So the whistleblower and all the people from them down to Bolton are lying to sell books?
see what’s wrong with republican thinking? The scientists are lying not the oil companies and everyone trump hired is lying not trump.
how many trump supporters have you thrown under the bus? Bolton is no liberal. If he’s warning you about hitler don’t call him a liberal
gibberish ,, did you just say the whistle blower? Like he’s legit lol that’s funny.
But think about all the people who you refuse to believe. Like there is a vast RIGHT wing conspiracy from the deep state RINO's to take Trump down. So you blow off anyone who comes forward. The whistleblower, sondlund, that woman, and everyone else who testified that what Trump did was wrong and made them very uncomfortable.
If you won't listen to these people that Trump is corrupt, you won't listen to anyone.
WASHINGTON ― The bombshell revelation that former national security adviser
John Bolton has written a book essentially confirming the
Democrats’ case against
President Donald Trump went curiously unaddressed by the president’s lawyers on Monday in the Senate
impeachment trial.
Bolton’s book alleges that Trump tied the release of congressionally approved Ukraine aid to the Ukrainians’ announcing investigations of former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden.
Trump Lawyers Ignore John Bolton Bombshell In Senate Trial | HuffPost
This is the shit we couldn't prove in the Mueller report. Now we have proof he is a criminal and Republicans are defending him? I hope they pay this November for their loyalty.
Did you read what Bolton wrote? And we all been saying even if trump did what democrats are accusing ITS NOT AGAINST THE LAW. Lol biden is clearly corrupt and if he’s nots asking wtf was his son doing is absolutely ok. Your just deranged.. trump has powers
What was his son doing? You mean his daddy got him a good paying job? Happens all the time. Look at every Republican Senator's son's. Look at GW Bush. You think he purchased the Texas Rangers baseball team with his own money that he earned? How about Trump? Without Trump's daddy Don is just a real estate guy in lower manhattan.
Yes, what Trump did was against the law. Please tell me you don't think it's ok for the president to strongarm another country into making up fake news against his opponent. Funny how much you guys bashed Bill for lying about one BJ because he was under oath but you embrace a pathalogical liar.
Can you cite in US Code what law was broken?
Or will you continue to lie, and spout off propaganda and falsehoods?
When you face your Creator, will you be able to tell Him that you are a man of truth?
Or will you hang your head in shame as a condemned and unrepentant man?
Trump called the new president of Ukraine on July 25. Someone within the intelligence community (we’re calling this person the ‘whistleblower’) heard the call and was concerned enough to report it to his boss, who agreed that things said in the call were problematic, and kicked it up the chain to the director of national intelligence.
In the call Trump appears to pressure the Ukrainian president to investigate the family of a political rival, former vice president and current presidential candidate Joe Biden. The president even stalled funds apportioned by Congress to support Ukraine’s military to increase that pressure.
That is why Trump is now facing impeachment.
The Constitution allows three reasons for Congress to impeach the president: treason, bribery, and high crimes and misdemeanors. Most impeachment cases fall into the third group, and so does this one. It’s the one bucket that doesn’t necessarily require an offense that is against the law.
The impeachment process is independent from criminal law. Most scholars agree that to be impeachable, an offense does not need to break the law.
And if doing what Trump did isn't against the law, it should be. And besides, this does break campaign finance laws. And he has broken them before. Republicans continue to allow him to break the law. If it was Obama they would have impeached him already.
The Ukraine call is outstanding because of the clarity of both the evidence and the offense. In short, the Ukraine call is impeachable because House leadership believes it has enough evidence of wrongdoing to garner enough votes. If what he did wasn't illegal, it was wrong. Abuse of power, lying, etc. He broke his oath when he was sworn in.
The alleged offense is that Trump tried to enlist the help of another country in his campaign for a second term. There is plenty of evidence for this. Investigators have records of the phone call, Trump’s own admission, and the admission of his private attorney, Rudy Giuliani.
You have abuse of presidential power for personal and campaign use.
Trump’s defenders don’t deny Trump’s actions. They can’t because the evidence is overwhelming. Instead, they argue that the offense is simply not that offensive, and not worthy of impeachment or removal from office.
The House only needs a simple majority on one of the articles to trigger an impeachment trial in the Senate. Once it gets to the Senate, Trump defense attorneys would make arguments on one side and members of the House on the other. Chief justice of the Supreme Court John Roberts would act as judge. In the end, Trump would be removed from office only if two-thirds of the Senate voted to convict. That’s an unlikely result because Republicans remain in control of the Senate, and ultimately impeachment proceedings are a political process rather than a criminal one.
The whole process would be a lot easier on Democrats if they didn’t have to rely on
perceptions of wrongdoing but instead on the letter of the law. But
did Trump break the law? That claim is more difficult for Democrats to argue because, well, there is no clear law on the matter.
Did the president break any laws?
To be impeachable, a presidential action does not need to break a law. Still, in this case, his actions might have. If the investigation found that Trump abused his position to gain competitive advantage over his adversary in the election, that would amount to soliciting a valuable contribution to his campaign from a foreign entity, which is forbidden by campaign finance laws. In order to be a criminal violation, a contribution needs to be more than $2,000. But for it to be a civil violation, any amount—monetary or otherwise—will do.
“There are specific campaign laws which prohibit any US citizen, whether it be the president or otherwise, from receiving a benefit or a value from a foreign party,” McCallion said.
So whether or not Trump broke those laws will depend on how lawmakers interpret “value.” Those who support impeachment say
Trump was clearly seeking something of value from Ukraine, namely, opposition research on Biden.
That’s made worse by the fact that Trump used military aid in his negotiation, leveraging not his personal fortune, but taxpayer money as a bargaining chip to pressure Ukraine’s president. Since the American government had voted to give the money to Ukraine, Trump withholding it to solicit information that would benefit himself strengthens the argument of the abuse of power, adding another layer of misconduct.
So if Trump asked Ukraine for information on anyone other than a rival candidate, would it be unlawful?
It wouldn’t break campaign finance laws. But it would still be problematic because it bypasses the lawful process to deal with such situations.
“If in fact the Department of Justice had a bonafide investigation of criminal activity and reached out to a foreign government, that would be OK,” McCallion said. But it’s one thing to have an official investigation from the Justice Department, and another thing to go rogue, using private citizens.
“In this case you have the president having authorized a private individual, Rudy Giuliani, outside any government accountability, to run basically a private or personal investigation,” McCallion said, adding that this is outside any due process.
“The phone call was through these private parties to further the goals of the Trump 2020 campaign,” McCallion said.
Even if the objective wasn’t to advance his career, the president can’t just personally pursue justice through private citizens outside his administration. While maybe not as egregious an an abuse of power, such behavior is problematic and shows contempt of due process, said Martin Flaherty, a law professor at Fordham and Princeton.
“The president acted outside the internal executive guidelines.”
But is acting outside of accepted guidelines a crime? It’s not.
...the only criminal laws it might break are campaign laws.
In the end, whether or not Trump broke a law will come down to how elected lawmakers interpret campaign finance laws. If they don’t think a law was broken, Trump could still be impeached. But only if lawmakers think the offense rises to the level of “high crimes and misdemeanors.” In today’s political climate, however, it will likely just come down to who holds the majority, Republicans or Democrats.
The alleged offense is that Trump enlisted the help of another country in his campaign for a second term. There is plenty of evidence for this. Investigators have records of the phone call, Trump’s own admission, and the admission of his private attorney, Rudy Giuliani.
You have abuse of presidential power for personal and campaign use
Trump’s defenders don’t deny Trump’s actions. They can’t because the evidence is overwhelming. Instead, they argue that the offense is simply not that offensive, and not worthy of impeachment or removal from office.
To be impeachable, a presidential action does not need to break a law. Still, in this case, his actions might have. If the investigation found that Trump abused his position to gain competitive advantage over his adversary in the election, that would amount to soliciting a valuable contribution to his campaign from a foreign entity, which is forbidden by campaign finance laws. In order to be a criminal violation, a contribution needs to be more than $2,000. But for it to be a civil violation, any amount—monetary or otherwise—will do.
That’s made worse by the fact that Trump used military aid in his negotiation, leveraging not his personal fortune, but taxpayer money as a bargaining chip to pressure Ukraine’s president. Since the American government had voted to give the money to Ukraine, Trump withholding it to solicit information that would benefit himself strengthens the argument of the abuse of power, adding another layer of misconduct.
Hang on a minute, did Trump break the law with his Ukraine call?
I think this takes the "Stupid Post Of The Day Award" Thanks for the humor
