Kansas Crimson

Well, during the House Impeachment hearings, according to the Republicans, the Courts did have the jurisdiction to issue and enforce subpoenas. Then, when some subpoenas were attempted to be enforced on collateral matters, the Republicans took the position that the Courts did not have jurisdiction over such things because "political questions" were at issue. Sort of a "tails I win/heads you lose" litigation position.

Keep in mind, it is all about the process.

Leawood wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2020 1:44 pm I guess the defense is, with no evidence (Should the Republicans go to the Courts like they say Pelosi and Co. should have done? Where is the process?) the Bidens extorted, too. So what Trump did is okay.

I just never heard of that defense before.

If that was directed to me, I'll point out that what I wrote was:

If Giuliani is truly 100% of his meds, then there's no way the Republicans bring Hunter in. If he's NOT, though, then the trial becomes about the Bidens and their corruption, which vindicates Trump's concerns. Or so the theory goes.

I didn't say anything about agreeing that this lets Trump off the hook. In fact, I think I implied the opposite. That's THEIR theory.

Not directed at you.

Well...Ok then.

Leawood wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2020 1:44 pm I guess the defense is, with no evidence (Should the Republicans go to the Courts like they say Pelosi and Co. should have done? Where is the process?) the Bidens extorted, too. So what Trump did is okay.

I just never heard of that defense before.

Why on earth would you?
It's not like you are an attorney or something.

So, did Hunter break a law by accepting a position?

Hunter Biden could have been robbing banks and it would have nothing to do with Trump's improper conduct.

Geezer wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2020 6:05 pm Hunter Biden could have been robbing banks and it would have nothing to do with Trump's improper conduct.

The conduct is not prima facie corrupt. In fact, extortion or quid pro quo or whatever you want to call is the way foreign policy is done, particularly with respect to foreign aid.

Hey, F.W. de Klerk, I know you want foreign aid, but before you get it, you need to legalize the ANC and let Mandela out of jail. And hey, Mandela, now that you are president, we want to give you foreign aid too, but first you have to disavow the ANC's pro-Soviet past and your own communist sympathies.

We're giving the aid, we get to leverage that any way we see fit.

The question here is whether there is any way to demonstrate what Trump did in this case was in the national interest and not the Trumpian interest. As I've said before, I don't think that's a case he can make. He is a rather self-absorbed man and he probably thinks that the national interest and his personal self-interest are the same, but he's an idiot. NEVERTHELESS, if Rudy has evidence of the crimes he claims to have evidence of, then getting Zelensky to investigate would be inarguably in the national interest.

Put Rudy under oath first. But if he has anything, then both Bidens should also be compelled to testify.

To be clear: I don't think Rudy has shit which is why he should testify first.

If it's between hearing from Rudy and Bolton and Mulvaney and Hunter versus hearing from no witnesses, I'd take the former.

Let Trump try to rip into someone for nepotism.

Mjl wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2020 6:27 pm If it's between hearing from Rudy and Bolton and Mulvaney and Hunter versus hearing from no witnesses, I'd take the former.

Let Trump try to rip into someone for nepotism.

^^^, because we know he'll be held to account, right?

"Let Trump" :

-withhold American taxpayer's money in the form of military aid appropriated by congress to extort help from a foreign government for his personal benefit in his reelection.

-brag about grabbing women by the pussy.

-declare that he believes Putin over our nation's intelligence services.

-equate white supremacist bigots with people protesting white supremacist bigotrt.

-pay off pornstars in the weeks leading up to his election.

-have 2 hour meetings alone with Putin, &/or tear up the American translator's notes after meeting otherwise alone with Putin.

-put thousands of children seeking asylum in cages for who knows how long?

-fire the FBI director because he won't bend to Trump's will.

-withhold all documents congress requests.

-encourage Russia, China, and Ukraine to investigate his political opponent, Biden.

-intimidate witnesses who are testifying in the House impeachment investigation, even while they're testifying.

-dangle pardons to his associates, to try and buy their silence.

[...]

ad nauseam...

that’s all?

TraditionKU wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2020 6:56 pm that’s all?

[...]

dammit

“...if Rudy has evidence of the crimes he claims to have evidence of, then getting Zelensky to investigate would be inarguably in the national interest.”

I’ll agree, with the note that the investigation should occur formally through the appropriate state departments and intelligence agencies and shit. Is there any credible reason to permit Rudy to run around playing Nancy Drew?


and I’ll also agree, I don’t think Rudy has shit.

Geezer wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2020 6:05 pm Hunter Biden could have been robbing banks and it would have nothing to do with Trump's improper conduct.

Similarly, it’s not reasonable to investigate Hunter for robbing a bank just cuz potus wants to.

The aid was enacted into law.
All of DC's if's and but's don't mean squat, as soon as the appearance of an investigation was requested it became a crime.

Geezer wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2020 7:20 pm The aid was enacted into law.
All of DC's if's and but's don't mean squat, as soon as the appearance of an investigation was requested it became a crime.

Nope.

Feral wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2020 6:50 pm

Mjl wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2020 6:27 pm If it's between hearing from Rudy and Bolton and Mulvaney and Hunter versus hearing from no witnesses, I'd take the former.

Let Trump try to rip into someone for nepotism.

^^^, because we know he'll be held to account, right?

"Let Trump" :

-withhold American taxpayer's money in the form of military aid appropriated by congress to extort help from a foreign government for his personal benefit in his reelection.

-brag about grabbing women by the pussy.

-declare that he believes Putin over our nation's intelligence services.

-equate white supremacist bigots with people protesting white supremacist bigotrt.

-pay off pornstars in the weeks leading up to his election.

-have 2 hour meetings alone with Putin, &/or tear up the American translator's notes after meeting otherwise alone with Putin.

-put thousands of children seeking asylum in cages for who knows how long?

-fire the FBI director because he won't bend to Trump's will.

-withhold all documents congress requests.

-encourage Russia, China, and Ukraine to investigate his political opponent, Biden.

-intimidate witnesses who are testifying in the House impeachment investigation, even while they're testifying.

-dangle pardons to his associates, to try and buy their silence.

[...]

ad nauseam...

Good point.

Here we go!



Fox and friends is criticizing the dem debate for a lack of diversity...

(Oh, and never mind that this was reported by Fox and friends’s all-white panel of hosts’s. They got a token black dude to come in and express how he feels much better represented by Trump...)

ousdahl wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 8:01 am They got a token black dude to come in and express how he feels

Cringe.

But this is what white liberals tend to do to minorities on the right.

ousdahl wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 7:55 am Here we go!



Fox and friends is criticizing the dem debate for a lack of diversity...

Well, was there a lot of racial diversity on the stage or was it all white people?