To Exonerate Trump, Republicans Embrace Russian Disinformation

[nota bene]

I no longer consider you to be a serious correspondent. If you can't pay attention to the most important issue in current American history, it is not rational to continue this discussion. I have read the Mueller report; apparently you can't be bothered. I have read the "transcript" of the conversation with Zelenskiy; apparently you haven't bothered. I read the documents underlying most of the news reports about various criminal activities conducted by this President.

If you are a Trump sycophant, just say so. Don't pretend to be "objective."

I'm not even a Trump fan, much less a sycophant. What I am a fan of is fairness. Don't pretend that you are.

 

[jnug]

Thread title: To Exonerate Trump, Republicans Embrace Russian Disinformation

My God, as of yesterday we have Republican House Intel Committee members even mouthing the words......Ukraine and Hillary, 2016......Ukraine and Hillary, 2016.

Russia bought itself a President and an American Political Party and bought it cheap.

 

[NWRatCon]

I'm not even a Trump fan, much less a sycophant. What I am a fan of is fairness. Don't pretend that you are.

Bull.

I recognize trolling when I see it. Let's pretend for a moment, difficult as it is to suspend disbelief in this instance, that you are interested in "fairness." What, in your view, is "fair"?
What is "unfair" about the process that has unfolded to date? Was Robert Mueller properly appointed as a Special Counsel? Did he follow the law within his ambit? Does Congress have the authority (and responsibility) to oversee the Executive Branch (including the President)? Has Trump obstructed the intentions of Congress? Has he behaved as an executive of any organizations should behave?

Let's talk turkey (and Turkey). Obstruction; Bribery; Abuse of Office

Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication influences, obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede the due and proper administration of the law under which any pending proceeding is being had before any department or agency of the United States, or the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation is being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress—

U.S. Code § 1505.Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees

Has he done so? Is there sufficient evidence available in the public record to so demonstrate?

(b)Whoever—
(2)being a public official or person selected to be a public official, directly or indirectly, corruptly demands, seeks, receives, accepts, or agrees to receive or accept anything of value personally or for any other person or entity, in return for:
(A)being influenced in the performance of any official act;
(B)being influenced to commit or aid in committing, or to collude in, or allow, any fraud, or make opportunity for the commission of any fraud, on the United States; or
(C)being induced to do or omit to do any act in violation of the official duty of such official or person;
(3)directly or indirectly, corruptly gives, offers, or promises anything of value to any person, or offers or promises such person to give anything of value to any other person or entity, with intent to influence the testimony under oath or affirmation of such first-mentioned person as a witness upon a trial, hearing, or other proceeding, before any court, any committee of either House or both Houses of Congress, or any agency, commission, or officer authorized by the laws of the United States to hear evidence or take testimony, or with intent to influence such person to absent himself therefrom;

U.S. Code § 201.Bribery of public officials and witnesses

Being "fair" does not require one to put blinders on and pretend something that has obviously happened hasn't been "proven" yet. Proven how? To whom? The assertion is tendentious and disingenuous. One should use the brain one has been gifted with to form their own judgments. That I have, with my considerable experience (as prosecutor, constitutional scholar, Assistant Attorney General, and Army officer), done so does not make such conclusions "unfair" or premature. It just makes me rational.

 

[NWRatCon]

This thread has drifted a long way from the topic. Perhaps that was intentional. As a reminder, the thread is about the Republican Embrace of Russian Disinformation. That has been on further display throughout the week's proceedings. Reality versus fantasy divides Republicans in the impeachment hearings (David Lauter, LA Times).

As the first week of public hearings over impeaching President Trump ends, Republicans remain united in the president’s defense, but divided on an important issue — whether to engage with reality.
...
Others have pursued fantastical theories that have taken hold in some parts of the conservative media world but which have no grounding in facts. Friday’s hearing featuring Marie Yovanovitch, the former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, highlighted the damage that those falsehoods can cause when they’re loosed into the real world.

Still they persist:

They’ve tried to create a narrative in which allegations that Ukraine supported Hillary Clinton could counterbalance the finding by U.S. intelligence agencies that Russia supported Trump.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has pushed that line too. His statements in support of it are a “classic” example of “an intelligence officer trying to throw off the scent and create an alternative narrative,” Yovanovitch said at Friday’s hearing.

Trump’s lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani, has also actively fed that theory, playing to the president’s penchant for seeing himself as a victim of conspiracies. Ultimately in the Ukraine case, Trump appears to have become so caught up in the web of conspiracy which Giuliani and others spun that he acted out a conspiracy of his own which now endangers his presidency.

 

[nota bene]

Bull.

I recognize trolling when I see it.

You see what isn't there.

 

[NWRatCon]

Au contraire
I see what is. Apparently, however, you will refuse to see what is obvious until the cows come home. Why is it, I wonder, that you never answer the questions posed? No more bleats about"fairness".

 

[Thoreau72]

I no longer consider you to be a serious correspondent. If you can't pay attention to the most important issue in current American history, it is not rational to continue this discussion. I have read the Mueller report; apparently you can't be bothered. I have read the "transcript" of the conversation with Zelenskiy; apparently you haven't bothered. I read the documents underlying most of the news reports about various criminal activities conducted by this President.

If you are a Trump sycophant, just say so. Don't pretend to be "objective."

One can be perfectly objective in seeing that whatever offenses DJT has committed, and he has in many trivial and petty ways, the other side's men have done the same. The federal government is an immoral and criminal organization, over many long years, long before the idiot Trump came on the scene.

"Impeachable Offenses" is essentially a political term. It is defined on a case by case basis by politicians, from Johnson to Nixon. None of them have been treason.