• 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!

GOP releases list of witnesses for impeachment hearings

I totally agree. The live in that sort of a double standard world.

Fortunately, the electorate does not.

More fortunately, this isn't a referendum.
 
Well, that would contradict the testimony of Deputy Asst. Secretary of State George Kent (Kent Deposition, Pg. 336-7):



If you're interested in the so-called "diamond prosecutors" scandal which led to Shokin's dismissal, it's explained in this article:

Ukraine Ousts Viktor Shokin, Top Prosecutor, and Political Stability Hangs in the Balance - The New York Times

You are posing an 'the ends justifies the means' argument, but it doesn't apply.

What Biden did was a clear quid pro quo: 'Fire the prosecutor, or the US will not give Ukraine $1B'. That's a quid pro quo, plain, clear and simple. In fact he's on video bragging about it.
And everyone's just fine with this.

In the Trump / Prez. Z. phone call transcript there was no such quid pro quo, and everyone has lost their ever freaking minds over it, claiming there was one.

Two standards here? Really?
 
You are posing an 'the ends justifies the means' argument, but it doesn't apply.

What Biden did was a clear quid pro quo: 'Fire the prosecutor, or the US will not give Ukraine $1B'. That's a quid pro quo, plain, clear and simple. In fact he's on video bragging about it.
And everyone's just fine with this.

In the Trump / Prez. Z. phone call transcript there was no such quid pro quo, and everyone has lost their ever freaking minds over it, claiming there was one.

Two standards here? Really?

Absolutely there are two standards... one is entirely consistent with US Law and the fiduciary responsibility to maintain US foreign aid dollars don't go to corrupt foreign officials.... while the other is an abuse of power to try to gain partisan advantage.

Are you really that morally blind that you don't see the difference between the two situations?
 
Absolutely there are two standards... one is entirely consistent with US Law and the fiduciary responsibility to maintain US foreign aid dollars don't go to corrupt foreign officials.... while the other is an abuse of power to try to gain partisan advantage.

Are you really that morally blind that you don't see the difference between the two situations?

No, I'm see two different standards being applied depending on which party you're from, who you are, and I most fervently object to that.
 
No, I'm see two different standards being applied depending on which party you're from, who you are, and I most fervently object to that.

I don't know how much more plainly I can phrase this for you.... one action was done to fight corruption.... the other was corruption.
 
I don't know how much more plainly I can phrase this for you.... one action was done to fight corruption.... the other was corruption.

The imagined quid pro quo was corruption? Yeah, OK. You go with that.
 
There's no way Sciffty is going to approve this list, but we can expect these same people to be called to the Senate, if there's a trial.

GOP releases list of witnesses for impeachment hearings

You expext these same people to be called before the senate ?

Joe-Hunter-GettyImages-520783510.jpg


At the top of Republicans’ list is former Vice President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter, who has emerged as a central figure in the Ukraine controversy due to his business dealings.

This ought to be good.

:popcorn2:
 
Back
Top Bottom