Should Trump Have Withheld Military Aid to Ukraine ?

[protectionist]

The difference between Trump and Biden?
Biden: open Quid Pro Quo with Ukraine as part of the United States official agenda to reduce corruption in Ukraine.
Trump: secret Quid pro Quo with Ukraine to further his own personal and political agenda .

The difference between Trump and Biden?

Biden: open Quid Pro Quo with Ukraine threatening withholding of 1 Billion of US aid, to preserve corrupt connection between his qualificationless son and Ukranian energy company Burisma, based on Joe Biden's position as USA VP, to further his own personal agenda, all having no benefit to the American people.

Trump: attempt to investigate the Biden corruption, according to US requirements.

 

[kwc57]

First of all, as so commonly happens when Democrats try to pull off another anti-Trump coup, the entire definition of this issue has become distorted to how they wish it to appear.
The President of the United States is required to investigate whether foreign countries seeking US aid are involved in corruption, to insure that the aid is properly used. That aid is supposed to be withheld if corruption is found.

There was no need for Trump to inquire about corruption as pertaining to then Vice-President Joe Biden (who openly broadcasted it on video). Clearly, there was corruption pertaining to Hunter Biden, who brought nothing to the Burisma table other than being the son of the US Vice-President.

Maybe Trump was wrong to allow Ukraine to get the aid they got, as was Obama who also gave Ukraine aid (although he did withhold MILITARY aid, and just gave blankets). By giving aid in the face of the Biden/Burisma corruption, the Ukrainians now become comfortable in engaging in corruption, while requesting US aid.

I can’t believe people are still going with the Biden corruption angle when it was so thoroughly disproven in last weeks testimony.

Holy shit! Bull Schiff telling Republicans to suspend when they ask inconvenient questions that don't support his personal vendetta didn't disprove jack shit. Get a grip.

 

[Richard-H]

First of all, as so commonly happens when Democrats try to pull off another anti-Trump coup, the entire definition of this issue has become distorted to how they wish it to appear.
The President of the United States is required to investigate whether foreign countries seeking US aid are involved in corruption, to insure that the aid is properly used. That aid is supposed to be withheld if corruption is found.

There was no need for Trump to inquire about corruption as pertaining to then Vice-President Joe Biden (who openly broadcasted it on video). Clearly, there was corruption pertaining to Hunter Biden, who brought nothing to the Burisma table other than being the son of the US Vice-President.

Maybe Trump was wrong to allow Ukraine to get the aid they got, as was Obama who also gave Ukraine aid (although he did withhold MILITARY aid, and just gave blankets). By giving aid in the face of the Biden/Burisma corruption, the Ukrainians now become comfortable in engaging in corruption, while requesting US aid.

If it was required for U.S. Presidents to with hold aid for countries that have a problem with corruption, there would not have been ANY U.S. aid for ANY country EVER. There also would never have been any U.S. allies!

 

[protectionist]

Really to me- just the idea that Trumpublicans are okay with Trump calling up any foreign leader anywhere and asking them to dig up dirt on his political rival amazes me.
That is Banana Republic/Russia kind of corruption of the office.

Has nothing to do with political rivals. That is merely the scam talk coming from Democrats to laughably concoct a reason for impeachment.

Has only to do with the corruption involving Bad Boy Biden.

All stemming from the Democrats fear that they must impeach to avoid a Trump re-election.

Rep. Al Green: "I'm concerned that if we don't impeach this president, he will get re-elected." There's the whole impeachment ruse in a nutshell >>

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5vsrS8M0qU

 

[kwc57]

First of all, as so commonly happens when Democrats try to pull off another anti-Trump coup, the entire definition of this issue has become distorted to how they wish it to appear.
The President of the United States is required to investigate whether foreign countries seeking US aid are involved in corruption, to insure that the aid is properly used. That aid is supposed to be withheld if corruption is found.

There was no need for Trump to inquire about corruption as pertaining to then Vice-President Joe Biden (who openly broadcasted it on video). Clearly, there was corruption pertaining to Hunter Biden, who brought nothing to the Burisma table other than being the son of the US Vice-President.

Maybe Trump was wrong to allow Ukraine to get the aid they got, as was Obama who also gave Ukraine aid (although he did withhold MILITARY aid, and just gave blankets). By giving aid in the face of the Biden/Burisma corruption, the Ukrainians now become comfortable in engaging in corruption, while requesting US aid.

I can’t believe people are still going with the Biden corruption angle when it was so thoroughly disproven in last weeks testimony.

Wowzers. Define disproven. State department cronies with axes to grind saying so doesn't prove shit.

Well lets see.
There is no evidence of either Hunter Biden or Joe Biden committing any crime.

There is evidence of Trump having a secret phone call and secret inquiries to get Ukraine to make a public announcement of an investigation into his political rival.

Hmmmmmm

Can you provide links to the extensive investigation showing the Bidens didn't commit any crimes? I mean, we are conduction an impeachment in the house based on an anonymous leakers second and third hand hearsay. From that, Schiff determined that we must turn over every rock in search of an actual crime. The Bidens do something that smells extremely fishy and even though there is smoke, there seems to be absolutely no need to look any further and see if anything criminal or unethical happened. You can't have it both ways sweetcheeks. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Don't be a hypocrite.

 

[2aguy]

First of all, as so commonly happens when Democrats try to pull off another anti-Trump coup, the entire definition of this issue has become distorted to how they wish it to appear.
The President of the United States is required to investigate whether foreign countries seeking US aid are involved in corruption, to insure that the aid is properly used. That aid is supposed to be withheld if corruption is found.

There was no need for Trump to inquire about corruption as pertaining to then Vice-President Joe Biden (who openly broadcasted it on video). Clearly, there was corruption pertaining to Hunter Biden, who brought nothing to the Burisma table other than being the son of the US Vice-President.

Maybe Trump was wrong to allow Ukraine to get the aid they got, as was Obama who also gave Ukraine aid (although he did withhold MILITARY aid, and just gave blankets). By giving aid in the face of the Biden/Burisma corruption, the Ukrainians now become comfortable in engaging in corruption, while requesting US aid.

I can’t believe people are still going with the Biden corruption angle when it was so thoroughly disproven in last weeks testimony.

It wasn't disproven, in fact, Yado whatever her name is stated it was an issue for the obama administration...

 

[2aguy]

Trump Schmump. why dont the failing new york times open up a fucking foreign bureau from moscow to kyiv and investigate the Bidens, if they really want the facts, after they find nothing on our great president!

The Bidens need not be investigated. There is nothing to investigate, All is clear. Joe threatened to withhold aid if a prosecutor he didn't like wasn't fired. and his know-nothing son was being paid $80,00/month just to be a Biden.

It wasn't even the money paid to the kid...it was the fact that his being on the board got crazy joe to threaten to withhold the aid...that is the corruption.

 

[colfax_m]

First of all, as so commonly happens when Democrats try to pull off another anti-Trump coup, the entire definition of this issue has become distorted to how they wish it to appear.
The President of the United States is required to investigate whether foreign countries seeking US aid are involved in corruption, to insure that the aid is properly used. That aid is supposed to be withheld if corruption is found.

There was no need for Trump to inquire about corruption as pertaining to then Vice-President Joe Biden (who openly broadcasted it on video). Clearly, there was corruption pertaining to Hunter Biden, who brought nothing to the Burisma table other than being the son of the US Vice-President.

Maybe Trump was wrong to allow Ukraine to get the aid they got, as was Obama who also gave Ukraine aid (although he did withhold MILITARY aid, and just gave blankets). By giving aid in the face of the Biden/Burisma corruption, the Ukrainians now become comfortable in engaging in corruption, while requesting US aid.

I can’t believe people are still going with the Biden corruption angle when it was so thoroughly disproven in last weeks testimony.

It wasn't disproven, in fact, Yado whatever her name is stated it was an issue for the obama administration...

The appearance of a conflict was an issue. There was nothing beyond the appearance and that's been confirmed over and over again the Biden corruption story is bogus.

 

[kwc57]

It was proven when Biden allowed his threat to the Ukrainians to be videoed.

I don't believe it. There is no such tape. What you have is a tape of Joe talking about it a few years later. In reality our 1 billion in loan guarantees was dwarfed by EU and the IMF one. The EU and the IMF wanted the same thing we wanted. They were serious about rooting out corruption. Not strong arming a sovereign government into generating investigations into domestic political rivals.

So in that instance. a quid pro quo withholding approved aid was perfectly fine? Hypocrite much? LOL

 

[2aguy]

First of all, as so commonly happens when Democrats try to pull off another anti-Trump coup, the entire definition of this issue has become distorted to how they wish it to appear.
The President of the United States is required to investigate whether foreign countries seeking US aid are involved in corruption, to insure that the aid is properly used. That aid is supposed to be withheld if corruption is found.

There was no need for Trump to inquire about corruption as pertaining to then Vice-President Joe Biden (who openly broadcasted it on video). Clearly, there was corruption pertaining to Hunter Biden, who brought nothing to the Burisma table other than being the son of the US Vice-President.

Maybe Trump was wrong to allow Ukraine to get the aid they got, as was Obama who also gave Ukraine aid (although he did withhold MILITARY aid, and just gave blankets). By giving aid in the face of the Biden/Burisma corruption, the Ukrainians now become comfortable in engaging in corruption, while requesting US aid.

I can’t believe people are still going with the Biden corruption angle when it was so thoroughly disproven in last weeks testimony.

It wasn't disproven, in fact, Yado whatever her name is stated it was an issue for the obama administration...

The appearance of a conflict was an issue. There was nothing beyond the appearance and that's been confirmed over and over again the Biden corruption story is bogus.

No, it isnt' bogus, it happened....and the ones who investigated it....are the same ones who made up the Russia hoax....so spare us...

 

[colfax_m]

First of all, as so commonly happens when Democrats try to pull off another anti-Trump coup, the entire definition of this issue has become distorted to how they wish it to appear.
The President of the United States is required to investigate whether foreign countries seeking US aid are involved in corruption, to insure that the aid is properly used. That aid is supposed to be withheld if corruption is found.

There was no need for Trump to inquire about corruption as pertaining to then Vice-President Joe Biden (who openly broadcasted it on video). Clearly, there was corruption pertaining to Hunter Biden, who brought nothing to the Burisma table other than being the son of the US Vice-President.

Maybe Trump was wrong to allow Ukraine to get the aid they got, as was Obama who also gave Ukraine aid (although he did withhold MILITARY aid, and just gave blankets). By giving aid in the face of the Biden/Burisma corruption, the Ukrainians now become comfortable in engaging in corruption, while requesting US aid.

I can’t believe people are still going with the Biden corruption angle when it was so thoroughly disproven in last weeks testimony.

Holy shit! Bull Schiff telling Republicans to suspend when they ask inconvenient questions that don't support his personal vendetta didn't disprove jack shit. Get a grip.

What the hell are you talking about? Listen to the damn testimony and learn a thing or two.

1. There was no active investigation into Burisma by Shokin.
2. Shokin was widely regarded by everyone with knowledge in the State Dept to be corrupt
3. The efforts to replace Shokin began by the career State Dept officials
4. Biden's participation was consistent with US foreign policy of reducing corruption in Ukraine.

 

[protectionist]

If it was required for U.S. Presidents to with hold aid for countries that have a problem with corruption, there would not have been ANY U.S. aid for ANY country EVER. There also would never have been any U.S. allies!

There is no "IF". It's required.

 

[colfax_m]

First of all, as so commonly happens when Democrats try to pull off another anti-Trump coup, the entire definition of this issue has become distorted to how they wish it to appear.
The President of the United States is required to investigate whether foreign countries seeking US aid are involved in corruption, to insure that the aid is properly used. That aid is supposed to be withheld if corruption is found.

There was no need for Trump to inquire about corruption as pertaining to then Vice-President Joe Biden (who openly broadcasted it on video). Clearly, there was corruption pertaining to Hunter Biden, who brought nothing to the Burisma table other than being the son of the US Vice-President.

Maybe Trump was wrong to allow Ukraine to get the aid they got, as was Obama who also gave Ukraine aid (although he did withhold MILITARY aid, and just gave blankets). By giving aid in the face of the Biden/Burisma corruption, the Ukrainians now become comfortable in engaging in corruption, while requesting US aid.

I can’t believe people are still going with the Biden corruption angle when it was so thoroughly disproven in last weeks testimony.

It wasn't disproven, in fact, Yado whatever her name is stated it was an issue for the obama administration...

The appearance of a conflict was an issue. There was nothing beyond the appearance and that's been confirmed over and over again the Biden corruption story is bogus.

No, it isnt' bogus, it happened....and the ones who investigated it....are the same ones who made up the Russia hoax....so spare us...

Nope. Bogus. Name one person that corroborates the bogus story.

 

[colfax_m]

It was proven when Biden allowed his threat to the Ukrainians to be videoed.

I don't believe it. There is no such tape. What you have is a tape of Joe talking about it a few years later. In reality our 1 billion in loan guarantees was dwarfed by EU and the IMF one. The EU and the IMF wanted the same thing we wanted. They were serious about rooting out corruption. Not strong arming a sovereign government into generating investigations into domestic political rivals.

So in that instance. a quid pro quo withholding approved aid was perfectly fine? Hypocrite much? LOL

Well, yes. Whether a quid pro quo is a problem or not has a lot to do with the motivation behind it. For Biden, he was participating in the foreign policy of the US. For Trump, he was trying to gain a personal benefit.

 

[g5000]

First of all, as so commonly happens when Democrats try to pull off another anti-Trump coup, the entire definition of this issue has become distorted to how they wish it to appear.
The President of the United States is required to investigate whether foreign countries seeking US aid are involved in corruption, to insure that the aid is properly used. That aid is supposed to be withheld if corruption is found.

There was no need for Trump to inquire about corruption as pertaining to then Vice-President Joe Biden (who openly broadcasted it on video). Clearly, there was corruption pertaining to Hunter Biden, who brought nothing to the Burisma table other than being the son of the US Vice-President.

Maybe Trump was wrong to allow Ukraine to get the aid they got, as was Obama who also gave Ukraine aid (although he did withhold MILITARY aid, and just gave blankets). By giving aid in the face of the Biden/Burisma corruption, the Ukrainians now become comfortable in engaging in corruption, while requesting US aid.

"The President of the United States is required to investigate whether foreign countries seeking US aid are involved in corruption..."

And the exact opposite way to achieve that is to extort a foreign country for dirt on a political opponent for personal gain.

It is astonishing you tards completely fail to see that!

 

[2aguy]

First of all, as so commonly happens when Democrats try to pull off another anti-Trump coup, the entire definition of this issue has become distorted to how they wish it to appear.
The President of the United States is required to investigate whether foreign countries seeking US aid are involved in corruption, to insure that the aid is properly used. That aid is supposed to be withheld if corruption is found.

There was no need for Trump to inquire about corruption as pertaining to then Vice-President Joe Biden (who openly broadcasted it on video). Clearly, there was corruption pertaining to Hunter Biden, who brought nothing to the Burisma table other than being the son of the US Vice-President.

Maybe Trump was wrong to allow Ukraine to get the aid they got, as was Obama who also gave Ukraine aid (although he did withhold MILITARY aid, and just gave blankets). By giving aid in the face of the Biden/Burisma corruption, the Ukrainians now become comfortable in engaging in corruption, while requesting US aid.

I can’t believe people are still going with the Biden corruption angle when it was so thoroughly disproven in last weeks testimony.

It wasn't disproven, in fact, Yado whatever her name is stated it was an issue for the obama administration...

The appearance of a conflict was an issue. There was nothing beyond the appearance and that's been confirmed over and over again the Biden corruption story is bogus.

No, it isnt' bogus, it happened....and the ones who investigated it....are the same ones who made up the Russia hoax....so spare us...

Nope. Bogus. Name one person that corroborates the bogus story.

Joe biden.

 

[LaDairis]

This is just about THE BIGGEST CLUE you could ask for....


Trump drops bid to slash foreign aid after Congress objects




Trump tried to cut foreign aid.

Congress objected.

Why?


ASK HUNTER BIDEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[colfax_m]

I can’t believe people are still going with the Biden corruption angle when it was so thoroughly disproven in last weeks testimony.

It wasn't disproven, in fact, Yado whatever her name is stated it was an issue for the obama administration...

The appearance of a conflict was an issue. There was nothing beyond the appearance and that's been confirmed over and over again the Biden corruption story is bogus.

No, it isnt' bogus, it happened....and the ones who investigated it....are the same ones who made up the Russia hoax....so spare us...

Nope. Bogus. Name one person that corroborates the bogus story.

Joe biden.

Joe Biden confirmed what we all knew, that Shokin was corrupt and the US policy was to have him replaced by someone less corrupt. He doesn't corroborate the bogus story that he did it for personal benefit.

 

[protectionist]

The appearance of a conflict was an issue. There was nothing beyond the appearance and that's been confirmed over and over again the Biden corruption story is bogus.

The Biden corruption is not a "story". It is a video of Bad Boy Biden himself bragging about his corruption, how he bullied the Ukranians into firing the prosecutor who was investigating his son's Burisma connection/corruption.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXA--dj2-CY

 

[colfax_m]

First of all, as so commonly happens when Democrats try to pull off another anti-Trump coup, the entire definition of this issue has become distorted to how they wish it to appear.
The President of the United States is required to investigate whether foreign countries seeking US aid are involved in corruption, to insure that the aid is properly used. That aid is supposed to be withheld if corruption is found.

There was no need for Trump to inquire about corruption as pertaining to then Vice-President Joe Biden (who openly broadcasted it on video). Clearly, there was corruption pertaining to Hunter Biden, who brought nothing to the Burisma table other than being the son of the US Vice-President.

Maybe Trump was wrong to allow Ukraine to get the aid they got, as was Obama who also gave Ukraine aid (although he did withhold MILITARY aid, and just gave blankets). By giving aid in the face of the Biden/Burisma corruption, the Ukrainians now become comfortable in engaging in corruption, while requesting US aid.

I can’t believe people are still going with the Biden corruption angle when it was so thoroughly disproven in last weeks testimony.

It wasn't disproven, in fact, Yado whatever her name is stated it was an issue for the obama administration...

The appearance of a conflict was an issue. There was nothing beyond the appearance and that's been confirmed over and over again the Biden corruption story is bogus.

The Biden corruption is not a "story". It is a video of Bad Boy Biden himself bragging about his corruption, how he bullied the Ukranians into firing the prosecutor who was investigating his son's Burisma connection/corruption.

Well, for starters the allegation that Shokin was investigating his son or Burisma is bogus.