Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is Trump Losing It?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by G David Bock View Post

    Similar could be said about the Bidin's. If they did nothing unethical or "wrong", then shouldn't object to completing investigations they sought to have suspended.

    A reminder of the Fifth Amendment in our Bill of Rights.

    Also, Trump and his family have been near daily targets since before he was elected.
    investigation was suspended already. Before Joe biden did anything. It could be argued that joe was pushing for an invesitigation into the company his son was on the board.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by G David Bock View Post

      ...
      Obstruction of justice, in United States jurisdictions, is a crime consisting of obstructing prosecutors, investigators, or other government officials. Common law jurisdictions other than the United States tend to use the wider offense of perverting the course of justice.

      Obstruction is a broad crime that may include acts such as perjury, making false statements to officials, witness tampering, jury tampering, destruction of evidence, and many others. Obstruction also applies to overt coercion of court or government officials via the means of threats or actual physical harm, and also applying to deliberate sedition against a court official to undermine the appearance of legitimate authority.
      ...
      Obstruction of justice is an umbrella term covering a variety of specific crimes.[1]Black's Law Dictionary defines it as any "interference with the orderly administration of law and justice".[2] Obstruction has been categorized by various sources as a process crime,[3] a public-order crime,[4][5] or a white-collar crime.[6]

      Obstruction can include crimes committed by judges, prosecutors, attorneys general, and elected officials in general. Federal law

      In federal law, crimes constituting obstruction of justice are defined primarily in Chapter 73 of Title 18 of the United States Code.[7][8] This chapter contains provisions covering various specific crimes such as witness tampering and retaliation, jury tampering, destruction of evidence, assault on a process server, and theft of court records.[9] It also includes more general sections covering obstruction of proceedings in federal courts, Congress,[10] and federal executive agencies.[9] One of the broadest provisions in the chapter, known as the Omnibus Clause, states that anyone who "corruptly... endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice" in connection with a pending court proceeding is subject to punishment.[11]

      Statistics regarding the frequency of obstruction of justice prosecutions are unclear.[12] In 2004, federal agencies arrested 446 people for obstruction, representing 0.3 percent of all federal arrests.[13] This does not include, however, people who were charged with obstruction in addition to a more serious underlying crime.
      ...
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obstruction_of_justice

      The Fifth Amendment provides protection from self-incrimination.
      With regard to Trump's Federal Income Tax returns, Congress could subpoena these from the IRS.
      So does the 5th still apply to the president in regards to use of his powers as president.

      If he committed murder or robbery sure he a normal citizen at that point and should be able to take the fifth.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by craven View Post

        So does the 5th still apply to the president in regards to use of his powers as president.

        If he committed murder or robbery sure he a normal citizen at that point and should be able to take the fifth.
        Have you found anything in the Constitution that says it wouldn't?
        TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

          And, you made my point.

          The Obama incident was downplayed in Obama's favor by the MSM and others. Brewer was made out to be the person in the wrong and the 'bad guy' if you will.

          This time, the same bunch are playing it up in Pelosi's favor and making Trump out to be the 'bad guy.'

          That's the hypocrisy. That's what the meme you posted shows when you compare the two incidents.
          You still did not get the point

          It was Obama who downplayed the incident and this is n contrast to Trump whoo tweeted the photo with Pelosi standing against him. Trump tried again to whine on tweeter, and it backfired.
          My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by craven View Post

            investigation was suspended already. Before Joe biden did anything. It could be argued that joe was pushing for an invesitigation into the company his son was on the board.
            Which "Fake News" are you referring to ???
            (Or is American English not your first language?)

            Watch Joe Biden Brag About Bribing Ukraine To Fire The Prosecutor Investigating His Son’s Company

            September 24, 2019 By Erielle Davidson

            The media has had a field day over new hearsay accusations that President Trump was wrong to ask Ukranian leaders to investigate political corruption related to Joe Biden. Predictably, several House Democrats have used this news cycle to again demand Trump’s impeachment. While the whistleblower complaint is based on hearsay, we do know that Joe Biden, while serving as vice president, pressured the Ukrainian government to fire the prosecutor who was investigating his son’s company.

            Hunter Biden joined the board of Ukrainian national gas company Burisma in 2014 while his father was managing the United States’ Ukraine policy and despite zero personal experience in the field. At the time Hunter Biden joined its board, Burisma was embroiled in allegations of corruption, allegations serious enough that Ukraine’s prosecutor general launched an investigation into the company.

            Joe Biden was so proud of his role in the prosecutor’s removal from investigating the company paying his son $50,000 per month merely to serve on its board that he actually bragged about it in a 2018 speech at an event for the publication Foreign Affairs. In this speech, Biden boasts his threat to withhold $1 billion in U.S. loans from Ukraine if they did not agree to fire the prosecutor who happened to be investigating the company giving his son a cushy sinecure.

            The prosecutor was fired, and the investigation was dropped six months later. While the investigation was just reopened last year, it has been a slow-moving process that has turned up little. At the time Biden pushed for the firing of Viktor Shokin, the prosecutor general, Shokin had plans to question Hunter Biden.
            ...
            https://thefederalist.com/2019/09/24...AYDm7UzvhBAyWE
            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~

            To recap: Joe Biden, at behest allegedly of Obama, 'Obstructed Justice' in the Ukrainian legal/political system by blackmailing the then current national leadership if they didn't fire the prosecutor/investigator and end the investigation of possible corruption in the firm that his son* was a member on the board of. * At a rather exorbitant rate of compensation it would seem, BTW.

            Trump asked the current Prez of Ukraine to consider re-opening that investigation, as a "favor" (no evidence of conditions/"quid-pro-quo"). No evidence of blatant intimidation of a foreign nation leader such as we saw Joe brag about doing.

            Meanwhile, "the usual suspects" of the Loonie-Left-Wing, Demon-rats(DNC), looters & freeloaders, and assorted socialists/communists out to 'fundamentally change America' via their presumed dynasty of Obama~Hillary Clinton are now up in arms and all akimbo because their plans have been thwarted, for a few years at least, via Trump and the Conservative patriots whom voted him into office.

            Like a pack of Captain Queeg's chasing after that missing pint of strawberries,
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Caine_Mutiny_(film)
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nndGGnOFvMk
            Trump's detractors have sought any will-o-the-wisp or delusion they can imagine to claim that he's acting "unPresidential" in trying to "find dirt on Biden". Thing is, if there's no "dirt" to be found, than Trump is engaging in another of his alleged follies and one would think his enemies would be glad to see him make a fool of himself, and the Ukraine, having them "pound sand" looking for missing "dirt". Instead, they are acting more as if there is "dirt to be found" and it's "criminal" for Trump to want to see the investigation renewed and with some vigor, to find that "dirt" (note "find", not "make").

            Once again, smoke-n-mirrors of distraction straight out of Saul Alinsky's manual;
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_for_Radicals
            voicing faux outrage that anyone would try to expose the corruption of our Left Wing("enemies ... domestic"), and the crimes of their previous POTUS and/or intended next one.

            Of course, your mileage may differ, but that's how this kangaroo court adventure is looking from this side of the political fence.
            Last edited by G David Bock; 18 Oct 19, 14:19.
            TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

            Comment


            • #66
              So, Mattis finally hit back with sarcasm after Trump attacked him during the Pelosi Trump meeting

              https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/18/polit...ech/index.html

              Former Secretary of Defense James Mattis on Thursday laughed off the news that President Donald Trump had called him "the world's most overrated general," joking that he's not just an overrated general, but the greatest overrated general.

              "So I would just tell you, I'm honored to be considered that by Donald Trump because he also called Meryl Streep an overrated actress," Mattis said at the annual Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner in New York. "So I guess I'm the Meryl Streep of generals and frankly that sounds pretty good to me."
              "And, you do have to admit, between me and Meryl, at least we've had some victories," he added.

              Trump disparaged Mattis --
              who resigned as defense secretary last year -- during a contentiousWhite House meeting Wednesday with congressional Democratic leaders to discuss Trump's decision to pull US troops from Syria, according to a Democratic source familiar with the meeting.

              Notice that he said " by Donald Trump" instead of " by the president." Ex military professionals know the protocol too well to make such casual mistake.
              And this was followed by the jab against Donald, "between me and Meryl, at least we've had some victories."

              Another sign of Trump's meltdown in the meeting. You do not disparage your former Secretary of Defense in front of Pelosi- your most hated political opponent.
              Last edited by pamak; 18 Oct 19, 13:54.
              My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

              Comment


              • #67
                Regards the thread title and OP, it's more like the Dems and MSM are the ones "losing it":
                ...
                White House acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney told reporters on Thursday that Trump's decision to withhold $391 million in aid to Ukraine was linked to his desire for an investigation by Kiev into a debunked theory that a Democratic National Committee (DNC) computer server was held in Ukraine.

                This sounds more related to the efforts of investigating foreign nation influence in the 2016 elections than going after Biden and son...

                ...
                In a written statement, Mulvaney later accused the media of misconstruing his comments. But his remarks at the White House, made while the president was traveling in Texas, tied action on the DNC server to the decision about the aid.

                "Did he also mention to me ... the corruption related to the DNC server? Absolutely. No question about that. But that's it. And that's why we held up the money," Mulvaney told reporters in the White House briefing room after saying Trump had also been concerned that European nations were not providing lethal aide to Ukraine.

                Later in the day, in an effort at damage control, Mulvaney said the withholding of aid was related strictly to Trump's concerns about corruption and the fact that other nations were not providing financial support to the country.

                "Let me be clear, there was absolutely no quid pro quo between Ukrainian military aid and any investigation into the 2016 election. The president never told me to withhold any money until the Ukrainians did anything related to the server," he said in the written statement released by the White House.
                ...
                https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...z&ocid=msnbcrd

                Sure sounds a bit more confusing and a different "spin" than the one we get from the Dems and MSM ...
                TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

                Comment


                • #68
                  Meanwhile ... Diplomat tells investigators he raised alarms in 2015 about Hunter Biden’s Ukraine work but was rebuffed

                  ...
                  A career State Department official overseeing Ukraine policy told congressional investigators this week that he had raised concerns in early 2015 about then-Vice President Joe Biden’s son serving on the board of a Ukrainian energy company but was turned away by a Biden staffer, according to three people familiar with the testimony.

                  George Kent, a deputy assistant secretary of state, testified Tuesday that he worried that Hunter Biden’s position at the firm Burisma Holdings would complicate efforts by U.S. diplomats to convey to Ukrainian officials the importance of avoiding conflicts of interest, said the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of confidentiality rules surrounding the deposition.

                  Kent said he had concerns that Ukrainian officials would view Hunter Biden as a conduit for currying influence with his father, said the people. But when Kent raised the issue with Biden’s office, he was told the then-vice president didn’t have the “bandwidth” to deal with the issue involving his son as his other son, Beau, was battling cancer, said the people familiar with his testimony.
                  ...
                  Kent, who also testified about how Trump’s associates raised unfounded allegations about the former ambassador to Ukraine, is the first known example of a career diplomat who raised concerns internally in the Obama administration about Hunter Biden’s board position. The Washington Post has previously reported that there had been discussions among Biden’s advisers about whether his son’s Ukraine work would be perceived as a conflict of interest, and that one former adviser had been concerned enough to mention it to Biden, though the conversation was brief.
                  ...
                  https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...z&ocid=msnbcrd

                  Dems can have conflicts of interest and "no problem", but not the same applies to Reps ...
                  TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
                    Meanwhile ... Diplomat tells investigators he raised alarms in 2015 about Hunter Biden’s Ukraine work but was rebuffed

                    ...
                    A career State Department official overseeing Ukraine policy told congressional investigators this week that he had raised concerns in early 2015 about then-Vice President Joe Biden’s son serving on the board of a Ukrainian energy company but was turned away by a Biden staffer, according to three people familiar with the testimony.

                    George Kent, a deputy assistant secretary of state, testified Tuesday that he worried that Hunter Biden’s position at the firm Burisma Holdings would complicate efforts by U.S. diplomats to convey to Ukrainian officials the importance of avoiding conflicts of interest, said the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of confidentiality rules surrounding the deposition.

                    Kent said he had concerns that Ukrainian officials would view Hunter Biden as a conduit for currying influence with his father, said the people. But when Kent raised the issue with Biden’s office, he was told the then-vice president didn’t have the “bandwidth” to deal with the issue involving his son as his other son, Beau, was battling cancer, said the people familiar with his testimony.
                    ...
                    Kent, who also testified about how Trump’s associates raised unfounded allegations about the former ambassador to Ukraine, is the first known example of a career diplomat who raised concerns internally in the Obama administration about Hunter Biden’s board position. The Washington Post has previously reported that there had been discussions among Biden’s advisers about whether his son’s Ukraine work would be perceived as a conflict of interest, and that one former adviser had been concerned enough to mention it to Biden, though the conversation was brief.
                    ...
                    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...z&ocid=msnbcrd

                    Dems can have conflicts of interest and "no problem", but not the same applies to Reps ...
                    That type of concern about conflict of interests is standard in the US political and economic system. The Trump supporters who vote for a president who had business all over the world are the last who should talk about THIS type of conflict of interests concerns. Biden's response in Ukraine shows that he just carried the official US policy and there is no sign that his son position there influenced his stance. This stance is also in agreement with the article which says that " But when Kent raised the issue with Biden’s office, he was told the then-vice president didn’t have the “bandwidth” to deal with the issue involving his son as his other son, Beau, was battling cancer, said the people familiar with his testimony."
                    If anybody wants to have an amendment to support a different political system where people with family business ties abroad are not permitted to run for public office in the federal government, I am all for it! Until then, everybody plays with the same current rules!
                    Last edited by pamak; 18 Oct 19, 15:15.
                    My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by G David Bock View Post

                      Which "Fake News" are you referring to ???
                      (Or is American English not your first language?)

                      Watch Joe Biden Brag About Bribing Ukraine To Fire The Prosecutor Investigating His Son’s Company

                      September 24, 2019 By Erielle Davidson

                      The media has had a field day over new hearsay accusations that President Trump was wrong to ask Ukranian leaders to investigate political corruption related to Joe Biden. Predictably, several House Democrats have used this news cycle to again demand Trump’s impeachment. While the whistleblower complaint is based on hearsay, we do know that Joe Biden, while serving as vice president, pressured the Ukrainian government to fire the prosecutor who was investigating his son’s company.

                      Hunter Biden joined the board of Ukrainian national gas company Burisma in 2014 while his father was managing the United States’ Ukraine policy and despite zero personal experience in the field. At the time Hunter Biden joined its board, Burisma was embroiled in allegations of corruption, allegations serious enough that Ukraine’s prosecutor general launched an investigation into the company.

                      Joe Biden was so proud of his role in the prosecutor’s removal from investigating the company paying his son $50,000 per month merely to serve on its board that he actually bragged about it in a 2018 speech at an event for the publication Foreign Affairs. In this speech, Biden boasts his threat to withhold $1 billion in U.S. loans from Ukraine if they did not agree to fire the prosecutor who happened to be investigating the company giving his son a cushy sinecure.

                      The prosecutor was fired, and the investigation was dropped six months later. While the investigation was just reopened last year, it has been a slow-moving process that has turned up little. At the time Biden pushed for the firing of Viktor Shokin, the prosecutor general, Shokin had plans to question Hunter Biden.
                      ...
                      https://thefederalist.com/2019/09/24...AYDm7UzvhBAyWE
                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~

                      To recap: Joe Biden, at behest allegedly of Obama, 'Obstructed Justice' in the Ukrainian legal/political system by blackmailing the then current national leadership if they didn't fire the prosecutor/investigator and end the investigation of possible corruption in the firm that his son* was a member on the board of. * At a rather exorbitant rate of compensation it would seem, BTW.

                      Trump asked the current Prez of Ukraine to consider re-opening that investigation, as a "favor" (no evidence of conditions/"quid-pro-quo"). No evidence of blatant intimidation of a foreign nation leader such as we saw Joe brag about doing.

                      Meanwhile, "the usual suspects" of the Loonie-Left-Wing, Demon-rats(DNC), looters & freeloaders, and assorted socialists/communists out to 'fundamentally change America' via their presumed dynasty of Obama~Hillary Clinton are now up in arms and all akimbo because their plans have been thwarted, for a few years at least, via Trump and the Conservative patriots whom voted him into office.

                      Like a pack of Captain Queeg's chasing after that missing pint of strawberries,
                      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Caine_Mutiny_(film)
                      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nndGGnOFvMk
                      Trump's detractors have sought any will-o-the-wisp or delusion they can imagine to claim that he's acting "unPresidential" in trying to "find dirt on Biden". Thing is, if there's no "dirt" to be found, than Trump is engaging in another of his alleged follies and one would think his enemies would be glad to see him make a fool of himself, and the Ukraine, having them "pound sand" looking for missing "dirt". Instead, they are acting more as if there is "dirt to be found" and it's "criminal" for Trump to want to see the investigation renewed and with some vigor, to find that "dirt" (note "find", not "make").

                      Once again, smoke-n-mirrors of distraction straight out of Saul Alinsky's manual;
                      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_for_Radicals
                      voicing faux outrage that anyone would try to expose the corruption of our Left Wing("enemies ... domestic"), and the crimes of their previous POTUS and/or intended next one.

                      Of course, your mileage may differ, but that's how this kangaroo court adventure is looking from this side of the political fence.
                      I was talking in reference to the biden deal.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by G David Bock View Post

                        Have you found anything in the Constitution that says it wouldn't?
                        yep oversight from congress

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          No. He's more popular than ever. 12% of the people at his Dallas rally haven't voted in 16 years, and they plan on voting for Trump.

                          Twitter is a generational thing. It may seem immature to older heads, but it's used widely by all classes of younger folks. It's a great way for getting your message across while bypassing the MSM, which wants to lie lie lie and harass Trump out of office. They're failing big league.
                          "It is a fine fox chase, my boys"

                          "It is well that war is so terrible-we would grow too fond of it"

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Isn't this supposed to mean Trump ever had something to loose?

                            Pruitt
                            Pruitt, you are truly an expert! Kelt06

                            Have you been struck by the jawbone of an ASS lately?

                            by Khepesh "This is the logic of Pruitt"

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              From a view from the outside of US domestic policies both the Bidens and the Clintons are completely peripheral displacement activity. It's by now geological layers of complete pointlessness cluttering the US political landscape.

                              But it keeps the US from scrutinizing the US situation as foreign policy actor for real, and presumably that is the point.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by craven View Post

                                yep oversight from congress
                                How about something more exact and specific, since there is no wording of this sort in the Constitution.
                                Maybe something you found in Article. I. ???
                                TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X