The [Current Year] General Political/Salma Hayek discussion thread, part 4!!!

[jamil]

What investigation was the Ukraine needing assistance with? And one other thing, is it a crime for the president to solicit aid for his campaign from a foreign government?

If Ted Kennedy weren’t dead you could ask him.

 

[KG1]

H

What investigation was the Ukraine needing assistance with? And one other thing, is it a crime for the president to solicit aid for his campaign from a foreign government?

Show me where the President implicitly solicited the aid of a foreign government for his campaign.

As I stated in a previous post the President is the chief executive and top law enforcement official which entitles him to solicit the aid in investigating allegations of potential wrongdoing no matter who the subject of the inquiry pertains to so Trumps request for assistance was not out of line in that capacity.

That’s not just my opinion but it’s a direct rebuttal proffered by Joe diGenova who happens to be quite experienced in matters pertaining to the law. It was in relation to Judge Napolitano’s opinion of criminal wrongdoing that you like to hang your hat on which admittedly pushed you over the edge into the abyss of impeachment.

 

[Kutnupe14]

H
Show me where the President implicitly solicited the aid of a foreign government for his campaign.

As I stated in a previous post the President is the chief executive and top law enforcement official which entitles him to solicit the aid in investigating allegations of potential wrongdoing no matter who the subject of the inquiry pertains to so Trumps request for assistance was not out of line in that capacity.

That’s not just my opinion but it’s a direct rebuttal proffered by Joe diGenova who happens to be quite experienced in matters pertaining to the law. It was in relation to Judge Napolitano’s opinion of criminal wrongdoing that you like to hang your hat on which admittedly pushed you over the edge into the abyss of impeachment.

C'mob KG. Joe diGenova is a crackpot. He's made predictions from "secret sources" for years, that are damn near always wrong. Remember when his sources told him that Clinton's was 100% going to be indicted and headed to prison. I think Napolitano is in an entirely different league.
And as far as showing you the president soliciting aid, never-ending that the transcripts weren't verbatim, there's apparently quite a few more instances with in the complaint. We may never see it, but so far a number of "non-Democrats" who have seen it, have called it "very troubling."

 

[bwframe]

The good news (besides the dems impeachment toilet swirl) is that with this "whistle blower" gone, there will be one less deep state traitor at the whitehouse.

 

[nonobaddog]

What investigation was the Ukraine needing assistance with? And one other thing, is it a crime for the president to solicit aid for his campaign from a foreign government?

President Zelensky was trying to investigate well-rooted corruption in his country. You know it is hard to do that when his own government has corrupt people in it. Kind of like the FBI here after obummer got done with it. Seeking outside help is probably the best way to get anything done right over there.

Zelensky first raised the issue of rooting out corruption in Ukraine and said he wanted to “drain the swamp” in his country given the long history of political and corporate corruption there. He mentioned to Trump that he had recently called Ukraine’s ambassador to the U.S. and planned to replace the official with “a very competent and very experienced ambassador.” Zelensky then told Trump that he was “hoping very much that Mr. Giuliani will be able to travel to Ukraine and we will meet once he comes to Ukraine.”

 

[KG1]

C'mob KG. Joe diGenova is a crackpot. He's made predictions from "secret sources" for years, that are damn near always wrong. Remember when his sources told him that Clinton's was 100% going to be indicted and headed to prison. I think Napolitano is in an entirely different league.
And as far as showing you the president soliciting aid, never-ending that the transcripts weren't verbatim, there's apparently quite a few more instances with in the complaint. We may never see it, but so far a number of "non-Democrats" who have seen it, have called it "very troubling."

Setting aside your opinion of diGenovoa it does'nt make him wrong in this instance. The President does have that authority and who's to say that he wasn't exercising it in his official capacity in this case. Which means that you or Judge Napolitano simply can't solely make the case otherwise.

 

[jamil]

Yup. When the behavior of a man who has violated Commandments with impunity is overlooked or excused as unimportant, then it's a legitimate charge.

Well. Unimportant compared to what? Pornstar ****er? Or socialist bat**** crazy democrat who vows to ban all semiautomatics? Granted *some* Trump supporters overlook it as being unimportant. Some simply put up with it because it’s that or something they see as much worse. So why get so judgmental? It’s an evaluation of priorities and tradeoffs. Did you vote for Clinton? If so, would that make you supportive of every evil she ever did? Or, was it that you judged her, evil as she is, less so than the alternative.

 

[T.Lex]

If that campaign finance law leads to impeachment, then the presidency is effectively undone.

 

[jamil]

If that campaign finance law leads to impeachment, then the presidency is effectively undone.

Yeah, but that's an awfully big stretch.

 

[T.Lex]

Yeah, but that's an awfully big stretch.

Its a political numbers game, right?

Articles of Impeachment in the house - well, the Dems already have enough votes for that. (I think.)

Trial in the Senate - how many Republican senators has Trump belittled?

The SCOTUS fight, in which Dems have already made the case that Trump's court is improperly politically stacked, will be battle.

 

[jamil]

Its a political numbers game, right?

Articles of Impeachment in the house - well, the Dems already have enough votes for that. (I think.)

Trial in the Senate - how many Republican senators has Trump belittled?

The SCOTUS fight, in which Dems have already made the case that Trump's court is improperly politically stacked, will be battle.

I think a Republican Senator has slim chances of staying in office if he votes to impeach Trump.

 

[BugI02]

I think a Republican Senator has slim chances of staying in office if he votes to impeach Trump.

So THAT’S what’s going to keep Mitt in line - self preservation. A Comey-like ‘Higher loyalty’ (to himself)

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Sending Rudy around to make deals?

 

[Phase2]

That quote is wildly out of context. What is about more than the July 25th call? The 'whistle blower" complaint? If the central figure is Rudy Giuliani, then why have the Democrats instantly (within 24 hours) proceeded to work on impeaching Trump?

There is more left out of that quote than explained by it.

 

[nonobaddog]

It’s an evaluation of priorities and tradeoffs. Did you vote for Clinton? If so, would that make you supportive of every evil she ever did? Or, was it that you judged her, evil as she is, less so than the alternative.

This is very well said!
It is also a comment on the political parties and the quality of candidates they present. It is a shame when the we are forced to vote for the least evil instead of the most good.

 

[T.Lex]

I think a Republican Senator has slim chances of staying in office if he votes to impeach Trump.

Constituents have a notoriously short memory, combined with a POTUS who's poll numbers (as unreliable as they may be) are unfavorable.

A senator in the 2d year of a term may have a different calculus than one in the 5th year.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Seems to be a concerted effort to push some serious misinformation today.

Adam Schiff "re-enacted" the Trump call outlandishly falsely during a congressional hearing... later said it was "parody"

Axios pushed a story about a Ukrainian advisor saying something.... later "corrected" that it wasn't an actual adviser. Regardless of the half-correction, the story was still repeated by ABC, et al

I think they're going to put all their eggs in this basket and just hope and pray the propaganda machine pushes public sentiment in their favor.

 

[ghuns]

Seems to be a concerted effort to push some serious misinformation today.

Adam Schiff "re-enacted" the Trump call outlandishly falsely... later said it was "parody"...

That smug little pencil necked twit really gets on my nerves.

I'd pay good $$$ to have seen acting DIN, Joe Maguire, smack that condescending look off his face.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Also, here's an interesting take:

As a former CIA analyst and former NSC official who edited transcripts of POTUS phone calls with foreign leaders, here are my thoughts on the whistleblower complaint which was just released. This is not an intelligence matter. It is a policy matter and a complaint about differences over policy. Presidential phone calls are not an intelligence concern. The fact that IC officers transcribe these calls does not give the IC IG jusrisdiction over these calls.

It appears that rules restricting access and knowledge of these sensitive calls was breached. This official was not on this call, not on the approved dissem list and should not have been briefed on the call. The way this complaint was written suggested the author had a lot of help. I know from my work on the House Intel Commitee staff that many whistleblowers go directly to the intel oversight committees. Did this whistleblower first meet with House Intel committee members?

It is therefore important that Congress find out where this complaint came from. What did House and Senate intel committee dem members and staff know about it and when? Did they help orchestrate this complaint?

My view is that this whistleblower complaint is too convenient and too perfect to come from a typical whistleblower. Were other IC officers involved? Where outside groups opposed to the president involved?

This complaint will further damage IC relations with the White House for many years to come because IC officers appear to be politicizing presidential phone calls with foreign officials and their access to the president and his activities in the White House. Worst of all, this IC officer -- and probably others -- have blatantly crossed the line into policy. This violates a core responsibility of IC officers is to inform, but not make policy. This is such a grevious violation of trust between the IC and the White House that it would not surprise me if IC officers are barred from all access to POTUS phone calls with foreign officials.

https://twitter.com/FredFleitz/status/1177206661603348480

 

[ArcadiaGP]

https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1177238644161204224

Pretty much from the playbook, they all know their parts.

Key unanswered (and yet to be asked) question: Who are the other world leaders whose call records with Trump were covered up? Is Putin among them?