• 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!

Trump Not Guilty

haymarket said:
The quote from McConnell is a dishonest one as its intent is to deceive and mask what they actually had done. The key phrase in the McConnell quote is "with unresolved questions of executive privilege that would require protracted litigation" The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court was presiding over the trial. If - and I say IF since Trump had not invoked the privilege - Trump were to invoke executive privilege - The Chief Justice was right there to rule on it. As you know there is not such thing as executive privilege to further or hide a crime..
Click to expand...

Irrelevant here as no crime was alleged.
 
dixon01767 said:
Irrelevant here as no crime was alleged.
Click to expand...

Abuse of power and covering it up with obstruction tactics is the crime Trump is accused of. One cannot allege executive privilege to cover up a crime.

Those were the final charges. The House also was looking at various crimes ranging from bribery to violation of federal law on foreign campaign aid. Those also are crimes and no claim of executive privilege protects from those.
 
Last edited:
haymarket said:
and what do you maintain he did?
Click to expand...

I don't maintain anything, he was a CIA man and named as an NSC advisor for Romney in 2011 during his campaign. He was on the board at Burisma at the same time Hunter Biden was.
 
OpportunityCost said:
I don't maintain anything, he was a CIA man and named as an NSC advisor for Romney in 2011 during his campaign. He was on the board at Burisma at the same time Hunter Biden was.
Click to expand...

so what?
 
haymarket said:
Abuse of power and covering it up with obstruction tactics is the crime Trump is accused of. .
Click to expand...

Neither are crimes. That's why no crime was alleged in the articles of impeachment. Crimes are defined by statute and would of required that each element of the crimes definition be shown with evidence. The Dems certainly didn't want to try and do that so they went with abuse of power that can be defined anyway they like.
 
dixon01767 said:
Neither are crimes. That's why no crime was alleged in the articles of impeachment. Crimes are defined by statute and would of required that each element of the crimes definition be shown with evidence. The Dems certainly didn't want to try and do that so they went with abuse of power that can be defined anyway they like.
Click to expand...

To the contrary. They are among the worst crimes a president can commit.
 
haymarket said:
What does that have to do with Trump being acquitted as the topic of this thread?
Click to expand...

He wanted to look into corruption in Ukraine, specifically Burisma, which it appears was buying influence---which can be defined as corruption.

Goes to justify his actions as necessary policy.
 
OpportunityCost said:
He wanted to look into corruption in Ukraine, specifically Burisma, which it appears was buying influence---which can be defined as corruption.

Goes to justify his actions as necessary policy.
Click to expand...

That nonsense has been proven to be crap. Trump official after Trump official testified before the House Committee that it was all a sham and Trump only wanted the announcement of an investigation that he could use for his own political domestic purposes. Trump has never shown he cares about corruption unless he himself benefits.

On Ukraine scandal, GOP tries to revive bogus '''corruption''' argument

Fact check: Did Trump really care about corruption in Ukraine? The evidence suggests no

Ukraine corruption disputed - Washington Times
 
Last edited:
haymarket said:
That nonsense has been proven to be crap. Trump official after Trump official testified before the House Committee that it was all a sham and Trump only wanted the announcement of an investigation that he could use for his own political domestic purposes. Trump has never shown he cares about corruption unless he himself benefits.

On Ukraine scandal, GOP tries to revive bogus '''corruption''' argument
Click to expand...

Rachel Maddow has no credibility, she actually has less credibility than you. I just connected the dots for you. Like I said, willful blindness.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Rachel Maddow has no credibility, she actually has less credibility than you. I just connected the dots for you. Like I said, willful blindness.
Click to expand...

What exactly did she say that is factually incorrect?

The only dots you tried to connect were on the far right side of the page and have never been proven true.
 
haymarket said:
What exactly did she say that is factually incorrect?

The only dots you tried to connect were on the far right side of the page and have never been proven true.
Click to expand...

Its an opinion piece!
 
haymarket said:
Filled with facts.

So what did she say that is factually incorrect?

And you have two other sources in my post which give you information as well.
Click to expand...

Filled with opinion, you backed an opinion piece with two other opinion pieces which have suggest and claim in them. They AREN'T factual, which was my point.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Filled with opinion, you backed an opinion piece with two other opinion pieces which have suggest and claim in them. They AREN'T factual, which was my point.
Click to expand...

Actually they are filled with facts. Disregard the opinion. What did she factually get wrong?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom