You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Bias against Trump
February 27 2020 2.48am

Bias against Trump

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 391 of 413 < 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 >

 

View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 21 Dec 19 5.55am Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

President Trump has been impeached on ridiculous charges.

Yet Republican supporters haven't been destroying property or looting or burning cars.

Mmmmm....I suppose that's because they aren't overly emotional Democrat supporters.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View cryrst's Profile cryrst Flag Chatham 21 Dec 19 7.14am Send a Private Message to cryrst Add cryrst as a friend

In the next phase of the comedy gold of Democrat beliefs do the republicans get the chance to call or force witnesses to give evidence?
Oh dear there could be some very worried people who knee jerked on this impeachment.
I think this is an outcome trump would have wanted in a strange way.
Clear the decks and all that.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 21 Dec 19 7.48am Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by cryrst

In the next phase of the comedy gold of Democrat beliefs do the republicans get the chance to call or force witnesses to give evidence?
Oh dear there could be some very worried people who knee jerked on this impeachment.
I think this is an outcome trump would have wanted in a strange way.
Clear the decks and all that.

It's going to be interesting, I think the Democrats have overplayed their hand with the 'floating voter' on this one....it's red meat to their base.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Badger11's Profile Badger11 Flag Beckenham 21 Dec 19 1.30pm Send a Private Message to Badger11 Add Badger11 as a friend

I suppose the two questions to ask are Did Trump do anything wrong? and if he did does it warrant impeachment?

I was listening to a constitutional expert who was of the opinion that Trump may have done something wrong (morally yes legally maybe) but that it didn't warrant impeachment.

His view was that impeachment was meant to prevent the most serious of crimes by a president e.g. attempting the over throw of the government and that both Trump and previously Clinton's alleged crimes simply do not meet that criteria.

There are other ways of censoring a President who may have behaved badly. Impeachment is pushing the nuclear button before you have tried any alternatives.

 


One more point

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 23 Dec 19 7.21pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Badger11

I suppose the two questions to ask are Did Trump do anything wrong? and if he did does it warrant impeachment?

I personally fail to see how anyone is able to conclude that Trump hasn't done anything wrong as he openly does such things on a very regular basis. Whether he is guilty of "high crimes and misdemeanours" is for the Senate to determine and with the super majority demanded and the level of pre-judgement going on that seems highly unlikely. That he has a case to answer though seems obvious as anyone who actually watched the hearings would know.

I was listening to a constitutional expert who was of the opinion that Trump may have done something wrong (morally yes legally maybe) but that it didn't warrant impeachment.

His view was that impeachment was meant to prevent the most serious of crimes by a president e.g. attempting the over throw of the government and that both Trump and previously Clinton's alleged crimes simply do not meet that criteria.

Not his call. That's for the Senate.

There are other ways of censoring a President who may have behaved badly. Impeachment is pushing the nuclear button before you have tried any alternatives.

Not really until he leaves office and by then it's too late.

Whether this is a politically advantageous move is a very open question given the way the right are presenting it. The Trump "base" is predictably rock solid as Trump has already achieved a God like status in their eyes and he can not do anything wrong. The bulk of the GOP are now in fear of that base and dare not express any doubts let alone contemplate voting against him. However, I don't think the Democrats had any other choice if they were to try to do their constitutional duty. They may well suffer at the polls as a consequence so my cynical mind wonders if this was all actually planned by Trump's team.

Politics in the USA is in a very bad place.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View cryrst's Profile cryrst Flag Chatham 23 Dec 19 9.00pm Send a Private Message to cryrst Add cryrst as a friend

The Senate hearing is different in operation.
Witnesses are called but not grilled By the republicans one to one.
Questions are written down and each asked by a judge.
How the judge interprets the question and in which sense is an individual choice of one person.
I wonder who will be called as a witness.
Biden senior or junior maybe.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 23 Dec 19 9.36pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by cryrst

The Senate hearing is different in operation.
Witnesses are called but not grilled By the republicans one to one.
Questions are written down and each asked by a judge.
How the judge interprets the question and in which sense is an individual choice of one person.
I wonder who will be called as a witness.
Biden senior or junior maybe.

All Senators can question, not just Republicans.
What would be the point of calling the Bidens when they aren't witnesses to the events under investigation? They are the people being targeted by Trump for investigation and are not involved, other than as an attempted diversion by the right.

The witnesses who should be called are those with direct knowledge of who issued the instructions and why they did so. That includes the request to investigate the Bidens, the suspension of aid, the promise of a WH meeting and the refusal to allow them to give evidence to the House committee.

Each and every staff member, senior and junior, current and former, with such knowledge should be put under oath and questioned.

If Trump has nothing to hide then refusing makes no sense as it would exonerate him. Refusing looks like, and almost certainly is, further obstruction of justice. Which he is already charged with.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View cryrst's Profile cryrst Flag Chatham 23 Dec 19 10.22pm Send a Private Message to cryrst Add cryrst as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

All Senators can question, not just Republicans.
What would be the point of calling the Bidens when they aren't witnesses to the events under investigation? They are the people being targeted by Trump for investigation and are not involved, other than as an attempted diversion by the right.

The witnesses who should be called are those with direct knowledge of who issued the instructions and why they did so. That includes the request to investigate the Bidens, the suspension of aid, the promise of a WH meeting and the refusal to allow them to give evidence to the House committee.

Each and every staff member, senior and junior, current and former, with such knowledge should be put under oath and questioned.

If Trump has nothing to hide then refusing makes no sense as it would exonerate him. Refusing looks like, and almost certainly is, further obstruction of justice. Which he is already charged with.

Surely the whole reason behind trumps alledged offence was questioning junior Biden's affair with a certain company.
Disprove this and trump is guilty.
Save a lot of time and money.
Why would this option not be taken for the good of the judiciary in the usa.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 23 Dec 19 10.56pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

quote=cryrst;3496174]

Surely the whole reason behind trumps alledged offence was questioning junior Biden's affair with a certain company.

Disprove this and trump is guilty.
Save a lot of time and money.
Why would this option not be taken for the good of the judiciary in the usa.

The reason for the impeachment is twofold.

Firstly why did he withhold aid and offer a WH meeting in an effort to get an investigation into the Bidens? Was this because he suspected corruption or whether he wanted to get some dirt to use in his reelection campaign? What Junr Biden did or didn't do, is immaterial to this.

The second is why he refused to allow his staff to give evidence, thus potentially obstructing justice.

Edited by Wisbech Eagle (23 Dec 2019 10.58pm)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View cryrst's Profile cryrst Flag Chatham 24 Dec 19 7.59am Send a Private Message to cryrst Add cryrst as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

quote=cryrst;3496174]

Surely the whole reason behind trumps alledged offence was questioning junior Biden's affair with a certain company.

Disprove this and trump is guilty.
Save a lot of time and money.
Why would this option not be taken for the good of the judiciary in the usa.

The reason for the impeachment is twofold.

Firstly why did he withhold aid and offer a WH meeting in an effort to get an investigation into the Bidens? Was this because he suspected corruption or whether he wanted to get some dirt to use in his reelection campaign? What Junr Biden did or didn't do, is immaterial to this.

The second is why he refused to allow his staff to give evidence, thus potentially obstructing justice.

Edited by Wisbech Eagle (23 Dec 2019 10.58pm)

He didnt withhold the aid.
Ukraine got the aid.
This is the thing.
No terms have or were put down.
Reading and watching even you have to admit hunter Biden's position within that company seems somewhat
Corrupt or in the least convenient.
Trumps staff had an option to appear and they chose not to for whatever reasons.
If they were that important they could have been legally obliged to attend.
That being utilised of course would mean the subject matter of the bidens could also have been bound legally to attend.
Maybe this would all be cleared up by now if that were the case.
I'm sure some shredders somewhere have been doing overtime though.
All of this impeachment is on the primary evidence of an overhead phone call.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 24 Dec 19 10.13am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by cryrst

He didnt withhold the aid.
Ukraine got the aid.

As it was released immediately AFTER it became public it had been withheld that actually adds circumstantial evidence.

This is the thing.
No terms have or were put down.

How do you or anyone else know? Those that do have been instructed not to testify.

Reading and watching even you have to admit hunter Biden's position within that company seems somewhat
Corrupt or in the least convenient.

Irrelevant. Biden has admitted that as the appearance of his son's appointment looks questionable that, in hindsight, it looks to be a mistake. However my understanding is that many of those with knowledge of the events have said that he has no case to answer and the accusations are all political mud slinging. It is however a totally separate issue. If evidence exists of anything deserving investigation then let the appropriate authorities take the appropriate actions and due process proceed. Trump dealing directly with another President is NOT appropriate.

Trumps staff had an option to appear and they chose not to for whatever reasons.

They were instructed not to.

If they were that important they could have been legally obliged to attend.

In some cases subpoenas have been issued but not complied with. Legal actions are underway but take months to be heard. As they would then be appealed all of this means that the impeachment trial would be over before decisions are made.

That being utilised of course would mean the subject matter of the bidens could also have been bound legally to attend.

Untrue as it is unrelated.

Maybe this would all be cleared up by now if that were the case.

Untrue. Diversion.

I'm sure some shredders somewhere have been doing overtime though.

Maybe but duplicates have a habit of turning up in this age of electronic documents and verbal testimony is what is really important.

All of this impeachment is on the primary evidence of an overhead phone call.

On one of the charges a call overheard by several, confirmed by a partial transcript and circumstantial evidence which includes the refusal of those with direct knowledge to testify. On the second charge the evidence of obstruction is obvious and in plain sight.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View cryrst's Profile cryrst Flag Chatham 24 Dec 19 4.09pm Send a Private Message to cryrst Add cryrst as a friend

So it is circumstantial always around then.
Was there a date for the release of funds.
This could be normal procedure unless the ukraine had a DD to the bank of America.
As for non appearance there may be some who wish not to appear at the Senate.
If some are democrats who have persued trump how would you see that.
Would you think there could be a reason, that being that they may not have told the truth first time around.
Even one refusal must be a light bulb moment about the whole thing being a set up.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 391 of 413 < 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Bias against Trump