• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Key allegations from the Ukraine whistleblower are true, despite what Trump says

JasperL said:
Either you didn't read the article, or you're lying. Neither is a good look, actually. It's a series of quotes from the WB complaint, and to the right of that is a discussion, with links, of evidence that proves or does not prove the claim. Facts might be "opinion" in Trump land, but not for the rest of us living in the reality based world.
Click to expand...

It's the author's opinion that a crime was committed. See how that works?
 
dixon01767 said:
They didn't investigate Biden and they have gotten their aid.
Click to expand...

1. That's not quite true:

Ukraine to review investigations into owner of company that employed Biden'''s son

2. It doesn't matter that Ukraine went on to comply with Trump's request or decided not to comply with Trump's request. The act of making the request is an impeachable offense on Trump's part.

3. Impeachment isn't just about punishing a current officeholder for abusing the office the officeholder holds, it's also about preventing future abuses of office. So whether or not Ukraine moves forward with Trump's request doesn't matter with regard to preventing future abuses of office by Trump. The bottom line is Trump isn't going to stop doing stuff like this. And why would his behavior be any different than any common criminal who either doesn't get caught or continues to get rewarded for bad behavior?
 
tres borrachos said:
Cool story. Too bad it isn't true.

Burisma should be investigated. By the Ukraine.

Biden didn't commit a crime in this country. If he did, Barr would have had him arrested by now. Or are you saying Barr doesn't know a crime when it's staring him in the face?
Click to expand...

Wait a minute, isn't the current claim that Trump asking the Ukraine to investigate Burisma is a campaign finance violation? Isn't that the major premise for this whole "inquiry"? If they are investigated and if Biden is found to have been involved in using his position in the US to influence the outcome of a Ukraine investigation then does that mean Trump needs to be impeached because....uh...because Biden is running for president and you can't investigate a guy that's running for president unless, of course, it turns out that he beats Hillary and then everything is cool?

Or something like that. Frankly, I'm having a harder and harder time trying to untie the mental knots the "resistance" keeps tying themselves into when it comes to Trump.
 
Lutherf said:
Wait a minute, isn't the current claim that Trump asking the Ukraine to investigate Burisma is a campaign finance violation? Isn't that the major premise for this whole "inquiry"? If they are investigated and if Biden is found to have been involved in using his position in the US to influence the outcome of a Ukraine investigation then does that mean Trump needs to be impeached because....uh...because Biden is running for president and you can't investigate a guy that's running for president unless, of course, it turns out that he beats Hillary and then everything is cool?

Or something like that. Frankly, I'm having a harder and harder time trying to untie the mental knots the "resistance" keeps tying themselves into when it comes to Trump.
Click to expand...

It now appears that Biden is the backup plan in case Trump is not successfully impeached. If Trump is successfully impeached then it is Warren's turn to be the DNC nominee.
 
apdst said:
It's the author's opinion that a crime was committed. See how that works?
Click to expand...

OK, my comment stands. You didn't read it or are lying. The word "crime" doesn't appear in that article, not a single time.

Try it. Ctrl/Command F - type crime - 0/0.
 
JasperL said:
OK, my comment stands. You didn't read it or are lying. The word "crime" doesn't appear in that article, not a single time.

Try it. Ctrl/Command F - type crime - 0/0.
Click to expand...

If you want to insist thst opinion = fact, that's on you.
 
Lutherf said:
Wait a minute, isn't the current claim that Trump asking the Ukraine to investigate Burisma is a campaign finance violation? Isn't that the major premise for this whole "inquiry"? If they are investigated and if Biden is found to have been involved in using his position in the US to influence the outcome of a Ukraine investigation then does that mean Trump needs to be impeached because....uh...because Biden is running for president and you can't investigate a guy that's running for president unless, of course, it turns out that he beats Hillary and then everything is cool?

Or something like that. Frankly, I'm having a harder and harder time trying to untie the mental knots the "resistance" keeps tying themselves into when it comes to Trump.
Click to expand...

Trump acting in his official capacity as President of the United States, asking Ukraine to investigate a political rival, and conditioning meetings and support on that corrupt foreign country conducting the investigations, plural, while sending his personal attorney to work with them while giving the personal attorney whose loyalty is 100% to Trump, 0% to the U.S., the authority of the AG of the United States.

It works better when you don't misrepresent all the actual arguments people have made 100 times on here and that we know you've read.
 
apdst said:
If you want to insist thst opinion = fact, that's on you.
Click to expand...

LOL, you're funny when you're bored and just want to argue, no matter how dumb your argument... :2razz:
 
JasperL said:
Trump acting in his official capacity as President of the United States, asking Ukraine to investigate a political rival, and conditioning meetings and support on that corrupt foreign country conducting the investigations, plural, while sending his personal attorney to work with them while giving the personal attorney whose loyalty is 100% to Trump, 0% to the U.S., the authority of the AG of the United States.

It works better when you don't misrepresent all the actual arguments people have made 100 times on here and that we know you've read.
Click to expand...

Trump's condition for the meeting was that Zelensky showed he was serious about cleaning up corruption and especially that corruption that impacted the US. Trump was clear about that and so was Volker. It was and is an entirely reasonable thing for one nation's leader to ask of another nation which will be receiving financial and military aid from the former.
 
JasperL said:
LOL, you're funny when you're bored and just want to argue, no matter how dumb your argument... :2razz:
Click to expand...

You'e funny when you try to look smart...lmao
 
Lutherf said:
Wait a minute, isn't the current claim that Trump asking the Ukraine to investigate Burisma is a campaign finance violation? Isn't that the major premise for this whole "inquiry"? If they are investigated and if Biden is found to have been involved in using his position in the US to influence the outcome of a Ukraine investigation then does that mean Trump needs to be impeached because....uh...because Biden is running for president and you can't investigate a guy that's running for president unless, of course, it turns out that he beats Hillary and then everything is cool?

Or something like that. Frankly, I'm having a harder and harder time trying to untie the mental knots the "resistance" keeps tying themselves into when it comes to Trump.
Click to expand...

I have no idea what the "current claim" is. You have to ask someone who is talking about campaign finance violations. I missed those words in my post.
 
tres borrachos said:
What crimes did Biden commit in this country?
Click to expand...

Why do you ask? I didn't say anything about "in this country"...though there may be a law against a sitting VP using their position for family personal gain.

That's why it needs to be investigated, don't you think?
 
W_Heisenberg said:
Oh, come on. Grow up. Get real man. Seriously. Nobody talks like that.

There doesn't need to be a precise recitation of the words, "I am now using my position as President of the United States to pressure you into investigating Biden, my political rival in the upcoming 2020 election."

Nobody talks like that.

Nobody says: "Oh, and I am doing this for my personal benefit and I'm doing this even though I may be violating my oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution. Also, I'd like to point out the precise definition of High Crimes and Misdemeanors, and I am committing just such an abuse of office right now. Did you get that? Transcriber, be sure to write those words down so when I'm accused of committing an impeachable offense there will be no confusion and people like Mycroft won't get that wrong idea! Should I repeat it again for the record?"

Mycroft... knock it off. Stop defending this crook. What is wrong with you? It cannot be made any more clear? Why do you hate Democrats more than you love our Constitution? It doesn't make sense what you are doing by ignoring the evidence IN FRONT OF YOUR FACE.

Stop being ridiculous. Wake up. Grow up.

Trump is screwed 6 ways to Sunday. We have the summary of the transcript. We have his public comments what happened in which he confirmed that he pressured Ukraine over the issue of Biden. We have the texts from Volker.

The things you and all other Trump supporters are saying about this are just dumb. There's no other word to describe it. It's just dumb.

You're basically just sticking your fingers in your ears like a kid and saying nanny nanny boo boo. That's how stupid the things you Trump supporters are saying and writing appear to the rest of us back here on Earth.

And even if he did say those precise words do you know what you'd say?

SOOOOOO WHAT.

That's what you'd say. You'd say that because the truth is YOU DO NOT CARE that Trump is a crook.

The truth is you guys hate the Democrats more than you love our Constitution.
Click to expand...

LOL!!

Who are you trying to convince? Me? Or yourself?

Tell you what...instead of all the blather, just show me actual factual evidence. Not this "We know what he meant" nonsense.
 
Mycroft said:
Why do you ask? I didn't say anything about "in this country"...though there may be a law against a sitting VP using their position for family personal gain.

That's why it needs to be investigated, don't you think?
Click to expand...

since that never happened, no it does not.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
It now appears that Biden is the backup plan in case Trump is not successfully impeached. If Trump is successfully impeached then it is Warren's turn to be the DNC nominee.
Click to expand...

Biden has been in politics so long that he can't help but have heaping piles of baggage. Sanders apparently has health issues. Warren is the other top candidate in the polls but I really don't think she has the chops to generate much enthusiasm beyond "at least she's not Trump".

The other Democrat candidates are way back there. Butigeg and Yang don't seem to be totally crazy but they don't have much of a chance and Trump would eat them alive. Harris and Booker have a better chance of pulling in votes but they're both just awful. I mean, can you imagine Trump campaigning against "Spartacus"? Beto? The guy is completely off his rocker. I doubt that even the "anyone but Trump" crowd would have a hard time voting for him.
 
Mycroft said:
That's something YOU imagine. The phone call made no mention of politics.

In any case, no...Biden isn't a "political rival" until he gets the Dem nomination.
Click to expand...

Quite possibly one of the dumbest responses I've ever heard. Trump has no political rivals apparently then. The gymnastics you go through to defend your god are truly pathetic.
 
Lutherf said:
Biden has been in politics so long that he can't help but have heaping piles of baggage. Sanders apparently has health issues. Warren is the other top candidate in the polls but I really don't think she has the chops to generate much enthusiasm beyond "at least she's not Trump".

The other Democrat candidates are way back there. Butigeg and Yang don't seem to be totally crazy but they don't have much of a chance and Trump would eat them alive. Harris and Booker have a better chance of pulling in votes but they're both just awful. I mean, can you imagine Trump campaigning against "Spartacus"? Beto? The guy is completely off his rocker. I doubt that even the "anyone but Trump" crowd would have a hard time voting for him.
Click to expand...

Warren thrills most of the DNC base, but scares almost everyone else, and will get the hard core anti-Trump vote. Sanders is not even a demorat, but plays one during DNC POTUS primaries. I agree that Beto is just a loon with no other job. Yang has interesting ideas, but is not destined to be POTUS. Booker is just loud much like Harris, but is really about nothing and both will fade away soon.
 
Lutherf said:
Trump's condition for the meeting was that Zelensky showed he was serious about cleaning up corruption and especially that corruption that impacted the US. Trump was clear about that and so was Volker. It was and is an entirely reasonable thing for one nation's leader to ask of another nation which will be receiving financial and military aid from the former.
Click to expand...

You aren't quoting from anything because the ONLY "corruption" Trump was concerned about was Crowdstrike BS to shift the blame for hacking to the DNC from the Russians, and Joe Biden. That's it. Not to mention the idea that Trump cares about 'corruption' as a principle anywhere is laughable. He only cares if cleaning it up helps DJT.

Further, Trump is too ignorant to know anyone's name over there, so it's not crystal clear which prosecutor he thought was tough and was unfairly pushed out, but we have to assume it was Shokin who was BFFs with the corrupt oligarchs in Ukraine and specifically protected Hunter Biden's boss, and was called out for it by name by the U.S. ambassador in Ukraine, and reformists in Ukraine, and the UK and all or almost all of western Europe, including the IMF. So Trump went to bat for a corrupt prosecutor. Look up the "diamond prosecutors". Here's a story from 2016:

Ukraine Ousts Viktor Shokin, Top Prosecutor, and Political Stability Hangs in the Balance - The New York Times

In the final hours before Parliament voted him out, Mr. Shokin had fired his reform-minded deputy prosecutor, David Sakvarelidze, with whom he had been feuding. It was not immediately clear whether that firing would remain in force.

With the prosecutor’s office in turmoil throughout Ukraine on Tuesday, one of Mr. Sakvarelidze’s appointees in the Odessa regional office was arrested by military prosecutors, assumed to be loyal to Mr. Shokin.

Foreign donors had complained about rot in the prosecutor’s office, not least because much of the money suspected of being stolen was theirs.

In one high-profile example, known in Ukraine as the case of the “diamond prosecutors,” troves of diamonds, cash and other valuables were found in the homes of two of Mr. Shokin’s subordinates, suggesting that they had been taking bribes.

But the case became bogged down, with no reasons given. When a department in Mr. Shokin’s office tried to bring it to trial, the prosecutors were fired or resigned. The perpetrators seemed destined to get off with claims that the stones were not worth very much.
Click to expand...

And as we all know, Trump hired Manafort, who was one of corrupt oligarch Yanukovych's very high paid and influential political advisers. It was Yanukovych who was forced to flee Ukraine for Russia when the population there effectively revolted over the corruption in Ukraine.

So none of your story fits ANY of the actual facts. It's gaslighting.
 
Mycroft said:
LOL!!

Who are you trying to convince? Me? Or yourself?

Tell you what...instead of all the blather, just show me actual factual evidence. Not this "We know what he meant" nonsense.
Click to expand...

It's in the transcript. Read it. Don't let Hannity give his propagandistic interpretation of it to you. He's lying to you.

And evidence can also be found in the collection of text messages Volker gave to Congress. And more evidence can be found in Trump's public statements. I can't make you comprehend English. I can't make you see past your own biases. What I can do is demonstrate, by way of analogy, the kind of mistake you're making.

Read the following transcript:

The Smoking Gun Tape

Show me where in this transcript Nixon says, "Let's cover-up this Watergate stuff."

Imagine Jaworski, the special prosecutor, saying, "Whelp folks, nothing to see here. Nixon didn't specifically say he covered up the Watergate break-in on the tape. This so-called smoking-gun tape is just a nothingburger."
 
Last edited:
W_Heisenberg said:
It's in the transcript. Read it. Don't let Hannity give his propagandistic interpretation of it to you. He's lying to you.

And evidence can also be found in the collection of text messages Volker gave to Congress. And more evidence can be found in Trump's public statements. I can't make you comprehend English. I can't make you see past your own biases. What I can do is demonstrate, by way of analogy, the kind of mistake you're making.

~dismissed the Nixon nonsense...it's irrelevant~
Click to expand...

I've read the transcript. I don't need anyone to tell me what's in it. There is nothing political in the transcript. Nothing.

Volker's text messages? There were 67 pages of text messages. Have you seen all of them? Or have you only seen the handful that Schiffty released...the ones he thought would support his/your narrative?

And talk about biases...what about YOUR biases that allow you to completely mischaracterize everything you hear?

I'll say it again..."just show me actual factual evidence".
 
Mycroft said:
Why do you ask? I didn't say anything about "in this country"...though there may be a law against a sitting VP using their position for family personal gain.

That's why it needs to be investigated, don't you think?
Click to expand...

So you admit that Biden didn't commit a crime in this country. So why would the President of the United States send his personal attorney to another country to investigate a crime in their country? I thought we weren't the world's police anymore, thanks to Trump. It's all about the USA. America first. As the President he should be worrying about crimes in this country.

What personal gain did Biden get? Answer is none.

I'll bet you blow your gasket when you think about the Trump family hotels being filled with dignitaries from other countries coming here to do business with this country's government. Or do you?
 
tres borrachos said:
What personal gain did Biden get? Answer is none.
Click to expand...

And you know this...how?

In any case, I made no mention of any personal gain that Biden might have received. I specifically mentioned "there may be a law against a sitting VP using their position for family personal gain".

We have evidence this may have happened. Don't you think it should be investigated?
 
Mycroft said:
And you know this...how?

In any case, I made no mention of any personal gain that Biden might have received. I specifically mentioned "there may be a law against a sitting VP using their position for family personal gain".

We have evidence this may have happened. Don't you think it should be investigated?
Click to expand...

Go ahead and post some evidence of the "personal gain". I'll anxiously await it.

Or were you speaking about another sitting VP?

We have evidence that Trump may have used the power of his office to have another country investigate his presumed political rival. But we all know you don't want that investigated.
 
tres borrachos said:
Go ahead and post some evidence of the "personal gain". I'll anxiously await it.

Or were you speaking about another sitting VP?

We have evidence that Trump may have used the power of his office to have another country investigate his presumed political rival. But we all know you don't want that investigated.
Click to expand...

What part of "family personal gain" do you not understand?

You are dismissed. (see my sig)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom