For those who think that Trump should not be impeached

Why should Trump trying to get a foreign government to interfere in our election simply be let go without repercussions?

I'm seriously confused as to why people seem to simultaneously think that this was a bad thing to do, but also there should be zero consequences for it.

But what about!!!!

but also there should be zero consequences for it.

That's a strawman.

One can think what he did is wrong but it doesn't deserve the most drastic of political penalties (removal from office) that a President can receive.

He could be formally censured by both Houses (don't laugh).

Also, while it might seem as letting him off, there is something to be said about the argument of being too close to the election and letting the voters mete out the punishment. Unless of course you think not enough voters will "punish" him.

With that said, he should be impeached for obstruction of justice.

@Master_Live: "He could be formally censured by both Houses (don't laugh)."

Okay, why shouldn't I laugh? Would this actually do anything? Or is it just a statement and nothing else?

You should laugh, "censure" lol.

That's probably McConnell's "off ramp". He knows the situation isn't good and has told members of the Republican majority to prepare for a long trial. He doesn't want to be seen as dismissive of the allegations and knows he has to protect members in purple states.

That's probably his strategy: long trial to "hear everybody", not removing him but censure him and then pushing the mantra of "let the People decide".

Quite dangerous, how can he square some members (if it turnout to be the case) of some Republican Senators voting for removal (meaning the President isn't fit for office) but others not so? Sure, there is difference of opinion but will those Senators who vote in favor of removal campaign against the President's reelection? Better case in that sense if everyone votes against removal. Quite the pickle right there for Republicans, but that's what you get when you elect a piece of garbage like Donald Trump.

Honestly for anyone politician that didn't take their oath of office seriously...…….they should resign. The country should always come first.

What crime are you accusing trump of

Show me the evidence of the crime

Joe Biden is not the end all, be all of the US election process. In fact, it's increasingly likely that he will not be the nominee for the Democratic party. People are assuming that Trump contacting the newly elected President of Ukraine to tell him that he believes the Biden family may have been part of some corrupt dealings with a Ukrainian oil company and recommends Ukraine investigate is not a crime.

It's only a perceived crime because Joe is running for president. Joe could have been napping at home watching the Nationals in the World Series with no intention of running and Trump could have done the same thing and the Democrats and media would have still called it interference because to them anything Trump does is horrible.

That said, Trump is clearly ignorant of Ukrainian politics because the entire country is rife with corruption.

I say if Joe Biden has nothing to hide, he has nothing to fear. I also say that if Trump is to be removed from office for "election interference" then clearly the CIA, FBI, FISA courts, and other entities involved in the spying on the Trump campaign in 2016 should also been brought to task for election interference.

It is OK that Hillary used Russia and the Ukraine to interfere in the 2016 election. Politico published an article about it in January 2017, a Ukrainian court found officials to government of the Ukraine guilty of interfering in the 2016 US presidential election, and Joe Biden bragging on a video of threatening to with hold one billion dollars to the Ukraine unless they fired the prosecutor looking in to the company Hunter Biden worked for. Trump ask the Government of the Ukraine as a favor to assist the United States Attorney General in to looking into corruption that occurred in the 2016 election involving the Ukraine. The president is mandated by the US Constitution to investigate corruption especially by government officials.

@Serraph105: Trump embodies the qualities unitedstatesians desire to have. A person with no problem to flaunt international law and violate other countries sovereignty.

Jim would be right.

Nothing he said in there is factual.

Prove it.

You guys both posted facts. The proof is on yourself. We'll wait. There is no evidence anywhere that Clinton worked with Russia or Ukraine. I need YOU to show me where this exists.

Well.....the first claim about Hillary using Russia and Ukraine to interfere in the 2016 campaign is never stated in the article Jim mentioned. Despite not actually citing his source, I went and found it (citation, notice it's from January 2017) and while it says that Russia and Ukraine were on Hillary's side it never makes the claim that Hillary tried to work with them. It's worth noting that this is well before the Mueller report came out and that we have had nearly 3 years worth of new information since then.

So the very first claim Jim made doesn't hold up. It also doesn't do anything to explain why the president shouldn't be held to account.

And you wouldn't see any Republicans do that.

So they were on Hillary's side, but she didn't work with them.

Alright ;)

There are a few key differences between what Biden did and what Trump did. First, Biden's son was not working for the Ukranian energy company during Joe's quid pro quo, so there wasn't a personal conflict of interest. Second, Joe wasn't the only person who wanted the prosecutor removed. It was an action taken jointly between allies. As vice president, Biden really doesn't have any sort of power to withhold funds unilaterally. Trump ordered the funds withheld without the support of anyone else, for no clear reason other than that Joe Biden was running against him. A quid pro quo itself isn't necessarily illegal or even unethical. It's all about how you go about it.

Damn... No answer

Let me try again

What crime are you accusing trump of

Show me the evidence of the crime

The thing is, if you are going to start at the place of not even acknowledging that Trump withheld aid from Ukraine in the hopes that he could get dirt on Joe Biden and thus interfering in our election, which is stated in the first sentence at the top of this topic, despite the fact that the House is working on impeachment from their end and despite the numerous topics on gamespot that you have taken part in, then I don't really believe it's worth engaging with you on this topic. I don't believe that you will be making your arguments in good faith, which means you (imo) will be making bad faith arguments, which in turn means that you can't actually be reasoned with. So why should I waste my time?

Ukraine was not told any aid would be withheld, unless they gave trump dirt on Biden (where is your evidence for this, please share, seems pretty important if you want people to take this claim seriously), what was asked to look into was from 2016, Biden wasnt running for president at the time of the call anyway, also does that mean Biden can never be investigated by default because he COULD run for president??

Joe Biden's son was working for a Ukrainian gas company at the time Joe Biden told them to fire the prosecutor. The only reason he got his job was because his dad was the vice president of the United States. You need to get your information straight. Every time Joe Biden was appointed as a special envoy to a country Hunter Biden received money for a company he was working for at the time. The countries were China and Romania.

I was going to bring that up, thanks Jim

So what is the punishment of leftwing media for interfering in the election?

The same punishment they got for promoting Trump-Russia collusion conspiracy theories,

They look like idiots and loose viewership

https://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/july-2019-ratings-cnn-sees-noticeable-year-over-year-drop-off-but-remains-a-top-10-cable-network-in-total-day/409984/

The same punishment for gaslighting on a public forum.

@jeezers: haha true. Its hillarious to me though. The Russians essentially exposed Hillary Clinton and the lefties are focused on the fact that the Russians did it as opposed to what the DNC actually did. Classic case of shoot the messenger.

But when leftwing media runs a constant barage of BS they just eat it up.

I love a good but what about defense

@jeezers: "Ukraine was not told any aid would be withheld, unless they gave trump dirt on Biden"

So to be clear, you believe that Ukraine did not know aid was currently being withheld? Or do you mean that it wasn't specifically articulated why the aid was being withheld even though they knew about it?

what was asked to look into was from 2016, Biden wasnt running for president at the time of the call anyway, also does that mean Biden can never be investigated by default because he COULD run for president??

He absolutely was, the call took place on July 25, 2019 and Biden announced his candidacy for president on April 25, 2019.

This stuff is easy to confirm with a quick google search.

Not needed to answer OP question.

Sorry, I had that wrong. He was on the board when the prosecutor was fired. He wasn't on the board during the time period the prosecutor was investigating.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-whistleblower-ukraine-buris/ukraine-agency-says-allegations-against-burisma-cover-period-before-biden-joined-idUSKBN1WC1LV

It's still a very different set of circumstances.

Both

and they did eventually get the aid, they just did not know aid would be frozen temporarily at the time of the phone call.

Personally i find this Ukraine call/Biden/Aid story a big smokecreen to take away focus from William Barr's investigation to try and keep everything focused on Trump instead of the political interference done by our own officials during the 2016 election.

But i don't think it is going to work.

"Why should Trump trying to get a foreign government to interfere in our election simply be let go without repercussions?"

The question is implying something that has yet to have concrete evidence.

You could start your answer with "If". As it is now your first post in this thread could be seen as spam and an attempt at derailing the thread.

Then shouldn't the question its self start with "If".

It can't be both scenarios, they contradict each other. That's why I was asking you to clarify which one you believed.

For our investigation into Trump during the 2016 election to qualify as interference, wouldn't the public have needed to know about it at the time? Was there any propaganda that resulted from it?

You could start your answer with "If".

It doesn't matter man. Jeezers keeps making claims that are not true and not reading (or at least not comprehending) responses from me that are purely about trying to figure out what he believes. I'm pretty much done with him on this one.

So you seem to be in possession of some "ironclad evidence that Trump said a word for word what you said above" so I hope you have shipped it to congress.

Until then there is no actual evidence of his "wrongdoing" other than Trump being Trump and in his normal non-politician way have said something that instantly will be made into something by the people who want him gone.

And as to the recent polls just to be clear, there is no movement among republicans.

@Jacanuk: this entire thing is an obvious last ditch effort by the dems, its pathetic and embarrassing, the process is not transparent, there is no bipartisan effort being shown. You have Shiff deciding who gets to be in the room, which witnesses can be used, who can sit in on the meetings, republicans aren't allowed to call witnesses, aren't allowed on the meetings, trump isn't allowed to defend himself. Its honestly one of the saddest things I've ever seen in US politics in my lifetime and its obvious that the media is in on it too. They Iove the drama and the clicks, how people can take this seriously when we still have no actual evidence of a crime is INSANE.

McCarthy had a neat little speech about it recently, I agree with him, the genie is out the bottle now and they are going to have some serious egg on their face.

https://youtu.be/Hj9Cb5U7O60

@jeezers: You do know in other impeachment inquiries it wasn't transparent either. And once it goes to a vote it will be.

It will still be behind closed doors with Adam Shiff acting as judge and jury. The Republicans were not allowed to ask basic questions as that might lead to the identity of the so called whistle blower because the Republicans would want to have him testify which would compromise Adam Shiff. Here is a link to the name of the whistle blower and Shiff's involvement.

realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2019/10/30/whistleblower_exposed_close_to_biden_brennan_dnc_oppo_researcher_120996.html

That's because they have to do their own investigation. Other impeachments had the investigation first as well. Ever hear of a Grand Jury? The Justice Department isn't...……...another misuse of power by trump by the way. The actual impeachment will be public.

1. The same crime Cohen went to jail for. If you could charge a sitting president, he would have been charged. Anyone else would have. Cohen isn't guilty in Trump's stead. That makes no sense. There are three parties, the Lawyer, Trump and his accountant who were involved.

2. Obstruction of justice. The report never found him innocent, it in fact mentioned several occasions (maybe 10) of obstruction of justice. They just left it up to congress, who chose to do nothing. 'you can still be guilty of obstruction of justice without committing a crime'.

https://www.vox.com/2019/4/18/18484731/mueller-report-trump-barr-obstruction-legal-experts

3. Trump CANNOT ask a foreign entity to involve themselves against his political opponents. The portion of the transcript released was enough proof for that.

4. Trump withheld 400M in aid to Ukraine, unless they agreed to proceed with investigations. A decorated US Colonel testified to this.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/10/29/public-confirmations-quid-pro-quo-between-trump-ukraine/

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/oct/22/us-ambassador-bill-taylor-ukraine-trump-military-aid-biden

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/23/us/politics/ukraine-aid-freeze-impeachment.html

These are all separate crimes.

There's a chance the FBI steps in the minute Trump steps down as president and is no longer protected under the rule 'A sitting president cannot be charged'.

Firstly, decorated witness aside. Trump's own transcript was enough. That brings up another problem. Trump broke protocol and had this and other phone calls stored in a classified server. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-ukraine-call-white-house-secret-server-impeachment-a9123536.html

If Trump is telling the truth and it is indeed a perfect phone call, release it to the interested members of Congress and the Senate and get this cleared up today.

-

You ask for concrete evidence, but people charged are not convicted, they are investigated. And so far there is enough evidence to move forward with investigations. And enough to move forward with impeachment investigations. If Trump is innocent, then the impeach procedure will fail in its tracks. However, so far it's not looking good.

Eventually, further along the procedure it goes, there'll be subpoena's for evidence, including the phone calls in the classified servers I imagine.

I don't know all the specific facts of this case. But I think that asking a foreign country for dirt on your political rivals is an impeachable offense. I certainly support a transparent investigation. I also think grossly incompetent, unstable, and unfit for the presidency is also impeachable but that's a much more subjective thing and depends on p.o.v.

Do people really believe the lies Trump says daily or do they just hate progressives so much they don't care?

@narlymech: I feel the same way about people who believe in Nancy Pelosi or Chuck shumer.

Different strokes for different folks I guess lol

Still waiting for those facts/proof.

I for one think it would be interesting if we in the rest of the world got to influence who gets to be the president in the US, Since it's clearly okay if we meddle in the political process.