REMINDER: THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to monitor the Forums. However, THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to review any materials submitted to or posted on the Forums, and remove, delete, redact or otherwise modify such materials, in its sole discretion and for any reason whatsoever, at any time and from time to time, without notice or further obligation to you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to display or post any materials provided by you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to disclose, at any time and from time to time, any information or materials that we deem necessary or appropriate to satisfy any applicable law, regulation, contract obligation, legal or dispute process or government request. Click on the following hyperlinks to further read the applicable Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Sidebar Sidebar

***Official Impeachment Proceedings***

Ifallalot

Ifallalot

Duke status
Dec 17, 2008
89,271
18,276
113
hal9000 said:
This hasn't been used since the 1930s so it's unlikely that the practice will be revived.

Still......this post doesn't address any kind of legal defense or statement defending Trumby's abuses of power or criminal activities.
Click to expand...
It doesn't need to. You don't counter wrongdoing with more wrondoing
 
hal9000

hal9000

Duke status
Jan 30, 2016
56,605
16,976
113
Urbana, Illinois
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/10/13/gordon-sondland-is-about-blow-hole-trumps-ukraine-defense/

Sondland will also indicate that he was merely relaying Trump’s defense, which he had discussed with the president on a phone call before the text message:

Sondland plans to tell lawmakers he has no knowledge of whether the president was telling him the truth at that moment. “It’s only true that the president said it, not that it was the truth,” said the person familiar with Sondland’s planned testimony, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive diplomatic matters.
...
The person familiar with Sondland’s testimony said the ambassador “believed Trump at the time and on that basis passed along assurances” that Trump was not withholding military aid for political purposes.
But Sondland’s testimony will raise the possibility that Trump wasn’t truthful in his denial of a quid pro quo as well as an alternative scenario in which the president’s interest in the scheme soured at a time when his administration faced mounting scrutiny over why it was withholding about $400 million in security assistance to Ukraine and delaying a leader-level visit with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
“Whether he’s deciding it’s getting too hot to handle and he backs off whatever his position really was a month earlier, I don’t know,” the person said of Sondland’s understanding.
...
Sondland is expected to say that for months before the Sept. 9 message, he worked at the direction of Rudolph W. Giuliani, Trump’s personal attorney, to secure what he would call in another text message the “deliverable” sought by Trump: a public statement from Ukraine that it would investigate corruption, including mentioning Burisma, a Ukrainian energy company, by name. In exchange for the statement, the president would grant Ukraine’s new president a coveted White House audience.
Click to expand...

and
The other quote Trump and his defenders often point to is from Zelensky, who said he didn’t feel pressured in that July 25 phone call with Trump. Much like Sondland, though, Zelensky has an interest in playing down anything corrupt, because Ukraine relies on the United States. Zelensky can’t just come out and accuse Trump of doing something wrong. He also has a personal interest in not looking like Trump’s stooge, which he was at risk of after the rough transcript showed him apparently acceding to Trump’s requests to launch certain investigations.

The fact that these statements are at the core of the Trump defense shows just how little they are working with at this point. It’s simply difficult to argue that Trump didn’t, at the very least, toy with a quid pro quo, even if it might have been implicit.

In the tweet above, Trump indicated that he “would love to send Ambassador Sondland, a really good man and great American, to testify.”

It sounds as if that may not be the case anymore. Sondland’s impending testimony sounds like that of a man covering his own backside and knowing his apparent defense of Trump could quickly fall apart upon further examination.
Click to expand...
 
M

mundus

Duke status
Feb 26, 2018
37,606
16,556
113
51 pages still no defenses of the indefensible just process complaints and projection.
 
Ifallalot

Ifallalot

Duke status
Dec 17, 2008
89,271
18,276
113
manbearpig said:
Stop and think about this for a second.

If a common citizen refuses to comply with a subpoena, they can and do go to jail.

Why should that be different for a politician? Why hold them to a different standard, above the law?
Click to expand...
Staffers aren't politicans

Congress isn't a court
 
manbearpig

manbearpig

Duke status
May 11, 2009
30,122
10,586
113
in the bathroom
Ifallalot said:
No, I don't believe in people being detained unless they have committed a crime.

Also, Congress is not a court.
Click to expand...
So you know for a fact no crime has been committed?

But you realize that fact is irrelevant when given a subpoena right? You receive one and fail to comply, you’re going to jail innocent or not. It’s part of something called due process....

So all that screeching about all politicians and clerks being criminals was bs? Because apparently that MUZLIIMM is more about that then you are.
 
Ifallalot

Ifallalot

Duke status
Dec 17, 2008
89,271
18,276
113
manbearpig said:
So you know for a fact no crime has been committed?

But you realize that fact is irrelevant when given a subpoena right? You receive one and fail to comply, you’re going to jail innocent or not. It’s part of something called due process....

So all that screeching about all politicians and clerks being criminals was bs? Because apparently that MUZLIIMM is more about that then you are.
Click to expand...
These are criminals holding a kangaroo court for other criminals. Does that make you feel better?

You're reaching here simply to be contrarian.

For the third time, Congress is not a court. I understand what subpoenas are, and the penalties for not complying in a court of law.

But the most laughable thing is that you're holding up Roz from Monsters Inc as some kind of hero. Do you think she'd be acting the same if it was her team?
 
S

Surfdog

Duke status
Apr 22, 2001
21,817
2,033
113
South coast OR
This is AGAIN becoming an "investigation needing a crime", instead of the usual "crime needing an investigation".

But what's new with the straw grasping desperate Dems?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ifallalot
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Share this page
Top Bottom