Trump didn't openly extort Zelensky. He simply made him an offer he couldn't refuse.

You seriously don't think Biden is isn't getting enough attention?

 

Nope. Not nearly. To be about as even, the top legacy media story would be something to the effect of, "Top Democrats (whoever they decide they want to be quoting) are pressuring Biden to step down from the Presidential race. They would manufacture this if it doesn't exist. Instead, the story has become about Trump. It's exactly the opposite of what it should be. We should be interested in further investigating the source of the Russian Conspiracy fraud and that, in part, is what Trump's call was about. We expect Barr to get to the bottom of this.

 

The Ukrainians have already investigated Biden and, at apparently the urging of at least Trump and Giuliani, may have begun another investigation. So, what else is there to report? Do you have any "new" news? Let's hear it. Meanwhile, the House investigation into Trump's call and Giuliani continue. Why are you objecting to that?

 

Because I expect nothing to come of it. It is as stupid as the "Birther" movement. It distracts from actually doing the people's work. I hear nothing from the Democratics other than promises of hand outs but no about improving our economy so that there are more jobs at higher wages. But what news is there to report? Again, the legacy media would make up news to the effect that Biden should end his Presidential campaign. Instead, crickets. Except from Fox

 

If Biden has already been "cleared" of wrong-doing...why should the media be demanding he resign from the presidential race?

 

I did not even know this had happened. It was not widely known until someone released the video of him boasting of his very inappropriate actions. Who says it was properly investigated? How many times was Kavanaugh investigated? I was told in this forum that actually, everyone wanted that prosecutor fired due to his being corrupt. Now, that Fox clip claims the timing of Biden's threats were upon learning the Prosecutor was about to interview Biden's son.

 

"Trump didn't openly extort Zelensky"

Exactly. Say it louder, so they can hear you in the back.

 

Are you kidding? Never saw any of the Godfather movies? Or watched an episode of the Sopranos? Or better still, read the transcribed testimony from a couple of mob trials? That is exactly how they operate, as most of us seem to know.

They don't sidle up to a guy on their boss' jury and say "you're on the jury, vote our way or we'll kill your children" they say "what cute little kids you have, it would be tragic if anything happened to them because of this trial."

Trump may as well have said "Gee, that's a really nice country you have. It would be a shame if anything happened to it." Put yourself in Zelenskiy's shoes for a moment: you're the new president of the only country in Europe that has been invaded and partially occupied by a hostile foreign military intent on taking the whole thing. Your only defense, for your country and the lives of millions of your people, is to rely on outside help, mainly from the U.S. Hundreds of millions in aid is currently being held up by the president, and in a phone call, he asks for a favor before he'll release that aid. Are you really going to say no?

Look at the timing: Trump did not authorize release of that aid until after Macquire brought the whistleblower's complaint to White House officials. Anyone who doesn't see the egregious coercion isn't looking, probably because, as is his habit, Trump is waving his arms and shouting "Look over there!"

 

The last Ukrainian prosecutor...who replaced the one everyone wanted out and who just left the job in May 2019. I have no idea how many times Kavanaugh was investigated. I presume, at least twice. Once when he became a U.S. federal judge and the second time in conjunction with Ford's accusations. My understanding is that the prosecutor that we, the EU and the IMF wanted fired was disliked because he was felt to be a hold-over from the prior pro-Russian regime and that the "West" didn't feel he was being tough enough on corruption. But, I am sure more will come out about that.

 

The question was not about prosecution...but rather the value of oppo research.

It's not that hard to determine. How much was paid for the Steele Dossier for instance?

 

He was in fact, investigating only companies that refused to pay him off...and of course once they did he dropped those investigations

 

About $12 Million from what I've read. So, are you suggesting this was akin to Trump getting $12 million campaign contribution? Sure, if we get creative. Alan Dershowitz says prosecutors should never get creative. It's a one more step towards authoritarianism.

 

Interesting and "credible," but was there any public discussion of his "inadequacies" at the time that would back that up?

 

No evidence of wrongdoing concerning Biden or his son has been discovered, but the fake claim serves Trump bum kissers as a much-needed diversion.

Jeffrey Harris, who worked as Giuliani’s top assistant when he was at the Justice Department in the President Ronald Reagan administration:
"I think the Giuliani that I know would prosecute the Giuliani of today."
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/ju...lleagues-believe-he-committed-crimes-n1059861
​

 

Yeah...America's Mayor has gone over to the Dark Side. It's either old age or the stress resulting from Trump's photograph collection of Rudy in drag.

 

Read the entire question again. I didn't ask that, and Muller said that it MIGHT. Not nearly so slam dunk a question for the experts.

 

I don't dispute any of that, which is why I'll likely vote 3rd party again. Or write in Rand Paul.

 

Good for you. Paul is a bit too dogmatic for me...probably gets that from his father.

 

You're babbling.

If you're asking if I was there, the question is utter nonsense. The whistelblower's report was declared "credible" by an IG who was appointed by Trump. We don't know who the whistelblower is, but it's a high ranking intelligence official. Which gives them even more credibility. This career intelligence official is risking his career and, given Trump's recent comments, even his life.

So spare me the B.S. Yes! We found out from as credible a source as we could ever hope to find. Your desperate attempts at defending a criminal are neither helpful nor "cute"... no matter what you think. The guy is once again found to be committing the most bizarre and outrageous crimes we have ever seen against our country, and must be removed.

 

Yes you did! You asked exactly that! And I answered.

What nonsense! I can only assume you didn't expect me to call you out with a direct and definitive answer.

Here it is

So now you want to change it. What question do you want me to answer. Make up your mind! But don't claim that is not what you asked.

 

Absolutely. He makes John Anthony Walker look like George Washington


Now here's an alternative view from what sounds like a sober person:

Rep. Mark Amodei supports the House’s inquiry into whether President Donald Trump should be impeached, but is withholding judgment on whether Trump has crossed the legal line.

“Let’s put it through the process and see what happens,” Amodei, the only Republican in the state’s congressional delegation, said on a call Friday with reporters, adding that he believes Congress is justified to look into the matter.

Just a few more like him, please.

 

We definitely need more Republicans like him. Especially in the Senate. 14 Republicans in the Senate who sincerely believe that... and Trump is history.

 

I think you are the first person on this forum to actually give that ridiculous charge any credence. Tells me all I need to know, except the names of the urinating hookers. You'd think someone could have flushed them out by dangling some cash, but Putin probably murdered them all. Cover up!!

 

You're applauding Rep. Amodei, eh? Note that he wants a hearing and appears to have an open mind.

 

I honestly have no idea what you are talking about. I am not changing the question, which was and is, "Has anyone in a position of authority ever even alleged that derogatory, truthful information (unlike the golden shower claim, paid for ... who was it, again?) is a thing of value under the election code?"

By "position of authority" and "allege", I don't mean some conspiracy nut on the internet making wild claims about "dirt" on Biden, I mean a duly elected or named prosecutor, making a formal charge under the election code, that "information" = "thing of value."

A good answer would either be "no," or "I do not know," or "yes, in 2003, the federal election commission charged Rep. _____ with violating the code by seeking derogatory, though truthful, background information on his opponent, from a domestic or foreign source."

I'd bet a beer you can't find one. And please don't cite Mueller again. He didn't charge Trump or anybody else with anything.