News1 min ago
Trump Impeachment Likely
https:/
Unlikely to succeed. But interesting nonetheless.
Unlikely to succeed. But interesting nonetheless.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ichkeria. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
The Dems are so far into the TDS they simply can’t get out of it.
It doesn’t matter if there is no evidence. It doesn’t matter if it is just rumour or innuendo. They will catch it and run with it. They haven’t learnt anything from the Meuller report.
Anything that can be spun is turned into a Persian carpet quicker than you can say fake news. I do think they know this but their whole narrative has been one thing and because they have nothing of value to offer the electorate just keep on keeping on at discrediting Trump.
I suppose eventually say something enough times and people will believe it is true even when shown evidence to the contrary.
It doesn’t matter if there is no evidence. It doesn’t matter if it is just rumour or innuendo. They will catch it and run with it. They haven’t learnt anything from the Meuller report.
Anything that can be spun is turned into a Persian carpet quicker than you can say fake news. I do think they know this but their whole narrative has been one thing and because they have nothing of value to offer the electorate just keep on keeping on at discrediting Trump.
I suppose eventually say something enough times and people will believe it is true even when shown evidence to the contrary.
It's not clear how the Democrats have invented any evidence. The accusation here is that Trump pressured Ukraine into investigating corruption allegations against Biden (a likely opponent in the 2020 election), and did so by withholding military funding. Trump has admitted to withholding that funding, Trump has admitted that he is aware of the allegations against Biden, and Trump (and his lawyer) has admitted that the topic came up in the relevant phone conversation. He hasn't yet joined the dots, but at the very least it deserves investigating. It's improper for a political leader to try and pressure another country to investigate their political opponents.
Nor is it any defence to say that Biden may have done something similar in 2016. That just makes them both wrong.
https:/
Nor is it any defence to say that Biden may have done something similar in 2016. That just makes them both wrong.
https:/
I realise that I've confused Impeachment with the trial process. The House of Representatives Impeaches by bringing the charges, and then the Senate performs the trial.
Since the Senate needs a 2/3 majority to convict, then the case will I assume be thrown out, but, yeah, looks like Trump is going to be impeached. I'm surprised.
Since the Senate needs a 2/3 majority to convict, then the case will I assume be thrown out, but, yeah, looks like Trump is going to be impeached. I'm surprised.
The Ukraine whistleblower was someone who heard a rumour. They have no first hand knowledge of the conversation and Trump has, wrongly I believe, said he will release the full unredacted conversation.
The Dems jump or should that be pounce... on anything they can spin into a negative.
Biden is corrupt for what happened with his son Hunter and the Ukrainian prosecutor who was investigating him.
However all Trump should do is say we are investigating collusion and Hunter and Joe Biden has been flagged up.
A good amount of the rest of their ‘impeachment rhetoric is made up fury over specifically and knowingly edited clips of what he says.
The Dems jump or should that be pounce... on anything they can spin into a negative.
Biden is corrupt for what happened with his son Hunter and the Ukrainian prosecutor who was investigating him.
However all Trump should do is say we are investigating collusion and Hunter and Joe Biden has been flagged up.
A good amount of the rest of their ‘impeachment rhetoric is made up fury over specifically and knowingly edited clips of what he says.
"Biden is corrupt for what happened with his son Hunter and the Ukrainian prosecutor who was investigating him. "
There's a lot packed into that sentence which deserves picking out
Firstly, what Trump says he wants investigated is the allegation that Joe Biden threatened to withold money from Ukraine (he was vice president at the time) unless they removed the local prosecutor in a post-Yanukovich anti-corruption inquiry into the Yanukovich-era-founded Burisma energy holding company. Biden's son was on the board of that company. Biden claims the prosecutor's removal was because of corruption allegations against the prosecutor and that the load was questioned in relation to those allegations.
So the prosecutor was not investigating Hunter Biden firstly, rather the company, and second, the counter allegation is that the prosecutor was apparently scarcely less corrupt it seems than Burisma. Not an uncommon scenario in Ukraine.
The key point I think made by the Democrats is that Trump was putting pressure on Zelensky for his own domestic political reasons.
Which is, of course, in turn denied.
This is a space to be watched.
There's a lot packed into that sentence which deserves picking out
Firstly, what Trump says he wants investigated is the allegation that Joe Biden threatened to withold money from Ukraine (he was vice president at the time) unless they removed the local prosecutor in a post-Yanukovich anti-corruption inquiry into the Yanukovich-era-founded Burisma energy holding company. Biden's son was on the board of that company. Biden claims the prosecutor's removal was because of corruption allegations against the prosecutor and that the load was questioned in relation to those allegations.
So the prosecutor was not investigating Hunter Biden firstly, rather the company, and second, the counter allegation is that the prosecutor was apparently scarcely less corrupt it seems than Burisma. Not an uncommon scenario in Ukraine.
The key point I think made by the Democrats is that Trump was putting pressure on Zelensky for his own domestic political reasons.
Which is, of course, in turn denied.
This is a space to be watched.
It was fascinating to see Scaramucci on Newsnight ranting avid st his old chum.
Hell hath no fury indeed ..
He thinks it looks bad for Trump - I have no idea, but it does seem that regardless of anything else, Trump has wholly misunderstood the reason for the dismissal of Viktor Shokin: looks like he was accused of not investigating at all, far from being removed for digging too deep. And he was replaced with Lutsenko who carried in as before!
At the very least his “request” to Mr Zelenskiy seems like political opportunism.
It was interesting to see the president and the comedian side by side last night: would be hard for the uninitiated to guess who’d been the actor in a previous life ;-)
Hell hath no fury indeed ..
He thinks it looks bad for Trump - I have no idea, but it does seem that regardless of anything else, Trump has wholly misunderstood the reason for the dismissal of Viktor Shokin: looks like he was accused of not investigating at all, far from being removed for digging too deep. And he was replaced with Lutsenko who carried in as before!
At the very least his “request” to Mr Zelenskiy seems like political opportunism.
It was interesting to see the president and the comedian side by side last night: would be hard for the uninitiated to guess who’d been the actor in a previous life ;-)
