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.
Then why not say that Trump was carrying out US policy as tasked by himself, the duly elected POTUS? Can't have it both ways. Either both cases are dirty, or neither is dirty.
As has been pointed out by numerous sources, this was understandable since several of Trump's phone calls with foreign leaders had been leaked. Phone conversations with both the Mexican and Aussie president were made public. Negotiation 101--you can't effectively negotiate in public.
I feel probably about the same as you. But this is somewhat tangential to the question under discussion.
The word 'mechanisms' came from your post, which I quoted (see post #100).
Your first point - it's a false equivalency. See my reasoning in last post. Joe Biden was following normal protocols. It was a US policy decision. Trump's arguably not.
That said, Trump IS attempting to say that he tasked it to himself as POTUS. I don't find that convincing weighed against the envoy texts - the transcript - the resources available to him - that the investigations should have been filed from the US end. For example, on the Biden question. How could Zelensky possibly know the contents of the Biden conversations over the Shokin firing with State - EU - IMF etc.
Your second point becomes relevant in establishing a coverup. If all the diplomatic conversations were moved to the higher security classification then that' demonstrates the Ukraine placement was the new norm. There are other possible filing patterns. No doubt evidence will be gathered then weighed in the Congressional proceedings.
Your first point - it's a false equivalency. See my reasoning in last post. Joe Biden was following normal protocols. It was a US policy decision. Trump's arguably not.
That said, Trump IS attempting to say that he tasked it to himself as POTUS. I don't find that convincing weighed against the envoy texts - the transcript - the resources available to him - that the investigations should have been filed from the US end. For example, on the Biden question. How could Zelensky possibly know the contents of the Biden conversations over the Shokin firing with State - EU - IMF etc.
Your second point becomes relevant in establishing a coverup. If all the diplomatic conversations were moved to the higher security classification then that' demonstrates the Ukraine placement was the new norm. There are other possible filing patterns. No doubt evidence will be gathered then weighed in the Congressional proceedings.
My turn to ask you a question. Trump is a businessman who presumably has some knowledge of key business concepts. What do you think of him tweeting that Hunter Biden "got 1.5 Billion dollars from China." He now's asking China to investigate.
You may believe the assertion to be true. (It is not.) Is it that Trump does not understand what venture capital firms do? He did not grasp the $1.5 billion was the target capitalization to be raised. Not pay to Hunter Biden. After all it's a pretty big number. Do not businessmen question financial figures?
If personally concerned, did he not care to inform himself that Hunter Biden only became an investor (plowing in slightly less than $500,000 for his own money after Biden left office) for a 10 percent equity share? His attorney says that to date Biden has earned nothing for this investment.
Now don't misunderstand. Hunter Biden absolutely was offered that initial seat on the BHR board because of his last name. Rightly or wrongly (and I would say wrongly), that is not illegal nor hardly unusual practice.
The larger question is that does not Hunter Biden deserve due process? Due process is defined as: fair treatment through the normal judicial system, especially as a citizen's entitlement.
I would not call a POTUS tweeting incorrect assertions etc. then calling on television for China to start investigating the "normal judicial system." Do not these requests coming directly from the POTUS carry with it the power of his office in a way that following in-place channels do not?
It is very convoluted stuff, and I can't say I remember all the details. I do remember a quote from a journalist (not Schweizer himself) guesstimating that the Biden family net wealth was in the low billions from these schemes. Notwithstanding that Joe has been in public service since he was in his 20s, and Hunter evidently has a very checkered past.
Again due process is not in the cards when dealing with the internal affairs of China and Ukraine. According to Schweizer, the very lack of transparency was doubtless a major reason why Hunter Biden opted to seek deals in foreign nations rather than domestically.
You already asked what I think about Trumps tweeting and his style, and I already answered.
Your first point - it's a false equivalency. See my reasoning in last post. Joe Biden was following normal protocols. It was a US policy decision. Trump's arguably not.
You say that Biden's action was ok because he was acting on orders from Obama, the duly elected POTUS. But Trump himself is now the duly elected POTUS. How is Obama's course a "US policy decision" but Trump's is not? In both cases, it's coming from the POTUS.
A distinction can only be made if we wish to irrationally find one because orange man bad.
A lot of red flags, but because Joe has that D, liberals believe any investigation is illegal.
Here are some red flags that neither Trump nor his supporters seem too worked up about -
Ivanka working at the WH and trying to rub shoulders with other heads of state with NO QUALIFICATIONS whatsoever, other than being Daddy's little girl.
And those Chinese patents for Ivanka? And those Saudi grants for Ivanka?
Jared Kushner working at the WH and cozying up with Saudi leaders with NO QUALIFICATIONS whatsoever in diplomacy, etc. Let's take a good hard look at what he's doing.
By ALL means - let's do chat about what the offspring of our elected officials are up to.
We won't even go into how many of Barr's family is currently employed in our government.
And the Trump boys and their foreign business dealings.
You say that Biden's action was ok because he was acting on orders from Obama, the duly elected POTUS. But Trump himself is now the duly elected POTUS. How is Obama's course a "US policy decision" but Trump's is not? In both cases, it's coming from the POTUS.
A distinction can only be made if we wish to irrationally find one because orange man bad.
Lame. Are you running out of ways to defend Dear Leader?
One action was predicated on investigating and digging dirt on one's political adversary and one wasn't.
My turn to ask you a question. Trump is a businessman who presumably has some knowledge of key business concepts. What do you think of him tweeting that Hunter Biden "got 1.5 Billion dollars from China." He now's asking China to investigate.
You may believe the assertion to be true. (It is not.) Is it that Trump does not understand what venture capital firms do? He did not grasp the $1.5 billion was the target capitalization to be raised. Not pay to Hunter Biden. After all it's a pretty big number. Do not businessmen question financial figures?
If personally concerned, did he not care to inform himself that Hunter Biden only became an investor (plowing in slightly less than $500,000 for his own money after Biden left office) for a 10 percent equity share? His attorney says that to date Biden has earned nothing for this investment.
Now don't misunderstand. Hunter Biden absolutely was offered that initial seat on the BHR board because of his last name. Rightly or wrongly (and I would say wrongly), that is not illegal nor hardly unusual practice.
The larger question is that does not Hunter Biden deserve due process? Due process is defined as: fair treatment through the normal judicial system, especially as a citizen's entitlement.
I would not call a POTUS tweeting incorrect assertions etc. then calling on television for China to start investigating the "normal judicial system." Do not these requests coming directly from the POTUS carry with it the power of his office in a way that following in-place channels do not?
How can you defend this, if you do?
I'm pretty sure that if Biden wins the White House, Hunter's investment will begin paying off in a huge way.
Lame. Are you running out of ways to defend Dear Leader?
One action was predicated on investigating and digging dirt on one's political adversary and one wasn't.
Should be clear enough even for the deplorables.
OK, I'd rather be 'lame' than stupid any day of the week. I have stated on CD many times that I am not a Trump supporter and did not vote for him in 2016. Get it through your head....
There is not yet evidence that "One action was predicated on investigating and digging dirt on one's political adversary and one wasn't. " If you have it, I would suggest contacting the Biden campaign.
Why would a large Ukraine company select a foreigner with no experience in their industry to sit on their board?
Why would a UAE backed investment company sink 500 million in a a dog of a property of 666 5th ave that no one would touch? Answer that. My guess is you will not.
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.