User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456
Results 51 to 60 of 60

Thread: Exposed partisanship

  1. #51
    Points: 106,378, Level: 79
    Level completed: 42%, Points required for next Level: 1,572
    Overall activity: 24.0%
    Achievements:
    Social50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Private Pickle's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    178635
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Rocky Mountain High
    Posts
    35,201
    Points
    106,378
    Level
    79
    Thanks Given
    6,521
    Thanked 10,099x in 7,395 Posts
    Mentioned
    205 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Who View Post
    The timing was rather improvident.
    So no one said it was in connection with an election. Got it.
    I find your lack of faith...disturbing...

    -Darth Vader

  2. #52
    Points: 140,076, Level: 90
    Level completed: 18%, Points required for next Level: 2,974
    Overall activity: 16.0%
    Achievements:
    Social50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Ethereal's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    455937
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    48,188
    Points
    140,076
    Level
    90
    Thanks Given
    9,305
    Thanked 28,661x in 18,196 Posts
    Mentioned
    985 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Rationalist View Post
    I'm not so sure of that. Obama was the first president to set the precedent that the government can literally order the assassination of a US citizen. That's a lot more blatant than any potential quid pro quo, and the media made barely a complaint about that. Overall, Obama may have been criticized a lot by conservatives, but the mainstream media usually provided cover for him.

    Democrats, in general, tend to have the media advantage when it comes to scandal coverage.
    Obama also threatened to imprison a New York Times journalist who would not divulge his source. Can you imagine if Trump tried to do the same thing?
    Two things awe me most, the starry sky above me and the moral law within me.
    --Immanuel Kant

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to Ethereal For This Useful Post:

    bulletbob (11-22-2019)

  4. #53
    Points: 13,779, Level: 28
    Level completed: 26%, Points required for next Level: 671
    Overall activity: 10.0%
    Achievements:
    10000 Experience Points1 year registered
    Cannons Front's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    12038
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,796
    Points
    13,779
    Level
    28
    Thanks Given
    1,909
    Thanked 3,697x in 2,131 Posts
    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Private Pickle View Post
    Sure and any defense lawyer will try to utilize that upon cross-examination. Yet it's still evidence.

    Yes. And others state they were in direct contact with either the POTUS or an agent of the POTUS such at Giulliani.
    No you are listening to CNN to much, while I have not watched every minute I have watched a great deal of the hearings by far the majority. No one has said that they were told by Trump or anyone else. Sondland is by far the closest to that but again he testified that NONE on the planet had told him to do anything, even the "overheard" phone call just says investigations and does not name who is to be investigated.
    They have said they heard, or were told, or that they thing, or they presumed, not that they were told or instructed. If I am wrong show me where it has been said.
    "The powers of the federal government are enumerated; it can only operate in certain cases; it has legislative powers on defined and limited objects, beyond which it cannot extend its jurisdiction." James Madison 1788

  5. #54
    Points: 13,779, Level: 28
    Level completed: 26%, Points required for next Level: 671
    Overall activity: 10.0%
    Achievements:
    10000 Experience Points1 year registered
    Cannons Front's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    12038
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,796
    Points
    13,779
    Level
    28
    Thanks Given
    1,909
    Thanked 3,697x in 2,131 Posts
    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Who View Post
    It's not against the rules for a POTUS to investigate corruption or even to investigate another candidate. What is absolutely not allowed is to involve a foreign government in that investigation. That is the crux of the impeachment theory. Trump could investigate Biden Sr. and Jr. with the full force of the FBI within the US and even through CIA and the US embassy in the Ukraine during an election. He can't enlist or pressure the Ukrainian government in that regard because, per federal law, "It is illegal for any person to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a U.S. election."
    You are factually incorrect, The Treaty Between the United States of America and Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters with Annex, signed at Kiev on July 22, 1998

    Article 1(3) states that assistance shall be provided without regard to whether the conduct involved would constitute an offense under the laws of the Requested State.
    Article 1(4) states explicitly that the Treaty is not intended to create rights in private parties to obtain,suppress, or exclude any evidence, or to impede the execution of a request.

    By Treaty we can request their help, and they can request ours. While there may be room to debate ""It is illegal for any person to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a U.S. election."
    Lets just look at that at face value, do you think anyone running for office that may have committed a crime in another nation may not be investigated because they are running for office?
    "The powers of the federal government are enumerated; it can only operate in certain cases; it has legislative powers on defined and limited objects, beyond which it cannot extend its jurisdiction." James Madison 1788

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Cannons Front For This Useful Post:

    bulletbob (11-22-2019)

  7. #55
    Points: 106,378, Level: 79
    Level completed: 42%, Points required for next Level: 1,572
    Overall activity: 24.0%
    Achievements:
    Social50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Private Pickle's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    178635
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Rocky Mountain High
    Posts
    35,201
    Points
    106,378
    Level
    79
    Thanks Given
    6,521
    Thanked 10,099x in 7,395 Posts
    Mentioned
    205 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cannons Front View Post
    No you are listening to CNN to much, while I have not watched every minute I have watched a great deal of the hearings by far the majority. No one has said that they were told by Trump or anyone else. Sondland is by far the closest to that but again he testified that NONE on the planet had told him to do anything, even the "overheard" phone call just says investigations and does not name who is to be investigated.
    They have said they heard, or were told, or that they thing, or they presumed, not that they were told or instructed. If I am wrong show me where it has been said.
    I don’t watch CNN... That’s as far as I got.
    I find your lack of faith...disturbing...

    -Darth Vader

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Private Pickle For This Useful Post:

    bulletbob (11-22-2019)

  9. #56
    Points: 13,779, Level: 28
    Level completed: 26%, Points required for next Level: 671
    Overall activity: 10.0%
    Achievements:
    10000 Experience Points1 year registered
    Cannons Front's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    12038
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,796
    Points
    13,779
    Level
    28
    Thanks Given
    1,909
    Thanked 3,697x in 2,131 Posts
    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Private Pickle View Post
    Sure and any defense lawyer will try to utilize that upon cross-examination. Yet it's still evidence.
    Yes. And others state they were in direct contact with either the POTUS or an agent of the POTUS such at Giulliani.
    Lets recap I will help you out
    Day One:
    The first two witnesses had no firsthand knowledge of Trump’s decision to temporarily hold back nearly $400 million in military aid to Ukraine, nor did they have any direct discussion with President Trump about his intent.
    Day Two:
    Yovanovitch the former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, was a key key witness, according to the press and Chairman. She had no knowledge of the supposed “quid pro quo” she had been fired two months before the Trump-Zelensky telephone call.
    Day Three:
    LTC Vindman testified that he felt “concerned” about Trump’s conversation with Zelensky. As with the witnesses before him, this was his gratuitous opinion. LTC Vindman had prepared materials and talking points in advance for Trump’s use in his call with Zelensky. When Trump did not follow the staffer’s script, he became offended.
    Morrison, LTC Vindman’s boss, could barely contain his contempt for Vindman, calling into question his judgment.Morrison testified he had no “concern” about Trump’s conversation on the call. He said there was “nothing improper” although he feared that Democrats would politicize the call. “My fears have been realized,” he observed.
    Day four:
    Sondland acknowledged that the president kept repeating to him “over and over again” that there was no “quid pro quo.” Quoting Trump, the ambassador testified that the president said: “I want nothing, I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo.” More than a dozen times he said that he merely “presumed” it.
    Day five:
    Holmes claimed he overheard portions of a telephone conversation between Trump and Sondland the day after the call. while eavesdropping he stated he formed the “impression” that the hold on U.S. security assistance to Ukraine was “likely” to nudge Ukraine into investigating the Bidens. Beyond supposition, Holmes had no other knowledge to support his opinion and actually stated he had no idea why the aid was held up
    Hill, was unaware of the call until it became public. Added nothing to the case as she had left her position before the conversation ever took place

    Ok so what did I miss?

    POST EDITED TO INCLUDE LINK:

    https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/greg...=prn_newsstand

    warning

    Warning

    @Cannons Front Reference forum rules you must include link to copied text.

    8. You must provide a link when quoting an article and follow fair use guidelines (you are permitted to copy and paste two to three paragraphs). In addition, do not alter another user's words when quoting them.


    If you have questions or concerns about this moderation action, please use the Report button to let us know.
    Last edited by Agent Zero; 11-23-2019 at 10:22 AM.
    "The powers of the federal government are enumerated; it can only operate in certain cases; it has legislative powers on defined and limited objects, beyond which it cannot extend its jurisdiction." James Madison 1788

  10. #57
    Points: 13,779, Level: 28
    Level completed: 26%, Points required for next Level: 671
    Overall activity: 10.0%
    Achievements:
    10000 Experience Points1 year registered
    Cannons Front's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    12038
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,796
    Points
    13,779
    Level
    28
    Thanks Given
    1,909
    Thanked 3,697x in 2,131 Posts
    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Private Pickle View Post
    I don’t watch CNN... That’s as far as I got.
    Well if that is the case, you sure seem to parrot what they say... I didn't think you could provide what you claimed so I recapped what everyone said for you, minus the mainstream media spin
    "The powers of the federal government are enumerated; it can only operate in certain cases; it has legislative powers on defined and limited objects, beyond which it cannot extend its jurisdiction." James Madison 1788

  11. #58
    Points: 106,378, Level: 79
    Level completed: 42%, Points required for next Level: 1,572
    Overall activity: 24.0%
    Achievements:
    Social50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Private Pickle's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    178635
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Rocky Mountain High
    Posts
    35,201
    Points
    106,378
    Level
    79
    Thanks Given
    6,521
    Thanked 10,099x in 7,395 Posts
    Mentioned
    205 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cannons Front View Post
    Lets recap I will help you out
    Day One:
    The first two witnesses had no firsthand knowledge of Trump’s decision to temporarily hold back nearly $400 million in military aid to Ukraine, nor did they have any direct discussion with President Trump about his intent.
    Day Two:
    Yovanovitch the former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, was a key key witness, according to the press and Chairman. She had no knowledge of the supposed “quid pro quo” she had been fired two months before the Trump-Zelensky telephone call.
    Day Three:
    LTC Vindman testified that he felt “concerned” about Trump’s conversation with Zelensky. As with the witnesses before him, this was his gratuitous opinion. LTC Vindman had prepared materials and talking points in advance for Trump’s use in his call with Zelensky. When Trump did not follow the staffer’s script, he became offended.
    Morrison, LTC Vindman’s boss, could barely contain his contempt for Vindman, calling into question his judgment.Morrison testified he had no “concern” about Trump’s conversation on the call. He said there was “nothing improper” although he feared that Democrats would politicize the call. “My fears have been realized,” he observed.
    Day four:
    Sondland acknowledged that the president kept repeating to him “over and over again” that there was no “quid pro quo.” Quoting Trump, the ambassador testified that the president said: “I want nothing, I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo.” More than a dozen times he said that he merely “presumed” it.
    Day five:
    Holmes claimed he overheard portions of a telephone conversation between Trump and Sondland the day after the call. while eavesdropping he stated he formed the “impression” that the hold on U.S. security assistance to Ukraine was “likely” to nudge Ukraine into investigating the Bidens. Beyond supposition, Holmes had no other knowledge to support his opinion and actually stated he had no idea why the aid was held up
    Hill, was unaware of the call until it became public. Added nothing to the case as she had left her position before the conversation ever took place

    Ok so what did I miss?
    You watch too much Fox. Or in this case read:

    https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/greg...=prn_newsstand

    If you’re gonna accuse someone of parroting a mainstream media source make sure to hide your tracks better when parroting a mainstream media source.

    You’re doing the same thing in cherry picking testimony to fit your agenda. If you can’t look at this objectively then what’s the point in discussing it?

    And plagiarism is wrong... Jus sayin...
    Last edited by Private Pickle; 11-22-2019 at 09:45 AM.
    I find your lack of faith...disturbing...

    -Darth Vader

  12. #59
    Points: 106,378, Level: 79
    Level completed: 42%, Points required for next Level: 1,572
    Overall activity: 24.0%
    Achievements:
    Social50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Private Pickle's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    178635
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Rocky Mountain High
    Posts
    35,201
    Points
    106,378
    Level
    79
    Thanks Given
    6,521
    Thanked 10,099x in 7,395 Posts
    Mentioned
    205 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cannons Front View Post
    Well if that is the case, you sure seem to parrot what they say... I didn't think you could provide what you claimed so I recapped what everyone said for you, minus the mainstream media spin
    LOL and I just got displaying to the entire Forum you plagiarized an Op Ed from Fox News to give me your “non-mainstream media spin” recap.
    I find your lack of faith...disturbing...

    -Darth Vader

  13. #60
    Points: 127,294, Level: 86
    Level completed: 39%, Points required for next Level: 1,956
    Overall activity: 21.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteranTagger First Class50000 Experience Points
    Dr. Who's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    862126
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Gallifrey
    Posts
    52,233
    Points
    127,294
    Level
    86
    Thanks Given
    4,685
    Thanked 4,388x in 3,017 Posts
    Mentioned
    95 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cannons Front View Post
    You are factually incorrect, The Treaty Between the United States of America and Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters with Annex, signed at Kiev on July 22, 1998

    Article 1(3) states that assistance shall be provided without regard to whether the conduct involved would constitute an offense under the laws of the Requested State.
    Article 1(4) states explicitly that the Treaty is not intended to create rights in private parties to obtain,suppress, or exclude any evidence, or to impede the execution of a request.

    By Treaty we can request their help, and they can request ours. While there may be room to debate ""It is illegal for any person to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a U.S. election."
    Lets just look at that at face value, do you think anyone running for office that may have committed a crime in another nation may not be investigated because they are running for office?
    They can be investigated, but not through the personal efforts of a rival candidate directly engaging a foreign government. Trump has a conflict of interest in this instance and it's that conflict that permits the current impeachment hearings. As I said, if Trump used more traditional protocols, he couldn't be so accused.
    "The difference between what we do and what we are capable of doing would suffice to solve most of the world’s problems.”
    Mahatma Gandhi

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Single Sign On provided by vBSSO