Disloyal Pence Aide Testifes Against Trump

[TreeFrogTrader]

The other aspect of this that is important is what started it. The dems are pretending Trump leaned on the Ukraine to "dig up dirt" on Biden. But in fact, Biden himself put the incident into the public domain. Having apparently exhausted the Corn Pop legend, Biden foolishly bragged about using US aid to intimidate the Ukraine into firing a troublesome prosecutor. The fact that he didn't see this as troublesome is worrying enough. You have to be a blind partisan to not see that Biden's actions constituted a massive conflict of interest at best, and outright corruption at worst.

Yup, there is a certain pattern to this.

The dems are/were real big on getting a russian investigation going to bring Trump down but they will and have fought tooth and nail to keep anyone from looking at the actual origins of it.

Ditto for Ukraine. They like to carve out one phone conversation with Trump but will fight you tooth and nail if you want to look at the history of Biden and Hunter in the Ukraine before this call, and they dont want to look at Ukraine actions and connections to the dems in the 2016 campaign that will uncover the larger rat's nest.

 

[El OchoCinco]

No, this is totally wrong. Trump's actions become questionable only to the extent he lacked a good faith basis to believe there was reasonable cause to have Biden's outrageous conduct investigated, free of Biden's threat of an aid cutoff. Otherwise, your rule is a president can never have a political rival investigated, no matter how outrageous his conduct, which is obviously not the law.

Central to that determination would be a searching examination of the Bidens' conduct, so that we would know if Trump acted on reasonable suspicion or merely political malice. The dems are attempting to skip this crucial step, which renders their entire proceeding a farce.

You misunderstand completely. It is only ridiculous because you changed the fact pattern to fit your assumption. The issue is not about investigating someone which the FBI or Justice Department can do independently.

What you cannot do is bribe a foreign country to investigate your political rival. It is really simple and not hard to see the distinction.

All of you really don't understand the law.

Let's assume I am bidding on a contract and I think my competitor fudged his numbers. I bribe the police to raid his office and take his files so they can look for fraud. Story ends right there, I committed a crime. Does not matter if they find the guy committed fraud on his bid. That is a separate crime and you cannot introduce that to mitigate the crime you committed.

Trump's actions do not have a good faith defense. Even if he had reasonable suspicion, it does not allow him to break the law.

A police officer has reasonable suspicion you have drugs in your house. He walks in to your house uninvited and sees pot all over and takes it and arrests you. Guess what.. judge throws the drugs out of evidence. Does not matter if cop was right, does not justify him breaking the law to get it (entry without warrant).

So whether this is impeachment or a trial, Trump cannot break the law to investigate Biden. Let's not be stupid here.

 

[TreeFrogTrader]

You misunderstand completely. It is only ridiculous because you changed the fact pattern to fit your assumption. The issue is not about investigating someone which the FBI or Justice Department can do independently.

What you cannot do is bribe a foreign country to investigate your political rival. It is really simple and not hard to see the distinction.

All of you really don't understand the law.

Let's assume I am bidding on a contract and I think my competitor fudged his numbers. I bribe the police to raid his office and take his files so they can look for fraud. Story ends right there, I committed a crime. Does not matter if they find the guy committed fraud on his bid. That is a separate crime and you cannot introduce that to mitigate the crime you committed.

Trump's actions do not have a good faith defense. Even if he had reasonable suspicion, it does not allow him to break the law.

A police officer has reasonable suspicion you have drugs in your house. He walks in to your house uninvited and sees pot all over and takes it and arrests you. Guess what.. judge throws the drugs out of evidence. Does not matter if cop was right, does not justify him breaking the law to get it (entry without warrant).

So whether this is impeachment or a trial, Trump cannot break the law to investigate Biden. Let's not be stupid here.

The Senate will examine Biden, Hunter, and the Whistleblower and many of the current witnesses further to establish whether Trump acting solely for personal gain or/and to further American interests in rooting out corrupt practices involving American funds and American personnel and American interests. You have gone ahead and decided for all of us that no reasons other than Trump's personal gain are allowable or can be supported such that there is no basis for requiring or allowing witnesses on that. such as Joe, Hunter, and the Spy.

All fine and dandy, except the Senate gets to decide, not you. And the courts are not really available for or likely to second guess what Senators sitting as jurors need to see. In fact, even outside of an impeachment process, all of these witness can be called by the Senate in just a regular committee hearing if it is in furtherance of their legislative or oversight responsibility- good luck arguing that it is not.

 

[kingjelly]

The other aspect of this that is important is what started it. The dems are pretending Trump leaned on the Ukraine to "dig up dirt" on Biden. But in fact, Biden himself put the incident into the public domain. Having apparently exhausted the Corn Pop legend, Biden foolishly bragged about using US aid to intimidate the Ukraine into firing a troublesome prosecutor. The fact that he didn't see this as troublesome is worrying enough. You have to be a blind partisan to not see that Biden's actions constituted a massive conflict of interest at best, and outright corruption at worst.

Yes, it's a conflict of interest and doesn't look good at all. It's pretty fucking rich however to bring up COI when the stupid fucker tried to have the G7 at Doral and has towers in Turkey and Trump let Erdogan put his dick right his ass and cancelled all sanctions. Then he was such a pussy that he had to have senators tell Erdogan that they weren't happy. The dude is every strong mans bitch, and he's leading the country, that's a real problem.

 

[maximumpossiblesuffering]

You seem on tilt. The mere accusation of a crime is not evidence of a crime, especially if the accuser is a Leftist. Unless you believe everything the media, Smollett, Congress, and Ford says.

The Democrats are risking their credibility among swing voters. Indeed, Trump’s approval polls have been increasing the last few weeks.

Perhaps the latest Democratic accusation that Trump lied in the Mueller Investigation is an attempt to add pressure upon Trump at a time when he may be medically vulnerable due to his rumored unscheduled visit this weekend for a check on his heart.

Should the above be true, and Democrats effort at assassination fails, maybe Pelosi can attack Trump with a paring knife and win the Congressional Medal of Honor. If Nancy also took out Pence, she could become President and declare a national emergency to suspend our Constitution and electoral process.

Oops. It sound like they got to me and I’m on tilt, too! Oh well. I wanted to say some positive things about Pete and Tulsi, but America’s need for someone like Trump has never been greater.

 

[Tony Stark]

Indeed, Trump’s approval polls have been increasing the last few weeks.

.

You just know I will not let that lie slip by.

 

[maximumpossiblesuffering]

Tony Stark, post: 4965007, member: 495092"]You just know I will not let that lie slip by.





Attached below is a chart from the the same source you quoted but that shows a time scale that matches the current Impeachment fervor of the Democrats. I have not bothered to call out a lot of things posted here on ET such as mischaracterizations of lower court rulings on the alleged Constitutionality of a action, the economic significance of a rising equities market, or long term mischaracterizations on other issues. A lie is an intent to deceive. There is a tremendous amount of deception by the Left and you are part of that.

Although I do respect your intelligence and even your character, you have yet to admit when your side gets it wrong. If you’ve been paying attention, I and some other Conservative ETers have beat up Trump when he has misstepped. I will address potentially tough questions head on and have adjusted my positioning according to facts. You rarely address tough questions regarding some on the unsustainable positions your side takes.

I hope you grow as a blogger and as a person and take on a more substantial role than merely repeatedly posting polls that do not reflect the participation of a significant number of Trump supporters. Trump supporters are less likely to participate in political polls and you know or should know this.

Trump’s aggregated approval polls over the last 30 days:

[/QUOTE]

 

[Tony Stark]

Tony Stark, post: 4965007, member: 495092"]You just know I will not let that lie slip by.





Attached below is a chart from the the same source you quoted but that shows a time scale that matches the current Impeachment fervor of the Democrats. I have not bothered to call out a lot of things posted here on ET such as mischaracterizations of lower court rulings on the alleged Constitutionality of a action, the economic significance of a rising equities market, or long term mischaracterizations on other issues. A lie is an intent to deceive. There is a tremendous amount of deception by the Left and you are part of that.

Although I do respect your intelligence and even your character, you have yet to admit when your side gets it wrong. If you’ve been paying attention, I and some other Conservative ETers have beat up Trump when he has misstepped. I will address potentially tough questions head on and have adjusted my positioning according to facts. You rarely address tough questions regarding some on the unsustainable positions your side takes.

I hope you grow as a blogger and as a person and take on a more substantial role than merely repeatedly posting polls that do not reflect the participation of a significant number of Trump supporters. Trump supporters are less likely to participate in political polls and you know or should know this.

Trump’s aggregated approval polls over the last 30 days:

View attachment 213682

Because Rasmussen has started increasing Trumps poll numbers and now has him back at 50 % which raises his aggregate on RCP who do not weigh their polls

Gallup,the oldest and single most respected pollster has Trump at 41.

538, which weighs their polls to not let a pollster like Rasmussen artificially bring up Trumps numbers also has Trump at 41.

Trumps first term average on Gallup is still 40,the lowest in Gallups history for a first term president.

 

[Spike Trader]

Lock them up. .

One of the strangest moments of the testimony of State Department official David Holmes, as laid out in the transcript released by the House Intelligence Committee on Monday, was when Holmes told Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-NY) that President Donald Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani claimed to be working as an adviser to Vice President Mike Pence.

 

[Cuddles]

What if she testified to something that is true?

I am just sitting back and letting the information fall where it may but you are extremely upset at anyone who says anything negative against the President. Is providing information to Congress now treason? If what she stated is true in her testimony then she has done nothing wrong.

In your world, anyone who testifies against their boss is wrong, no matter what the boss did. let the process run its course.

By the way, if impeachment is in the Constitution, then it is allowed to proceed as it is proceeding.