Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"I want nothing. I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo."

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

  • pamak
    replied
    Originally posted by American87 View Post

    Actually, Trump's words were, "I want nothing. I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo."
    when he was caught.. So, this piece of evidence does not change the inferences one can have from Trump's "talk to Rudy" words and from Rudy's conduct.

    Leave a comment:


  • American87
    replied
    Originally posted by pamak View Post

    Even the smoking gun evidence requires inferences. which is the correct term instead of the term "presumption" you mentioned. We also have Trump's and Giuliani's words which certainly are not hearsay. ("I need a favor though") and a background context that was explained in all the previous posts.


    Trump WILL be impeached! Get used to the idea...
    Actually, Trump's words were, "I want nothing. I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo."

    Leave a comment:


  • pamak
    replied
    Originally posted by ljadw View Post

    You mean : he was in charge of the illegal affairs of Burisma ?
    Hunter was not lobbying . Joe was lobbying . No sane person ,and no intelligent Ukrainian would pay a loser as Hunter $ millions, unless he was the son of Joe .
    The son of a VP is not a private person : private persons do not go to China using Air Force 2 .
    In 2006 Hunter was appointed by young Bush at the Board of Administration of Amtrack, because his father was a powerful senator .Not because Hunter was a private person .
    This is speculation. Lawyers usually engage with companies which are under investigation.
    You do not know what Hunter did. What you DO know though is that at the time,nobody made accusations against Biden, not even the republicans. They remembered Hunter only later as Trump was preparing the ground for the 2020 election. Also, at the time when Joe was involved there was not any active investigation of Burisma.

    The son of a VP is as much a private person as the son of Trump who run his personal business while his father is a president. Selective application of a prosecutor's suspicions regarding the potential opportunity for fraud as a result of somebody's political connections does not cut it! Feel free to change the current laws if you do not like the current system.
    Last edited by pamak; 24 Nov 19, 14:38.

    Leave a comment:


  • ljadw
    replied
    Originally posted by pamak View Post

    The son of the VP is a private person with the same legal rights as any other, including former lawmakers who become CEOs and offer their services to different companies after they leave politics So, if Biden wants to take a seat in an international corporation this conduct should not trigger any government investigation by itself. And if somehow someone finds additional evidence of conduct that raises suspicion of Hunter participating in a fraud, then this is an issue of the DOJ and not of Trump's personal lawyer. Quid Pro Quo in getting payed for lobbying is the standard practice in the US. Also, you make assumptions because Biden is a lawyer and in fact the Burisma announcement for his hiring mentioned that he was also in charge of the legal affairs.
    You mean : he was in charge of the illegal affairs of Burisma ?
    Hunter was not lobbying . Joe was lobbying . No sane person ,and no intelligent Ukrainian would pay a loser as Hunter $ millions, unless he was the son of Joe .
    The son of a VP is not a private person : private persons do not go to China using Air Force 2 .
    In 2006 Hunter was appointed by young Bush at the Board of Administration of Amtrack, because his father was a powerful senator .Not because Hunter was a private person .

    Leave a comment:


  • pamak
    replied
    Originally posted by ljadw View Post
    Hunter Biden was not a private person: he was the son of the vicepresident ,and was not hired because of his knowledge ( he was a loser ) but because he was the son of the vicepresident .Why did Hunter receive $ millions ? Because he was the son of Joe and because Joe would do something in return for Burisma .
    This is also called : a quid pro quo .
    The son of the VP is a private person with the same legal rights as any other, including former lawmakers who become CEOs and offer their services to different companies after they leave politics or children of the current president who engage in business deals for their personal business while their father is the POTUS. So, if Biden wants to take a seat in an international corporation this conduct should not trigger any government investigation by itself. And if somehow someone finds additional evidence of conduct that raises suspicion of Hunter participating in a fraud, then this is an issue of the DOJ and not of Trump's personal lawyer.

    Quid Pro Quo in getting payed for lobbying is the standard practice in the US and it is legal. Also, you make assumptions because Biden is a lawyer and in fact the Burisma announcement for his hiring mentioned that he was also in charge of the legal affairs.And offering legal expertise for a price is also a legitimate "quid pro Quo" On the other hand, the federal law is clear that a quid pro quo in which an official act of an elected US politician is affected by a thing of value that he seeks from another party is a quid pro quo with corrupt intend and illegal
    Last edited by pamak; 24 Nov 19, 14:24.

    Leave a comment:


  • pamak
    replied
    Originally posted by ljadw View Post

    Burisma was in very big troubles, its CEO had left for Russia,to survive ,it hired an American, not coincidentally the son of the man who in reality was the viceroy of Ukraine . If Hunter was not the son of Joe, he would not receive $ millions .
    Do not conflate the investigation of the owner for things he may have done wayyy before Hunter got the seat in the board of directors with the investigation of the company itself. The legal team for the owner who defended him was different from the legal team of the company.

    Leave a comment:


  • ljadw
    replied
    Originally posted by pamak View Post

    Apparent conflict of interest exists everywhere from lobbyists meeting with lawmakers who legislate laws that affect the industry to the appointment of ex coal industry CEOs in the EPA to having candidates like Trump having businesses abroad. As I said, if one wants to question every aspect of the current economic system in the US, then there is no problem with investigating Hunter too. But be selectively sensitive to apparent conflict of interest does not cut it.

    You do not now what Burisma wanted and more importantly, it does not matter what Burisma wanted. What matters is Hunter's conduct and if it goes beyond the usual one we see from every CEO in the business. Guess why the defense industry gets former generals in their board of directors or why industry in general get retired politicians. They want to increase the company's prestige and access to government in order to get more contracts. And they pay handsome money for such lobbying service.
    Burisma was in very big troubles, its CEO had left for Russia,to survive ,it hired an American, not coincidentally the son of the man who in reality was the viceroy of Ukraine . If Hunter was not the son of Joe, he would not receive $ millions .

    Leave a comment:


  • ljadw
    replied
    Hunter Biden was not a private person: he was the son of the vicepresident ,and was not hired because of his knowledge ( he was a loser ) but because he was the son of the vicepresident .Why did Hunter receive $ millions ? Because he was the son of Joe and because Joe would do something in return for Burisma .
    This is also called : a quid pro quo .

    Leave a comment:


  • pamak
    replied
    Originally posted by ljadw View Post

    Marc Thiessen,the man who wrote in the WAPO that the Bidens were guilty of malfeasance,is a never Trumper and an enemy of Trump. Trump replied by a tweet to his attacks .Thus do not say that the WAPO is tolerant and accepts the opinions of non leftists .
    And Thiessen was hired by the WAPO because he is an enemy of Trump .
    Thus we have an enemy of Trump ( conservatives who attack Trump ,finish as liberals ) who said that the Bidens are criminals .
    Joe, vicepresident ,and Hunter, a loser were working simultaneously in Ukraine .
    Joe to fight against corruption ( officialy ) and to promote the interests of his boss,Hunter, in fact did not work, the news that he was paid by Burisma was sufficient.The reality is that Burisma hired Joe .
    What would have been the reaction of Amanpour, and the otherat the following scenario in 2001 ?
    Exxon is in difficulties ( bribe money to the Swamp,tax evasion,and other small things ) and is investigated . Suddenly,the daughter of Cheney is hired by Exxon for $ 200000 a month and ...the investigation is stopped and the prosecutor is fired .
    I know some people who would talk of impeachment .
    This scenario happened a few years ago in Ukraine .And,there is an impeachment going on of the man who made it public and wants to investigate it .
    Marc Thiessen does not have any evidence to suggest what he wrote and has not testified under oath. If she has any evidence of such crime, she could have talked to Trump and the DOJ. The fact that Trump made sure that th DOJ was no part of the discussion is a clear indication that it was realized that they did not have any legal basis to ask for a criminal investigation.

    Hunter is a lawyer and Burisma hired him as a CEO and head of the legal affairs. Lawyers usually offer service to companies in trouble and we do not start criminal investigations for people who offer such service JUST because they were hired by a company.

    Also, there as not any active investigation of Burisma when Joe Biden was appointed by Obama as the point man for executing the US policy in Ukraine. Moreover, Ukraine had a history of corrupt politicians and prosecutors who often acted as crooks extorting companies with the threat of investigations in exchange of getting briberies.

    Leave a comment:


  • pamak
    replied
    Originally posted by ljadw View Post

    Yoshiko Herrera,the usual leftists and anti Russian professor from Madison University,said in the WAPO that the hiring of Biden was a conflict of interests.And the quote of the NYT about the hiring of Biden has been taken over by a lot of leftists media : Business Insider,WSJ,Axios,...
    And Biden did not offer his services to Burisma. He even ignored the existence of Burisma . Burisma wanted Biden because his father was vicepresident, in fact Burisma hired thhe vicepresident in function of the US .and it was willing to pay the price.And the price was $ millions.For this price, they could buy all Democrats, except Hillary ,who asked $ billions .
    Apparent conflict of interest exists everywhere from lobbyists meeting with lawmakers who legislate laws that affect the industry to the appointment of ex coal industry CEOs in the EPA to having candidates like Trump having businesses abroad. As I said, if one wants to question every aspect of the current economic system in the US, then there is no problem with investigating Hunter too. But be selectively sensitive to apparent conflict of interest does not cut it.

    You do not now what Burisma wanted and more importantly, it does not matter what Burisma wanted. What matters is Hunter's conduct and if it goes beyond the usual one we see from every CEO in the business. Guess why the defense industry gets former generals in their board of directors or why industry in general get retired politicians. They want to increase the company's prestige and access to government in order to get more contracts. And they pay handsome money for such lobbying service.

    Leave a comment:


  • ljadw
    replied
    Originally posted by pamak View Post

    As I said it is the totality of the evidence which reveal the quid pro quo and I did give in the previous post Sondland's testimony about the presence of such quid pro quo. And no, Sondland is not a second hand source. He was directly involved in the negotiations and spoke with Guiliani after the president told him to "talk to Rudy."

    Sorry, but it is your claim that this Eric Ciaramella was the whistleblower.

    Your opinion is weak when you cannot back it up with reasoning. I explained that Hunter was a CEO and a lawyer who was a member of the board of directors and in charge of the legal affairs. If his position and link to the Vice President is enough to establish a reasonable suspicion that can trigger a government investigation then all lobbyists in the US should be investigated for the contracts their companies get together with the lawmakers who are linked to them. You still have failed to provide what makes Biden son's activity rise above the usual business in our current capitalist system


    Yes, foreign aid was also tied to the investigations. Sondland simpy testified that he was not aware of that link. He did not say that he knew that such link did not exist. it makes zero sense to expect that Trump would have openly told Sondland or other diplomats to propose an illegal offer of getting dirt in exchange of military aid. But people can still see the link when without reason such military aid is frozen at the time when Ukrainians were told to investigate the Bidens and nobody could inform even the Pentagon about the reasons for such freeze. This is why I mentioned that the law against bribery covers BOTH direct and indirect soliciting of a bribe.
    Marc Thiessen,the man who wrote in the WAPO that the Bidens were guilty of malfeasance,is a never Trumper and an enemy of Trump. Trump replied by a tweet to his attacks .Thus do not say that the WAPO is tolerant and accepts the opinions of non leftists .
    And Thiessen was hired by the WAPO because he is an enemy of Trump .
    Thus we have an enemy of Trump ( conservatives who attack Trump ,finish as liberals ) who said that the Bidens are criminals .
    Joe, vicepresident ,and Hunter, a loser were working simultaneously in Ukraine .
    Joe to fight against corruption ( officialy ) and to promote the interests of his boss,Hunter, in fact did not work, the news that he was paid by Burisma was sufficient.The reality is that Burisma hired Joe .
    What would have been the reaction of Amanpour, and the otherat the following scenario in 2001 ?
    Exxon is in difficulties ( bribe money to the Swamp,tax evasion,and other small things ) and is investigated . Suddenly,the daughter of Cheney is hired by Exxon for $ 200000 a month and ...the investigation is stopped and the prosecutor is fired .
    I know some people who would talk of impeachment .
    This scenario happened a few years ago in Ukraine .And,there is an impeachment going on of the man who made it public and wants to investigate it .
    Last edited by ljadw; 24 Nov 19, 05:44.

    Leave a comment:


  • ljadw
    replied
    Originally posted by pamak View Post

    Of course there is evidence of quid pro quo. As I said, the totality of evidence provides this qpq.

    Burisma was investigated and Hunter was also the head of the legal affairs. Lawyers offer their services to companies who need them. Such behavior does not trigger an FBI investigation. Nor is there any reason to have a public announcement of such specific investigation.

    All these testimonies provide the link of QPQ together with the transcripts and the highly unusual situation of having a personal lawyer working against the established policies as they were understood by the diplomats and the Pentagon at the time. When Trump says "I want a favor though" immediately after Zelensky started talking about the military equipment that can help Ukraine and when the military aid is frozen at a time when Ukrainians were told to investigate Biden, and when the Pentagon or the diplomats are not offered any explanation that can justify the freezing, there is only one reasonable explanation that can explain all these events together. The same is true with Burisma and Biden.

    Yoshiko Herrera,the usual leftists and anti Russian professor from Madison University,said in the WAPO that the hiring of Biden was a conflict of interests.And the quote of the NYT about the hiring of Biden has been taken over by a lot of leftists media : Business Insider,WSJ,Axios,...
    And Biden did not offer his services to Burisma. He even ignored the existence of Burisma . Burisma wanted Biden because his father was vicepresident, in fact Burisma hired thhe vicepresident in function of the US .and it was willing to pay the price.And the price was $ millions.For this price, they could buy all Democrats, except Hillary ,who asked $ billions .

    Leave a comment:


  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    Originally posted by pamak View Post

    Even the smoking gun evidence requires inferences. which is the correct term instead of the term "presumption" you mentioned. We also have Trump's and Giuliani's words which certainly are not hearsay. ("I need a favor though") and a background context that was explained in all the previous posts.


    Trump WILL be impeached! Get used to the idea...
    And, it will cost the Democrats the 2020 election. Get used to the idea...

    Leave a comment:


  • pamak
    replied
    Originally posted by Nichols View Post

    Of course you won't because there is no evidence of quid pro quo. If there was you leftist would have impeached the president.

    You have no "relevant posts" you are pushing hearsay and presumptions.
    Even the smoking gun evidence requires inferences. which is the correct term instead of the term "presumption" you mentioned. We also have Trump's and Giuliani's words which certainly are not hearsay. ("I need a favor though") and a background context that was explained in all the previous posts.


    Trump WILL be impeached! Get used to the idea...

    Leave a comment:


  • Nichols
    replied
    Originally posted by pamak View Post

    I am not into repeating all the relevant posts I wrote in this thread.
    Of course you won't because there is no evidence of quid pro quo. If there was you leftist would have impeached the president.

    You have no "relevant posts" you are pushing hearsay and presumptions.

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X