https://news.yahoo.com/trump-admits-ask … 51988.html
Trump is daring the Democrats to start the impeachment process now. He wants it now because the country is split on the idea (about 50% in favor).
By doing it now, he can rile up his supporters and have them pound on the Senate to reject the House.
If the economy declines into recession next year as many predict, Trump's support will plunge and impeachment becomes more likely.
So he has better chances with impeachment now than later.
Promisem, I really would like to avoid the impeachment process for political reasons. But this guy, Trump, with his temerity of thinking he won't get caught while brazenly rummaging through the cookie jar, is asking for it.
The problem is that the GOP dominated Senate mesmerized by the allure of this clown would never remove Trump from office even if he had shot the Pope.
Then again, Shar, maybe I'm wrong, or maybe he is overconfident. The Republicans in Congress are being awfully quiet instead of defending him.
EDIT: This article does a good job of explaning how he went "from wishing for impeachment to dreading it."
https://www.politico.com/news/2019/09/2 … ine-004984
Pelosi said she is starting an impeachment inquiry, not drafting articles of impeachment. She said we will let the facts determine our time line. I think her strategy is to continue with hearings and investigations to bring out more facts and possibly more people like Guiliani and Trump's other lawyers and white house aids who may be involved in a cover up.
This will give Pelosi the time to get more people on board who are not there yet. It could also bring out the worst in Trump that we haven't seen yet.
As a sitting president, Trump can't be indicted, but he is fair game as soon as he leaves office. They will be able to nail him for obstruction of justice as AG Barr and Mueller have said. Whether that will happen or not, who knows?
From what I have read right now, Trump's damage control people are in a state of anxiety and chaos and they are afraid of what he may say or do next.
With Trump it is all about survival and winning. He does it by lying and making up stories that fit his agenda for the moment. Fox News is his state run propaganda machine that can reach more people than the MSM. His supporters will support him come hell or high water. It will be a tough sell to get them to see reality.
This isn't very credible. Read this sentence and tell me where there is any admission.
"an apparent reference" to efforts to dig up dirt on the role Joe Biden and his son Hunter are alleged to have played in Ukraine several years back.
This is called an unsubstantiated assumption. This is actually a pretty sad allegation.
Lot's of smoke accumulating around Biden and his son... This matter needs to be investigated. This kind of accusation needs to be clarified to put it to rest. "Several officials in Ukraine have indicated that the government is likely to reopen investigations into corruption, including the gas company that employed Hunter Biden, the son of President Trump’s potential 2020 challenger Joe Biden."
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news … en-company
"On 18 April 2014, Hunter Biden, the son of then-US vice president Joe Biden, was appointed to the board of Burisma Holdings. He left the company in April 2019. At the same time, one of the board members was Devon Archer, a former senior adviser to John Kerry 2004 presidential campaign."
Joe Biden announced he was running for President on April 25, 2019.
A bit odd... This is odorous.
Keep it up. You know if Biden gets in office this behavior will flip to the other side and we'll see calls for impeachment for Biden's interference on behalf of his son when he was previously in office.
The wheel goes round and round and round.
Perhaps L to L, but IF is NOT IS , and IS is what we are seeing right now.
Totally an unprecedented abuse of power and authority, is this man so dumb as not to learn anything from the Russian affair where he just barely dodged a bullet?
Unprecedented? Seems like business as usual in Washington, to me. It obviously just irritates you because you dislike this particular person.
Biden even bragged about getting someone fired who was investigating. Wasn't even a peep then.
You apparently are ignorant of what happened during Biden's conflict with the corrupt Ukrainian prosecutor. Biden and other world leaders wanted the corrupt prosecutor gone because his past behavior. The Ukrainian govt reports there is absolutely no indication neither Biden nor his son did anything wrong during that time.
This is completely different from what Trump admitted to doing. He was asking the Ukraine's president to gather dirt on a political opponent, an impeachable offense at the very least.
Oh. So the fact that his son benefited is completely irrelevant.
Benefitted in what manner? Do you know something the reporters and investigators don't? Do tell! Or are you simply "Trumping" it?
Hunter Biden was put on the board of Burisma Holdings bringing down $50,000 a month. Hunter Biden neither speaks nor can he read or write Ukrainian. He has absolutely NO experience in the natural-gas industry, which is what this company did for the Ukraine. So, what was his purpose on the board? What could he bring to the company other than access to his father who was the vice president at the time while making $50,000 a month? Oh, yeah, Hunter financially benefited in a big way.
Okay, what political experience does Ivanka and Jarrod bring to the table, Mike? If you want to discuss children of high office holders lets start at the top.
I challenge you to show what boards of companies in foreign countries they have been put on AFTER their father has negotiated a deal with the country as president.
So, I am looking for being placed on the boards of companies in foreign countries where they didn't speak, read or write the language AND had no experience in the company's industry.
THAT is unique to Biden.
Didn't answer my query, Mike. What experience has Ivanka and Jerrod have to advise a world leader? Are you sure it was after Biden negotiated the deal his son got the job? Dou you actually know what his job description is?
Come on Randy, work with me here. The topic of the thread is "Trump Admits Asking Ukraine to Investigate Biden’s Son-Now this stinks"
So, a viable response would involve speaking about Biden's son. It has nothing to do with Ivanka and Jerrod. So, I don't respond to most of your questions because they are blatant attempts to deflect from the topic. So, do you have anything on topic to say?
I have ALWays disliked him even before his so called television show. I will admit that, he is arrogant, corrupt and cowardly at his core. But, that is just my opinion, of course.
So you say that I cannot judge him objectively because I don't like him?
So, Trump has boasted and admitted to many discusting things. But as President of the United States, the bar is raised higher. Your circumventing the appropriation functions of Congress to pursue a personal political vendetta would be a crime for any one taking the time to look, and I will be damned if he gets away with it again.
I never watched the show. There was nothing appealing about the premise or the man.
Totally unprecedented abuse of power and authority?
Wait, isn't what Trump is being accused of EXACTLY what was done to Trump when he was a candidate?
Credence, the hysterics I have seen from you, Scott, and others on here is astounding, or sad, or both.
Scott has over 20 articles bashing Trump (I stopped counting at 20) that is kind of fanatical IMO.
All the talk that he was going to be impeached before his first year was up, then his second year, now his third.... he's going to be there for four years folks (I said this 3 years ago) and if the lunacy and hysterics keeps up it will only help ensure he will be there for 8.
Disconnect from the News Media's BS... and get on with your lives, save your energy for the election, volunteer to drive people to vote, put up signs, do something that will make an impact, ranting online won't do it.
What is the point of this forum at all, really? Why would anyone waste their energy bashing Trump when they know full well that the usual suspects will appear to oppose the view and the usual suspect will appear to support the view.
Why not try to discuss things we can agree on, rather than things we're just all going to scream about?
It would seem to me that corporate America and politics-as-usual politicians just love watching us little people scream at each other on the internet because it keeps us from doing anything productive or useful in terms of changing things that obviously need to be changed.
Trump was an effort (a poor one, IMO) by people in this country to send Washington a message. Are Democrats really going to respond to that message by nominating and then possibly electing Joe Biden?
That would seem to miss the point.
Nice hope, but I think online participation is, for some, mostly about venting in ways they can't in real life.
I will add, in relation to your last comment, that the DNC has too much power to allow the people to decide who their candidate will be.
"It would seem to me that corporate America and politics-as-usual politicians just love watching us little people scream at each other on the internet because it keeps us from doing anything productive or useful in terms of changing things that obviously need to be changed."
Okay, I agree with you. I just have not had conversations with Democrats/Liberals where we agree on much more than humans need oxygen to live.
My question to you is...where do we start? I just don't see common ground on politics. If there is, please let me know. I just don't see it.
I think getting big money out of politics or at least making big money transparent is a start. I think it benefits the people to know who donates to which candidate and to limit contributions and to end PACs.
Somehow, some way, a politician's job has to be serving the people and not soliciting donations for his/her next election.
Do I think this is possible? I don't.
I think getting money out of politics is impossible.
Worse I think much of our tax dollars go to funding the very issues Americans do not want happening, funneled to Non-Profits much the way the corporations funnel money to politicians, in ways that are under the table yet still gray-area legal.
Another problem is those bedded firmly to a party like a religion, so when I post something like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4eKJWBjYlw to prove a point I just made (above) they will go 'that is an alt-right site and therefore anything they say is worthless'.
So since getting money out of politics is impossible. Try for something attainable.
Get people to disconnect from MSM news. It's ALL bad... Fox, CNN, doesn't matter... they are ALL feeding you mind rotting garbage.
I'm not saying everything these channels put out is garbage... but the 10% worthwhile information is not worth the 90% of fabrication, falsehoods, and corporate based tripe they are feeding you.
To be blunt if you are a hardcore supporter of CNN or FOX and think they are preaching the gospel truth, you are a damned fool.
I completely agree, Ken. I'm waiting for some channel to put forth a news channel that just reports news... but maybe nobody would watch? We all want to be entertained too much.
I just watched a small bit of a segment on CNN about Fox & Friends. It was Anderson Cooper on the screen making fun of Stephanie Grisham and Fox like an 8-year-old might mock somebody who had a disability. Is that really what we've sunk to now?
I firmly believe what we see on CNN and Fox is a reflection of us. America is in a sad state in terms of its intellectual faculty.
As far as money in politics, I completely agree with you.
Every campaign I worked told everyone the same thing, "Fund raising is the mother's milk of politics."
So, to me, that means that perhaps the government needs to get involved by limiting campaign contributions or by providing a fund that candidates draw from equally or by some other method that basically limits large campaign contributions.
But then that limits free speech possibly because rich people have a right to express themselves.
It would also limit the free speech of us little folks and our grassroots efforts.
All I'm saying is that candidates should possibly all have to use a capped amount of money, which means that it will be less about the money and more about what they do with it.
Would you set that cap at the amount the least popular candidate might raise? The most popular? Somewhere in between, perhaps 3/4 of what the least popular of the Democratic or Republican might raise?
How would you ensure a handful of big donors didn't use up all the "available" donation, leaving nothing for anyone else (as GA mentions) and still allowing donors to buy politicians?
If the cap is not some astronomical amount, it would mean spending by candidates will fall drastically - will advertisers (and other recipients of that donated money such as airlines or motels) allow that to happen or will they lobby intensively and stop any such attempt before it happens?
Personally, I'd like to see a cap as well, but also think there are an awful lot of considerations involved. Including people "running" for office that have no intention of winning, just in collecting lots of free money and living a nice life while they run.
Sorry I didn't respond right away.
I'm glad we agree on this basic idea of a cap. Clearly, there'd be a lot of rules and who the heck knows how the DNC and RNC would affect them. However, I'd hope that the rule would be established by a non-partisan group and be funded federally.
From my experience, most of these "grassroots" efforts are funded with rich people, or corporate money, and the "little folks" really have no clue what they are supporting. Any time we speak of having no limits on what individuals can give to politicians, it seems we are giving rich people more of a voice than those without the funds.
Is it a rich person's right to have more influence on our government than an average American does? I think we should have caps as crankalicious speaks of and continue to limit individual contributions. In fact, publicly financed, capped campaigns might be the way to go. Why shouldn't we be able to just have debates and a set number of appearances for each candidate and let the people decide based on the platforms as opposed to endless parades of nonsense commercials, etc? It seems we would be likely to get better people for the jobs this way. This will not happen anytime soon though.
As far as the specific topic. This type of politics reflects Americans as a people. We have "lost our moral compass."
It's not even rich people. Know anyone who works for a union? When you work for a union a portion of your dues will go to the union's candidate's choice. I agree with you, I just don't see a way for it to stop. Everybody wants to have influence with the politicians.
Yes. GA also pointed out that it's not just rich people, however they clearly due have more input than the average American. Of course, unions pool cash from their people, making this seem a more valid democratic expression. I think publicly financed elections are the way to go.
"It would seem to me that corporate America and politics-as-usual politicians just love watching us little people scream at each other on the internet because it keeps us from doing anything productive or useful in terms of changing things that obviously need to be change"
That is why I support politics are politicians that are truly ready to move us to the next level. My idea of the "next level" may well not be shared.
I am curious just how far the Right is willing to go and to what extent. But, unfortunately, I agree with Mike, I have to struggle hard to find little if any positions that I and hard core rightwingers agree on. So, yes, we are all in trouble.
Well, Ken being a candidate and being the President of the United States are two different things.
I can accuse Mr. Trump of using bad judgement and have that if not anything else apply at the minimum. Are you always joined with Trump at the hip?
You suck up to Trump, you would be among the last from whom I would expect an impartial evaluation of this issue.
Trump deserves most of the attacks that he receives.
Dirty Republicans, mitch (the turtle) McConnell threatened Obama with their determination to make him a one term President, so I have no sympathy for Trump nor his supporters.
As for his ability to gain other term, we will see.....
What are your sources, the Drudge Report or Brietbart,
how do I know that YOUR sources are any more impartial?
Trump deserves more of the negative attention he receives in the press.
Credence, I agree with Ken. Stop being an hysterical and fanatical lunatic (his words). I'm the only one who deserves that label.
Scott, I don't know, but it seems like more than a coincidence that Trump focuses on corruption in a country to support withholding Congressionally appropriated funding which is very same one that he browbeats for information that is self serving and beneath the dignity of the office for solely political purposes.
If people cannot not see the brazen nature of this then I am more than happy to be defined as hysterical and lunatic by those guys.
Some people on here defend a corrupt, racist and law-breaking President simply because he represents their party.
It's especially sad when they are fine with Trump begging or blackmailing other countries into helping him win an election.
Actually, it's scary more than sad.
It's more than just party politics, many here support him because they believe he is doing the right things.
My comment wasn't exactly in support of Trump. My comment was meant to point out the hypocrisy, or at the very least, the fact that both sides have accused one another of the same.
Which, if you weren't buried knee deep in your loathing for Trump, or were capable of seeing the BS the media keeps spinning for what it is (so much garbage and triggering), you might have taken for how I intended it.
You can stand firm in your beliefs and debate an issue, or you can sink to being a name calling, labeling, embodiment of indignation online... but that type of interacting with others convinces no one your side has the better argument or position.
Are you stating Biden's withholding money from the Ukraine was equal to Trump's blackmailing them? As far as I can tell, there was nothing to the claim and other world leaders felt the same as Biden about the corrupt Ukrainian prosecutor.
Of course, if one is zany enough to believe Faux News, it's another "Deep State conspiracy. Do you thinks so, Ken?
I'm sure we can agree they have NOTHING. An allegation made by an alleged whistle blower who did not hear the phone conversation with the Ukrainian president and based it on information someone told them. Wow...I don't know if the other side realizes this, but that is NOT proof of ANYTHING. I wonder if the charge by the alleged whistle blower could be discarded based on "Hearsay" laws. Maybe the legal definition of hearsay is beyond their ability to comprehend? That's possible.
I believe once the transcript is released, the Democrats will look like they always look...pathetic.
Name calling? Out of the blue, you posted a comment calling Credence, myself and others fanatical, lunatic and hysterical.
Do you deny it?
No one attacked you. No one called you names. You simply started lashing out. You are blind to your own Trump and Fox-fueled hatred.
Of course your post was in support of Trump. All of them are.
If one is not an active member of the "Beat up on Trump" at every opportunity bandwagon, one is firmly in support, is that it? Does it never occur to you that there ARE other considerations in our world than to destroy the President?
And you'll consider them all before admitting Trump is a crook.
Single minded hatred of Trump doesn't allow for reason.
Single minded loyalty to Trump doesn't either.
You say hatred, but we can document multiple instances of Trump committing crimes, including his latest public confession to solicitation of foreign interference to further his re-election campaign. What we see is a criminal occupying the highest office in the land. Why that doesn't also make you angry stuns the rest of us. What else are you willing to accept if it benefits your policy views?
Perhaps it is because your "documentation" (read: unsupported claim from an unknown source) is not proof of anything...except a strong desire to oust a president you hate.
Why mere claims, which are a dime a dozen and usually false (remember, we knew President Trump collaborated with Russia to fix the election), are adequate to spew such hatred stuns the rest of us.
When this investigation, too, reveals no serious wrong-doing, what will be the next one? There is little doubt (actually no doubt at all) that this is the way of the future - hound a political adversary with false claims and loud shouts until they are destroyed by public opinion. Although not new, the scope of such activity has grown to unbelievable proportions and is part of the reason Trump was elected in the first place - a great many people are sick and tired of political games and simply want leaders that care more for the country and it's people than for themselves and their party. Why that message is ignored in favor of "politics as usual" also stuns the rest of us.
Do you deny that Trump told the Urkainian president to investigate Biden?
Do you deny that Trump withheld aid from Ukraine before the call, even though Congress authorized the aid?
"but we can document multiple instances of Trump committing crimes"
There are no facts to support your statement. President Trump has not been indicted or impeached for any crime what so ever? You seem to accuse and convict on nothing but unproven media reports. Lots of smoke but never no fire. I trust that if the president committed any crime or misdemeanors the fools in congress would have started the impeachment process. They are salivating to destroy him, and if had any form of proof of any crime, they would have an impeachment underway.
Congress should move on to help our president work on his wonderful agenda. An agenda that is solving long-time problems. They appear more foolish each day. I note you use the word we as if you speak for others here on HP? I might borrow the term and say we see is our government has a party that is acing daily to destroy our country at all cost, just because they lost.. Perhaps you might stop in your tracts, and really have a long look at all the incidents of what you claim are crimes the president committed. And look for proof, not conjecture.
Consider you just may be deriving your opinion or conclusion on the basis of incomplete information.
It appears you are being fueled by media bias. Time to do research into some of your accusations, and look for facts not media conjecture.
Considering my conclusions are derived from information contained within legal documents and not the media, and I know how to spell the word 'tracks,' I'll agree that you and I will not see eye-to-eye on what constitutes proof or that you are really knowledgeable at all about where I source my research from.
And yes, I believe I represent many others here in knowing that Trump committed crimes to become elected. We know he was named Individual-1 in a felony conviction as a co-conspirator. He was forced by the Attorney General of NY to shut down his foundation for illegally using its funding on his campaign. Those are two clear proofs of crimes.
Your's and Dan's arguments that an indictment or impeachment needs to exist to recognize a crime has been committed is laughable. The president cannot be indicted while in office. Impeachment without the support of a highly partisan Senate would not have held Trump accountable to these crimes.
And conviction of an impeached president, by a highly partisan Senate, isn't going to happen, either. Where does that leave the whole thing when he is impeached by House Democrats and the Republican Senators, after investigation, declare he is innocent of the charges?
Does it leave it showing that our "leadership" on the Hill cares far more about politics than truth? Because it surely looks that way to me, and I do not except either side of the room...which brings us right back to just how and why Trump was elected in the first place. There are far more important items on the agenda to consider than removing political rivals from office - illegal aliens in the country, grossly failing infrastructure, "sanctuary" cities and states that deny federal law, veteran homelessness and health care are just some of them - but the Hill spends its time and our money on political ploys.
I believe you were alive when Nixon was impeached. Only 43% of Americans believed he should be impeached and the GOP stayed on Nixon's side until the evidence came out showing his corruption. I expect the same could happen in this impeachment.
"until the evidence came out showing his corruption."
That's the problem. Lets take for instance this issue with Ukraine.
Trump noted it would be nice if Ukraine looked into Crowdsource and Hunter Biden (who helped make a 1.8 Billion dollar U.S. loan disappear).
Trump is merely trying to expose yet more of the malfeasance that was rampant in the previous administration. And once again the Democrats and the media works to twist this into a crime by Trump.
The key here is, rational Americans not invested into hard left politics, that take the time to review the facts... see there is no evidence supporting the wild claims against Trump... but there is plenty of suspect activity by many who are trying to oppose him, be it Comey, Strzok, Biden, Clinton, etc.
At best, we have the pot calling the kettle black here. At worst, we have a totally corrupt and criminal network of high ranking government officials and office holders trying to cover up their treasonous activities that harmed American interests for the sake of pocketing a few billion dollars and holding onto power.
To all you Trump supporters out there: No matter what you do or say about Obama or Trump will excuse Trump from what he has done. There are now two documents that say he tried to curry favor from a foreign power to get dirt on an opponent, so it would give him a political advantage in an election. Further, he held up approved financial aid as a bribe to the foreign power. The latest document shows that six high ranking intelligence people were aware of his efforts.
He will not be impeached for two reasons: a sitting president cannot be indicted and the Senate will not allow it. However, what he has done is above the law and in this country no one should be above the law. His results whether true or imaginary are no excuse for his actions.
And just to keep the record straight, Mitch McConnell said the senates' job was to make Obama a one term president and Obama succeeded in being a two term president despite all the obstacles that were placed in front of him by the right wing congress.
Ken, you're joking, right? If this was an official inquiry into Biden, why does Trump refer it to his personal lawyer, Guiliani. That fact alone lays out perfectly that this was soliciting a foreign government to investigate a campaign rival, clearly something of value and illegal. The guy who asked a foreign government in Russia to influence the 2016 election just asked Ukraine to do the same thing in 2020. But this time, he withheld aide approved by Congress to achieve that goal. That's a clear abuse of his office.
Yes the fraud case in NY is ongoing As is the Co-conspirator case, neither has come to fruition. He actually could come out on the other end as a winner. As he did in Story's case... You just don't appear to understand no one is guilty until proven to be guilty? We have courts to decide guilt, not talk jock or poor losers.
It appears you take allegations, accusations as being factual? Perhaps you should consider the outcome of the Meuller report? The president came out standing tall without being charged or impeached for that hysterical claim. For over two years we watched nightly accusations from Adam Schiff and others making the claim they had facts, evidence of crimes. Where is that evidence, where is the proof? They have now moved on to something even more ridiculous...
Am I to understand that you believe the president can be impeached without crime or misdemeanor? I realize some of the media touts are making statements that claim no crime need be committed. Yes, are stating th constitution allows for a broader category to accuse a president of crime, although that category is vague and has precedent in regard to former presidential impeachments.
I suggest you do some research on impeachment. And I must ask a question. Do you really think the Senate would vote to impeach this president? There will be no impeachment, here will only be many Dem's with egg on their faces, and further their descent politically. They are becoming more than foolish, they have become an embarrassment to the country.
This statement is laughable ---" Your's and Dan's arguments that an indictment or impeachment needs to exist to recognize a crime has been committed is laughable. "
No, proof of a crime, facts needs to be present. Not just some tout making unfounded accusations that they concoct out of twisting and leaving out before and after sentences to change the context of the president's comments.
https://www.ajc.com/news/national/how-d … hUL1WA0IJ/
Yes, the fraud case is ongoing because Trump cannot be charged until he leaves office, but N.Y. forced Trump to shutter his foundation and give up the rights to the remaining funds as he could not be trusted to use them appropriately. That's a fact - this is not opinion. Why was it closed? Because of the violations of him illegally using it for personal gain and toward his campaign. Or to quote the NY Attorney General, there was a 'shocking pattern of illegality.' Need a refresher on what illegality means - it means they broke laws.
Yes, the rich can find ways to evade guilt, we all know this. But when the person Trump ordered to illegally (need a refresher on the word?) pay off McDougal and Daniels was convicted for that crime, and can prove Trump ordered that payment, and Trump was named as Individual-1 in the conviction, the evidence is fairly clear even if Trump has not been charged yet. For those of us who didn't go to the OJ Simpson School of Law, guilt in this case is clear.
Trump was far from standing tall. Congress is in the middle of investigating him for the ten instances of Obstruction of Justice. A question no supporter seems to be able to answer - why did Trump look to obstruct an investigation into, and thereby protect, a hostile foreign government that has been found to have attacked our 2016 election? In my eyes, that's pretty treasonous. Are you saying that you support those that attack our country?
As for impeachment, I refer you to above. Nixon's impeachment was not popular at the start either, and the Republican party stayed with him until many of the facts were brought to light of his criminality. This week alone, we see factual evidence that Trump solicited a foreign government for assistance against one of his chief political rivals. And before you say Biden needs to be investigated in retort, that could be the case. And Hunter Biden was not even on the board of the company conservatives are railing against when the suspect misconduct occurred.
But why did Trump not go through official channels then and why was his personal lawyer, Guiliani, the point-person for this investigation? Why, because this was Trump asking for a thing of value, damaging information on his main rival in the 2020 election. Soliciting that assistance is illegal. Withholding aid approved by Congress to get it is using his position for personal benefit. These are both violations of his oath of office.
I have to apologize for not replying to comment. It's very obvious we don't agree on anything you have taken the energy to put into your comment. It would seem useless to go back and forth I will respect your right to your opinion, although mine differs.
What does your comment have to do with my reply about his name calling?
"Of course your post was in support of Trump. All of them are."
Which was in reply to LTLs post of "My comment wasn't exactly in support of Trump. My comment was meant to point out the hypocrisy..."
You seem to have an inability to distinguish between supporting Trump and making any comment that does not trash him. Thus my own comment.
Wilderness: You be the judge!
https://a.msn.com/r/2/AAHPzTe?m=en-us&a … InAppShare
Ah, I see you ignored the main point of my post to cherry pick the last sentence.
You seem to have an inability to read any comments without misdirection.
Saying his comments always support Trump, which they do like yours, is much ado about nothing.
I understand what you are saying about "grassroots" movements hard sun, so let me put it differently.
Suppose you really supported a candidate and wanted to help--beyond just a campaign donation of money--by doing anything you could to convince folks to vote for your candidate.
Suppose you decided to host a backyard BBQ to convince your neighbors to vote for your candidate. Any money you spend on that BBQ could be called a campaign contribution.
Suppose you are a professional musician and you offered to play for free at a rally for that candidate. Your donated services could be called a campaign donation.
etc. etc. etc.
Would you feel your free speech Rights were violated if you were not allowed to do any of those things because of campaign finance laws?
I am not against campaign finance caps or reform, but I think they must be structured so that examples like those given aren't prohibited.
If we have privately financed campaigns, as we do now, then I understand your point. Especially as your examples don't have much to do with the amount of cash any particular person has
I think the limits are there for one good reason. To keep any one entity, potentially selfish interests, from having too much influence. Agreed that reform should not outlaw your referenced activities and reform must be nuanced.
If this was an official inquiry into corruption, why was Trump's personal attorney, Rudy Guiliani, someone with no government position, referred as a point-person to the Ukraine President? If some Trump supporter could explain this, that'd be great.
Both Trump and Biden should be probed. Relentlessly, With probes.
Valeant, if you don't recognize that both Democrats and Republicans are fighting for the same team, (and we the people aren't on it) then no we don't have any common ground.
You know what I don't get, is how just because a person dislikes Trump, that makes Biden a great guy...
Its fine if you dislike Trump, for whatever reason, that doesn't make the other option automatically better.
You don't turn a blind eye to all of Biden's wrongdoings just because you despise Trump. What you do is find someone else to support, and make sure Biden isn't the nominee.
"Its fine if you dislike Trump, for whatever reason, that doesn't make the other option automatically better."
That depends on your point of view, Ken. In my opinion, Trump is by far is worst example of any one that has held to office or is currently running for it.
You aren't alone, Credence. Two surveys of Presidential scholars have him tied for last place as the worst President in all of American history.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historica … idents?-26
Got me kinda wondering who Trump was tied with for the bottom position. None of this stuff is set in stone but I can easily see him on the bottom 10 though.
Buchanan was ineffective because he did nothing to even stave off events leading to Civil War. Trump reminds me more of Andrew Johnson, an abrasive, arrogant bull in the China shop, quickly ready to undue all the carefully prepared post war plans of his truly great predecessor, Abraham Lincoln.
Well, if you want to see Trump win both the electoral college AND the popular vote, Biden is the man to get behind.
All those swing states Clinton barely lost, will now be clear cut victories for him. Of course, that's just my opinion, knowing the DNC they will bury the likes of Warren and Gabbard and go with the corrupt DC crony.
Vote for a third party. Preferably one that is in favor of less government.
Ken, I like your question about Biden being a great guy just because somebody hates Trump. I always try to ask myself this question when getting behind a politician - am I just liking this person because I dislike the other person.
I think it's only natural to think that way.
The Democrats have the option to put up someone who is not corrupt to the core, and an absolute stooge for the corporate elite, and that is EXACTLY what Biden is.
Put Warren out there, give America a REAL choice between two people who are not 100% beholden to the most criminal and harmful elements to have influence or power in D.C.
The DNC won't do that, they don't want Warren... they want a frontman to give lip service to the concerns and needs of their supporters, not someone who will actually try and make the changes they campaign on.
That's at least one reason I support Warren and not Biden. While I don't see Biden as the same destructive choice as Trump, I think Biden will eventually produce worse than Trump. It will move the Right further to the right because Biden is a career politician and it's exactly what America is screaming that it doesn't want. Even if Biden is the nominee and gets elected, it will end up being bad for the left in myriad ways.
The Democrats need to give America an alternative to politics as usual. Warren is actually a candidate who has made her whole career on draining the swamp. She can beat Trump at his own game on that front. She can run on that issue alone and probably win.
Do I think it will be easy? No. Trump has yet to apply full force on whatever smear campaign he's going to run against Warren.
What has Warren done, in her lifetime on the Hill, to drain the swamp? It's a massive job, as Trump found out, but she's had years and years to do something - what was it?
Specifically, what is "the swamp." Also, how do we measure any progress toward draining "the swamp?"
You've got to be kidding. You want me to tell you what Warren has done? Even if I responded with a string of links, would you read them? Believe them? Of course you wouldn't.
What power does a single senator have to drain the swamp?
Warren has built her career on financial regulation - trying to make sure Wall St. doesn't destroy our lives and protects the little guy from being ripped off by huge financial institutions.
I bet you can find plenty of stuff on what she's done. You don't need somebody like me to tell you just so you can dismiss her out of hand.
Biden and Clinton are prime examples of politicians that abuse their position, have no decency, making their millions betraying Americans.
Crankalicious, you seem to have a good mind, seem a decent person, you just base your 'facts' and 'perceptions' of the world on outright propaganda machines like CNN that spin their 'news' filling you full of bias, lies, BS.
CNN will try to destroy Warren just like they tried/try to destroy Trump. For the very reason you claim her to be a good candidate... she wants change, she wants to help Americans... the DNC will never allow her to be the nominee.
It will be Biden, or some other loser who they know they can control.
Right. Only Democrats abuse their power. Never Republicans.
The RNC tried to stop Trump, but the Republicans don't have SUPERDELEGATES so, at the end of the day, they have to honor the people's choice when it is overwhelmingly in favor of a politician.
The DNC can ignore their voters, and does.
The RNC tried to circumvent the voters, they considered hijacking the nomination, but the Republican process is just not corrupt enough to get away with it.
The DNC did circumvent the voters, they did hijack the nomination, and they were corrupt enough, despite insider whistle blowers like Donna Brazile coming out with the crimes committed, to get away with it.
With respect, I believe you are still showing pro Republican, anti Democrat bias.
In my case, as a former Republican, I see the GOP as more corrupt and hypocritical than the Democrats.
You say you are a former Republican, maybe so, perhaps one of those well off individuals that liked to socialize at the golf club and belonged to the Audubon Society, whose sensibilities have been offended...
Truly disgraceful that the Republicans, once reserved for the social elites who belonged to the right clubs, has become the party of the working masses....
Truly deplorable that the uneducated trailer trash now think of the Republican party as theirs and the uncouth Trump, their champion, is now the head of the Party.
Yeah, I'm driving a car with more than 200,000 miles on it. Not quite the car of the social elite.
What I am is someone who believes in certain conservative principles that your beloved President violates on a daily basis.
What's disgraceful is that the GOP has become the party of white nationalists and propaganda lovers.
It's no longer the party of Ronald Reagan.
Keep pushing the propaganda, you can fool some of the people all of the time.
Cmon Ken, this is not representative, just a bunch of photo ops, what do the stats really show about black support regarding Trump? Please avoid using biased and notoriously unreliable right wing news outlets.
We as a group are at odds with this man, Trump, as we are with much the GOP and its policies. A well placed photo or two will not change that.
I don't think "we as a group" works, just like it doesn't work for white or hispanic, its only about identity and victim politics if you are willing to see the world through that prism or skewed political spectrum.
More people wake up to the truth everyday. And the Biden-Ukraine issue helps hasten the awakening of more people. I'd say a person almost has to want to be ignorant not to see the corruption going on with Hunter & Joe Biden. The mental gymnastics one has to go thru to try and make Biden's corruption a Trump crime, is extreme.
I'm stepping in here cause I find your argument, to put it lightly, less than compelling Ken. Credence, we had a minor difference on a race-related discussion recently. I just want to let you know that I see the tactic Ken just used...post a few photos of minorities with Trump as proof that minorities like Trump.
And then, when you point out that stats state otherwise, turn it into "your seeing the world through a victims lens" argument. What, we are no longer allowed to poll minorities to see how they feel about things?
Of course, Credence, you may not quite agree with my assessment here.
Yes, Hard sun, your assessment is correct and spot on....
Thanks for the affirmation. I knew it couldn't be just me.
Beware the echo chamber. It is enticing, comfy and appealing. It may not always be the right choice.
True that. Thanks for pointing out I read too many of your posts. You're a virtual canyon where the echo comes to life.
Not my favorite guy to listen to (meaning I don't really like him), but I found the back half of this clip interesting, if it is true that Senator Chris Murphy went to the Ukrainian President and said this, the whole lid on the corruption going on in D.C. is about to be blown off.
Starting at 5:45: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvZBXhfoeTU
No lid is going to blow off of anything. They'll scream, they'll rant, they'll float their version of reality (both sides, mind you) and then, at some point, they'll move on to something else to scream about.
There will be no accountability for anyone. It's politics. It's not justice.
Randy, it's not about being psychic. It's all about quietly using common sense, and waiting for actual facts. Do you ever stop to reflect on all the past allegations? Do you ever just sit back and put the puzzle together? The Dem's are repetitive, they move in the same circle of alligations. I need I run through them? Start with Trump being a racist, move on to him obstructing justice. It goes around and around. Do you see why some find it tedious, and somewhat foolish?
Yes Shar, I find it tedious and foolish of those who believe Trump is innocent of any wrongdoing, especially in the light of so much evidence against him.
The evidence? The president had and has every right to ask a foreign country to investigate an American citizen that he feels may have committed a crime. The USA has documented agreements with many countries in regard to cooperation with investigating a crime.
But would he have taken the trouble to be so diligent about investigating this matter if anyone other than a primary opponent, Joe Biden, was not running against him next fall?
Seems convenient, a coincidence, perhaps?
I always think that too many coincidences have to lead to a pattern or direct cause
I can't answer that question. I do realize he may have been asking due to the fact he has been investigated for over two years on the assumption he committed election crimes. Biden is running for president, I would guess he could be under the same scrutiny as Trump was.
Yes, He asked Zelinsky to investigate Biden. The president has the authority to ask a foreign country to assist in an investigation into an American citizen. As other countries leaders can ask for our assistance. We have actually traties that stipulate he can ask assistance. One just agreement with Ukraine.
In my opinion, the cat is out of the bag, time to open an impeachment procedure and seek proof, take a vote, and end this one way or the other.
Sharlee: Trump asked a foreign government to investigate if the son of a top campaign opponent has committed a crime in exchange for Javelin missile systems. And he was willing to hold up the funding until an agreement was made. That is an abuse of power for the benefit of Trump, not the people.
The Department of State Inspector General has corroborating evidence that what the whistleblower claims is true and factual. Now there are two whistleblowers and both have corroborating evidence.
That's a load of rubbish.
The Democrats found out their corruption was about to be blown wide open for the public to see, so they circled the wagons and are trying to impeach the President, a smokescreen to cover how corrupt Biden has been, let alone Crowdstrike.
"President Trump in July asked the president of Ukraine to “do us a favor” by looking into an American cybersecurity firm, CrowdStrike, and the location of a Democratic National Committee server that Mr. Trump said was believed to be in Ukraine’s possession."
If that server is found and its information becomes public, supposedly Biden, Clinton, and others would have a major problem on their hands.
Ken: Crowdstrike and the deep state don't exists. They are figments of the right wing propaganda machine made up by Fox News pundits. They are both conspiracy theories that are used to distract the truth. Do you have any proof that crowd strike and the deep state actually exists?
Crowdstrike was one of the asks by Trump. I think in Trump's mind it actually exists. The other was digging up dirt on Biden and his son in exchange for Javelin missile systems. Please prove me wrong.
The IG has not made any statements on the WB claims?
"The ICIG (Intelligence Community Inspector General) reviewed the information provided as well as other information gathered and determined that the complaint was both urgent and that it appeared credible," according to the memo from the office of IG Michael K. Atkinson "
Note the words "appeared credible". This man did his job, that is all I see from Atkinson. He has made no other statements that would lead to the president's guilt? The context of his statement is in regard to the complaint.
He claimed it was urgent and the complaint appeared credible. He gave no opinion to truth or guilt.
Tedious? We have been down this very road with many of the allegations that have been directed at Trump. None have produced a reason for an impeachment? One fact, we have the Dem's calling for his impeachment from the day he took office. I would think you would become accustomed to tedious? Not sure that many here are giving an opinion on his innocents, but choose to see some proof of crime once again.
Sharlee: So you believe Trump is not a racists and has not obstructed justice, is that correct? You need to research to see if the allegations against Trump are true instead of trying to prove that Biden and his son are criminals.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_vi … nald_Trump
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story … use-227050
"Could you offer a resource that indicates that Hunter Biden had experience in international law? I have not been able to locate much on his business other than it is a small consulting firm? Rosemont Seneca Partners, an international consulting firm."
I was simply asking another for information. his statement was matter of fact that Hunter Biden has experience in international law?
I am in no way trying to prove Biden's son is a criminal. I do believe now that the information has surfaced on possible wrongdoing on the part of Biden and his son need it needs to be investigated. I have said it over and over, one needs facts to prove guilt. I have openly stated Biden and his son should not be accused until some facts put forward. Not sure why you are put on the defensive in regard to my comment?
I don't believe Trump is a racist. That is my opinion, and I need not be crucified for it. I respect you have a right to your opinion, please respect mine.
If you think Trump is bad, get behind a better candidate and work to vote him out in 2020.
The whining, complaining, labeling, insulting, etc. that has gone on for 3 years... against Trump. against anyone supporting Trump, it does NOTHING to deter those who would vote for him... if anything, it has hardened their resolve to support him. Why?
Because the Russian Conspiracy was contrived. A two year long LIE that was pushed as absolute gospel. Because there have been efforts trying to Impeach him since the day he took office.
Its been a circus, led by fools like Maxine Waters and Al Green who called for his Impeachment the day he was sworn in.
Stop the witch-hunt... stop supporting the grossly corrupt (IE - Clinton & Biden) and get behind a decent candidate that hasn't sold their soul for power and money.
Dump Biden and stop defending him, that is the smart thing to do.
Ken: I don't have to defend Biden and his Son. Here is the real story. Whether you choose to read it and believe it or not is your problem.
If Trump is not removed from office, I will then try to vote him out, but as long as he is in office, I will not support him. He lies too much for his and own good, and the countries own good. It is starting to catch up with him now and my prediction is, it will only get worse.
https://www.businessinsider.com/ukraine … ned-2019-9
You won't see anything. You can't. Those such as yourself who have willingly consumed the koolaid lost that ability.
It just breaks my damn heart you don't like me, Ken. I so wanted your approval....
And you seem to be deaf to facts about Trump's criminality.
One note of agreement is not an echo chamber. Here's the definition:
"an environment in which a person encounters only beliefs or opinions that coincide with their own, so that their existing views are reinforced and alternative ideas are not considered."
There's no echo chamber here. In fact, you could say I prevented the potential for an echo chamber by disagreeing with Ken's original statement.
I certainly don't read you stating this when a couple of Hubers agree that Trump is a victim of media, a victim of the "deep state", a victim of "the liberals," etc.
When asked about his behavior, Biden says he acted in line with accepted ethical standards; later saying when he became president he would (something to the affect of) make such standards unacceptable.
That, to me, is a clear message that Trump asking for a clearer understanding of what happened won't reflect well on Biden, if everything is exposed.
I'm so sick of the bogus bs of the hypocritical attacks on Trump. The American public is not stupid, even if those on the left keep falling for ignorance.
I don't think all on the Left "keep falling for it". Though some are indeed easily duped.
I think a large portion of the 'Left' believe in open borders and globalism, believe in socialism (the teaching of which has taken over many college campuses) or hold beliefs equally detrimental to the best interests of the Nation and its citizens.
The ACLU's founding members wanted to bring down America and its institutions. The OCF (Open Society Foundation) funds dozens of 'non-profits' that work against the interests of America from within America. Even the UN with its Global Compact for Migration and other agendas now works against America's sovereignty and economic wellbeing.
And most of the MSM works in support of these organizations and causes, no surprise, as they were indoctrinated with socialism and progressive ideology in the universities they attended.
I believe many want Trump removed because he stands in the way of these goals and agendas, many want to transform America, and just like in Venezuela, or China, or any nation which its people bring Socialism to control, there are many in America that work towards that goal.
And that, folks, is how conservative media brainwashes their followers. Getting them to see a whole population of people in their own view as opposed to reality. And you wonder why we think you guys are cult-like?
You do realize the term open borders was taken from a speech Clinton gave to some Brazilian bankers? She was discussing the flow of goods between countries.
As for socialism, when using government funds for healthcare or education, those things are socialist to conservatives. When using them to bail out farmers for horrible trade policies, that is not. Instilling tariffs to force businesses where to produce goods and services is not exactly free market enterprise by the way. That's about the biggest example of government controlling the means of production you can find. Both parties have examples of socialist policies. Let's at least be honest that it's solely about fearmongering. Somehow you have to undermine the fact that under the past two democratic presidents the economy has improved tremendously and deficits grew smaller.
"And that, folks, is how conservative media brainwashes their followers. Getting them to see a whole population of people in their own view as opposed to reality. And you wonder why we think you guys are cult-like?"
I trust you see the irony in complaining how a whole group of people see a whole group of people as one?
"You do realize the term open borders was taken from a speech Clinton gave to some Brazilian bankers? She was discussing the flow of goods between countries."
Do you think that is how it is used today? Or is this just a deflection from the left wanting virtually unlimited immigration?
"As for socialism, when using government funds for healthcare or education..."
What would you call forcing people to pay for what others want? It certainly isn't capitalism - would the term "Marxism" fit better in your opinion? "From each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs"?
I'll start at the end. I was just forced to pay for farmers because of bad policies. Was I not? I am forced to pay more for goods and services because of tariffs, tariffs that aim to control the manufacturing of goods. None of your arguments apply to the point, that there are socialist policies currently within both parties.
I do believe that open borders is misused. Yes, there are those on the left that would favor unlimited immigration. But they are definitely in the minority of the Democratic party. Many believe in a pathway to citizenship, but not illegal immigration.
Yes, I stereotyped those who subscribe to conservative media sources. Guilty of irony.
Geez, Ken for someone who always appear to be above the fray, you sound like a perfect parrot regarding the standard rightwing playbook.
Standard erroneous viewpoints and stereotypes, just because much of our side questions the cost effectiveness of a border wall does not mean they are for open borders. What it is that you consider detrimental to a nation and its citizens is in actuality, just your opinion, because it is not mine.
ACLU has been linchpin in protecting my civil rights and liberties, concepts that has always been something the Right naturally resists. I have more reasons to support their existence over otherwise.
It is always the usual stuff, blame the press, blame higher education when people develop adverse attitudes to rightwing ideas. Why do right wingers always believe that those having adverse opinions against them have been indoctrinated or brainwashed in some way? Does anybody ever get credit for thinking for themselves?
If by being "globalist", I accept a balance between what can be considered national sovereignty and the reality of existing as one among a family of nations where cooperation is necessary to keep the peace, then I am a globalist.
What would happen if either China or Russia were free to act in the sole interests of its national sovereignty?
Trump is being removed because he is an idiot. While I find his agenda anathema, his continue tendency to walk the fine line between illegal and highly unethical will be the ultimate cause of his own undoing.
And yes, I want to make structural changes to the current system, but advocating for the Right as you usually do, you are compelled to resist it. That is completely natural and expected.
I was just stating facts.
I recognize from the 'progressive socialist' playbook doing so makes me the enemy, makes what I say offensive, or makes me a 'right-winger'.
But no, stating fact is just stating fact, and nothing more.
And you have data to back up how many Democrats are 'progressive' to back up your claim? What percentage believes in this mysterious open borders idea? How supportive Democrats are of free tuition and single-payer healthcare?
Have you ever used Twitter? I'd say not to bother. Literally, facts are 'hate speech' on Twitter, whenever they fly in the face of the 'progressive' agenda.
"Standard erroneous viewpoints and stereotypes, just because much of our side questions the cost effectiveness of a border wall does not mean they are for open borders."
What about the proliferation of "sanctuary" cities and states, refusing to acknowledge the laws of the country about immigration? What about demands that people entering illegally be immediately released if they but parrot the word "sanctuary"? What about the demands to do away with ICE? What about using citizen resources (tax money) to educate foreign citizens in our country illegally? What about aiding people to form caravans to intentionally overwhelm our resources and gain entry that way? What about state governors that refuse to allow the national guard to aid in patrolling the border, then demand federal resources to care for illegal aliens entering that same unguarded border?
Credence, it isn't just about a difference of opinion over the effectiveness of a wall (although everywhere there IS one illegal crossings drop dramatically, all over the world) - it is that virtually every action from the left that concerns illegal aliens entering or already in the country is to hamper or deny efforts to stop the influx or to protect those already here from the law. The left won't even deport those that commit criminal acts here - sometimes very egregious ones - and instead take action to protect them from ICE!
Given all this, what other conclusion is possible? Regardless of what your personal opinion as to what should be done, the overwhelming rhetoric and action from the left is to encourage and aid it. That can only indicate a desire for open borders.
"What about the proliferation of "sanctuary" cities and states, refusing to acknowledge the laws of the country about immigration? What about demands that people entering illegally be immediately released if they but parrot the word "sanctuary"? What about the demands to do away with ICE? What about using citizen resources (tax money) to educate foreign citizens in our country illegally? What about aiding people to form caravans to intentionally overwhelm our resources and gain entry that way? What about state governors that refuse to allow the national guard to aid in patrolling the border, then demand federal resources to care for illegal aliens entering that same unguarded border? "
Your points are well taken, Wilderness. This is one Democrat that remains against the concept of wide open borders, and unjustified taxpayers funds doled out to non citizens, etc. but I still would take the conservative stance on this issue much more seriously if there were as much zeal prosecuting those that hire them.
Actually, I think the conservative stance is to do something about it all, and I think they are on board with stopping the work potential. Unfortunately, the conservative "leadership" is not with them on this; there is far too much money involved (and donations) to be on board with the concept.
But are you on board with closing the border (as tightly as reasonably possible) against any illegal crossing, or just criminals and other such "undesirables"? I think there are very few liberals that are happy with drugs, criminals, human trafficking and such coming across, but are quite happy to let anyone else in to feed at the American trough. And that does not begin to address the millions already here...
You mean give Schiff time to write another fiticious piece of crap like all the others. How long are these losers going to not do what they were elected to do, and that was not impeach a sitting president. So childish and beneath them. Obvious the voter's thought they were better than that when they voted for them.
Sadly, that appears to about sum it up.
Why was Biden's action with Ukraine only an issue once he became a candidate for President?
Now why would you say it isn't an issue for an American politician to threaten a foreign country if they don't let his son bypass the law? Because he was a Democrat?
Now this is a fantastic statement. You have just done exactly what Trump wants you to do even though there's no evidence to support it. Biden was demanding that the Ukraine fire a corrupt prosecutor like about a dozen other people. Where is your evidence that Biden made that statement, acting as Vice President, in order to benefit his son? If that's what he did, he should be put in jail, wouldn't you agree?
And what should we do to Trump given he asked for a favor in exchange for releasing aid? What should we do to Trump given he posed the idea that the foreign aid was tied to the favor? What should we do to Trump given that he asked for this favor?
Personally, I would really like to know what the hell that company got for $50k/month and what they thought they were going to get. I don't want to be that naive. Was that Ukraine's favor? Hey, we give the VP's kid a position on the company board and we'll get favorable decisions or influence?
If that's what is happening in Washington all the time, we're all in a lot more trouble than arguing whether or not Trump or Biden should be President. If that's the case, none of us have a chance.
Also, why hasn’t anyone heard about this Biden issue until now? Why weren’t you outraged until now?
So, since this involves the Ukraine, I will try and spread some light on it.
Why hasn’t anyone heard about this Biden issue until now?
The simple answer is this was minor compared to all of the scandals of Hillary Clinton and the DNC. ALSO, at the time this happened Petro Poroshenko was president of the Ukraine. He was a typical corrupt Ukrainian president who turned people off during his time in office by keeping and maintaining his companies in Russia and other things. What Biden and his son did was nothing new. That type of corruption was standard.
Biden overstepped his authority by making a condition of getting funding based on the firing of a Ukrainian official. Ukraine is a free country and should be able to handle their own internal affairs. I wonder if the United States would like it if Germany made it a condition that Hillary Clinton be in jail before they cut a new trade deal for cars. Think about it. It was none of the business of the United States.
Volodymyr Zelensky in the new president of the Ukraine and has only been on the job since May of 2019. One of his selling points to get him elected was how he was going to eliminate the corruption in government.
So, the new president of the Ukraine promising to do away with corruption is asked by the current president of the United States about corruption including Biden.
It was an honest question. Zelensky has been asked to investigate such allegations of corruption including the situation with Biden.
What did the Ukrainian company get for giving Hunter Biden $50,000 a month? Obviously access to his father and the White House. Biden and his son had other sweetheart deals with other countries. Yes, that is corruption.
It has been all over the news since 2014. Trumpians are making a big deal about it now to distract people from Trump.
Even more laughable, now the Trump administration is investigating the Clinton email server AGAIN.
Don't be surprised if they start shrieking about Bill Clinton pretty soon. Or maybe Benghazi.
Got a beef? Explain these as not important, but Trump is off base.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions … han-trump/
https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/did-uk … -election/
https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house … -democrats
Imagine if that had been Don Jr. who went to the Ukraine and helped make 1.8 Billion dollars of U.S. funds disappear.
Imagine if it was Don Jr. who went to China, got a 1.5 Billion dollar business deal, and then Don Sr. met with some Chinese officials on a private plane right afterwards with Don Jr.
So if things were reversed wouldn't they be calling whoever was going after Don Jr and Don Sr for these crimes a hero?
Bu it isn't Don Jr & Sr …. its Hunter and Joe Biden that did them.
Those are opinion pieces by conservative columnists.
Of course, Scott. They have nothing left to defend the cretin.
ALL "news" is opinion pieces these days... at best.
Or its just biased propaganda and falsehoods (IE- CNN) at worst.
A lawyer friend point out something interesting I didn't realize. By trying to impeach on the Ukrainian phone call, the Democrats have essentially stated there was nothing in the Mueller Report that was impeachable.
IF Biden and his son hadn't had this history with the Ukraine prior to the phone call, it may have been an issue. Given the fact that Biden has a history of getting his son money from countries the United States is dealing with in some way, makes the questions of President Donald Trump very legitimate.
So, if the Biden story has legs, then we shouldn't look into the possibility that our President is withholding funds in return for foreign governments to dig up dirt on a political opponent? This seems exactly how dictators in places such as Russia and South America operate. This is not how a functioning democracy allows its President to behave.
If the Biden's son issue were a true criminal matter that needed to be dealt with, don't you think the wiser move would have been to let US intelligence officials deal with the matter? They could make contact with anyone in the Ukraine who may be able to provide info relevant to the investigation. Instead, Trump makes it a personal issue despite the clear implications of how it may look..which is why he tried to hide it.
Oh yeah, the intelligence communities are part of the deep state, along with everyone except the President. This means we must believe ONLY the President, we must defer ONLY to the President's judgement, we must do ONLY what the President says. I see how this works.
"our President is withholding funds in return for foreign governments to dig up dirt on a political opponent"
1. Ukraine got the funds promised by the United States.
2. President Donald Trump didn't need to dig dirt on a political opponent. He wanted to investigate corruption of a former vice president AND his son in foreign country.
3. The Ukraine president has only been in office a few months. So, his predecessor was very corrupt. This is the time to ask the new Ukrainian president who has dedicated himself to eliminating corruption for such an investigation.
1. Trump admitted he withheld funds and Kellyan Conway confirmed it, only stating that the reason was for "broader concerns." Whether they eventually got them, or not, may only be relevant as to the reason why they got them. Was it because the Ukranian President agreed to dig up dirt on Biden?
2. He may not have needed to but he did attempt to anyway.
3. You really think Trump was the best guy for this job, even if what you say is true?
This really just confirms what I stated on how things play out with Trump supporters.
We must believe ONLY the President, we must defer ONLY to the President's judgement, we must do ONLY what the President says.
I think this is more an example of a lack of objectivity from the left who suffer from TDS.
"Was it because the Ukranian President agreed to dig up dirt on Biden?"
Do you know the difference between "digging up dirt" and investigating acts of corruption? The left admits the Biden situation had been around since 2014. So, there was NO digging involved.
I understand that not everything is the Presidents fault. That is not the issu.
Digging up dirt is when the President takes it upon himself to personally take care of a matter involving a political opponent with at least an implied quid pro quo. How could there not be a quid pro quo considering Trump's position as it pertain to Ukraine. Whether the situation has been around our not, he is still digging with the attempt to bring it back up just before an election year.
I held out judgment on this. It is just not looking good for Trump here.
Mike, I give you credit for at least trying to point out there were no funds withheld after that conversation, that Trump promised nothing, etc.
But I doubt it matters, so long as there are "news sources" out there peddling falsehoods and inaccurate information, the people "devoted to the cause" will cling to such fabrications.
I agree with you. I believe if given the opportunity to point out the truth, I feel obligated to point it out.
I'm sure we can agree the MSM will continue to peddle their falsehoods as facts, truth and reality no longer have a place in today's American journalism.
What truth? So far you haven't refuted any of the points I made. You simply pointed out that funds were eventually given to the Ukraine...which I never denied. And you added your opinion on the definition of digging up dirt, which is not a compelling argument IMO.
You have nothing to defend Trump with here, but to sit back and state: "Oh yeah, I told them, but they just don't see it."
I don't disagree with you on everything Mike, but clearly, on this matter we are not going to agree.
This is the absolute truth of it, and where any debate on anything must begin.
The understanding that the MSM is complicit in covering up the truth, and peddling falsehoods. That the media protects the most criminal elements in D.C. rather than exposing them.
What is the MSM... all is owned by a handful of corporations, in the 70s it was over 100 different owners, and this was before Cable News and Sirius radio.
Control the media and you control the masses.
“Control of thought is more important for governments that are free and popular than for despotic and military states. The logic is straightforward: a despotic state can control its domestic enemies by force, but as the state loses this weapon, other devices are required to prevent the ignorant masses from interfering with public affairs, which are none of their business…the public are to be observers, not participants, consumers of ideology as well as products.” - Noam Chomsky - "“It’s the primary function of the mass media in the United States to mobilize public support for the special interests that dominate the government and the private sector."
Trump is the representation of a 'populist' uprising in the country against the corruption in D.C., against 3 decades of lies like NAFTA will be good jobs and the ACA will save you money and make things more affordable.
The RNC didn't want him, they spent billions trying to stop him. He certainly isn't a Democrat, they want to destroy him. Trump is nothing more than a representation of tens of millions of Americans that are fed up.
What did he run on? "Drain the Swamp"
What is the Swamp?
Just about everyone in D.C. that has been there for a quarter century or more. That is a LOT of people, in Congress, in the halls of the Pentagon, CIA, FBI, etc... Presidents come and go, these people are there for 30, 40 years making policy, making law, they don't answer to, or really care what Americans think.
And we see the Swamp in action right now, trying to cover up Hunter and Joe's criminal acts, if they don't lord knows how much Ol' Joe can spill, how much dirt he must have on a whole lot of people in D.C.
Of course the media has a lot of power. Trump wants to control the media so he can control our thoughts. Not me. If I gotta pick a poison, I'd rather have the power in the hands of groups like the State Department, etc., than in the hands of one ill-equipped con man.
If draining the swamp is getting rid of Washington insiders, he's not doing a very good job. Then, he's introducing an entirely new level of public/private corruption with his businesses that he refuses to give up while President.
"That is a LOT of people, in Congress, in the halls of the Pentagon, CIA, FBI, etc."
This is called government, for better or worse. These institutions are made up of the people, real Americans. The sons and daughters of Americans that hail from all walks of life. Should we give it all up for Trump and his closest cronies?
Trump wants to control the media because he wants to control your thoughts?
Honestly, after going though a rigorous course to get you out of the cult the media on the left has already created, you'd probably have the tools you needed not to get hoodwinked again.
I'm not even sure what that means. But, I'll never be a Trump fan and have never been in love with the media. It didn't take a course for me not to like certain aspects of the left wing and the media. It's funny how, if you don't like Trump, people just lump you in with "the media" and "the left." America's main problem is these dichotomies that create divisions. The media does serve a very vital purpose. I will say that. And, there's some great reporting from CNN, MSNBC, in between some of the garbage.
"This is called government, for better or worse. These institutions are made up of the people, real Americans. The sons and daughters of Americans that hail from all walks of life."
Well damn! Nicely said. ^5
No one stated there were funds withheld AFTER that conversation. Not the news sources I read anyway. The fact that funds were not withheld after that conversation simply suggests that Trump thought the call went well. That the Ukrainian President would look into Biden.
So how much are Ivanka and Jerrod earning, aa? Or do you even care?
No, he's just a lawyer, meaning law "expert", whose law firm was hired by the Ukrainian company to provide legal expertise, not energy expertise.
Yes, it was a conflict of interest. No, it wasn't illegal according to a wide variety of sources.
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-mete … d-ukraine/
This is funny. Yeah, it is common for companies to put members on their boards with NO experience in their industry or are able to speak the foreign language. Hunter Biden's firm didn't provide any legal services. There is no records of billing for legal services provided. So, why what Hunter Biden on the board? He provided access to his father the vice President. Hunter Biden could provide nothing else and for this he got $50,000 a month. Pretty corrupt. It does need to be investigated. I support President Donald Trump's asking for an investigation.
"On 18 April 2014, Hunter Biden, the son of then-US vice president Joe Biden, was appointed to the board of Burisma Holdings. He left the company in April 2019.
Joe Biden announced he was running for President on April 25, 2019.
A bit odd... This is a bit odorous, smells like sulfur. Why would Huner leave such a lucrative job? This is smoke..
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- … SKBN1W91UG
https://www.businessinsider.com/ukraine … ned-2019-9
I think it is interesting how Biden claims he had no idea what his son Hunter was doing with the Ukrainians, yet, there is a picture of Biden and the president of Burisma holdings together at a golf game. Oooooh...the smoke is getting thicker. I say we need to investigate this soon!
Yes, it would seem odd a son would work for a company over 5 years, and old dad was not aware... Or as you pointed out playing golf with hunters boss. Yes, we certainly need an investigation. Poor Joe, he has both parties chasing him.
Look, we agree on something again, Mike. Unless you're not serious.
Somebody should absolutely investigate how and why Hunter Biden got that job. And what he was expected to do.
It certainly wouldn't be the first time a politician's kid got some kind of sweetheart job, would it?
And imagine all the ways our stable genius President could have made this an issue other than the one he chose. I find the amount of stupidity in this particular path (asking the Ukraine for help) kind of confounding because I think this sort of patronage is worthy of investigation.
In all honesty, the president of the United States has an obligation to investigate corruption. A treaty to this agreement was signed during the Bill Clinton administration. If Biden did nothing wrong, then he shouldn't worry about an investigation. Any investigation would HAVE to involve the Ukraine, so, President Donald Trump asking makes perfect sense.
He left because Trump was making it a political issue for his father, even though it has been plastered all over the media since 2014.
It seems odd he would leave if one were to look at the optics one would think he should have stayed if he hd done nothing wrong. He certainly stuck it out for many years? Did Hunter put out a press release why he was leaving Burisma?
I would almost think if I were to just want to create smoke, I would summarize Trump had him canned. Do you see where I am headed here? We have no idea why Hunter left his job, no facts just what we want to believe. Yes, to me it looks bad. Just as Trump's phone call looks bad to you. But in reality, it's all smoke.
Hi Mike. I am not intending to refute your statement, but only want to offer a possibility.
I was listening to some NPR interview of an author that said he interviewed Hunter for a book; not sure if it was a biography or what, but, he says that Hunter says there were months when he received more than that $50k per month because of billings for legal services he provided that were other than his board seat duties.
I haven't checked that out, but in the context of the interview subject, it sounded legit.
If true, that would mean that Hunter Biden did sometimes provide legal services to the company.
ps. If the numbers are available anywhere, I bet $50k per month isn't an outrageous sum for some major corp board seats for high profile names.
I did some research. I just thought Hunter Biden was some dude with nothing to offer, but he was a lawyer, so a corporation would certainly want to pay a lawyer with international legal experience. That's still a lot.
Could you offer a resource that indicates that Hunter Biden had experience in international law? I have not been able to locate much on his business other than it is a small consulting firm? Rosemont Seneca Partners, an international consulting firm.
This article does not address that, but it may be the single best piece I've read on this situation:
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi … on/598804/
Ken should read this. He'll love it.
Do you think it wise to wait until the Biden /son investigation is complete? I am very sure Hunter's firm will be well scrutinized. I am not willing to bash him or let him off the hook until real facts are presented.
It's precisely that we're not all up-in-arms about this THAT is the problem. This is all about influence-peddling. And it's accepted. People making millions of dollars because they work for the government or worked for the government or have "influence". Cash in! It makes those who work for the people seem less like servants and more like vultures.
In today's current political climate, one really has to do their own research and conclude for themselves what the truth is.
You cannot depend on CNN, you cannot depend on FOX, any article you read may be filled with bias, or omissions, you can't rely on any source.
What a person can do, is review multiple outlets that seem credible, and draw one's own conclusions.
Just because Comey declared Clinton innocent of any crime, did not make it so, it just meant that Comey was using his position to cover her and cover up major abuse of power and corruption.
Just because the House, now controlled by Democrats, wants to impeach Trump over a call to the Ukrainian President does not make him guilty of what they are accusing him of.
It might be that they are trying to cover up Biden's crimes, so that they in turn are not at risk of being exposed for theirs. There is no greater collection of criminals and thieves than what currently sits in Congress.
An attempt to smooth it over, if they are acknowledging that this much malfeasance went on, they must be trying to cover up some truly damning corruption.
Ukraine Gas Firm Burisma Made $1.8 Billion in U.S. Aid Go Missing
A subsidiary of the Bank of China named Bohai Capital signed an exclusive deal with Hunter Biden and Chris Heinz’s Rosemont to form a $1 billion joint-investment fund called Bohai Harvest RST. The deal was later increased to $1.5 billion.
The thing about investigating Hunter Biden that is so unbelievably stupid is that Trump could and should investigate this type of influence-peddling, but he's only asking for one investigation against a political opponent.
He could easily cover himself by asking for a wide-ranging investigation into this type of corruption, only his Republican supporters won't let him because it would bring so many people down, Trump's support in D.C. would evaporate.
So we're all just going to pretend that one side does this crap more than the other and it will continue on because nobody is willing to buck the system and just investigate everyone.
And oh, btw, the way Trump is going about this is definitely an impeachable offense - and one that he could have easily avoided were he truly interested in draining the swamp.
I would like to point out that we don't know what President Donald Trump is investigating. We only know about Biden because of the conversation with the Ukraine.
I believe from a legal standpoint, it will be difficult if not impossible to prove this conversation rises to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors.
It's obvious Biden did worse.
Asking a foreign government to investigate a political rival is a violation of the oath of office, particularly when the implication of withholding aid is involved. There's nothing legal that needs to be established, only what Congress deems impeachable.
There's nothing I've read that suggests Biden did anything wrong or that any decisions he made had anything to do with Hunter. You seem to be forgetting that getting rid of Shokin was so that MORE corruption would be investigated, not less. Shokin was known as somebody who did not do anything vis a vis corruption.
It's obvious Trump violated his oath of office...
This would be true if there wasn't the appearance of corruption by his political rival with the foreign country. ALSO, there is the treaty between the Ukraine and the United States that was signed to fight corruption and share information. The Ukrainians believe it was pretty crooked.
Can we agree that if Biden did nothing wrong, he would welcome an investigation to clear his name. That hasn't happened. What we have seen if Biden denying he knew anything about the Ukrainian gas company and then there are pictures of him golfing with an executive of the company. Oh, I wonder what an investigation would reveal.
"Can we agree that if Biden did nothing wrong, he would welcome an investigation to clear his name. That hasn't happened."
Dems have demanded Trump's tax returns a hundred times, with the assumption that if he doesn't provide them it's because there is something to hide.
Is there a difference here? Not that I can see. Guilty until proven innocent according to Democrats - Biden must be guilty.
Yes, Trump is being audited by the IRS. Should there be something wrong with his taxes, the financial experts at the IRS will be the ones giving the fines, etc. So, that is a BIG difference. His tax returns are being investigated by the government agency tasked with investigating tax issues.
This, exactly, was what I was thinking just moments before I read it.
If they weren't worried about what would be exposed, this would never have become an issue.
Oh, you mean like Trump is welcoming an investigation into his taxes, the violations of the Emolument Clause, his asking foreign leaders to investigate his political enemies?
What's Trump's excuse for refusing to obey lawful subpoenas, Ken?
Randy I suggest you check out: Secret Empires: How the American Political Class Hides Corruption and Enriches Family and Friends
Its very informative. It goes into detail on how things work, like with Hunter & Joe Biden.
How children of members of Congress, and the VP, are not required to fill out any ethics forms or financial disclosure forms. This allows children of Senators, Representatives, and the VP to financially benefit from decisions their parents make in committees and from their political position.
Like for instance, a subsidiary of the Bank of China named Bohai Capital signing an exclusive deal with Hunter Biden and Chris Heinz’s Rosemont to form a $1.5 billion joint-investment fund called Bohai Harvest RST.
The book documents the corruption of Joe Biden and his son when they went to China and made billions by mixing American policy with Chinese government (military). This covered two chapters of the book.
The book exposed Republicans as well, but we are focusing on Biden here, he is just as dirty and corrupt as any of them. Which is why Congress is working so hard to protect him.
You mean like when Ivanka and Jerrod received Classified Clearances when they were not qualified, Ken? Address that...
Conspiracy theories can say anything, Ken. Did you see Trump avoiding the question several times as to what he wanted The Ukraine president to do? It was sad to watch as Trump made a fool of himself one more time, but not the last I'll wager.
Peter Schweizer is a partisan hack and his books are not worth the paper they're written on. Get better sources Ken.
Trump's investigation about Biden and his Son will die on the vine, just like most of Trump's made up conspiracy theories. They will continue the investigations and they will find nothing, because nothing exists, but it will go on forever, just like the Obama birther movement and voter fraud.
Here are the facts about CrowdStrike and Biden's corruption according to Politco:
Trump requested that Ukraine investigate the cybersecurity firm—CrowdStrike—that determined the Democratic National Committee had been hacked by Russia. This is a recurring obsession for Trump—the fact that the DNC did not provide its server to the FBI to examine independently. Trump told the Associated Press in 2017 that he thought CrowdStrike was “Ukraine-based” and “owned by a very rich Ukrainian.” The firm was actually founded by a Russian-American, Dmitri Alperovitch, and is based in Sunnyvale, California...end of story.
Biden and his Son's corruption:
"Ukraine’s chief prosecutor Viktor Shokin, who was not considered “a very good prosecutor” by Ukraine’s own parliament, which voted to remove him. Indeed, Shokin was widely condemned as soft on corruption and fired in 2016 amid international pressure to remove him. Trump and Giuliani, however, have claimed that Biden alone urged Ukraine to fire Shokin because he was investigating the Ukrainian gas company Burisma, whose board members included Biden’s son Hunter. According to documents obtained by Bloomberg earlier this year, there was no active investigation of Burisma when Shokin was fired—it had been dormant for more than a year by that point. Subsequent Ukrainian prosecutor generals have insisted they’ve found no evidence of wrongdoing by either Biden or his son."
The key point here is that Trump says that Joe Biden stopped the prosecution. There was no prosecution because the prosecutor was fired by the Ukrainian government for corruption. Joe Biden nor Hunter Biden were involved. But Trump and his cohorts will let their investigation go on forever because it serves them politically. It's right out of Trump's playbook.
I appreciate your comment and the information you have provided from media reports. I truly hope he Biden aligation I looked at by the DOJ, and put to rest one way or the other. I trust if the content of your comment is true, Bidin and his son will be exonerated. If it is false both Biden and his son will have broken the law, and have to face the music.
I will repeat my sentiment --- Do you think it wise to wait until the Biden /son investigation is complete? I am very sure Hunter's firm will be well scrutinized. I am not willing to bash him or let him off the hook until real facts are presented."
I am just looking for facts, and it well apparent we have not been provided them as of yet.
You're not looking for facts Shar, you're grasping at straws. There was never an investigation into Hunter Biden by the Ukraine. Why, because there wasn't any reason to. You're falling for Fox News crowd again and repeating their talking points. And Trump once again admitted he's asking other countries to investigate his political rival.
Clearly against the Constitution, but you're only interested in Biden. Very telling indeed!
I am not grasping for straws, not sure how you derived that out of my comment? The allegations have been cast, as they have been in regards to Trump's phone call. I do think the Biden allegations need to be looked at. It well appears we are in a time that we accuse people of crimes, and then look for the evidence. This is not a fair system, but we might as well become accustomed to it.
"I appreciate your comment and the information you have provided from media reports. I truly hope the Biden allegation are looked at by the DOJ, and put to rest one way or the other. I trust if the content of your comment is true, Bidin and his son will be exonerated. If it is false both Biden and his son will have broken the law, and have to face the music.
I will repeat my sentiment --- Do you think it wise to wait until the Biden /son investigation is complete? I am very sure Hunter's firm will be well scrutinized. I am not willing to bash him or let him off the hook until real facts are presented."
Wait until when? There is no basis for an investigation as there are no particular charges against Hunter at this time. If so, then please enlighten me. The charges against Trump are many and obvious as seen today when he admitted once again wanting a foreign country to investigate his political rival. Do you see the difference?
" There is no basis for an investigation as there are no particular charges against Hunter at this time."
If you truly believe this, I must point out there have been no particular charges against our president. Only allegations of crimes. Congress s put the cart before the horse For three years the Dem's have accused the president of crimes, they just have not proven any one of the allegations. When they can't prove their alligtion they move on to another. I accustom a person not be accused of a crime unless evidence is present. Let me repeat my view on the latest allegations against the president
It is time for Congress to do their job, and proceed with an impeachment. vote. They have made serious allegations and need to prove their case. I find it very unfair that they investigate to find a crime. Time to give the president an opportunity to defend himself. Time to follow protocol, vote for impeachment and get on with it. Otherwise, I see this as just a cheap political smear.
In regards to Biden and his son, alligations have been brought forward, they need to be investigated and put to rest one way or the other.
"What is good for the goose is good for the gander."
Did you hear Trump asked China to investigate both Biden and Warren, Shar? This was in June after Warren started to rise in the polls. Apparently he's worried both will beat him in 2020.
And what has Biden's son done illegally? Do you even have a clue other than Fox talking points? What does Hannity and Limbaugh say?
Actually I have been following Reuters in regards to this story. They simply report in a non-bias way. They have reported it daily from the day it broke. I am aware Trump made a comment that "China should" investigate Biden and his son. He did not ask them to? Context should matter.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- … SKBN1WJ11U
"In regards to Biden and his son, alligations have been brought forward, they need to be investigated and put to rest one way or the other."
The allegations have been around for 5 years, investigated and dropped.
No, they haven't been.
They were covered up by a corrupt cabal, and now that those criminal elements are losing control in D.C. these issues are having the spotlight put on them, as well they should be.
There is no Comey to sweep things under the rug for them, and claim no crime was committed when indeed there were, flagrant and obvious. Nor do they control the DOJ or AG.
So its a great thing that these matters are being brought into the light, for the American people who want to see the corruption to see it. For those wanting to remain ignorant, or continue to make excuses for it, that's another matter.
Got a link to a credible site to prove your assertion of a cover-up, Ken? And your last paragraph defines the right more than the left re Trump's criminality.
Brought to light? It has been all over the news since 2014.
Has the Trump administration brought charges in his 2.5 years in office? No.
Has the Republican Senate launched an investigation since 2014? Again no.
Did the House of Reps controlled by the Republicans in 2017 and 2018 launch any investigations? No once again.
If what Biden did was so illegal, he would have been charged a long time ago.
Unethical is not the same as illegal.
Point in your favor, I will cede it.
So, let us agree that what our politicians have created is a world where it is ok for their children to funnel billions from foreign countries into their investment funds, corporations, etc.
Let us also agree that there is very little chance that these foreign funders would want anything to do with the likes of Hunter Biden if they didn't believe they were going to get something back in return of value, something other than what Hunter can provide, as he is powerless and offers nothing special.
Let us also agree that how foreign & corporate lobbyists operate in D.C., especially with those in Congress, is also highly 'unethical'.
Our body of lawmakers has made it legal for themselves to siphon hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars... through things like the non-profit Clinton Foundation or the son of the VP being listed as the CEO of a foreign corporation or Managing partner if a investment co.
Going into politics broke and coming out a decade or two later worth a couple hundred million is not illegal... merely unethical, because those writing the laws (Congress) and those overseeing our security (FBI) are making sure its 'legal'.
James Comey in his July 5, 2016 press statement, laid out a case for gross negligence in the handling of classified information by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. He confirmed many of the classified materials were, in fact, classified at the time Secretary Clinton was handling them and any “reasonable person” should have known that even many unmarked documents contained classified information.
Something any rank and file American would have been thrown in jail for, and the key thrown away, was somehow ok for a ruling political figure to do. Comey himself determined there was no illegality in it, it was unworthy of investigating further, despite 32,000 deleted emails, despite destroyed hard-drives of computers she was instructed to turn in.
This is the government you are supporting & defending, but you have won the argument, technically what they are doing is not illegal, because they are the ones writing the laws and enforcing the regulations.
Perhaps you can tell us the horrible classified info Hillary erased from her server, Ken? It has to be really awful the way the right carries on about it. How about filling us in.....if you indeed have a clue?
I concede to you that politicians and Wall Street together have made it much easier for the elite to serve themselves much more than the rest of us.
How else can anyone explain a massive tax cut for billionaires and corporations that is skyrocketing our national debt?
Why else is income inequality in the U.S. now greater than any time in history?
They don't have sides like we do. They simply jockey for wealth and power anyway they can get it. Meanwhile, they inflame us with propaganda.
"This is the government you are supporting & defending..."
I'm not blindly defending it. We have to go along with laws and an imperfect system to a certain limit.
Beyond that limit is anarchy.
I have not been able to find any prior investigations into Biden or his son. I did at one point read the I believe in 2014 the State Department claimed there was no conflict of interest for Hunter to work for foreign governments. Although this is just a memory, I have not been able to locate any investigations on the Biden's when Biden was Vice President.
At any rate, this scandal has started a media scandal, and it needs investigating. Ukraine has started an investigation, with no results as of yet. It's sad that we have to have this kind of politicking. Unfortunately, a precedent has been set to charge a crime then pursue to prove it.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- … SKBN1WJ11U
Sharlee: Mueller has stated that if Trump were not a sitting president he would be indicted for obstruction of justice. Therefore as soon as he is no longer president, he will be fair game for that to happen.
In reference to "what is good for the goose, is good for the gander": In a court of law, you are presumed innocent until proven guilty. However, under congressional investigations, it seems you are guilty until proven innocent. Let me remind you, Hillary was presumed guilty by the GOP during her 3 year investigation for Benghazi and then, they finally gave up.
Trump is using distraction about the Biden's. It was the corrupt Ukrainian prosecutor that was removed from office by his own government with the aid of Biden acting as VP to Obama. He was not running for office. He did not do it for his own personal gain. His son had already left the company where he was on the board.
On the other hand, Trump is running for re-election and he wanted the Biden's to be investigated for his own personal gain to give him advantage in the election. He wanted to use a foreign power to give him that edge.
He is now asking China and the Ukraine to investigate the Biden's. That again is asking a foreign power to interfere with our election process. The only reason he cares about the Biden's is because he is in first place among the candidates. It's right out of the Trump play book. If Biden was not running for office, Trump would care less about him. It's only because he is his opponent, he is trying to find dirt on him: right out of the Trump play book.
I respect your right to your opinion. Mine varies, and to continue a conversation would be counterproductive.
Shar, with respect, the Hunter Biden story has been scrutinized in depth by the media and legal experts for 5 full years.
No one could find or prove anything illegal. The Trump administration didn't pursue it for nearly 3 years -- until now.
Please understand that Trump is simply using this to deflect criticism of his behavior elsewhere.
Biden Hunter has been scrutinized by legal experts? What proof of there is of this? Was there an investigation? If so, I would like to see the final report. There are programs you can use to determine the number of story subjects with articles written about them. Prior to 2019, guess how many stories were written about Hunter Biden and the Ukraine? Less than 50 original and more than 100 follow articles. This has hardly been scrutinized by the media.
He has no good sources, Don. Only bad sources agree with Ken.
Allow me to grab your comment about the Crowdstrike thing to add another, important, (I think), detail Mike.
I wasn't familiar with the Crowdstrike issue. So I took a quick walk-about. Multiple sources that I looked at offer this clarification: There never was a single DNC Server to be turned over to the FBI. The "server" was actually cloud-based email and communications software stored and accessed via cloud services supported by 140 servers.
Crowdstrike did supply the FBI with an electronic image of the data on all 140 of those servers, which is the same as if they had given the FBI all 140 associated servers. Of course, that explanation demands that we accept Crowstrike's word that the electronic images were as good as the physical servers. I think I will.
Just thought that I should bring this in. The "pressure" employed by Trump on the Ukrainian government is deserving of Censure by Congress at the minimum.
If it is proven that he tied the "pressure" with the withholding of Congressionally directed appropriations for the Ukraine for solely personal gain or political advantage in some sort of shakedown, then impeachment is in order.
But that is equally true for Trump’s children. Ivanka Trump, for instance, has been awarded 34 trademarks from the Chinese government since her father took office. Some of the trademarks, which include wedding dresses, art valuation services, child care centers, sunglasses and more, extend through 2028, meaning the president’s daughter could well cash in on them once Trump departs the White House.
Moreover, Trump’s insistence that Biden pressured Ukrainian officials so as to aid his son glosses over the fact that Trump, by his own admission, pressured Ukraine’s president to investigate Biden, and that pressure can certainly be seen as aiding his own reelection bid. Now it could lead to his impeachment.
“They did it too” is not exactly a robust defense, whether by the president, his Republican defenders or Democrats. As former Watergate reporter Carl Bernstein noted on CNN, examining the perks received by the children of powerful politicians may be a sideshow, but it’s one that shouldn’t be overlooked.
“Hunter Biden is a legitimate story to be looked at in terms of his role in this Ukrainian gas company. There is nothing that I’m seeing that substantiates Mr. Giuliani’s or the president’s allegations about crooked prosecutors dropping charges because it was Biden,” Bernstein said, adding, “But if anybody has a history of terrible conflict of interest by his children, it is this president of the United States. And we ought to be looking at all of these questions about the children and presidents and vice presidents of the United States in conflicts of interest.”
Just so long as they are all held accountable equally, and all removed from D.C. I have no problem with it.
If its OK for Hunter to make billion dollar deals with China and Ukraine, its fine for Ivanka, right?
Or is this just one more double standard?
If its wrong for one, its wrong for all.
Those texts messages released by the House Intelligence Committee are revealing to say the least.
I like this. Right now the bar is set at "politically useful" and it's long past time to raise it to the standard used for all other suspected criminal activities: "beyond a reasonable doubt". With the caveat that "reasonable" does not mean "anything assumption I can use to get what I want".
So now you're doubting Trump's own words? That is an improvement...
I will always doubt the word of anyone on Capital Hill. How about yourself, Randy - do you doubt the word of politicians standing to gain political power when they claim Trump has done something wrong? Or do you take their word for it simply because you hate the man?
I believe you answered the question this time, with a resounding "No!". You do NOT doubt the word of politicians making claims that will lead to gaining political power for themselves or their party. Unless that politician is Donald Trump or other Republican, of course - that remains unstated, but then it doesn't need to be, does it?
Your choice, of course, but not one I will agree with.
So nepotism is fine with you so long as it involves corruption, the hypocrisy of being against fossil fuels, while also supporting them, and provided the person is a democrat. Thanks for clearing things up for us all.
Nice Twitter meme. Like all things progressive, the substance of it is...where, exactly?
Shocking that you missed the point of the meme that the right is accusing Hunter Biden of taking a position in fossil fuels with no experience, but are hypocritically silent when Trump gives his kids positions in government with that same level of experience. Why is one corrupt in your eyes and you're not screaming corruption about Jared or Ivanka?
Here is a BIG difference. President Donald Trump's children are not paid. We all know that Hunter Biden was getting $50,000 a month for nothing.
"President Trump’s daughter, Ivanka Trump, who serves as Advisor to the President, and her husband, Jared Kushner, who serves as Assistant to the President and Senior Advisor, each forgo their White House salaries."
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/01/the-hig … -2019.html
Then tell us how you know what Hunter Biden is doing or has done in the Ukraine, Mr. Knowledge. I want the particulars as to what his job description was and how you know so much about his personal ability. This should be enlightening....
And naturally Ivanka and Jared are foregoing their salaries. It's a drop in the bucket compared to the deals they've made using the POTUS as a connection. Perhaps you can also tell me how many trademarks Ivanka has in China since Daddy was elected? I seriously doubt it though...
Latest From Zelenskiy --- No Blackmail, and he will investigate the Bidens for any wrongdoing. Facts are beginning to surface. The fact is Zelenshy was on the other end of this call, his description of the call is a very important fact.
https://nypost.com/2019/10/10/ukraine-p … joe-biden/
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukra … SKBN1WP0XL
Shar, I think we're going to start bumping heads again in a serious way.
You are making a false claim and posting links that you imply back up that false claim but don't.
Zelensky DID NOT say he was investigating "the Bidens". He said nothing at all about it in the first article and only said he was "open" to investigating Hunter Biden in the second article.
Furthermore, as the first article said at the end, "There is no evidence that the Bidens did anything wrong in Ukraine."
Yes, you are correct there is no evidence thus far. that the Biden's broke the law. I stand corrected. Zelensky did not in these articles make any claims in regards to investigating the Bidens. I read articles last week with statements from that new prosecutor Ruslan Ryaboshapka claiming he was investigating the Gas company Burisma.
"Ukraine's prosecutor general, Ruslan Ryaboshapka, announced Friday that he will review cases involving Hunter Biden but that he isn't aware of any evidence of wrongdoing by Biden."
October 4, 2019
https://www.npr.org/2019/10/04/76738670 … er-employe
Oct 4 2019
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/04/worl … risma.html
Yes they are! The entire conversation lasted about 40 minutes. The "perfect" transcript of the "beautiful" call is only 10 minutes or so. Hmmmmm...perhaps you can solve this mystery, Shar?
I will leave that to Congress... I think they will discover that discrepancy, and get to the bottom of it. Although I think the statement from Zelinsky is very important. I mean it's all about the phone call. So far the to involved are claiming it was a simple phone call, without any feelings that blackmail was involved.
"So nepotism is fine with you so long as it involves corruption"
And nepotism is fine with you so long as it involves the Trump family.
Yes, "Facts are beginning to surface.".
Giuliani associates who aided Ukraine investigation arrested on campaign finance charges
Two associates of Rudy Giuliani who have been linked to his investigations in Ukraine have been indicted for campaign finance violations.
Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman are accused of using a limited liability company to make political contributions related to American elections, in violation of FEC prohibitions against contributions from foreign nationals. Both men have been linked to Giuliani’s efforts to conduct investigations in Ukraine.
“Parnas and Fruman, who had no significant prior history of political donations, sought to advance their personal financial interests and the political interests of at least one Ukrainian government official with whom they were working,” the indictment says.
Parnas and Fruman created Global Energy Producers (GEP), and allegedly funneled money through the company. This included contributions of $325,000 and $15,000 to committees in May 2018, “to obtain access to exclusive policital events and gain influence with politicians,” the indictment says. They allegedly incorporated GEP around the time the contributions were made.
The indictment also charges that Fruman and Parnas schemed to donate money to an unidentified U.S. congressman, at the same time they were asking that congressman to get the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine removed from her job.
According to FEC records, GEP contributed $325,000 in May 2018 to pro-Trump super PAC American First Action.
The two men allegedly dined with Trump himself in 2018 and later met with his eldest son Donald Trump Jr. at a Beverly Hills, Calif., fundraiser, according to reporting in the Wall Street Journal.
Earlier this week, John Dowd, a former attorney for Trump who represents the two men, told the Miami Herald they would not cooperate with House requests for documents as part of the investigation.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/giulia … ce-charges
https://thehill.com/homenews/administra … rrested-on
This well appears to be factual information. It certainly will be interesting to see this unfold. It is very damming...
Sharlee, if you read the link to Fox News you get a more balanced report than the “facts” Island bites posted other than the link. For example
Attorney General Bill Barr has been "aware and supportive" of SDNY officials and knew that both men would be arrested and charged Wednesday, a senior Justice Department official told Fox News.
Giuliani told Fox News that he represents Parnas and Fruman on a separate matter and called their arrest and indictment "timing suspect." He stated that he "will reveal relevant facts very very shortly."
Giuliani, an attorney for President Trump, said he finds it "extremely suspicious" that the arrest was made in connection with an FEC matter that has yet to be resolved, and which Giuliani said is a civil matter.
So let’s leave out Giuliani said:
“indictment ’timing suspect.’ He stated that he ’will reveal relevant facts very very shortly.’”
if ”Facts are beginning to surface” try not spinning them by not getting all the facts.
T: Fox News is not news; it is entertainer's opinions and Trump's propaganda machine. They leave out just enough to be able to spin what the real facts are. Yes, I do my research and analysis. Here is the actual indictment document with the Grand Jury charges:
https://www.npr.org/2019/10/10/76889479 … violations
I suppose the irony of you showing an NPR link, while saying Fox is a Trump propaganda machine is lost on you.
NPR couldn't shift any further left if they wanted it to.
Ken: Did you even look at the document? Here it is by itself without being embedded in the NPR article. So you don't think that Trump tweeting advice from Hannity is propaganda?
https://apps.npr.org/documents/document … Indictment
Mike, unfortunately we live in a world where news agencies are biased, where people will stand up and lie under oath for their political beliefs or agendas, and where 'evidence' will be manufactured (IE: dossier for the Russian collusion query).
I have no problem admitting Trump is uncouth, unprofessional in how he handles information and in conversation, and that he may even be a crook.
But I recognize there is a BIGGER problem, and that bigger problem is why Trump is there in the first place.
That bigger problem is embodied in the likes of Biden & Clinton, lifelong D.C. politicians that have learned how to funnel hundreds of millions of dollars through their kids, non-profits, investment scams, etc.
These politicians sell their political favor for financial gain and are not concerned in the least with the long term interests of Americans or America, if they were, we would be living in a far better country than what we have today.
Trump is nothing more than a tool of the people that are tired of being ignored by a corrupt political system.
What difference do all of Trumps "crimes" and "disrespectful" actions make if the alternative to Trump is another corrupt D.C. crony like Biden or Clinton? Given the choice between those two options, I'd place my money on Trump being re-elected. But for one thing...
China is going to ensure America is in economic recession by November 2020, and the media will make sure the American people hear nothing about what really caused it, putting the blame on Trump.
Trump will be out, Biden (or Clinton), who has sold out to China, will be in, and the progression of America's decline and China's ascension to global domination will get back on track.
The script is already written, you just have to sit back and watch it unfold.
You had your shot with the criminal Trump, Ken. Stop trying to blame others for your mistake.
Because you know Trump is a criminal, it shouldn't be much to ask a man as intelligent as yourself what crimes it is Trump has been convicted of.
Wanta wager a hundred he won't be convicted, Toddy?
I reported that because you may address me by my name, or you may allude to me in some manner of your choosing. Corrupting my name is juvenile, but it is what I expect from you, juvenile behavior.
Again, what crimes has Trump committed? None that you know of. You're just a random citizen on the web. You don't know anything about Trump's life, or if he's ever committed a crime. It means nothing to you at all to state things which you have no facts concerning - you are not concerned with reality, just your fantasy.
Wesman: This is before he was president.
He is being charged with fraud in connection with Trump University. Eric Schneiderman, the Attorney General of New York, who is prosecuting Trump, told CNN, “If you look at the facts of this case, this shows someone who was absolutely shameless in his willingness to lie to people, to say whatever it took to induce them into his phony seminars. Telling people who are in hard economic times — we’re talking about 2008, 2009 — people desperate to hold onto their homes, to make some money, convincing them that he will teach them his entrepreneurial secrets.”
- Trump Tower was built using undocumented Polish laborers to demolish the building that previously stood on the site. At trial, the workers testified they worked without basic safety equipment like hardhats and gloves and they were supposed to earn $5 an hour from Trump’s low-bid contractor. But court documents show that for weeks, they were paid nothing. An NBC News story in which numerous witnesses were interviewed showed that Trump knew about the undocumented, unpaid workers. Yet under oath, Trump testified that he knew nothing, thus adding perjury allegations to the labor law violations.
-Trump is alleged to have violated immigration laws in hiring foreign models for Trump Model Management. These models worked illegally, and he failed to pay them fairly. Two of the former Trump models said Trump’s agency encouraged them to deceive customs officials about why they were visiting the United States and told them to lie on customs forms about where they intended to live. “It’s like modern-day slavery,” one model told Mother Jones. Senator Barbara Boxer has called for the Department of Homeland Security to investigate Trump for human trafficking in relation to Trump Model Management.
- Trump’s charitable foundation appears to have repeatedly broken IRS rules, according to the Washington Post. In five cases, the Trump Foundation told the IRS that it had given a gift to a charity whose leaders told The Post that they had never received it. In two other cases, companies listed as donors to the Trump Foundation told The Post that those listings were incorrect.
-His charitable foundation violated tax laws by giving a $25,000 political contribution to a campaign group connected to Florida’s attorney general, Pam Bondi, in 2013. As a registered nonprofit, the Trump Foundation was not allowed to make political donations. He paid a $2,500 fine.
-Trump is accused of bribing the Attorney General of Florida, Pam Bondi to drop her investigation of Trump University. She successfully solicited a donation from him before the fraud case, and afterward, he held a fundraiser for her at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach.
-In 2007 and in 2012, Trump and his wife bought two gifts for themselves at charity events for his foundation, totaling $32,000, breaking IRS rules. One gift was a $20,000 painting of himself.
-A deposition describes him raping his first wife Ivana, pulling out fistfuls of her hair in a fit of rage, stripping off her clothes, then penetrating her forcefully without her consent, after which she hid in a locked room and cried all night, as revealed in the 1993 book Lost Tycoon: The Many Lives of Donald J. Trump, and described in a Daily Beast article. The divorce was granted on grounds of Donald’s “cruel and inhuman treatment” of Ivana.
-He is currently being charged with child rape in a case for which there is an eyewitness and credible information to support the claim. The woman filing suit in April 2016 claims that as a 13-year-old in 1994, she was enticed to attend parties with the promise of money and modeling jobs at the home of Jeffrey Epstein, a Level 3 registered sex offender (the most dangerous kind), after Epstein was convicted of misconduct with another underage girl.
The woman alleges Trump initiated sexual contact with her on four separate occasions, with the fourth being a “savage sexual attack” in which he tied her to a bed and forcibly raped her while she pleaded with him to stop. He threatened that she and her family would be “physically harmed if not killed” if she ever revealed what was done. The eyewitness, Epstein’s party planner wrote, “I am coming forward to swear to the truthfulness of the physical and sexual abuse that I personally witnessed of minor females at the hands of Mr. Trump and Mr. Epstein . . . I swear to these facts under the penalty for perjury even though I fully understand that the life of myself and my family is now in grave danger.” Trump told a reporter a few years ago: “I’ve known Jeff for 15 years. Terrific guy. He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side . . .”
In sum, this history and these allegations alone would disqualify someone from a job as a camp counselor, bank teller, or any position of trust. Imagine what Human Resources would say to this record. Perhaps Trump could get a job pumping gas. But President of the United States? I don’t think so. Many have served prison time for doing a lot less.
If that is not enough for you. How about this?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_aff … nald_Trump
"That bigger problem is embodied in the likes of Biden & Clinton, lifelong D.C. politicians that have learned how to funnel hundreds of millions of dollars through their kids, non-profits, investment scams, etc."
And you think the best answer to that issue is Trump? Come on Ken.
Politics was broken even before Trump. We all know that. But trying to blow up the system to make fix that is idiotic, because you can't blow up the system without also ripping up the Constitution.
The Constitution simply does not allow there to be a dictator in the White House. The only way to do that is to violate the Constitution. And that is we're seeing right now. The White House is literally refusing to recognize the authority of Congress. It's not just a specific legal question around a particular request. It's a blanket refusal to recognize the authority of Congress. That authority derives from the Constitution itself.
I'm sorry Ken, but however bad politics was broken before, it doesn't warrant the trashing of the Constitution that's taking place by the White House right now.
Yes, I see more has come out on the story. It will be interesting to see what comes out by tonight. The arrests seem to have an opportune timeline.
President Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani had lunch with two associates just hours before their arrests, according to a report by The Wall Street Journal.
Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman were detained at Dulles airport outside of Washington last night. They had recently purchased one-way tickets, according to a law enforcement source.
US prosecutors did not intend on unsealing the indictment against the Giuliani associates, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, according to two US officials.
Their hand was forced when Parnas and Fruman attempted to leave the country, according to officials.
US attorney Geoffrey Berman said during a press conference today that the $325,000 donation Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman — two Giuliani associates charged with federal campaign finance violations — made to "committee-1" in spring 2018 was "one of the largest" donations it had received.
CNN has identified that committee as America First Action. It's now chaired by Linda McMahon, the former head of the Small Business Administration who left the White House to join the super PAC this spring.
Multiple other former administration officials also work there, including Sean Spicer and Kelly Sadler.
Igor Fruman and Lev Parnas (second and third from left respectively)
Parnas and Trump
Fruman and Trump
Parnas (left) and Fruman (right) as of this week
Apparently "draining the swamp" simply means no longer talking to people when they get charged or convicted of crimes that benefit you.
It appears that not ONLY did the alleged whistle blower speak with Adam Schiff and his committee prior to filing a complaint, they has also previously worked with Joe Biden. This entire thing the Democrats have done really stinks.
"a new report in The Washington Examiner that the whistleblower at the center of Democrats' impeachment push had worked with Biden. The whistleblower's anti-Trump attorney, Mark Zaid, acknowledged earlier in the week that his client had "contact" with current presidential contenders "from both parties."
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news … als-reveal
Which Democratic party and mass media hoax has been your favorite in 2019? Myself, I've gone from knowing I could never vote for a Democrat, to knowing I could NEVER EVER vote for a Democrat.
by Readmikenow 62 minutes ago
I have been confused as to exactly how to handle a Biden presidency. I consider him a babbling old fool who got rich selling out the United States and his vice president as a female who is a socialist/communist and had to sleep her way into a career. My opinion of both is extremely...
by John 13 months ago
I don't know about you, but the wagon wheels on this impeachment iniative are starting to come off. The recent challenge by Trump for Pelosi to bring the impeachment inquiry to a house vote is a win-win move. If it comes to a vote and they decide not to impeach, then we go back to waiting for the...
by Denise 11 months ago
We have known, since before Trump was sworn in, we would and up here. The left has never hidden their agenda.This CNN opinion piece, I hope, nails down where we are and why.https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.co … index.htmlIf Trump is winning. If he has successfully accomplished what I had...
by Sharlee 10 months ago
Today Adam Schiff stood before our Senate and told a long ongoing story. A story that he could not prove. Yet he was allowed to go on and on telling his story. Schiff used all the drama he could muster. He even had the audacity to provide videos of witnesses that testified in the House...
by Grace Marguerite Williams 11 months ago
Now that President Trump is impeached, what will the ramifications be for American society? Will those who voted for Trump riot & even attack those who the former deem are responsible for this impeachment? Will sociopolitical divisions be further exacerbated than they are...
by Readmikenow 12 months ago
House Dem reverses course on Trump impeachment as support among independents fallsHouse Dem now sees no 'value' in Trump impeachment, as polls show fading support among independents"Michigan Democratic Rep. Brenda Lawrence, a prominent supporter of Kamala Harris who has previously supported...
Copyright © 2020 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
HubPages Inc, a part of Maven Inc.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|