Media Bias

Sorry but when ken starr and that dipshit from harvard are completely contradicting themselves in a mind numbing manner what is there to be objective about? Let’s not over complicate this shit. If you want to say you think asking for dirt on the bidens in exchange for military aid is ok than have at it. But that is EXACTLY what happened. And no Obama didn’t do it first.

Yes Biden threaten the Ukraine PM to remove an Ukraine Prosecutor and threaten him with 1 billion Loan Guarantees in aid. He specifically said, if its not done by the time I get back on his plane, then no aid.

Biden and I quote: What you know, son of a bitch, the prosecutor was fired.

Look up the video as Biden explains this on a campaign stop.

Yes, Biden and the Obama Administration participated in a quid pro quo.

Yes Biden threaten the Ukraine PM to remove an Ukraine Prosecutor and threaten him with 1 billion Loan Guarantees in aid. He specifically said, if its not done by the time I get back on his plane, then no aid.

Biden and I quote: What you know, son of a bitch, the prosecutor was fired.

Look up the video as Biden explains this on a campaign stop.

Yes, Biden and the Obama Administration participated in a quid pro quo.

Biden was acting on behalf of the official policy of the united states government at the time.

This is not about threatening to cut off a country's aid. There is nothing wrong with that. Its done all the time. I would hope that Trump regularly uses his power as POTUS to exert pressure on other world leaders to support America's interests.

The difference here is that, in this case, if the allegations are true, Trump would not have been acting on behalf of the United states official policy towards Ukraine. He would have been using his power for PERSONAL political gain.

This is the difference. Whether you agree with it or not, do you understand that part?

[QUOTE=BigHairedAristocrat;1243662]Biden was acting on behalf of the official policy of the united states government at the time.

This is not about threatening to cut off a country's aid. There is nothing wrong with that. Its done all the time. I would hope that Trump regularly uses his power as POTUS to exert pressure on other world leaders to support America's interests.

The difference here is that, in this case, if the allegations are true, Trump would not have been acting on behalf of the United states official policy towards Ukraine. He would have been using his power for PERSONAL political gain.

The president investing corruption is doing the same.

Bolded. You are jumping

Read the transcripts… and put down the "opinion" articles. The facts don't connect these things. Bribery, Treason, and Extortion are high crimes and misdemeanors, if these things were true and proven the Impeachment article would have included these along with the witness testimony/documentation within the House process. They didn't.

[QUOTE=BigHairedAristocrat;1243662]Biden was acting on behalf of the official policy of the united states government at the time.

This is not about threatening to cut off a country's aid. There is nothing wrong with that. Its done all the time. I would hope that Trump regularly uses his power as POTUS to exert pressure on other world leaders to support America's interests.

The difference here is that, in this case, if the allegations are true, Trump would not have been acting on behalf of the United states official policy towards Ukraine. He would have been using his power for PERSONAL political gain.

The president investing corruption is doing the same.

Bolded. You are jumping

Read the transcripts… and put down the "opinion" articles. The facts don't connect these things. Bribery, Treason, and Extortion are high crimes and misdemeanors, if these things were true and proven the Impeachment article would have included these along with the witness testimony/documentation within the House process. They didn't.

Contrary to the last impeachment involving Clinton, Trump has done everything in his power to prevent evidence from being produced and witnesses from testifying. So far, we have very limited information, and the only official evidence is all "second-hand." Trump even gloated last week on TV that he had the evidence and the Democrats didn't.

The best way to quash this is to produce EVERYTHING, order EVERYONE to testify, and let republicans and democrats determine what actually happened. Sadly, the President is making a concerted effort to cover things up, so lawmakers are limited in one they are able to do. Trumps also threatened republican senators, which essentially amounts to jury intimidation.

It is truly sad that our democracy has come to this. The president is incredibly corrupt and politicians on both sides are more concerned with appeasing their constituents than behaving like adults and doing their jobs.

I cannot wait for this nightmare to be over in November.

Biden was acting on behalf of the official policy of the united states government at the time.



This is not about threatening to cut off a country's aid. There is nothing wrong with that. Its done all the time. I would hope that Trump regularly uses his power as POTUS to exert pressure on other world leaders to support America's interests.



The difference here is that, in this case, if the allegations are true, Trump would not have been acting on behalf of the United states official policy towards Ukraine. He would have been using his power for PERSONAL political gain.



This is the difference. Whether you agree with it or not, do you understand that part?



Facts psssh.....

[QUOTE=BigHairedAristocrat;1243662]Biden was acting on behalf of the official policy of the united states government at the time.



This is not about threatening to cut off a country's aid. There is nothing wrong with that. Its done all the time. I would hope that Trump regularly uses his power as POTUS to exert pressure on other world leaders to support America's interests.



The difference here is that, in this case, if the allegations are true, Trump would not have been acting on behalf of the United states official policy towards Ukraine. He would have been using his power for PERSONAL political gain.



The president investing corruption is doing the same.



Bolded. You are jumping



Read the transcripts… and put down the "opinion" articles. The facts don't connect these things. Bribery, Treason, and Extortion are high crimes and misdemeanors, if these things were true and proven the Impeachment article would have included these along with the witness testimony/documentation within the House process. They didn't.



What transcripts? You mean the summary of the transcript???? Why block witnesses from testifying? Come the fuck on man. You stop listening to Fox and open your own actual eyes

[QUOTE=Chico23231;1243664]



What transcripts? You mean the summary of the transcript???? Why block witnesses from testifying? Come the fuck on man. You stop listening to Fox and open your own actual eyes

The transcripts and testimony matched up. The President wasn't given due process in the house.

Biden was acting on behalf of the official policy of the united states government at the time.

This is not about threatening to cut off a country's aid. There is nothing wrong with that. Its done all the time. I would hope that Trump regularly uses his power as POTUS to exert pressure on other world leaders to support America's interests.

The difference here is that, in this case, if the allegations are true, Trump would not have been acting on behalf of the United states official policy towards Ukraine. He would have been using his power for PERSONAL political gain.

This is the difference. Whether you agree with it or not, do you understand that part?

BUT, that really falls under the concept of a black or white fallacy.

The black-or-white fallacy occurs in arguments that have a disjunctive premise―that is, one that gives alternatives―when one or more alternatives is incorrectly omitted. The fallacy tries to force you to choose either black or white when gray is an available alternative.

It is entirely possible (and honestly highly likely) that President Trump was using his power for both Official Policy (rooting out corruption in Ukraine - this is obviously a strong and ongoing interest for US policy) and personal political gain. That is what Pres Obama did in asking the Russian Foreign Minister to let Putin know he would have more leeway after his election. Bush did it by expressing "Mission Accomplished" on a US Naval vessel, he clearly wanted to energize his base, AND strengthen his US policy toward Iraq. It has been done in many ways and many times. And I would say that, in Biden's case, holding up the aid to remove the prosecutor also falls under both - upholding US policy, and in the interest of Biden's personal family's gain/protection.

BUT, that really falls under the concept of a black or white fallacy.



It is entirely possible (and honestly highly likely) that President Trump was using his power for both Official Policy (rooting out corruption in Ukraine - this is obviously a strong and ongoing interest for US policy) and personal political gain. That is what Pres Obama did in asking the Russian Foreign Minister to let Putin know he would have more leeway after his election. Bush did it by expressing "Mission Accomplished" on a US Naval vessel, he clearly wanted to energize his base, AND strengthen his US policy toward Iraq. It has been done in many ways and many times. And I would say that, in Biden's case, holding up the aid to remove the prosecutor also falls under both - upholding US policy, and in the interest of Biden's personal family's gain/protection.

Let's be honest here Cred. Do you really think Donald Trump, the supremely self-centered leader of our country who only really cares about himself, is concerned with corruption in the Ukraine?

He wants the Biden investigation announced because it helps Trump politically, in the upcoming election of his life. Literally. If Trump loses in November, I guarantee you there will be state and/or federal prosecutors lining up cases to move against him that he won't be able to use the protection of the POTUS to defend himself against.

I agree with you, I think Joe Biden used his position to help his struggling son out and it was an absolutely terrible move in hindsight. He probably sold Burisma on the job for Hunter as a way to get access to himself. Let's not act like Trump is a saint in that regard either, for the price of a Mar-A-Lago membership (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/18/us/mar-a-lago-trump-ethics-winter-white-house.html?action=click&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article) or a drink at the Trump Hotel (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/it-was-like-a-breeding-ground-trump-hotels-mix-of-gop-insiders-and-hangers-on-helped-give-rise-to-impeachment-episodes/2020/01/16/2e4cdf3a-3888-11ea-bb7b-265f4554af6d_story.html) you can get access to Trump or Guliani. And who can forget, you can literally record an hour long video of Trump talking inside the White House (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sxSGKB3Sj0) and all you have to do is be a donor or a Guliani henchman.

Let's be honest here Cred. Do you really think Donald Trump, the supremely self-centered leader of our country who only really cares about himself, is concerned with corruption in the Ukraine?

...

And ultimately this is the Democratic argument, at best with witnesses it will be a he said/he said on the linkage. And half the country will like Don Lemon and his ilk will laugh at Trump supporters for supporting Trump, and half, like me, will be disgusted with the never trumpers and rational people who hate Trump and assume/accept that all his intentions must be evil/self centered.

It's not going to resolve and hearts/minds are not going to change, and I am remembering why I left the debate :( As Sunnyside said, we get sucked in to a time wasting slew of disgust for people who we should have a major common point (HTTR) of agreement, except G1 who sucks all around! (j/k G1, just your politics and football suck, I am sure you have many other redeeming qualities)

edit: and so you don't think I am deflecting - yes I think he cared about Ukraine in 2017 and 2018. This is from a 2018 WP article
Time and again, U.S. officials have said anti-corruption efforts were part of U.S. policy in Ukraine.

“The leaders agreed on the importance of expanding bilateral trade and investment, and the Vice President underscored the need for continued reforms to fight corruption, increase transparency, and improve the business climate,” read the March 2018 readout of Vice President Pence’s call with then-Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko.