President Donald Trump - Formal Impeachment Inquiry Announced

Overheal

Republicans seem to be utterly frustrated trying to keep straight faces in this narrative. Watch how one responds when asked if it is okay for foreign governments to interfere in US elections

https://twitter.com/moveon/status/1189970650045263873?s=21

Also note the other congressman’s exchange in the noted transcript.

weisses

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Irrelevant - Trump is a candidate in the 2020 election and by the letter of the law, what he did was illegal. A lawful investigation would not have been initiated by a call from the President.

That is where is puppet Guiliani comes into play

Spencerfreeman

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Irrelevant - Trump is a candidate in the 2020 election and by the letter of the law, what he did was illegal. A lawful investigation would not have been initiated by a call from the President.

Investigating past corruption is not illegal.
The call in question was not initiated by Trump.

duploelabs

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

Investigating past corruption is not illegal.
The call in question was not initiated by Trump.

But effectively using tax payers money, not your own, in relation to your reelection is. The distinction is that Trump is a candidate for reelection (as well as the sitting president) and must adhere to campaign financing laws that apply to him

Overheal

Also the call was of course initiated by the WH. you think the WH needs to kowtow to Ukraine on when to receive its calls? No. Sorry to be blunt but the US is the big spoon in that international relationship.

Spencerfreeman

Overheal wrote: »

Also the call was of course initiated by the WH. you think the WH needs to kowtow to Ukraine on when to receive its calls? No. Sorry to be blunt but the US is the big spoon in that international relationship.

You do know that it was Vindman's dept. that suggested the call?

Overheal

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

You do know that it was Vindman's dept. that suggested the call?

Not without Rudy’s involvement

Spencerfreeman

Overheal wrote: »

Not without Rudy’s involvement

Rudy works for the NSC who suggested the call?

Igotadose

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

Investigating past corruption is not illegal.
The call in question was not initiated by Trump.

Investigating corruption, posing as investigators while being financed by the taxpayer? Not legal certainly. Investigative powers are provided, by the courts, to duly authorized individuals. The FBI, for instance.

Rudy was freelancing digging dirt on a 2020 opponent at behest of his client. No more, no less, not authorized *by anyone.* If you think it was, show us the authorization.

duploelabs

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

Rudy works for the NSC who suggested the call?

Not in an official capacity

ebbsy

This is all a waste of time, it w'ont be voted through and nobody in America will really care in 2020.


#Trump 2020

Spencerfreeman

Igotadose wrote: »

Investigating corruption, posing as investigators while being financed by the taxpayer? Not legal certainly. Investigative powers are provided, by the courts, to duly authorized individuals. The FBI, for instance.

Rudy was freelancing digging dirt on a 2020 opponent at behest of his client. No more, no less, not authorized *by anyone.* If you think it was, show us the authorization.

The President can nominate whomsoever he pleases to investigate corruption.

Was he freelancing or working for the President?

Igotadose

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

The President can nominate whomsoever he pleases to investigate corruption.

Was he freelancing or working for the President?

Since when can the President 'nominate whomsoever he pleases?' He has Constitutional powers to investigate? You're making that up.

Per Rudy, he was working for the President. I meant "freelancing" in that Rudy's "investigation" was simply him working for Trump, no legal justification whatsoever for whatever the fCuk Rudy was doing. Certainly not an official "US Government sponsored" investigation.

Overheal

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

The President can nominate whomsoever he pleases to investigate corruption.

Was he freelancing or working for the President?

To work in an official capacity any nominee of the President would have to be confirmed by the Senate. When was Rudy confirmed by the Senate

Igotadose

Overheal wrote: »

To work in an official capacity any nominee of the President would have to be confirmed by the Senate. When was Rudy confirmed by the Senate

Maybe that's what was meant by nominated. And you're right, Rudy wasn't nominated to do anything and certainly wasn't confirmed. Like most of Trump's cabinet these days.

Penn

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

The President can nominate whomsoever he pleases to investigate corruption.

Was he freelancing or working for the President?

He's Trump's personal lawyer, not employed by the government. If what Trump wanted was only centered around governmental policy and international diplomacy, a non-government employee should not have been sent to engage with it.

If on the other hand Trump's interest was more personal and he was looking for something which would benefit himself rather than the country, his personal lawyer would be someone near the top of the list of people to send.

Spencerfreeman

Overheal wrote: »

To work in an official capacity any nominee of the President would have to be confirmed by the Senate. When was Rudy confirmed by the Senate

And unofficially as an investigator?

Igotadose

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

And unofficially as an investigator?

Do you actually have anything to contribute?

Rudy wasn't an investigator as no government agency confirmed him as such. Do you have a point to make?

Spencerfreeman

Penn wrote: »

He's Trump's personal lawyer, not employed by the government. If what Trump wanted was only centered around governmental policy and international diplomacy, a non-government employee should not have been sent to engage with it.

If on the other hand Trump's interest was more personal and he was looking for something which would benefit himself rather than the country, his personal lawyer would be someone near the top of the list of people to send.

What he was looking into was not government policy or international diplomacy.

Finding the missing 1.4 billion would benefit the country not Trump.
He could have sent Jim Rockford if he had wanted to.
It's obvious to me that Trump's primary interest wasn't for gain in the 2020 election.
He knows he has nothing to fear from Joe Biden on that front.

Spencerfreeman

Igotadose wrote: »

Do you actually have anything to contribute?

Rudy wasn't an investigator as no government agency confirmed him as such. Do you have a point to make?

......

A few points for you.

Igotadose

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

What he was looking into was not government policy or international diplomacy.

Overheal

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

What he was looking into was not government policy or international diplomacy.

Finding the missing 1.4 billion would benefit the country not Trump.

Then it would be the governments policy to investigate something like that - so what Rudy was looking into was government policy. Therefore he had no authority to do it.

Spencerfreeman

Overheal wrote: »

Then it would be the governments policy to investigate something like that - so what Rudy was looking into was government policy. Therefore he had no authority to do it.

I think Trump has every reason to distrust the department involved with Ukraine.

Professor Moriarty

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

What he was looking into was not government policy or international diplomacy.

Finding the missing 1.4 billion would benefit the country not Trump.
He could have sent Jim Rockford if he had wanted to.
It's obvious to me that Trump's primary interest wasn't for gain in the 2020 election.
He knows he has nothing to fear from Joe Biden on that front.

So there's nothing of substance in the Quid Pro Quo investigation?

Overheal

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

I think Trump has every reason to distrust the department involved with Ukraine.

A paranoid narcissist certainly would but it doesn’t authorize the President to dispatch his personal lawyer to disrupt our foreign policy with Trump’s alternate agenda that involves digging up dirt on a primary candidate in the 2020 election, of which Trump is also a candidate of.

Spencerfreeman

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

So there's nothing of substance in the Quid Pro Quo investigation?

As per the actual transcript, no.

Spencerfreeman

Overheal wrote: »

A paranoid narcissist certainly would but it doesn’t authorize the President to dispatch his personal lawyer to disrupt our foreign policy with Trump’s alternate agenda that involves digging up dirt on a primary candidate in the 2020 election, of which Trump is also a candidate of.

Again, no mention of 2020 anywhere in the transcript.

Overheal

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

Again, no mention of 2020 anywhere in the transcript.

This, as already evidenced, goes way beyond just a lone phone call on July 25.

“2020” doesn’t need to be mentioned: he still solicited a foreign government to investigate another candidate in the 2020 election.

Professor Moriarty

Spencerfreeman wrote: »

As per the actual transcript, no.

Okay. So the investigation is a nothingburger?

Spencerfreeman

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Okay. So the investigation is a nothingburger?

I think it's a distraction to delay other investigations from being pursued.
I think the main witness's are connected to the Durham investigation.