Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Quid Pro Quo is "this for that". It's just that simple.
Dick Mulvaney is the current spokes person for the Trump administration. Since Fox News may not be giving you all of the news, here is Mulvaney saying that there was a quid pro quo trade when pressed for information on the cessation of arms aid to Ukraine.
Back room favors. We can do them but not the govt. We can make a contract or treaty with total transparency. Even if it’s just the head of security or intel - but someone has to have oversight.
So where are all of my critics. A Trump official contradicted himself. This is only the most recent in a long line of contradictions called the Trump presidency.
When Obama gave Iran pallets of cash in return for them promising to keep the nuclear deal, that was quid pro quo.
Except Obama did not give Iran pallets of cash. I know you won't listen since it doesn't your agenda but Obama released the money that belonged to Iran as a return for agreeing to the nuclear arms deal. The key here is that the money already belonged to Iran. He just gave it back to them.
Without 'quid pro quo' you don't have politics, which is the art of compromise. Compromise is quid pro quo.
It depends on context. As a union guy, OP, if a union negotiator offers reduced benefits for increased pay rate, that is quid pro quo and is fine and normal. If the same negotiator offers reduced benefits in return for an envelope full of cash, that is not so fine.
You could interpret the Trump-Zelensky phone call either way. In any case since there was no overtly offered quid pro quo it is much ado over nothing. Democrats need to run on the issues and beat Trump at the ballot box. Remember, what comes around, goes around.
Without 'quid pro quo' you don't have politics, which is the art of compromise. Compromise is quid pro quo.
It depends on context. As a union guy, OP, if a union negotiator offers reduced benefits for increased pay rate, that is quid pro quo and is fine and normal. If the same negotiator offers reduced benefits in return for an envelope full of cash, that is not so fine.
You could interpret the Trump-Zelensky phone call either way. In any case since there was no overtly offered quid pro quo it is much ado over nothing. Democrats need to run on the issues and beat Trump at the ballot box. Remember, what comes around, goes around.
I agree with much of your answer but do not agree that Trump’s “perfect” phone call is nothing. He was asking the president of Ukraine to dig up dirt on Trump’s political enemy, likely his opponent in the next presidential election. This was an attempt to involve another country in our electoral process. When I heard about the phone call, I knew it was really, really bad.
And DJT’s people knew it was bad as well, because they wanted to make sure its transcript would not see the light of day. State Department Officials heard about it. They thought it was concerning, and hence, the whistleblower.
We are coming uncomfortably close to a definition of matrimony here.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
