Why Can't Trump Just Admit That He Made A Mistake?

[Hawktawk]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... ar-AAHuOBK

Something new every day. With all due respect to my friends like Asea, RD and so on who think its just what it is and we can just ride it out there's never been a president more in need of impeachment, 25th amendment,whatever.Removal from office ASAP .

TDS is alive and well, only its suffered by those who believe for one minute its OK to have this guy within a thousand miles of the white house.

I realize it won't happen, the Repubs have sold their soul to the devil, not sure for what and the Dems have lost their courage to push it to the limit. History will judge both very harshly assuming there's an ability to review history at the end of this sorry spectacle.

[RiverDog]

ASF, here comes the narcissistic clown, except now he's selling us he's got the goods on Iran. Are you buying anything he says if you're congress, or do you need more than his word? You trust his mental state and that he'll do the right thing based on his military advisors right? He just created a crisis with his words 'locked and loaded' and zero proof.

I don't think any Congress would take the word of any POTUS w/o seeing at least some evidence from our intelligence agencies and trusted military advisors. In that respect, I don't think Trump is any different than any of his predecessors. What I don't like is his rhetoric, that he's painting himself into a corner by opening his cake hole to show everyone how tough he is. He's making the crisis much worse.

Just watching a news blip in it now. They've got quite a bit of physical evidence on Iran, much more than the "zero proof" referred to above.

[I-5]

Riv, 'zero proof' applies to when they said it. The reckless 'locked and loaded' rhetoric only makes a volatile sitatuation worse. I just hope he actually has the attention span to listen to his ALL of his advisors. We're all in the same boat if this thing blows up.

[I-5]

ASF, Riv, and any others who think Trump is just 'rhetoric''....do you think it will be easier for future White House administrations to be much less transparent, ie cancelling weekly press conferences, revoking or threatening to revoke press passes (at least until courts reinstate them), refusing to release tax returns, and stop sharing transcripts of the president's calls with foreign leaders? All these things that were common practice with every president of the modern era, have changed with Trump, and now a precedent has been established that this is acceptable. Just rhetoric, huh?

[RiverDog]

ASF, Riv, and any others who think Trump is just 'rhetoric''....do you think it will be easier for future White House administrations to be much less transparent, ie cancelling weekly press conferences, revoking or threatening to revoke press passes (at least until courts reinstate them), refusing to release tax returns, and stop sharing transcripts of the president's calls with foreign leaders? All these things that were common practice with every president of the modern era, have changed with Trump, and now a precedent has been established that this is acceptable. Just rhetoric, huh?

IMO Trump is an anomaly and his behavior won't have a lasting effect on future Presidents. There's already laws pending in some states that would require all candidates that appear on a ballot for a public office to disclose their tax returns. So long as those laws aren't declared unconstitutional, it would effectively require all POTUS candidates to make them public. We also may see some legislation that addresses some of the other issues, like revoking press passes.

[I-5]

IMO Trump is an anomaly and his behavior won't have a lasting effect on future Presidents. There's already laws pending in some states that would require all candidates that appear on a ballot for a public office to disclose their tax returns. So long as those laws aren't declared unconstitutional, it would effectively require all POTUS candidates to make them public. We also may see some legislation that addresses some of the other issues, like revoking press passes.

Unfortunately, a federal judge just struck down a state law that California passed requiring all presidential candidates in the 2020 election to disclose their tax returns. So I slightly disagree with your assessment. I'm not going to compare him to Hitler yet, but to me there is no such thing as anomaly. There is only history and hindsight, and each president does have a big effect on it. I hope the positive of it is that future presidents must be subject to a HIGHER standard of financial transparency, mental and physical fitness, and more thanks to this debacle.

[RiverDog]

Unfortunately, a federal judge just struck down a state law that California passed requiring all presidential candidates in the 2020 election to disclose their tax returns. So I slightly disagree with your assessment. I'm not going to compare him to Hitler yet, but to me there is no such thing as anomaly. There is only history and hindsight, and each president does have a big effect on it. I hope the positive of it is that future presidents must be subject to a HIGHER standard of financial transparency, mental and physical fitness, and more thanks to this debacle.

I wouldn't rule out the possibility of a federal law requiring all future candidates to disclose tax returns and other information. JFK, who in death was a very popular President, had a law passed that prohibits future POTUS's from putting immediate relatives to cabinet level positions like he did with his brother Robert. Prior to Trump, releasing individual tax returns was a concept that was accepted by members of both parties.

Unless science and medicine can come up with a an objective, quantifiable means to measure mental fitness, I would oppose any such determination as being a requirement for candidacy for public office. Who's to say who's mentally fit and who isn't?

[I-5]

I wouldn't rule out the possibility of a federal law requiring all future candidates to disclose tax returns and other information. JFK, who in death was a very popular President, had a law passed that prohibits future POTUS's from putting immediate relatives to cabinet level positions like he did with his brother Robert. Prior to Trump, releasing individual tax returns was a concept that was accepted by members of both parties.

Unless science and medicine can come up with a an objective, quantifiable means to measure mental fitness, I would oppose any such determination as being a requirement for candidacy for public office. Who's to say who's mentally fit and who isn't?

2 things:

- what would be the reason a federal judge overruled the California law requiring 2020 presidential candidates to release tax returns? Yes, it was voluntary before now, but what is a good reason to not disclose?
- are there not empirical studies on mental health that would allow a diagnosis? As in, if you have a mental illness or not?

[RiverDog]

2 things:

- what would be the reason a federal judge overruled the California law requiring 2020 presidential candidates to release tax returns? Yes, it was voluntary before now, but what is a good reason to not disclose?

What the CA judge ruled was that it was not up to the states to determine requirements for federal office, and I tend to agree. The Constitution lays out specific qualifications for President (age, country of birth, residency) as well as Senators and Representatives. If they're going to add a requirement for disclosing tax returns, it's probably going to have to be done at the federal level.

- are there not empirical studies on mental health that would allow a diagnosis? As in, if you have a mental illness or not?

None that I know of that would satisfy me. I want something like an x-ray or CAT scan, a blood test, a missing chromosome in a DNA link, or some other observable, measurable attribute or attributes that anyone with a high school education can understand and that would prove conclusively that a person is mentally unfit. I do not want some shrink analyzing ink blot interpretations to declare a person unfit to hold office.

[obiken]

To answer the question of your original post, no he can't He lies even when the truth will work better!

[c_hawkbob]

Well Pelosi finally pulled the trigger. I guess 75% of dems demanding impeachment was her threshold.

[RiverDog]

Well Pelosi finally pulled the trigger. I guess 75% of dems demanding impeachment was her threshold.

Yep, it seems that the Ukraine-gate phone call pushed them over the top.

I also see where Trump tweeted that he is going to release the full, unredacted transcripts of the phone conversation he had with the Ukrainian president. I'll believe that when I see it.

Like Idahawkman would say...get out your popcorn!

[Hawktawk]

The senate unanimously voting for the whistleblower report to be released to the congress is the most surprising and potentially ominous development for trump. Couldn’t happen to a nicer more competent rational guy. Let’s see if McConnell and Graham can defend the actions of this guy after impeaching Clinton over lying about a consensual bj. It’s about the only thing I agree with the Democrats on but they finally got this right . And this isn’t hard to understand either. A very popular democrat candidate viewed as an honest good guy by a majority of Americans and who crushes trump head to head is the victim of an attempt to slime him and his son by the sitting president in a phone call that took place one day after bob muellers testimony. Americans get this and trump and even his syncophants in the senate know it. Get ya popcorn indeed. Pence 2019!!!!

[Aseahawkfan]

Unfortunately, a federal judge just struck down a state law that California passed requiring all presidential candidates in the 2020 election to disclose their tax returns. So I slightly disagree with your assessment. I'm not going to compare him to Hitler yet, but to me there is no such thing as anomaly. There is only history and hindsight, and each president does have a big effect on it. I hope the positive of it is that future presidents must be subject to a HIGHER standard of financial transparency, mental and physical fitness, and more thanks to this debacle.

You're not going to compare him to Hitler "yet"? If this is the American version of Hitler, then Americans don't know what the hell they're even talking about.

Trump is nothing like Hitler. Just because you don't want to admit his lack of willingness to go to war doesn't mean it isn't there. Trump has always been anti-war and more talk tough to push negotiations than do. No matter how you try to paint it, that is a good trait of his.

[Aseahawkfan]

ASF, Riv, and any others who think Trump is just 'rhetoric''....do you think it will be easier for future White House administrations to be much less transparent, ie cancelling weekly press conferences, revoking or threatening to revoke press passes (at least until courts reinstate them), refusing to release tax returns, and stop sharing transcripts of the president's calls with foreign leaders? All these things that were common practice with every president of the modern era, have changed with Trump, and now a precedent has been established that this is acceptable. Just rhetoric, huh?

Did any of those things start a war or fundamentally change America? Not from what I've seen.

Once again, past presidents have done worse. You seem to want to give them a pass because they don't act like Trump. I do not fall for that. I have been watching Trump's policies and acts very closely. They are mostly business as usual other than his prickly temper and treatment of the press. And here is the kicker, nothing he has done has stopped the press from continuing to endlessly attack him and his family for every little thing they do. If the press had been suppressed or we lived in a totalitarian state or anything near, the press would be dead right now. If the press in Russia or China attacked their leaders like the press here attacks Trump, i guarantee canceled press conferences and the like would be the least of their worries.

What are the some of the really big things Trump has done that isn't business as usual? Let's see if we can list them. I mean business as usual for Republicans.

1. Not divorcing himself from his businesses. Not sure if this is a big deal since every administration that cuts taxes usually has business ties even if they alter them once they the take presidency. Even if they engage in legal facades to eliminate the conflict of interest, they still greatly benefit from any tax cuts or laws that benefit business. Trump didn't engage in the legal facades, not sure I should care.

2. Acknowledging Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. This was another of those examples of doing something that is nothing more than a change in wording as the United States already overlooked Israel's annexation of Jerusalem. Trump just said screw it and put a period on it. This really changed nothing in that time-wasting situation.

3. His treatment of the press. Trump has been at war with the press. This has been a new tactic against the left wing press. It hasn't done much to stop them from trying to take them down other than seeing more lying and outright corrupt behavior by the left wing press to take him down. Seems he dragged them into the mud and they decided to stay in their to fight him. Then again the press has been a joke for a long time now with Fox and CNBC being little more than talking heads for the factions they support.

4. He eliminated a lot of useless regulations. The list here is so long that it may have been a good thing to get rid of so many of these little laws that don't do much.

5. His trade wars. He had a lot of useless trade wars, negotiated a lot of new trade deals that were slight improvements. And still hasn't been able to tame China who is waiting for him to be gone for business to return as usual.

6. His general rude, narcissistic, and jackass behavior. He doesn't act like a president as far as public discourse goes. He's rude, bullying, and loves to get in Twitter fights. I think that is what seems to drive people the most crazy. They just can't stand this guy's rude, boorish behavior and thus build him up into a much more evil and sinister character than he is. I think this is what annoys me the most. I get it. People hate him. He's a jackass. But please stop making this guy seem worse than he is. All this he might launch nukes and start wars and other such trash never game true and I knew it wouldn't.

7. His anti-immigrant rhetoric. He's really brought the immigration discussion into the public forum heavily in a way no president has done. It has been there for years simmering, but he decided to use it to get him elected. Not that he's actually changed any laws or done much real here given immigration is still high and immigrants are still doing well enough. Not sure he has been very effective at curbing immigration and even the faces of the anti-immigration stance like Anne Coulter has given up supporting him because of his ineffective plans and rhetoric. His wall has been mostly useless.

Trump's not some violent guy and never was. I had no idea why Trump was going to turn into one once he took office. He literally had no history of it and people were acting like he was going to lose his mind and nuke someone. Who is unhinged? Trump or the people assuming that tired trash. Why anyone wants to let Trump make them look crazy I do not know. Why let yourself get caught up in his game? He likes winding people up and then making them seem stupid. It's part of how he got elected and made people look stupid in debates.

I think that may be the most annoying part of Trump's legacy is how stupid he made America look. Whether the people that follow him believing his lies and behaving like him or the people that hated him getting so wound up and making up just as many lies and engaging in just as much trash behavior fighting him.

[Aseahawkfan]

The senate unanimously voting for the whistleblower report to be released to the congress is the most surprising and potentially ominous development for trump. Couldn’t happen to a nicer more competent rational guy. Let’s see if McConnell and Graham can defend the actions of this guy after impeaching Clinton over lying about a consensual bj. It’s about the only thing I agree with the Democrats on but they finally got this right . And this isn’t hard to understand either. A very popular democrat candidate viewed as an honest good guy by a majority of Americans and who crushes trump head to head is the victim of an attempt to slime him and his son by the sitting president in a phone call that took place one day after bob muellers testimony. Americans get this and trump and even his syncophants in the senate know it. Get ya popcorn indeed. Pence 2019!!!!

Trump needs to be investigated for that. That is stepping way over a line if he did that. That is Nixon-like level of crime. I think even the Senate would hammer him if proven true. Very good timing for the Dems. It seems the Dems luck is turning if this turns out to be actionable. You might get your wish.

[RiverDog]

The senate unanimously voting for the whistleblower report to be released to the congress is the most surprising and potentially ominous development for trump. Couldn’t happen to a nicer more competent rational guy. Let’s see if McConnell and Graham can defend the actions of this guy after impeaching Clinton over lying about a consensual bj. It’s about the only thing I agree with the Democrats on but they finally got this right . And this isn’t hard to understand either. A very popular democrat candidate viewed as an honest good guy by a majority of Americans and who crushes trump head to head is the victim of an attempt to slime him and his son by the sitting president in a phone call that took place one day after bob muellers testimony. Americans get this and trump and even his syncophants in the senate know it. Get ya popcorn indeed. Pence 2019!!!!

This is a huge gamble for the Dems and could easily backfire. Trump has agreed to release the full transcripts of his phone conversations with the Ukrainian president, and it's impossible for me to believe that he would do so if it contained anything incriminating. And what about Joe Biden? Will he come off clean as a whistle? At the very least, his son engaged in a very questionable conflict of interest by agreeing to serve on the board of directors of the Ukrainian oil company that stands to benefit from US aid. The RNC has accused Biden of pulling strings for his son and has called on Creepy Joe to release his phone conversations while he was the VP. Can you trust Joe Biden's recollection of events, the same Joe Biden that thought FDR gave his fireside chats over television, when he says he did nothing wrong?

So we'll see. Personally, I'll remain open minded, but my fear is that this could result in another 5 years of that ass clown.

[RiverDog]

It seems the Dems luck is turning if this turns out to be actionable. You might get your wish.

I don't agree that it's good timing for the Dems, nor do I think that it's necessarily lucky for them. Biden's son has engaged in some very questionable business practices, not only with Ukraine, but with China as well. We really don't know how the chips will fall. The Dems going to have to move quickly on this in order to keep it from interfering with the 2020 election. It usually takes time to move public opinion, the type of opinion to motivate Republicans to give up Trump. He's at 80% approval within his own party.

I do agree that if the accusations are true, that it would amount to an abuse of power and impeachment would be justified. I just worry about the consequences should the Dems fail to get him.

[Hawktawk]

I’m not going to respond to all of that . Good lord you can type. But a few bullets here. I was one who thought trump might blunder into war when he was elected . It didn’t take long to realize he’s such a complete pussy who fires good men on twitter because he lacks the nutz to say it to their face , something I had to do quite a few times in my career, certainly has no stomach for war.

And that’s dangerous . He got credit in many quarters for calling off the attack on Iran after having ordered it as retaliation for the downing of a 100 million dollar drone in international air space . I see it quite differently . If he didn’t want to attack he should not have ordered the launch. He looks soft and indecisive, big hat no cattle. Now we have seen Iran wipe out half the Saudi oil production capacity . His response is more sanctions. If he didn’t want war he should have not jerked the rug out from under a country who was abiding by the terms of an agreement a US president had signed . Wtf did he think would happen if he did that ? Ready fire aim.It’s clear from his weak fearful actions he won’t start a war or enter it even if it’s warranted .

I fear he will possibly lose a war, perhaps a horrible unthinkable war. He soft pedals our greatest geopolitical foe who has more nukes, more lethal newer ones, newer better quieter subs, numerous weapons systems that violate start and as evidenced by the sky fall mishap attempting to build a nuclear armed cruise missile with a reactor for power that would be impossible to defend against with a missile shield. And this is the guy Trump praises , stands beside and says he believes him over our intelligence agencies, lobbied for him to be readmitted to the G7 just a couple of weeks ago. I’ll go to my grave wondering why Russia interfering in our elections with the purpose of electing this mentally ill rube is no big deal.

[obiken]

I don't agree that it's good timing for the Dems, nor do I think that it's necessarily lucky for them. Biden's son has engaged in some very questionable business practices, not only with Ukraine, but with China as well. We really don't know how the chips will fall. The Dems going to have to move quickly on this in order to keep it from interfering with the 2020 election. It usually takes time to move public opinion, the type of opinion to motivate Republicans to give up Trump. He's at 80% approval within his own party.

I do agree that if the accusations are true, that it would amount to an abuse of power and impeachment would be justified. I just worry about the consequences should the Dems fail to get him.

They had to impeach on Ukrainegate, he wants them to Impeach, he needs them to impeach.

The sons actions are a separate issue. With Ukrainegate, Trump by his own bragging, called a Foreign leader and told him to put an American Citizen, IE the son of a political rival, under Investigation, de facto, violating his Due process, the Constitution, and committing Treason as well. Moreover River, he committed bribery by demanding quid Pro quo. IE a favor or advantage granted or expected in return for something.
Example: the employer told his worker that unless she gave him sex, she would be fired. That is bribery. Then he threatened to hold up funds, that Congress had already appropriated, and he signed off on, without authorization, or for a security reason. That is a violation of the Constitution. So guys, we have just with the phone calls to the Ukrainian leader, Treason, Bribery, and other High Crimes and misdemeanors. IF Not what the hell is? So I am not a Liberal, but I have to use their line, IF OBAMA had done this oh flock, oh dear!

[I-5]

“The President of the United States sought to enlist a foreign government to interfere in our democratic process by investigating one of his political rivals -- and may have used the withholding of Congressionally-appropriated foreign assistance days earlier as intimidation”

Which part of the statement above is not accurate? The president himself has affirmed these events took place, even if he tries spin it.

Game. Set.

[obiken]

“The President of the United States sought to enlist a foreign government to interfere in our democratic process by investigating one of his political rivals -- and may have used the withholding of Congressionally-appropriated foreign assistance days earlier as intimidation”

Which part of the statement above is not accurate? The president himself has affirmed these events took place, even if he tries spin it.

Game. Set.

Yeah, I think Carrot Top, Baby Hands, might have just stepped on his little penis on this one.

[RiverDog]

“The President of the United States sought to enlist a foreign government to interfere in our democratic process by investigating one of his political rivals -- and may have used the withholding of Congressionally-appropriated foreign assistance days earlier as intimidation”

Which part of the statement above is not accurate? The president himself has affirmed these events took place, even if he tries spin it.

Game. Set.

The second part may or may not be true. Trump has not admitted to withholding funds as a means of intimidation. But he's going to have to come up with a damn good excuse if he wants me to believe otherwise. Even Mitch McConnell said that he wasn't given a reason.

Keep your eyes on the Senate Republicans. They will need at least 20 R votes to remove him from office. So far, they're not saying much.

[RiverDog]

They had to impeach on Ukrainegate, he wants them to Impeach, he needs them to impeach.

The sons actions are a separate issue. With Ukrainegate, Trump by his own bragging, called a Foreign leader and told him to put an American Citizen, IE the son of a political rival, under Investigation, de facto, violating his Due process, the Constitution, and committing Treason as well. Moreover River, he committed bribery by demanding quid Pro quo. IE a favor or advantage granted or expected in return for something.
Example: the employer told his worker that unless she gave him sex, she would be fired. That is bribery. Then he threatened to hold up funds, that Congress had already appropriated, and he signed off on, without authorization, or for a security reason. That is a violation of the Constitution. So guys, we have just with the phone calls to the Ukrainian leader, Treason, Bribery, and other High Crimes and misdemeanors. IF Not what the hell is? So I am not a Liberal, but I have to use their line, IF OBAMA had done this oh flock, oh dear!

Hey, Obi. Glad to see you're dipping your toes in here.

Although it's unethical as hell, it's not against the law to put an American citizen under investigation unless they use some sort of illegal means that violate that citizen's civil rights...unauthorized wiretaps, illegal search and seizure, illegal arrest, etc. And most scholars will argue that we have to be at war for the crime of treason to apply. Ukraine is not our enemy, to the contrary, we've been trying to foster a relationship with them.

We'll have to wait and see exactly what it was that Trump said to the Ukrainian president, but even from his own admission, what he did IMO constitutes an abuse of power as it would appear that he was using the office of the President to extract a political favor from a foreign government to be used against his likely opponent in the upcoming election. The fact that Congressionally approved funds were delayed just prior to his phone call needs to be explained, but at the moment, that action appears to support the premise that Trump was trying to intimidate the new, young Ukrainian president into acceding to his demands.

[I-5]

Riv, does a president have to directly say 'I'm withholding congress appropriated funds until you do this favor for me'? Yeah, no. So far, his spin is not believable. He doesn't get to decide what's appropriate or inappropriate. The fact is, he did personally ask Mulvanney to pause, THEN was heard asking the Ukrainian president to investigate his rival's son multiple times.

[Aseahawkfan]

After reading that memo, did Trump just play the Democrats for total idiots? Sometimes I wonder about this guy. He probably wanted that phone call released, wanted the Dems to ask for it, and now he gets to talk about Biden's son and this Crowdstrike company. Now he gets to talk about Biden and Ukrainian collusion. He doesn't look that bad at all to the American people. Instead it looks like Biden did something dirty and the president is asking about it. I seriously wonder if Trump and his team are far more canny than they are given credit for. If they can spin this as discrediting Biden, wow, what a smart move. We will see the reaction to it now. Sheesh.

[Aseahawkfan]

Riv, does a president have to directly say 'I'm withholding congress appropriated funds until you do this favor for me'? Yeah, no. So far, his spin is not believable. He doesn't get to decide what's appropriate or inappropriate. The fact is, he did personally ask Mulvanney to pause, THEN was heard asking the Ukrainian president to investigate his rival's son multiple times.

And if Biden influenced an investigation, that is also unethical as well.

So we basically have a situation where two wrongs don't make a right and two wrongs must be investigated.

Are you seeing what Trump just did from a political standpoint? He just screwed the Dems hard. Even if they investigate Trump. they now have to investigate Biden as well for corruption. What a damn smart move by Trump. That douchebag is way smarter than I give him credit for. I did not think he could do something like this. It was like a sacrifice move on a chess board telling the Dems, sure, you can investigate me and Joe Biden at the same time. Wow. We'll see how this move plays out.

Trump haters will call it corruption on Trump. Trump lovers will be asking about Biden. Swing voters though will probably want both of them investigated. This seems like some Trump trickery to me to put Biden under investigation.

[I-5]

ASF, your 'if' on Biden is a zero, as in there is no evidence of any wrongdoing there, and the son has never been under investigation, and there is no investigation to call off. Look it up and let us know if it's different.

But since you mentioned two wrongs in your analogy, you are saying Trump did something wrong.

On that I agree.

You've been giving Trump a lot of credit here, and the 'smartness' you're talking about is simply called gaslighting, which we all know he is really good at, having practiced it for a lifetime. Kellyanne Conway might be the zen master, though.

[Aseahawkfan]

Wow. I'm thinking about this even more. If this phone call had not been released, no one would even be asking about Biden and Ukraine. Trump asking for Barr to investigate Biden and talking about it would seem super shady and his usual petty tactics. The Dems could spin it as Trump trying to attack Biden.

With this phone call released to the public with no actual threat of withholding aid spoken of, he gets to deliver information to the public about BIden's son doing something illegal in the Ukraine. He gets to associate Biden using his influence to kil the investigation. He gets to look at the Dems and say, "Sure, investigate me. You're doing it anyway. Now you need to investigate Biden. I will ask the American people to tell you to investigate Biden."

Wow. We will see how this move plays out. Trump has been trying to get the Dems to investigate their own for ages. I wonder if he now found a way to get the American people to back an investigation into the Democrats prime candidate. Now all he has to do is to release the aid to Ukraine, smile at the Dems with no threat to withhold aid in the memo, and say I never withheld aid to investigate anything. If he releases the aid now after the story is spun up with no promise of exchange on the phone call, he just made an incredibly shrewd political move that set the Dems up for problems.

Let's see if the aid gets sent to the Ukraine now and how this gets spun.

[Aseahawkfan]

ASF, your 'if' on Biden is a zero, as in there is no evidence of any wrongdoing there, and the son has never been under investigation, and there is no investigation to call off. Look it up and let us know if it's different.

But since you mentioned two wrongs in your analogy, you are saying Trump did something wrong.

On that I agree.

You've been giving Trump a lot of credit here, and the 'smartness' you're talking about is simply called gaslighting, which we all know he is really good at, having practiced it for a lifetime. Kellyanne Conway might be the zen master, though.

You're a Trump hater, so you can't see the game objectively. He may have just played a game on the Dems. If he releases the aid now with no promise of exchange, then there is no charge. He gets some dirt on Biden released to the general public that would normally have been classified at a key time in the election process with nothing actionable. That phone call has no threats in it. If there is any proof that Biden's son was investigated and BIden killed it, now the Dems and the Justice Department can look into it with the blessing of Trump's supporters and possibly swing voters. He can now publically hammer Biden and the Dems with something no one would have ever thought of or knew about. Trump has literally had nothing to hammer the Dems with to investigate themselves that the public would bite on. Now he may have that.

Tell me where the threat was in that memo? Also tell me if Trump releases the aid now, is there any crime? Not that I can see. Asking to investigate is not a crime, threatening is something else. All he needs to do is release the aid now with no threat on the memo and he now has a weapon to beat Biden with that the Democrats themselves asked to be released. He doesn't even need the Ukraine to investigate Biden's son. He just needed the American people to know there is something there and he can publically hammer Biden with it.

Do you not see the political gamesmanship in that? Seriously, put your Trump hate down for a moment. And see what just happened from a purely political standpoint. And ask yourself if the information about Biden would have made it to the public in a way Trump could use in a favorable way if the Democrats had not demanded it be released? This may have just been a very carefully orchestrated game of politics to sway the public and get them asking questions about Biden.

My prediction is Trump releases the aid to the Ukraine with no additional problems noted. The Ukraine investigation on Biden's son may not even happen. He'll just uses the accusation to hammer Biden during the election and raise questions on him. If that is all that happens, well damn. Way more smarts than I give him credit for and I don't think he is as dumb Riverdog thinks he is.

So we'll see if I'm right or he gets ousted because of it. I don't see this as impeachable, especially if the aid gets released to the Ukraine. Not a single threat on that phone call. And I think he will use this Ukraine thing to hammer Biden during the 2020 election raising questions about his corruption.

[I-5]

I think we have different facts.

My understanding is that the aid was already released, but not until AFTER the phone call with Zelensky, and also AFTER whistleblower complaint. Trump admitted he had delayed it because he was 'worried about corruption'. Rich.

The funds were released on Sept 11.*

There is no evidence that Joe Biden or Hunter Biden did anything wrong, nor has either of them been under invesigation.

Let me know if you know something I don't that makes the statements above inaccurate.

* https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... stleblower

[Aseahawkfan]

Ok. Let's ask ourselves what do the Dems need to prove to impeach Trump.

1. That Trump threatened the Ukrainian president with withholding of aid in exchange for an investigation.

2. That the Ukrainian president knew about the withheld aid during the phone call.

3. That an investigation by Ukraine is being done.

4. That aid is continuing to be withheld.

If any of those questions come up with a big no, not much to go on. From the memo, it did not even sound the Ukrainian president knew any aid had been withheld. I'm starting to wonder if Trump withheld the aid to set up his game. We will see.

[RiverDog]

In the notes from the phone conversation, Immediately after the Ukrainian Pres asked about getting some shoulder fired ground-to-air missiles, Trump told him that he would like for them to "do us a favor" and suggested they open an investigation into Biden and son.

When I hear someone asking me to do a favor, it means that they are asking for something a little above and beyond a standard transaction..."could you do me a favor and throw in an extra pair of shoelaces with those shoes I just bought?" The only problem is that the notes are not a word-for-word transcript, they're contemporaneous notes taken by officials (presumably CIA agents) that were listening in on the phone call, so we don't know for sure that the request for missiles by the Ukrainian Prez was met with an immediate request of a favor from Trump as the notes suggest.

But the timing of the withholding of military aid (McConnell has already said that he didn't get an explanation) occurring just a week or so ahead of the phone call is a little more than circumstantial evidence. That part needs to be explained before I'll believe Trump's story that he was concerned about corruption.

In my opinion, even if the withholding of aid wasn't related to the "favor", Trump's request for them to re-open a case that had already been determined to have found no wrongdoing indicates that Trump's motivations were purely political and constitutes an abuse of power.

We'll see if 20 Republican Senators see things the way I do.

[Aseahawkfan]

Now the Ukrainian President is speaking for Trump and saying he was never threatened. Literally, the guy they absolutely needed on their side is not on the Dems side. He would have to be the major witness in their trial. And Warren just shot up in the polls apparently.

[Aseahawkfan]

In the notes from the phone conversation, Immediately after the Ukrainian Pres asked about getting some shoulder fired ground-to-air missiles, Trump told him that he would like for them to "do us a favor" and suggested they open an investigation into Biden and son.

When I hear someone asking me to do a favor, it means that they are asking for something a little above and beyond a standard transaction..."could you do me a favor and throw in an extra pair of shoelaces with those shoes I just bought?" The only problem is that the notes are not a word-for-word transcript, they're contemporaneous notes taken by officials (presumably CIA agents) that were listening in on the phone call, so we don't know for sure that the request for missiles by the Ukrainian Prez was met with an immediate request of a favor from Trump as the notes suggest.

But the timing of the withholding of military aid (McConnell has already said that he didn't get an explanation) occurring just a week or so ahead of the phone call is a little more than circumstantial evidence. That part needs to be explained before I'll believe Trump's story that he was concerned about corruption.

In my opinion, even if the withholding of aid wasn't related to the "favor", Trump's request for them to re-open a case that had already been determined to have found no wrongdoing indicates that Trump's motivations were purely political and constitutes an abuse of power.

We'll see if 20 Republican Senators see things the way I do.

The main witness the Ukrainian president is saying he wasn't threatened. Sorry bud, it will end there if the Ukrainian president didn't feel threatened, the aid is sent, and their evidence crashes with Trump being able to drag a bunch of material to use against the Dems out of this. It won't matter if Ukraine investigates a thing as long as Trump can insinuate things happened with reporters steadily dragging out information that occurred in Ukraine.

I'm starting to think this is Trump's payback for the Russian Collusion Investigation. There is always payback when you do these kinds of things.

This is going to be a real interesting propaganda battle to see how they can spin it. If Trump takes Biden down so Warren is his opponent, convinces the American people the Democrats are the bigger scumbags in Ukraine, and spins this as him ferreting out the "Deep State" to get his supporters riled up to vote again, then damn, unbelievable.

[I-5]

Getting the Ukrianian president to say he didn't feel threatened doesn't end his troubles. Why would it?

I'll go back to this statement from Pelosi and Hoyer:

“The President of the United States sought to enlist a foreign government to interfere in our democratic process by investigating one of his political rivals -- and may have used the withholding of Congressionally-appropriated foreign assistance days earlier as intimidation”

Zelensky may be the subject, but he himself has nothing to do with the actions taken by the president as described above.

Example: if i tell my son he can't watch TV until he finishes his chores, but I let him watch TV anyway even though he doesn't do his chores and says he never believed he was threatened....that means I never tried to coerce him, right? Uh huh. By the way, if that happens, I'm probably not a very good dad.

[RiverDog]

Getting the Ukrianian president to say he didn't feel threatened doesn't end his troubles. Why would it?

It doesn't help the case against Trump, either.

“The President of the United States sought to enlist a foreign government to interfere in our democratic process by investigating one of his political rivals -- and may have used the withholding of Congressionally-appropriated foreign assistance days earlier as intimidation”

The first part is true, the second needs to be investigated.

It now appears as if Trump is changing his story as to why he delayed Congressionally approved funds, from preventing "bureaucratic corruption" within the Ukrainian government to the "lack of similar financial contribution by other Western powers". If there's one thing that Trump has taught us over the past 2.5 years, it's not to believe a single word that comes out of his mouth. I don't believe him. It sounds as if he got to thinking that the latter excuse sounded better than the former. If he can't come up with some sort of tangible proof of withholding funds to extract more aid from western European nations, I'll ascribe to the Dem's narrative that it was used to coerce Ukraine into "doing a favor for us."

Zelensky may be the subject, but he himself has nothing to do with the actions taken by the president as described above.

Agreed.

[Aseahawkfan]

Getting the Ukrianian president to say he didn't feel threatened doesn't end his troubles. Why would it?

It seriously erodes the case against him.

“The President of the United States sought to enlist a foreign government to interfere in our democratic process by investigating one of his political rivals -- and may have used the withholding of Congressionally-appropriated foreign assistance days earlier as intimidation”

The second part is not proven and if he released the aid, it's all done. If the Ukraine never even knew he withheld aid, then that is even worse for the Dems. That is the part that I want to see. If he withheld aid intending to play the Democrats to make them look like idiots, while not really ever intending to keep the aid back so he can have the Dems release information about Joe Biden per their request that is some serious political gamesmanship. I think he may have done it.

Really, think about it. How credible would the Biden information have been if Trump just somehow released it himself or some news organization released it. Probably would have passed completely unnoticed. Instead The Dems demanded its release focusing the public not only on Trump's behavior but the behavior of the Democrats biggest contender's son. Do you think Trump supporters will see this as anything other than a double standard?

So the wild card is not Trump supporters who will see this as the Dems protecting their candidate while showing Trump a double standard, but what will happen with the swing voters? Will that see Trump as corrupt or as ferreting out corruption by the Democrats? We will see.

Zelensky may be the subject, but he himself has nothing to do with the actions taken by the president as described above.

Yes, he does. If Ukraine knew nothing about withheld aid, then there was no threat. They have only President Trump asking to investigate what may be well-documented corruption by a high level United States politician. Sound familiar?
Finding the corruption is often less compelling then the insinuations. Trump sounded a lot more devious before the Mueller Report found no collusion than when people were dreaming of a smoking gun. Now Biden gets to deal with insinuations about his behavior.

Trump has very little to lose. He was already under constant investigation and attack. Now he threw some meat to his attack dogs to go after Biden.

Example: if i tell my son he can't watch TV until he finishes his chores, but I let him watch TV anyway even though he doesn't do his chores and says he never believed he was threatened....that means I never tried to coerce him, right? Uh huh. By the way, if that happens, I'm probably not a very good dad.

Yes. It does mean you never tried to coerce him as you had no weight to your threat. In court they could not prove your coercion. They would laugh it out of court.

Now you're getting it. Asking with no real threat is not a crime. The individual you are supposed to have threatened has to feel threatened. I can't just walk to up say you and ask you to punch my neighbor in the face because I don't like him, then you don't do it and don't feel threatened, I'm not going to jail or experiencing any problems with the law.

You have to have a credible threat to show abuse of power. I'm not sure asking for Ukraine to investigate someone that may have committed a crime there is enough to impeach.

But we will see won't we. Both Dems and Repubs propaganda machines are in full spin mode. We'll see who spins stronger come November 2020. I know for sure Trump will be hammering the Dems and Biden over this. If they impeach and Trump stays in office while beating Biden and the Dems over the head with this Ukraine thing and then wins re-election, he will be nigh untouchable. I will have to listen to the Anti-Trump crowd for more four more years. That will be super annoying.

Suffice it to say there are no need to debate this further. Now I just to need to watch and see if Trump shot himself in the foot or made a sacrifice play to turn the tables on the Dems. He basically took an issue concerning the biggest political threat to his re-election that was a complete non-factor that no one cared about and somehow it is ending up in the political arena at seemingly the right time.

Who knows. This may have been a Dem schism power move to take out both Biden and Trump while pushing another candidate to the forefront like Warren or Harris. Kill two birds with one stone. All I know for sure is someone powerful is pulling some strings and making some moves with this trash.

[I-5]

Sorry ASF, your ‘logic’ just doesn’t have any logic attached to it. Ukraine knew they were supposed to receive the aid but as of the call hadn’t received it yet, since they DISCUSSED it. Then Trump asked him for a FAVOR. Lastly, the aid was finally released on September 11, AFTER the whistleblower complaint was filed. What is so hard to understand about this timeline?

Regarding coercing my son, whether I fail or not, it’s the ATTEMPT we are talking about, not the result. Your thinking is flawed here, too.

[Hawktawk]

It’s really simple here. Guys like asea and the departed burrton are bright people but just too cool for school regarding trump. I’m branded as a trump hater and wear the badge with pride. I hated him from about 2 weeks after he came down the escalator because I correctly sensed he was wholly unfit to lead America . I hate trump with a passion. I’ve never encountered another human being so deserving of a Micheal Dixon to the little mushroom. But my hatred now is about love of America, the constitution, the rule of law . As I say it’s a simple scandal. The president pressured a foreign leader who understands America is his only chance to survive into investigation of his primary rival for the most powerful job on the planet. It does not matter if the allegations against Hunter were legit and all indications are they are not. It doesn’t matter if hunter was procuring prostitutes for old Joe, committing campaign finance , whatever. The prez told a foreign leader to coordinate with his PERSONAL lawyer and the frigging AG of the nation to
Investigate Joe Biden. One day after Bob Mueller testified before Congress ...hard stop. If this is not impeachable conduct do away with the procedure already. On another note Ben Sasse who faces a primary fight said these revelations are “very troubling “
As did Pat Toomey and Thad Cochran. So the dam is leaking . Meanwhile as Joni Ernst says she sees “nothing “
In the report video of her in 2014 advocating impeaching Obama over executive actions surfaced just today....
Get ya popcorn