Russia bounty on US troops

[Weezer]

Go ahead and call the POTUS out and issue some kind of censure or formal rebuke or whatever they decide Weez. But what Slick Willy did didn’t warrant removal of office and was the origin of this tit for tat we have now.

I disagree. He broke the law. Not even about him having a relationship with a subordinate, which in the military would get him into all kinds of ****, but he knowingly broke the law. If that doesn't warrant removal, then it takes a hell of a lot to warrant removal. But I do agree that it led to the current tit for tat atmosphere we have, but not because Republicans acted politically, but because Democrats knew Bill had been legitimately caught. In a perfect world, Bill's dalliances would have never come to light, but we don't live in a perfect world. Once they came to light, it would have been criminal, IMO, to do nothing.

 

[Weezer]

Only on seldom occasions will a perjury offense result in prison time. It is rarely enforced, and even when it is enforced, there is almost always a political purpose for it. Perjury charges tend to only be pursued when a prosecutor is desperate to nail either a politician, or an organized crime boss with something (anything), and they have nothing else that they can pin on him.

So all of these Trump officials being prosecuted for lying to Congress or Mueller or whoever, they should all be set free because it's entirely political?

 

[NorthDallas40]

I disagree. He broke the law. Not even about him having a relationship with a subordinate, which in the military would get him into all kinds of ****, but he knowingly broke the law. If that doesn't warrant removal, then it takes a hell of a lot to warrant removal. But I do agree that it led to the current tit for tat atmosphere we have, but not because Republicans acted politically, but because Democrats knew Bill had been legitimately caught. In a perfect world, Bill's dalliances would have never come to light, but we don't live in a perfect world. Once they came to light, it would have been criminal, IMO, to do nothing.

I can agree to that.

Oh and on the Lewinsky affair, while slimeballish they were both adults. It was textbook sexual harassment just due to the work relationship... but even that affair alone didn’t warrant removal. To your point it all went to **** in how he dealt with the revealing of it.

 

[BowlBrother85]

So all of these Trump officials being prosecuted for lying to Congress or Mueller or whoever, they should all be set free because it's entirely political?

Those are good examples. There is no question that the prosecutions of Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort, Rick Gates, Roger Stone and Michael Cohen involved a political agenda... just like going after Bill Clinton did.

 

[Weezer]

Those are good examples. There is no question that the prosecutions of Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort, Rick Gates, Roger Stone and Michael Cohen involved a political agenda... just like going after Bill Clinton did.

So they should all be exonerated and any convictions expunged, right?

 

[BowlBrother85]

So they should all be exonerated and any convictions expunged, right?

Not if they were convicted for more than just perjury... as Paul Manafort was.

 

[Weezer]

Those are good examples. There is no question that the prosecutions of Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort, Rick Gates, Roger Stone and Michael Cohen involved a political agenda... just like going after Bill Clinton did.

And chasing after Bill for Whitewater was a political agenda. Chasing after Bill for lying under oath was a responsible action unless you believe obvious crimes by a President should be swept under the rug.

 

[Weezer]

Not if they were convicted for more than just perjury... as Paul Manafort was.

You're spinning. Your double standard is showing. Republicans/Trumpers = guilty. Democrats = not guilty.

 

[NorthDallas40]

Not if they were convicted for more than just perjury... as Paul Manafort was.

 

[Weezer]

Democrats were not bound to vote in favor of conviction and removal from office, even if they believed that Bill Clinton had committed perjury. That is still an individual judgment call from each Senator and the reasoning for voting against conviction and removal from office was sound. Although Bill Clinton had committed perjury, his lies concerned a personal matter rather than a professional one. Clinton had not lied over a matter related to his duties as the President of the United States. He had lied about an extramarital affair and then tried to cover it up. In other words, he had not lied about his knowledge concerning the break-in of a rival political party's headquarters, and then tried to cover it up.

Revisiting this post, let's pose a hypothetical. Donald Trump rapes a woman and conclusive evidence exists, should he be removed from office? I mean, it's a personal matter, correct? Nothing to do with his duties? That's why I don't buy this argument. A crime is a crime. A POTUS should not be above the law.

 

[BowlBrother85]

You're spinning. Your double standard is showing. Republicans/Trumpers = guilty. Democrats = not guilty.

If you want to vacate all perjury convictions, that is fine with me. Perjury is like a jay-walking charge. It's selectively enforced, the motives behind it's enforcement are almost always political. I'm just pointing out, that some of Trump's associates, such as Paul Manafort, have been convicted of other things than simply lying.

 

[Weezer]

If you want to vacate all perjury convictions, that is fine with me. Perjury is like a jay-walking charge. It's selectively enforced, the motives behind it's enforcement are almost always political. I'm just pointing out, that some of Trump's associates, such as Paul Manafort, have been convicted of other things than simply lying.

At lower levels of law, perjury is not political. It seems you're advocating different laws for us common folks as compared to the ruling elite.

 

[Weezer]

Did you know that under federal law, perjury is a felony that can hold a sentence of up to five years?


But it's no big deal, right?

 

[BowlBrother85]

Revisiting this post, let's pose a hypothetical. Donald Trump rapes a woman and conclusive evidence exists, should he be removed from office? I mean, it's a personal matter, correct? Nothing to do with his duties? That's why I don't buy this argument. A crime is a crime. A POTUS should not be above the law.

I was strictly referring to the offense of perjury, when the lying under oath concerns a personal matter. I never said that a President shouldn't be held accountable for any crimes involving their personal life, such as the extreme hypothetical example which you cited.

 

[BowlBrother85]

At lower levels of law, perjury is not political. It seems you're advocating different laws for us common folks as compared to the ruling elite.

At lower levels of law, outside of the military, perjury is very rarely enforced. That is a reality.

 

[VFFL@THE BEACH]

Let me guess, you're a catcher.

You were making fun of Trumps name while calling him out for the same thing. Now go back to sleep.

Good talk.

 

[VFFL@THE BEACH]

Trump is a giant, arrogant douche bag. You'll get no argument from me on that one. But there is no conclusive evidence he broke the law. There is a huge grey area on the POTUS being able to delay aid. Did he act unethically? I believe so. But did it rise to the level of impeachment when whether or not he violated the law is questionable? NO, it did not. And the Democrats knew this. They've convinced their base it should have been enough, but even Nancy knew it was not, which is why she drug her feet for so long. You bought into political theater. Being a giant arrogant d-bag is not an impeachable offense. Beating the chosen one is not an impeachable offense. Trump should never have been elected, but he was running against an opponent who should also never have been elected. And we're repeating that with this election, with the exception that the other guy who should never be elected(Biden) probably will be. Trump is an ass hat, but the Dems have yet to offer up enough that actually supports removal from office. And honestly, until COVID hit, odds are, Trump was going to be reelected. The left has taken this tragedy and used it for every ounce of political hay they can make, and Biden will be the beneficiary. But once again, the country will lose because we will elect an undeserving candidate to be our leader. But is that enough to impeach Joe? No, just as it wasn't enough to impeach Trump.

People on both sides, people I think are probably good people, have allowed themselves to have the wool pulled over their eyes. They're so convinced they are on the side of right that they fail to see both sides are wrong.

You make lots of good points here that I agree with.

I think without racial issues and covid the election is still closer than you think. 2016 was a close election and he did not win the popular vote. However, if I had to bet money it would be drumpf in a close election. I am not writing him off this election. Lots of things can happen before the election.

I think you are right in that both sides are wrong not necessarily in relation to impeachments but in general. The beauty of our government is that it was based on compromise. Roger Sherman called government an infernal business of compromise. I tend to agree that compromise means nobody gets what they want but at the end of the day it provides better government.

When we as citizens allow our senators and representatives to do whatever they want without fear of losing their seats then they don't have to compromise. This necessity of compromise forces government officials to work together.

 

[Weezer]

You make lots of good points here that I agree with.

I think without racial issues and covid the election is still closer than you think. 2016 was a close election and he did not win the popular vote. However, if I had to bet money it would be drumpf in a close election. I am not writing him off this election. Lots of things can happen before the election.

I think you are right in that both sides are wrong not necessarily in relation to impeachments but in general. The beauty of our government is that it was based on compromise. Roger Sherman called government an infernal business of compromise. I tend to agree that compromise means nobody gets what they want but at the end of the day it provides better government.

When we as citizens allow our senators and representatives to do whatever they want without fear of losing their seats then they don't have to compromise. This necessity of compromise forces government officials to work together.

To address the last paragraph, we are in desperate need of Congressional term limits, but will never see them as it would mean the very people we want to limit would have to vote to surrender power. Serving in Congress should not be a lifetime appointment, but often is.

 

[VFFL@THE BEACH]

Revisiting this post, let's pose a hypothetical. Donald Trump rapes a woman and conclusive evidence exists, should he be removed from office? I mean, it's a personal matter, correct? Nothing to do with his duties? That's why I don't buy this argument. A crime is a crime. A POTUS should not be above the law.

1. Not sure that is hypothetical at all.
2. You are really sticking to your guns on this no crime was committed by drumpf. I think you are a little too concrete on the idea of a crime. In that you need it too specific. Presidents have abilities to violate the integrity of the government that everyone else does not have. The man unsolicited, admitted to asking foreign governments for help getting elected, bribery and violating checks and balance or treason.

Let's take a step back and look at both impeachments for the impact they have on society.
1. Clinton had an immoral relationship and then lied about it under oath which is perjury.
Who was harmed?
Monica Lewinsky and her family or friends.
Hilary and Chelsea and family and friends.
The public's trust to the extent that our president is willing to lie about personal affairs. Does this continue into public and business affairs? He was never caught again but this chick who was trump's former g/f and eipstiens harem coordinator may be interesting.

2. Trump used bribery for political gain and violated or delayed checks and balances. Asked or offered to ask China for help in a U.S. election.
Who was harmed?
Every American, except trump and family.
The integrity and validity of the government
The validity of U.S. elections
The Constitution

I see drumpfs issues/crimes having a more serious impact on America.

 

[VFFL@THE BEACH]

To address the last paragraph, we are in desperate need of Congressional term limits, but will never see them as it would mean the very people we want to limit would have to vote to surrender power. Serving in Congress should not be a lifetime appointment, but often is.

I agree but we don't need term limits if people hold them accountable. Civic duty and education in this country is part of its downfall.

 

[Weezer]

1. Not sure that is hypothetical at all.
2. You are really sticking to your guns on this no crime was committed by drumpf. I think you are a little too concrete on the idea of a crime. In that you need it too specific. Presidents have abilities to violate the integrity of the government that everyone else does not have. The man unsolicited, admitted to asking foreign governments for help getting elected, bribery and violating checks and balance or treason.

Let's take a step back and look at both impeachments for the impact they have on society.
1. Clinton had an immoral relationship and then lied about it under oath which is perjury.
Who was harmed?
Monica Lewinsky and her family or friends.
Hilary and Chelsea and family and friends.
The public's trust to the extent that our president is willing to lie about personal affairs. Does this continue into public and business affairs? He was never caught again but this chick who was trump's former g/f and eipstiens harem coordinator may be interesting.

2. Trump used bribery for political gain and violated or delayed checks and balances. Asked or offered to ask China for help in a U.S. election.
Who was harmed?
Every American, except trump and family.
The integrity and validity of the government
The validity of U.S. elections
The Constitution

I see drumpfs issues/crimes having a more serious impact on America.

You're being overdramatic about who was harmed by Trump's actions. Whether or not he broke the law is a large grey area. Did Biden break the law when he used his position as VP to have the Ukrainian prosecutor removed? It's not as clear cut as some would like to believe.

In Clinton's case, it's clear he broke the law. He admits to breaking the law. Should he, as POTUS, be above the laws that apply to the rest of us common folk. If you think he should, then I certainly understand why you're so dismissive of his impeachment. But if you don't think that, then I'm left to believe the defense is entirely political.

 

[Weezer]

I agree but we don't need term limits if people hold them accountable. Civic duty and education in this country is part of its downfall.

I agree they should be held accountable, but politics override common sense. And the longer you allow them to stay, the more power and corruption they amass.

 

[Tyler Durden]

 

[USAFgolferVol]

Really? So, yanking promised defensive weapons from two NATO member nations - because Putin wouldn't like that - isn't "disaster"'. Instead of blankets and good wishes, providing Ukraine with *actual* lethal weaponry to defend against Putin is a "disaster". Compelling Europe to allocate more funding for her defense; "disaster". Being proven right all along about the threat from China...."disaster". Not listening to the 1980s "calling for their foreign policy"? - "disaster". Not starting another war like prior presidents..."disaster", too, eh?

So, no, I actually substantiate remarks and show how they align with facts. BELIEF plays no part.

Maybe there is something to this, but I discredit anything Bolton says before he utters it. Zero cred.

He has at least as much credibility as the President

 

[Purple Tiger]

You're being overdramatic about who was harmed by Trump's actions. Whether or not he broke the law is a large grey area. Did Biden break the law when he used his position as VP to have the Ukrainian prosecutor removed? It's not as clear cut as some would like to believe.

In Clinton's case, it's clear he broke the law. He admits to breaking the law. Should he, as POTUS, be above the laws that apply to the rest of us common folk. If you think he should, then I certainly understand why you're so dismissive of his impeachment. But if you don't think that, then I'm left to believe the defense is entirely political.

Let's try to keep some perspective here. Clinton got blown. Trump let our soldiers get blown away.