• 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!

Clinton/Biden/Trump

NeverTrump said:
Um so you're just denying some of the contents have been disclosed such as the ones mentioned in my OP, right? I just wanna get that on record.
Click to expand...

I'm certain the contents have not been disclosed.
Are you going on record saying the contents have been disclosed but you just can't produce them here?
 
bubbabgone said:
I'm certain the contents have not been disclosed.
Are you going on record saying the contents have been disclosed but you just can't produce them here?
Click to expand...

Really? So again, how does the media know that Trump asked Ukraine 8 times to look into Joe Biden, and how is it that they know how much he offered them to do it? Or are you expecting this information to be wrong when everything is known? Isn't much more likely that it will be even more revealing with other information to back this up, like IDK an audio recording, which is what is claimed to exist. I don't know why you continue to play these games.

If the media was making this up wouldn't they come up with asking Russia 50 Times and offering them billions of dollars? These things are oddly specific to make up...
 
bubbabgone said:
The claims by the whistleblower haven't been disclosed. How could they be fact-checked? The word you're grasping for is "speculated".
Click to expand...

This is the anti-Trump brigade's favorite activity, SPECULATION.

The only thing is, they've never been right about anything yet...Always judging in the absence of facts.
 
Last edited:
trixare4kids said:
This is the anti-Trump brigade's favorite activity, SPECULATION.

The only thing is, they've never been right about anything yet...Always judging in the absence of facts.
Click to expand...

Amazing ain't it.
But they keep doing it.
Albert Einstein: The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
 
NeverTrump said:
Really? So again, how does the media know that Trump asked Ukraine 8 times to look into Joe Biden, and how is it that they know how much he offered them to do it? Or are you expecting this information to be wrong when everything is known? Isn't much more likely that it will be even more revealing with other information to back this up, like IDK an audio recording, which is what is claimed to exist. I don't know why you continue to play these games.

If the media was making this up wouldn't they come up with asking Russia 50 Times and offering them billions of dollars? These things are oddly specific to make up...
Click to expand...

Still waiting on the details in the complaint.
Have them?
 
bubbabgone said:
Still waiting on the details in the complaint.
Have them?
Click to expand...

What do you think I'm trying to discuss with you. These are the details in the complaint. There will be more that comes out which will only support the things I've already mentioned, now do you want to discuss that or do you still wanna ignore it?
 
bubbabgone said:
Still waiting on the details in the complaint.
Have them?
Click to expand...

Trump refuses to release the details, that's the entire issue.

Why do you think "waiting" is how you get to that? You must not be following this very closely, or not understand?

And shouldn't it go to congress, and not you, first? I would think it should be public only if Congress decides to take action on it because of its seriousness. Otherwise, let it remain secret.
 
bubbabgone said:
Amazing ain't it.
But they keep doing it.
Albert Einstein: The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
Click to expand...

And their hypocrisy continues to astound! Opposition research on Trump very good. Opposition research on Biden an impeachable offense.
You can't make this stuff up. ;)

ETA:
Giuliani said, "that he has obtained sworn statements from "five people in the Ukraine, who said that 'we were brought into the White House, the Obama White House, and we were told, 'Go dig up dirt on Trump and Manafort in January of 2016."

Trump urged Ukraine president to investigate Joe Biden'''s son

More Democrat rules for thee but not for me?
When and if I see the alleged sworn statements above, because I suspect that they will have to be released, I would think so.
 
Last edited:
Mach said:
Trump refuses to release the details, that's the entire issue.

Why do you think "waiting" is how you get to that? You must not be following this very closely, or not understand?
Click to expand...

Personally, I think he will let it be released despite being protected by executive privilege .
So I understand the reason for not doing it.
You should be very nervous considering the current chatter is that there was no quid-pro-quo.
But chatter by those who haven't seen it is meaningless.

And shouldn't it go to congress, and not you, first? I would think it should be public only if Congress decides to take action on it because of its seriousness. Otherwise, let it remain secret.
Click to expand...

Well, for one thing, we saw what happens when some in Congress take action. They fail miserably because of impure motivation. I'm surprised you would keep wanting to see that.
 
trixare4kids said:
And their hypocrisy continues to astound! Opposition research on Trump very good. Opposition research on Biden an impeachable offense.
You can't make this stuff up. ;)

ETA:
Giuliani said, "that he has obtained sworn statements from "five people in the Ukraine, who said that 'we were brought into the White House, the Obama White House, and we were told, 'Go dig up dirt on Trump and Manafort in January of 2016."

Trump urged Ukraine president to investigate Joe Biden'''s son

More Democrat rules for thee but not for me?
When I see the sworn statements above because I suspect that they will have to be released, I would think so.
Click to expand...

Logic and reason have no place in partisan politics.
 
Captain Adverse said:
This video (I literally just watched prior to seeing the OP) answers IMO your "questions:"



The analyst points out several things I agree with, the first being the constant effort by the MSM to overwhelm the public with one negative story after another. Each one following a failed attempt to find "the thing" that will finally undo Trump. That (in his words) the MSM are grasping for some story that allows them to play offense instead of defense. That this happens every time, as with the recent Kavanaugh story, where the MSM asserts wrongdoing only to find it has to defend it's mistaken assertions.

Arguing "worst case scenario" he points out that the Democrats are suggesting, based solely on assumptions of what "the whistleblower" might have reported, that somehow the President is not allowed to suggest to a foreign head of state that they might want to investigate someone for possible wrongdoing. How is that illegal? How is that an "abuse of power?" How is that not something one head of state can say to another? That this is just another "now Trump has gone too far" effort.
Click to expand...


LOL When Trump says "investigate" it means find something or make up something that I can use against Biden. You don't think Trump would be satisfied with a negative outcome do you? And when he couples that with a threat to withhold military aid that Congress has provided it is extortion. But even if you deny the threat, using his office for political benefit from a foreign power is also corrupt as hell. Is that the precedent you want for all our Presidents? To allow them to leverage the countries blood and treasure for their own benefit? A President does not own our Country, they are simply stewards who have pledged on a bible to serve the people.
 
Last edited:
bubbabgone said:
Personally, I think he will let it be released despite being protected by executive privilege .
You should be very nervous considering the current chatter is that there was no quid-pro-quo.
Click to expand...
Why would I be nervous if a whistle-blower complaint was properly forward to congress after being delayed by POTUS? That makes no sense. Well, it does make me more nervous about POTUS being allowed to stay in the WH I guess?

But chatter by those who haven't seen it is meaningless.
Click to expand...
In every criminal case that is investigated, investigators chatter about the case without having seen the crime, and they determine to the best of their abilities after collecting all the data they reasonable can, what occurred.

You don't appear to make a reasonable argument.
 
Mach said:
Why would I be nervous if a whistle-blower complaint was properly forward to congress after being delayed by POTUS? That makes no sense. Well, it does make me more nervous about POTUS being allowed to stay in the WH I guess?


In every criminal case that is investigated, investigators chatter about the case without having seen the crime, and they determine to the best of their abilities after collecting all the data they reasonable can, what occurred.

You don't appear to make a reasonable argument.
Click to expand...

He doesn't seem to grasp that concept that some people have seen the details of the report, but that the media only has partial information. So that's not surprising.
 
Mach said:
Why would I be nervous if a whistle-blower complaint was properly forward to congress after being delayed by POTUS? That makes no sense. Well, it does make me more nervous about POTUS being allowed to stay in the WH I guess?


In every criminal case that is investigated, investigators chatter about the case without having seen the crime, and they determine to the best of their abilities after collecting all the data they reasonable can, what occurred.

You don't appear to make a reasonable argument.
Click to expand...

Because the whistleblower law didn't apply in this instance it wasn't forwarded to Congress.

Here. About the Law ...

"The Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act of 1998,[1] amending the Central Intelligence Agency Act of 1949 and the Inspector General Act of 1978, sets forth a procedure for employees and contractors of specified federal intelligence agencies to report complaints or information to Congress about serious problems involving intelligence activities."

Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act - Wikipedia
 
Captain Adverse said:
The analyst points out several things I agree with, the first being the constant effort by the MSM to overwhelm the public with one negative story after another. Each one following a failed attempt to find "the thing" that will finally undo Trump. That (in his words) the MSM are grasping for some story that allows them to play offense instead of defense. That this happens every time, as with the recent Kavanaugh story, where the MSM asserts wrongdoing only to find it has to defend it's mistaken assertions.
Click to expand...

I disagree with you but I thought you were a rational person. You're attacking the motives of the accusers instead of the substance of the accusation. That's a type of ad hominem argument. It's invalid and irrelevant.

It's true of every politician around the world that opponents are "out to get him (or her)." But that fact alone doesn't discredit their allegations. Sometimes the politician is indeed corrupt. You can be a corrupt politician AND the opposition can be out to get you. Nixon is an example of this.

Captain Adverse said:
Arguing "worst case scenario" he points out that the Democrats are suggesting, based solely on assumptions of what "the whistleblower" might have reported, that somehow the President is not allowed to suggest to a foreign head of state that they might want to investigate someone for possible wrongdoing. How is that illegal? How is that an "abuse of power?" How is that not something one head of state can say to another? That this is just another "now Trump has gone too far" effort.
Click to expand...

You're using a straw man strategy here. You're perfectly right that a president has every right to demand some foreign country investigate corruption. But you're omitting some facts and thus creating a straw man. Trump pressured Ukraine to investigate his political opponent's son.

You can't deny that you intentionally reworded the allegation to make it sound innocuous. Trump wanted Ukraine to investigate corruption vs Trump wanted Ukraine to investigate his political opponent's son.

Let's summarize your arguments:

1. An ad hominem attack on the motives of the accusers

2. A straw man mischaracterization of the allegation
 
bubbabgone said:
Personally, I think he will let it be released despite being protected by executive privilege .
So I understand the reason for not doing it.
You should be very nervous considering the current chatter is that there was no quid-pro-quo.
But chatter by those who haven't seen it is meaningless.



Well, for one thing, we saw what happens when some in Congress take action. They fail miserably because of impure motivation. I'm surprised you would keep wanting to see that.
Click to expand...

Actually quid pro quo does not need to be verbally articulated, when a President of the U.S. tells you to do something multiple times, the power of his office makes it a threat all by itself. You know this as well as Trump does but choose to ignore it because...Trump.
 
Last edited:
NeverTrump said:
He doesn't seem to grasp that concept that some people have seen the details of the report, but that the media only has partial information. So that's not surprising.
Click to expand...

Yes, it's madness. If you take that nonsense, and apply it to any other scenario in reality, it also looks 100% absurd and stupid.

A doctor hears you complain about symptoms...has no idea what is really the cause, and she says:

"I can't speculate about your issue because this Trump nutter thinks speculation is all I have and is worthless!!"
"This other Trump supporter said its meaningless to discuss a disease I have not seen first-hand!"

Whatever am I to do, how do I diagnose and treat you, if I cannot investigate what's wrong with you (if anything)? I'm so stupid to listen to stupid trump supporter faux-logic!

We saw this during Russia investigation too..when Russians were evidenced to have helped Trump win the election, and Trump knew about it and welcomed it, and advertised 100+ time the stole DNC documents, but not directly in a quid pro quo...remember that?
*what proof do you have he committed a crime!?!?!*
*That's what the MOTHER ****ING INVESTIGATION IS FOR YOU DUMB MOTHER ****ERS*.

Maybe without the cursing, but it's so stupid it hurts.
 
Last edited:
bubbabgone said:
Because the whistleblower law didn't apply in this instance it wasn't forwarded to Congress.
Click to expand...

You claim you don't know the details.
You then immediately claim to know the details make it inapplicable to the whistle-blower law.

Why can you not make a reasonable claim?
 
iguanaman said:
But even if you deny the threat, using his office for political benefit from a foreign power is also corrupt as hell. Is that the precedent you want for all our Presidents? To allow them to leverage the countries blood and treasure for their own benefit? A President does not own our Country, they are simply stewards who have pledged on a bible to serve the people.
Click to expand...

Trump supporters will attempt to deny that Trump's motive was to go after Biden but the problem is that Trump and Guiliani have already admitted this.
 
bubbabgone said:
Because the whistleblower law didn't apply in this instance it wasn't forwarded to Congress.

Here. About the Law ...

"The Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act of 1998,[1] amending the Central Intelligence Agency Act of 1949 and the Inspector General Act of 1978, sets forth a procedure for employees and contractors of specified federal intelligence agencies to report complaints or information to Congress about serious problems involving intelligence activities."

Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act - Wikipedia
Click to expand...

So Congress decided that no whistle blower protection is needed in matters of national security? That seems strange don't you think? Why did the IG state that it was something that needed to be sent to Congress? It appears to me that the DOJ or the Whitehouse have no jurisdiction in the complaint yet Whitehouse and DOJ lawyers are involved.
 
Last edited:
iguanaman said:
Actually quid pro quo does not need to be verbally articulated, when a President of the U.S. tells you to do something multiple times, the power of his office makes it a threat all by itself. You know this as well as Trump does but choose to ignore it because...Trump.
Click to expand...

Also quid pro quo is not necessary here at all. The simple act of using the office of president of the U.S.A. to ask a foreign government to investigate your opponent is itself an abuse of power. It's like Obama calling up Putin and asking him to investigate Trump during the election. That would have been an abuse of power.
 
bubbabgone said:
about serious problems involving intelligence activities."
Click to expand...

Uh that's what the whistle-blower said it was. If you want to break this apart piece by piece, you will sadly find yourself in a corner with no way out, just like every other despicable things you have defended alt-right figures doing. Do you really wanna go there? Again? Do you like being humiliated on message boards?

You can choose to not believe the US intelligence community, like our President, but that isn't very American.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom