Conservative lawyers call for quick impeachment

Cimorene

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 7, 2016
6,262
6,018
Toronto
✟246,655.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
Upvote 0

Kentonio

Well-Known Member
Jan 25, 2018
7,467
10,458
48
Lyon
✟266,564.00
Country
France
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
When I say the Russia thing turned out to be a dud doesn't mean to say that I believe Russia or other countries in the world don't seek to influence a U.S. election. It's meant to say what Muller said that he concluded there was no evidence to press charges against the President.

That’s not completely true. Mueller found insufficient evidence that Trump deliberately aided Russia efforts to help his campaign, however he found lots of evidence of obstruction of justice. However as he made perfectly clear in his report, he felt bound by DoJ guidelines that a serving president cannot be indicted while in office.

Interestingly of course those guidelines are not law, just department policy.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: whatbogsends
Upvote 0

GACfan

Well-Known Member
Aug 15, 2019
1,958
2,257
Texas
✟77,930.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
{snip}Again a charge with no REAL proof to back that up. You even admitted later on in your post, "Yes, we don't know the heart of Trump."

According to scripture, we can know what is in the heart of a man.

"You will know them by their fruits" (Matthew 7:16).

"Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks (Matthew 12:34).

A good man brings good things out of the good stored up in his heart, and an evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in his heart. For the mouth speaks what the heart is full of" (Lk. 6:45).

From out of the abundance of his heart, Trump speaks and the vile spews out of his mouth like an overflowing river: slandering people, insulting people, mocking people, using profanity, taking God's name in vain, bearing false witness, and a lying tongue. He is known by the fruits he bears: hatred, discord, jealousy, FITS OF RAGE, and selfish ambition (Galatians 5:19-21). Do the Fruits of the Spirit describe the kind of person he is? Does he show love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control in his life or does he demonstrate the works of the flesh?

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: whatbogsends
Upvote 0

iluvatar5150

Well-Known Member
Aug 3, 2012
25,028
23,941
Baltimore
✟551,895.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
This is legit a terrific post but I mean I think for a lot of Trump supporters the only standard for deciding that somebody is a conservative is if he / she has unwavering devotion & sycophancy to Donald Trump. That's it.

Oh sure, but it seems that many of them don't believe that. They still think they're hewing to some traditional notion of conservatism.
 
Upvote 0

Bobber

Well-Known Member
Feb 10, 2004
6,584
3,076
✟213,723.00
Faith
Non-Denom
According to scripture, we can know what is in the heart of a man.

"You will know them by their fruits" (Matthew 7:16).

"Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks (Matthew 12:34).

A good man brings good things out of the good stored up in his heart, and an evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in his heart. For the mouth speaks what the heart is full of" (Lk. 6:45).

From out of the abundance of his heart, Trump speaks and the vile spews out of his mouth like an overflowing river: slandering people, insulting people, mocking people, using profanity, taking God's name in vain, bearing false witness, and a lying tongue. He is known by the fruits he bears, like hatred, discord, jealousy, FITS OF RAGE, and selfish ambition (Galatians 5:19-21). Do the Fruits of the Spirit describe the kind of person he is? Does he demonstrate love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control in his life or does he demonstrate the works of the flesh?

Hold it now. You've just basically revealed what the scripture says about ALL who are outside of the Lord, meaning the real status of those not born again. That would include every person of every other political party. None of this means that such individuals don't have a capacity to have right motives and intentions in anything they do.

My point we don't know Trump's heart in context had to do with his intent for wanting an investigation actually carried out. Any President can truly want to see crimes dealt with from the past which are effecting the welfare of the nation and that truly can be his only motive, so again you don't know as an absolute his motive or intent of a particular thing.
 
Upvote 0

wing2000

E pluribus unum
Supporter
Aug 18, 2012
20,775
17,081
✟1,389,801.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Id say if these writers were "true conservatives" they would know and appreciate that the country has been through the ringer the last few years hearing of Russia! Russia! and it all turned out to be dud.

We have a pretty good clue as to what his motive was as the lawyers noted:

1) In a July 25, 2019, telephone call with the president of Ukraine – a summary of which has been released by the White House – the president requested “a favor” in the context of a discussion of Ukrainian security matters. Specifically, immediately after President Zelensky thanked the president “in the area of defense” and indicated a readiness to buy additional armaments consistent with a U.S. defense proposal, President Trump asked for “a favor.” The favor was to investigate a baseless theory relating to the 2016 investigation into Russian interference in the U.S. election. The U.S. president further requested that the Ukrainian president coordinate the requested investigation with both his personal attorney and the Attorney General of the United States, presenting both a blurring of lines between personal legal representation and official U.S. government business, and, the appearance of inappropriate politicization of the Office of the Attorney General. He then requested, additionally, that the Ukrainian government look into allegations relating to his Democratic presidential opponent, Joe Biden, saying “There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great.”
 
Upvote 0

Tom 1

Optimistic sceptic
Supporter
Nov 13, 2017
12,212
12,526
Tarnaveni
✟818,769.00
Country
Romania
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
In their own words.
Mission Statement - Checks and Balances

Mission Statement
We are a group of attorneys who would traditionally be considered conservative or libertarian. We believe in the rule of law, the power of truth, the independence of the criminal justice system, the imperative of individual rights, and the necessity of civil discourse. We believe these principles apply regardless of the party or persons in power. We believe in “a government of laws, not of men.”

We believe in the Constitution. We believe in free speech, a free press, separation of powers, and limited government. We have faith in the resiliency of the American experiment. We seek to provide a voice and a network for like-minded attorneys to discuss these ideas, and we hope that they will join with us to stand up for these principles.

I don't know if it's a new thing or not, but a frequent internet definition for 'conservative' seems to involve the pursuit of a particular set of interests only. To me it seems like something of a parody of conservatism.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: wing2000
Upvote 0

Bobber

Well-Known Member
Feb 10, 2004
6,584
3,076
✟213,723.00
Faith
Non-Denom
This is legit a terrific post but I mean I think for a lot of Trump supporters the only standard for deciding that somebody is a conservative is if he / she has unwavering devotion & sycophancy to Donald Trump.

I'd say there's different ways of defining if one is truly a conservative. When one sees the reality on the ground is there are no conservatives who'll be candidates for the next Presidential election and they allow the election to be taken away by a total non-conservative than conservative values truly wouldn't have meant too much to them. Many pondered in the early days how Trump would govern...say what one will many may not like his style but he has at least went along the direction of conservative values when it's come to policies and he's attempted to keep his promises.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

DaisyDay

I Did Nothing Wrong!! ~~Team Deep State
Jan 7, 2003
37,939
17,417
Finger Lakes
✟7,530.00
Country
United States
Faith
Unitarian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
What's clearly obvious is the Dems were desperate in trying to push every button and pull ever lever to cover up their great failure
Tell me, how was the Mueller investigation a failure and how was it the Dem's? That investigation, initiated by a Republican DOJ with a Republican in charge found that Russia clearly did interfere with our 2016 election in favor of Donald.
 
Upvote 0

whatbogsends

Senior Veteran
Aug 29, 2003
10,370
8,314
Visit site
✟281,129.00
Faith
Atheist
I'd say there's different ways of defining if one is truly a conservative. When one sees the reality on the ground is there are no conservatives who'll be candidates for the next Presidential election and they allow the election to be taken away by a total non-conservative than conservative values truly wouldn't have meant too much to them. Many pondered in the early days how Trump would govern...say what one will many may not like his style but he has at least went along the direction of conservative values when it's come to policies and he's attempted to keep his promises.

I didn't realize that disregard for the Constitution and separation of powers was a conservative value.
 
Upvote 0

NotreDame

Domer
Supporter
Jan 24, 2008
9,565
2,493
6 hours south of the Golden Dome of the University
✟505,939.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
In their own words.
Mission Statement - Checks and Balances

Mission Statement
We are a group of attorneys who would traditionally be considered conservative or libertarian. We believe in the rule of law, the power of truth, the independence of the criminal justice system, the imperative of individual rights, and the necessity of civil discourse. We believe these principles apply regardless of the party or persons in power. We believe in “a government of laws, not of men.”

We believe in the Constitution. We believe in free speech, a free press, separation of powers, and limited government. We have faith in the resiliency of the American experiment. We seek to provide a voice and a network for like-minded attorneys to discuss these ideas, and we hope that they will join with us to stand up for these principles.

As soon as I read the title, I knew your point was going to get lost. I’m not sure what benefit you thought to be gained by calling those lawyers “conservative.” Foreseeably, you had to attempt to justify their self-avowed label of “conservative.” That is a losing proposition given the variance in the meaning of “conservative” among conservatives themselves.

Should have said here’s some smart people who want Trump impeached expeditiously.
 
Upvote 0

NotreDame

Domer
Supporter
Jan 24, 2008
9,565
2,493
6 hours south of the Golden Dome of the University
✟505,939.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
He's just using the same definitions Trump uses
Anyone who supports Trump: good, the best, conservative, maga

Anyone who is opposed to Trump: enemy of the people, fake, librul, traitor, impeach,​

Do you see the irony in that statement in relation to your perceived notions of conservative? I’m not at all agreeing with the poster your debating with but you’re using a set definition you agree with.
 
Upvote 0

Cimorene

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 7, 2016
6,262
6,018
Toronto
✟246,655.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
I'd say there's different ways of defining if one is truly a conservative. When one sees the reality on the ground is there are no conservatives who'll be candidates for the next Presidential election and they allow the election to be taken away by a total non-conservative than conservative values truly wouldn't have meant too much to them. Many pondered in the early days how Trump would govern...say what one will many may not like his style but he has at least went along the direction of conservative values when it's come to policies and he's attempted to keep his promises.

I'd say those who want to call themselves conservatives in Trump's tribe are going to make up the definitions that suit themselves. Their actions have defined them to the rest of the world, and not favourably.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

NotreDame

Domer
Supporter
Jan 24, 2008
9,565
2,493
6 hours south of the Golden Dome of the University
✟505,939.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Really? It's become clear he did what he did for personal political objectives? Just a load of hogwash. There's nothing that could be said to be clear about such at all.

The writers of this can't consider there's more reasons than one to go a certain direction? How about getting to the bottom of what happened in 2016 which has nothing to do with 2020?

Or that's the sole responsibility of the DOJ? Really? And what of Presidents or leaders of any kind that would demand the request come from the actual leader himself?

So a leader like Trump the President doesn't even have a place in investigating how are foreign entities may have worked in cahoots with Americans to compromise the electoral process of the United States?

Point: Wanting to ensure the electoral process is safe is just as sound a reason for Trump to do what he did as it could be he did it for personal reasons.

Seeing these writers DON'T KNOW the heart and motives of a man regardless of their claims that they do the President rightly deserves the benefit of the doubt. They can't just make declarations certain things are facts.

Sure, there’s more to be discovered, but there are some facts known to us or available to us. Trump could have abused his power and position as President but to determine that requires an investigation. If it is shown there is no factual basis to reasonably believe the Biden’s committed a crime and facts develop to show Trump was seeking dirt on a potential opponent or tarnish him with the prospect of an investigation, and used military funding as leverage to that end whereas Congress had already appropriated the money, then he needs to go.

The link below provides a decent view of the president’s power to investigate and its possible abuses.

Is It Ever OK for a President to Ask a Foreign Country to Investigate a Political Rival? - POLITICO Is It Ever OK for a President to Ask a Foreign Country to Investigate a Political Rival? — POLITICO
 
  • Agree
Reactions: cow451
Upvote 0

SimplyMe

Senior Veteran
Jul 19, 2003
9,613
9,331
the Great Basin
✟325,989.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Sure, there’s more to be discovered, but there are some facts known to us or available to us. Trump could have abused his power and position as President but to determine that requires an investigation. If it is shown there is no factual basis to reasonably believe the Biden’s committed a crime and facts develop to show Trump was seeking dirt on a potential opponent or tarnish him with the prospect of an investigation, and used military funding as leverage to that end whereas Congress had already appropriated the money, then he needs to go.

The link below provides a decent view of the president’s power to investigate and its possible abuses.

Is It Ever OK for a President to Ask a Foreign Country to Investigate a Political Rival? - POLITICO Is It Ever OK for a President to Ask a Foreign Country to Investigate a Political Rival? — POLITICO

I think the Politico article misses two issues. First, that President Trump, in asking the Ukraine to investigate Biden, never had a DoJ investigation started. While he did talk about Barr calling to follow up, Trump then never asked Barr to call, much less to open an investigation into the Bidens. Now, I've seen it argued that Trump "forgot" but that ignores the fact he "remembered" to talk to Giuliani and have him in Ukraine doing an investigation privately, not connected to the US government -- and not being sent as a US government envoy (Giuliani is on record stating he was there as a "private citizen." This would appear to provide evidence that Trump was doing this for personal (campaign) reasons and not as an actual investigation if Biden was corrupt.

Next, there is the fact that many of the facts that Trump wanted require a US investigation, not one in the Ukraine. For example, the defense of Biden is clearly that he was acting in his role as VP, as an envoy of the US government, when he fired the prosecutor, that it was not being done for personal reasons. As such, the evidence for that would be found in various government documents about the loan, and any conditions the government wanted for that loan.

Yes, eventually the investigation likely would involve Ukraine, such as how Hunter Biden was hired by Burisma -- but that would logically come after investigating things I mentioned above, the finances of both Bidens, etc -- investigations done in the US. And we have the treaty to get those investigations done without the president being involved and needing to ask a "favor" of a foreign government.

One last point, the timing also makes it suspect. The alleged corruption being investigated was from 2016. The video that is being used to claim Biden fired the prosecutor for personal reasons was from January, 2018. So why, over a year later and only after Biden is a front runner to be the Democratic front runner, is this issue important enough for a US President to ask a favor? If this was really a concern, shouldn't this have been done at last a year previously?

Granted, we'll see what the investigation finds and if the President ever cooperates. At the same time, to me, there are clear signs of abuse of power with how Trump seemingly was wanting to keep this as a "private" (personal) investigation and not one done by the US government.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

NotreDame

Domer
Supporter
Jan 24, 2008
9,565
2,493
6 hours south of the Golden Dome of the University
✟505,939.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I think the Politico article misses two issues.

Yes, eventually the investigation likely would involve Ukraine, such as how Hunter Biden was hired by Burisma -- but that would logically come after investigating things I mentioned above, the finances of both Bidens, etc -- investigations done in the US. And we have the treaty to get those investigations done without the president being involved and needing to ask a "favor" of a foreign government.

One last point, the timing also makes it suspect. The alleged corruption being investigated was from 2016. The video that is being used to claim Biden fired the prosecutor for personal reasons was from January, 2018. So why, over a year later and only after Biden is a front runner to be the Democratic front runner, is this issue important enough for a US President to ask a favor? If this was really a concern, shouldn't this have been done at last a year previously?

Granted, we'll see what the investigation finds and if the President ever cooperates. At the same time, to me, there are clear signs of abuse of power with how Trump seemingly was wanting to keep this as a "private" (personal) investigation and not one done by the US government.

First, that President Trump, in asking the Ukraine to investigate Biden, never had a DoJ investigation started. While he did talk about Barr calling to follow up, Trump then never asked Barr to call, much less to open an investigation into the Bidens. Now, I've seen it argued that Trump "forgot" but that ignores the fact he "remembered" to talk to Giuliani and have him in Ukraine doing an investigation privately, not connected to the US government -- and not being sent as a US government envoy (Giuliani is on record stating he was there as a "private citizen." This would appear to provide evidence that Trump was doing this for personal (campaign) reasons and not as an actual investigation if Biden was corrupt.

The potential corruption Trump is obsessed with occurred in Ukraine. Hence, it makes sense he would ask Ukrainian authorities to investigate and would also explain why Barr was never told or opened such an investigation. Trump not advising Barr he asked Ukraine authorities to investigate possible corruption involving or committed by the Biden’s in Ukraine, which involved the termination of a prosecutor, doesn’t show Trump’s request was for personal, political reasons. Trump limited his request to those authorities with immediate jurisdiction of the alleged corruption, Ukrainian authorities.

Next, there is the fact that many of the facts that Trump wanted require a US investigation, not one in the Ukraine. For example, the defense of Biden is clearly that he was acting in his role as VP, as an envoy of the US government, when he fired the prosecutor, that it was not being done for personal reasons. As such, the evidence for that would be found in various government documents about the loan, and any conditions the government wanted for that loan.

Well, I do not know how many facts of corruption Trump asked Ukrainian authorities to investigate in Ukraine, require a U.S. investigation, and your post certainly doesn’t put forth any effort showing the plethora of facts are state side. Some of your facts, though, aren’t facts.

Biden didn’t fire the Ukrainian prosecutor. He pressured Ukraine to terminate Shokin by withholding aid. He was physically present Ukraine when he delivered his ultimatum. Second, Trump is alleging Biden demanded Shokin’s termination because the company, Burisma, a company located in Ukraine, was under investigation by Shokin and Hunter Biden sat on its board. Understanbly, facts are going to exist and be found in Ukraine, although I’m not sure how many or how little, but your post doesn’t establish where “many” of them exist at all.

None of what I’ve said should be understood as a defense of Trump. If these facts paint a picture of abuse of power, then he should be impeached and convicted by the Senate.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

SimplyMe

Senior Veteran
Jul 19, 2003
9,613
9,331
the Great Basin
✟325,989.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The potential corruption Trump is obsessed with occurred in Ukraine. Hence, it makes sense he would ask Ukrainian authorities to investigate and would also explain why Barr was never told or opened such an investigation. Trump not advising Barr he asked Ukraine authorities to investigate possible corruption involving or committed by the Biden’s in Ukraine, which involved the termination of a prosecutor, doesn’t show Trump’s request was for personal, political reasons. Trump limited his request to those authorities with immediate jurisdiction of the alleged corruption, Ukrainian authorities.



Well, I do not know how many facts of corruption Trump asked Ukrainian authorities to investigate in Ukraine, require a U.S. investigation, and your post certainly doesn’t put forth any effort showing the plethora of facts are state side. Some of your facts, though, aren’t facts.

Biden didn’t fire the Ukrainian prosecutor. He pressured Ukraine to terminate Shokin by withholding aid. He was physically present Ukraine when he delivered his ultimatum. Second, Trump is alleging Biden demanded Shokin’s termination because the company, Burisma, a company located in Ukraine, was under investigation by Shokin and Hunter Biden sat on its board. Understanbly, facts are going to exist and be found in Ukraine, although I’m not sure how many or how little, but your post doesn’t establish where “many” of them exist at all.

None of what I’ve said should be understood as a defense of Trump. If these facts paint a picture of abuse of power, then he should be impeached and convicted by the Senate.

If you've researched this, the claim by Biden is that he was sent as an envoy to do this -- that the decision was made here in the US by the Obama administration. We've had various members of the administration -- such as those at, or just below, the cabinet level who stated they signed off on firing the prosecutor, Shokin. Shokin was widely "known" to be corrupt by those in the DoD, CIA, and State (and each department signed off before Biden left, if these statements are true). Additionally, it was "known" by our European allies and they also wanted Shokin removed. Last, a letter from the time has been in the media recently, signed by three Republicans, that all agreed that Shokin needed to be removed -- and a couple of them have even made statements saying they were fully in support of the plan to remove Shokin.

This is why I'm saying that the investigation would clearly start in the US -- when was the decision made, who was driving the push for Shokin to be fired, etc. If the claims in the above paragraph is true, Biden was merely an envoy delivering the US message to the Ukraine -- that if you want the loan you need to fire Shokin, as well as implement other anti-corruption efforts.

Further, since Biden admitted to pressuring the Ukraine, there is little that a Ukrainian investigation will tell us -- we already know that Biden threatened to withhold the loan unless he fired Shokin -- that fact is stipulated by all parties. The question is why he withheld it -- was it US policy or was he protecting his son? And, again, that answer will be found in the US, not in Ukraine.

One other issue, the investigation into Burisma was for offenses that occurred in 2010-2012; things that occurred two years before Hunter Biden joined the company. As such, Hunter Biden shouldn't have been under investigation -- any interviews would be about what he'd seen at Burisma, did he have knowledge or seen documents from that time, or had he seen any attempts by Burisma to cover up.

The sole thing that maybe would need to be investigated in Ukraine is why they chose Hunter Biden for their board. Burisma has stated they hired Hunter Biden to oversee their legal department (not on a day to day basis, but as a board member would) and work on international relations business opportunities. Despite the claims he had no oil and gas experience; he had a law degree from Yale, had worked in a major law firm, and had experience and contacts, through his venture capital business, in international business.

Further, the story is that he got the job because Devon Archer, one of his co-founders at the venture capital firm, was first invited to Burisma's board and was the one responsible for Hunter's being invited to join. So, yes, while parts of that would need to be investigated in Ukraine, much of it likely still occurs in the US.

Last, since when do we "outsource" criminal investigations of US crimes? Particularly when investigating in a country known for corruption? I can't buy the argument that the investigation does not start in the DoJ, that any investigations in Ukraine are not done with someone from the US DoJ (either DoJ attorney or FBI), when the investigations are for violations under US law. Additionally, the President does not need to ask -- we have a treaty with Ukraine that covers joint investigations.

The argument that a US Citizen is investigated in a foreign country by their law enforcement to see if he violated US law, with no US investigation open, just doesn't work for me, and I suspect it wouldn't work for a number of judges in the US, either.
 
Upvote 0