U.S. House to launch Trump impeachment inquiry over Ukraine controversy

[Chomper Higgot]

8 hours ago, chokrai said:

Joe Biden and his son dealing is China are far worse then anything Trump has done, you just never hear about it because you guessed it they are Democrats.

We do hear about, you yourself are banging on about it.

 

It’s otherwise filed under unsubstantiated hogwash whataboutary.

 

Trolling it here on TVF doesn’t make it true.

[JHolmesJr]

A wonderful article that presents a very fair and balanced view about why the MSM doesn't want to

talk about the Biden's activities in Ukraine...like most of the anti trump crowd here.

 

Key Point: Raising concerns over Hunter Biden does not mean you are excusing Trump’s actions.

 

Another snippet that stood out for me: 

"A stepson of former Secretary of State John Kerry also was asked to serve as a director (of BURISMA) but reportedly declined and warned Hunter Biden not to do it; Biden didn’t listen. He later told The New Yorker that “the decisions that I made were the right decisions for my family and for me.”

 

 

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/465520-he-who-must-not-be-named-how-hunter-biden-became-a-conversation-stopper

Edited October 13, 2019 by JHolmesJr

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, JHolmesJr said:

A wonderful article that presents a very fair and balanced view about why the MSM doesn't want to

talk about the Biden's activities in Ukraine...like most of the anti trump crowd here.

 

Key Point: Raising concerns over Hunter Biden does not mean you are excusing Trump’s actions.

 

Another snippet that stood out for me: 

"A stepson of former Secretary of State John Kerry also was asked to serve as a director (of BURISMA) but reportedly declined and warned Hunter Biden not to do it; Biden didn’t listen. He later told The New Yorker that “the decisions that I made were the right decisions for my family and for me.”

 

 

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/465520-he-who-must-not-be-named-how-hunter-biden-became-a-conversation-stopper

What Hunter Biden did looks bad.  However it was not illegal and there is no evidence that Joe Biden used his position as Vice President to protect or enrich himself or his son.  The same can't be said for Trump, who routinely stays at and promotes his own hotels.

[gamb00ler]

19 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

The pity is that the Americans should never have been there in the first place. It wasn't their war.

Please do a little more reading about exactly what USA's role was in Syria.  They were fighting ISIS which was/is certainly a terrorist threat.  ISIS was able to carve out a territory partially because of the Syrian civil war.  USA was not very active in the Syrian war except when Bashar al-Assad used chemical weapons.

 

For starters you might find it illuminating to read *THIS* or watch/listen to Fareed Zakaria's interview with Susan Rice on his weekly GPS show.

[thaibeachlovers]

2 hours ago, gamb00ler said:

Please do a little more reading about exactly what USA's role was in Syria.  They were fighting ISIS which was/is certainly a terrorist threat.  ISIS was able to carve out a territory partially because of the Syrian civil war.  USA was not very active in the Syrian war except when Bashar al-Assad used chemical weapons.

 

For starters you might find it illuminating to read *THIS* or watch/listen to Fareed Zakaria's interview with Susan Rice on his weekly GPS show.

I think I'm fairly up on what is going on in that area of the world. IMO America should not get involved there as it is too complicated, and whatever they do is probably going to have unintended consequences. Far better to have kept US troops out of it, and supplied Kurdish forces with the means to defeat IS.

IMO the Kurds are the only force that is trustworthy and not going to turn US weapons against the US in the future.

 

BTW, the IS, like the Taliban, isn't going away, so unless the US was prepared to remain in Syria indefinitely, it was always going to end badly for someone.

Edited October 13, 2019 by thaibeachlovers

[Scott]

Troll post and reply removed.

 

[gamb00ler]

30 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I think I'm fairly up on what is going on in that area of the world. IMO America should not get involved there as it is too complicated, and whatever they do is probably going to have unintended consequences. Far better to have kept US troops out of it, and supplied Kurdish forces with the means to defeat IS.

IMO the Kurds are the only force that is trustworthy and not going to turn US weapons against the US in the future.

 

BTW, the IS, like the Taliban, isn't going away, so unless the US was prepared to remain in Syria indefinitely, it was always going to end badly for someone.

I agree with almost everything you wrote.  But, I feel strongly that the troop deployment to Syria was correct.  Their role was primarily training, air support and providing intelligence.  Their orders were to restrict direct fighting to defensive operations.  A total of 8 US soldiers were killed in Syria and I mourn for each one.

 

I think the effectiveness of the Kurdish force was significantly improved by the physical presence of the US forces.  Their deployment also deterred the aggression by the Turks that is now taking place.

[thaibeachlovers]

2 hours ago, gamb00ler said:

I agree with almost everything you wrote.  But, I feel strongly that the troop deployment to Syria was correct.  Their role was primarily training, air support and providing intelligence.  Their orders were to restrict direct fighting to defensive operations.  A total of 8 US soldiers were killed in Syria and I mourn for each one.

 

I think the effectiveness of the Kurdish force was significantly improved by the physical presence of the US forces.  Their deployment also deterred the aggression by the Turks that is now taking place.

Fair enough, but the Americans can't stay there forever, and the Turks are always going to want to destroy the Kurds.

The only real solution is for the Kurds to be given a homeland, but so long as Turkey is in NATO that isn't going to happen.

[RideJocky]

Can a president be charged for that sort of thing? If they could, there are several previous presidents that would have been charged.

Uhhh, not if they were democrats...

[RideJocky]

It had nothing to do with any war, it was a campaign promise.  He now says that all of the troops have been removed from Syria which is another out right lie.  There are still a little over 1000 of the most combat ready troops still there.  One lie after another, on and on and on and.....!!!  Whether he is reelected or not, the lies will continue until he kicks the bucket.

Yes, all of the sudden the dems are war hawks...

[heybruce]

26 minutes ago, RideJocky said:

 

Yes, all of the sudden the dems are war hawks...

The troops weren't fighting a war, they were preventing one.  Approximately 50 US troops in Syria helping Kurdish fighters along the Turkey border served as a trip wire.  Turkey would not invade while they were there.  As soon as Trump pulled the troops out Turkey invaded and is in the process of routing the only capable ally we had in the region.

 

Want another reason why Trump's pull-out was a bad idea?

 

" Adding to the turmoil Sunday, hundreds of Islamic State families and supporters escaped from a holding camp in Syria amid the fighting between Turkish forces and the Kurds. "  https://news.yahoo.com/turkish-media-forces-capture-town-081635141.html

 

If Trump wanted to keep a campaign promise, he should have focused on getting Mexico to pay for the wall.  That was his greatest hit on the campaign trail.

 

This is actually marginally on-topic.  This bone-headed move by Trump could give Senate Republicans political cover to vote to convict Trump in his upcoming impeachment.

Edited October 14, 2019 by heybruce

[riclag]

On 10/13/2019 at 1:03 AM, wayned said:

When they draw up articles of impeachment they should add one for Premeditated Murder.  That's what he is doing by abandoning the Kurds in Northern Syria to fulfil a campaign promise!

more conspiracy theories, now your dishing murder!

Edited October 14, 2019 by riclag

[johnnybangkok]

10 hours ago, JHolmesJr said:

A wonderful article that presents a very fair and balanced view about why the MSM doesn't want to

talk about the Biden's activities in Ukraine...like most of the anti trump crowd here.

 

Key Point: Raising concerns over Hunter Biden does not mean you are excusing Trump’s actions.

 

Another snippet that stood out for me: 

"A stepson of former Secretary of State John Kerry also was asked to serve as a director (of BURISMA) but reportedly declined and warned Hunter Biden not to do it; Biden didn’t listen. He later told The New Yorker that “the decisions that I made were the right decisions for my family and for me.”

 

 

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/465520-he-who-must-not-be-named-how-hunter-biden-became-a-conversation-stopper

You keep going on and on (and on and on) about the Bidens as some sort of magic wand that'll magically excuse Trumps actions. Both things are not mutually exclusive; if the Bidens have done something illegal (and so far there is no evidence of this) then get it investigated and either charge them or exonerate them. This can be done in an official capacity through official channels. However what cannot be done (which you willfully ignore time after time) is a sitting President asking a foreign power for 'a favor' to do the investigation. As soon as Biden became Trumps political opponent, the rules changed; campaign finance rules are VERY clear on this matter and whether Trump purposely or inadvertently broke them, what is for sure is he broke them and no amount of deflecting is going to change that fact.  

That's the point - not the one you keep trying to force.

[bristolboy]

1 hour ago, riclag said:

more conspiracy theories, now your dishing murder!

Given Trump's ignorance, a more apt charge would be negligent homicide (genocide?).

Edited October 14, 2019 by bristolboy

[Jingthing]

Let's get real here. 45 committed a huge foreign policy mistake throwing the Kurds under the bus that will have negative consequences well into the future as far as persuading groups in the future to ally with us. However obviously disastrous foreign policies per se can't generally be impeachable offenses. They could be war crimes but the U.S. isn't doing the murdering directly. By pulling out the murder is a predictable result but that's not the same thing legally, Morally and ethically is another matter. It's horrible!

 

There could be exceptions where foreign policy moves could suggest the need for impeachment. It would depend on degree. Such as bombing a random country because the president didn't like a tweet. That would definitely show unfitness to serve as president.  Some might argue throwing the Kurds under the bus is similar. It's probably getting there but that's  a judgement call. 

Edited October 14, 2019 by Jingthing

[thaibeachlovers]

3 hours ago, heybruce said:

his bone-headed move by Trump could give Senate Republicans political cover to vote to convict Trump in his upcoming impeachment.

Nothing will save GOP senators from the voters wrath if they convict Trump. Some that are not standing for re election might be swayed. After all, they probably hate Trump as much as the Dems, they being part of the swamp and all.

[bristolboy]

3 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Nothing will save GOP senators from the voters wrath if they convict Trump. Some that are not standing for re election might be swayed. After all, they probably hate Trump as much as the Dems, they being part of the swamp and all.

And Trump isn't, because, unlike them, he has gone after Wall Street and corporate interests? 

[RideJocky]

Nothing will save GOP senators from the voters wrath if they convict Trump. Some that are not standing for re election might be swayed. After all, they probably hate Trump as much as the Dems, they being part of the swamp and all.

But I thought the polls show that virtually everyone wants him impeached?

[Jingthing]

Just now, RideJocky said:

 

 

But I thought the polls show that virtually everyone wants him impeached?

 

 

No. But the vast majority now support an impeachment inquiry and 51 percent support impeachment and removal. It's at about 20 percent of republicans now which might sound low but it's a massive and quick spike up from almost nothing! If the total goes to 60 percent the chances for 45 to be convicted become significant. 

[Jingthing]

3 minutes ago, stevenl said:

You conveniently left out a few words 'Trump impeachment inquiry over ...'.

Biden's son in his role of consultant at MBNA really plays no part in the Trump impeachment inquiry.

Well yes and no and here's why. 

If the senate holds a conviction trial after the house impeachment, the senate is run by republicans. They will certainly try to use the Biden situation as a deflection defense tactic. So like it or not, rational or not, it's going to be in the mix. 

[JHolmesJr]

4 minutes ago, RideJocky said:

 

 

But I thought the polls show that virtually everyone wants him impeached?

 

 

 

Yes...every single person on the planet....

 

https://nypost.com/2019/10/12/fox-news-pollster-braun-research-misrepresented-impeachment-poll-analysis/

[JHolmesJr]

It is unbelievable to what extent Adam Schiff himself has sabotaged this

impeachment enquiry. He will forever carry this stain with him...if he isn't

removed and sued first.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/schiff-admits-he-should-have-been-much-more-clear-about-contact-with-whistleblower

[RideJocky]

It is interesting (albeit telling) that back when it was the Mueller debacle the left was all about having an open investigation, transparency and the public’s right to know every detail, but all that’s out the window now.

Everything is secret and they can just leak what they like.

What’s that about?


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[Jingthing]

It is interesting (albeit telling) that back when it was the Mueller debacle the left was all about having an open investigation, transparency and the public’s right to know every detail, but all that’s out the window now.

Everything is secret and they can just leak what they like.

What’s that about?


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

You're joking right? Mueller didn't open his mouth for years. Don’t stress. 45 already impeached himself. What's going on now is about packaging.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Becker]

2 hours ago, JHolmesJr said:

It is unbelievable to what extent Adam Schiff himself has sabotaged this

impeachment enquiry. He will forever carry this stain with him...if he isn't

removed and sued first.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/schiff-admits-he-should-have-been-much-more-clear-about-contact-with-whistleblower

Yes, Adam Schiff is the bad guy and he is the one that will be stained forever and not the travesty in the WH!

Don't look here, look over there, over theeeere!

Edited October 14, 2019 by Becker

[Becker]

2 hours ago, stevenl said:

No point in this, you go from one to the next deflection.

Exactly, there is no point and I think this person hit the nail on the head:

 

Link: Ex-Bush Aide Peter Wehner Has Damning Theory For Why Trump Supporters Won't Turn On Him

"It is almost like a hermetically sealed world. Facts are like BBs, they’re just bouncing off of a brick wall. They just don’t penetrate. Now it’s not just a defense of Trump, it’s a defense of their defense of Trump,” Wehner said. “To indict him is to indict themselves, and to indict their own judgment, and that’s hard for any human being.” 

[johnnybangkok]

3 hours ago, JHolmesJr said:

you cant be like Adam Schiff and cherry pick your own facts.

Joe Biden is on tape bragging about how he shook down Ukraine with

a quid pro quo. Let us see some EU and IMF leaders go on camera to say

that they approved this...we are not going to take MSM's word for it.

You are either being willfully ignorant or you simply don't get it. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume the latter.

 

Joe Biden, in his then capacity as VP of the US was allowed to cajole, bully, threaten, ridicule, strong-arm and generally do whatever the hell he wanted with a foreign nation as long as it was in the BEST INTEREST OF AMERICA. This includes any quid pro quo arrangement that he, the POTUS, the IMF, the EU and allies might think appropriate which in this case included threatening to withhold funds from a foreign nation unless they cleaned up their act and got rid of an ineffective and corrupt prosecutor. The reason? The foreign country in question ISN'T a political opponent. 

 

Donald Trump in his capacity as POTUS could also do this IF it wasn't against a current political opponent. But in that small difference lies all this issue as some very strict campaign finance rules say you cannot ask a foreign power for a 'favour' to investigate a political rival. If Biden WASN'T his likely opponent for the most powerful job in the world then perhaps he could have got away with asking for a 'favor' but he is and therefore by default Trump has to stick to the rules. If Biden is crooked (literally no evidence but since we are halfway through your flight of fancy, lets just go with it) it is completely, utterly and irrefutably irrelevant to the actions of Trump. He is not allowed to do what he has very publicly admitted to doing. That's an impeachable offense and no amount of your deflecting will ever change that.

 

Biden could be as guilt as sin but it doesn't change the fact that Trump is not allowed to do what he very clearly did.

 

Now do we get it?

 

   

 

[JHolmesJr]

1 hour ago, johnnybangkok said:

Now do we get it?

 

No!

 

The way I see it, Biden isn't confirmed as running against Trump yet...he's part of a large group 

that's still jostling to be his opponent. And he ain't a shoo in by any stretch. Biden wasn't operating

in the same orbit as a Mayor Pete or Beto either....he was on the world stage, so if he's done something shady

with an ally in the past, the President has a right to wonder what went on. He hasn't asked Ukraine to fabricate

dirt on Biden.

 

Biden has made himself look guilty of shady behaviour....his sons actions probably aren't criminal 

but they are enough to topple Biden from his high horse of let's make America moral again.

[Slip]

Trump has a right to wonder.  He does not have the right to abuse his position by blackmailing a foreign government into investigating his political opponents.  I thought they taught civics in the US.

[heybruce]

7 hours ago, JHolmesJr said:

More evidence of Biden-ness.

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mbna-paid-bidens-son-as-biden-backed-bill/

 

how is this not corruption at the highest levels?

 

Want to see how the MSM media is 'playing their part' in the Trump 

attempted takedown, check out exposecnn.com

Video drops later tonight. I don't know what to expect but it cannot be good

for CNN.

Biden voted on legislation that affected the credit card industry while Biden's son was paid as a consultant by the credit card industry.

 

Trump backed a tax bill that benefited the real estate industry while holding onto his real estate empire.

 

Trump is the one who directly benefited from his conflict of interest.