Pages: 1 ... 67 68 [69] 70 71 ... 78   Go Down

Author Topic: Impeaching Donald Trump  (Read 14836 times)

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5418
    • Flicker photos
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #1360 on: November 10, 2019, 10:30:21 pm »

Without the whistleblower and Hunter Biden's testimony during the impeachment process, the impeachment if approved by the Democrats will be dead on arrival in the Senate.   Apparently, Republican Senator Rand Paul read one of my posts and seems to agree with me. :)

"Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky, who has emerged as an outspoken supporter of Trump and critic of the whistleblower, said making military aid contingent on corruption investigations should not be controversial.

"Presidents have withheld aid before for corruption," Paul said on NBC's Meet the Press . "So the thing is I think it's a mistake to say, 'Oh, he withheld aid, until he got what he wanted.' Well, if it's corruption, and he believes there to be corruption, he has every right to withhold aid.""


Apparently, Sen. Lindsey Graham has been reading my posts as well.

"I consider any impeachment in the House that doesn't allow us to know who the whistleblower is to be invalid because without the whistleblower complaint, we wouldn't be talking about any of this and I also see the need for Hunter Biden to be called to adequately defend the President and if you don't do those two things it's a complete joke," Graham, a South Carolina Republican, said.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/10/politics/lindsey-graham-whistleblower-testimony-impeachment-inquiry/index.html

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15233
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #1361 on: November 10, 2019, 11:04:21 pm »

This conversation is absolutely insane.. just incredibly tiresome.

I agree.

It is absolutely insane and tiresome that you present hearsay, conjectures, what you or somebody else thinks and believes, as unquestionable facts and proof of guilt.

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12845
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #1362 on: November 10, 2019, 11:23:49 pm »

My question that I never asked before was addressed to Chris, who made the statement, not you.  Your smart-aleck response is tiresome.

How is exactly does the point you are discussing from Chris differ from the core argument discussed at length in the 60 previous pages of this thread Alan?

Cheers,
Bernard

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12845
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #1363 on: November 10, 2019, 11:28:58 pm »

It is absolutely insane and tiresome that you present hearsay, conjectures, what you or somebody else thinks and believes, as unquestionable facts and proof of guilt.

Well, the only group of people who keep denying the facts at hand are hard core Republicans who seem to think it’s preferable to keep supporting Trump at any cost over a possible loss to Democrats... everybody else, inside and outside the US, has done the very simple thing which is to acknowledge the facts.

Those facts are indisputable, they have been confirmed by all those who testified under oath, Republicans or not. Some of them by Trump himself.

But... I thought the point being debated by Alan with Chris was completely different? ;)

Cheers,
Bernard

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12845
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #1364 on: November 10, 2019, 11:37:28 pm »

Btw, the rules surroundings whistle blowing should be easily understandable by anyone with common sense.

If the identity of the current whistle blower were revealed this would most probably prevent future whistle blowers from doing what the law forces them to do, which is to inform higher authorities of a possible problem.

Besides, its identity is completely irrelevant because the White House themselves confirmed his/her claims when they published the transcripts.

Not to mention the fact that countless witnesses under oath have confirmed his/her claims also.

This is all driven by pathetic political plays attempting to demonstrate that this case is an unfair political move by Democrats. The hope of those requesting that his/her identity be reveaied are just hoping that he/she is a Democrat. Which, even if true, would only just confirm that Democrats did follow a law voted in by Republicans...

Cheers,
Bernard

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5418
    • Flicker photos
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #1365 on: November 11, 2019, 12:29:22 am »

How is exactly does the point you are discussing from Chris differ from the core argument discussed at length in the 60 previous pages of this thread Alan?

Cheers,
Bernard

I asked Chris to explain how Trump violated the law he quoted.  If you know Chris's explanation, you;re a better mind reader than I am. The law seems to constrain foreign nationals not the president of the US.

[quote from: Chris Kern on November 10, 2019, 08:49:11 pm
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."

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5418
    • Flicker photos
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #1366 on: November 11, 2019, 12:40:01 am »

Well, the only group of people who keep denying the facts at hand are hard core Republicans who seem to think it’s preferable to keep supporting Trump at any cost over a possible loss to Democrats... everybody else, inside and outside the US, has done the very simple thing which is to acknowledge the facts.

Those facts are indisputable, they have been confirmed by all those who testified under oath, Republicans or not. Some of them by Trump himself.

But... I thought the point being debated by Alan with Chris was completely different? ;)

Cheers,
Bernard

Facts are not determined in newspapers or by talking heads on cable news programs.  Nor are they determined by a political leader, Congressman Schiff, who has the authority to select who the witnesses are, what types of cross-examination the defence may do, and who can be called to testify or not allowed to testify.  That's how the Soviet Union's star chamber trials preceded when they wanted to convict the defendant.

In America, facts are arrived at by sworn testimony by witnesses selected by both sides,  Other evidence is presented in a fair hearing where both sides can ask questions and cross-examine witnesses and question the evidence.  It's the way to arrive at truth.  Only a dictator says the truth is indisputable.  Your argument shows just how much your lack of understanding the American jurisprudence system and our constitution are.  It's a lynch mentality of "getting the guy"  regardless of what the facts are.  It's just an extension of the two year insane hysteria of how Trump colluded with the Russians, subsequently disproved.  This is just more of the same, only worse. 

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5418
    • Flicker photos
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #1367 on: November 11, 2019, 12:54:10 am »

Btw, the rules surroundings whistle blowing should be easily understandable by anyone with common sense.

If the identity of the current whistle blower were revealed this would most probably prevent future whistle blowers from doing what the law forces them to do, which is to inform higher authorities of a possible problem.

Besides, its identity is completely irrelevant because the White House themselves confirmed his/her claims when they published the transcripts.

Not to mention the fact that countless witnesses under oath have confirmed his/her claims also.

This is all driven by pathetic political plays attempting to demonstrate that this case is an unfair political move by Democrats. The hope of those requesting that his/her identity be reveaied are just hoping that he/she is a Democrat. Which, even if true, would only just confirm that Democrats did follow a law voted in by Republicans...

Cheers,
Bernard


Impeachment of a president has constitutional priority over any congressional laws.  Getting rid of a president is of such a substantial undertaking that a president has a right to defend himself.  He represents the people of the USA and has constitutionally been elected to be president.  That's no small thing.   A president has never been removed from office in over 200 years of our Republic.  We can;t take that removal lightly.  If the witness is required to reveal any facts that may affect the impeachment, his testimony will take priority over any whistleblowing laws.  He may have been protected in less important situations.  But should not be in this situation.

Secondly, you pulled a switch on us.  In the first case you say, or others have said, that impeachment is strictly a political act.   So now you say that there are facts that seem to show that the whistleblower's testimony has already been revealed in facts presented elsewhere, particularly the transcript.  But if the impeachment is political in nature as many argue, then the president's defenders have a right to see if the whistle blower had political reasons to have "whistle blown" in the first place.  After all, you're the one saying it's political.  So making the whistleblower testify is not to reveal facts, but to reveal his political beliefs and whether he was influenced to file complaints based on his political beliefs.  And we don;t know what his political beliefs are at this point.  Only his testimony in Congress will reveal that so he must testify for a fair hearing. 

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12845
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #1368 on: November 11, 2019, 12:59:18 am »

I asked Chris to explain how Trump violated the law he quoted.  If you know Chris's explanation, you;re a better mind reader than I am. The law seems to constrain foreign nationals not the president of the US.

[quote from: Chris Kern on November 10, 2019, 08:49:11 pm
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).

How is that not a confirmation that what Trump did is illegal?

Cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: November 11, 2019, 01:04:43 am by BernardLanguillier »
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12845
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #1369 on: November 11, 2019, 01:02:16 am »

Facts are not determined in newspapers or by talking heads on cable news programs.  Nor are they determined by a political leader, Congressman Schiff, who has the authority to select who the witnesses are, what types of cross-examination the defence may do, and who can be called to testify or not allowed to testify.  That's how the Soviet Union's star chamber trials preceded when they wanted to convict the defendant.

In America, facts are arrived at by sworn testimony by witnesses selected by both sides,  Other evidence is presented in a fair hearing where both sides can ask questions and cross-examine witnesses and question the evidence.  It's the way to arrive at truth.  Only a dictator says the truth is indisputable.  Your argument shows just how much your lack of understanding the American jurisprudence system and our constitution are.  It's a lynch mentality of "getting the guy"  regardless of what the facts are.  It's just an extension of the two year insane hysteria of how Trump colluded with the Russians, subsequently disproved.  This is just more of the same, only worse.

The facts I am talking about are indeed those provided by witnesses under oath in front of a by-partisan hearing.

Exactly what you write is required.

Cheers,
Bernard

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12845
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #1370 on: November 11, 2019, 01:03:59 am »

Impeachment of a president has constitutional priority over any congressional laws.  Getting rid of a president is of such a substantial undertaking that a president has a right to defend himself.  He represents the people of the USA and has constitutionally been elected to be president.  That's no small thing.   A president has never been removed from office in over 200 years of our Republic.  We can;t take that removal lightly.  If the witness is required to reveal any facts that may affect the impeachment, his testimony will take priority over any whistleblowing laws.  He may have been protected in less important situations.  But should not be in this situation.

Secondly, you pulled a switch on us.  In the first case you say, or others have said, that impeachment is strictly a political act.   So now you say that there are facts that seem to show that the whistleblower's testimony has already been revealed in facts presented elsewhere, particularly the transcript.  But if the impeachment is political in nature as many argue, then the president's defenders have a right to see if the whistle blower had political reasons to have "whistle blown" in the first place.  After all, you're the one saying it's political.  So making the whistleblower testify is not to reveal facts, but to reveal his political beliefs and whether he was influenced to file complaints based on his political beliefs.  And we don;t know what his political beliefs are at this point.  Only his testimony in Congress will reveal that so he must testify for a fair hearing.

You are the one claiming the impeachment is political, I am not.

I am saying the exact opposite.

The impeachment is based on a clear violation of the constitution, it’s NOT a political play.

Cheers,
Bernard

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5418
    • Flicker photos
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #1371 on: November 11, 2019, 01:17:49 am »

It may because English isn’t my mother language, but in 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).

How is that not a confirmation that what Trump did is illegal?

Cheers,
Bernard

Trump wanted the president of the Ukraine to make his investigation public to force him to actually do the investigation.  I'm sure Trump has heard plenty of verbal agreements, yes men,  in his career that were broken before the sun set.    The Ukrainians are so crooked, they;ll make promises one minute and break them the next.  So he wanted Ukraine to make it public to force them to comply and actually do the investigation of their corruption.  Obama should have thought of having them make it public when he asked them to investigate. Trump is smarter than Obama on things like this.  He's dealt with New York contractors like I have.  They all lie.  Ukraine's no different.     

Reminds me of Sam Goldwin of Metro Goldwyn Mayer MGM  Hollywood fame.  He once stated that a verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's printed on.  Not sure if you get this English idiom.  It actually sounds like something NY Yankee catcher Yogi Berra would say too. 

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5418
    • Flicker photos
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #1372 on: November 11, 2019, 01:25:53 am »

The facts I am talking about are indeed those provided by witnesses under oath in front of a by-partisan hearing.

Exactly what you write is required.

Cheers,
Bernard

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.
« Last Edit: November 11, 2019, 01:31:21 am by Alan Klein »
Logged

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5418
    • Flicker photos
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #1373 on: November 11, 2019, 01:28:59 am »

You are the one claiming the impeachment is political, I am not.

I am saying the exact opposite.

The impeachment is based on a clear violation of the constitution, it’s NOT a political play.

Cheers,
Bernard
It's nothing but political.  The Democrats have spent three years trying to impeach Trump.  Actually they no longer want to impeach him just damage him enough so he loses re-election in 2020.  Hopefully, the Democrats can also take the Senate.  That's what it's all about.  Power.  The rest is just conversation.

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12845
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #1374 on: November 11, 2019, 02:47:58 am »

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.

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
« Last Edit: November 11, 2019, 03:23:58 am by BernardLanguillier »
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12845
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #1375 on: November 11, 2019, 02:50:17 am »

It's nothing but political.  The Democrats have spent three years trying to impeach Trump.  Actually they no longer want to impeach him just damage him enough so he loses re-election in 2020.  Hopefully, the Democrats can also take the Senate.  That's what it's all about.  Power.  The rest is just conversation.

This is your view.

The reality is that a President in office has violated the constitution he had sworn to protect and that it should be the duty of all senators to ensure this is punished per the law.

The Democrats are doing their job, the Republicans aren't.

Cheers,
Bernard

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12845
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #1376 on: November 11, 2019, 02:53:22 am »

Trump wanted the president of the Ukraine to make his investigation public to force him to actually do the investigation.  I'm sure Trump has heard plenty of verbal agreements, yes men,  in his career that were broken before the sun set.    The Ukrainians are so crooked, they;ll make promises one minute and break them the next.  So he wanted Ukraine to make it public to force them to comply and actually do the investigation of their corruption.  Obama should have thought of having them make it public when he asked them to investigate. Trump is smarter than Obama on things like this.  He's dealt with New York contractors like I have.  They all lie.  Ukraine's no different.     

Care to share any facts on this?

First time I hear this view of what happened. All the public information I have seen indicated that Ukraine had absolutely no intention to investigate Biden because there was no reason to do so.

I am sorry Alan, your comments looks like another attempt to rewrite history in a way that supports the fantasy story you are believing in.

Cheers,
Bernard

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15233
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #1377 on: November 11, 2019, 09:10:08 am »

The facts I am talking about are indeed those provided by witnesses under oath in front of a by-partisan hearing...

No, these are not facts. These are hearsays and opinions. Every “fact” was preceded with “I think,” or “I heard,” or “I believe.”

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15233
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #1378 on: November 11, 2019, 09:18:13 am »

This is your view.

The reality is that a President in office has violated the constitution...

And that is your view.

Otherwise, it is open to (political) interpretation.

Alan Goldhammer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3828
    • A Goldhammer Photography
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #1379 on: November 11, 2019, 09:21:55 am »

My question that I never asked before was addressed to Chris, who made the statement, not you.  Your smart-aleck response is tiresome.
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   
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 67 68 [69] 70 71 ... 78   Go Up