Trump Impeachment: Pelosi to Announce Impeachment Inquiry of President Trump

[KCfromNC]

He merely asked Ukrainian to look into the possibility of corruption in the Obama administration.

I've seen this in a few different threads, so it is obvious the messaging from the GOP has finally started to try something other than "nuh uh, is not!". As such, it deserves a bit more of a review.

The issue here is that they're talking about alleged corruption which was already looked into and the charges dismissed as baseless. But is now being brought up again because, well, we don't know. The GOP / RT spin doesn't say. One very reasonable connection is that the person Donald wants to investigate is one of the leading candidates running against him in the next election.

Yeah, I'm not sure this latest "he was just investigating corruption" spin is going to fly. Especially when people start asking why if were something he was supposed to be doing would he and his employees try to cover it up?

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

You also completely ignored my posts where I've told you, law enforcement is not the President's job -- he is not the head of the Justice Department.

I ignored it because you are wrong. A little civics 101 lesson. The legislative branch is responsible for making laws. The executive branch is responsible for ensuring that those laws are enforced. Which is why the DOJ falls under the Executive branch and not the Supreme court. The president is the chief executive over the entire executive branch of government to include the DOJ. Hence, law enforcement is one of the president's ultimate responsibilities. He doesn't walk around with a badge and a gun. Rather, he has the authority to tell any federal employee where to take that badge or point that gun. So if the president suspects possible corruption. Or illegal activity, it is not only his prerogative, but his responsibility to ensure it is investigated. This obviously includes any political opponent. This is also why he has the power to pardon for convicted criminals.

 

[cow451]

I ignored it because you are wrong. A little civics 101 lesson. The legislative branch is responsible for making laws. The executive branch is responsible for ensuring that those laws are enforced. Which is why the DOJ falls under the Executive branch and not the Supreme court. The president is the chief executive over the entire executive branch of government to include the DOJ. Hence, law enforcement is one of the president's ultimate responsibilities. He doesn't walk around with a badge and a gun. Rather, he has the authority to tell any federal employee where to take that badge or point that gun. So if the president suspects possible corruption. Or illegal activity, it is not only his prerogative, but his responsibility to ensure it is investigated. This obviously includes any political opponent. This is also why he has the power to pardon for convicted criminals.

Then why is the DOJ not investigating Biden?

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Then why is the DOJ not investigating Biden?

I am pretty sure they are. But they dont have jurisdiction in Ukraine. Which is why Trump is seeking cooperation with Ukraine.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

The Media Manipulation of the Whistleblower Story.

 

[Speedwell]

I am pretty sure they are. But they dont have jurisdiction in Ukraine. Which is why Trump is seeking cooperation with Ukraine.

In any case it's all likely to come up and be gone over in the Senate. Trump's defense is sure to be based in part on whether he had a legitimate reason to request Ukraine's help in pursuing corruption on the part of Biden.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

And ... how will we know whether or not this is true ... unless we investigate ...

Well, the little investigating that has occurred has already revealed that the complaint was false...so....

 

[Hank77]

I am pretty sure they are. But they dont have jurisdiction in Ukraine. Which is why Trump is seeking cooperation with Ukraine.

Then he should have sent someone from the government to investigate, not his personal attorney, Giuliani. He really screwed up doing that. It's so obvious this was for political reasons not for national security reasons.
If Joe Biden financially benefited, as Trump as said he did, while he was assigned as a delegate to the Ukraine that should be easy enough to prove without going to the Ukraine or China. Tax returns, bank records, property documents, etc.
Guess what we already have his tax returns for those years, you and I can even look at them. If there was any truth to what Trump says you can bet there are media outlets that would have already found it.

 

[SimplyMe]

I ignored it because you are wrong. A little civics 101 lesson. The legislative branch is responsible for making laws. The executive branch is responsible for ensuring that those laws are enforced. Which is why the DOJ falls under the Executive branch and not the Supreme court. The president is the chief executive over the entire executive branch of government to include the DOJ. Hence, law enforcement is one of the president's ultimate responsibilities. He doesn't walk around with a badge and a gun. Rather, he has the authority to tell any federal employee where to take that badge or point that gun. So if the president suspects possible corruption. Or illegal activity, it is not only his prerogative, but his responsibility to ensure it is investigated. This obviously includes any political opponent. This is also why he has the power to pardon for convicted criminals.

You are the one that needs the Civics lesson. As I keep telling people, yes, the DoJ is in the Executive Branch; however, it was intentionally set up to remain independent. It's interesting that the only other time this was an issue was under Nixon....

 

[SimplyMe]

I am pretty sure they are. But they dont have jurisdiction in Ukraine. Which is why Trump is seeking cooperation with Ukraine.

Why do they need the Ukraine's cooperation to investigate Biden? After all, all the evidence -- whether Biden blocked the funds himself or if he were sent by the US Government (and on behalf of our allies) is going to be in the US. What happened in the Ukraine is not really in doubt.

Beyond that, even if we were going to investigate in the Ukraine we already have a treaty set up for it -- and it calls for the AG, or someone else who he's given authorization, to call the Ukraine and ask for help. This is what is really odd about Trump's phone call -- and to me gives the truth of the matter; Trump claimed he was going to have Barr call and he wanted them to work, as with his personal attorney, Giuliani. Of course, Trump never told Barr to call the Ukraine (which, again, is what the treaty says should happen) and sent Giuliani to the Ukraine -- it is clear he was looking more for dirt to use in his campaign than any serious investigation into Biden.

 

[SimplyMe]

Then he should have sent someone from the government to investigate, not his personal attorney, Giuliani. He really screwed up doing that. It's so obvious this was for political reasons not for national security reasons.
If Joe Biden financially benefited, as Trump as said he did, while he was assigned as a delegate to the Ukraine that should be easy enough to prove without going to the Ukraine or China. Tax returns, bank records, property documents, etc.
Guess what we already have his tax returns for those years, you and I can even look at them. If there was any truth to what Trump says you can bet there are media outlets that would have already found it.

I'm going to disagree, a little. The claim isn't that this made Biden money, rather that he was withholding a loan from the Ukraine to stop the investigation into his son. However, it is still something that we'll find the answers to in the US, not the Ukraine. If he blocked the loan on his own and unilaterally told the Ukraine to fire the prosecutor -- then that evidence would be here in the US.

The problem with that narrative is that the prosecutor was believed to be corrupt and the US as well as our European allies all wanted the prosecutor removed from office, that he had stopped the investigation that Biden's son worked for. Instead, the facts appear to show that Biden was sent as an envoy of the US Government (not of his own volition) and that it was the US putting the condition on issuing a loan (not Biden).

And, as is pointed out, the Ukraine closed the investigation into the company two years ago (after Obama/Biden was out of office) and neither Biden was found to do anything wrong. For Trump to want them to reinvestigate now, with no new evidence, shows this is a politically motivated witch hunt.

 

[A_Thinker]

Well, the little investigating that has occurred has already revealed that the complaint was false...so....

You must be watching different coverage than me .....

 

[A_Thinker]

Instead, the facts appear to show that Biden was sent as an envoy of the US Government (not of his own volition) and that it was the US putting the condition on issuing a loan (not Biden).

This is where the Republican fake news on this, most readily, falls apart.

American Vice-Presidents simply don't have the power to deny US loans to foreign powers ...

 

[lasthero]

I'm going to disagree, a little. The claim isn't that this made Biden money, rather that he was withholding a loan from the Ukraine to stop the investigation into his son. However, it is still something that we'll find the answers to in the US, not the Ukraine. If he blocked the loan on his own and unilaterally told the Ukraine to fire the prosecutor -- then that evidence would be here in the US.

The problem with that narrative is that the prosecutor was believed to be corrupt and the US as well as our European allies all wanted the prosecutor removed from office, that he had stopped the investigation that Biden's son worked for. Instead, the facts appear to show that Biden was sent as an envoy of the US Government (not of his own volition) and that it was the US putting the condition on issuing a loan (not Biden).

And, as is pointed out, the Ukraine closed the investigation into the company two years ago (after Obama/Biden was out of office) and neither Biden was found to do anything wrong. For Trump to want them to reinvestigate now, with no new evidence, shows this is a politically motivated witch hunt.

It's really frustrating that everything you just posted is both true and readily available information, but keeps getting ignored.

 

[lasthero]

This is where the Republican fake news on this most, readily, falls apart.

American Vice-Presidents simply don't have the power to deny US loans to foreign powers ...

When you really think about it, even if the narrative that Republicans are pushing is true, it doesn't put Trump in a good light. Even if I accept that he was just investigating something in the pursuit of justice, it still makes him look like a fool for beating a horse that's been dead for years, and not realizing how bad this would make him look.

At worst he's a crook, at best he's an idiot. That's your president, folks.

 

[wing2000]

It's really frustrating that everything you just posted is both true and readily available information, but keeps getting ignored.

A man sees what he wants to see.....(no accident that FOX commentary videos keep appearing in this thread).

 

[cow451]

I am pretty sure they are. But they dont have jurisdiction in Ukraine. Which is why Trump is seeking cooperation with Ukraine.

It’s not up to Ukraine to investigate American crime. If Biden has possibly broken US law, it is the DOJ that should initiate an inquiry. The President was trying to get a political favor using American tax dollars.

 

[Hank77]

I'm going to disagree, a little. The claim isn't that this made Biden money, rather that he was withholding a loan from the Ukraine to stop the investigation into his son. However, it is still something that we'll find the answers to in the US, not the Ukraine. If he blocked the loan on his own and unilaterally told the Ukraine to fire the prosecutor -- then that evidence would be here in the US.

I agree.
I didn't explain what I was referring to, my bad.
Trump has said that when Joe and Hunter went to China They made 1.5 billion dollars through Hunter's business dealings there. That's why I mentioned China.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

You are the one that needs the Civics lesson. As I keep telling people, yes, the DoJ is in the Executive Branch; however, it was intentionally set up to remain independent. It's interesting that the only other time this was an issue was under Nixon....

It doesn't matter what the DOJ was "initially" set up to be. It is currently under the executive branch and is overseen by the President.

 

[SimplyMe]

It doesn't matter what the DOJ was "initially" set up to be. It is currently under the executive branch and is overseen by the President.

It absolutely matters what the DoJ was set up to be -- particularly since it has always been under the Executive Branch. Again, we are talking about what is stated in the US Code (US Law).