hbtheduce 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.

---

"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.

---

Option 1: Pass a law limiting the power of the president... - Not going to happen. McConnell won't even pass election security.

Option 2: Censure - Republicans and most people on this board won't admit that the President did ANYTHING wrong.

Option 3: Let the 2020 election sort it out - President Trump's behavior in question has a DIRECT effect on the 2020 election.

We are now worried about a president and foreigners having an impact on an election?

tsuag10 said:

---

---

He is getting all of this information directly from The Party of Regions, which is a pro-Russian party in Ukraine that advocates for Ukraine to be reintegrated into Russia.

backintexas2013 said:

---

We are now worried about a president and foreigners having an impact on an election?

---

Now? That is a very large part of what this entire thing is about.

And you were so concerned with this in the past?

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

hbtheduce 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.

---

"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.

---

Option 1: Pass a law limiting the power of the president... - Not going to happen. McConnell won't even pass election security.

Option 2: Censure - Republicans and most people on this board won't admit that the President did ANYTHING wrong.

Option 3: Let the 2020 election sort it out - President Trump's behavior in question has a DIRECT effect on the 2020 election.

---

Option 4: Jimmy Valentine for President in 2020 because he has all of the answers!

Quote:

---

McConnell won't even pass election security.

---

What the heck is "election security."

Shouldn't we be focused on passing "eliminate world hunger" and "cure all the diseases" first?

backintexas2013 said:

---

And you were so concerned with this in the past?

---

My interest in politics has ebbed and flowed over the years. I lost a lot of interest towards the end of the Obama years.

I think that whatever comes from Horowitz or Durham's investigations everyone involved should be charged accordingly. I assume that is what you are getting at.

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

hbtheduce 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.

---

"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.

---

Option 1: Pass a law limiting the power of the president... - Not going to happen. McConnell won't even pass election security.

Option 2: Censure - Republicans and most people on this board won't admit that the President did ANYTHING wrong.

Option 3: Let the 2020 election sort it out - President Trump's behavior in question has a DIRECT effect on the 2020 election.

---

Option 1: Then maybe there isn't clear consensus that the President shouldn't be able to pressure countries to investigate or not investigate certain crimes. Because both sides like that power when they hold the office.


Option 2: Yes because the new standards you propose make any politician immune from investigation. Because at the end of the day, if Joe Biden isn't "running for president", your entire case falls apart.


Option 3: I thought we were all for free and open elections. We have the right to vote for a president who has done nothing criminal, and its also in the interest of the united states to know that Joe Biden's son took millions of dollars from a corrupt company. Its also good that we know Trump wanted it investigated. How does this not create a clear open picture for both candidates?

It also assumes that Biden would be the nominee.

Sims said:

---

Quote:

---

McConnell won't even pass election security.

---

What the heck is "election security."

Shouldn't we be focused on passing "eliminate world hunger" and "cure all the diseases" first?

---

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/1540/text

I guess I really should put that I'm not a liberal in my signature.

Trump asked him to work with DOJ. Did you forget that part?

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

tsuag10 said:

---

---

He is getting all of this information directly from The Party of Regions, which is a pro-Russian party in Ukraine that advocates for Ukraine to be reintegrated into Russia.

---

Let's have an investigation then to make sure. I'm sure you are in board with that.

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

He is getting all of this information directly from The Party of Regions, which is a pro-Russian party in Ukraine that advocates for Ukraine to be reintegrated into Russia.

---

Do you have any evidence of this claim other than The Moscow Project, or another anti-Trump propaganda outlet?

Also, does the source of the information Rudy has make it less true?

I'm not saying I 100% believe everything Rudy is saying right now. I'm saying I don't think any of us have any evidence to disbelieve him, so we should probably see how this all plays out.

hbtheduce said:

---

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

hbtheduce 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.

---

"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.

---

Option 1: Pass a law limiting the power of the president... - Not going to happen. McConnell won't even pass election security.

Option 2: Censure - Republicans and most people on this board won't admit that the President did ANYTHING wrong.

Option 3: Let the 2020 election sort it out - President Trump's behavior in question has a DIRECT effect on the 2020 election.

---

Option 1: Then maybe there isn't clear consensus that the President shouldn't be able to pressure countries to investigate or not investigate certain crimes. Because both sides like that power when they hold the office.


Option 2: Yes because the new standards you propose make any politician immune from investigation. Because at the end of the day, if Joe Biden isn't "running for president", your entire case falls apart.


Option 3: I thought we were all for free and open elections. We have the right to vote for a president who has done nothing criminal, and its also in the interest of the united states to know that Joe Biden's son took millions of dollars from a corrupt company. Its also good that we know Trump wanted it investigated. How does this not create a clear open picture for both candidates?

It also assumes that Biden would be the nominee.

---

Option 1: Both sides also hate that power when used against them.

Option 2: I"VE NEVER SAID JOE BIDEN SHOULDN'T BE INVESTIGATED

Option 3: Joe Biden or his son has not been charged with anything. Trump's accusations of him, if false, have a great impact on the 2020 election.

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

I think that whatever comes from Horowitz or Durham's investigations everyone involved should be charged accordingly.

---

Best thing you've said all day.

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.

---

The only thing that I bristled at was (if this happened) the request for an announcement that the investigation is being started.

On the one hand, I can see where you want the Ukraine to commit to fighting corruption publicly. On the other hand, this is a bridge too far. Unethical in my opinion. But, not anywhere near an impeachable offense, either.

But, that request did not happen on that call. Nor is it clear that the request came from Trump.

Everything else is Trump just doing his job. Rooting out corruption is what he was elected to do.

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

hbtheduce said:

---

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

hbtheduce 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.

---

"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.

---

Option 1: Pass a law limiting the power of the president... - Not going to happen. McConnell won't even pass election security.

Option 2: Censure - Republicans and most people on this board won't admit that the President did ANYTHING wrong.

Option 3: Let the 2020 election sort it out - President Trump's behavior in question has a DIRECT effect on the 2020 election.

---

Option 1: Then maybe there isn't clear consensus that the President shouldn't be able to pressure countries to investigate or not investigate certain crimes. Because both sides like that power when they hold the office.


Option 2: Yes because the new standards you propose make any politician immune from investigation. Because at the end of the day, if Joe Biden isn't "running for president", your entire case falls apart.


Option 3: I thought we were all for free and open elections. We have the right to vote for a president who has done nothing criminal, and its also in the interest of the united states to know that Joe Biden's son took millions of dollars from a corrupt company. Its also good that we know Trump wanted it investigated. How does this not create a clear open picture for both candidates?

It also assumes that Biden would be the nominee.

---

Option 1: Both sides also hate that power when used against them.

Option 2: I"VE NEVER SAID JOE BIDEN SHOULDN'T BE INVESTIGATED

Option 3: Joe Biden or his son has not been charged with anything. Trump's accusations of him, if false, have a great impact on the 2020 election.

---

Option 1: So you agree that this is just a political power game, not a "somber removal of an out of control president"

Option 2: An investigation in Ukraine strengthens a DOJ investigation.

Option 3: Trump has never accused him of anything, he said that the payments to his son look fishy, and that others around him said firing shokin looked fishy. Therefore Ukraine should investigate in this new regime is "tough on corruption".

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

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

---

How about the Attorney General? Wouldn't he know the proper way to route the information?

BusterAg 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.

---

The only thing that I bristled at was (if this happened) the request for an announcement that the investigation is being started.

On the one hand, I can see where you want the Ukraine to commit to fighting corruption publicly. On the other hand, this is a bridge too far. Unethical in my opinion. But, not anywhere near an impeachable offense, either.

But, that request did not happen on that call. Nor is it clear that the request came from Trump.

Everything else is Trump just doing his job. Rooting out corruption is what he was elected to do.

---

If this were being handled in a court of law, I would agree with you that the evidence does not meet the standard of being criminal, however I view the amount of evidence (the call, the testimony, Trump's tweets, everything) and I think he did what he is being accused of. It's like an OJ Simpson situation to me. Yeah, the glove doesn't fit, but he did that *****

BusterAg said:

---

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

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

---

How about the Attorney General? Wouldn't he know the proper way to route the information?

---

Yes, and just like how AG Sessions and AG Lynch recused themselves from very sensitive investigations, I would expect Barr to do the same in an investigation of Joe Biden.

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

Option 2: Censure - Republicans and most people on this board won't admit that the President did ANYTHING wrong.

---

What did Trump do that was illegal or violated the Constitution? Please provide evidence.

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

Option 3: Let the 2020 election sort it out - President Trump's behavior in question has a DIRECT effect on the 2020 election.

---

That's really what this is all about. Democrats can't field a candidate who has any semblance of a chance or beating Trump, so they want to cast aspersions on him in hopes that it will have a direct effect on the 2020 election.

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

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

---

How about the Attorney General? Wouldn't he know the proper way to route the information?

---

Yes, and just like how AG Sessions and AG Lynch recused themselves from very sensitive investigations, I would expect Barr to do the same in an investigation of Joe Biden.

---

Sessions didn't recuse himself because it was sensitive. Had he not been part of the Trump campaign, he would have been fully involved.

tsuag10 said:

---

---

POTD

FriscoKid said:

---

tsuag10 said:

---

---

POTD

---

Yep. Never interrupt an enemy when he is destroying himself.

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

Option 3: Joe Biden or his son has not been charged with anything. Trump's accusations of him, if false, have a great impact on the 2020 election.

---

You have to have an investigation before you can make determine guilt or innocence. (Congressional Democrats should take note of this).

Your claim that a President should not investigate possible criminality and especially actions that are in direct conflict with the interests of the United States because it could possibly have a negative effect on the suspect is ludicrous.

1872walker said:

---

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

Option 2: Censure - Republicans and most people on this board won't admit that the President did ANYTHING wrong.

---

What did Trump do that was illegal or violated the Constitution? Please provide evidence.

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

Option 3: Let the 2020 election sort it out - President Trump's behavior in question has a DIRECT effect on the 2020 election.

---

That's really what this is all about. Democrats can't field a candidate who has any semblance of a chance or beating Trump, so they want to cast aspersions on him in hopes that it will have a direct effect on the 2020 election.

---

Not for me. I don't want any of the Democrat candidates or Trump to be our president in 2020. The only way for that to happen is for him to resign, not run in 2020, or impeachment.

1872walker said:

---

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

Option 3: Joe Biden or his son has not been charged with anything. Trump's accusations of him, if false, have a great impact on the 2020 election.

---

You have to have an investigation before you can make determine guilt or innocence. (Congressional Democrats should take note of this).

Your claim that a President should not investigate possible criminality and especially actions that are in direct conflict with the interests of the United States because it could possibly have a negative effect on the suspect is ludicrous.

---

I'VE NEVER SAID BIDEN SHOULD NOT BE INVESTIGATED

Cassius said:

---

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

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

---

How about the Attorney General? Wouldn't he know the proper way to route the information?

---

Yes, and just like how AG Sessions and AG Lynch recused themselves from very sensitive investigations, I would expect Barr to do the same in an investigation of Joe Biden.

---

Sessions didn't recuse himself because it was sensitive. Had he not been part of the Trump campaign, he would have been fully involved.

---

https://www.justice.gov/jmd/government-ethics-outline

DOJ employees may not "participate in a criminal investigation or prosecution if he/she has a personal or political relationship with any person or organization substantially involved in the conduct that is the subject of the investigation or prosecution, or who would be directly affected by the outcome."

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

1872walker said:

---

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

Option 3: Joe Biden or his son has not been charged with anything. Trump's accusations of him, if false, have a great impact on the 2020 election.

---

You have to have an investigation before you can make determine guilt or innocence. (Congressional Democrats should take note of this).

Your claim that a President should not investigate possible criminality and especially actions that are in direct conflict with the interests of the United States because it could possibly have a negative effect on the suspect is ludicrous.

---

I'VE NEVER SAID BIDEN SHOULD NOT BE INVESTIGATED

---

But you make assumptions that Trump interferes with the 2020 election absent any evidence, while at the same time refusing to leave open the possibility that this entire thing was based upon an investigation to root out corruption both foreign and abroad. Past, current, and attempting to eliminate it in the future.

If you are going to claim to be impartisan, some semblance of objectivity would be beneficial in believing you.

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

hbtheduce said:

---

Jimmy Valentine said:

---

hbtheduce 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.

---

"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.

---

Option 1: Pass a law limiting the power of the president... - Not going to happen. McConnell won't even pass election security.

Option 2: Censure - Republicans and most people on this board won't admit that the President did ANYTHING wrong.

Option 3: Let the 2020 election sort it out - President Trump's behavior in question has a DIRECT effect on the 2020 election.

---

Option 1: Then maybe there isn't clear consensus that the President shouldn't be able to pressure countries to investigate or not investigate certain crimes. Because both sides like that power when they hold the office.


Option 2: Yes because the new standards you propose make any politician immune from investigation. Because at the end of the day, if Joe Biden isn't "running for president", your entire case falls apart.


Option 3: I thought we were all for free and open elections. We have the right to vote for a president who has done nothing criminal, and its also in the interest of the united states to know that Joe Biden's son took millions of dollars from a corrupt company. Its also good that we know Trump wanted it investigated. How does this not create a clear open picture for both candidates?

It also assumes that Biden would be the nominee.

---

Option 1: Both sides also hate that power when used against them.

Option 2: I"VE NEVER SAID JOE BIDEN SHOULDN'T BE INVESTIGATED

Option 3: Joe Biden or his son has not been charged with anything. Trump's accusations of him, if false, have a great impact on the 2020 election.

---

Kind of like how the Steele dossier attempted to do?

It's 12:14 PM on December 6, 2019 and Donald J. Trump is STILL your POTUS!

Quote:

---

I'VE NEVER SAID BIDEN SHOULD NOT BE INVESTIGATED

---

Then why do you support Trump being impeached? It is appropriate for a head of state to ask another head of state to help with an ongoing investigation if they can. That's how it works.

I commend the board for continuing to engage with this troll...but really though...why bother? Just tell him sorry your girl lost and tell him to go away.

Something about throwing starfish back in the sea..... idk