The extortion hyperbole of the left...

Politics and religion: two polarizing topics that deserve their own little place
Post Reply
xtrawildcat
Posts: 4138
Joined: February 15th, 2016, 10:41 pm
Has liked: 16 times
Been liked: 130 times

Re: The extortion hyperbole of the left...

Post by xtrawildcat » November 12th, 2019, 8:29 am

.
Last edited by xtrawildcat on November 12th, 2019, 9:47 am, edited 1 time in total.

spot2180
Posts: 4501
Joined: November 12th, 2017, 10:32 am
Has liked: 109 times
Been liked: 60 times

Post by spot2180 » November 12th, 2019, 9:38 am

xtrawildcat wrote:
November 12th, 2019, 8:24 am
Once again,
Bribery is the act of giving or receiving something of value in exchange for some kind of influence or action in return, that the recipient would otherwise not offer.

SECTION 4. The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
So let's run with it! Let's get it going. Let's see if that passes muster. You already know that the charge you are suggesting here will not stand the test of cross examination. You already know it is a fool's errand. But you are bought in to the narrative that is so fragile that it is protected by that lying mother-scratcher Schiff. Republicans are licking their chops to call witnesses but are not allowed.
"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored." ~ Aldous Huxley

xtrawildcat
Posts: 4138
Joined: February 15th, 2016, 10:41 pm
Has liked: 16 times
Been liked: 130 times

Post by xtrawildcat » November 12th, 2019, 9:44 am

spot2180 wrote:
November 12th, 2019, 9:38 am
xtrawildcat wrote:
November 12th, 2019, 8:24 am
Once again,
Bribery is the act of giving or receiving something of value in exchange for some kind of influence or action in return, that the recipient would otherwise not offer.

SECTION 4. The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
So let's run with it! Let's get it going. Let's see if that passes muster. You already know that the charge you are suggesting here will not stand the test of cross examination. You already know it is a fool's errand. But you are bought in to the narrative that is so fragile that it is protected by that lying mother-scratcher Schiff. Republicans are licking their chops to call witnesses but are not allowed.
And yet you can't reply with a counter argument. The charge is straight forward and the evidence is not in question. Republicans had lots of oportunities for cross examination during the closed hearings. Transcripts of those hearings have been released. What happened to the exculpatory information from their cross examination.

Senate will have to decide if this particular act of bribery by Trump is grounds for removal. I doubt they do.

spot2180
Posts: 4501
Joined: November 12th, 2017, 10:32 am
Has liked: 109 times
Been liked: 60 times

Post by spot2180 » November 12th, 2019, 10:44 am

xtrawildcat wrote:
November 12th, 2019, 9:44 am
spot2180 wrote:
November 12th, 2019, 9:38 am


So let's run with it! Let's get it going. Let's see if that passes muster. You already know that the charge you are suggesting here will not stand the test of cross examination. You already know it is a fool's errand. But you are bought in to the narrative that is so fragile that it is protected by that lying mother-scratcher Schiff. Republicans are licking their chops to call witnesses but are not allowed.
And yet you can't reply with a counter argument. The charge is straight forward and the evidence is not in question. Republicans had lots of oportunities for cross examination during the closed hearings. Transcripts of those hearings have been released. What happened to the exculpatory information from their cross examination.

Senate will have to decide if this particular act of bribery by Trump is grounds for removal. I doubt they do.
My rebuttal? And I've noticed that you are now calling it 'bribery', just like the media is doing. Connotation is the bomb, right? If the initial word you are using doesn't send the message you want, change it to a more sinister word. You are super useful 'independent thinker', aren't you? :rofl: :rofl: They say jump and you say 'how high'. Anything to get Trump out. Pathetic.

On to the rebuttal: First of all, this whole impeachment is based on political grounds, not criminal grounds. That, first and foremost, is grounds for dismissal. On top of that, the whistle blower, Eric Ciaramella, wasn't even on the call (he was second hand, and Taylor was fourth hand), was openly negative about Trump, has extensive ties to Brennen and Clapper--both anti-Trumpers-- and is probably the 'Charlie' mentioned in the texts between Page and Stzrock about spying on Trump in the white house. Spying on a duly elected president of the United States looking for that something that will end Trump's presidency. No wonder why they are flipping out on releasing his name. Oh and his lawyer is a dandy. Maybe willie should lecture him on the ol' coup thing since he was calling it a coup back in '17 and saying that CNN would help.

Also there is no quid pro quo. You have to infer way too much to get what you want, and even though you think differently--but that is all really: you thinking differently--there is no proof of quid pro quo. No matter how much you try to hash it up, no matter how many witness that have testified, none of it amounts to the quid pro quo that is being imagined. And your ignoring the quid pro quo that happened with Biden in Ukraine is testament to just how political your beef and chemmy's beef and willie's beef and Schiffty's beef and Nad's beef and Pelosi's beef with Trump on this issue is.
Last edited by spot2180 on November 12th, 2019, 12:08 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored." ~ Aldous Huxley

xtrawildcat
Posts: 4138
Joined: February 15th, 2016, 10:41 pm
Has liked: 16 times
Been liked: 130 times

Post by xtrawildcat » November 12th, 2019, 12:02 pm

spot2180 wrote:
November 12th, 2019, 10:44 am
xtrawildcat wrote:
November 12th, 2019, 9:44 am

And yet you can't reply with a counter argument. The charge is straight forward and the evidence is not in question. Republicans had lots of oportunities for cross examination during the closed hearings. Transcripts of those hearings have been released. What happened to the exculpatory information from their cross examination.

Senate will have to decide if this particular act of bribery by Trump is grounds for removal. I doubt they do.
My rebuttal? First of all, this whole impeachment is based on political grounds. That, first and foremost, is grounds for dismissal. On top of that, the whistle blower Eric Ciaramella wasn't even on the call, was openly negative about Trump, had extensive ties to Brennen and Clapper and is probably the 'Charlie' mentioned in the texts between Page and Stzrock about spying on Trump in the white house.
1. Agree. This impeachment is based on political grounds. Trump using our tax money to bribe Ukraine to investigate his political rival.
2. Who cares if the whistle blower was on the call. He said he wasn't and his information came from others. Everything he reported has been verified with direct testimony from guys like Sondlund, an admisstion by Trumps chief of staff and the transcript of Trumps call to Zelensky.

spot2180
Posts: 4501
Joined: November 12th, 2017, 10:32 am
Has liked: 109 times
Been liked: 60 times

Post by spot2180 » November 12th, 2019, 12:08 pm

xtrawildcat wrote:
November 12th, 2019, 12:02 pm
spot2180 wrote:
November 12th, 2019, 10:44 am


My rebuttal? First of all, this whole impeachment is based on political grounds. That, first and foremost, is grounds for dismissal. On top of that, the whistle blower Eric Ciaramella wasn't even on the call, was openly negative about Trump, had extensive ties to Brennen and Clapper and is probably the 'Charlie' mentioned in the texts between Page and Stzrock about spying on Trump in the white house.
1. Agree. This impeachment is based on political grounds. Trump using our tax money to bribe Ukraine to investigate his political rival.
2. Who cares if the whistle blower was on the call. He said he wasn't and his information came from others. Everything he reported has been verified with direct testimony from guys like Sondlund, an admisstion by Trumps chief of staff and the transcript of Trumps call to Zelensky.
I added more to my post.
1. And Obama used tax payer money to investigate a political opponent when he spied on an American running for president. You have yet to prove your case. Obama spying has been proven.
2. Everyone should care that the whistle blower was not in on the call. It opens it up for just about anybody to accuse a sitting president of anything as long as the media is compliant and willing to make shit up to get someone impeached. You'd be gnashing your teeth and pulling your hair if it happens to a politician you like. You are concerned about the short game, and ignoring the long game. Huge mistake. Idiotic mistake. This damages the republic, but you don't care as long as your Trump hate is satisfied.
"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored." ~ Aldous Huxley

User avatar
MajorAppleCat
Posts: 1792
Joined: September 3rd, 2013, 6:09 am
Location: Kansas Territory
Has liked: 4 times
Been liked: 61 times

Post by MajorAppleCat » November 12th, 2019, 1:09 pm

LOL.

You cannot have "bribery" or "extortion" when the person being allegedly "bribed" or "extorted" doesn't even know he is being "bribed" or "extorted," The cause of action lies with the person being "wronged" not a third person. Certainly not congress. It also requires an "exchange." This is why EVERY sting operation conducted by the FBI is videotaped.

In the case of Trump, there is no "wronged" person complaining of being bribed or extorted, nor do we have an exchange. What we have is an opposing party taking words out of context for the purpose of impeachment... since their obvious candidates stand no chance of beating Trump in the general election. (If they did, why wouldn't they wait another year.)

As for an "abuse of power," no power was abused.... unless you consider delaying funds to a foreign country to be an abuse. If so, then the libs have set us down the path of impeachment proceedings anytime an opposing party controls Congress... since all opposing parties view the POTUS to have abused his powers.

The whole thing is a farce.
"Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word, equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude." Alexis de Tocqueville

User avatar
MajorAppleCat
Posts: 1792
Joined: September 3rd, 2013, 6:09 am
Location: Kansas Territory
Has liked: 4 times
Been liked: 61 times

Post by MajorAppleCat » November 12th, 2019, 1:23 pm

xtrawildcat wrote:
November 12th, 2019, 12:02 pm
spot2180 wrote:
November 12th, 2019, 10:44 am


My rebuttal? First of all, this whole impeachment is based on political grounds. That, first and foremost, is grounds for dismissal. On top of that, the whistle blower Eric Ciaramella wasn't even on the call, was openly negative about Trump, had extensive ties to Brennen and Clapper and is probably the 'Charlie' mentioned in the texts between Page and Stzrock about spying on Trump in the white house.
1. Agree. This impeachment is based on political grounds. Trump using our tax money to bribe Ukraine to investigate his political rival.
2. Who cares if the whistle blower was on the call. He said he wasn't and his information came from others. Everything he reported has been verified with direct testimony from guys like Sondlund, an admisstion by Trumps chief of staff and the transcript of Trumps call to Zelensky.
No exchange. Not a bribe. Not illegal to ask a foreign government to look at corruption... albeit the son of an opposing candidate.
"Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word, equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude." Alexis de Tocqueville

katlander
Posts: 4287
Joined: June 3rd, 2015, 12:44 pm
Has liked: 2 times
Been liked: 157 times

Post by katlander » November 12th, 2019, 2:27 pm

So if he asked N. Korea to quit firing nukes and promised to remove sanctions if they did would that also be bribery and extortion? Only if PDJT did it I'm sure. This whole thing is ridiculous and would be laughed off the stage if not for a bunch of corrupt losers representing the left. Hopefully the American public is seeing the light.

ChemicalKat
Posts: 3720
Joined: September 11th, 2017, 9:18 am
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 30 times

Post by ChemicalKat » November 12th, 2019, 2:34 pm

katlander wrote:
November 12th, 2019, 2:27 pm
So if he asked N. Korea to quit firing nukes and promised to remove sanctions if they did would that also be bribery and extortion? Only if PDJT did it I'm sure. This whole thing is ridiculous and would be laughed off the stage if not for a bunch of corrupt losers representing the left. Hopefully the American public is seeing the light.
What is wrong with you?

Post Reply