Let’s call it the “loser’s defense”
trump was so inept that he tried to bribe a foreign country, one which we have extraordinary leverage over, his people ignored him, he failed, ergo he is innocent.
laughable but that is reality in the trumpverse.
The official "let's impeach Trump" thread
- Thread starter colton
- Start date
Let’s call it the “loser’s defense”
trump was so inept that he tried to bribe a foreign country, one which we have extraordinary leverage over, his people ignored him, he failed, ergo he is innocent.
laughable but that is reality in the trumpverse.
JazzyFresh
Banned
Impeaching the president is no laughing matter. What I am against is this hoax called Russia and this hoax called Ukraine just because you guys don't like the guy. I don't even like the guy but i'm not for weaponizing the impeachment process because I don't like the ELECTED official. How about you go to the polls and beat the guy fair and square? No, instead we make up garbage like Collusion, then we switch it to obstruction, then nothing happens, so we make up some whistleblower who said Trump said something on a phone call. Scream Quid Pro Quo, then suddenly it's not even about the phone call anymore and republicans cant even call witnesses. The same whistleblower who's lawyer openly tweeted he was going to resist and that a coup was coming.
Beat him fair and square. I absolutely dare you all to beat him fair and square... You can't though so you have completely thrown every value you have out the window to impeach him. I'm sorry I don't buy this ******** that you guys are bringing. Trump is not the first president to overstep his constitutional boundries and he wont be the last. We could dig deep enough and do this clown show to any president since I've been alive. Hell Biden is leading your polls and his son somehow magically landed a cushy job with garbage credentials. The guy who was dismissed from the military, has a drug addiction, slept with his dead brothers wife. Yeah, I believe he was the best person for the job... Yet whenever someone brings that up we are shushed and told it's nothing.
Or how about this new news that Carter Page(supposedely) completely lied and fabricated evidence to get the FISA warrant to start this entire Russia Hoax? We have transcripts of Obama's FBI openly admitting they have back up plans if Trump is elected, then suddenly this whole Russiagate pops up. You guys really don't give a ****. Your really don't. All you want is to better Trump. All you want is to get him impeached because you can't stand him. I'm sorry, I don't buy it. You are calling wolf time and time and time and time again.
I'm sorry, I feel that I'm thinking for myself. I hardly post tweets, news articles, social media garbage ever. I use my own words. You guys obviously disagree but there is more than your side to the story. I've been blasted every corner, people telling me how stupid I am, all for a difference of opinion. This very thread was to Impeach Trump for nothing more than disliking the guy. I understand not liking the guy but I think you are going to any legnth to get him out and I don't buy it. People don't want to vote for Trump but I think a good majority of Americans agree with me that they'd rather have Trump than this Socialist(Marxist) resist around every corner ******** you guys are on.
JazzyFresh
Banned
At the end of the day Trump will still be president and absolutely nothing will be accomplished. Just a complete waste of everything.
JazzyFresh
Banned
More passionate than annoyed to be 100% honest. I think the route you guys are taking is 100% wrong and don't wish it on any candidate. Sadly Pandora's box is open.
Is negotiating a trade agreement with China an attempt at extortion? Attempted bribery? Are you aware of how bi-lateral relations work?
It's perfectly reasonable to ask Ukraine to help investigate corruption involving the U.S. State Dept., especially in light of the fact that the DOJ is already investigating it.
Last edited:
olden_undercover
Well-Known Member
Fair enough. Thanks for taking the time to articulate your thoughts. I totally respect you and your position, although I will say for my part my reasons for not supporting him aren't really about disliking Trump (true as that may be). We're frankly just in really different places, in terms of how we're thinking about this, and I doubt we'll ever see eye-to-eye, but that's okay. I'm comfortable with still calling you a friend. Go Jazz.
a) I wasn't talking about China at all.
b) As has been well established, this was not at all about asking Ukraine to investigate corruption in general. I mean, the evidence is overwhelming. Like I could start listing the evidence and not be done an hour from now. But you're not looking for evidence, are you? You're looking for excuses.
c) I noticed you conveniently didn't answer any of my questions.
a) I pointed to China as an example where the President is negotiating with a foreign power, conducting foreign policy as he is empowered and obligated to do. If you want to be partisan, you can try to argue that Trump is 'extorting' trade concessions from China. However, it is precisely his job to do this in support of the national interest. That's just one example of how foreign relations works.
b) I don't think evidence is overwhelming at all. Nothing I've seen would hold up in a court of law. You can't establish charges of bribery or extortion unless a concrete (preferably quantified) demand was made to Zellenskyy that departs from Trump's normal foreign relations. Zellenskyy, or someone in his administration, would need to verify that this was the case, or you'd need an authentic record. Furthermore, you would need to show that asking (or even pressuring) Ukraine to help investigate U.S. State Dept. corruption is a clear departure from the nation's interest. Whereas, as President, Trump has every right to establish his foreign policy with Ukraine's new President Zellenskyy, even if former state dept. officials don't agree with it.
If the evidence were real, it could be summarized in two sentences. It doesn't take hours to list things.
You're saying that Trump is only trying to go after Biden for personal political reasons. I'm saying, and the Justice Department has publicly stated, that there is a much broader investigation into U.S. State Dept. corruption involving Ukraine going on. It started before Zellenskyy took office. It's not just the Crowdstrike server story. It's a bigger pay-to-play scheme that involved the Clintons, members of the Obama state department, as well as possibly Joe Biden, and it was covered up by the FBI.
That's John Durham's investigation. You seem to be ignoring its existence, although in all fairness, several details have been kept quiet as the investigation is ongoing.
Many people, myself included, agree with the Justice Dept. that pursuing this investigation is very much in the nation's interest, even if the convictions it yields are few. You and others are welcome to disagree, but that is simply your own personal view and not grounds to impeach a President for high crimes or misdemeanors.
c) I thought your questions were being flippant, but I'll answer them here --- Yes, attempted murder, arson, robbery, bribery, or extortion are serious crimes. However, no crime has been shown to be committed by Trump. No serious prosecutor would pursue this case based on what's surfaced in hearings. Now granted, impeachment is a political process rather than a purely legal one. However, if/when this goes to trial in the Senate, it will get dismissed quickly, not on merely partisan grounds, but because the evidence is weak. There's an allegation made by an anonymous whistleblower who claims to have second-hand or third-hand conversations and an interpretation of circumstantial facts.
To make this case, you pretty much need Zellenskyy or someone he appointed to say, "Trump threatened to withhold foreign aid unless we fabricate evidence against Joe Biden." Or you'd need a voice recording that establishes the same. You need real evidence of the threat (withhold the aid) and the cure ("make up dirt") to create the case.
So far, Zellenskyy is denying that this is what happened, which stands as evidence against the claim. So you also need to show that the person who is being bribed or extorted is aware that he is being bribed or extorted.
D
Deleted member 365
Guest
Is he though? How do we know he’s negotiating things with China in the country’s interest? Especially when the country’s interest would’ve been best served having never started a trade war at all? Or do we need another farm bailout to prove the trade war’s effect?