The official "let's impeach Trump" thread
- Thread starter colton
- Start date
Zombie
Well-Known Member
Your very clever attempt at sophistry notwithstanding, no. Whether something is morally right or not doesn't depend on how liberals might feel about it.
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
He shouldn't do stuff like that, but I have far less of a problem with a president publicly announcing that he will hold an event at a property he owns than I do with a vice president's son quietly obtaining multi-million dollar contracts because the people hiring him believe they are purchasing the power to influence our government. It frustrates me greatly that the media doesn't seem to care about the latter at all except to the extent that they will publish stories attempting to explain why it is okay. Their bias is so incredibly blatant.
Well, that link can certainly be surmised upon, that they were purchasing favor with the Vice President, but it has not been established in any way. No law was broken by the simple hiring of Hunter Biden. There is no crime in evidence in that situation.
I mean if you can produce some sort of coherent evidence based argument that establishes criminal wrongdoing, the news, all of it, would jump on the story.
But to say, "OMG that salary is so high! What does he do? What does he do? Why does he get that salary?" and think you've proven something? It goes back to something I said in the pyramid thread. There's a thing where people think that by not knowing something they know something.
You don't know what he did for that company. You don't know. By virtue of not knowing what he possibly could have done for his salary doesn't mean you now know what he did for that salary. That's not how this works. That's not how "knowing things" works.
And at the same time you minimize the President using his office to pressure a foreign leader to investigate the President's political rival. There is actual evidence that he did that. Evidence, a confession, an explanation that "no one cares" from the President's staff and press secretary. That's not particularly alarming.
But in a situation where you don't really know, which convinces you that you specifically do know, you are the very most gravely concerned?
Okay...
Jumping on GF's "You don't know that" train
Zombie
Well-Known Member
I don't know what Hunter Biden has to do with the question I asked. I mean, I think OJ Simpson killing people is worse than what Trump did too, but that's hardly a defense.
You seem to agree though, that presidents profiting off their status while in office is a bad thing, so what do you think should be done about it?
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
The president offered to provide a venue for free. I think the only reasonable punishment for such a sickening offence is impeachment... though some may think we ought to go straight to hanging. And yes, it is relevant that the media does not seem to care when similar or worse things happen involving Democrats.
Not even you believe that. Pull the pin on the extinguisher, your pants are totally on fire.
Trump called the Foreign Emoluments Clause of the US Constitution the "fake emoluments clause"
No he didn't. Under pressure, he said he would provide it "for cost"
And you can bet your sweet pah- tooey he was talking about for total cost, not for variable cost, which means he still makes money on the deal.
Zombie
Well-Known Member
You really think Trump was going to pay for the necessary improvements to his property as well as provide lodging, food and drinks to the dignitaries, their staffs and the media out of his own pocket? What about any rounds of golf or trips to the spa? Was he going to comp those as well?
Even if we're to believe Trump was going to make every effort not to profit from this event, he would still receive the benefit of free advertising for his brand, and all of this would come at the expense of his competitors.