• 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!

Bad Defense By Trump

Athanasius68

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 27, 2016
Messages
30,036
Reaction score
6,344
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
It continues to be a fact that Ukraine received its aid, and no investigation was required in order for it to happen
That's continues to be the best defense.

Anything else obscures this fact and leaves Trump open to claims such as being reported that Bolton is claiming.
 
It continues to be a fact that Ukraine received its aid, and no investigation was required in order for it to happen
That's continues to be the best defense.

Anything else obscures this fact and leaves Trump open to claims such as being reported that Bolton is claiming.

What tune do whistle when you walk past the cemetery?
 
It continues to be a fact that Ukraine received its aid, and no investigation was required in order for it to happen
That's continues to be the best defense.

Anything else obscures this fact and leaves Trump open to claims such as being reported that Bolton is claiming.

was tha aid late, on time, or early?
 
It continues to be a fact that Ukraine received its aid, and no investigation was required in order for it to happen
That's continues to be the best defense.

Richard Reid, the Shoe Bomber, could claim the same defense - he never blew up the airplane, so he should go free.
 
Richard Reid, the Shoe Bomber, could claim the same defense - he never blew up the airplane, so he should go free.

It continues to be the case that it is illegal to want to blow up a plane.
Its not illegal to withhold aid.
 
It continues to be a fact that Ukraine received its aid, and no investigation was required in order for it to happen
That's continues to be the best defense.

Anything else obscures this fact and leaves Trump open to claims such as being reported that Bolton is claiming.

Do you know when the aid was released?

I believe it was the day after the whistle blower complaint became public knowledge. So the idea that no investigation was needed is kind of absurd on it's face. Trump abused his power in an attempt to bribe a foreign nation with American taxpayer dollars for his own benefit. He stopped when he got caught.
 
It continues to be the case that it is illegal to want to blow up a plane.
Its not illegal to withhold aid.

Withholding aid for corrupt abuse-of-power reasons qualifies for "high crimes and misdemeanors" just fine. And your defense of it in the OP is completely destroyed by the Shoe-Bomber analogy.
 
It continues to be the case that it is illegal to want to blow up a plane.
Its not illegal to withhold aid.

It's illegal to withhold approved aid for personal benefit. The GAO said so.
 
It's illegal to withhold approved aid for personal benefit. The GAO said so.

except there is absolutely no proof he did so for personal reasons , if at all.
 
except there is absolutely no proof he did so for personal reasons , if at all.

The US Government Accountability Office says it was illegal because it was for personal gain.

The evidence I've seen is overwhelming.
 
It continues to be a fact that Ukraine received its aid, and no investigation was required in order for it to happen
That's continues to be the best defense.

Anything else obscures this fact and leaves Trump open to claims such as being reported that Bolton is claiming.
The whistle-blower coming forward was required for the aid to be released.
 
Do you know when the aid was released?

I believe it was the day after the whistle blower complaint became public knowledge. So the idea that no investigation was needed is kind of absurd on it's face. Trump abused his power in an attempt to bribe a foreign nation with American taxpayer dollars for his own benefit. He stopped when he got caught.

It was released after Congress, in a bipartisan fashion, threatened to withhold Defense spending if the aid was not released.
 
Hmm... in other words, oversight worked?

Not really. Sure, Trump panicked when the scandal first broke, and in fact all Republicans were panicking for a good month before they settled on attacking the impeachment process as a defense in addition to outright gaslighting. But if the White House can block subpoenas with impunity then, ultimately, oversight isn't really a thing.
 
Hmm... in other words, oversight worked?

What worked was the whistle-blower system, though there is a lot of pressure from Trump and Republicans to stop it working in the future (by outing the whistle blower).

What has not worked though is the oversight as it relates to impeaching and removing President for bribery and high crimes and misdemeanors.
 
except there is absolutely no proof he did so for personal reasons , if at all.

Why do you believe Donald Trump held up the aid?

Do you honestly believe this man, who makes everything about him and is absurdly corrupt, cared one iota about some corruption investigation in Ukraine? Why was it necessary to axe the ambassador and send in his goons for a legitimate investigation then? And why did his plans suddenly change the moment an investigation began?

If this was all perfect, normal stuff as Trump and his defenders claim.....why?
 
Not really. Sure, Trump panicked when the scandal first broke, and in fact all Republicans were panicking for a good month before they settled on attacking the impeachment process as a defense in addition to outright gaslighting. But if the White House can block subpoenas with impunity then, ultimately, oversight isn't really a thing.

Do you think the dems should have gone to court?
 
Not really. Sure, Trump panicked when the scandal first broke, and in fact all Republicans were panicking for a good month before they settled on attacking the impeachment process as a defense in addition to outright gaslighting. But if the White House can block subpoenas with impunity then, ultimately, oversight isn't really a thing.

Congress didn't propose oversite.
They proposed impeachment.
 
Back
Top Bottom