MEMBER & GUEST INTERACTION SECTION > THE CONSTITUTION

(3 minutes). And This is The Star Witness???

<< < (2/5) > >>

incognito:
I just read and reread the transcript of THE CALL several times. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Unclassified09.2019.pdf

Where is the extortion? What am I missing? Where is the quid pro quo?

My takeaway is the call centers around corruption, incomplete investigations and overall swamp draining.

As far as the US Government meddling in foreign affairs and how the world really works, it does not get clearer than Joe Biden explaining it on video. But that is the point of foreign aid in the first place, no? (BTW - my sister-in-law works abroad for the US Department of State giving away money to foreign organizations. She has been stationed in several hot spots in the Middle East and Africa over the last decade. She is now back in a more developed country. No more barbed wire compounds for her.)

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/09/27/flashback_2018_joe_biden_brags_at_cfr_meeting_about_withholding_aid_to_ukraine_to_force_firing_of_prosecutor.html
I said, I?m telling you, you?re not getting the billion dollars. I said, you?re not getting the billion. I?m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: I?m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you?re not getting the money. Well, son of a bleep. (Laughter.) He got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time. - Joe Biden

I am curious about Hunter Biden and his qualifications to be on the BOD of a foreign company while Daddy is VP with a billion dollar checkbook.

There is enough there to start a legitimate investigation. Is it unreasonable to ask a foreign government to use its resources to investigate things happening in its own country, one with a soiled history in this arena? It all seems like fair game to me.


Edited to add:Read the qualifier at the bottom of the first page of the transcript of the call. To try to enforce an action using that as evidence as the foundation puts the whole prosecution on shaky ground.

gww:
Jim and Tom
If your argument is that they all do it and so that makes it ok, that is fine.  That is not saying he did not do it which he did.  If he did it and you say you don't care, that is a different question.  The question is not what did every one else do.  That is all just smoke and no defense.  I don't tell you that you have to care that he did it.  He proved himself guilty when he released the money.  If draining the swamp was so important, he would still be holding the money.  When he got caught he released it and claimed no foul.  Then the smoke and mirrors began.
Cheers
gww

Kathyp:

--- Quote ---I used to handle a lot of classified information. You cannot get near that material with extensive training.
--- End quote ---

Yup.  Intent has nothing to do with it.  If I had unintentionally left something on the desk that should have been locked up, it still was a punishable crime even if it was an accident. 


--- Quote ---If your argument is that they all do it and so that makes it ok, that is fine.  That is not saying he did not do it which he did.  If he did it and you say you don't care, that is a different question.  The question is not what did every one else do.  That is all just smoke and no defense.  I don't tell you that you have to care that he did it.  He proved himself guilty when he released the money.  If draining the swamp was so important, he would still be holding the money.  When he got caught he released it and claimed no foul.  Then the smoke and mirrors began.
--- End quote ---

What did he do?  We don't know anything about anything and yesterday was no help.  There is no witness testimony to any crime.  The Mueller investigation turned up no crime. 
Impeachment is supposed to be for a crime.  That's why they are calling this an impeachment investigation.  They are still in search of the crime!

In this country, the president is in charge of our foreign policy.  Not the State Department, not Congress, not Intel.  We have had a long-standing problem with State Dept thinking they are in charge of foreign policy.  That's not a new thing.  They exist to implement the policy of the US and the president sets those policies. 

incognito:

--- Quote from: gww on November 14, 2019, 12:00:13 pm ---Jim and Tom
If your argument is that they all do it and so that makes it ok, that is fine.  That is not saying he did not do it which he did.  If he did it and you say you don't care, that is a different question.  The question is not what did every one else do.  That is all just smoke and no defense.

--- End quote ---
Actually, the prudent man concept is well founded in our legal system. Some examples:

Reasonable or Prudent man is a hypothetical person used as a legal standard especially to determine whether someone acted with negligence. This hypothetical person exercises average care, skill, and judgment in conduct that society requires of its members for the protection of their own and of others' interests.

The prudent-person rule (also known as the "prudent man rule") is a legal maxim restricting the discretion allowed in managing a client's account to the types of investments that a prudent person seeking reasonable income and preservation of capital might buy for his or her own portfolio.

The concept of the ?reasonable person? is a legal conceit that is subject to differing interpretations in practice, but it is the legal system?s best tool to determine whether a person?s perception of imminent danger justified the use of protective force.

iddee:
GWW, what Jim and Tom are saying is, the dems did it and it was OK'ed. That opens it up to being done without breaking the law. If it were illegal before, the dems determined it was now legal, so anyone should be able to do it. After all, it was determined that doing it was legal. Jim and Tom are not saying an illegal act is OK because someone else did it. They are saying it was legalized when others done it and were cleared of breaking the law.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version