Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
I would, if it was a thing he actually did. I’ve said it was unethical for Trump to go there, but an investigation is not “interference” in itself. The Bidens aren’t above scrutiny. It could have made them look like boy scouts if they weren’t corrupt aholes too.
Let me ask- is the notion that Ukraine helped the Clinton campaign in 2016 a conspiracy to you?
I will confess ignorance here - I don't know how Ukraine helped Clinton - but if they did, they did not do a very good job.
Yes, the investigation IS interference, simply because of how Trump could then use it. He's doing his best to slam Biden now with the "he should be investigated by Ukraine and China"* schtick. Imagine what he could do with the "Biden is so corrupt Ukraine is investigating him"* schtick. He doesn't need a finding of corruption any more than he needed the FBI to find Hillary had committed a crime. Being investigated is enough fodder for him.
Wasn't one of Trump's conditions that Zelensky make a public announcement that they were investigating Biden? Trump wanted that made public. Didn't the Trump administration prepare a statement for Zelensky? Or am I misremembering?
It's a 'conspiracy theory', yes.
Trump supporters are convinced that Biden is guilty of something and that Trump's secret "investigation" is only because he is concerned about corruption and can't trust the DOJ and FBI.
If you're talking about the article still, just a couple days ago, you quote-adopted Levin who said, in discussing this article, that Trump is a lying corrupt #######. Taibbi isn't saying that Trump didn't do it, just that (if you get past all the misstatements of facts) it's undemocratic to use impeachment. And he makes a decent and maybe good point at the end about what happens if Trump simply doesn't go.
Fake news. Trump never said those things on national television. That was a clever misrepresentation using Alec Baldwin to impersonate him. The lying media conspired with the do nothing Democrats to pass it off as the real thing. And, even if it was Trump, he was joking, which is why he pretended to be Alec Baldwin pretending to be Trump. And, even if he wasn't joking, it's not breaking the law because he's the President.
None of my views concern Trump as I did not vote for Trump nor will I ever vote for him. My views are what we want going forward. If Biden has some dirt on his hands I want to know now, not after he is elected and then having 2 years of investigations like Trump. Do I think Biden is dirty? Not sure but it does seem his son is involved in something that Joe may have had knowledge of. Time will tell.
Then Trump's ploy has worked. He never intended to have an investigation with an actual conclusion prior to election day, because that investigation will confirm what was already determined: Biden's pressure (along with the pressure from the rest of the free world) was to get rid of the corrupt prosecutor who wasn't doing anything, not to get rid of a prosecutor who was investigating his son. All Trump ever wanted was something he could use to smear Biden from now until election day. The fact that he's created doubt in your mind (along with millions of others) shows he has succeeded. And, if you won't vote for Trump, he also "wins" if you won't vote for Biden, just as he won by convincing people not to vote for Clinton.
Is there a particular reason you don't trust the investigation/analysis that has already occurred on this subject?
Is it not obvious? Joe Biden is leading the negotiations to determine what kind of military and financial support Ukraine is going to get. Meanwhile Ukraine is suppose to be 'investigating' the company to which Biden's son is pulling in excess of 6-figures a month. That puts the government in a position where it would be suicide to come down too hard on this company. It is a massive conflict of interest. One which should be not be allowed IMHO. But it happens all the time and people game the system for personal gain, especially in these international dealings.
I said I wasn't responding anymore, but I feel like this is a good way to illustrate being "balanced" so I'm going to. Lets say everything you say here is correct...I disagree completely, based on all the information we have. Circumstances and people involved are completely different, but lets say its correct. Your logic still applies today as reason not to trust an "investigation" but in reverse. Now you have a US agency who wants there to be dirt and is holding over the heads of the Ukrainians military support/funding. That puts the government in a position where it could be suicide NOT to come down too hard on Biden's son. It's a massive conflict of interest. One which should not be allowed, but it happens all the time and people game the system for personal gain, especially in these international dealings. The new wrinkle added by this scenario is now the President is making personal requests as President, which wasn't the case before.
Amazing how fast that figure grows. Next thing you know, he'll be making 6-figures per week which is nearly as much as Ivanka does from her Chinese copyrights.
I have heard figures from $50K to 160K per month. It is an enormous salary regardless of the exact number that he is only getting because his daddy was vice president of the united states which gives the company leverage against the Ukraine government coming down on them. And that is the point. Thank you for ignoring the obvious and focusing on some meaningless nit.
There is nothing to disagree with. What the Bidens did suck and what Trump did suck. Here is a decent balanced article, if that is what you really care about.
It is an outrageous conflict of interest which politicians and their famility routinely profit off of, but politiicans want us to look the other way on. It is definitely wrong, but it is probably not illegal and impossible to prove anyways. If Biden was the typical federal employee, such a setup where he was in charge of decisions which directly impact a company his son works for would never be allowed ethically.
There's plenty...starting with his 6 figure monthly salary...I got all the info I needed from BBC and Reuters. Why would I need to rely on opinion pieces from CNBC? I'm confident I have the correct information to make an informed opinion on this. You'd be wise not to use the sources you endlessly complain about in our MSM to get this information. It's making it difficult to have an actual discussion with you.
That is a nit. Does it really matter if it is $50K per month or whatever. It is a big salary. And same back out you. You fail to address the real point which is the conflict of interest. Nobody here wants to admit the obvious.There's plenty...starting with his 6 figure monthly salary...I got all the info I needed from BBC and Reuters. I'm confident I have the correct information to make an informed opinion on this. You'd be wise not to use the sources you endlessly complain about in our MSM to get this information. It's making it difficult to have an actual discussion with you.
Oh...and it's not the least bit lost on me that you completely avoided my overall point to post this. Well done
So...my point is, what pressure not to investigate a company (that was investigated and no wrongdoing found) was there?
This is then ridiculous stuff...people disagree with you, clearly state why...and you throw this crap out there over and over again.
It is a known conflict of interest, period. Whether you believe it was a positive or negative influence on Ukraines policies has no bearing. It is not the results which creates the conflict of interest, it is the situation. That is why you avoid conflicts of interest, because it is impossible to prove how decisions are influenced.
No...a known conflict of interest is if his father was doing things to influence the company. Bidens son or the Trump's just having business over seas is a potential conflict and why they should be avoided. Nobody will argue that.
You're acting like Biden did this in a vacuum...he did not. He (along with several other world leaders) was applying pressure in a way that was asking for the company his son was working for to be investigated. And I'm on record saying that if something was found in the investigation, he should have been held accountable. I have no allegiance to Biden or his son.
I was involved in a conversation....the poster posted that while talking to several people.
Same here. If what Biden and his son have done is wrong then I have zero problem running him out of town. He means nothing to me.You're acting like Biden did this in a vacuum...he did not. He (along with several other world leaders) was applying pressure in a way that was asking for the company his son was working for to be investigated. And I'm on record saying that if something was found in the investigation, he should have been held accountable. I have no allegiance to Biden or his son.
This isn't odd to me...it's expected. What I find odd is that in some minds the last "investigation" performed was somehow tainted by Biden's ability to influence but somehow a new investigation by Trump is going to be valid despite his ability to influence. That logic absolutely baffles me. Best I can tell it's two sides of the same ####### coin!
Do you actually read what you type? You just accused me of doing the exact same thing you did. Also the little alias comment is way out of line. Who do you think you are? You are in multiple threads policing the discussion. Get a life. Please.
I agree with this.
I dunno...it seems like this is a perfectly normal conversation where people disagree. I'm not hear to read the same thing over and over again, I want different opinions. Suddenly out of the blue, he calls this a cesspool - why? what's the point? It feels very much like jon_MX is lashing out because reasonable people don't agree with him.
Well, I refused to take his cnbc opinion piece as gospel over what I've read on BBC and Reuters for starters. Then I pushed back pointing out following the logic he established that his desire for another investigation would suffer from the exact same problems and the reasons he didn't trust the first one would be valid for this one as well. Then I suggested that he might not want to use the MSM he is constantly bagging on as flawed and biased as his source either. So, yeah....cesspool
You mean the guy who was suspended for promising to slap another poster has issues lashing out?
![[scooter]](/data/avatars/m/22/22287.jpg?1659477690){kind=avatar}
