Impeachment for Dummies

Don't forget the blow-back getting the house flipped.

I’m more concerned about the ramifications of Trump setting a precedent for future Presidents to conspire with foreign leaders to smear their political opponents.

But sure, let’s care about who wins or who loses the majority in Congress.

Oh, and if Hillary already set that precedent; then Trump would already be absolved. Ergo, it hasn't set precedent.

Hillary and Trump are both guilty of trying to get dirt on their campaign opponents.

Foreigners were used to get that dirt.

The difference is channels.

Hillary went through a US Company which dug up dirt with foreign agents with former ties to foreign governments. - NOT ILLEGAL (Unless, I'm wrong. Please correct me otherwise.)

Trump went directly through a foreign leader and withheld military weapons in exchange for information. Quid Pro Quo with foreign powers to interfere in a US Election. - ILLEGAL

If Trump goes to Impeachment and the Senate clears him in any way; that reverses the illegality of Trump's actions.

Which is fine. You want Trump off the hook, the Senate may want Trump off the hook, Republicans, voters want to absolve Trump but by absolving him, you absolve his actions and allow a future President to do this again WITH NO CHANCE OF IMPEACHMENT! Which, if you're so partisan I actually have to spell it out to you.

TL;DR If the Senate absolves Trump, any President, Democrat or Republican; will be able to do it.

It's not that hard of a position, nor is it at all anti-Trump. Yet you attack me like the I'm specifically targeting Trump and not my actual concern.

Using a middleman doesn't absolved a crime, it makes it a conspiracy instead. Even then your defense wouldn't hold even if allowed. https://libertyunyielding.com/2019/09/23/ukraine-has-evidence-their-government-colluded-with-the-clinton-campaign/

No actual quid pro quo was given in that transcript, despite your claims otherwise. Ukraine didn't even know about the aid holdup it until quite some time later and it was know by the US government that the investigation was already underway.

You’re going to have to prove that Hillary legally set a precedent to absolve Trump and endangered the entire election process by opening us up to foreign influence. Again, even if Hillary committed the crime, and isn’t convicted, no precedent is set to utilize a foreign government to influence our elections

There was most definitely a quid pro quo. You can deny the evidence the transcript makes clear. Ukraine has no choice but to continue to maintain their own self-interest by maintaining a positive relationship with not just the US in particular but the Trump administration specifically. Anything they do contrary may potentially cost them the military aid they need. So, at this time, their testimony is unreliable.

"Again, even if Hillary committed the crime, and isn’t convicted, no precedent is set" And here is your double standard again. Last time I pointed out you came up with this gem, "You can say 44 Presidents have done this, that doesn't make it LEGAL! " Which would be selective persecution [sic] as such would be an actual legal defense.

"Then he actively, on television, tells China to investigate the Bidens in exchange for lowering the tariffs. A more definitive quid pro quo. On live TV." Here's what he actually said, https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/trump-publicly-urges-china-ukraine-investigate-bidens-amid-impeachment-inquiry-n1061956
You're adding stuff that Trump never said to manufacture that complaint, and Trump didn't actually ask China to do anything. Furthermore you trying to criminalize free speech and criticism of political figures on top of that.

No, they’d still need the evidence to prove it. And even then that would not be optimal as it would mean the President can be made a puppet to any foreign power.

Free speech doesn’t absolve him either if he confesses to the crime he is accused of.

The full video here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJd1y0TPPl8

Trump says, and I quote:

“But if they don’t do what we want then we have tremendous power.... ”

...

“China should start an investigation into the Bidens”

And I will actually concede! I don’t have much time or patience to hear Trump speak himself which unfortunately means I’ll have to read a condensed version. Many media outlets did indeed claim Trump spoke as if these two sentences were next to each other. He later clarified that those were separate issues. Discussed back to back, it’s easy to misinterpret this as a double down.

I will it go so far as to blame the Media. Trump is purposely vague on what he speaks and he was being questioned on one thing then the other before merging the two subjects. But no, it does not appear he offered a public QPQ here as I erroneously said before.

What he does say to other foreign leaders, however, is still a concern based on the Ukraine transcript alone.

The transcript alone is Trump asking a country we have a treaty with investigate corruption and crimes that affected our elections as allowed by that treaty. If you have a problem with that with no other context then you are very biased in having a problem with the laws being enforced and crime investigated.

Unfortunately, that is not true. I have no problem with Trump investigating crimes. The time table is unfortunately problematic with Biden leading in the polls at the time of his investigation. Trump knew about Biden’s removal of the prosecutor for years and conveniently doesn’t go after him until the primaries. I just don’t buy it. And apparently, I’m not the only one since it merits inquiry and investigation.

My bias is not born purely out of ignorance but by information obtained well before the 2016 election on how he run his businesses and treated former employees. As I was a registered Republican and voted in the primaries I considered Trump a disgraceful showboat of a candidate. Not what we needed to follow someone like Barack Obama. We needed someone with experience and integrity. We got neither in my opinion.

No, you said the call alone, and now have switched to not the call alone. You don't get to switch context like that to defend yourself. And the call to Ukraine was from July before the primaries, which have not even happened yet. Of course here you forget that Ukraine started in investigation before the call and the USA knew that the investigation was started.

But as least Biden was in the lead then, and it is not along after the candidacy announcement and the investigation started before the call, so you cannot be sure of the time line on this. It would be a good question to ask for the impeachment, but that clown show in the house isn't likely to ask. In all it is likely linked to the investigation of the start of misinformation in part from Ukraine that started the Russia collusion narrative that would have likely started much earlier.

At first glance things do seems to add up, but coloration alone is not proof of causation and when you look closer many of the things that seemed to line up are actually out of order or do not fit.

In all I would like a complete though and fair investigation of this scandal, even if it finds Trump did commit impeachable crimes. So far we have too many things on the impeach side that stink like three week old fish and no one seems to care to clean it up.

“So far we have too many things on the impeach side that stink like three week old fish and no one seems to care to clean it up”

Politics in a nutshell.

Yes, and because of that we may never know the truth, which is kind of the point of polyticks.

calronmoonflower:
“Odd you made the exact same reply twice, as if it had been scripted in advance”

——

If my comment is hidden by downvotes I repost but only on my own memes. It’s a curtsey for not just myself but you so it’s easier to find when I reply to you.

Sorry. I replied to a hidden comment just now. twice. Would you please post your rebuttals in this chain?

If not, I will. Should’ve done it before but I will from here on in. I’ll also ask you to not downvote my comments if you intend to reply. You are very free to do so, but it seems to over complicate things for us to scroll through the entire page, unhiding comments just to reply to them.