1. No Victim In The US? If the Biden's laundered Hunter's paycheck from Ukraine to Latvian banks and then to Cypriot banks and then to US banks, that looks like money laundering and the US would be the victim. Congress passed laws in the 1970's about US corporations bribing foreign governments for contracts. Whether there is a provision for a Vice President to engage in this type of graft with a foreign government may/may not come under that law. There may be other foreign interference laws that apply. That is for the DOJ to determine, not INTERNET GURUS and their DEVOTEES. 2. They Presume That The Ukraine is Perfectly Capable of Setting Its Own Priorities? Then what was Joe Biden doing threatening Ukraine that he was going to pull $1 billion in US support if they did not fire prosecutor Shokin?. What right did the IMF and the EU have to make supposedly similar threats? 4. US Meddling? Are you referring to meddling by Joe Biden, or Donald Trump---or both?
And I told you the remedy to any and all of this. The Dept of Justice puts up a Chinese Wall between their goals to seek a possible prosecution, and the President of the United States. The conflict of interest between a President running for re-election and this kind of circumstance, means he cannot have any role to play whatsoever. He should not even know a case is being contemplated, if one is.
All these attacks on PRESIDENT TRUMP are based on dubious PREMISES punctuated with what-ifs like "possible", "maybe", "If so"... They are followed by silly semantics that are stretched so thin they look like spaghetti. Who do people in the anti-Trump media and politicalforum think they are fooling? Trump has the constitutional authority to conduct foreign affairs as he sees fit. He needs official Congressional approval for treaties and declarations of war. If ANY government official (Biden) admits to co-ersion of a foreign government while in office, Trump can ask their head of state to investigate. The Office of President alone is enough to persuade friendly world leaders to comply. Ukraine's president did just that. He did not push back on Trump's request, so why does anyone think he resorted to co-ersion? Oh, that's right. We're talking about Trump frothers here.
are you suggesting that the role of POTUS has the "right" to do as he wants, when he wants without any kind of boundaries , ?? Sounds a lot like a monarchy of days gone by. Seems that a democratic republic has leader who is accountable to the population, and functions within the perimeters of the CONSTITUTION. the LAW and does not have the liberty of manipulating things to suit his own purposes. He /she is there for the NATION....... the entire nation. NO ONE functions without any rules, guidelines, ........not even royalty. The only ones that do.......are TYRANTS ....... dictators , autocrats none of which behave as if they are accountable to the population they lead. Just as important .....POTUS is elected by the people and is countable to the people who voted him in........and those that didn't. Particularly those that did not.
You don't seem to have read the Constitution. Your post reminds me of something I have learned-- The less someone knows about something, the more they want to argue about it. When they run of arguments, they retreat to the moral high ground and pee on those who know better.
It is one's choice if one allows himself to be peed on Funny thing.......The US as a nation has tried to maintain the higher moral ground It advertises itslf as antion of ethics. So what is the issue?? My point is : No leader warrants complete devotion.........as all leaders are human and have failings.
He cannot have a role to play whatsoever? He can certainly play a role per his powers under the Constitution. If you are referring to him recusing himself, that is for him to decide--not Internet gurus and their devotees.
The US brags about it EXCEPTIONALISM. It must work. Millions want to come here all the time. I have met people from all over the world in the course of my business. I liked to ask them a few questions. The most common answers were: Question: How do you like the US? Answer: Love it Question: What do you like best about the US? Answer: Opportunity Would you ever go back? Answer; Never Would you like to trade places with someone from Canada?
Back to the Impeachment Inquiry of the current POTUS.......... Don't think it is ethical or even legal for POTUS to be threatening the WB.. OR........do folks find that conduct acceptable?/ What kind of behavior do folks consider UNACCEPTABLE in their POTUS??.............or should he/she be able to do as he wishes ........with no limitation?? Of course the other question is: IF the current POTUS was a Democrat ........and behaved exactly as Trump does........would that be acceptable too??
why is it so important to ask such questions?? Does it provide you with some kind of reassurance that the US is what you believe it to be?? If one is happy with where one lives......that should be sufficient. Yes.....folks want to come to the US.......but the way that is being handled.......at the border for eg........is deplorable and inhumane. Now New York times is reporting that Trump has proposed at some meeting that some kind of moat like feature be constructed there and then filled with crocs and snakes......... as a deterrent. He also suggested that the border patrol shoot anyone that tries to cross. The point is THAT is the KIND OF THINKING the current POTUS has .......and it is getting pretty close to insanity ......as it is just bizarre that someone would even consider something so barbaric. His bizarre twitter activity is not fitting of a professional person......let alone a POTUS. .......but it seems folks all have different expectations of their POTUS........
He does not 'recuse' himself. 1. There is no role because there is no investigation. Even if there were an investigation, the Dept of Justice does not normally discuss its ongoing investigations into people it may suspect are guilty of money laundering or any crime with the President of the United States. Now if he wants to go outside protocol and try to start such an investigation, and if the person he wants to get investigated happens to be the son of his potential rival, and if he further decides to use his office to influence a foreign govt to foster an 'investigation' over seas for more 'evidence', then as happenstance he may find himself ensnared in a whistleblower complaint. If it so happens that the White House tries to bury the complaint, and the evidence behind a wall of secrecy designed for the highest level of national security clearance, without any national security issues to defend that choice, and if he threatens the whistleblower and simultaneously orders his staff to 'out him' then the House may use its powers under the constitution, to impeach him. In short, his peculiar fascination with the son of Biden, and his fixation on this two pronged international investigation based on innuendo and guesswork, is getting his own ass kicked.
GOP uneasy with Giuliani https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/463940-gop-uneasy-with-giuliani should think so..He is quite scattered.......and not doing himself ......nor Donald any favors.
Why should he not be proud about forcing out a corrupt prosecutor that half of the EU nations was also pressuring for his removable at the time. Sorry but it have zero to do with his son unless you are of the opinion that major EU nations was also was concern over his son.
He forced the government of Ukraine to remove the prosecutor who was investigating corruption in general and specifically in the case of his son being placed on the Burisma board at $600,000 per year. What was the EU trying to hide ???
Ironic to mention those that "think for themselves" immediately followed by a quotation of Ayn Rand's addled excuse for "thinking".
What you say may be true but it's a good idea to investigate anyway in case there was corruption, and that seems quite possible.
Withholding military aid is the equivalent of quid pro quo which is what makes what your BLOTUS did a CRIME.
Your BLOTUS has no authority to extort a foreign leader to conduct an investigation of his political opponent.
In fact he has authority, and duty, to conduct enquiries into all possible crimes. He has sworn to uphold the law.
You're likely getting that from the MSM and accepting it without question. Let's see that evidence as provided by "half of the EU nations". Which ones were they? And of course this has nothing to do with the EU but everything to do with corruption at the highest levels of US Government. You have no idea whatsoever who these 'major EU nations' are. Any 'collusion' has always been between the MSM and the Democratic Party, now being swallowed up by the far left.
