We need a new excuse

Now that Bolton has revealed direct evidence Trump held up aid for an investigation of Biden, the right needs a new reason not to impeach Trump.
Please help with your best ideas!

 

You mean like the video of Joe Biden bragging about when he did it?

 

Tighten your seat belts folks looks like we may finally get a real trial with witnesses and corroborating documented evidence.As Shakespeare said,"the truth will out'.

 

Separate case. You don’t defend a bank robbery suspect by claiming other bank robbers got away with it.

 

The truth is that investigating potential corruption isn't corrupt.

 

Except that the corruption has NOTHING to do with the Ukraine.

 

I don't get why you think this debunked talking point is relevant, or in any way has anything at all to do with trump soliciting a foreign government to announce a fake investigation, under threat of withholding congressionally approved funds for personal political gain?

 

soliciting a foreign government to announce a fake investigation against your domestic political rival, by withholding congressionally approved funds is.

 

Nonsense.

 

(a) ProhibitionIt shall be unlawful for—
foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make—
(A)
a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election;
(B)
a contribution or donation to a committee of a political party; or
(C)
an expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication (within the meaning of section 30104(f)(3) of this title); or
(2)
a person to solicit, accept, or receive a contribution or donation described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) from a foreign national.
foreign national” means—
(1)
a foreign principal, as such term is defined by section 611(b) of title 22, except that the term “foreign national” shall not include any individual who is a citizen of the United States; or
(2)
an individual who is not a citizen of the United States or a national of the United States (as defined in section 1101(a)(22) of title 8) and who is not lawfully admitted for permanent residence, as defined by section 1101(a)(20) of title 8.

 

Not germane and more importantly not charged.

 

Most people know that Bolton has always been an aggressive hawk, pushing for military action. More that once, he's been upset because he didn't think people listened to him, and has been pissed off enough to react with hostility. The credibility gap is here makes it pretty obvious that Bolton is tweaking his memory in a bit of payback. Not new for him. The left is like a Roomba, roaming everywhere trying to suck up anything it can find to use as evidence. Sometime, the house dog has taken a crap, and the Roomba sucks that up too..... As the saying goes, Sh*t happens. That doesn't mean you should make a diet of it.

 

Oh but it has everything to do with Ukraine, as it did when Biden did the same damn thing inorder to protect his emolument.

 

What is the "direct" evidence? Bolton wrote words in a book for profit?

 

It definitely would be fun watching some long-serving GOP Senators, like McConnell, spin some pretzel logic as to why Bolton now has ZERO credibility, when they previously had no problem following him into the Iraq war.

However, they can count on the GOP electorate having short memories.

 

Look, you are obviously only going with what your RW media is telling you.

I don't have the time or inclination and patience needed to re-educate you, especially since based on my past experience with you all you do is throw out these talking points. Everytime someone blows holes in your theories, you just repeat verbatim the same thing.

Believe what you want. You're not convincing me or anyone else that uses a brain.

 

Wasn't it you that was saying all the evidence was hearsay?
Not any more.

 

Federal law prohibits a foreign national from directly or indirectly making a “contribution or donation of money or other thing of value” in connection with a U.S. election, and prohibits a person from soliciting, accepting or receiving such a contribution or donation from a foreign national. Federal law defines “contribution” to include “any gift … of money or anything of value made by any person for the purpose of influencing any election for Federal office.” And the FEC by regulation defines “solicit” to mean “to ask, request, or recommend, explicitly or implicitly, that another person make a contribution, donation, transfer of funds, or otherwise provide anything of value.”

And that’s all the law requires. Whether or not Ukraine came through, whether or not the communications involved a quid pro quo, the solicitation of a thing of value from the Ukraine President in connection with a U.S. election could be a federal crime.

https://www.justsecurity.org/66277/the-quid-is-a-crime-no-need-to-prove-pro-quo-in-ukrainegate/

 

ronv beat me to it, but its a demonstrable fact that it is not nonsense, lol.

 

Why? Assuming theres any good reason to believe a war criminal, corruption is still corruption and still a good reason to be wary about what we do with our money.

And Trump is already impeached. The issue now is whether Trump investigating Biden for saying he did what yall impeached Trump for is grounds for removal Trump from office and likely putting Biden in there instead.

Which is Monty Python style hilarious.

 

Trum

Trump only hires the best people, we have Trump’s word on that, so why wouldn’t we believe the word of one of the people Trump hired? Are you calling Trump inept?

 

Did what?

 

What I produce are facts. Like it or not you cannot convict some of something they haven't been charged with.

Nor are you convincing any one with your endless bloviating. Sadly to say that is where we are today. Everyone's facts depend entirely on what side of the aisle you. To my side your facts are little more than a cover up for high crimes and misdemeanors perpetrated by the Obama administration, in a similar fashion you view mine. So neither of us gains ground and you view a Senate acquital as direlection of duty an I view as brave men making a stand against leftist corruption.

 

I'm saying Bolton is somewhat volatile and reactive, meaning his cred can be like situation ethics. I'm also saying that the left could listen to him for an hour with 59 promoting a view and one criticizing it, and would claim the one minute was the entire argument. Inconsistency dilutes, sometime destroys credibility.

 

It is a demonstrable fact that the charge sited us not under review in this impeachment, and it is equally demonstrable that the charge listed is not germane.