Jimmy Valentine said:

---

Private citizens go through our regular justice system, Presidents face impeachment

---

Joe Biden was a Vice President when most of this was going down. He would need to go through impeachment, not the regular justice system. But, nothing happened. The FBI did not initiate an investigation.

If Schiff hadn't put his nose into this Ukraine business, nothing would have gone down either. They tried going through the traditional whistleblower route with the FBI, and the FBI shut it down as a politically motivated attack. The impeachment proceedings only got off the ground due to the pressure by Schiff.

So, again, why is it not OK for the POTUS to put pressure on trying to aid a corruption investigation, but it is OK for a member of the House of Representatives?

The reality is, there is no good answer there. Since there is no good answer there, I will revert to the previous question:

If a politician has credible information that a member of the other party that you are running against is involved in international corruption, and that politician asks foreign entities for help to gather information to look into that corruption, is that an impeachable offense?

Why would you impeach a former VP when he could be charged criminally for his alleged crime?

Yes i have a job

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

Why would you impeach a former VP when he could be charged criminally for his alleged crime?

---

Ok, let me ask it slightly differently, since you missed my point:

If a politician has credible information that a member of the other party that you are running against, who is a private citizen, is involved in international corruption, and that politician asks foreign entities for help to gather information to look into that corruption, is that an impeachable offense?

BusterAg said:

---

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

Why would you impeach a former VP when he could be charged criminally for his alleged crime?

---

Ok, let me ask it slightly differently, since you missed my point:

If a politician has credible information that a member of the other party that you are running against, who is a private citizen, is involved in international corruption, and that politician asks foreign entities for help to gather information to look into that corruption, is that an impeachable offense?

---

Don't forget he's obligated to ask - by treaty and law regarding foreign aid

According to the FEC that politician should immediately contact the FBI.

K188Ag said:

---

MetoliusAg said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

No, a President cannot abuse their power to force a foreign government to fabricate charges against a political opponent. That is not what happened here.

---

---

But it did happen in 2016 under Obama and in Ukraine.

ETA: The so-called "black ledger" against Manafort was likely forged pursuant to the DNC's and State Department's request.

---

link, please.

---

Its a pretty easy search:

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/449206-fbi-warned-early-and-often-that-manafort-file-might-be-fake-used-it-anyway

https://www.wnd.com/2019/06/fbi-was-warned-manafort-evidence-probably-fake/

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/04/hammer-about-to-drop-on-slimy-alexandra-chalupa-hoaxer-behind-fake-russia-narrative-and-key-promoter-of-dnc-resist-trump-rallies-outside-white-house/

---

Unless it's mother Jones or msnbc, he's going to reply that those are "fake news".

Bill Clinton is calling on line 1... Obama on line 2 ...

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

According to the FEC that politician should immediately contact the FBI.

---

There was no contribution. HTH

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

According to the FEC that politician should immediately contact the FBI.

---

Please go look up the legal definition of "anything of value".


Foreign influence on elections has been ever present. Especially when that "influence" is telling us information about our elected officials. The public has a right to know what other countries think about our policy and policy makers.


If a country commits crimes to gather, distribute, or amplify their information. Throw them in jail. You are acting hysterically to claim anything that happened in 2016 or today is truly concerning.

hbtheduce said:

---

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

According to the FEC that politician should immediately contact the FBI.

---

Please go look up the legal definition of "anything of value".


Foreign influence on elections has been ever present. Especially when that "influence" is telling us information about our elected officials. The public has a right to know what other countries think about our policy and policy makers.


If a country commits crimes to gather, distribute, or amplify their information. Throw them in jail. You are acting hysterically to claim anything that happened in 2016 or today is truly concerning.

---

I disagree. At Prof. Turley's testimony for President Clinton's impeachment he had a great analogy that I'll use here.

Quote:

---

"Executive power exhibits the same physical properties as a gas in a confined space. When you expand the space the gas will fill the space. You should not be misled. Your decision will define executive power and authority. If you decide certain acts do not rise to impeachable offenses, you will expand the space for conduct and we will have to live with that expansion. And we will have to live with that expansion."

---

I see a great danger in setting a precedent that Trump's actions are fair game. It will be abused and likely by someone that you won't like.

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

Private citizens go through our regular justice system, Presidents face impeachment

---

Private citizens are allowed due process. Presidents face impeachment via arbitrary rules concocted by the majority party in the house that is butthurt over losing the election. HTH

captkirk said:

---

I see great danger in the precedence of ignoring open, in your face political corruption because it was committed by a Dem

---

I've never said we should ignore it. I think it should be investigated by the FBI.

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

I see a great danger in setting a precedent that Trump's actions are fair game. It will be abused and likely by someone that you won't like.

---

The issue is that your argument, as well as that of Liberals, is based on a fallacy. Trump's actions were addressing criminal acts in the past, not an attempt to influence an election in the future.

The fact that opposition politicians (as well as likely friendlies) is a byproduct that cannot be ignore simply because they may run against the President in a future election.

Unfortunately it can't be accepted as it implodes the entire narrative.

aggiehawg said:

---

Wait! We are back to campaign finance violations now? If people like us on Forum 16 who are closely following this can't keep track of what Trump's supposed impeachable offense du jour, how in the hell are the average Americans going to understand why he needs to be impeached, much less removed from office?

The Dems are doing a terrible job of formulating a narrative and sticking to it.

---

Good Lord! I was responding to BusterAg's hypothetical question to me!

1872walker said:

---

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

I see a great danger in setting a precedent that Trump's actions are fair game. It will be abused and likely by someone that you won't like.

---

The issue is that your argument, as well as that of Liberals, is based on a fallacy. Trump's actions were addressing criminal acts in the past, not an attempt to influence an election in the future.

The fact that opposition politicians (as well as likely friendlies) is a byproduct that cannot be ignore simply because they may run against the President in a future election.

Unfortunately it can't be accepted as it implodes the entire narrative.

---

Understood, I disagree.

They are just grasping at straws... The paper kind.

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

captkirk said:

---

I see great danger in the precedence of ignoring open, in your face political corruption because it was committed by a Dem

---

I've never said we should ignore it. I think it should be investigated by the FBI.

---

In conjunction with Ukrainian authorities since they have access to relevant and material information.

See how that works??

hbtheduce said:

---

Then write a law limiting the power of the president on criminal investigations in other countries. Rewrite the law on the military aid making it fund immediately after DOD approval, don't give a arbitrary deadline.

Impeachment is hardly the only tool available.


Edit: Also I also think it would be crazy to make you immune from investigation by running for president. But that is what your standard suggests.

---

The fact that President Trump and most Republicans won't even acknowledge that anything wrong occurred rules this out for me.

Even Prof. Turley said in his testimony that his call was far from perfect.

Think if that had been the framing for the past several months.


"Trump has been conducting foreign policy in a way that congress doesn't agree with, we are going to hold an investigation to see what laws we should change to better reign in his power and prevent "targeting of political opponents"".

Dems would sound sane, reasonable and Trump might actually look bad. But sadly libs have gone insane.

aggiehawg said:

---

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

captkirk said:

---

I see great danger in the precedence of ignoring open, in your face political corruption because it was committed by a Dem

---

I've never said we should ignore it. I think it should be investigated by the FBI.

---

In conjunction with Ukrainian authorities since they have access to relevant and material information.

See how that works??

---

Yep, fine with that.

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

hbtheduce said:

---

Then write a law limiting the power of the president on criminal investigations in other countries. Rewrite the law on the military aid making it fund immediately after DOD approval, don't give a arbitrary deadline.

Impeachment is hardly the only tool available.


Edit: Also I also think it would be crazy to make you immune from investigation by running for president. But that is what your standard suggests.

---

The fact that President Trump and most Republicans won't even acknowledge that anything wrong occurred rules this out for me.

Even Prof. Turley said in his testimony that his call was far from perfect.

---

Nothing wrong occurred. In fact, he did his job (perfectly, I might add).

Pinche Abogado said:

---

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

hbtheduce said:

---

Then write a law limiting the power of the president on criminal investigations in other countries. Rewrite the law on the military aid making it fund immediately after DOD approval, don't give a arbitrary deadline.

Impeachment is hardly the only tool available.


Edit: Also I also think it would be crazy to make you immune from investigation by running for president. But that is what your standard suggests.

---

The fact that President Trump and most Republicans won't even acknowledge that anything wrong occurred rules this out for me.

Even Prof. Turley said in his testimony that his call was far from perfect.

---

Nothing wrong occurred. In fact, he did his job (perfectly, I might add).

---

So Prof. Turley was incorrect?

MOCO9 said:

---

Soooo let me get this straight. You can engage in corrupt behavior and as long as you run for President you can't be investigated for it because, ya know, political opponent and all that...

---

No, see above.

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

1872walker said:

---

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

I see a great danger in setting a precedent that Trump's actions are fair game. It will be abused and likely by someone that you won't like.

---

The issue is that your argument, as well as that of Liberals, is based on a fallacy. Trump's actions were addressing criminal acts in the past, not an attempt to influence an election in the future.

The fact that opposition politicians (as well as likely friendlies) is a byproduct that cannot be ignore simply because they may run against the President in a future election.

Unfortunately it can't be accepted as it implodes the entire narrative.

---

Understood, I disagree.

---

So you contend that Trump's motivation was to dig up dirt on a person who may or may not be one of the dozen of candidates of an opposing party who may be nominated to run against him?

1872walker said:

---

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

1872walker said:

---

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

I see a great danger in setting a precedent that Trump's actions are fair game. It will be abused and likely by someone that you won't like.

---

The issue is that your argument, as well as that of Liberals, is based on a fallacy. Trump's actions were addressing criminal acts in the past, not an attempt to influence an election in the future.

The fact that opposition politicians (as well as likely friendlies) is a byproduct that cannot be ignore simply because they may run against the President in a future election.

Unfortunately it can't be accepted as it implodes the entire narrative.

---

Understood, I disagree.

---

So you contend that Trump's motivation was to dig up dirt on a person who may or may not be one of the dozen of candidates of an opposing party who may be nominated to run against him?

---

Yes, that is what I believe.

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

hbtheduce said:

---

Then write a law limiting the power of the president on criminal investigations in other countries. Rewrite the law on the military aid making it fund immediately after DOD approval, don't give a arbitrary deadline.

Impeachment is hardly the only tool available.


Edit: Also I also think it would be crazy to make you immune from investigation by running for president. But that is what your standard suggests.

---

The fact that President Trump and most Republicans won't even acknowledge that anything wrong occurred rules this out for me.

Even Prof. Turley said in his testimony that his call was far from perfect.

---

"Wrong" is an opinion on policy. Its like pulling teeth to get you libs to confess that nothing CRIMINAL happened. Criminality is the BEST (and only) standard for impeachment.

I've provided several other options that don't rip away the election choice of millions of Americans. All this blathering about "open and free elections" during a process designed to overturn the last election and change the choice for the next is the highest form of hypocrisy.

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

1872walker said:

---

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

1872walker said:

---

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

I see a great danger in setting a precedent that Trump's actions are fair game. It will be abused and likely by someone that you won't like.

---

The issue is that your argument, as well as that of Liberals, is based on a fallacy. Trump's actions were addressing criminal acts in the past, not an attempt to influence an election in the future.

The fact that opposition politicians (as well as likely friendlies) is a byproduct that cannot be ignore simply because they may run against the President in a future election.

Unfortunately it can't be accepted as it implodes the entire narrative.

---

Understood, I disagree.

---

So you contend that Trump's motivation was to dig up dirt on a person who may or may not be one of the dozen of candidates of an opposing party who may be nominated to run against him?

---

Yes, that is what I vin believe.

---

And that the DOJ should be the only ones to initiate an investigation? What if the DOJ is corrupted?