New bank subpoena shows Hunter received money from Beijing during Joe's campaign

[KCfromNC]

Nope the precedent for conducting numerous investigations of a president was established in 2017.

Repeating talking points is a much weaker approach than actually demonstrating they're true. But in this case I can understand why this post is resigned to the former.

 

[The Barbarian]

Nope the precedent for conducting numerous investigations of a president was established in 2017.

Bill Clinton was president in 1993. Republicans were "investigating" all sorts of weird things and finally hit pay dirt. He committed adultery. As Ken Starr reluctantly admitted in his final report, that's all there was.

 

[Ceallaigh]

Bill Clinton was president in 1993. Republicans were "investigating" all sorts of weird things and finally hit pay dirt. He committed adultery. As Ken Starr reluctantly admitted in his final report, that's all there was.

Nothing compares to the number of times a president was gone after from 2017 to 2021. I heard several experts saying how it was going set a precedent regarding future presidents. So if Joe Biden is getting investigated too much, that means they were right. A pandora's box was opened.

In Bill Clinton's case it only went so far and concluded with an impeachment. It didn't keep going on and on one investigation after another during his entire presidency.

But unfortunately for Biden going after a president with numerous investigations is the current standard.

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

Nothing compares to the number of times a president was gone after from 2017 to 2021. I heard several experts saying how it was going set a precedent regarding future presidents. So if Joe Biden is getting investigated too much, that means they were right. A pandora's box was opened.

In Bill Clinton's case it only went so far and concluded with an impeachment. It didn't keep going on and on one investigation after another during his entire presidency.

But unfortunately for Biden going after a president with numerous investigations is the current standard.

We'd never had that criminal of a president before. What would you expect?

 

[Ceallaigh]

We'd never had that criminal of a president before. What would you expect?

The president was never charged with any crimes between 2017 - 2021. Maybe the current president won't be charged with any crimes during his time in office either.

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

The president was never charged with any crimes between 2017 - 2021.

But we now know (we pretty much always knew) he was committing crimes during that time period and before because he has now been charged in 4 different courts. Your guy is criminal. Sorry.

 

[Ceallaigh]

But we now know (we pretty much always knew) he was committing crimes during that time period and before because he has now been charged in 4 different courts.

Therefore they can't take any chances with this and future presidents.

As for the former president this nation has been waiting over seven years for him to actually be convicted of criminal charges.

 

[Ceallaigh]

They better hurry up with that before he becomes president again and is untouchable for another 4 years.

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

Therefore they can't take any chances with this and future presidents.

As for the former president this nation has been waiting over seven years for him to actually be convicted of criminal charges.

Right, because all people who are president are the same and all potential criminals. There were no indications that your guy might have been shady before he ran...

 

[Ceallaigh]

Right, because all people who are president are the same and all potential criminals. There were no indications that your guy might have been shady before he ran...

Seems to me many find the current president shady. As a matter of fact there are those who have considered him to be shady throughout a lot of his political career. They deserve as much of a chance to find out if they're right or not by investigating him to the same extent as his predecessor.

 

[The Barbarian]

Nothing compares to the number of times a president was gone after from 2017 to 2021.

Trump did a lot of stuff and much of it was illegal or fraudulent. What do you expect?

In Bill Clinton's case it only went so far and concluded with an impeachment.

Well, turns out it's not a crime to commit adultery. If it was, Trump would have four more indictments.

It didn't keep going on and on one investigation after another during his entire presidency.

Actually, it did. Huge number of accusations. Everything from drug smuggling, land fraud, weapons trafficking, and what have you. None of it with any evidence linking anyone in the Clinton administration. In fact, it was later revealed that the drug smuggling had been mostly by the republican-supported Contras trying to get a revolution going in Central America.

Kenneth Starr's successor as Independent Counsel, Robert Ray, released a report in September 2000, that stated "This office determined that the evidence was insufficient to prove to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that either President or Mrs. Clinton knowingly participated in any criminal conduct."
...
The length, expense, and results of the Whitewater investigations turned the public against the Office of the Independent Counsel; even Kenneth Starr was opposed to it.[59] The Independent Counsel law was allowed to expire in 1999.[59]

Whitewater controversy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

But even a hard-core republican like Starr finally had to admit that it was all fantasy with no indictable actions by Clinton. It's worth reading to see what a real partisan witch-hunt looks like.

 

[Ceallaigh]

Trump did a lot of stuff and much of it was illegal or fraudulent. What do you expect?

Allegedly. He's yet to be convicted of anything after seven or eight years. After all that time he might be found liable in civil claims court.

Well, turns out it's not a crime to commit adultery. If it was, Trump would have four more indictments.

Actually, it did. Huge number of accusations. Everything from drug smuggling, land fraud, weapons trafficking, and what have you. None of it with any evidence linking anyone in the Clinton administration. In fact, it was later revealed that the drug smuggling had been mostly by the republican-supported Contras trying to get a revolution going in Central America.

Kenneth Starr's successor as Independent Counsel, Robert Ray, released a report in September 2000, that stated "This office determined that the evidence was insufficient to prove to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that either President or Mrs. Clinton knowingly participated in any criminal conduct."
...
The length, expense, and results of the Whitewater investigations turned the public against the Office of the Independent Counsel; even Kenneth Starr was opposed to it.[59] The Independent Counsel law was allowed to expire in 1999.[59]

Whitewater controversy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

But even a hard-core republican like Starr finally had to admit that it was all fantasy with no indictable actions by Clinton. It's worth reading to see what a real partisan witch-hunt looks like.

There weren't numerous congressional investigations and hearings throughout Clinton's entire presidency.

 

[The Barbarian]

There weren't numerous congressional investigations and hearings throughout Clinton's entire presidency.

Well, let's take a look...

Republicans in the 104th Congress also launched major investigations into the Clinton administration. The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform held several hearings into the alleged politically motivated firing of seven White House Travel Office employees. In 1998, an independent prosecutor concluded that there was no evidence to charge the Clintons for wrongdoing.

Additionally, the Senate established a special committee to investigate property investments in the Whitewater Development Corp. made by Bill and Hillary Clinton when they were governor and first lady of Arkansas. After a 13-month investigation, the Republican majority’s final report accused the Clinton administration of “highly improper conduct” but did not provide evidence of criminality.

Congress investigates presidents, the military, baseball and whatever it wants – a brief modern history of oversight

The House GOP has announced a slew of investigations, including a review of the conduct of the Department of Justice and its investigations of Donald Trump.

theconversation.com

The difference is, they didn't find any evidence of criminal behavior, as courts have found involving Donald Trump.

 

[The Barbarian]

Trump did a lot of stuff and much of it was illegal or fraudulent. What do you expect?

Allegedly.

No. A court has already found him guilty of fraud. The trial is now in the punishment phase. He's a criminal, officially.

 

[The Barbarian]

7 years=recently?
He’s dead a year, as well.

More recently, I guess.

 

[Ceallaigh]

Trump did a lot of stuff and much of it was illegal or fraudulent. What do you expect?


No. A court has already found him guilty of fraud. The trial is now in the punishment phase. He's a criminal, officially.

It's a civil trial, not a criminal trial.

 

[The Barbarian]

It's a civil trial, not a criminal trial.

Yes. He was found guilty of fraud. In this case, the penalty will be civil not criminal. It's not the first time he's been caught committing fraud, actually. I think it was $25 million he had to return to people he had cheated out of their money in the fake "Trump University" scam. He seems to never learn from these kinds of things.

 

[Ceallaigh]

Yes. He was found guilty of fraud. In this case, the penalty will be civil not criminal. It's not the first time he's been caught committing fraud, actually. I think it was $25 million he had to return to people he had cheated out of their money in the fake "Trump University" scam. He seems to never learn from these kinds of things.

He has to be found guilty in a criminal trial to be "a criminal, officially". The verdict he received in this civil trial would not go on his criminal record, if he had one.

 

[The Barbarian]

This thread isn't about Trump's civil and criminal indictments. Let's move on.

 

[KCfromNC]

The president was never charged with any crimes between 2017 - 2021.

Yeah, that's been DoJ policy for decades : https://www.justice.gov/d9/olc/opinions/2000/10/31/op-olc-v024-p0222_0.pdf

It doesn't demonstrate anything w.r.t. the evidence of criminal behavior.