The Quid Pro Quo As a Corruption Investigation Ploy(?)! Not In The Matter of Chinese Tea(?)!

[mascale]

Quid pro quo to create an political outcome is generally illegal bribery. That being noted, then of course the White House will not acknowledge that quid pro quo: Was in place in the conditional aid to Ukraine phone call. The course has been taken to embrace the Act, and Deny the Concept.

Then to compare, Trump's White House than suggested that China should investigate former Vice President Biden. Nothing was offered, and nothing received. So no quid pro quo charge could be raised, only depending on what is happening in the Trade Talks. Many will note that China has no pertinent interest in launching a Communist Party inquiry into details of anything Joe Biden ever did with respect to China, Their economy is slowing, for one thing.

So the China request can be said a compare and contrast.

Can Proportionality Distinguish Quid Pro Quo Corruption?

The compare and contrast points to the Trump White House offering the security bribe to the new Ukranian President.

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred."
(Mainly White Eyes just stole Lands of Many Nations--doing nothing so corrupt as a bribe(?)!)

 

[theHawk]

China loves the quid pro quo system Washington has used for decades.

Pay off corrupt US politicians and their kids, like the Bidens, and US trade policy won’t be changed and will allow China to steal our manufacturing jobs and rape us on trade.

They’d certainty prefer Corrupt Joe in the White House to go back to doing business as usual, than continue to deal with President Trump who isn’t playing their game.

 

[mascale]

"Institutional Quid Pro Quo" not thought illegal, is confined to the concept of the US National government way of creating deals. It is also normal business, mostly anywhere. When used to a particular advantage, then it is an illegal transaction, a bribe.

In the matter of the Chinese Tea, of the recent week--No parties offered or accepted anything for anything. So the White House could use the Matter of the Chinese Tea--which had nothing to do with anything--to say it was just like the requested bribe, (illegal favor), in the matter of the Security Arrangements for the Ukraine.

Then anyone can notice that China is being forced to react to the Trump policies, and anyone can notice that North Korea expected a quid pro quo in the scaling back of its nuclear program. In that absence, The Trump White House has botched another deal, and with basis in a widely accepted bribe, a quid pro quo. The North Koreans are widely known to have expected a lifting of sanctions, and other material, economic outcome.

So no impeachment there, and no public call for North Korea to investigate Joe Biden.

In Los Angeles, talking to the unions, VP Biden goes to the basis problem. Since what is normal for Trump--and that White House(?)--is not normal for anyone else in the United States; Then Trump reasoning--abuse of power--could lead to explosive crisis outcomes.

Hence Impeachment and a successful trial outcome are warranted.

The crisis intervention in the matter of the Nixon Administration did create a successful resign-from-office outcome: Similar basis of crisis intervention.

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!'
(Crisis Intervention in the matter General Custer's illegal invasion: Easily said warranted.)