Yarddog
Diamond Member
- Jun 13, 2014
- 18,087
- 12,386
- 1,405
It is illegal when said president asking for favors is running in the same election as the target of his favors.Its not illegal for one president to ask another to do him a favor. He did not ask anyone to make up false dirt against a political opponent. The favor was only in regards to computer servers, and that was it. He asked if they could help get down to the bottom of what happened. Now prove that should be interpreted as looking for false dirt... and not looking for the truth into what happened.
Well, its funny that when I read the transcript i don't see Biden's name brought up 7 or 8 times, I don't see Trump asking for dirt either 7 or 8 times. The favor had to do with the Crowd strike thing... the servers.. and Trump was asking him to find the truth, not to make something up .. AS PRESENTED TO US BY SCHIFF ! Sorry but we all know the Democrats have been trying to impeach Trump for the last 3 years.... then supprise supprise a secret CIA operative comes by with faulty 2nd hand info. I just cant believe you don't see the corruption here. I don't have to like President Trump one bit to see that these actions are bordering on criminal ...if not criminal.
Trump brought up Biden and his son 3 times. He mentioned Crowdstrike only once.
Maybe I missed something, i thought there were only two sentences... and Zelenski did most of the talking about Biden , not Trump. There was no Quid Pro Quo
Further more Trump simply said "whatever you can do would be great" .... Whatever you can do??? that could be anything... I hardly call that pressure, Which is why Schiff had to do his editorializing... to make things appear much much worse. If he simply read the transcript straight he would have gotten no reaction.
After explicitly connecting US aid to the Ukraine with a 'favor' that Trump wanted them to do: the investigations into crowdstrike and the Bidens. With Trump personally holding back the aid the aid to Ukraine. A message that the Ukrainians were made to understand quite clearly, as demonstrated by the Ukrainian summary of the conversation BEFORE the whistleblower complaint was made public.
"Donald Trump expressed his conviction that the new Ukrainian government will be able to quickly improve Ukraine’s image and complete the investigation of corruption cases that have held back cooperation between the Ukraine and the United States."
The qui quo pro was clearly understood by the Ukraine. And clearly communicated by Trump. And also, not the basis of the impeachment inquiry.
Again, there's no question that Trump explicitly solicited an investigation into his chief political rival from a foreign government. That, all by itself is impeachable. And Trump has long since admitted to that. The quid quo pro is just sleezy corruption gravy.
("Donald Trump expressed his conviction that the new Ukrainian government will be able to quickly improve Ukraine’s image and complete the investigation of corruption cases that have held back cooperation between the Ukraine and the United States.")
Who made that quote? Where in the phone call did Trump say investigation cases was holding back US cooperation? Trumps call was also all about talking to a newly elected President in the Ukraine, so its not suprising that he would be making positive overatures to him.
And heres the other thing. If Biden actually did commit some sort of crime in the Ukraine..... it is NOT digging up dirt to try to determine that. It's only digging up dirt if you are asking someone to lie or make shit up. Trump in no way did that. The truth is truth. Seeking or asking for the truth is not an impeachable offense. This seems to be lost on everyone , if Biden commited no crime, there will be nothing to get to the bottom of simple as that. A Vice president using his influence wrongly in a foreign country to enrich his kid.. Would if true, be a very impeachable offense.
seems to me, the Democrats have made this strike against trump as an effort to stop any investigation into wrong doing, and actually that could be seen as obstruction.