Forums - Politics Discussion - Official Thread: The Impeachment of President Donald Trump

fatslob-:O said:
Machiavellian said:

Trump going down has more to do with him being the complete moron then anything else you or John can think up.  We are here today because of how incompetent this whole Ukraine situation was handled by Trump and his administration.  This whole narrative, of socialist this, liberal that is just another way to deflect from an obvious idiotic handling of another situation that continue to baffle me on why people consider this moron capable of anything more than screwing shit up as he has shone throughout his life.

Oh well keep looking for ways to move the blame to everyone else besides the one person who got us here.

Don't you get it ? It's not about who to blame ... 

It's about what Trump represents and it's that he represents America with all of it's idiosyncrasies and beliefs too. If Trump loses then America loses as well because it's own people doubt the very institutions behind their systems thus potentially undoing their project to democratize the whole world ... 

Would you rather see America keep losing in the world if it means you wanting to see Trump losing so badly ? America facing defeat behind the very foundations they've built upon the world so far means victory for the communist middle kingdom regime! 

I am sorry but Trump doesn't represent America.  Trump was elected to a position and just like any elected individual, he can be removed from office if he doesn't do his job.  Basically what you are saying is that Trump is above the constitution which we have lived our lives in the US for centuries.  No one man or woman can represent America, its the reason we have that document that sets limits on the power and removal of that one person.

As to your second paragraph, I have no clue what you are talking about.  You are putting Trump on some type of pedestal.  As I stated, the reason we are here is because of Trump himself.  He got us here because he did not respect the institution of the job he holds. His incompetence and moronic ability to wade into things without thinking cause him to ignore all the signs he was wading into dangerous waters.  All this middle kingdom stuff you are throwing out means nothing when the person you are defending isn't smart enough to handle something as basic as this situation without crossing the line.  



Around the Network

The Constitution Article 2 Section 3 actually states it is the President’s job to make sure laws are being properly enforced. So maybe you all need to read the Constitution. Trump did nothing more than follow his oath of office.



drinkandswim said:

Well most reasonable people dont think investigating corruption is a crime. Only the people that hate Trump believe that. Trump didnt need dirt on Biden. He was investigating to see if the dirt was true. Because that was the actual potential crime. Not investigating it. Plus it has not been proven that aid was held back for this investigation. Actually the OMB testified it was due to general corruption concerns with Ukraine.

What other issues regarding corruption in Ukraine has Trump specifically expressed concern over?



drinkandswim said:

The Constitution Article 2 Section 3 actually states it is the President’s job to make sure laws are being properly enforced. So maybe you all need to read the Constitution. Trump did nothing more than follow his oath of office.

I've read the constitution plenty in law school.  The laws being referred to in that passage refer to the laws of the United States.  What federal law exactly was he enforcing? What in the constitution or federal common law would give him the authority to withhold congressional appropriated funds to do so?  I look forward to what I am sure will be a spirited and respectful debate with an opponent that is surely well versed in constitutional law :)! I really look forward to learning from you, as you seem to have a firmer grasp of the constitution than the professors at top law schools!  https://medium.com/@legalscholarsonimpeachment/letter-to-congress-from-legal-scholars-6c18b5b6d116 I have finals next week so this will be such a HUGE help for me! 



drinkandswim said:

1). Well most reasonable people dont think investigating corruption is a crime. Only the people that hate Trump believe that. 2). Trump didnt need dirt on Biden. 3). He was investigating to see if the dirt was true. 4). Because that was the actual potential crime. Not investigating it. 5). Plus it has not been proven that aid was held back for this investigation. 6). Actually the OMB testified it was due to general corruption concerns with Ukraine.

1). Correct.  Investigating corruption itself is not a crime.  But using the guise of investigating corruption for the purpose of interfering with our election through a foreign entity is a crime. Any reason why Trump has never asked any other country to root out their corruption?  Why just Ukraine?  Further, the State Department and the DoD both required Ukraine to implement critical anti-corruption measures prior to the aid being allocated.  Ukraine passed all of it already.  The OMB didn't need to do their own check because it's already part of the aid package to begin with. The aid was supposed to be dispersed by law.  H.R.5515 - John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019.

2). Then why ask about it so often?  Why ask Ukraine?  Why ask China? 

3). He didn't need to.  The details of Hunter Biden, Burisma, prosecutor Shokin, etc...are already known and in the open. 

4). I don't follow you here.  What actual US crime do you mean?  A Ukrainian prosecutor not investigating a Ukrainian company is a US crime?  Further, the the lack of an investigation into Burisma (and others) was the reason Shokin was removed.  It was because he wasn't investigating...not because he was investigating.  The IMF loaned Ukraine billions of which much was being funneled into offshore accounts.  Shokin was supposed to investigate those.  He didn't.  This is why the international community, including the US, was pressuring for his removal. Trump would know this if he actually listened to his State Department.

5). It has been testified as such by many with no testimony to the contrary.

6). Nobody from the OMB has testified.  Trump has barred all White House and executive branch employees from testifying or providing documents. 

Many of your statements suggest you have not read any of the information I provided in the opening posts.


EDIT: I stand corrected.  I forgot that Mark Sandy from the OMB did testify in a closed door session. He testified that the process was highly unusual in that a political appointee, Michael Duffey, came into the OMB, took over the apportionment process and placed the hold.  He also said he raised his concerns with the general counsel and noted that 2 OMB employees quit over this issue. He also states the action violates the Impoundment Control Act of 1974. He also said the OMB was not notified why the aid was frozen until September 9...2 days before it was released.  So while I incorrectly stated that an OMB official did not testify when they did, he certainly did not testify that it was for corruption concerns in Ukraine.  He stated that was simply the story they were told 2 days before the aid was released despite months of no explanation, staff departures, official complaints filed and unusual procedures taking place.

Last edited by SpokenTruth - on 06 December 2019

Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

Around the Network
drinkandswim said:

The Constitution Article 2 Section 3 actually states it is the President’s job to make sure laws are being properly enforced. So maybe you all need to read the Constitution. Trump did nothing more than follow his oath of office.

Would that not be Laws in the US, not another country.  If you are going to start listing sections of the Constitution, it would be good to know what they pertain to.  No one is not saying that Trump as President does not have the authority to work with foreign governments, its when he tries to use his office for his own political gain is why we are hear.  The silly part is even if you believe Trump was somehow concerned about corruption within Ukraine, to only want a public statement that they are investigating a political rival doesn't even take that much of a leap to see that Trump cared very little about corruption and more about setting up a smear campaign.  I guess if you want to continue to deceive yourself that this was all for corruption then so be it but you have a lot of testimony to counter a lot of that.



drinkandswim said:

The Constitution Article 2 Section 3 actually states it is the President’s job to make sure laws are being properly enforced. So maybe you all need to read the Constitution. Trump did nothing more than follow his oath of office.

Did you not notice I listed several sections from the Constitution in my post?  You're really going to ask someone that gave Constitutional reference to read the Constitution?

With that in mind, please advise us what laws he was enforcing.



Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

fatslob-:O said:
RolStoppable said:

That reads like a variation of the reasoning to put Hitler in power in the 1930s.

Looking back, Hitler didn't necessarily get everything wrong because some of the ideas he put into practice are now in the hands of a geopolitical rival who has potential to become the next superpower ... 

The middle kingdom could ultimately validate quite a bit of Hitler's thinking which means he had the right concept all along. If western world want to be taken over by idiocy then the middle kingdom no matter how socially oppressive they are means that they are the only sane civilization left ... 

Your admiration of the concept of creating a master race shines through. And yes, "middle kingdom" certainly sounds grander than typing China.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

Machiavellian said:

I am sorry but Trump doesn't represent America.  Trump was elected to a position and just like any elected individual, he can be removed from office if he doesn't do his job.  Basically what you are saying is that Trump is above the constitution which we have lived our lives in the US for centuries.  No one man or woman can represent America, its the reason we have that document that sets limits on the power and removal of that one person.

As to your second paragraph, I have no clue what you are talking about.  You are putting Trump on some type of pedestal.  As I stated, the reason we are here is because of Trump himself.  He got us here because he did not respect the institution of the job he holds. His incompetence and moronic ability to wade into things without thinking cause him to ignore all the signs he was wading into dangerous waters.  All this middle kingdom stuff you are throwing out means nothing when the person you are defending isn't smart enough to handle something as basic as this situation without crossing the line.  

Yes he currently does represent America as he is the head of state ... 

@Bold Straw man, never said he was above the constitution. Likewise, the opposition in congress is also not above the constitution. It's that the constitution grants him the sole power to represent America since he is the highest official ... 

One person can represent America since every other elected official does not represent the union. Senators only represent a state and the house members can only represent a district so what's left is the president ... 

You don't determine who or who hasn't crossed the line, that's for the others out there to do so. Trump is fine since he's unlikely to get convicted, what's not fine is the opposition trying to unduly undermine American leadership across the world in the face of a strong geopolitical rival that could set new terms. I asked before and I'll ask again, would you prefer Trump going down even if it means giving the keys of world hegemony to an undemocratic state or would you prefer to combat the rise against these states even if it means having Trump at the helm ?

You take it for granted that America will still remain the world leader without Trump since he is arguably the best chance in decades to combating the rise of a powerful hostile regime ... 

RolStoppable said:

Your admiration of the concept of creating a master race shines through. And yes, "middle kingdom" certainly sounds grander than typing China.

@Bold It's not just that. A potential master race will ultimately lead to the formation of the most powerful civilization. Only the best civilization may prevail while weak civilizations should perish ... 

Humans are designed to exterminate each other for the greater good to prove that ideas from a certain group are superior to the other groups. It's what we do best ... 



Even if Trump's genuinely concerned about Ukrainian corruption (he's not), per the National Defense Authorization Act, only the Secretary of Defense has the power to allow or deny disbursement of aid. His department reports on Ukraine's progress on anti-corruption efforts and a decision is made. In this case, John C. Rood, undersecretary for policy at the DoD, informed Congress in May that Ukraine had indeed taken measures to reduce corruption, thereby qualifying for the assistance, no ifs or buts. Trump ignored his own Defense Department's positive evaluation, and then blocked the aid when the law bars anyone but the Secretary of Defense from doing so. And if genuine concern for corruption cannot be his rationale for blocking the aid, the only other possibilities are either extreme gullibility toward anything that comes out of Rudy's mouth, or extortion to get Zelensky to damage a political opponent.

https://web.archive.org/web/20191203024648/https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/10/23/trump-mulvaneys-claim-that-corruption-concerns-held-up-ukraine-aid/