Impeaching Donald Trump

[Alan Goldhammer]

All testimony has mainly been held in secret until now. Democrats who were in charge of the hearings have released only parts of it that make Trump look bad.  There is no impartial judge who makes decisions about these things.

The open hearing regarding impeachment starts next week. It's then that the public will be able to hear testimony that's not in secret.  However,  Democrat Congressman Schiff who still controls the process because Democrats have more members in the House of representatives,  has already refused to allow the whistleblower and Hunter Biden to testify.  There still will be no judge or hearing officer making impartial decisions.  The Democrats will decide what happens just like in a Star Chamber Soviet trial.  So the opposition party, the Democrats, already have their thumbs on the scale of justice.  They will not allow a fair hearing where both sides can present their witnesses and cross examine them.  It's a farce.

For what may be the 200th time, do you not understand that the inquiry is NOT a trial?  the trial takes place in the Senate.  You may not like that the Democrats can set the rules but that's the way things are!  It was the same with Benghazi when the Republicans set the rules and Secretary Clinton testified at length when those hearing went on.  Other than a few good people most Trump appointees are stonewalling this.  What do they have to hide?

this continued argument is getting to be quite pointless.  We'll see what the public process brings and ultimately what Speaker Pelosi decides. 

[Chris Kern]

What may be impeachable is a somewhat more complex issue, but your hypothetical would appear to involve a violation of 52 USC §30121: "It shall be unlawful for . . . a person to solicit . . . [a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value] from a foreign national."

It may because English isn’t my mother language, but the sentence above reads: it’s illegal for the “person” (the President Trump) to request something of value (a public announcement that a corruption investigation is on-going on Biden, a political rival of Trump) from a foreign national (the president of Ukraine).

Your understanding of the excerpt from the statute I quoted is correct.  The statute prohibits, inter alia, asking a foreign national for anything of value in connection with a federal election.

That law has frequently been cited in connection with the effort by President Trump, some of his political appointees, and his private lawyer to persuade the Ukrainian president to launch an investigation of the Bidens.  If the House of Representatives impeaches Trump I suspect it will form the basis of one of the counts in an article of impeachment accusing Trump of abuse of power.  But the inquiry is still in the investigative stage—public hearings begin this week—and the content of the articles, if indeed any are adopted, is difficult to predict with confidence at this juncture.

[Alan Klein]

A lot of us have answered your question multiple times.  You are transfixed by what Hunter Biden may or may not have done.  that is not the question on the table for the impeachment hearing at all.  There is ample documentation that VP Biden AND the EU (or countries within the EU) were trying to get rid of a corrupt Ukrainian prosecutor.  The EU has no stake at all in the impeachment inquiry but do provide justification about what the US did with respect to the prosecutor in question.  Hunter Biden is just a smoke screen in another attempt by the anti-impeachment inquiry folks to try to deflect what the President is documented to have done.  You likely will not agree with this; the lead editorial in the NY Times today has a listing of all the defenses of the President that have been put on the table to date (we have not see the ET alien or PTSD defense yet but I suspect those are coming):  https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/10/opinion/republicans-trump-impeachment.html   

We need Hunter Biden to testify and swear under legal penalty that he and his father have either conspired to get the 50000 month by offering a deal with the Ukrainian Corporation or they hadn't.  If they made a deal,  then Trump was correct in asking for an investigation and the impeachment won't happen.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

We need Hunter Biden to testify and swear under legal penalty that he and his father have either conspired to get the 50000 month by offering a deal with the Ukrainian Corporation or they hadn't...

Alan, this isn't how these things work. Nobody would make such a deal on either side that would leave a trace of it, nor admit it. Such things are done with unspoken rules that everybody involved understands. There is nothing technically illegal about accepting a cushy position on the board. It stinks in the court of public opinion, though.

Such a game is played much more subtly. Never directly. Never open quid pro quo. Things often appear the opposite of what they are. A smart player would not fire a prosecutor for investigating a company. They would make it look like they are firing him for NOT investigating the company. Appearances are deceiving. Never mind the company continues un-investigated after the "heroic" firing.

So, let me see.

- The State Department thought Burisma is corrupt.

- The EU thought Burisma is corrupt.

So what is Burisma to do? They put a son of the US Vice-President on board and pay him $600K. Smart move, however you look at it.

1. If Burisma knew they are corrupt and the Biden move worked, then that was a small price to pay.
2. If Burisma knew they are innocent, then the Biden move was a costly, but ultimately worthy, price to pay.

My bet is on #1.

[Alan Klein]

Alan, this isn't how these things work. Nobody would make such a deal on either side that would leave a trace of it, nor admit it. Such things are done with unspoken rules that everybody involved understands. There is nothing technically illegal about accepting a cushy position on the board. It stinks in the court of public opinion, though.

Such a game is played much more subtly. Never directly. Never open quid pro quo. Things often appear the opposite of what they are. A smart player would not fire a prosecutor for investigating a company. They would make it look like they are firing him for NOT investigating the company. Appearances are deceiving. Never mind the company continues un-investigated after the "heroic" firing.

So, let me see.

- The State Department thought Burisma is corrupt.

- The EU thought Burisma is corrupt.

So what is Burisma to do? They put a son of the US Vice-President on board and pay him $600K. Smart move, however you look at it.

1. If Burisma knew they are corrupt and the Biden move worked, then that was a small price to pay.
2. If Burisma knew they are innocent, then the Biden move was a costly, but ultimately worthy, price to pay.

My bet is on #1.

Of course I realize Hunter is not going to say he did anything wrong.  However, his appearance as a witness will raise in the people's mind that it still smells fishy.   Average people don;t make $50,000 a month in a no-show job and that Trump called it right.  There probably was corruption so Trump's (and Obama's) calling for the Ukraine to investigate corruption in general and the Bidens in particular was a smart request on his part.  If there's political fallout against Joe Biden, well, that just points to the DC swamp Trump always talks about.  People will give Trump a pass and Biden becomes toast in getting nominated. 

Like I said, the Democrats have shot themselves in the foot.  Like setting your camera at its widest aperture, only the nose is in focus - getting Trump.  Meanwhile the bokeh has obscured the rest of the picture that will help destroy Biden, the very candidate that had the best chance to beat Trump in 2020. 

[Alan Klein]

If you don't believe me that Biden's toast, ask Bloomberg.

[Alan Goldhammer]

We need Hunter Biden to testify and swear under legal penalty that he and his father have either conspired to get the 50000 month by offering a deal with the Ukrainian Corporation or they hadn't.  If they made a deal,  then Trump was correct in asking for an investigation and the impeachment won't happen.

Trump can ask for an investigation and he can also direct the Justice Department to investigate this.  What he CANNOT to is use a quid pro quo of holding up or preventing Congressionally appropriated funds.  This is the case, not whether Hunter, VP Biden, or even Rudy Guiliani did anything wrong (though Rudy looks to be skating on very thin ice these days and that's why he has retained outside counsel).

[LesPalenik]

If you don't believe me that Biden's toast, ask Bloomberg.

Right now, Bloomberg is too busy for silly questions. He is preoccupied with more important stuff.

“I think he [Bloomberg] would be better for the markets because he would represent more fiscal responsibility,” Brown Brothers Harriman Chief investment strategist Scott Clemons said on Yahoo Finance’s The First Trade. “One of the most interesting things — and discouraging things — about this administration over the past two or three years is that we are running trillion dollar deficits in a period of relatively good economic activity. I am a long-term investor, so I worry what that means in the longer term when the economy turns down again.”

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/president-bloomberg-may-be-better-for-stocks-than-trump-191535586.html

[John Camp]

I think Trump would beat Bloomberg. Sad to say, Bloomberg, a Jew, would push all those alt-right, white supremecist, anti-semitic, anti-big-city, anti-media buttons that make up Trump's base; and as a moderate liberal, he'd all piss off all the progressive Democrats who are pulling for Warren or Sanders, and they just might sit on their hands if Bloomberg snatched the nomination away from them. At this point, a Biden/Klobuchar ticket seems to be the Democrats best bet. Joe may be too old and a little dumb, but he'd just be a caretaker anyway, until 2024. The #1 task of the 2020 election, IMHO, is to get rid of Trump, who is essentially the head of an organized crime family. I don't care who does it, conservative Republican, centrist, liberal Democrat. We just have to keep our eye on the ball, and get rid of heel spurs.

[Alan Klein]

Trump can ask for an investigation and he can also direct the Justice Department to investigate this.  What he CANNOT to is use a quid pro quo of holding up or preventing Congressionally appropriated funds.  This is the case, not whether Hunter, VP Biden, or even Rudy Guiliani did anything wrong (though Rudy looks to be skating on very thin ice these days and that's why he has retained outside counsel).

Trump has held up foreign aid to Pakistan when they didn't meet what he thought were anti-terrorist requirements.  DIsputes between Congress and the president go through a process called impoundment if they can't agree on situations where a president hold back foreign aid.  If they can't come to an agreement it could go before the Supreme Court to decide.  But these are not impeachable offenses, just normal disagreements between these two branches of the government.    In any case, Trump only delayed payments to Ukraine.  They got the money after a few weeks. 

[Alan Klein]

I think Trump would beat Bloomberg. Sad to say, Bloomberg, a Jew, would push all those alt-right, white supremecist, anti-semitic, anti-big-city, anti-media buttons that make up Trump's base; and as a moderate liberal, he'd all piss off all the progressive Democrats who are pulling for Warren or Sanders, and they just might sit on their hands if Bloomberg snatched the nomination away from them. At this point, a Biden/Klobuchar ticket seems to be the Democrats best bet. Joe may be too old and a little dumb, but he'd just be a caretaker anyway, until 2024. The #1 task of the 2020 election, IMHO, is to get rid of Trump, who is essentially the head of an organized crime family. I don't care who does it, conservative Republican, centrist, liberal Democrat. We just have to keep our eye on the ball, and get rid of heel spurs. 

Klobuchar is already at the bottom of Davy Jones locker and Biden is sinking fast.  Regarding Bloomberg, while there are anti-semites and other despicable people who support Trump, their numbers are probably smaller than number of Communists who support Sanders.  It's not like in Europe where the multi party system allows for marginal parties of extremes.  In America, you either support the Democrat Party or you support the Republican Party.  So each party is stuck with their crazies. 

[JoeKitchen]

Your statement is completely misleading. You are implying that republicans were not in the loop, which has been demonstrated to be completely untrue.

Not only during the open heardings, but during the initial phase also. Republicans were totally involved in the hearings.

Cheers,
Bernard

Being involved is not the same as being given fair treatment. 

As Alan said, it is a farce.  Schiff is not allowing wintnesses to be called by the Republicans, including the whistle blower whom Schiff was very excited about having testify before it came to light that his staff met with him 18 days before filing the report.  Additionally, Schiff has been coaching witnesses and censoring Republican questions. 

It is not a fair process by any stretch. 

The other Alan is right though on his opinion of it not being the actual trial.  If it gets that far, which I doubt it will since it will coming crashing down on the Dems, Republicans will be given a fair trial.  However, I doubt it reaches that far.  In order to prove it is an impeachable offense, they need to prove intent to that it was for the 2020 election, not the continuing 2016 election corruption investigation, which will be impossible to do.  So if it goes to the Senate, Trump wins and comes out strong, then the Dems loose. 

With this, it is hit or miss what happens.  However, with all of the moderates coming into the race in the Dems, and Biden's candidacy shot, Warren looks like the winner, and then the looser.  In recent polling by the NYTs, she looses in all of the swing states to Trump, even with the impeachment noise. 

All the Dems had to do was not go crazy, and on a local level that is what they did and won, but on the national level they have totally lost their minds. 

[Alan Klein]

For what may be the 200th time, do you not understand that the inquiry is NOT a trial ?  the trial takes place in the Senate.  You may not like that the Democrats can set the rules but that's the way things are!  It was the same with Benghazi when the Republicans set the rules and Secretary Clinton testified at length when those hearing went on. Other than a few good people most Trump appointees are stonewalling this.  What do they have to hide?

this continued argument is getting to be quite pointless.  We'll see what the public process brings and ultimately what Speaker Pelosi decides. 

What do Schiff and the Democrats have to hide?  They;re the ones refusing to allow the whistleblower and the Bidens to testify.  Also, the impeachment may not be a trial.  But it is legal hearing where a decision will be made to impeach or not to impeach the duly elected President of the United States, no small matter.  That requires a fair process otherwise the people will reject  the results as being just political.

[Alan Klein]

Being involved is not the same as being given fair treatment. 

As Alan said, it is a farce.  Schiff is not allowing wintnesses to be called by the Republicans, including the whistle blower whom Schiff was very excited about having testify before it came to light that his staff met with him 18 days before filing the report.  Additionally, Schiff has been coaching witnesses and censoring Republican questions. 

It is not a fair process by any stretch. 

The other Alan is right though on his opinion of it not being the actual trial.  If it gets that far, which I doubt it will since it will coming crashing down on the Dems, Republicans will be given a fair trial.  However, I doubt it reaches that far.  In order to prove it is an impeachable offense, they need to prove intent to that it was for the 2020 election, not the continuing 2016 election corruption investigation, which will be impossible to do.  So if it goes to the Senate, Trump wins and comes out strong, then the Dems loose. 

With this, it is hit or miss what happens.  However, with all of the moderates coming into the race in the Dems, and Biden's candidacy shot, Warren looks like the winner, and then the looser.  In recent polling by the NYTs, she looses in all of the swing states to Trump, even with the impeachment noise. 

All the Dems had to do was not go crazy, and on a local level that is what they did and won, but on the national level they have totally lost their minds. 

Joe, this whole thing isn't about impeachment. It's about damaging  Trump enough so he will lose reelection and possibly give the Senate to the Democrats.  They saw what happened in 2018 when they picked up a lot of anti-Trump seats in the House.  They figure lighting will strike twice.

I do agree that they may have bitten off more than they can chew because they hate Trump so much.  They''re willing to shoot Biden to hurt Trump.  Cut their nose off to spite their face.  Frankly, I think Trump set the whole thing up.  He wanted to destroy Biden and now it looks like the impeachment will do exactly that.  People have it backwards.  Trump is playing chess while the Democrats are playing checkers.  He didn't beat the Republican insiders in 2016 and then the Democrat party run by the Clinton machine because he's a dope.  The Dems are acting like dodo birds.  The only thing in Bidens favor is the Dems are terrified if Warren wins the nomination because she'll then lose the general election.  Biden is well-liked and will continue to get the protection of the anti-Trump media. It's going to be an interesting few months.   

[Alan Klein]

Oh.  I forgot about Hillary. She's not done.  She's probably warming up another email server right now, licking her chops as she sees Hunter Biden, the Ukraine Grifter, drag his father down to oblivion.  She's probably lining up the superdelegates as we speak ready to pounce when the two mayors, the Indian and the Marxist scare the Democrats to hell and go pleading at Hillary's doorstep in upstate New York to save them.  She'll be cackling all the way back down. 

[JoeKitchen]

Oh.  I forgot about Hillary. She's not done.  She's probably warming up another email server right now, licking her chops as she sees Hunter Biden, the Ukraine Grifter, drag his father down to oblivion.  She's probably lining up the superdelegates as we speak ready to pounce when the two mayors, the Indian and the Marxist scare the Democrats to hell and go pleading at Hillary's doorstep in upstate New York to save them.  She'll be cackling all the way back down.

The Clintons are a sign of everything that went wrong with the Dems and probably the main reason why both someone like Trump and Bernie/Warren could have a chance.  Bill Clinton changed the course of the Dems in supporting workers to supporting elites primarily for the campaign contributions.  Although I would most certainly have not supported the Dems if Bill never went into politics and the Dems continued to supporting working class people, I would have been more comfortable with them.  I think balance is key and we no longer have balance. 

We have a group of people (Republicans) being dragged kicking and screaming to work with working class people by Trump, whom they would not normally associate with, and a group of people, who lived through the red scare and seen first hand the destruction socialism brought upon the countries who employed it, using socialism to attract voters.  It's a pretty bad paradigm the Clintons have brought onto the country. 

I still favor Trump over the Dems though.  Trump is not a great politicians, but a wrecking ball.  Warren too may be a wrecking ball, but we all know what socialism brings, and I would rather retain my wealth, not see it squandered away. 

My wife are and I are not worth 7 figures yet, but more then halfway between 6 and 7.  I would not be surprised to see the so called wealth tax be lowered into our realm, since what she proposes just cant be paid for even with the current taxes she advertises, and I cant imagine how we would come up with a 2% additional tax every year of our total wealth. 

[Alan Goldhammer]

I've wasted too many bytes in offering replies to this thread.  Here is my parting prediction.  Nancy Pelosi is too clever for the President and she will carefully read the tea leaves before deciding to move ahead with an impeachment vote.  The rank and file Republican legislators really don't like the President other than a hard core 12-24 in the House and I'm not sure there are any in the Senate.  They are going to figure out a way to kick Trump out after this term one way or another.  The Republican nominee for President and odds on favorite to win given the economy will be.................................wait for it..............................................................Nikki Haley!!!!!!  First woman President.  You can book mark this and see if I'm correct.

Have fun continuing this "dialogue."  Ich habe genug.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

2020 winning ticket: Trump-Haley.

[Alan Klein]

I've wasted too many bytes in offering replies to this thread.  Here is my parting prediction.  Nancy Pelosi is too clever for the President and she will carefully read the tea leaves before deciding to move ahead with an impeachment vote.  The rank and file Republican legislators really don't like the President other than a hard core 12-24 in the House and I'm not sure there are any in the Senate.  They are going to figure out a way to kick Trump out after this term one way or another.  The Republican nominee for President and odds on favorite to win given the economy will be.................................wait for it..............................................................Nikki Haley!!!!!!  First woman President.  You can book mark this and see if I'm correct.

Have fun continuing this "dialogue."  Ich habe genug.

Alan G., you mean we won't hear from you until Nov 2020?  No. There's too much that's going to happen before then to keep you in here.

[John Camp]

I've wasted too many bytes in offering replies to this thread.  Here is my parting prediction.  Nancy Pelosi is too clever for the President and she will carefully read the tea leaves before deciding to move ahead with an impeachment vote.  The rank and file Republican legislators really don't like the President other than a hard core 12-24 in the House and I'm not sure there are any in the Senate.  They are going to figure out a way to kick Trump out after this term one way or another.  The Republican nominee for President and odds on favorite to win given the economy will be.................................wait for it..............................................................Nikki Haley!!!!!!  First woman President.  You can book mark this and see if I'm correct.

Have fun continuing this "dialogue."  Ich habe genug.

Yeah, you're right. I'm out, too.