Lets talk quid pro quo

Corruption in Ukraine which we know exist, yes it should have been held up until the administration in particular the President was assured corruption especially probable cause of corruption would be investigated and that STILL needs to be investigated.

 

It was into a blatant probable cause of a pay to play scheme involving the son of the VP using connections within our government to financially benefit himself. Why do you assert that is off limits to investigate?

 

Wrong. He described it in detail

 

And yet the DOD had certified that corruption wasn't an issue and the Trump Admin knew this

 

not hardly, now Ivanka getting many patents with china during her official White House visit to China... that should be investigated

and not by China, but by the US government

 

Which of his people said that Trump didn't want an actual investigation to happen?

 

It's okay when they do it because when they do it it's for the right reasons the ends justify the means.

They have Superior morality.

 

Why what is the probable cause of corruption simply because as she does world wide got her copyrights for the merchandise he business sells and has been selling for years internationally. You are really so desperate now as to try and conflate that with the direct cash payments for nothing Hunter Biden received. Well if you think that warrants some investigation then SURELY you believe there should be a full investigation into the Biden matter without any qualification or quid pro quo correct?

 

Wrong he said he presumed and that being said what he presumed is not an impeachable offense. We need assurances Ukraine IS fighting corruption and we still need an investigation into the probable cause of corruption with the Biden scandal.

 

Because that does not grant immunity from investigation.

 

I believe it was Volker who testified that the goal of getting the Ukraines to announce publicly they would be investigating corruption and weeding it out was to prevent another private promise they would not come through on as had happened in the past. No one testified to any bribe and there is no evidence of a bribe and the Constitutions listing of bribery in the impeachment clause is the President TAKING a bribe. Presidents use foreign aid and other means to "bribe" foreign leaders routinely.

 

Just from their end, they are only part of the government and not in charge of foreign policy or foreign aid or foreign commerce and are certainly not a criminal investigative branch when it comes to financial crimes and corruption.

 

They also did the research...Trump just uses his desires...and in this case his desire was to use the bogus claim of corruption to strongarm Ukraine into helping him get re-elected

 

I meant the President's behavior. The Ukraine had already been cleared for the aid by Congress, DoD and the State Department. If the President had knowledge of something his own government did not have, then he should have gone to his DoJ, DoD, State Department, and CIA and and asked them to investigate, while simultaneously informing Congress of the reasons for his delay. Instead, he illegally withheld the aid and tried to run a quid pro quo extortion via his personal attorney and the Three Amigos.

 

So, after weeks of whining and complaining about not being treated fairly and being excluded from the Impeachment Inquiry, the President now announces neither he or his attorneys will NOT participate in the Judiciary Committee hearings beginning this week, in response to Nadler's invitation.

 

Exactly. The most important thing was the PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT

That's not how you fight corruption. It's how you USE the claim of corruption for political purposes

 

Trumpets don't want to deal with this thread. They ignore all the evidence, then say there is no evidence or it is all hearsay. The evidence below is not hearsay.

Of course, that is why they avoid the post.

 

Good. I too want Israel's wing seriously clipped.

 

It certainly was a good plan to get the investigations going since they had reneged or otherwise ignored previous agreements don't you think?

 

I haven't heard them say that but the necessary participation was when the witnesses were being questioned and the counter witnesses could be presented. Now we are at the review stage and still don't even know what exactly will be the procedure other than Nadler will be able to exclude witnesses at will. How about like with Nixon and Clinton they meet and hash out the rules and terms and process?

 

There's been no corruption on the Presidents behave, the corruption with the Ukraine oligarach's was pay to play and putting Hunter Biden in their back pocket as the most glaring example we have. The DoJ is involved and the President is in charge and will do it as he sees fit. Part of that is requesting the President of Ukraine honor the treaty that exist between us and certainly the President can choose the role of the discussing that with their President. You argument is a canard.

 

Do you think that I was directing that post at you?

 

Which is commonly referred to as "salary"

 

Utterly irrelevant. You can make a strong argument that every policy foreign and domestic a president pursues is for "personal gain".

 

Only indirectly

What Trump did was DIRECT personal gain

My how your arguments evolve though