The Trump Crime Family

[jalimon]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...f804e2-018e-11ea-9518-1e76abc088b6_story.html

When you dig a bit you can easily find the correct link. Easier to complain tho...

 

[Bred Sob]

OK, that settles it then. Trump is a criminal, along with his children. Seems like peanuts though, given the fact that he will surely be impeached pretty soon. The testimony by the star witness is indeed devastating.

MR. ZELDIN: This is the only reference in your opening
statement to Biden other than your one reference to the
July 25th call. And this isn't firsthand. It's not
secondhand. It's not thirdhand. But if I understand this
correctly, you're telling us that Tim Morrison told you that
Ambassador Sondland told him that the President told
Ambassador Sondland that Zelensky would have to open an
investigation into Biden?

AMBASSADOR TAYLOR: That's correct.

https://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/CPRT-116-IG00-D008.pdf

Trump is toast.

 

[Valcazar]

OK, that settles it then. Trump is a criminal, along with his children. Seems like peanuts though, given the fact that he will surely be impeached pretty soon.

What does one have to do with the other? Trump's other crimes aren't the reason he is being impeached, and being impeached isn't limited to crimes. They don't have a lot to do with one another.
Or is your point that you think small crimes are ok?

Trump is toast.

Obviously not. The odds he will be removed are slim. Like you, most of the Senate is ok with his criming as long as the crimes are targeting other people and they get what they want out of it. Even abuse of power and risks to national security aren't things most Republicans care about.

It is adorable that you pulled up the talking point du jour like a good minion and present it like it is a massive gotcha.

 

[anon_vlad]

OK, that settles it then. Trump is a criminal, along with his children. Seems like peanuts though, given the fact that he will surely be impeached pretty soon. The testimony by the star witness is indeed devastating.

.........

Ambassador Sondland told him that the President told
Ambassador Sondland that Zelensky would have to open an
investigation into Biden?

................................

Trump is toast.

Are you aware that Sondland has confirmed this? That makes it first hand.

 

[Valcazar]

Are you aware that Sondland has confirmed this? That makes it first hand.

You're asking him to think for himself and not repeat "own the libs" talking points. That's not really in his wheelhouse. Were you around for the Mueller stuff? Facts that contradict his narrative are things he avoids.

 

[Bred Sob]

Are you aware that Sondland has confirmed this? That makes it first hand.

Yes, he did -- after he didn't. Choose whichever you prefer.

 

[Bred Sob]

and being impeached isn't limited to crimes. They don't have a lot to do with one another.

Of course not. Carthago delenda est. Trump must be impeached. No need to bother with that "high crimes and misdemeanors" junk.

Like you, most of the Senate is ok with his criming as long as the crimes are targeting other people and they get what they want out of it.

You see, as our supreme authority on impeachment Mr. Valcazar has just pointed out, we don't need to bother with his "criming". Or do we? But hey, that was in the previous paragraph, right? We are way past that by now.

 

[Bred Sob]

Were you around for the Mueller stuff? Facts that contradict his narrative are things he avoids.

I meant to ask you about that, thank for you reminding me. Admirably, you took lots of time and effort to prove to us that Trump was (and most likely still is) an agent of Putin. What happened with that remarkable finding? Oh, I see, that might have been a crime, which, as we have just seen, has nothing to do with impeachment.

Please keep posting, we all need a comic relief once in a while.

 

[Valcazar]

Of course not. Carthago delenda est. Trump must be impeached. No need to bother with that "high crimes and misdemeanors" junk.

The fact you don't know what that phrase means isn't my problem.

You see, as our supreme authority on impeachment Mr. Valcazar has just pointed out, we don't need to bother with his "criming". Or do we? But hey, that was in the previous paragraph, right? We are way past that by now.

Do you work at being this dumb?
You said you thought his crimes were small stuff.
But my point was about the GOP stuff in the Senate. They have made it very clear they don't care about his crimes either.

What happened with that remarkable finding?

As usual, you are misrepresenting my position. Proving he was an agent of Putin wasn't the point there. (Which you would know if you had ever read it.)

You do know nothing in the report has been contraindicated, right? In fact, a lot of it overlaps what is going on now with Ukraine.

Look. No one expects you to do more than repeat talking points, but can you at least try not to sound so ignorant when you do so?

 

[Bred Sob]

Valcazar, I must admit that even though I sometimes can not resist the temptation to point out some of your more remarkable rhetorical achievements, I invariably do so against my better judgment. Be assured that I always keep in mind the chief rule of a Trump "debate" (FLOABW): TDS is a serious condition, and people afflicted with it ought to be consoled, not ridiculed. Take your medicine and try to have a good night of sleep.

 

[anon_vlad]

Yes, he did -- after he didn't. Choose whichever you prefer.

Sondland was forced to confirm after his colleagues "ratted". In any case, the transcript released by the White House of the phone call sounded like something out of gangster movie - "I need a favor, though". I will admit that I was wrong in thinking that Trump spends all his time golfing, tweeting and watching Fox News. Apparently he watches movies also.

 

[Bred Sob]

In any case, the transcript released by the White House of the phone call sounded like something out of gangster movie - "I need a favor, though".

Well, apparently "sounding like something out of gangster movie" is the new standard for impeachment. Replacing, obviously, that obsolete "high crimes or misdemeanors" business. Let's see how it works out, I am stocking up on popcorn.

 

[anon_vlad]

Does Trump stealing from his own charity qualify as a high crime or misdemeanor?

https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a29739052/trump-admits-foundation-malfeasance/

"but the President* of the United States has stipulated in an official legal document that he used money meant for veterans to pump up his presidential campaign."

 

[Bred Sob]

Does Trump stealing from his own charity qualify as a high crime or misdemeanor?

Apparently not. It seems that there needs to be a clear geographical dimension. Russia did not work out, so we are now on to Ukraine. If that falls through too, hey, the map is big. Belarus, Moldova, what is next? Why not Transnistria, a nice place for an impeachable offence too. Sky is the limit really.

 

[anon_vlad]

Well, apparently "sounding like something out of gangster movie" is the new standard for impeachment. Replacing, obviously, that obsolete "high crimes or misdemeanors" business. Let's see how it works out, I am stocking up on popcorn.

You are twisting my words like a true Trumpeteer. Lying about one's sex life as Clinton did is an impeachable offence, but extorting the Ukranians for help in an election and stealing from a charity to obtain campaign funds is not.

 

[Bred Sob]

You are twisting my words like a true Trumpeteer.

You are flattering me.

Lying about one's sex life as Clinton did is an impeachable offence

I am not a lawyer, but I think the technical term is "perjury and obstruction of justice", not "lying about one's sex life"

but extorting the Ukranians for help in an election and stealing from a charity to obtain campaign funds is not

I will take your word for that.

 

[anon_vlad]

>>but extorting the Ukranians for help in an election and stealing from a charity to obtain campaign funds is not

I will take your word for that.

You don't need to take my word. Trump has admitted both. (He seems to assert that neither are crimes as a sitting president is above the law.) As you know, he never lies.

 

[Bred Sob]

You don't need to take my word. Trump has admitted both. ... As you know, he never lies

Reading is difficult work, I get that. But can you perhaps make an attempt at understanding your own words?

You said that "<some alleged crime> is not [impeachable]" (possibly aiming to be sarcastic, who knows) and I played in kind replying "I will take your word for that". Trump's admissions (if any) have nothing to do with that. Clear enough or do you need further clarification?

 

[Doc Holliday]

Congress can practically chose to impeach a President for whatever reason they chose.

I'm told that if they chose to they could even impeach a President for accepting a consensual blow job from a fellow adult. I kid you not. You can get impeached for accepting a blow job! :lol:

 

[cloudsurf]

I kid you not. You can get impeached for accepting a blow job! :lol:

Only if the intern is clumsy and allows half his load to land on her dress......lol