Show of HandsShow of Hands

ArrowFodder November 19th, 2019 7:11pm

Is the act of calling for an investigation into a political opponent, who might be the next President, a corrupt act, if verifiably true information comes out as a result of the investigation showing that the candidate would be a corrupt President?

5 Liked

Comments: Add Comment

kspells TheOtherOtherside
11/22/19 6:51 am

Who cares if the would be nominee is corrupt, or how long they will be? The request for an official public announcement, to discredit the nominee, without just cause, while withholding aid, is corrupt. And why would any idiot think to defend such a vile act?

Reply
Squidboy Snarkapottamus
11/19/19 1:40 pm

Asking a foreign country to do it is a clear violation of the law: www.fec.gov/resources/cms-content/documents/mtgdoc_19-41-A.pdf
Using the power of your office to withhold congressionally authorized aid is extortion & a clear violation of the constitution.

Reply
ArrowFodder ohio
11/19/19 2:01 pm

The first article is about : “a contribution, a gift,deposit of money or anything of value made by any person for the purpose of influencing any election for Federal office” . Please explain how that relates to anything in the Impeachment testimony so far.

ArrowFodder ohio
11/19/19 2:03 pm

The second thing you said is not in evidence. There is no extortion, bribery or quid pro quo or in evidence. There is only a request for an investigation

DJ13
11/19/19 2:06 pm

An investigation that Trump suddenly only became concerned about once Biden became the front runner in our next election. Coincidence.... I think not....

ArrowFodder ohio
11/19/19 6:22 pm

That’s not in evidence at all. Vindman testified today that Hunter Biden on the board of Burisma was odd and had the potential for a conflict of interest. Investigating Burisma for corruption was discussed and had been done before . If it let do Hunter Biden so be it . This is the sort of thing President’s can do when setting foreign policy objectives

DJ13
11/19/19 8:39 pm

So Burisma had already been investigated. There was no need to ask for another investigation, except for political purposes.. Got it...

ArrowFodder ohio
11/20/19 5:44 am

If you want to believe that the world is static like a child’s board game , you are free to do so . Nothing in the evidence or testimony indicates that there were not current reasons for investigating Burisma. In fact the opposite is the case

kspells TheOtherOtherside
11/22/19 6:58 am

Who cares if the would be nominee is corrupt, or how long they will be? The request for an official public announcement, to discredit the nominee, without just cause, while withholding aid, is corrupt. And why would any idiot think to defend such a vile act?

Squidboy Snarkapottamus
11/22/19 7:14 am

Partisan blindness

kspells TheOtherOtherside
11/22/19 9:09 am

My God the man is saying we can’t defend ourselves against Russia’s tanks, we have no anti rank weapons. And Trump was withholding our help, our help not his. Who else is going against Russia to give that kind of aid?

SuperAgain They lie, Get Over It
11/19/19 12:45 pm

It’s still corrupt. Government ethics standards call for any government official with a personal interest in the outcome of such an investigation to recuse themselves. The proper action is for an independent Special Counsel to be appointed by the AG (in coordination with Congressional Judiciary Committees) to investigate the allegations.

Reply
PhxLibertarian Phoenix
11/19/19 12:56 pm

How is that materially different from having an independent government do the investigation since it appears the issue took place on their soil?

ArrowFodder ohio
11/19/19 12:56 pm

Well ... the investigation into the corruption that lead to the Russia collusion hoax is already underway. As you say “The proper action is for an independent Special Counsel to be appointed by the AG (in coordination with Congressional Judiciary Committees) to investigate the allegations.

ArrowFodder ohio
11/19/19 1:00 pm

And the President, as head of the executive and the head of AG Barr correctly asked the President of Ukraine for help in the AG’s investigation. That includes investigating the Biden’s as they are intimately involved in the events in Ukraine that lead to the Russia hoax

omniku dot com
11/19/19 4:56 pm

“And the President, as head of the executive and the head of AG Barr correctly asked the President of Ukraine for help in the AG’s investigation.”

This is part of the problem. The president should not be directing DOJ; although DOJ is technically under the executive branch, it is an independent agency that should not be taking direct orders from the president and the president should not be directly involved in DOJ investigations.

.

SuperAgain They lie, Get Over It
11/19/19 5:05 pm

...and the AG is also expected to be a non-partisan advocate for equal justice under the law. AG Barr is most definitely acting in a highly partisan manner and thus is also compelled to recuse or face his own impeachment proceedings. The mere appearance of a potential conflict of interest is sufficient to REQUIRE recusal! After all, we don’t want anyone or anything our Government officials do to ever appear to be corrupt. Right?

ArrowFodder ohio
11/20/19 5:49 am

Nope. The AG gets authority from the President. It’s perfectly acceptable and expected that the President would also weigh in directly with his own authority, which is the authority the AG acts with. Remember Obama and Holder , his wingman AG. Republicans didn’t like that phrase because they didn’t like Obama or Holder . But the fact is that is normal for the executive branch

SuperAgain They lie, Get Over It
11/20/19 6:48 am

It’s not normal and should never become such! ...You should do a whole series on ridiculous justifications for all manner of crimes, misconduct, immorality, and generally antisocial behavior. It’s your gift! πŸ˜‰

ArrowFodder ohio
11/21/19 6:17 pm

The fact is it’s totally normal and I think most Presidents used their position for the benefit of the country and also for their own political benefit. The entire #shampeachment is an attempt to Criminalize actions that are part of a President’s job description. Dershowitz makes the exact same argument. I’ll be posting a poll on that . At this point the impeachment is looking like a complete dud. All the big fireworks have been fired (mueller) and now the leftover fire cracker ( Ukraine) has fizzled. Oh well :). At least it was entertaining:)

omniku dot com
11/22/19 5:05 am

“It’s perfectly acceptable and expected that the President would also weigh in directly with his own authority, which is the authority the AG acts with.”

This is why we need to start teaching civics in our schools again. People don’t even know how our government is supposed to work so how are they supposed to know when it becomes corrupted?!

The cynic in me wonders if we intentionally stopped teaching civics in school for this very reason. An uninformed and apathetic citizenry is easier to control.

.

SuperAgain They lie, Get Over It
11/22/19 6:19 am

Our politics have always always been in the meat packing plant rather than the nice ballpark frank packages we would give to our kids. Perhaps they really need advanced nutrition classes so they can recognize all of the artificial ingredients! πŸ‡·πŸ‡ΊπŸ˜πŸ˜‰πŸ˜‰

Malekithe My pronouns are GFY
11/19/19 12:40 pm

If Biden had not already admitted to extortion while VP and this story already been reported, there would be nothing to investigate. Assuming he was the actual nominee, then asking to “dig up” dirt on a political rival without reason would be bad and it is exactly what the Democrats did to Trump in 2016

Reply
ArrowFodder ohio
11/19/19 12:50 pm

There is ZERO evidence that Trump asked Zelensky or anyone in the Ukrainian Government to “dig up dirt” on Biden or Hunter Biden. That is exactly what is NOT in evidence. The first place you heard that fiction from was from Schiff in his fictional parody of the Transcript

Malekithe My pronouns are GFY
11/19/19 1:12 pm

They don’t have to dig up dirt. The dirt is already there.
No one is above the law and Biden cannot hide by being one of 60 people to run for the Democrat nomination.

ArrowFodder ohio
11/19/19 1:24 pm

I think you might be misunderstanding something. While there is already information on Biden , there are still unanswered questions. It is appropriate to have the Bidens investigated if there is reason to think there was more corruption and if it is connected to corruption in Ukraine.

theNobamist Silicon Valley
11/19/19 12:31 pm

There's an easier way to say:
Biden's a crook
He's a loudmouth braggart
And shouldn't be President

Reply
Ebola007 Florida
11/19/19 12:29 pm

Of course not.

Reply
UniversePlan Michigan
11/19/19 12:28 pm

This user is currently being ignored

Reply
ArrowFodder ohio
11/19/19 12:53 pm

There is evidence of the former not the latter

PhxLibertarian Phoenix
11/19/19 12:58 pm

Correct AF, there isnt even a suggestion that he asked for a particular result, just an investigation.

ArrowFodder ohio
11/19/19 1:06 pm

Exactly right . Schiff has been trying to use sleight of hand to make us think that it was the latter He even made up his own fictional version of the call in which all the elements of what he hopes he could accuse the President of were present . But in the real phone call there was no request for “digging up dirt” no Bribery and no extortion.

DJ13
11/19/19 1:28 pm

There is first hand witness testimony that the aid was held up until Ukraine at least announced that they would investigate what Trump asked them to investigate. There are even more first hand testimony to that fact, if they were allowed to testify.

ArrowFodder ohio
11/19/19 2:07 pm

What is the evidence that the aid would be held up until an announcement of an investigation was made? I’d like to see that evidence

DJ13
11/19/19 3:24 pm

Try listening to the witnesses without your Trumpbot ears.....

PhxLibertarian Phoenix
11/19/19 3:56 pm

But an investigation is proper. It is only a problem if aid was dependent on finding him guilty.

DJ13
11/19/19 4:05 pm

An investigation for political gain in return for aid promised is not appropriate...

ArrowFodder ohio
11/19/19 6:23 pm

And that is not in evidence.

PhxLibertarian Phoenix
11/19/19 6:36 pm

You assume political gain because you are anti trump but there is no evidence of that. There is credible evidence that a crime has been committed. It is trump's job and duty to have it investigated.

DJ13
11/19/19 8:41 pm

No, I see and hear through firsthand witnesses, the political purpose behind the investigation because I'm not a Trumpbot....

DJ13
11/19/19 8:43 pm

Having it investigated through proper channels possibly, yes. Not through the back channels that Trump used solely for political gain....

PhxLibertarian Phoenix
11/19/19 9:21 pm

How is that not the proper channel? It happened in ukraine?

Also, nobody has presented evidence it was for personal gain. What they have presented was an opinion. And you know how opinions are like assholes, right?

DJ13
11/19/19 9:35 pm

There was already witness to a back channel being done. Trump using his personal lawyer in any way on the investigation is not a proper channel...There is witness testimony to another phone call of Trump asking if Ukraine was going to publicly announce the investigation. That's what the political gain was, just the fact that who he suddenly realized was his main opponent in the election was under investigation would give him the edge...

Think Lovin Life
11/19/19 9:45 pm

DJ ... if Mr Biden weren’t guilty the. There’d be no political advantage gained from the investigation. Thanks for admitting that you agree that Mr Biden is guilty.

DJ13
11/19/19 9:52 pm

Think, try a little reading comprehension. I said just the announcement of an investigation was all he needed... No guilty verdict.....You must have Trumpbot eyes and ears....lol

Think Lovin Life
11/19/19 9:54 pm

DJ ... I get that you have to appear to bully others in a feeble attempt to make a point. I stand by ,y assertion that if Mr Biden weren’t guilty then an investigation holds NO political advantage for MrT.

Your inability to refute my assertions does not invalidate what I said.

DJ13
11/19/19 10:27 pm

No, you're inability to THINK (ironic isn't it), invalidates your post...

Think Lovin Life
11/19/19 10:29 pm

DJ ... run from the truth, it’s ok.