Page 26 of 33 FirstFirst ... 162425262728 ... LastLast
Results 251 to 260 of 330

Thread: Ukraine opens criminal probe into possible surveillance of ex-US ambassador

  1. #251
    Student
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    298

    Re: Ukraine opens criminal probe into possible surveillance of ex-US ambassador

    Quote Originally Posted by Chomsky View Post
    Source: (CNN) Ukraine opens criminal probe into possible surveillance of ex-US ambassador

    Can Trump's attempts to have an investigation into his political opponent announced by the Ukrainians, have backfired any worse? In response to Trump's effort to get Ukraine to announce an investigation into his political opponent, today Ukraine announced an investigation into Trump's attorney who delivered the request!

    What an amazing turn.

    They key words in the Ukraine statement (the final sentence in my quote), seems to be "illegal activities". Illegal, in terms of the Vienna Convention of which the U.S. is a signatory.

    It looks possible that if the U.S. Congress fails to find Trump having acted illegally, Ukraine might. Which wouldn't be saying much for us as a nation.

    Regardless, the President looks like he has finally succeeded in getting a Ukraine investigation!
    Maybe they'll discover that it was Biden who was having he watched.

  2. #252
    Professor
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,307

    Re: Ukraine opens criminal probe into possible surveillance of ex-US ambassador

    Quote Originally Posted by jpn View Post
    Actually no. Please name an important issue in which Democrats widely share a view that runs counter to mainstream expert opinion.
    That wasn't the point. What's happening is the Democrats are creating conversations which never happened on some very important topics. It was noticeable most recently with Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi and the habit is being picked up by their followers.

  3. #253
    Professor
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,307

    Re: Ukraine opens criminal probe into possible surveillance of ex-US ambassador

    Quote Originally Posted by TomFitz View Post
    Yes, they did.

    Repeatedly. We have 200 pages on that score.

    But collusion is not a chargeable felony.

    The other 200 pages detail Trump’s attempts to hide what he was doing, and obstruct the investigation.

    A pattern of behavior that repeats itself in the Ukranians case.
    Where are these 200 pages? Which laws have been broken?

  4. #254
    Guru

    jpn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    2,576

    Re: Ukraine opens criminal probe into possible surveillance of ex-US ambassador

    Quote Originally Posted by Fred C Dobbs II View Post
    That wasn't the point. What's happening is the Democrats are creating conversations which never happened on some very important topics. It was noticeable most recently with Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi and the habit is being picked up by their followers.
    Such as...? And providing links would be nice.
    Annoy Russia. Vote Democrat.

  5. #255
    Sage



    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,198

    Re: Ukraine opens criminal probe into possible surveillance of ex-US ambassador

    Quote Originally Posted by Chomsky View Post
    Source: (CNN) Ukraine opens criminal probe into possible surveillance of ex-US ambassador

    Can Trump's attempts to have an investigation into his political opponent announced by the Ukrainians, have backfired any worse? In response to Trump's effort to get Ukraine to announce an investigation into his political opponent, today Ukraine announced an investigation into Trump's attorney who delivered the request!

    What an amazing turn.

    They key words in the Ukraine statement (the final sentence in my quote), seems to be "illegal activities". Illegal, in terms of the Vienna Convention of which the U.S. is a signatory.

    It looks possible that if the U.S. Congress fails to find Trump having acted illegally, Ukraine might. Which wouldn't be saying much for us as a nation.

    Regardless, the President looks like he has finally succeeded in getting a Ukraine investigation!
    Where is OUR Secretary of State on this? We had an American Ambassador followed and possibly had her life in danger from thugs and Pompeo doesn't condemn it? Of course not, he's on the side of the people who wanted to unseat her because she was on the side of anti-corruption.
    "The ship of democracy, which has weathered all storms, may sink through the mutiny of those on board." -- Grover Cleveland

  6. #256
    Sage



    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,198

    Re: Ukraine opens criminal probe into possible surveillance of ex-US ambassador

    Quote Originally Posted by Fred C Dobbs II View Post
    Rest assured that no one is 'laughing' at America any more than they ever had. This is just nonsense and it comes up every time a Republican is elected, especially with Reagan.

    If leftists were more aware of international leaders they may have a few laughs themselves.
    The poll posted in #233 says otherwise. Those not influenced by facts and evidence can believe otherwise.
    "The ship of democracy, which has weathered all storms, may sink through the mutiny of those on board." -- Grover Cleveland

  7. #257
    Guru

    jpn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    2,576

    Re: Ukraine opens criminal probe into possible surveillance of ex-US ambassador

    Quote Originally Posted by Fred C Dobbs II View Post
    Where are these 200 pages? Which laws have been broken?
    The Mueller Report stated: “We, at the outset, determined that, when it came to the president’s culpability, we needed to go forward only after taking into account the OLC opinion that indicated that a sitting president cannot be indicted.” Instead of prosecuting the president, Mueller laid out a path for Congress to take action.

    The report detailed abundant evidence that the campaign sought Russian help, benefited from that help and obstructed the F.B.I. investigation into Russian actions.

    For example, per then White House Council Don McGahn's sworn testimony, Trump* ordered him to fire Mueller. McGahn refused because it would be classic obstruction of justice. Then he told McGahn to do it again. McGahn said he'd have to quit. When all this came out in the NYT, Trump began an aggressive campaign to get McGahn to lie about it, saying Trump never told him to fire Mueller. Trump told WH staff secretary to get McGahn to write a litter "for our records" stating that the president never directed him to fire Mueller. Again, McGahn wisely refused.

    According to Mueller's report, McGahn complained to White House chief of staff Reince Priebus that Trump was trying to get him to "do crazy ****."



    *Impeached
    Annoy Russia. Vote Democrat.

  8. #258
    Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,585

    Re: Ukraine opens criminal probe into possible surveillance of ex-US ambassador

    Quote Originally Posted by bearpoker View Post
    It may be tactical. It's 100% legal. It's not interfering in our elections if he's simply going after the truth regardless of the effect the truth has. It may effect our elections, but that's not his fault. Effecting is not the same as interferring.
    I agree. My wording wasn't the best. By 'perfectly legal' I meant 100% legal. What I allocated 99-1 was motivation, possible motivation, of course. And yes, there is a difference between legal proceedings and computer hacking. I was struck by the irony of the circumstances, so I took a little liberty with my rhetoric. Hope that clears it up.

  9. #259
    Professor
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,307

    Re: Ukraine opens criminal probe into possible surveillance of ex-US ambassador

    Quote Originally Posted by jpn View Post
    Such as...? And providing links would be nice.
    You want Adam Schiff's make believe conversation? I'm surprised you hadn't heard of it. YouTube

    Nancy Pelosi? Pelosi quotes from The Irishman as she attacks Trump in final House impeachment speech | Daily Mail Online

  10. #260
    Professor
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,307

    Re: Ukraine opens criminal probe into possible surveillance of ex-US ambassador

    Quote Originally Posted by jpn View Post
    The Mueller Report stated: “We, at the outset, determined that, when it came to the president’s culpability, we needed to go forward only after taking into account the OLC opinion that indicated that a sitting president cannot be indicted.” Instead of prosecuting the president, Mueller laid out a path for Congress to take action.

    The report detailed abundant evidence that the campaign sought Russian help, benefited from that help and obstructed the F.B.I. investigation into Russian actions.

    For example, per then White House Council Don McGahn's sworn testimony, Trump* ordered him to fire Mueller. McGahn refused because it would be classic obstruction of justice. Then he told McGahn to do it again. McGahn said he'd have to quit. When all this came out in the NYT, Trump began an aggressive campaign to get McGahn to lie about it, saying Trump never told him to fire Mueller. Trump told WH staff secretary to get McGahn to write a litter "for our records" stating that the president never directed him to fire Mueller. Again, McGahn wisely refused.

    According to Mueller's report, McGahn complained to White House chief of staff Reince Priebus that Trump was trying to get him to "do crazy ****."
    *Impeached
    That's it? He told his lawyer to fire Mueller but it never happened? And you feel a President should be impeached for something that never happened?

    How about something that did happen, such as Hillary Clinton and the DNC's involvement with Russia in order to affect the 2016 election. That really did happen.

Page 26 of 33 FirstFirst ... 162425262728 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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