? It occurred to me, if I were handling the securing of the WB's identity, I would 'selectively leak' a decoy name to the Far-Right press so they could chase their tails while still keeping the WB secure. I'm not saying this what is happening, but it is an interesting theory. Aside from my basically devious nature, what triggered this thought was the relative lack of extreme outrage the DEMs at the top of the investigations have expressed ovr the 'outing' of the alleged Whistleblower. There is also the specter of a truly awesome "Gotcha!!" against the Trump minions and Trumpettes if such a situation were to be true...
<O>
Shouldn't there be a separation of State between the politics and the CIA? :yep:
It's like having a mole for Russia in your administration :yep:
Same thing to me an enemy is an enemy :yep:
Russia already has a mole in the Administration:
https://www.twincities.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/BC-EU-Trump-Putin-The-Latest-IMG-jpg.jpg?w=512
...and, you are right...
...an enemy is an enemy...
<O>
em2nought
11-12-19, 05:37 PM
Epstein didn't kill himself. :D
Skybird
11-12-19, 07:03 PM
The sharp noise you just heard was my forehead falling onto the table.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50399230
Hillary Clinton has said she is "under enormous pressure" to challenge US President Donald Trump in next year's White House election.
The former Democratic presidential nominee refused to rule it out, telling the BBC: "Never say never."
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRSXF_ROvoMOOCvOk4PELhQCQWEfKgwT v8djrDB3imxW2cdym71&s
em2nought
11-12-19, 07:36 PM
The sharp noise you just heard was my forehead falling onto the table.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50399230
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRSXF_ROvoMOOCvOk4PELhQCQWEfKgwT v8djrDB3imxW2cdym71&s
Bill has to be sweatin', you know she's gonna need some sympathy votes this time around. If what he has on her was kept on Epstein's Island Bill's toast. :D I'm expecting Stacey Abrams, even if she loses she'll probably start moving into the White House anyway.
Mr Quatro
11-12-19, 07:39 PM
The sharp noise you just heard was my forehead falling onto the table.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50399230
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRSXF_ROvoMOOCvOk4PELhQCQWEfKgwT v8djrDB3imxW2cdym71&s
Wow! without the link I wouldn't believe you Sky :o
This like one of those curb feelers cars use to have to see how close to the curb they are :yep:
I can't believe the Democrats would be so foolish as to run her as her nominee so her only path is as a third party candidate and that would only split the dem vote.
Calm down, y'all...
The chances of Hillary Clinton getting the nomination next year is the same as Trump ever telling the truth about anything... :haha:
...and given the hole Trump and the minions are digging for themselves, even if she did run, Clinton would probably win... :03:
<O>
ikalugin
11-13-19, 03:26 AM
Calm down, y'all...
The chances of Hillary Clinton getting the nomination next year is the same as Trump ever telling the truth about anything... :haha:
...and given the hole Trump and the minions are digging for themselves, even if she did run, Clinton would probably win... :03:
<O>
I can already sense the satisfaction I would feel, should Trump win.
...and I my satisfaction when Trump loses and has to face the criminal and civil trials awaiting him...
...and the way things are going for Trump, and how he and his minions keep digging their own holes to fall into, I may not have to wait for the Election to get my sense of satisfaction... :haha:
...I wonder how Putin will feel when he loses his stooge in the White House?... :hmmm:
<O>
u crank
11-13-19, 06:03 AM
Well, first of all, what you listed is a collection of claims made by fervid pro-Trump defenders as a means to undercut what has already been an extremely damaging set of testimonies that does not bode well for the Commander-In-Chief.
It may be what some 'fervid pro-Trump defenders' are saying but it is not what I am saying. If and it is still an if, Eric Ciaramella is the whistleblower his history is not a secret nor are his friends and associates.
Ciaramella has worked for the Central Intelligence Agency for several years and was assigned to the White House during the end of the Obama administration.
He likely works closely with Alexander Vindman, the impeachment inquiry witness who is now Ukraine director for the NSC, Ciaramella’s former role.
He worked closely with Biden in his role as an expert on Ukraine. Ciaramella also has ties to Sean Misko, a former NSC co-worker who now works for Representative Adam Schiff and the Intelligence Committee. According to The New York Times, the whistleblower first went to a CIA lawyer and then to an unnamed Schiff aide before filing the whistleblower complaint. The aide told the whistleblower to follow the formal process, but conveyed some of the information he learned from him to Schiff, without revealing his name, The Times reported.
The whistleblower’s ties to Democrats, including Biden, Schiff, former CIA Director John Brennan, former Director of Intelligence James Clapper and former National Security Adviser Susan Rice, have created controversy, with Trump and Republicans using his past work with them in an attempt to discredit him. Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert told a local radio station in his home state of Texas that many in Washington D.C. knew the whistleblower’s identity, calling him a “staunch Democrat,” and former “point person on Ukraine,” who never called out corruption in the Eastern European country.
Ciaramella also has ties to former Democratic National Committee operative and opposition researcher Alexandra Chalupa, a Ukrainian-American who has been targeted by some conservatives as being behind an effort to accuse the Trump campaign of Russian collusion.
https://heavy.com/news/2019/10/eric-ciaramella/
Alexandra Chalupa is one of the more interesting 'friends' that Ciaramella has.
She is the Ukrainian version of Christopher Steele. A paid political operative for the Democratic National Committee, Chalupa leveraged her government contacts in Ukraine (she’s Ukrainian-American) to dig up Russian dirt on Team Trump in 2016 for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.
https://amgreatness.com/2019/11/11/inside-the-war-on-biden-ukraine-reporting/
There are endless intersections between the Trump-Russia collusion hoax and Ukrainegate—same journalists, same fabricated evidence, same impeachment grist, and same plotters, including Adam Schiff. But the end game is the same: Obscure the actual foreign interference in an American election.
What's that old saying ... “A man is known by the company he keeps”
Two items of interest came to my attention today; one involves yet another of Trump's highly questionable and appalling lack of proper and/or sane judgement, bordering on willful neglect, in the appointment of the minions who work for him in the US Government and how astoundingly unqualified, duplicitous, and, basically, idiotic they are; this article, published 12 Nov 2019, gives the story of Mina Chang, the deputy assistant secretary in the State Department's Bureau of Conflict and Stability Operations, who seems to be not very far off the 'Trump Standard of Honesty And Integrity' when it come to stretching the truth to its breaking point:
Senior Trump official embellished résumé, had face on fake Time cover --
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/senior-trump-official-embellished-resume-had-face-fake-time-cover-n1080356
A senior Trump administration official has embellished her résumé with misleading claims about her professional background — even creating a fake Time magazine cover with her face on it — raising questions about her qualifications to hold a top position at the State Department.
An NBC News investigation found that Mina Chang, the deputy assistant secretary in the State Department's Bureau of Conflict and Stability Operations, has inflated her educational achievements and exaggerated the scope of her nonprofit's work.
Whatever her qualifications, Chang had a key connection in the Trump administration. Brian Bulatao, a top figure in the State Department and longtime friend of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, attended a fundraiser for her nonprofit in Dallas and once donated $5,500 to her charity, according to a former colleague of Chang's.
Chang, who assumed her post in April, also invented a role on a U.N. panel, claimed she had addressed both the Democratic and Republican national conventions, and implied she had testified before Congress.
She was being considered for an even bigger government job, one with a budget of more than $1 billion, until Congress started asking questions about her résumé.
The gap between Chang's actual qualifications and her claims appears to be the latest example of lax vetting by the Trump administration, which has become known for its many job vacancies and appointments made without thorough screening.
This level of malfeasance and neglect of duties and obligations by Trump and his minions is why his administration is the sad, pathetic wreck it is; this is more than mere mismanagement, it is almost literally no management at all, an administration that fails at administering...
I wonder where Ms. Chang got here idea of using a fake Time Magazine cover to embellish her status? May be it was inspired by this situation...
Time Asks Donald Trump's Golf Clubs to Remove Phony Magazine Cover --
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/time-asks-donald-trump-s-golf-clubs-remove-phony-magazine-n777546
I guess its a case of if you're gonna steal, steal from the worst...
The second item, and arguably the worst of the two, is described in this film clip from Seth Meyers' program, also 12 Nov 2019, about the level of incompetence of the candidates Trump has nominated to Federal Judge positions, which are lifetime appointments; if it weren't for the fact the scenes in the clip are from actual Senate confirmation hearings, a casual observer would be inclined to think they were from a bad comedy skit; truth is stranger than fiction and, in this case, the truth is our Federal Court system is being crippled when such losers as these are even, in the wildest of imaginations, deemed to be acceptable candidates to hold highly responsible, lifetime judicial positions; only a complete and total idiotic fool would seriously think these are good choices...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXyds_jalBU
I don't care about the party or political stance of any President who is doing the nominations to lifelong Federal Court appointments since that should not be a litmus test factor superseding the basic competency, ethics, integrity, and experiential background qualifications of a candidate. According to the ABA records, in the past thirty (30) years since 1989, twenty-one (21) nominees to the Federal Courts have received ABA ratings of "Not Qualified"; of these 21, nine (9) were nominated by Trump, a rate of 43% of the "Not Qualified" nominees in that 30 year period; Clinton had four (4) total nominees rejected by the ABA, and GW Bush had eight (8) nominees rejected, but it should be well noted both Clinton and Bush each had those many respective rejections over a period of two terms spanning eight (8) years, while Trump racked up his total in two and three-quarter years. The ABA also lists the degree of the overall ABA's reviewers' dissatisfaction with proffered nominees with the levels being: "Majority not qualified", "Substantial majority not qualified", and "Unanimously not qualified"; Clinton had none of his four listed nominees given the "Unanimously not qualified" rating, Bush had three of his eight listed nominees given the "Unanimously not qualified" rating, and Trump has had three of his nine listed nominees given the "Unanimously not qualified" rating over his two and three-quarter years; this is not a bell-ring endorsement of his past critical judgement, nor of hi present or possible future judgement...
ABA ratings during the Trump administration --
https://ballotpedia.org/ABA_ratings_during_the_Trump_administration
It looks like Trump actually likes The Swamp... as long as its stocked with his gators... :D
Like I said, I don't care about which party or which part of the political spectrum is doing it when it is obvious bad is bad...
...and Trump is a very, very bad president doing a very, very bad job...
<O>
It may be what some 'fervid pro-Trump defenders' are saying but it is not what I am saying. If and it is still an if, Eric Ciaramella is the whistleblower his history is not a secret nor are his friends and associates.
https://heavy.com/news/2019/10/eric-ciaramella/
Alexandra Chalupa is one of the more interesting 'friends' that Ciaramella has.
https://amgreatness.com/2019/11/11/inside-the-war-on-biden-ukraine-reporting/
What's that old saying ... “A man is known by the company he keeps”
Still, regardless of all the Trump minions and Trumpettes blatherings, the substance and specifics of the complaint have, as much has been made public, been borne out by the testimony in the depositions, the statements of minions like Giuliani, among others, the White Hose Transcript/Memo, and various other revelations. Whoever the WB may be, at this point, it is almost irrelevant to the process as it goes forward; there is too much corroboration to make anything the WB could add or say to really make a difference, one way or another; the WB, at this point, could neither further the defense of Trump, nor the efforts to impeach him. Whatever the background or associations of the WB, the facts are the facts, the testimony of those so far deposed, and who will soon testify in public hearings, has not only substantiated the main claims of the complaint, and who or what the WB is will not change any of that; I still fully expect the WB will, eventually, be called to testify, but, really, what could their testimony do to alter what is already known, or may be revealed, in the coming hearings?...
In the end, whatever action will be taken will have t be based on the facts, testimony, and evidence gathered, presented, and vetted by the House Committees, hearings into what Trump and/or his minions did or did not do; the WB is not the one accused of violation of the Constitution and the law and the WB is not the one who will face possible legal ramifications from the Trump & minions' actions. The persons accused are Trump and his administration and only the evidence or testimony relevant to the Trump & minions is what will matter; and there is ample evidence even without the WB, including the big fat present Trump gave the DEMs with that Zelensky transcript. And the loud cries, wails, moans and bitching by Trump, the minions, and Trumpettes about 'second and third hand' information and 'hearsay' have all but been totally dissolved by the depositions thus far by first hand witnesses backing up the WB's complaint(s); the case has gone past the speculative to the factual...
Besides, no matter what the background of the WB, what, legally could be done to s/he? Charge them with perjury or lying to federal agents? That won't fly because proof of corroboration kills those charges. Sue for defamation? Again, moot since pretty much none of the WB's complaint has been proven false. Really I can't think of a credible, reasonable charge or suit to be levied; maybe someone else can...
It should be kept in mind the charges and allegations against the Trump White House go well beyond just the Zelensky phone call and the claims of extortion and abuse of power. There are also the questions of violations and/or compromising of National Security, coverup of possible criminal acts, witness tampering, subornation of perjury, obstruction of justice, and probably several other legal woes for Trump...
One event going on now may have other grave implications for Trump going forward: the trial of Roger Stone. In what has been rather surprising testimony thus far, one of Trump's own people served up Stone on a platter and, in the process linked Trump and his campaign to Stone's misdeeds, all but saying Trump was more personally involved than Trump has publicly stated. In addition, Stone's own former right-hand man, Rick Gates, has furthered the evidence of a direct connection to Trump and Trump's knowledge of and complicity in Stone's activities. The biggest problem for Trump may be his written responses to the written questions posed by Mueller during Mueller's investigations, which are being contradicted, under oath, by the accounts of Bannon and Gates. If it is proven Trump lied (and, I know, Trump lying is hardly possible :03:) in his responses, he is open to charges of lying to a Federal Agent, at best, or direct perjury, at worst, either of which is, actually, a Federal felony and an impeachable offense...
Trump 2016 details hidden in Mueller report revealed in Roger Stone trial --
https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/12/politics/roger-stone-trial-rick-gates-testimony/
And what has come out is only the result of two witnesses' testimonies. There is more trial to come and, if it amplifies on what has come so far, future charges of campaign law violations and obstruction og justice may loom on Trump's horizon...
My medication has finally begun to kick in and I need to ride it out; I guess I'll have to settle for watching the first day's hearings later on YT...
<O>
Mr Quatro
11-13-19, 10:10 AM
Now being beamed live on all major channels on my TV ... :o
I'm going to go defrost my freezer :D
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/historic-impeachment-hearings-are-set-to-begin-with-gop-and-democrats-pushing-dueling-messages-on-trumps-conduct/ar-BBWEQMz
The House will begin the public phase of its impeachment inquiry Wednesday with Democrats and Republicans prepared to offer competing narratives of whether President Trump inappropriately pressured Ukraine to investigate his political rivals, during televised hearings that could determine the fate of his presidency.
u crank
11-13-19, 10:17 AM
Whoever the WB may be, at this point, it is almost irrelevant to the process as it goes forward
Well it may be irrelevant to the phone call but as we are about to find out in the FISA case there is always an underlying story. It seems like most of the lefty MSM and people like yourself have an utter lack of curiosity about certain things. If the narrative is not 'orange man bad' then it is not worth examining. It is possible you know that wrong doing can occur on both sides. That is the kind of thing I am interested in. I've been following US politics most of my adult life and I think we are the same age. It is never white hat/black hat. Never. The abuse of power takes place on both sides and we are about to see that exposed. Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz is expected to release his report around Thanksgiving. U.S. Attorney John Durham's administrative review has shifted to a criminal inquiry. Bad news for some people.
This brings us back to Eric Ciaramella. Nothing happens in a vacuum. If the same characters that were involved in the Russia Collusion scam are now popping up in relation to Mr. Ciaramella my instinct is to sit up and take notice. And if the same type of bias exists we should ask who and why. And that is why this guy needs to be put under oath and questioned. It has nothing to do with Trump's guilt or innocence. It is about the process.
Mr Quatro
11-13-19, 10:20 AM
The motives of the President are being examined then so should the motives of the WB be examined :yep:
Am I wrong when I say
I presume most of you Americans will be away from Subsim the next couple of days or weeks-´cause this hearing is a must-see.
Markus
Aktungbby
11-13-19, 12:28 PM
/\ Nah; so far all the Democrat parlimentary harrassment leads to boring smoke and 'quid pro quo' does not add up to the necessary 'high crime and misdemeanor'. Like previous impeachees, Andrew Johnson and Clinton, the motion will fail to carry...Moreover, cooler heads will prevail; does anyone really want VP Pence to take over!!??:k_confused: I'm stickin' with:subsim:!:arrgh!:
Mr Quatro
11-13-19, 12:35 PM
/\ Nah; so far all the Democrat parlimentary harrassment leads to boring smoke and 'quid pro quo' does not add up to the necessary 'high crime and misdemeanor'. Like previous impeachees, Andrew Johnson and Clinton, the motion will fail to carry...Moreover, cooler heads will prevail; does anyone really want VP Pence to take over!!??:k_confused: I'm stickin' with:subsim:!:arrgh!:
I agree with Aktungbby :yep:
Plus qualifies for quote of the year:
does not add up to the necessary 'high crime and misdemeanor'. Like previous impeachees, Andrew Johnson and Clinton, the motion will fail to carry...
We have better things to do my leaves are pilling up :D
But what I have watched is very sobering of the Presidents personality behind the scenes ... :o
I honestly don't think that he thinks that he has done anything wrong.
Aktungbby
11-13-19, 12:46 PM
I agree with Aktungbby :yep:
Plus qualifies for quote of the year:
I honestly don't think that he thinks that he has done anything wrong. :Kaleun_Salute: YOUR CHEQUE IS IN THE MAIL BBY!:O: PLUS YOUR COMMENT IS STRANGELY CORRECT; ONE OF THE 'ELEMENTS OF A CRIME IS INTENT' WITH THE SECONDARY 'ABILITY TO COMMIT THE CRIME'. IN ORDER TO CONVICT, YA GOTTA HAVE BOTH ELEMENTS. HE CERTAINLY LACKS ABILITY AND HIS Y-CHROMOSOME MEGALOMANIAC EGO IS SO HIGH HE'S INCAPABLE OF INTENT....:timeout: ALL OF WHICH MAKES HIM THE PERFECT COUNTERWEIGHT TO FATBOY IN N. KOREA... AND HIS FINGER IS ON THE BIGGER BUTTON
Catfish
11-13-19, 02:27 PM
"I was drunk when i drove, i did not see the pedestrian."
There is a german saying, which is relevant for court decisions:
"Unwissenheit schützt vor Strafe nicht."
~ Innocence does not protect from punishment when you commit a crime.
"I was drunk when i drove, i did not see the pedestrian."
There is a german saying, which is relevant for court decisions:
"Unwissenheit schützt vor Strafe nicht."
~ Innocence does not protect from punishment.
Your example of drunk driving is hardly "innocence". There must be something lost in translation. "Intent" perhaps?
Catfish
11-13-19, 03:36 PM
^ Yes, it is more like e.g. "i never knew i had to pay VAT", hard to believe the person saying this did not do it intentionally.
skidman
11-13-19, 04:48 PM
Ignorantia juris non excusat is a legal principle based on Roman law. While it is a general rule in many European countries, in the US there are some restrictions: A person cannot be convicted of violating it if there was no probability he could have known the law existed (Lambert v. California, 1957), however this exception does not apply when a reasonable person would expect their actions to be regulated (United States v. Freed, 1971).
So, can Trump be considered as a reasonable person? In other words: Is he possibly too stupid to be held responsible?
^ Yes, it is more like e.g. "i never knew i had to pay VAT", hard to believe the person saying this did not do it intentionally.
Ah, I think I know of a similar phrase:
"Ignorance of the law is no excuse"
So, can Trump be considered as a reasonable person? In other words: Is he possibly too stupid to be held responsible?
This phrase made me remember all those cases who have been on the news and where the defense tried to convince the court that his/her client was insane at the time of the crime.
To your information I do not accuse Trump being insane because I do not have any education in psychology.
Markus
Mr Quatro
11-14-19, 09:46 PM
The name Eric Ciaramella is starting to make the rounds on social media so I looked it up.
This article is two weeks old and no one on the democrats investigation side knows who the WB is :oops:
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/10/whistleblower_eric_ciaramella_is_this_the_best_the yve_got.html
The whistleblower is now pretty well outed by investigative journalist Paul Sperry, and it's underwhelming. He's been identified as one Eric Ciaramella, 33, prep school grad, Yalie, Obama backwash, political operative, and fanatic Trump-hater. Hardly the Mister Probity concerned about national security that's been painted.
Sperry did the digging but pointed out that that the man's identity had been an open secret in the Beltway, with mainstream media doing their darnedest to keep his name from being attached to his rather spectacular charges.
Federal documents reveal that the 33-year-old Ciaramella, a registered Democrat held over from the Obama White House, previously worked with former Vice President Joe Biden and former CIA Director John Brennan, a vocal critic of Trump who helped initiate the Russia "collusion" investigation of the Trump campaign during the 2016 election.
from the same article
The whistleblower filed his "urgent" report against Trump with the I.C. inspector general on Aug. 12, but it was not publicly released until Sept. 26.
Prior to filing, he had met with Schiff's Democratic staff for "guidance." At first, the California lawmaker denied the contacts, but later admitted that his office did, in fact, meet with the whistleblower early on.
Schiff's 40 second statement:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-CufSImUkQ&feature=emb_logo
Buddahaid
11-15-19, 12:01 AM
Ah, I think I know of a similar phrase:
"Ignorance of the law is no excuse"
In that sense it implies deliberate avoidance of being informed and not just uninformed.
In that sense it implies deliberate avoidance of being informed and not just uninformed.
Well it is a necessary part of the law. Without it anyone can just claim ignorance. "I didn't know it was against the law to hit her with a hammer!"
But it is not absolute. From Wikipedia:
However, some recent interpretations weaken this concept. Particularly in civil law, regard can be had to the difficulty of being informed of the existence of a law considering the lifestyle of the average citizen. On the penal side, the quality of the knowledge of the law can affect the evaluation of the animus nocendi or the mens rea, in that certain subjective conditions can weaken personal responsibility. The theme was widely discussed, also for political reasons, at the time of the Enlightenment and in the 18th century, given the heavy proportion of illiterate citizens in European countries (who would have some difficulties being aware of all the laws in a country). It was then argued that both the presumed knowledge and the heavily increasing corpus of national legislation were working in favor of lawyers rather than citizens.
In recent times, some authors have considered this concept as an extension of (or at least as analogous to) the other ancient concept (typical of criminal law) that no one can be punished under a law that was issued after the action was committed (non-retroactivity of the law. See ex post facto). This interpretation is however disputed, given that the matter would hierarchically more properly refer to a constitutional doctrine rather than to a civil or penal one.
Some modern criminal statutes contain language such as stipulating that the act must be done "knowingly and wittingly" or "with unlawful intent," or some similar language. However, this does not refer to ignorance of laws, but having criminal intent.
Going a little off topic-even though it have to do with US politics
What's your comment on this ?
Under the law, students can't be penalized if their work is scientifically wrong as long as the reasoning is because of their religious beliefs.
https://local12.com/news/local/ohio-house-passes-bill-allowing-student-answers-to-be-scientifically-wrong-due-to-religion?fbclid=IwAR01hSMZ_U_svv58eY7m6aUlFveTna6O rlWpv0MnqTLjg1wmC--GluAxQKg
I say it's so wrong..keep those two things apart or do your best to keep them apart.
Markus
Skybird
11-15-19, 01:13 PM
Going a little off topic-even though it have to do with US politics
What's your comment on this ?
https://local12.com/news/local/ohio-house-passes-bill-allowing-student-answers-to-be-scientifically-wrong-due-to-religion?fbclid=IwAR01hSMZ_U_svv58eY7m6aUlFveTna6O rlWpv0MnqTLjg1wmC--GluAxQKg
I say it's so wrong..keep those two things apart or do your best to keep them apart.
Markus
Its troubling, its worrying, it is totally wrong and anti-ratio and anti-reason and anti-science - and unfortunately it illustrates a general trend in the West in general andf the US in special: that hurt feelings, beliefs, religiously founded claims for special rights erode the common law, the public institutions, the opinion forming, the policy-making, the media:- everything, the whole Western civilization.
We are definetly on a path towards back into the medieval understandings of religion trumping everything. Its everywhere, if you only open the eyes, and Muhammeddans and Christian fundamentalists, political correct and fascist feminists, climate messiahs and politicla world-improvers march happily united in this crusade against the thinking part fo mankind. The little that is left of it. We already live in post-democratic, post-rational, post-humanistic times already, many still have not fully understood that. The compass points towards growijg extrmisnm, totlaiotarinaism, rleigous dogmatism, and a war against science as long as it does not support the officially wanted dogmata.
It salso kind of a back-.swiong of the pendulum. The left, the special rights activists for this and that, the redistributors, the always-relativizers, the absolute maximum moralist, have pushed it so far beyond the envelope that a counter reaction ot all their vcraziness and insantiy by which the haunt the world and Western society increaisngly, almost naturally must trigger an as-extremist swing-back.
Its also an illustration of the reason why I since alway say that any religion, no matter which one, must always, without exception, be kept on the shortest of lines, and under tightest control. Religions do not coexist, that is not their agenda and their purpose. Leave them a little bit of space to breath, and they immediately start to dream again of making it all their own and to dominate and to subjugate everybody and everyting and the whole public and communal sphere.
There should be pills providing immunization against religious infestation. And public religious practicing, no matter what cult and action, should be draconically punished. Its not the idela soltuion, but tzhe only onbe I could imagine to acchieve what mjust be achieved: freedom for everybody from the other's religious claims and demands. This includes symbols, clothings and items of elgious meaning an dheritage beign worn in public.
Keep what you believe in and what is between yourself and the idol you hold up, in the silence of your own cabin, and in your heart. If you demand to missionise and live it out in the public, it is no longer your personal and private thing but an attack on the freedom of all others. And if you say your relgion demands you to missionise, then yoiu are an conquereor and attacker. And then others have the right to fight you off in self-defence. Muhammeddans, Christians, Hindus, I dont care, I do not differentiate, it does not matter, its all the same evil, sick claim to have power over other people.
The Golden Rule - that is the only ethical-moral law I accept to comply with and to demand everybody else to comply with. And more than just that should not even be needed, if you think of it. If everybody, really everybody would live up to it, then this world would be a better place in no time than all religions could ever hope or claim to turn it into.
Well, more stupidity and intellectual self-mutilation being done, according to that article you linked. Fits perfectly into our modern present, I would say.
Buddahaid
11-15-19, 08:07 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dka2jI2dLHY&feature=emb_logo
The Democrats are leading us down a road that could destroy our Republic.
Attorney General Barr accuses the left of systemic 'sabotage' of Trump administration
“I deeply admire the American presidency as a political and constitutional institution,” he began. “Unfortunately over the past several decades, we have seen a steady encroachment on executive authority (https://www.foxnews.com/category/politics/executive) by the other branches of the government.”
Barr said the “avalanche of subpoenas” and constant attempt to derail appointments by the Trump administration have only served to “incapacitate” the executive branch.
“Immediately after President Trump won the election, opponents inaugurated what they called the ‘resistance’ and they rallied around an explicit strategy of using every tool and maneuver to sabotage the functioning of the executive branch and his administration.”
“The cost of this constant harassment is real,” he continued.
Bar likened the language used by Trump’s opponents to that of groups who attempt to overthrow militant rule of seized governments.
“Now resistance is the language used to describe insurgency against rule imposed by an occupying military power. It obviously connotes that the government is not legitimate. This is a very dangerous and, indeed, incendiary notation to import into the politics of a democratic republic.”
He continued: “They essentially see themselves engaged in a war to cripple, by any means necessary, a duly elected government.”
Barr claimed that while Trump’s presidency falls outside the norm of previous administrations, he was elected with the public fully aware of this.
“The fact is, that, yes, while the president has certainly thrown out the traditional beltway playbook and punctilio, he was upfront about what he was going to do and the people decided that he was going to serve as president."
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/attorney-general-barr-left-systemic-sabotage
VipertheSniper
11-16-19, 09:56 AM
you know the thing is we've now had 2 or I guess 3 governments in Austria which had a party in it (Freedom party) despised by the left part of the political spectrum and the aftermath of the corruption of the first/second is still ongoing and the 3rd got blown up by corruption as well and the jargon used was pretty much the same and in hindsight it seems for good reason.
Catfish
11-16-19, 11:37 AM
Hey when such trustworthy companies like "Fox News" and "The American Thinker" tell it, it must be true. :up:
Hey when such trustworthy companies like "Fox News" and "The American Thinker" tell it, it must be true. :up:Shut it you commie pinko liberal! :stare:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEunP3rPAxs
u crank
11-16-19, 12:02 PM
Hey when such trustworthy companies like "Fox News" and "The American Thinker" tell it, it must be true. :up:
I don't think it matters who tells it. What matters is whether it is true or not. That is the case you should be making. Can you make it?
Only one simple question
What is he doing ?
Saw a clip from yesterdays hearing when Mr. Trump twitted against one of the witness(can't remember her name-only that she have been an ambassador in Ukraine)while see gave her testimony.
So what is he doing ?
Markus
Skybird
11-16-19, 02:26 PM
Only one simple question
What is he doing ?
Saw a clip from yesterdays hearing when Mr. Trump twitted against one of the witness(can't remember her name-only that she have been an ambassador in Ukraine)while see gave her testimony.
So what is he doing ?
Markus
He does what he does best: playing it feculent, malicious, and nasty. Neither rules or conventions, nor laws and obligations apply to him, for his minions humorously call him a "president"!" Rotten matter creates smelly scents, so do not be surprised anymore, we all know by now what dirt he is made of in his inside. Lil' boy's parents must have all-embracingly failed in trying to teach him even the absolute minimums of manners, style and behaviour. Or they just gave up in despair, I don't know.
Its difficult to think of this creature without wanting to fall back to extremely juvenile swear-words. The brazeness in person. What a looser by character. What a fail of a human being. I hold every dog's vomits in higher esteem.
I don't think it matters who tells it. What matters is whether it is true or not. That is the case you should be making. Can you make it?
Of course they can't because they know that it is true.
Its difficult to think of this creature without wanting to fall back to extremely juvenile swear-words. The brazeness in person. What a looser by character. What a fail of a human being. I hold every dog's vomits in higher esteem.
You know while it's kinda fun to watch you fill your soul with such burning hatred of the Bad Orange Man, I worry that if all that pent up, impotent rage doesn't have an outlet you might give yourself an aneurysm dude. Maybe you should take up knitting or something.:)
Buddahaid
11-17-19, 12:40 AM
You don't have to hate someone to think they're childish idiots.
Mr Quatro
11-17-19, 09:52 AM
You don't have to hate someone to think they're childish idiots.
Who has made our country stronger military, finances, taxes, stock market, useless laws overcome, pardon good fighting men, has a beautiful well spoken wife and shows us the evil side of the left wing as a bunch of socialist trying to take over our country. :yep:
Skybird
11-17-19, 11:27 AM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_polarization
The reason to my question
"What is he doing ?"
is based on my knowledge about laws or the little knowledge I have.
In every country in Europe a suspect will get a tougher punishment if s/he threaten or affect a witness.
and this is what Mr. Trump did by twitting about this woman.
He tried to affect or threaten her, while she gave her testimony.
His action does not exactly make his situation better.
Markus
Skybird
11-17-19, 02:13 PM
The reason to my question
"What is he doing ?"
is based on my knowledge about laws or the little knowledge I have.
In every country in Europe a suspect will get a tougher punishment if s/he threaten or affect a witness.
and this is what Mr. Trump did by twitting about this woman.
He tried to affect or threaten her, while she gave her testimony.
His action does not exactly make his situation better.
Markus
As I already indicated to you, he stands above the law. Not really, but thats what he and many of his followers think.
It gets worse with radical evangelist Christians. Some of them go as far as saying that being against lil' Cesar is being against God. In principle this provides him a divine card blanche, and it will stay this way as long as he gets their votes, and he will get them as long as they think he will push their religious agenda. The most clasisc of cooperaitons, since the medieval, if not earlier: religion legitimises king, king protects and subisidizes religion, happily united both rule over the ordinary peasants and live at their cost. A very unholy and destructive alliance.
Skybird
11-18-19, 10:15 AM
The little boy may not like it, but there are also other stories in the world beside Him.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/11/18/world/middleeast/iran-iraq-spy-cables.html
And the documents show how Iran, at nearly every turn, has outmaneuvered the United States in the contest for influence.
Remembering the naivety and folly by which the Bush administration acted, that really is no surprise.
Strange.
Compared to lil' Cesar on all channels these days, one almost misses those old times. :-?
All I have to say is :roll:
...
One event going on now may have other grave implications for Trump going forward: the trial of Roger Stone. In what has been rather surprising testimony thus far, one of Trump's own people served up Stone on a platter and, in the process linked Trump and his campaign to Stone's misdeeds, all but saying Trump was more personally involved than Trump has publicly stated. In addition, Stone's own former right-hand man, Rick Gates, has furthered the evidence of a direct connection to Trump and Trump's knowledge of and complicity in Stone's activities. The biggest problem for Trump may be his written responses to the written questions posed by Mueller during Mueller's investigations, which are being contradicted, under oath, by the accounts of Bannon and Gates. If it is proven Trump lied (and, I know, Trump lying is hardly possible :03:) in his responses, he is open to charges of lying to a Federal Agent, at best, or direct perjury, at worst, either of which is, actually, a Federal felony and an impeachable offense...
...
<O>
I posted that comment on 13 Nov; now we have this:
House Investigating Whether Trump Lied To Mueller In U.S. Russia Probe --
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-lie-mueller-written-testimony_n_5dd2c9d4e4b01f982f066331?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly9uZXdzLmdvb2dsZS5jb20v&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAHSjYlvhIqv47_m6i2kXMEyJyG-x9WxHsWIQVz5cw7H1XCprYl9tdRoTaTVafbwWoiPU2IDloPFob 8A3oq_GzIZee7zidNISY_ADKyp0GJGkc6lJMzxccK94E5vti4d NQDlPziyAOscMFq2TZMNq4__BC6ZgqIVlKLstMTbH2nZv
House investigating whether Trump lied to Mueller --
https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/18/politics/house-investigating-trump-lying-to-mueller/index.html?utm_source=CNN%27s+Impeachment+Tracker&utm_campaign=624335ba33-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2019_11_18_06_25&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_84015bed88-624335ba33-109208393
I dunno... maybe I'm psychic... or, maybe...
,,,say, you don't think the US House Of Representatives reads SubSim's General Topics, do you?... :hmmm: ...
:haha:
<O>
From the Mueller hearing:
Q: Director Mueller, isn't it fair to say that the president's written answers were not only inadequate and incomplete because he didn't answer many of your questions, but where he did his answers show that he wasn't always being truthful.
A: I would say generally.
One of the things I've often said about the GOP: they aren't really afraid Trump will lie under sworn oath, they're more afraid he'll tell the truth under sworn oath...
<O>
Skybird
11-19-19, 09:34 AM
"Great that always everything rolls off me!"
https://s19.directupload.net/images/191119/b4coq84q.png (https://www.directupload.net)
Klaus Stuttmann für Der Tagesspiegel
Rockstar
11-19-19, 02:38 PM
just an FYI the Mueller investigation ended 22 March 2019.
the current impeachment topic is the accusation of bribery.
Mr Quatro
11-19-19, 03:03 PM
One of the things I've often said about the GOP: they aren't really afraid Trump will lie under sworn oath, they're more afraid he'll tell the truth under sworn oath...
<O>
This is a pun, uh? :D
Very funny, but how on earth does anyone see the US Senate agreeing with the left wing democrats to do away with the threat of the POTUS running for a second term? :o
This I can say with a 120 % certainty
Whatever Trump are going to say in the witness stand ordinary people will depending on their standpoint towards Trump either accuse him for lying and some will say he told the truth
Markus
Catfish
11-19-19, 04:21 PM
^ Trump will say it with 150 percent certainty.
Onkel Neal
11-19-19, 05:08 PM
Or more! :)
What does the Interagency say? They think they are the ones in charge.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/prosecutors-preparing-charges-against-two-guards-epstein-death-sources-say-n1085371
I just want to get out in front of this story and say that Epsteins guards didn't kill themselves...
u crank
11-19-19, 09:30 PM
I just want to get out in front of this story and say that Epsteins guards didn't kill themselves...
:har:
Skybird
11-21-19, 06:53 AM
Insights into the mind of a "stable personality" and "genius" that is second to none.
https://i.postimg.cc/q72tvm57/Unbenannt.png (https://postimages.org/)
https://www.morgenpost.de/resources/1573564641/img/placeholder.png
:har: Yeah Donny, you'rrrre the grrreatest (tm).
Yeah, I saw it earlier. Unbelieavable. :doh:
Two things that immediately came to mind: Is his memory so bad that he can't remember something so simple, and why would he have to memorize something like this anyway, if he was telling the truth? :hmmm:
Skybird
11-21-19, 10:46 AM
Corrupt politician Adam Schiff’s lies are growing by the day. Keep fighting tough, Republicans, you are dealing with human scum who have taken Due Process and all of the Republican Party’s rights away from us during the most unfair hearings in American History......
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 21, 2019 (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1197503790729121794?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)
Once again: Wowh. "Republicans, you are dealing with human scum". Says the top political representative of one of the bioggest (or should I say "buggiest"...) nations on this planet, live, in public.
By this notorious shameless dehuminization of disagreeing people and political opponents he just shows what piece of scrum he is himself: dirty, shabby, brutal, animalistic. Like in his inside, so on his outside.
It also puts him in infamous company of tyrants and dictators who dehumanised their political enemies as well before throwing them into prison, camps, KZs. First you dehumanise the opponent and take his humanness away - and then the mob will not protest if you crack down on them brutally. The mob will even applaude. Its not humans being cracked down on, its just animals. Rats. Be thankful that somebody cleans the world of that garbage!
There is no excuse for defending such a piece of dog dirt in this office. Doing so just speaks against the one defending him, for he lowers himself to the same low niveau that way. Whats coming next? That the so claimed "president" of the United States smears penisses on the screen during press conferences? Or shows porno pictures with cut-and-pasted portraits of Pelosi? Or recommends to drown his enemies in sanitary cleaner liquid? He already has regretted in public that his opponents do not get just lynched anymore like in the good old times.
Naked hate is what he preaches.
Beware whom you line up with and whom you defend and whom you pay your loyalty to, no matter what your motives are. You show standards and format by your choce - or you show the lack of these. The Republican speaker in the senate already said weeks ago that no matter the evidence or facts or information, no matter what - he would defend the lil boy, come what may. He does not care for truths and evidence and facts. This makes the speaker not one tiny bit better than the lil' boy himself. And it mercilessly reveals that the impeachment procedure as it is formally defined has a lethal design flaw that could lead to it beeing completely incapable and meaningless a safety.
Preachings like this fall on deaf ears, I fear, and yes, I fear lil' Cesar will get away with it. The mob dances in the streets, they want a rumble, they want rude yells and bar brawls and obsceneties on stage while drinking themselves under the table. Pfui bah.
Onkel Neal
11-21-19, 10:51 AM
Insights into the mind of a "stable personality" and "genius" that is second to none.
https://i.postimg.cc/q72tvm57/Unbenannt.png (https://postimages.org/)
https://www.morgenpost.de/resources/1573564641/img/placeholder.png
:har: Yeah Donny, you'rrrre the grrreatest (tm).
Holy cow, apparently that is real
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wired.com/story/trump-notes-photographer/amp
Skybird
11-21-19, 11:01 AM
Did you really think it possible I would cheat on such a thing?
Onkel Neal
11-21-19, 11:14 AM
Not you, but I did think maybe it was a fake image that was on the internet.
after reading an article and watching the video, it's obvious that he is quoting the ambassador, so it does make sense that he would write it down. what doesn't make sense is how he rambles and has such an unstructured way of speaking, he sounds like an 8 year old kid.
Aktungbby
11-21-19, 12:13 PM
TODAYS EDITORIAL CARTOON: I SUSPECT THE DEMOCRATS ARE....BIDEN' THEIR TIME ON THIS::O: http://www.cartoonistgroup.com/properties/anderson/art_images/cg5dd61657d9d08.jpg:shucks:
Did you really think it possible I would cheat on such a thing?
I can confirm it
I saw* Mr. Trump standing in front of the White house and saying most of what was written on this note
In this press meeting he said a little more.
*
in the news
Markus
Oh you poor snowflakes getting your panties all in a twist over a tweet but have no problem at all with the constant insulting vileness that is spewed at Trump every day. Hypocrites.
Skybird
11-21-19, 09:19 PM
Oh yes, this unthankful world just does not know how to recognize true grit and greatness and genius, its so sad! An innocent messiah walking on planet Earth again, and just everbody laughs. What infamy! I feel so dirty. So guilty. So undeserving. I almost want to cry.
Mr Quatro
11-21-19, 09:30 PM
Insights into the mind of a "stable personality" and "genius" that is second to none.
https://i.postimg.cc/q72tvm57/Unbenannt.png (https://postimages.org/)
https://www.morgenpost.de/resources/1573564641/img/placeholder.png
:har: Yeah Donny, you'rrrre the grrreatest (tm).
Not President Trump's hand writing just a note well written in printed style so he could read it back. Said the same thing in front of the WH without the note.
All of this will forgotten and the USA will move on to it's next big problem Black Friday sales :up:
Oh yes, this unthankful world just does not know how to recognize true grit and greatness and genius, its so sad! An innocent messiah walking on planet Earth again, and just everbody laughs. What infamy! I feel so dirty. So guilty. So undeserving. I almost want to cry.
Well go hide in the closet or something first because nobody wants to see you do that in public! Yech! Take your nazi analogies with you.
Mr Quatro
11-21-19, 10:04 PM
Well go hide in the closet or something first because nobody wants to see you do that in public! Yech!
Come on August (edit that) and stop letting them get to you :up:
Come on August (edit that) and stop letting them get to you :up:
He's not getting to me, I was just toying with him. You get him going and next thing he's seriously justifying the assassination of women and children because they are related to a political leader he doesn't like. I figure he's not that far off coming up with a similar final solution for Trump and his supporters too and I just wanted to see if I could nudge him into revealing it. His rhetoric has spiked recently and I figure he's about to blow.
Buddahaid
11-21-19, 11:55 PM
.....Take your nazi analogies with you.
Says the person who just used them.
Mr Quatro
11-22-19, 01:01 AM
He's not getting to me, I was just toying with him. You get him going and next thing he's seriously justifying the assassination of women and children because they are related to a political leader he doesn't like. I figure he's not that far off coming up with a similar final solution for Trump and his supporters too and I just wanted to see if I could nudge him into revealing it. His rhetoric has spiked recently and I figure he's about to blow.
Okay, have it your way ... It is a strange day when you bait your enemies :hmmm:
I'm going to take a break and stay out of the loop for a while ...:yep:
They say this impeachment thing could last till March after it goes to the Senate :o
Skybird
11-22-19, 04:56 AM
:salute:Trump & August 2020 !:salute:
Because they speak the same language and do the same tricks. :yeah: Vote two buddies for a grrreater (tm) future!
Not President Trump's hand writing just a note well written in printed style so he could read it back. Said the same thing in front of the WH without the note.
All of this will forgotten and the USA will move on to it's next big problem Black Friday sales :up:
Oh, Mr Quatro, once again, the actual facts and truth upend both you and Trump; the notepad is plainly marked with "Aboard Air Force One", a pad which is almost always for the President's sole use (the mobile equivalent of "From The Desk Of The President Of The United States" letterhead), the notes are written in Trump's favorite writing instrument, the broad tip Sharpie (last widely seen falsely altering an official US Government map to deliberately mislead the public into thinking a hurricane, in an way at all, threatened to devastate the state of Alabama), and, the final proof of Trump's hand, the name of the Ukraine President is misspelled (its Zelensky, not "Zellinsky,"), the kind of error Trump does with great frequency in his tweets. So, the claims you have made really don't hold much credence...
Donald Trump Carries 'Quid Pro Quo' Notes to Air Force One, Misspells Ukrainian President Zelensky's Name --
https://www.newsweek.com/trump-notes-impeachment-zelensky-misspelled-quid-pro-quo-1473042
It should also be pointed out the call cited in the notes to Sondland was made very shortly after it was revealed the Whistleblower's complaint had been formally forwarded to the House of Representatives, in keeping with the law, and the call appears to be a frantic rearguard action to make it appear the original intent of Trump, Giuliani, et al, in the Ukraine was not a personally self-interested quid pro quo. This sort of attempt to 'rewrite' the truth post facto is a tactic that has been used often by Trump; the most egregious example is when Trump was caught withholding donations made, ostensibly, to the Trump Foundation to benefit veteran's charities; some USD $2.8 Million was raised, but Trump, via his foundation did not disperse the funds as intended by the contributors, but, instead withheld the funds and used them as a sort of 'slush fund' through which to make purchases for himself and to even payout money to settle personal lawsuit losses; it wasn't until some journalists asked some of the veterans charities that were supposed to receive payouts from the Trump Foundation about how the funds were being used to benefit veterans and the charities responded they had not received a single cent of the funds, that was when the news of the Trump Foundation fraud broke and Trump frantically disbursed some, but still not all of the donated money, all the while trying to make it seem as if the news stories had no impact on the disbursements when it was obvious, if there had been no stories, the funds would still be undisbused, likely to date...
The nature of Trump's call with Sondland with the claims of "No Quid Pro Quo!!" is eerily reminiscent of an Oval Office meeting involving Nixon, some of his co-conspirators, and John Dean, the White House Counsel. The Watergate scandal was beginning to lead up to the very desk of Nixon and those of his closest associates; they needed a fall guy, a patsy, and apparently decided Dean would be the perfect guy. The meeting was setup and the 'conversation' was rigged in such a way as to make it appear Dean was the actual originator and impetus behind Watergate; however, very early on Dean, being far from a fool, realized the direction of the 'conversation' and surmised it was being recorded so as to be presented as evidence of Dean's "crimes" and as an exoneration of Nixon, and, perhaps, some of Nixon's co-conspirators. Dean was careful of his words and, following the meeting, became one of, if not the most important, witnesses against Nixon and his administration...
Considering how Trump made his call statements almost immediately after the House formally received the Whistlblower's formal complaint, with the full knowledge of the now dire consequences of the alleged charges, and how he pointedly made cries of "No Quid Pro Quo!!" in an apparent attempt to counter growing evidence of the actual intent of Trump interactions with the Ukraine, one can only wonder if Sondland had a "John Dean" moment and realized, with a sleazeball like Trump, he was possibly being set up as a possible fall guy/patsy for Trump's Ukraine mess, much as Dean came to realize, in that Oval Office meeting, he was being set up by sleazeball Nixon...
Such a consideration could be the base of Sondland's enthusiasm to declare the existence of a quid pro quo, name those involved, and to describe, in detail, their activities. Consider his testimony as a sort of 'nuclear' preemptive strike against Trump and his minions' possible attempts to pin their crimes on him...
BTW, on your Black Friday shopping, you should avoid buying Trump/MAGA items: they may soon be next to worthless... :03:
<O>
u crank
11-22-19, 07:02 AM
I've been watching the impeachment inquiry as much as I can stand it. The same things are repeated over and over by both sides. It is tiresome. I usually go to the CNN and Fox news websites, US edition/politics pages for my morning coffee. You would think there are two separate inquiries going on with the same cast of characters in each. The spin is remarkable. But there are some reasonable voices.
Democrats on the Intelligence Committee have spent the vast majority of their impeachment hearings trying to persuade voters that bureaucrats believe Donald Trump is impulsive, self-serving, and misguided — all of which is unsurprising, and completely irrelevant to the matter at hand.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/11/the-impeachment-hearings-have-been-useless/
For one thing, Hill’s broader contention is dubious. While Trump hasn’t called out Russia for interference, various other GOP leaders have done so on numerous occasions, including in a Senate intel report. And a person can simultaneously believe that both the Russians and Ukrainians meddled in 2016 to various degrees (and the Iranians.)
Even if one doesn’t, though, failing to adopt the Democrats’ histrionic tone over the threat of Twitter bots is neither criminal nor unconstitutional. (Reacting to 2016 as if it were Pearl Harbor, in fact, is likely quite pleasing to Putin.) If selling conspiracy theories to the American public for partisan reasons were a crime, Representative Adam Schiff would be serving consecutive life sentences in Supermax.
Harsanyi makes a point here I can't help but agree with.
To me, there’s little question such a call from the president — whether he was explicitly favor trading or not — is at the very least unethical and at most an abuse of power. Is it impeachable? That’s a political decision. Because, no matter how hard liberals try and convince you otherwise, the Trump presidency doesn’t operate in a vacuum. Republicans believe they’ve been living life under two sets of rules. Considering what previous administrations have gotten away with — and what many of the people now clamoring for impeachment helped them get away with — it’s difficult to blame them. Perhaps if Democrats and operatives within government hadn’t spent three years cooking up a fantastical Manchurian Candidate conspiracy to delegitimize Trump this impeachment inquiry might be playing out differently. As it stands now, the entire effort is drenched in partisanship. Which makes it extremely unlikely that many voters will be pried from their previously held positions. Nothing that’s been said during these hearings changes that fact.
I cannot help but think that the Democrats are painting themselves into a corner. I think there are only three possible options here. Drop the whole thing, hold a censure vote in the House, or hold an impeachment vote in the House. The first is most unlikely, the second is a possibility (and an out for Pelosi) and the third is almost for certain. The impeachment vote holds little risk for Trump other than hurting his election chances. The Democrats though may regret it.
I made a search because I did remember seeing the president standing in front of the press saying those words.
Found it on youtube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQRdgjh7hrs
Markus
Rockstar
11-22-19, 01:56 PM
Quid Pro Quo is not on the list of impeachable offenses probably for the very reason that Quid Pro Quo it is not always looked at as an illegal act. On the other hand bribery is an impeachable offense. What matters is if the request was in the public's interests or it was done for personal gain. I for one would like to see an investigation opened on the Biden's association with a corrupt business like the Ukrainian company Burisma. On the other hand if it is shown Trump asked for something for personal gain then he may very well be facing impeachment for bribery. But just because it so happened Biden was a potential presidential election rival doesn't mean that's why Trump requested an investigation.
Its not that he asked for something in return for something. It has everything to do with WHY he asked.
Says the person who just used them.
If he can use them then why can't I in response?
Buddahaid
11-22-19, 04:33 PM
You can but you can't complain about it anymore then.
Skybird
11-22-19, 04:59 PM
Fear the revenge of a Goa'uld - these snake worms are terrible narcissists. :doh:
Anyway.
For almost an hour on Fox News, Donald Trump shared conspiracy theories about Ukrainian meddling in the 2016 US presidential election, again attacked a decorated former US ambassador and suggested a foreign service officer at the US embassy in Ukraine was lying under oath.
And those were just the bullet-point highlights.
It was yet further evidence that the president's take diverges entirely from the testimony of witnesses in the public impeachment hearings and the accounts reported in the mainstream US media.
Mr Trump, for instance, was adamant that a 26 July phone call between himself and Gordon Sondland, the US ambassador to the EU who was in Kiev at the time, "never took place".
It was during this call - confirmed by Mr Sondland himself - that witness David Holmes testified on Thursday that the president asked about Ukrainian "investigations" the day after Mr Trump had told Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate Democratic rival Joe Biden.
Critics will pick apart the president's comments, but if there's one thing clear after nearly three years of this presidency, when Mr Trump asserts his defence repeatedly and vociferously, his supporters and the Republican party back him up, no matter what fact-checkers may say.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50520652
The Democrats, sending a terrible lineup into battle themselves, a left-leaning crew that makes them weak and assailable themselves, are misled when thinking that truth, evidence, files will lead them anywhere, for this regime now simply will shamelessly lie on and on and on and even deny facts that get rubbed right into its face. And the mob cheering and applauding this doing, the gang of political opportunists who do not care for right and wrong, law and justice, but say yes and no on grounds of what serves their own career ambitions best, give this kind of infamy and brutality its undeserved reward. The mob never has followed sharp intellect or argument, fact or truth - the mob follows the alpha brute who yells and shouts the loudest and is the most brutal in slamming his fist into other people's face. This is where Trump excels in, brutality and shameless lie, and it is the only thing he excels in, for intellctually he is a zero. Thats what the mob wants to see when assembling before a stage. Not culture, but spectaculum - the messier and the more obscene and brutal, the better! Let the other side see who is the stronger one! The tougher one! Bang! Bang! Bang!
But if the little Cesar gets away with what he does, and even wins the next election, its becoming dangerous because he already has established a new, dangerous, brutal inhumane way of politics, so far not seen in this frankness in the West, only in tyrannies and dicatorships abroad.
Long time ago, fifteen years plus minus a few years or so, I said here in some long forgotten debate that ran hot like so many others back then, that to me the most likely scenario for the long time future of the Us is that it will turn into a fascist police state or fascist military dictatorship, which in the end is the same. When I sum up all what has happened since then, I see no reason to correct this prediction. The left will try to resist, and it will even try in violence sooner or later. But the right has the military and the secvuirty apparatus behind it. It will win. And then the gods may have mercy with those who held up the wrong colours.
The US will live on. But form these times on they will not have anything in common anymore with the visions the first settlers and foundign fathers had. And all that holy paper stuff in the museum will be worth the price for toilet paper only.
The Russians could not have caused greater destruction by launching a nuclear strike. Getting their useful idiot into the WH was the greatest victory of theirs ever. A triumph.
Catfish
11-22-19, 05:14 PM
^ Nah come on, it may be a shame, but T. is not the man or villain enough to bedevil him that way, not worth the effort.
He is intelligent or besser "gerissen" or "bauernschlau" enough to still have 50 percent of americans as supporters. It was hard enough to learn two strange languages, i cannot understand what happens and why. I gave up after Trump and brexit. Let it go, you won't change it, you will only amass hate if you try to understand it, relax. Humans are idiots, look at China, look at North Korea, at Russia, live with the facts, relax. ;)
em2nought
11-22-19, 05:18 PM
On the other hand if it is shown Trump asked for something for personal gain then he may very well be facing impeachment for bribery. But just because it so happened Biden was a potential presidential election rival doesn't mean that's why Trump requested an investigation.
Its not that he asked for something in return for something. It has everything to do with WHY he asked.
I'm pretty sure a strong case can be made for Trump having absolutely no fear of being beaten in an election by creepy Joe Biden. LOL As a Republican who has appeared in porn, I think I could take Biden in an election. :har:
Skybird
11-22-19, 05:44 PM
^ Nah come on, it may be a shame, but T. is not the man or villain enough to bedevil him that way, not worth the effort.
He is intelligent or besser "gerissen" or "bauernschlau" enough to still have 50 percent of americans as supporters. It was hard enough to learn two strange languages, i cannot understand what happens and why. I gave up after Trump and brexit. Let it go, you won't change it, you will only amass hate if you try to understand it, relax. Humans are idiots, look at China, look at North Korea, at Russia, live with the facts, relax. ;)
I do not imply that he knows what he is doing, I did not mean an intenmtion to push the US inbto that fascist reigme direction. But I have ofteh said by now I see him not as the cause but as the symptom of things. And in this bigger view his appearance and the fact that so many forgive him his unacceptable failings and brutal behaviour and nevertheless even support and defend him when he denies realty and calls it a lie while it bveing rubbe din his face, show that this shift towards the brutlaization of potlics is beign accepted. I do not grant him the brains and wittiness to know this or that by plan - man, he needs a crib sheet to memorize even profane outbursts like the one I showedon that picture (he later told it into the camera word by word), that is not a sign of sovereignty or a bright mind or capable memory. Simple truth is: he is a mental and intellectual dud. And a psychiatrically noticable personality with striking deficits and problems.
Its just for reasons of probability that a blind hen picking the ground all day long, occasionally hits a corn too. By accident.
That 50% of Ameifans support btw most likely is a myth. Not even every fifrth citizen elgibale to votel cared tio give him his vote last time. Most seem to not care, or have turned away in resignation. Thats how it seems to me. Likely that the past three years however have activated the polticla will again. And this may be where the impeahcment, even when fialign, will mount a threat on Trump: it may tip the baölance in faovur iof Demcoreats regarding the many protest and undecided and alway-scangign voters who feel no party loyalty at all. If so I epxect such an effect being against little Cesar, not in his favour. And this could become a problem at the next elections. Two defeats serving as warning shots he already has received recently.
I may have misunderstood it.
A few days ago I saw 10-15 sec. of Sondland's testify in this public hearing
Where he used the word impression and some names.
Later I heard The President having this press meeting
(link in my former post)
For me it doesn't sum up.
Is there something I have misunderstood ?
Markus
u crank
11-22-19, 06:04 PM
The Russians could not have caused greater destruction by launching a nuclear strike. Getting their useful idiot into the WH was the greatest victory of theirs ever. A triumph.
And there you are wrong Skybird. The Russian victory was getting Americans and the MSM to believe that they, the Russians could actually effect the outcome of an American election. That they could put a man of their choice in the White House. After that anything is possible.
:salute:Trump & August 2020 !:salute:
Because they speak the same language and do the same tricks. :yeah: Vote two buddies for a grrreater (tm) future!
First thing I would do as Trumps VP is tell Germany that they don't get their aid unless they force you do something productive.
Rockstar
11-22-19, 06:26 PM
I'm pretty sure a strong case can be made for Trump having absolutely no fear of being beaten in an election by creepy Joe Biden. LOL As a Republican who has appeared in porn, I think I could take Biden in an election. :har:
I agree, I never saw Biden as a big election threat. But it does seem to be the presumption of the whistleblowers and those of the Schiff Show. That Trump made the call to gather dirt instead of a genuine investigation into, nepotisim, conflict of interest, and why the Bidens were associating with the well known corrupt Ukrainian company Burisma. That to me is in the publics interests.
Skybird
11-22-19, 06:57 PM
First thing I would do as Trumps VP is tell Germany that they don't get their aid unless they force you do something productive.
And I hope you would get the appropriate reply. German business in the uS creates and maintains almost 700 thousand jobs (4th rank amongst foreign investors in the US). 40% of these are in industrial priorucftion, givj g Germany 2nd rank in thsi category. Financial investments in the US economy is beyond 400 billion (4th rank). 5300 companies in the US would not survive without german investors (again 4th rank). Germany is 6th largest export target for the US.
Tax wins for the US state due to German investments is accordingly.
I agree on the military and defence budget problem, Germany's policy here is undefendable and lousy. But the ties between nations go beyond just the military dimension. BTW, it was the target of US polic after WWII to turn the germnan into the militarily impotent dwarfes that they now are. As the saying oes: NATO was founded to keep the Sovjets out, the US in, and the Germans down.
Its not that simplistic and one-sided and easy as the lil' boy always paints it so that his small mind can handle the bits and bytes of the situation. His remarks on how baldy the German eocnomy abuses the US, are running jokes over here. Some commentor wanted to hang them up on display in a museum for surrealistic art.
Well I don't recall him saying much about Germany at all but i'm sure in his mind you are pretty small potatoes.
Onkel Neal
11-22-19, 07:57 PM
^ Nah come on, it may be a shame, but T. is not the man or villain enough to bedevil him that way, not worth the effort.
He is intelligent or besser "gerissen" or "bauernschlau" enough to still have 50 percent of americans as supporters.
Please be kind and remember who the alternative was, Grandma Nixon. :03:
Skybird
11-22-19, 08:58 PM
Well I don't recall him saying much about Germany at all but i'm sure in his mind you are pretty small potatoes.
That isstrange because in Europe we recall him having attacked unfair German economy strength and unfair car exports a lot. Point is if he strikes Germany like he wanted to bluff China, the reaction will not just come from Germany, but the whole EU economy space. And that you will feel. The China adventure does not go well, and the sam attempt with EU will not go as well, too. 27% of the global economic output is a force that even the US cannot afford to take easy. And many US voters of Lil boy already now feel the sting from the Chinese retaliation. The claimed economic groeth in the US is not convincing, but looks to me as standing on feet of clay.Short time jobs soaring are not socially selfmaintaining but a mortgage on the future. Deficit soaring. Debts exploding. China outmanouvering the US in lil boys trade war.
The problem is that these things will not get solved by your mighty military. And economically you are only one amongst three or four.
Rockstar
11-22-19, 11:12 PM
. The claimed economic groeth in the US is not convincing, but looks to me as standing on feet of clay.
you might have a point there.
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
The Federal Reserve should get our interest rates down to ZERO, or less, and we should then start to refinance our debt. INTEREST COST COULD BE BROUGHT WAY DOWN, while at the same time substantially lengthening the term. We have the great currency, power, and balance sheet.....
6:42 AM · Sep 11, 2019·Twitter for iPhone
Like I said before zero or negative interest rates are a last ditch effort to stimulate economic growth. Batten down the hatches.
That isstrange because in Europe we recall him having attacked unfair German economy strength and unfair car exports a lot. Point is if he strikes Germany like he wanted to bluff China, the reaction will not just come from Germany, but the whole EU economy space. And that you will feel. The China adventure does not go well, and the sam attempt with EU will not go as well, too. 27% of the global economic output is a force that even the US cannot afford to take easy. And many US voters of Lil boy already now feel the sting from the Chinese retaliation. The claimed economic groeth in the US is not convincing, but looks to me as standing on feet of clay.Short time jobs soaring are not socially selfmaintaining but a mortgage on the future. Deficit soaring. Debts exploding. China outmanouvering the US in lil boys trade war.
The problem is that these things will not get solved by your mighty military. And economically you are only one amongst three or four.
Yeah I also seem to recall that you once gleefully claimed that we would be buried by Germany and the mighty European Union by now. but well over a decade later and not only ain't it happened yet but the British are rightly bailing on the whole clown car. I laugh at arrogant European know-it-alls who have been prognosticating our imminent doom for going on three centuries and they ain't been right yet, nor will they ever be.
Skybird
11-23-19, 03:07 PM
I am exclusively relating to Lil' Boy's threats at the German economy and the European economy in the past two, three years, the trade war with China that strangely goes so very differently than he expected, and the US economic numbers of the same time. You may want to see a neurologist and have your memory checked, maybe it is some early degenerative brain process going on.
You give a lot of quotes by me, on past economy discussions now or some post above on what I said about crooks at the helm of rogue states who start wars only because their families are save from retaliation and the blood toll is always paid by the others only, and for some strange reason you forget to quote them in the context they once were given in , and you do so since as long as I know you, to give them the twist you desire. Making noise, "anpöbeln", and not caring for the truth of claims and quotes and remarks - its clear to see why little Cesar can count on guys like you, since you have so much in common. The only question is whom learned from whom.
As Gary Cooper once put it in a movie: "When I was not higher than my hound's tail, I had a little tin soldier, about [a finger's length] high. And one day I lost it, and I cried. My mother said: stop boy, one day that soldier is bound to show up. And she was right. You're back."
em2nought
11-23-19, 03:52 PM
I laugh at arrogant European know-it-alls who have been prognosticating our imminent doom for going on three centuries and they ain't been right yet, nor will they ever be.
I'm sure if it ever were to occur those Europeans would come gleefully to our aid with their own reverse version of the Marshall Plan. :har:
Catfish
11-23-19, 03:57 PM
^ oh yes i try to imagine ww2 or the immediate time after with Trump as US president
Tchocky
11-24-19, 02:11 AM
___
Well,... that was pithy...
<O>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=my-5beVW0v4
<O>
Onkel Neal
11-24-19, 09:13 AM
These debates surprise me
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8EQFhj8ca4
Here's wild prediction in this Trump-Ukraine-Biden-impeachment saga.
The Congress decide to impeach President Trump and from there it goes on to the Senate.....before the Senate vote......President Trump....Resign
(or he don't)
Markus
Here's wild prediction in this Trump-Ukraine-Biden-impeachment saga.
The Congress decide to impeach President Trump and from there it goes on to the Senate.....before the Senate vote......President Trump....Resign
(or he don't)
Markus
If Impeachment passes the House it will be along party lines. If anything some Dems in Trump districts will break ranks and vote against it just for their own political survival but as far as I can tell they won't have a single republican vote.
Now the Speaker of the House has said that they would not move forward with Impeachment unless it is bipartisan. Since that is not likely to be the case there is more than a little doubt she will even let it get to a vote.
Either way Trump is not going anywhere at least until January 2021.
em2nought
11-24-19, 02:42 PM
So once impeachment fails what will be the democrats next step in the continuing attempted coup? :D
They had a big win with the Chick-fil-A surrender, but then RBG checked into the hospital again. If she croaks they're absolutely gonna flip their lids. :hmmm:
Rockstar
11-24-19, 02:52 PM
Here's wild prediction in this Trump-Ukraine-Biden-impeachment saga.
The Congress decide to impeach President Trump and from there it goes on to the Senate.....before the Senate vote......President Trump....Resign
(or he don't)
Markus
i have recently heard some low key subtle news reports concerning his health. could be a preparation for an exit to save face 'before' things can go bad for him and the party. Could be too just a normal check-up with the doctors. These days its hard to know fact from fiction. Only vienna knows lol :D
A story from the world of the Danish media is funny but also tragic
Some weeks back several Danish newspaper had an article about children who had been detained. Those article described how up to 1000 children had been removed from they parents
Between the lines it was clearly a hint on how dreadful President Trump is.
Well until someone whispered those newspaper in their ears
The article you have posted is an old one...it's from 2015...when Obama was President.
It's like....Hey here something we can hang Trump on, doesn't matter if it's true or not...just print/post it..
Today it's almost impossible to find this article. I have tried to find it.
I know there are some Danes who have made a screen dump.
Markus
There in nothing like a well run, highly organized, and responsible Executive Branch...
...unfortunately for "we, the people", what Trump has delivered is nothing like a well run, highly organized, and responsible Executive Branch...
Navy Secretary forced out after Trump's war crimes intervention causes division and chaos in military --
https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/24/politics/pentagon-mark-esper-richard-spencer/index.html
Here is the text of the SECNAV's resignation letter:
READ: Navy Secretary Richard Spencer's letter to the President acknowledging his termination --
https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/24/politics/read-navy-secretary-richard-spencer-resignation-letter/index.html
As Secretary of the Navy, one of the most important responsibilities I have to our people is to maintain good order and discipline throughout the ranks. I regard this as deadly serious business. The lives of our Sailors, Marines and civilian teammates quite literally depend on the professional execution of our many missions, and they also depend on the ongoing faith and support of the peopl we serve and the allies we serve alongside.
The rule of law is what sets us apart from our adversaries,” Spencer wrote. “Good order and discipline is what has enabled our victory against foreign tyranny time and again, from Captain Lawrence’s famous order ‘Don’t Give up the Ship’, to the discipline and determination that propelled our flag to the highest point on Iwo Jima.
The Constitution. and the Uniform Code of Military Justice, are the shields that set us apart, and the beacons that protect us all. Through my Title Ten Authority, I have strived to ensure our proceedings are fair, transparent and consistent, from the newest recruit to the Flag and General Officer level.
Unfortunately it has become apparent that in this respect, I no longer share the same understanding with the Commander in Chief who appointed me, in regards to the key principle of good order and discipline. I cannot in good conscience obey an order that I believe violates the sacred oath I took in the presence of my family, my flag and my faith to support and defend the Constitution of the United States.
Another person who is honorable and cognizant of their duties and responsibilities forced out because of the whims and fancies of Captain Bone Spurs...
...and the S.S. Trumptanic continues all ahead full towards the icebergs...
<O>
Skybird
11-25-19, 07:20 AM
"Trump's tax cut was a huge flop - generous gifts for corporations, no visible increase in investment," reads the devastating conclusion of Princeton economist and Keynesian Paul Krugman (https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&rurl=translate.google.de&sl=auto&sp=nmt4&tl=en&u=https://www.spiegel.de/thema/paul_krugman/&xid=17259,15700021,15700186,15700190,15700256,1570 0259,15700262,15700265,15700271,15700283&usg=ALkJrhhp4-gzhmQ0Fxbm4dx4VScE-rnbaA) , "So critics are right and supporters wrong."
Wowh, if even a Krugman admits that. Economists hardly can get much more Keynesian than him.
https://translate.google.de/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.spiegel.de%2Fwirtschaft%2Fsozi ales%2Fdonald-trump-seine-steuersenkungen-waren-ein-flop-a-1298067.html
...and the S.S. Trumptanic continues all ahead full towards the icebergs...
It even zig-zags, not to miss even just a single one.
.................................................. ..............................................."Something stinks to heaven!".................................."Quatsch!"
https://s19.directupload.net/images/191125/3gubw4h3.png (https://www.directupload.net)
Der Tagesspiegel, Klaus Stuttmann
So when Trump survives this latest coup attempt and goes on to win reelection whatever will you do?
Rockstar
11-25-19, 07:07 PM
Ahhh I see the two great warrior arm chair generals of the internetwebz are stepping up to say Trump was wrong to support Gallagher. Are you saying Gallagher is guilty? Have any of you even bothered looking at the case? Seems to me, by your latest reaction to 'the daily headline' it never occurred to either of you two to even consider that part of it.
Many will debate the substance of the public impeachment testimony against President Trump. To me, each of the Democrats’ witnesses of the past two weeks appeared to be well-intentioned and hard-working, and seemed genuinely to believe they know what’s best.
But a picture also emerged of U.S. diplomats who appear to believe they, rather than the U.S. president, have the ultimate authority to determine our foreign policy. And if the president doesn’t go along? He clearly must be wrong — in their view. Or, even worse, he’s a traitor. He’s to be obstructed. Taken down.
In an odd turnabout, they actually make the case for President Trump’s mantra that we need to “drain the swamp.”
One can first look at the language witnesses used as they vented about Trump’s tutelage in ways that veered far from relevance to the impeachment allegations. They conveyed hurt feelings, bruised egos and strong differences of opinion. At times, the testimony sounded a bit like a human resources conference or psychotherapy session.
The diplomats testified that they were “shocked and devastated” to learn that Trump and Ukraine’s new president did not have faith in them. They complained that, under Trump, “foreign service professionals are being denigrated and undermined” and the State Department isn’t getting the “attention and respect” it deserves. They expressed “disappointment” that Trump had the nerve to defy the federal agencies by not discussing “any of our interagency agreed-upon talking points” in Trump’s first call with Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky. They were “embarrassed” in front of Ukrainians when they didn’t have answers about U.S. policy.
https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/471643-impeachment-inquiry-its-a-question-of-who-should-run-the-show
Ahhh I see the two great warrior arm chair generals of the internetwebz are stepping up to say Trump was wrong to support Gallagher. Are you saying Gallagher is guilty? Have any of you even bothered looking at the case? Seems to me, by your latest reaction to 'the daily headline' it never occurred to either of you two to even consider that part of it.
Oooh, a warning to the Moderators...
I'm gonna have to use an "F" word here...
... Here it comes...
Facts!...
In point of fact, Gallagher was actually found guilty of one of the ten charges leveled against him, in a verdict given by a seven member military jury. I'm not saying he's guilty: a military jury did, and I'm not gonna dispute them. Gallagher's conviction, interestingly was on the only one of the charges that would not, under military law, demand a dishonorable discharge. What Gallagher received was the sort of 'convenient' verdict and sentencing one often sees in civilian trials where, either out of a desire to just be done with a case or out of consideration for a defendants social rank , status, or past good works, a sort of 'plea deal' is made by the jury where they pass on conviction on other more serious or potentially higher penalty charges in favor of a 'token' conviction; it allows the jury to affirm a wrong or wrongs was/were committed and punish the perpetrator while freeing them of having to assess higher penalties. Its kind of like convicting someone facing multiple charges getting on the 'lesser of all their evils'...
Keep in mind, in Gallagher's case we're talking about military justice, which is very substantially different from civilian justice. The standards in military justice are far more stringent and the penalties, in comparison to civilian equivalents, are more often than not more severe. Also, the military justice system is a closed system: all the actions taken under the UCMJ are undertaken solely under military auspices; the judges are military officers, the prosecutors are military officers, the jurors are usually military members of their branch of equal rank, except for enlisted men, where the jurors can be non-coms unless the defendant requests a solely enlisted rank jury. the size of the jury cn vary depending on the nature of the proceedings, with a size of as little as three jurors to as many as twelve, as in mandatory death penalty cases. The closed system of military justice, if transposed into a civilian context, would see an accused plumber tried before a jury of fellow plumbers, a bus driver would have a jury of bus drivers, and so on. The civilian jury is intended to give a cross-section of the community's demographics, although, in practice, it usually falls to those unable to dodge a jury summons, The only close parallel to the military system in the civilian world would be some of the professional oversight associations or committees, like a Bar Association, a Medical Association, etc.
Gallagher really, in truth has gotten preferential treatment in excess of what would be afforded to other military convictees if they didn't have the aura of being a Seal about themselves; and that aura is part of the crux of the matter: being awarded an elite status and all the perqs that attend such a status also means being held to much higher moral, ethical, and performance standard than other members of the service; the individuals, such as the Seals, Green Berets, etc., are held up as being the pinnacle of duty, honor, moral rigor, obedience to and compliance with military law and tradition, and are the best 'face' of their services. As such, when they do fail to meet those standards, they can expect a heightened punitive response; the higher one gets, the longer and harder the fall...
Military justice is not just about the imposition of the UCMJ, it is als about maintaining and reinforcing the military's entire structure of discipline, respect, obedience, and unity of purpose. That is why internal military legal matters very, very rarely feel the intrusion of civilian influence. The military takes care of its own matters and the rulings of military courts are rarely often overturned in clemency pleas; senior officers are very reluctant to second guess the will of military jury or the findings of a military judge. A point can be made that military legal proceedings are not only intended to punish those convicted, but also to serve as an object lesson to deter others who may seek to violate the strict imposition of military law, order, and discipline. In Gallagher's case, he has been afforded extraordinary deference in excess of what is usually afforded convicted defendants, sending the message of, if you can whine about your case to the ears of politicians, you can thumb your nose at military justice and honor. And, the intrusion of Trump into the process flies in the face of the 'hands off' policy of the Oval Office when it comes to matters of internal military discipline and justice, unless there are egregious circumstances attending. Gallagher's case is/was not of a level to warrant such preferential attention. It should be painfully obvious Trump's entire stance in this matter is just Ol' Bone Spurs pandering to his base and hoping to get Brownie points from the Trumpettes. Trump, and, for that matter, almost any President has very little to no knowledge of the USMJ or its processes. Apart from hack political grandstanding, Trump is harming military discipline more than he's helping...
Just another instance of trump and his minions acting on matters way, way, out of their depth...
This link, from early January of 2019, written by an experienced JAG and citing another case of Trump intervention in a military justice matter, might be interesting since it discusses, far better than myself, the issues revolving around military justice and the intervention of a President as Unlawful Command Influence (I know, Trump doing something unlawful; impossible, right? :03:):
Trump’s Intervention in the Golsteyn Case: Judicial Independence, Military Justice or Both? --
https://www.lawfareblog.com/trumps-intervention-golsteyn-case-judicial-independence-military-justice-or-both-0
This link goes into the subject of Unlawful Command Influence on another case in which Trump intervened, but this time to assert for a harsher penalty on a defendant:
President Trump’s Careless Rhetoric, Unlawful Command Influence, and the Bergdahl Court-Martial --
https://www.justsecurity.org/39541/president-trump-bowe-bergdahl-unlawful-command-influence/
Armchair General? I never would have made a good General; just wouldn't be comfortable with the expected puffery. Still, an armchair General who can solidly back themselves up with facts and cites is better than being a curbside, drive-by private who can't keep up his arguments with anything other than a couple or so sentences of generalizations and unsupported, sometimes less than accurate statements... :D :03:
<O>
Rockstar
11-26-19, 07:56 AM
Oh ya I forgot about your treasure trove of facts, research and law. So let me add arm chair lawyer to your repertoire.
According to a NYT article. Chief Gallagher was found not guilty of war crimes by the military court. However he was found guilty of posing for a trophy photo which carried a maximum of 4 months in the brig. He had already spent more than that in pre-trial confinement that is when the President said enough let him go he did his time. After which the Navy suits appeared hellbent on discharging Gallagher from the service without one benefit or his Trident pin.
Looks to me like Spencer didn't give a ratz arse about good order and discipline. Instead Spencer was trying to save face and what better way to do that these days than to make it all about Trump? Also you dont need to lecture anyone here about the UCMJ or Good Order and Discipline. I'd hazard a guess and say most here at this website have all experienced it first hand.
ikalugin
11-26-19, 08:17 AM
Underground construction of secret metro line for US leadership, an OSINT report:
https://t.co/LAeFzBsrES?amp=1
(redirects to Telegram from Twitter)
I think what a lot of people are forgetting, is that the President is also the Commander in Chief of the armed services as stated in Article II, section II of the Constitution. That section also grants him the power to pardon and reprieve for offences against the United States.
Since the President has the authority to intervene. The question is, was the intervention warranted. Just food for thought.
Rockstar
11-26-19, 11:00 AM
That's true from what I've gathered the reason he intervened was the Chief had already spent much more time in the brig during pre-trial confinement than the maximum which could be awarded for his trophy photos. As far as retirement goes he did his time he was asked to do more than what any arm chair general is capable of thinking or doing without crapping their pants and freezing in fear.
I'm well aware in the service, one nasty-gram can wipe out 10 attaboys. But here I agree with the intervention, allow the chief his benefits of which I believe he has more than earned and one option and that is to retire immediately. I think the President did the right thing tells me he was interested in the trials outcome and gave a damn.
Skybird
11-26-19, 11:19 AM
More likely he was not so much interested in the trials outcome but in collecting some sympathy points with a major contributor to his voter base: the average Jims and Joes in the military.
Rockstar
11-26-19, 11:27 AM
More likely he was not so much interested in the trials outcome but in collecting some sympathy points with a major contributor to his voter base: the average Jims and Joes in the military.
No doubt there's political hay to be generated right down the party line, goes with the territory I guess. You're damned if you do and damned and if you don't.
edit: party politics and political butt hurt aside I think he did the right thing.
Sorry for going back to this ongoing hearing.
Our news channel have this weekly magazine "The world according to President Trump"
In yesterdays program, they showed a 30 second clip from this hearing and some statement from President Trump.
In this hearing the chairman asked Sondland some question and he answered with a little laughter saying
Things like
- That's how we talk to each other
In the same sequence they change from this hearing to President Trump
Who said
I barely know him, he seems to be a nice guy.
Now I wonder...who's lying and who would benefit most from it ?
And if it's Mr. Trump who have lied about their friendships, what will happen to him ?
If it's Sondland who have lied ?(in ordinary court a witness can be prosecuted if s/he lie)
Markus
Rockstar
11-26-19, 02:43 PM
Whats your take on this? Looks like a fairly well put together system finally using some of the available tech too me.
California trying to change the way we vote.
https://www.wsj.com/video/california-is-trying-to-change-the-way-we-vote/AAB9D66B-951E-41FA-9288-F3BC256CB165.html?mod=trending_now_video_5
Skybird
11-26-19, 03:08 PM
edit: party politics and political butt hurt aside I think he did the right thing.
There were three cases. I realsised that in two cases I could not differ between what might be media stunts that blew somehtign out of proportion, ordinary combat action being interporeted as excessivce or something like that, so I decided to abstain from an opinion on these two cases. I do not say pro and I do not say contra on these. The third however, posing with the corpus of dead enemies, is something that cannot be interpreted as combat action, but shows a severly derailed persinality (whatever the reaosn may be) or a severly derailed general set of behaviour standards and morals. And this after the images from Abu Ghraib. I say "guilty" here. Also, the miliuary justice system has been devalued severly in this case, he ran throzgh the demanded procedures and was found guilty, and then the little boy int he WH comes along and say "Ätschi-bätschi, you may say this, but I say something different." Not good. A lot of people in the JAG (is it the office responsible here? I know it only form TV series, I admit) must be pissed and feel disrespected, although I assume for a start that they did their job to their best knowledge.
Lil' Boy's arguments do not convince me. He took an opportunity to score a cheap point and fueling already burning fires. Mind you, in his thinking there is not enough room for anything more than just "I", and I have no doub that he cares #### about the reputation of these three men or about justice. That they profit from his decisions, is a side-effect that happens to be real but that he is not interested in at all. His own profit is what made him doing it. The three other men just happen to not get in his way.
One day this justice are going to bite him in the rear.
Markus
Buddahaid
11-27-19, 12:30 AM
One day this justice are going to bite him in the rear.
Markus
But it will be distasteful and they'll spit it out ensuring another victory for, for, for, what?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=liUf4LHewcs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dC66tlk6NCE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19-vXG_2Ov0
<O>
Rockstar
11-27-19, 04:45 PM
There were three cases. I realsised that in two cases I could not differ between what might be media stunts that blew somehtign out of proportion, ordinary combat action being interporeted as excessivce or something like that, so I decided to abstain from an opinion on these two cases. I do not say pro and I do not say contra on these. The third however, posing with the corpus of dead enemies, is something that cannot be interpreted as combat action, but shows a severly derailed persinality (whatever the reaosn may be) or a severly derailed general set of behaviour standards and morals. And this after the images from Abu Ghraib. I say "guilty" here. Also, the miliuary justice system has been devalued severly in this case, he ran throzgh the demanded procedures and was found guilty, and then the little boy int he WH comes along and say "Ätschi-bätschi, you may say this, but I say something different." Not good. A lot of people in the JAG (is it the office responsible here? I know it only form TV series, I admit) must be pissed and feel disrespected, although I assume for a start that they did their job to their best knowledge.
Lil' Boy's arguments do not convince me. He took an opportunity to score a cheap point and fueling already burning fires. Mind you, in his thinking there is not enough room for anything more than just "I", and I have no doub that he cares #### about the reputation of these three men or about justice. That they profit from his decisions, is a side-effect that happens to be real but that he is not interested in at all. His own profit is what made him doing it. The three other men just happen to not get in his way.
I view Abu Grahib as a serious screw up, absolutely uncalled for, no reason for it, a total breakdown of good order and discipline. However Chief Gallagher case is IMO something different. He was charged and found not guilty of war crimes. But it appears the pictures he took was looked upon by some as something unbecoming of a trained killer of his fellow man, a result of combat action. We expect him to do our dirty work and sent him overseas to a foreign land to kill another. He did what some here would outright refuse or soil themselves if confronted. He did what we asked of him but he is not some kind of robot. There will be internal conflicts, psychological damage and mental derailment. If not helped he will all on his own find a way to deal with the things he's done. IMO Trophy photos was one of those ways maybe an attempt to dehumanize those we expected him to kill by his own hand. Easy for some to judge but I think he deserves at least an ounce of respect and a ton of professional help from trained professionals and his peers. Not jail time nor condemnation for doing something we ourselves are afraid to do.
Skybird
11-28-19, 07:03 AM
I view Abu Grahib as a serious screw up, absolutely uncalled for, no reason for it, a total breakdown of good order and discipline. However Chief Gallagher case is IMO something different. He was charged and found not guilty of war crimes. But it appears the pictures he took was looked upon by some as something unbecoming of a trained killer of his fellow man, a result of combat action. We expect him to do our dirty work and sent him overseas to a foreign land to kill another. He did what some here would outright refuse or soil themselves if confronted. He did what we asked of him but he is not some kind of robot. There will be internal conflicts, psychological damage and mental derailment. If not helped he will all on his own find a way to deal with the things he's done. IMO Trophy photos was one of those ways maybe an attempt to dehumanize those we expected him to kill by his own hand. Easy for some to judge but I think he deserves at least an ounce of respect and a ton of professional help from trained professionals and his peers. Not jail time nor condemnation for doing something we ourselves are afraid to do.
Difficult to judge from a distance, but pretty much of what you say was on my mind as well (I was psychologist, mind you). However, I came to different conclusions than you, and I also think here regarding the function of a precedence. Trophy shots with enemy cadavers maybe are explainable on a psychological (though derranged) or deep-rooting archaic level, but there is also the need to maintain and hold up the cool professional level of discipline and executing military tasks that by behaviour like this get eroded. If this example becomes common, than determination in the military effort easily will turn into outright cruelty as a self-purpose, or worse: cruelty as a duty and goal to strive for.
Skybird
11-28-19, 07:56 AM
Ladies and Gentlemen, the "president of the United States".
https://s19.directupload.net/images/191128/zw7dus88.png (https://www.directupload.net)
Fortschreitende Vertrottelung.
Onkel Neal
11-28-19, 12:00 PM
Lol, he wishes:D
^ Frankie goes to Hollywood's song "Two Tribes" came up in my head.
Markus
Rockstar
11-29-19, 07:49 AM
Difficult to judge from a distance, but pretty much of what you say was on my mind as well (I was psychologist, mind you). However, I came to different conclusions than you, and I also think here regarding the function of a precedence. Trophy shots with enemy cadavers maybe are explainable on a psychological (though derranged) or deep-rooting archaic level, but there is also the need to maintain and hold up the cool professional level of discipline and executing military tasks that by behaviour like this get eroded. If this example becomes common, than determination in the military effort easily will turn into outright cruelty as a self-purpose, or worse: cruelty as a duty and goal to strive for.
Its probably more common than we think. No different than stalking and hunting a living, beautiful, majestic and strong animal. My first time I felt terrible, I still feel a tinge of remorse for taking an animals life but I have become more comfortable with it each time. We gather around it patting each other on the back, some saying how 'blessed' we are for making the kill, take a life to give a life etc etc. We talk about the freedom to take guns and find our food as if to trying to convince ourselves what we did was OK. Meanwhile someone takes a trophy photo of us with big grins on our faces kneeling next to the animals corpse.
Skybird
12-01-19, 07:42 AM
Its probably more common than we think. No different than stalking and hunting a living, beautiful, majestic and strong animal. My first time I felt terrible, I still feel a tinge of remorse for taking an animals life but I have become more comfortable with it each time. We gather around it patting each other on the back, some saying how 'blessed' we are for making the kill, take a life to give a life etc etc. We talk about the freedom to take guns and find our food as if to trying to convince ourselves what we did was OK. Meanwhile someone takes a trophy photo of us with big grins on our faces kneeling next to the animals corpse.
I killed an animal just once, an ill dog straying around our camp, with a bow. I felt neither pride nor regret over it, I considered it necessary to protect us while sleeping, and so did it. I can imagine to kill an animal for food, but I again would nto feel pride or joy in it, and maybe even some regret. I understand that background and culture of hnting that you describe. Its just not my culture. I also understand the culture of war, and war culture, and how both affect each other over time. Both Kohn Keegan and Martin van creveld wrote two very differfnt and very recommendable boosk about it, I red both twice. I understand the psychological need of warriors" for symbolic self-reassurnaces and thus: bulding of ritual and customs that then are mandatory to follow. I all understand that, becasue all that cna be explained.
What i do not like is, however, to comoare deer huntign with war killing and to comoare a hunting trophy shot with posing with killed enemies in war. Savages may do that, but then thes esavges before committed often atricities today beign seen as unacceptable. Posng with dead bodies of humans, simply I do not accept. I also do not accept raping of women in conquered cities. I understand why it is beign done, why it happens, why it even gets commanded at times. But it is a stepping beyond a certain red line, and I do not accept crossing that line, not for me, and not for others.The same with needless torture and cadaver selfies. Its unethical, its barbaric, it shows a degree of iongoing dehumanization of those doing the deed, its is a severe crime, period.
And as I said, discipline and military order. An army is more than a pack of hungry rabid bastards.
We must make these diferences, else we are not any better than the worst scum we ever needed to wage war against.
What i have a prb
em2nought
12-01-19, 08:48 AM
Hello fellow cult members and all others! Once again they have placed their foot in their proverbial mouths and insure that history will repeat itself! This whole "cult" thing is going to be just as unfortunate for the democrats as the "deplorables" thing was in 2016. ROTFLMFAO :har:
We're gonna need a hella amount of Kook-Aid! TRUMP 2020! :up:
https://fb.kraftapps.com/koolaidshake/static/assets/images/dec/dec-kool-aid-wave.png
Jimbuna
12-03-19, 07:53 AM
I'm certainly no big admirer of Trump and even less of a one for Macron but I believe the POTUS is spot on here.
US President Donald Trump has accused his French counterpart Emmanuel Macron of being "nasty" for saying Nato was "brain dead".
Mr Trump is in London for a summit marking the Western military alliance's 70th anniversary.
Mr Trump said Nato served a great purpose, and Mr Macron's remarks had been "very insulting".
He also said he could see France "breaking off" from Nato, but did not explain why.
Nato - the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation - was founded after World War Two to counter the threat of Soviet expansion. The 29 member states pledge to come to the aid of one another should any come under attack.
But speaking last month, Mr Macron complained that Nato members were no longer co-operating on key issues.
He described the alliance as "brain dead", stressing what he saw as a waning commitment from its biggest guarantor - the US.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50641403
Catfish
12-03-19, 08:21 AM
"Trump says NATO is obsolete organization"
"Trump says NATO is obsolete"
"Trump says NATO is obsolete but still 'very important to me'"
Trump says about NATO "I said it was obsolete. It's no longer obsolete"
Well changing one's mind makes sense, sometimes.
What Macron also means is that the NATO is now essentially unfit for its purpose, and looking at it i have to agree. Also, how should any country depend on the US when its president changes his mind twice a day.
France and the EU should make treaties and trade with Russia, competition that the US of course cannot like. On the other hand it does not make much sense to ship US liquid gas over the Atlantic to fuel european powerplants. Neither economical, nor ecological.
edit just saw this: Coal power becoming uninsurable (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/dec/02/coal-power-becoming-uninsurable-as-firms-refuse-cover)
USA is pulling out. "Lloyd’s, the world’s biggest insurance market, is the only major European firm which continues to insure new coal projects." :hmmm:
This is a very interesting read:
Populism, Elites, and National Security
Michael J. Glennon The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University
The tensions that have arisen of late between populism and elites pose grave risks for the United States and, I believe, for western democracies generally. These tensions extend far beyond their more obvious manifestations in international trade, immigration, and race relations.
.....
What we have been witnessing over the last year, however, is precisely that: an epic collapse in the image of public harmony. A week has barely gone by in which a salvo was not exchanged between the President and managers of the security bureaucracy. The President tweets that the former FBI director is an “untruthful slime ball,”9 compares the CIA to Nazis,10describes its former leaders as hacks;11 the security managers and their alumni colleagues respond with a counter-barrage of name-calling and leaks. The Washington Post cited nine senior intelligence sources for one critical story; the New York Times cited four for another.12
Set aside the question of who started it or who’s right: The consequence of this public breach is that there is no longer a unitary imagined order governing the making of national security decisions. The myth system has collapsed. Talk of a deep state is now rampant; the President himself regularly refers to it. Three-fourths of the public now believes there is a deep state, defined as a group of “unelected government and military officials who secretly manipulate or direct national security policy.”https://css.cua.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Populism-Elites-and-National-Security.pdf
Onkel Neal
12-03-19, 10:39 PM
Well, of course there's a deep state, probably has been since the country matured after WWI. The govt carries a lot of entrenched career bureaucrats, they are going to have an effect.
Skybird
12-04-19, 07:13 AM
You might be surprised that Snowden seems to have a slightly more positive view of the state bureaucrazy. In his book he called it the kast functioning instance of the state (different to the polticians and parties). He said the problem is that the bureaucratic services move too many dutries and works to external private contractors - who do jto need to supply the same security certificates as the servant sin state service must show up with ( at their cost, finacially, and needing one year to pass). The state/the tax payers must pay for the certtificaitons of state employees, who then get hired by private comoanies who then use their foot in the door at providing said services for as high a prce as they cna reach. Private business just reaps the fruits, but does not contribute to the costs. Snowden writes the biggest and most shocking revelation to him, during the years when he became aware of how much ifś going ill, is when he relaised that for this and certain other reasons - to bypass survveilance by congress and other reasons - the "state" even wants this system to not function. Chapter 11.
I once again recommend the book, "Permanent Record". Well written, with a nice touch of self-irony, and it shows with what a family and man you are dealing here when condemning him., its an impressive - and revealing - history. Those not knowing his family's background, might be surprised. And the man himself gave his country and peopel a very great service that showed his integrity. Those just condemning him as a "traitor", have no real idea. I appreciate the way oh how he reached to his final conclsuons - and the consistence to stick with the consequences and so doing what he did.
As he put it somewhere: the country'S hardware and much of its software are okay, but its operation system is a big mess.
Jimbuna
12-04-19, 08:07 AM
https://i.postimg.cc/bwt9q4dN/77189267-10156779927568061-3650555320645713920-o.jpg (https://postimages.org/)
Skybird
12-04-19, 08:28 AM
:haha: For a few seconds you got me there, Jim!
From the article I reference above:
The most pernicious embryonic myth is that the Framers handed down a system of checks and balances that is self-correcting. That myth is perhaps the most dangerous one of all. The system is not self-correcting. The myth that it is self-correcting probably derives from the familiar intention of the Framers to set ambition against ambition so as to preclude the rise of autocratic power. That was of course their purpose, but it’s only half of the picture. The other half involves the need for civic virtue, at two different stages. The Framers believed, first, that citizens themselves must be engaged and informed, so as to be able to participate meaningfully. Decision-makers cannot be held accountable unless citizens have enough knowledge and intelligence to do that. The Framers also believed, however, that people must select officials who are committed to advancing the public interest, rather than their own private, personal interest. People have to be wise enough not only to reject another Caesar, but to reject another Crassus. Absent civic virtue at both levels, they believed that the equilibrium of power would collapse, and democracy would not survive. Like the rest of the Framers, Madison had no doubts in this regard. He said: “I go on this great republican principle, that the people will have virtue and intelligence to select men of virtue and wisdom. Is there no virtue among us?
If there be not, we are in a wretched situation. No theoretical checks, no form of government, can render us secure. To suppose that any form of government will secure liberty or happiness without any virtue in the people, is a chimerical idea.”14 Nonetheless that seems to be just the myth that some educated Americans are now beginning to embrace—the illusion that our government is a machine that runs of itself, whatever the level of virtue among the people.There is a corollary myth that has emerged alongside the myth that the political system is self-correcting. The corollary is that the security bureaucracy is an appropriate check on elected officials—that its managers are wise, all-seeing guard-ians charged with commandeering the ship of state when some unsteady captain or crew sails it into the shallows. This myth is of course welcomed by some security managers them-selves, who have coveted bureaucratic autonomy for years but have never been willing to stand up and claim it outright. Of course we can appropriately check elected officials, some now think—why any longer be coy about it? A number of former prominent officials have very candidly stated their hope or expectation that their successors will do just that. Michael Mor-rell, a former acting head of the CIA, worried openly that “the president’s advisers have not been able to properly ‘manage’ the president.”15 Listen to the recent words of Phillip Mudd, a former top official in both the CIA and FBI:So, the FBI people—I’m going to tell you—are ticked, and they’re going to be saying, I guarantee it, you think you could push us off this because you can try to intimidate the director, you’d better think again, Mr. President. You’ve been around for 13 months; we’ve been around since 1908. I know how this game is going to be played, and we’re going to win.16
Jimbuna
12-04-19, 10:34 AM
:haha: For a few seconds you got me there, Jim!
That was the general idea :03:
Skybird
12-04-19, 11:01 AM
" “I go on this great republican principle, that the people will have virtue and intelligence to select men of virtue and wisdom. Is there no virtue among us?"
----
None that I could see of a sufficient scale. Parsites bribe the voters to come to power. Votrers are uneduacted, clueless and lazy. Dilettantees rule. Predators make the laws protecting their game.
Madison went into the same trap that Marxists and communists step into. He counted on what he considered to be the best in man. By that, he missed the sober reality. Because I doubt that his assumption even was valid already back in his time.
I do not believe in the good in man. I believe in some good in some men. And these days,a ll too often they cannot make a difefrnce anmyore, they are too few, the world is too rotten, and the mades are too many.
Disillusionment is the motto of this stage of my life. In princip0le we still live in the social order of the deepest medieval, with neufeudal self-proclaimed "elites" own enslaved peasants who are fed with illusions about how "free" they are. The world I see, is a slaughterhouse, and only those at the very top feast at the dining table. No blank bajonets in the streets over here. But illusions being fed, brainwashing being enforced, dependency commanded, self-reliance fought against.
u crank
12-04-19, 02:14 PM
Sometimes a more realistic view of the things we have little control over can help to mitigate feelings of hopelessness and delusion. In the case of politics and the ruling class things have changed very little since the dawn of man.
Jimbuna
12-05-19, 09:42 AM
Speaker Nancy Pelosi says the House of Representatives will file impeachment charges against US President Donald Trump for alleged abuse of power.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-50671570
Skybird
12-05-19, 11:45 AM
Yes, fro all what I heard when listening in to the news of he past days, the case is overwhelmingly against Lil' Boy.
Just too bad that the case is not decided by a a neutrlsa third auhtoriuty like a High court, but the most unsuited instance one could imagine for this: the Senate, biased, with republican speaker already having announced that he doe snot care for facts, truths and evidence but will vote it down NO MATTER WHAT. Its as if you sue the boss of a Mafia clan - and have his accomp0lices formigngup the jury at court. It just makes no sense. Congress should decide whetehr or not to start an impeahcment process, and if saying yes, then the proceeding shozukd be left to the court. Not a club of highly biased, highly personally involved profiteers who put their own interest about the basic principles of justice and law and order.
There is too much corruption and feudalism build into the very system design. By now its so rotten that it stinks to heaven.
If the lil boy would gte chadsed out - extremely unlikely - thew wholw current White Hiuse gang, inclduing Penceand othe rhigh rankings, would need to be thrown out as well. We have learned during the hearing that they were fully aware and in full knowledge of the little boy's failures in the Ukraine conspiracy he unleashed - and they remained silent and helped to keep it hidden, they are still lying about it. That means all their names are burnt as well.
Its not enough to just hoping to prevent his re-eleciton next year by hanging the ongpoing impeachment story coverage in t he news aroud hzis neck. He must be held accountable. He must be brought toi court after his "presidence". Only then justice has been served. Without thnat, it all remains to be just an opporutneistic manouver, successful maybe if reeleciton fails, but anythign but "just". Impeaching this boy is ist the first step. He must be held accoutnable afterwards. You do not leave it to stopping an ongoing bank robbery, but you bring the robber to court afterwards, and then throw him into jail.
Most likely nothing of all this will happen. The system(s) is too rotten alread, the poison too deep inside minds.
And there is nobody worth to take the seat at the head of the table, they all are products of the established regime and its rigged game rules.
Hang them all, and burn the whole damn house down.
I have to agree with Skybird on this.
Yes it's your country, your President and yours rules.
But this case should have been investigated by FBI and the case should have been in the high court.
Markus
u crank
12-05-19, 02:05 PM
I have to agree with Skybird on this.
Yes it's your country, your President and yours rules.
But this case should have been investigated by FBI and the case should have been in the high court.
Markus
No offence to you or Skybird but you guys need to do some research before you make statements like that.
The FBI is part of the Executive branch of the US government. The President is the head of the executive branch. You should be able to see why the FBI cannot investigate the President.
Likewise the 'high court', which I assume you mean the Supreme Court, has judges who are appointed by the President. There are two of them on that court right now. Again you should be able to see how that would be a problem.
It is Congress which is responsible for checking executive power. The bar for impeachment is set high, not to protect obvious wrongdoing but to protect all Presidents from continous attempts to remove them from office.
If Schiff were to present his case in a court of law, the judge would take one look at the "evidence", bang his gavel and say case dismissed.
Skybird
12-05-19, 05:30 PM
I did not mention the FBI.
But you do a good job in describing the wroings that corrupt your system of checks and balances. ;) There is an inbuild fundamental flaw in them. And it goes deeper than just the Lil Boy's job-getting.
It seems we live in a time where all Western democratic systems get to reveal their inherent limitations. Personally, i am still as hostile as always to any conception and idea of a "state". Because I seriously doubt that it can be had without such criminal deformations. The devil alwaysd comes dressed in good intentions. The onyl way to stay free and self-responsible and to have no masters owning you and establishing a crime syndicate, is not to have a state. We have thousands of years of history proving that. Where there are creators and producers, there are the mades and the parasites, the wannabe-kings and the visionaries.
As Helmut Schmidt once said: "Politicians with visions should be send to a psychiatrist."
Speaker Nancy Pelosi says the House of Representatives will file impeachment charges against US President Donald Trump for alleged abuse of power.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-50671570
Then she is a liar. Last Spring she was saying this:
"Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country,”
If those articles pass it will be without a single Republican vote and quite possibly those of several Red State Democrats as well so it shows that Pelosi and her party don't really care if it divides the country.
Rockstar
12-06-19, 11:11 AM
I have to agree with Skybird on this.
Yes it's your country, your President and yours rules.
But this case should have been investigated by FBI and the case should have been in the high court.
Markus
Alexander Hamilton's opinion why the Senate ,not the high court, should be involved in the impeachment process.
The Federalist Papers : No. 65
https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed65.asp
Also, according to congresswoman Maxine Waters: “Impeachment is about whatever the Congress says it is. There is no law that dictates impeachment. What the Constitution says is ‘high crimes and misdemeanors,’ and we define that.” She echoes what Gerald Ford wrote back in 1970. What, then, is an impeachable offense? The only honest answer is that an impeachable offense is whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history; conviction results from whatever offense or offenses two-thirds of the other body considers to be sufficiently serious to require removal of the accused from office..." Congressman Gerald Ford, 116 Cong. Rec. H.3113-3114 (April 15, 1970)
Of course nobody likes to talk about that. But impeachment does seem to me to be a highly politicized event than a legal one. Who sets the standards as to what is impeachable and not? The FBI doesn't have written code or law to reveal and guide them in an impeachment investigation. It appears what Waters and Ford said are correct when they say only the congress can define that. Of course Stephen Colbert might have better facts.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBjGD5VGVg0
<O>
Rockstar
12-09-19, 10:02 PM
https://media.giphy.com/media/l0FsyB60ei0yOm3aXz/giphy.gif
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pj1k3CTpss
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCpbg_ycAlU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTo1kW67N50
Buddahaid
12-09-19, 10:48 PM
We'll know the articles tomorrow. While I'm on record for not liking Trump and believing he is a charlatan and a compulsive liar, the impeachment process is pretty thin. I can't wait to see what comes out of the Senate when Republicans are calling witnesses.
Buddahaid
12-10-19, 12:23 AM
Gack! After watching CNN I'm watching Fox and I have to say I find Fox disgusts me more. Yes, they both slant to support they're views, but I find Fox uses far more snotty innuendo and smear tactic. Maybe it's just the response to an unfavorable IG report, but I have to turn it off now. Tucker Carlson makes me want to puke.
Article I: Abuse of power
Article II: Obstruction of Congress
u crank
12-10-19, 09:28 AM
Article I: Abuse of power
Article II: Obstruction of Congress
So predictable.
Also predictable, House will vote for impeachment.
Also predictable, Senate will vote to acquit.
I'm losing interest fast.
Rockstar
12-10-19, 10:16 AM
"Pelosi and Democrats point to what they call a pattern of misconduct by Trump in seeking foreign interference in elections from Mueller’s inquiry of the Russia probe to Ukraine."I've been seeing a different pattern developing since 2016 and want to say that I ..... ummm nevermind I should stop. :D
https://www.conservativedailynews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/AdamSchiff-620x330.jpg
ikalugin
12-10-19, 10:34 AM
So predictable.
Also predictable, House will vote for impeachment.
Also predictable, Senate will vote to acquit.
I'm losing interest fast.
Who knows, maybe it would tank the US house of representatives vote due to moderate DEMs swinging. Now that would be amusing.
Aktungbby
12-10-19, 11:02 AM
Nah; so far all the Democrat parlimentary harrassment leads to boring smoke and 'quid pro quo' does not add up to the necessary 'high crime and misdemeanor'. Like previous impeachees, Andrew Johnson and Clinton, the motion will fail to carry...Moreover, cooler heads will prevail; does anyone really want VP Pence to take over!!??So predictable.
Also predictable, House will vote for impeachment.
Also predictable, Senate will vote to acquit.
I'm losing interest fast. PRECISELY:https://media.timesfreepress.com/img/photos/2019/12/03/191204impeachment7372536198.jpg
A question to my American friends
From what you have read and heard during this progress, incl. the hearing.
Are you convinced he is:
1. Guilty ?
or he is:
2. Not Guilty ?
I'm not interested in lots of links, but what you are personally convinced he is.
Markus
Bilge_Rat
12-10-19, 11:51 AM
what a joke:"abuse of power" and "obstruction of congress".
the Dems are no longer even pretending they have any proof of any sort of crime.
The only question now is how many Dem congressmen or senators will defect and vote against this farce.
u crank
12-10-19, 12:43 PM
This should be about accountability but it isn't. The main characters in this comedy, Pelosi, Schiff and Nadler are all in super safe blue districts. Hell you could duct tape a banana to a wall, call it a Democrat and it would get elected. The members who may pay the price for this are the ones who won in 2018 in red leaning districts.
I'm sure Nancy is praying for them.:O:
Rockstar
12-10-19, 12:49 PM
https://media.giphy.com/media/2uy09Y7XhprXtflooV/giphy.gif
Rep. Jim Jordan tweeted during the hearing: “We don’t get to hear from @RepAdamSchiff today. Under Nadler’s rules, 4 hours of today’s impeachment hearing will be staff asking staff questions. Dems want to use unelected staff to remove a duly-elected President, none of whom are directly accountable to the people.”
https://madworldnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/composite_15759079964146-678x305.jpg
Rockstar
12-10-19, 12:57 PM
A question to my American friends
From what you have read and heard during this progress, incl. the hearing.
Are you convinced he is:
1. Guilty ?
or he is:
2. Not Guilty ?
I'm not interested in lots of links, but what you are personally convinced he is.
Markus
I'm convinced it's a purely political show right down the party line with no regard to whats fact, fiction, guilt or innocence. IMO its the culmination of calls for impeachment which began in 2016. Its the pissing away of my tax money on investigation after investigation by career politicians for their own gain and that of their beloved party.
Anything to keep the masses from recognizing and participating in far more pressing issues like the direction our economy is taking as the FED pumps hundreds of billions of dollars into it trying to keep it afloat. That chime app only works if you have a job.
Rockstar
12-10-19, 01:17 PM
Meanwhile its business as usual for the rich kid crackhead and his dad
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lH_sdTC7Anw
Rockstar
12-10-19, 02:14 PM
like I said earlier. Talk isn't isnt about the merits of the case or dividing fact from fiction. Its about elections and how the big show can help or hinder political objectives.
https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/10/democrats-censure-impeachment-080311
The idea of censure, according to the lawmakers, is to offer a competing alternative to impeachment that could attract at least some Republican support on the floor. It would also help Democrats avoid a lengthy impeachment trial in the Senate, which some in this group fear could tilt public opinion toward the GOP in the final months before the 2020 election.
you damn straight it could
Bilge_Rat
12-10-19, 02:58 PM
"censure" is being floated by vulnerable House Democrats, but based on my reading, Republicans have no interest in going that way which is why it does not seem to be going anywhere.
I would have thought a censure motion was the easiest way to get out of this mess, but seems the GOP is calculating that acquittal in the senate is better for Trump politically.
"censure" is being floated by vulnerable House Democrats, but based on my reading, Republicans have no interest in going that way which is why it does not seem to be going anywhere.
I would have thought a censure motion was the easiest way to get out of this mess, but seems the GOP is calculating that acquittal in the senate is better for Trump politically.
I am pretty sure that this won't be the Democrats last shot at removing Trump from office before the upcoming election.
personal prediction, Trump wins 2020 and isn't removed by impeachment.
Democrat government in power for 2024.
there.
personal prediction, Trump wins 2020 and isn't removed by impeachment.
Democrat government in power for 2024.
there.
Both branches of Congress and the Executive? You know a likely early indicator of that happening would be if the Senate flips Dem in 2022.
Meanwhile its business as usual for the rich kid crackhead and his dad
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lH_sdTC7Anw
As compared to those 2 bastid sons Trump has,lol
As compared to those 2 bastid sons Trump has,lol
Way to stay classy eddie!
A question to my American friends
From what you have read and heard during this progress, incl. the hearing.
Are you convinced he is:
1. Guilty ?
or he is:
2. Not Guilty ?
I'm not interested in lots of links, but what you are personally convinced he is.
Markus
The only thing presented so far as evidence has been hearsay and opinion, until there is either direct evidence, or a witness with direct knowledge of the alleged incident, the verdict has to be not guilty
Buddahaid
12-11-19, 12:57 AM
I like what Starr has to say here despite loathing Tucker's smarmy snotty boy perpetually offended persona.
https://video.search.yahoo.com/video/play?p=ken+starr+fox+news+trump+impeachment+interv iew&vid=228a11804baeb2cdff7af828564611b8&turl=https%3A%2F%2Ftse4.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOV F.5MWWy%252fW2QRvRQxvHA71vMQ%26pid%3DApi%26h%3D270 %26w%3D480%26c%3D7%26rs%3D1&rurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.msn.com%2Fen-us%2Fvideo%2Fother%2Fstarr-no-bipartisan-support-for-trump-impeachment%2Fvi-BBY0Esd&tit=%3Cb%3EStarr%3C%2Fb%3E%3A+No+bipartisan+suppor t+for+%3Cb%3ETrump%3C%2Fb%3E+%3Cb%3Eimpeachment%3C %2Fb%3E&c=0&h=270&w=480&l=216&sigr=132gegdq3&sigt=127mhcuoo&sigi=12oh370dm&ct=p&age=1575944701&fr2=p%3As%2Cv%3Av&fr=crmas&tt=b
Cybermat47
12-11-19, 01:31 AM
American politics are very inspiring to me. They remind me that my country could be doing a lot worse.
But seriously, hope things improve for you guys soon.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahh8i3bg5Js
<O>
u crank
12-11-19, 09:34 AM
If there is a singular point to the release of Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz's report it is not what the left wing MSM has focused on. The report did find that there was no political bias in the launch of the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
Take that however you may but the big story is about Christopher Steele's dossier. The report makes clear the dossier never had even a shred of credibility. People beleive what they see is true because that is what they believe.
Like the much-ballyhooed report by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, the Horowitz report is a Rorschach test, in which partisans will find what they want to find.
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/political-commentary/horowitz-report-steele-dossier-collusion-news-media-924944/
Horowitz's report debunks long held claims by both the left and the right. But it paints a damning picture of an incompetent FBI and it's leadership. And central to that was their view of the Steele dossier.
Press figures have derided the idea that Steele was crucial to the FISA application, with some insisting it was only a “small part” of the application. Horowitz is clear:
"We determined that the Crossfire Hurricane team’s receipt of Steele’s election reporting on September 19, 2016 played a central and essential role in the FBI’s and Department’s decision to seek the FISA order."
The report describes how, prior to receiving Steele’s reports, the FBI General Counsel (OGC) and/or the National Security Division’s Office of Intelligence (OI) wouldn’t budge on seeking FISA authority. But after getting the reports, the OGC unit chief said, “receipt of the Steele reporting changed her mind on whether they could establish probable cause.”
Horowitz's report also gives a different view on another widely held belief of some Democrats and members of the media. And that was about the memo released by Rep. Devin Nunes which was widely derided after it came out in Jan. 2018.
There was gnashing of teeth when Nunes first released his memo in January, 2018. The press universally crapped on his letter, with a Washington Post piece calling it a “joke” and a “sham.” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi slammed Nunes for the release of a “bogus” document, while New York Senator Chuck Schumer said the memo was intended to “sow conspiracy theories and attack the integrity of federal law enforcement.” Many called for his removal as Committee chair.
The Horowitz report says all of that caterwauling was off-base. It also undercuts many of the assertions made in a ballyhooed response letter by Nunes counterpart Adam Schiff, who described the FBI’s “reasonable basis” for deeming Steele credible. The report is especially hostile to Schiff’s claim that the FBI “provided additional information obtained through multiple independent sources that corroborated Steele’s reporting.”
My hope is that those in the media and certain politicians should pay a price for being so wrong and believing anything in Steele's dossier without some serious investigation first. And Mr. Steele, well he should apologize and then go away quietly.
As a result, a “well-developed conspiracy” theory based on a report that Comey described as “salacious and unverified material that a responsible journalist wouldn’t report without corroborating,” became the driving news story in a superpower nation for two years. Even the New York Times, which published a lot of these stories, is in the wake of the Horowitz report noting Steele’s role in “unleashing a flood of speculation in the news media about the new president’s relationship with Russia.”
No matter what people think the political meaning of the Horowitz report might be, reporters who read it will know: Anybody who touched this nonsense in print should be embarrassed.
AVGWarhawk
12-11-19, 12:03 PM
A question to my American friends
From what you have read and heard during this progress, incl. the hearing.
Are you convinced he is:
1. Guilty ?
or he is:
2. Not Guilty ?
I'm not interested in lots of links, but what you are personally convinced he is.
Markus
Of high crimes and misdemeanor? Nope. The House has nothing. It is a word game. First is quid pro quo. That did not drive support. Bribery! People understand that and certainly Americans can get behind bribery charges. Well, they can't prove bribery. So, let just go for abuse of power. Sorry, I don't see it. So does most of America. Obstruction of Congress. Ok, sure....however is this a high crime and misdemeanor? Maybe a misdemeanor but certainly not enough to remove a sitting president.
This entire ordeal is politically driven and has been since the day Trump was sworn in.
AVGWarhawk
12-11-19, 12:05 PM
American politics are very inspiring to me. They remind me that my country could be doing a lot worse.
But seriously, hope things improve for you guys soon.
They will improve when this nonsense of impeachment is done.
Mr Quatro
12-11-19, 12:36 PM
Breaking News: Donald Trump pulls his hair out
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/why-time-picking-greta-thunberg-will-drive-donald-trump-crazy/ar-AAK1pEh
Why Time picking Greta Thunberg will drive Donald Trump crazy
On Wednesday morning, Time magazine announced that teen climate
activist Greta Thunberg was its person of the year.
Rockstar
12-11-19, 01:06 PM
Obstruction of Congress. Ok, sure....however is this a high crime and misdemeanor? Maybe a misdemeanor but certainly not enough to remove a sitting president.
I think Dwight Eisenhower was the first president to invoke executive privilege. Back then he used it close another screwed up chapter in American politics and bring to an end Senator Joe McCarthy's fishing expedition for Russians. Of McCarthy's fishing expedition Eisenhower wrote: “It is a sad commentary on our government when such a manifestly useless and spurious thing can divert our attention from all the constructive work in which we could and should be engaged.”
AVGWarhawk
12-11-19, 03:41 PM
I think Dwight Eisenhower was the first president to invoke executive privilege. Back then he used it close another screwed up chapter in American politics and bring to an end Senator Joe McCarthy's fishing expedition for Russians. Of McCarthy's fishing expedition Eisenhower wrote: “It is a sad commentary on our government when such a manifestly useless and spurious thing can divert our attention from all the constructive work in which we could and should be engaged.”
The entire process is setting a very bad precedence. The Constitution states the following: "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." Unpacking this statement the word "other" is equating high crimes and misdemeanors on the same level as treason and bribery. Again, the Democrats pushing the "bribery" when quid pro quo fizzled out. As such, the Democrats are now considering obstruction and abuse of power on the same level as treason and bribery. What will be next? Parking ticket is on the same level as bribery?
So... Should we keelhaul President Trump or just draw & quarter him?:hmmm:
AVGWarhawk
12-11-19, 04:07 PM
Breaking News: Donald Trump pulls his hair out
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/why-time-picking-greta-thunberg-will-drive-donald-trump-crazy/ar-AAK1pEh
Why Time picking Greta Thunberg will drive Donald Trump crazy
How dare he......
https://www.nzcpr.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Greta.jpg
AVGWarhawk
12-11-19, 04:10 PM
So... Should we keelhaul President Trump or just draw & quarter him?:hmmm:
Neither. He has not done anything. However, if he has they sure can't prove it.
Maybe we'll just reelect him. :D
Neither. He has not done anything. However, if he has they sure can't prove it.
I was being facetious. :O:
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.