What Trump supporters would like the rest of us to believe.

I find the Democrat's overt political nature of their investigations into Trump to be repugnant. It feels like an abuse of our court systems. However, I find far more concerning an executive incumbent directly seeking an investigation of their election rival.

Here you have someone in power, who has command of the enforcement division of the country, going after someone who has no such power, who may potentially serve as their challenger in the general election. Tolerating that kind of thing sets the rules such that someone in that same position could very easily abuse our enforcement branch to prevent a potential challenger from challenging them.

I am not saying this is what Trump is doing. I do not know what his motivations truly are. What I am saying is setting the rules like that is dangerous. While I am disheartened by the fact that I see Trump pushing for an investigation into the Bidens, it is the Republicans in the House and the Senate that turn a blind eye to this obvious serious concern and blow it off like it's nothing, as if all future presidents will be just as trustworthy. To me, that is the real tragedy.

 

Right, so I can understand where you would go to impeachment on this since it's big in the news. But it's not really what I was trying to get at with my original statement. If you will notice, I said:

So there's a lot of ways you can not tolerate something. Removal from office is probably the strongest rebuke. But you can also pass resolutions, be vocally critical, raise concerns, etc. What I am most depressed about is the overt partisanship that takes place - especially in Congress. It is extraordinarily rare for a Republican to voice any concern, when the call clearly has concerning elements in it.

Allowing such a thing to slide by as common practice will just invite more of the same behavior from future presidents. I fear one day that toleration will end up with a candidate being arrested - not because they did anything particularly bad - but because we have accepted the practice enough that the incumbent can get away with it to preserve their tenure.

I seriously hope I am wrong and this is an unfounded fear.

 

Take that up with the left, of which I am not a member of. As for the Biden’s I have no problem with an investigation into them so long as Trump is not involved.

 

I have no problem with the Biden’s being investigated, but Trump should play no part in it. You have read way too much into what I have said.

 

Partisans are predictable in that they only take issue when it effects them negatively. This applies to both sides.

 

I make no claims as to what Obama knew. I leave such speculation to the biased. I can post a transcript of a call released by Trump in which Trump asks for an investigation into the Biden’s, which is unethical by my measure of ethics.

 

Both sides are hypocrites. Pointing out the hypocrisy of the left does not justify the hypocrisy of the right.

 

So I don't claim to have an answer to your questions, but it is very easy to look up more sources. I would recommend using the time range feature on Google to check for articles that were printed at about the time Shokin was removed to see what the scoop was then, before this became a big political issue in the States:

https://www.google.com/search?q=vik...=cdr:1,cd_min:3/20/2016,cd_max:3/31/2016&tbm=

 

Look how insiders conspired to take down Trump.

 

Yes....so that makes you morally superior because you don't take a side I guess. How "universal of you"..We, for years, have watched the "middle of the roaders" with their hands in their pockets as the Nation is drug left. There wasn't much division then, that is, until someone (President Trump) said NO MORE!

 

Are you in command of the police? Probably not, so why are you comfortable with the cops being allowed to investigate you?

It's how it works, whether it's investigating you or a political rival. don't like it? well, I don't blame you, but it's the system we have.

 

Another ineffectual excuse for Trump's impeachable behavior, that Ukraine didn't know it was being extorted, goes up in smoke.

US officials knew of Ukraine’s Trump anxiety
https://apnews.com/139dd535eac749aa961bc0205d10e872

WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S. State Department officials were informed that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy was feeling pressure from the Trump administration to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden even before the July phone call that has led to impeachment hearings in Washington, two people with knowledge of the matter told The Associated Press.

In early May, officials at the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv, including then-Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch, were told Zelenskiy was seeking advice on how to navigate the difficult position he was in, the two people told the AP.

 

Were informed by who?

 

Trump asked for cooperation according to treaty and Ukraine did not begin such an investigaton. We KNOW the investigation into Trump and his campaign DID occurred. And nothing unethical if there is probable cause as there was with Biden. In fact even the Obama administration was concerned and had prepped Yavanovitch about Hunter Biden for her confirmation hearing.

"Also, for any readers persuaded by former Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch’s congressional testimony today that she was the key to a free and independent Ukraine free of corruption, it’s worth noting two relevant issues.

On the corruption front, the Obama administration helped her prepare to field questions at her Senate confirmation hearing in June of 2016 about Hunter Biden’s role on the board of Ukrainian gas company Burisma. The company was then under investigation in Ukraine. Team Obama knew there was a powerful aroma surrounding the Biden deal and that Ms. Yovanovitch needed to be armed with talking points. As it turned out, nobody asked her about the Biden deal in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and she didn’t volunteer any comments on the topic."
https://www.wsj.com/articles/obama-appointee-denied-long-tenure-as-trump-ambassador-11573860922

 

There's a good reason for that.

I have yet to see a single Trumpette express any alarm over the unsecure nature of the call between Sondland and Trump in a public setting. A call concerning US policy towards Ukraine's ability to defend itself from Russian aggression easily eavesdropped on by Russia.

 

Yes Sondland should have known better. And even the Trump administration knew there were Biden problems in the Ukraine and so worried they gave Yavonovitch talking points to deflect it at her confirmation hearings. Then did she do anything about it while serving? Thankfully she was replaced.

 

Why do you believe a political opponent, by virtue of being a political opponent, of an incumbent White House should be immune from investigation of actions he took while in federal office?

 

No I've read just the right amount, This thread and the previously mentioned one that you created in which you worry that no amount of evidence will sway Trump voters and their foolish talking points.

 

I have taken a side, squarely against Trump as his investigation into a political rival is unethical. I do not justify bad behavior by pointing out bad behavior, instead I stand against bad behavior no matter if it be a Democrat or Republican who is behaving badly. The principled do not justify bad behavior, they stand against it while partisans justify bad behavior by pointing out bad behavior on the side they oppose.

Taking issue with me because I hold myself to high standards is a silly as having high standards and doing all we can to live by them is a good thing. I don’t claim to be better than others nor do I believe that I am, but I do hope that my example inspires some to hold themselves to higher standards too just as others have inspired me to do the same. Holding ourselves to high moral and ethical standards is a good thing and rare in politics which is Machiavellian in that when high standards get in the way of a political agenda, the standards are tossed aside. This applies to the left and the right.

It is a sad day when the principled are attacked for holding themselves to high standards, especially when those attacks come from the right which is where I learned said standards. I was a Christian conservative for most of my life which is where my values and ethical standards come from.

 

Question for you..... Many of us see Hunter Biden taking home over $80,000/ month for doing something in which he has no expertise as very shady. I'll go you one more. It's my suspicion that Hunter was appointed to the board so that it would shield a corrupt Berizma from investigation in light of the fact his father, Joe Biden, was sitting in the office of an American Vice President. My question for you my friend is, "Does the mere fact that Joe Biden decided to run for office, shield him from a very likely scheme of corruption? I am a Christian Conservative and that is where my values and ethical standards resound. Logic should be universal however and that is why I want an answer as to why an investigation should not be pursued merely because a corrupt politician runs for office and should be accounted "immunity".

 

If being placed in a position of power that one is not qualified to hold is evidence of something shady, then for the sake of a logical consistency we need to also look at a number of Trump appointees such as the neurosurgeon that is the head of the HUD. I stand against those who jump to conclusions about Hunter Biden just as I stand against those who jump to conclusions about Trump.

As for Joe Biden, I have no problem with him being investigated, but Trump should have no part in it as he has a vested interest in the outcome of an investigation into Biden. It is unethical to allow those with a vested interest in the outcome of an investigation to play a part in said investigation as to do otherwise is to openly invite bias into the investigation.

If logic should be universal as you say, then for the sake of logical consistency Trump should be judged by the right just as the right judge the left. Giving Trump a pass for doing something that would land a Democrat in how water with the right is hypocrisy. If roles were reversed there is no way in hell that Republicans would be OK with a Democrat President investigating a prominent Republican who may run against him in a future election. Tribalism, where is there is one set of rules for the “in” group and another for the “out” group.

 

"But ... but ... but ... Obama!"

It amazes me that the right simply cannot recognize their own hypocrisy.

 

In a sane political environment, Trump wouldn't be president.

 

Obama wasn't running against Trump.

 

Backwards.

Biden represented us and most of the civilized world, plus several international banking firms, in getting a Ukrainian prosecutor ousted because he wouldn't investigate corruption. That video is a clip out of context, with spin added by the far right.

If Barr wants to investigate Joe and/or Hunter Biden, he's free to do so. I wish he would, so that Trump and his cult will stop bleating bull pucky about it.