• 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!

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

Chomsky said:
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!
Click to expand...

Maybe they'll discover that it was Biden who was having he watched.:lol:
 
jpn said:
Actually no. Please name an important issue in which Democrats widely share a view that runs counter to mainstream expert opinion.
Click to expand...
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.
 
TomFitz said:
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.
Click to expand...
Where are these 200 pages? Which laws have been broken?
 
Fred C Dobbs II said:
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.
Click to expand...

Such as...? And providing links would be nice.
 
Chomsky said:
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!
Click to expand...

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.
 
Fred C Dobbs II said:
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.
Click to expand...

The poll posted in #233 says otherwise. Those not influenced by facts and evidence can believe otherwise.
 
Fred C Dobbs II said:
Where are these 200 pages? Which laws have been broken?
Click to expand...

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
 
bearpoker said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
jpn said:
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
Click to expand...
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.
 
Fred C Dobbs II said:
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.
Click to expand...

It never happened because the White House Counsel. Not HIS lawyer. Refused to carry out a Presidential order he knew to be illegal and unethical. Not once. But multiple times. If not for that it probably would have happened. Especially with the present White House Counsel. That clearly points to a pattern of obstructive acts by this President with corrupt intent.
 
Fred C Dobbs II said:
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?
Click to expand...
Trump* could shoot someone on 5th Ave and you'd say, "that's it?"

Fred C Dobbs II said:
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.
Click to expand...
No it didn't and we all know it didn't. No matter how often you repeat Russian-supplied talking points, those talking points are still lies. Stinking Russian lies. According to US intelligence.

So you're lying for Putin? Or maybe you didn't know that is what Russia wants you to think? :roll: Fiona Hill, a respected Russia scholar and former senior White House official, told some of Mr. Trump’s fiercest defenders in Congress that they were repeating “a fictional narrative.” Selling out America to advance Russia's agenda with Russia's fictional narrative are you? Anything for Master Trump?

In a briefing that closely aligned with Dr. Hill’s testimony, American intelligence officials informed senators and their aides in recent weeks that Russia had engaged in a yearslong campaign to essentially frame Ukraine as responsible for Moscow’s own hacking of the 2016 election, according to three American officials. The briefing came as Republicans stepped up their defenses of Mr. Trump in the Ukraine affair.
Click to expand...

Consider yourself a patriot do you?

Comrade?



*Impeached
**According to US intelligence
 
Last edited:
Fred C Dobbs II said:
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.
Click to expand...

Except that it didn't, and you should feel bad for posting that rubbish.
 
jpn said:
Trump* could shoot someone on 5th Ave and you'd say, "that's it?"
Click to expand...

Not to mention if he had tried to shoot someone on 5th Ave and missed. That wouldn't be crime either because he missed. Never mind the attempt to murder.







*Impeached
**According to US intelligence[/QUOTE]
 
Hamish Howl said:
Except that it didn't, and you should feel bad for posting that rubbish.
Click to expand...

of course it happened, Hillary was looking for dirt in Russia on Trump and paid Steele for the Steele Dossier that they were sure would kill off Trumps chances!
 
Atomic Kid said:
It never happened because the White House Counsel. Not HIS lawyer. Refused to carry out a Presidential order
Click to expand...

actually that s why you have a White house Council and why all organizations have the equivalent ie so non layers will know whats legal and whats not. 1+1=2
 
jpn said:
Instead of prosecuting the president, Mueller laid out a path for Congress to take action.
Click to expand...

Mueller never said Trump was guilty of anything or would have been guilty had he not been president and obviously Congress did nothing and didn't take the "path". Moreover Mueller used illegally obtained FISA warrants to conduct fraudulent investigations for which some will now go to prison.
 
jpn said:
The report detailed abundant evidence that the campaign sought Russian help,
Click to expand...

what help are you talking about??? Liberal just made it up again???
 
jpn said:
Trump* could shoot someone on 5th Ave and you'd say, "that's it?"
Click to expand...
Actually I wouldn't and that's a very weak dodge. You really are wanting Trump impeached for doing nothing and you must know now how ridiculous that is.
No it didn't and we all know it didn't. No matter how often you repeat Russian-supplied talking points, those talking points are still lies. Stinking Russian lies. According to US intelligence.
Click to expand...
Your link has nothing whatsoever to do with the Steele Dossier, Hillary Clinton or the DNC. Did you read it?
So you're lying for Putin? Or maybe you didn't know that is what Russia wants you to think? :roll: Fiona Hill, a respected Russia scholar and former senior White House official, told some of Mr. Trump’s fiercest defenders in Congress that they were repeating “a fictional narrative.” Selling out America to advance Russia's agenda with Russia's fictional narrative are you? Anything for Master Trump?
Click to expand...
Again, this has nothing to do with what was discussed and, though beside the point, Fiona Hill made an ass of herself.
 
Hamish Howl said:
1. OPINION CONTRIBUTOR. Did you honestly think that wouldn't get noticed?

2. There is nothing in that article that meets your assertion that the Clinton campaign dealt with Russia.
Click to expand...
I don't know what you don't know so a few simple questions. Have you ever heard of the "Steele Dossier"? Do you know about its contents? Do you know who paid for it? Do you understand its intended use?
 
Fred C Dobbs II said:
You're actually concerned about the opinion of one of the most corrupt countries in the world? They couldn't find the 'world stage' if they were sitting on it.

Ambassadors can be both investigated and/or fired. This is nothing new.
Click to expand...
Which country are referring to? The one investigating? Or, the one doing the cover-up?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom