Official Donny, Drumpf, Trump Thread

[flockofseagulls104]

Not a very good whataboutism there, SSS.

Since Trump’s inauguration, Don Jr. and Eric have been responsible for the Trump Organization, which sprawls across more than 30 countries, about 500 business entitles, and according to Trump generated about $9.5 billion in revenue before he took office. And they certainly haven’t put things on pause during their father’s term in office.
.

Why should they?.
.

Just hours before the Trumps’ Fox News appearances, Forbes reported that Eric and Don Jr. have sold more than $100 million of the family’s real estate since the January 2017 inauguration — including a $3.2 million deal in the Dominican Republic last year that is “the clearest violation of their father’s pledge to do no new foreign deals while in office.” Foreign money has also poured into the Trump International Hotel, located just blocks from the White House, which the president’s most recent financial disclosure indicated made him $41 million last year alone.

In addition to Ukraine, the Trumps have also accused Hunter Biden of cashing in in China. But as the New York Times detailed in August, a $1.7 billion Trump Organization project in Indonesia received a $500 billion infusion from a state-owned Chinese construction company. And it’s not just Eric and Don Jr.; Ivanka Trump, despite working in the White House, continues to do business in China as well. And last year, Ivanka’s husband, White House official Jared Kushner, received a massive cash infusion from Qatar.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... aine-china

You keep claiming, based on nothing other than a generalized statement about Ukrainian corruption, that the investigation into Burisma and the Bidens was some sort of sham. But it's not just the Ukrainians who have said there was no evidence of corruption. Kurt Volker, one of Trump's own appointments, said that Joe Biden did nothing wrong and that he did not think the allegations against Joe Biden were credible. So you have a long list of witnesses saying (A) Joe Biden did nothing wrong, and (B) what Trump did was improper, and you just dismiss them all as people with grudges against Trump.

Yup. A lot of people do, as you well show. Volker has a right to his opinion, but it's just that. Many people who know just as much or more than him have different opinions. I dont think Schiff was interested in hearing from them.

[silverscreenselect]

Many people who know just as much or more than him have different opinions.

People like you, Trump, and Mark Levin. These people are career diplomats, military officers, and others who are experts in international diplomacy and relations. They are also not Democratic operatives or others in the tank for Adam Schiff. And their opinions should carry weight. That's why in trials they allow experts to give their opinions.

As far as people that Schiff isn't interested in hearing from, does that include the various people who have refused summons when called to testify? Tomorrow, Mick Mulvaney gets his chance to testify. Let's see if he does so or invents a reason not to.

Devin Nunes now has a chance to call his own witnesses. Let's see whether the Republicans actually bring people in or just claim that they won't participate in a farce and witch hunt.

[flockofseagulls104]

Many people who know just as much or more than him have different opinions.

People like you, Trump, and Mark Levin. These people are career diplomats, military officers, and others who are experts in international diplomacy and relations. They are also not Democratic operatives or others in the tank for Adam Schiff. And their opinions should carry weight. That's why in trials they allow experts to give their opinions.

As far as people that Schiff isn't interested in hearing from, does that include the various people who have refused summons when called to testify? Tomorrow, Mick Mulvaney gets his chance to testify. Let's see if he does so or invents a reason not to.

Devin Nunes now has a chance to call his own witnesses. Let's see whether the Republicans actually bring people in or just claim that they won't participate in a farce and witch hunt.

It is a farce. Just like the Russian Collusion farce. Just like the Resistance farce.
What is the crime?

[silverscreenselect]

What is the crime?

In very simple terms even you might understand... extortion.

Here's a definition of extortion from a legal site:

Extortion is a form of theft that occurs when an offender obtains money, property, or services from another person through coercion. To constitute coercion, the necessary act can be the threat of violence, destruction of property, or improper government action. Inaction of the testimony or the withholding of testimony in a legal action are also acts that constitute coercion.

Trump tried to obtain services (an investigation of Biden for his personal political gain) by improper government action... the withholding of funds that had been approved by Congress. This wasn't a general call for the Ukrainians to get tough on corruption... the Bidens were the only people that Trump ever mentioned investigating. And the fact that the plan eventually fell through is no defense. There are a number of people in federal prison today for terroristic conspiracies that fortunately were thwarted before they were carried out.

The Founding Fathers were especially concerned about bribery which is why it, along with treason, are the only crimes mentioned by name in the impeachment section of the constitution. One of the main grievances about Royal governors and other British officials in colonial times was their routine demand and acceptance of bribes and favors. This was put in the Constitution to condemn and hopefully (not a hope that came to pass a lot of the time) put a stop to it in the United States.

[flockofseagulls104]

What is the crime?

In very simple terms even you might understand... extortion.

Here's a definition of extortion from a legal site:

Extortion is a form of theft that occurs when an offender obtains money, property, or services from another person through coercion. To constitute coercion, the necessary act can be the threat of violence, destruction of property, or improper government action. Inaction of the testimony or the withholding of testimony in a legal action are also acts that constitute coercion.

Trump tried to obtain services (an investigation of Biden for his personal political gain) by improper government action... the withholding of funds that had been approved by Congress. This wasn't a general call for the Ukrainians to get tough on corruption... the Bidens were the only people that Trump ever mentioned investigating. And the fact that the plan eventually fell through is no defense. There are a number of people in federal prison today for terroristic conspiracies that fortunately were thwarted before they were carried out.

The Founding Fathers were especially concerned about bribery which is why it, along with treason, are the only crimes mentioned by name in the impeachment section of the constitution. One of the main grievances about Royal governors and other British officials in colonial times was their routine demand and acceptance of bribes and favors. This was put in the Constitution to condemn and hopefully (not a hope that came to pass a lot of the time) put a stop to it in the United States.

Sorry. No, he didn't. If he actually did anything like Schiff's fantasy I might be inclined to agree with you. But the facts show otherwise.

[silverscreenselect]

But the facts show otherwise.

Trump's self-serving statements are not facts. Most of your facts seem to reside somewhere in the deep state.

[flockofseagulls104]

But the facts show otherwise.

Trump's self-serving statements are not facts. Most of your facts seem to reside somewhere in the deep state.

The fact is the transcript of the call and the statements of the 2 people on the call. ' Dirt', ' make up stuff' and all the other bullshit are from Schiff, were not part of the phone call in any way, shape or form, and everything else is opinions. Not one of the witnesses, even those who claim the transcript is incomplete, say that it left out anything that changed anything.
The dems are suffering from a credibility gap. They have cried wolf for so long and so many times it is pathetic. In any case the president will not be convicted of any charge the democrats in the house impeach him for. Talk about abuse of power for political purposes.

[wbtravis007]

But the facts show otherwise.

Trump's self-serving statements are not facts. Most of your facts seem to reside somewhere in the deep state.

The fact is the transcript of the call and the statements of the 2 people on the call. ' Dirt', ' make up stuff' and all the other bullshit are from Schiff, were not part of the phone call in any way, shape or form, and everything else is opinions. Not one of the witnesses, even those who claim the transcript is incomplete, say that it left out anything that changed anything.
The dems are suffering from a credibility gap. They have cried wolf for so long and so many times it is pathetic. In any case the president will not be convicted of any charge the democrats in the house impeach him for. Talk about abuse of power for political purposes.

ICM!

You're really something else

[Bob78164]

I, for one, find it fascinating how many of the people who want to hit Biden because they think his adult son (whom he has no legal right to control) made money off the family name (which wouldn't be illegal) don't seem to care a whit that Donny has actually been getting money from foreign governments because of his office (which violates the Constitution). --Bob

[flockofseagulls104]

I, for one, find it fascinating how many of the people who want to hit Biden because they think his adult son (whom he has no legal right to control) made money off the family name (which wouldn't be illegal) don't seem to care a whit that Donny has actually been getting money from foreign governments because of his office (which violates the Constitution). --Bob

How has he been getting money from foreign governments, bobby? Are we back to emoluments again? You had a hissy fit on that even before he took office.

If Hunter's last name was Jones, would they have given him millions of dollars for nothing? What did they get in exchange, considering that daddy was put in charge of diplomatic relations with ukraine? Think Mr. Nadler would be interested in investigating that? I know you don't care, but I certainly would like to know. I'm one of those people the president was referring to when he mentioned mr biden's name to president zelensky.

So tell me exactly why Burisma paid millions of dollars to hunter biden, who was out of his father's control. Why on God's green earth would they do such a thing?

[flockofseagulls104]

Trump's self-serving statements are not facts. Most of your facts seem to reside somewhere in the deep state.

The fact is the transcript of the call and the statements of the 2 people on the call. ' Dirt', ' make up stuff' and all the other bullshit are from Schiff, were not part of the phone call in any way, shape or form, and everything else is opinions. Not one of the witnesses, even those who claim the transcript is incomplete, say that it left out anything that changed anything.
The dems are suffering from a credibility gap. They have cried wolf for so long and so many times it is pathetic. In any case the president will not be convicted of any charge the democrats in the house impeach him for. Talk about abuse of power for political purposes.

ICM!

You're really something else

I'm a threat to The Future Of Our Democracy.

What does ICM mean?

[flockofseagulls104]

But the facts show otherwise.

Trump's self-serving statements are not facts. Most of your facts seem to reside somewhere in the deep state.

You seem to be confused. Do you even know what the deep state is?

[Bob78164]

I, for one, find it fascinating how many of the people who want to hit Biden because they think his adult son (whom he has no legal right to control) made money off the family name (which wouldn't be illegal) don't seem to care a whit that Donny has actually been getting money from foreign governments because of his office (which violates the Constitution). --Bob

How has he been getting money from foreign governments, bobby? Are we back to emoluments again?

Last time I checked, the Emoluments Clause was still part of the Constitution, so yes.

It's also just plain corrupt. And it's much more efficient to pay off the actual officeholder than it would be to pay one of his kids in the hope that dad will do what you want.

But the way I know you're in the tank for Donny is that you just don't care. You're willing to see Donny get all kinds of money from foreign governments, in direct violation of the Constitution, without batting an eye, but you're all hot and bothered because you don't like the way Joe Biden's adult son made some money. You really are like the voters who were asked if they'd change their mind about Donny if he shot someone on Fifth Avenue and replied: "You'd have to know why he shot him."

If it were just you, I'd tell you to flock yourself and be done with it. But voters like you have seized control of the Republican Party, which means that spineless Republican politicians who care more about staying in office than they care about our country are enabling Donny. And because that's the case, the Republican Party deserves the electoral oblivion that will eventually arrive for it. --Bob

[silverscreenselect]

You seem to be confused. Do you even know what the deep state is?

It's the space between your ears.

[flockofseagulls104]

I, for one, find it fascinating how many of the people who want to hit Biden because they think his adult son (whom he has no legal right to control) made money off the family name (which wouldn't be illegal) don't seem to care a whit that Donny has actually been getting money from foreign governments because of his office (which violates the Constitution). --Bob

How has he been getting money from foreign governments, bobby? Are we back to emoluments again?

Last time I checked, the Emoluments Clause was still part of the Constitution, so yes.

It's also just plain corrupt. And it's much more efficient to pay off the actual officeholder than it would be to pay one of his kids in the hope that dad will do what you want.

But the way I know you're in the tank for Donny is that you just don't care. You're willing to see Donny get all kinds of money from foreign governments, in direct violation of the Constitution, without batting an eye, but you're all hot and bothered because you don't like the way Joe Biden's adult son made some money. You really are like the voters who were asked if they'd change their mind about Donny if he shot someone on Fifth Avenue and replied: "You'd have to know why he shot him."

If it were just you, I'd tell you to flock yourself and be done with it. But voters like you have seized control of the Republican Party, which means that spineless Republican politicians who care more about staying in office than they care about our country are enabling Donny. And because that's the case, the Republican Party deserves the electoral oblivion that will eventually arrive for it. --Bob

Is this about peopke staying in his hotel, bobby?
How does it work? Does he come out in favor of policies that benefit the country who pays the most for their rooms? Or who books the most rooms? If the visitors from another country don't stay at his hotel, does he go to war with them?
What titles has he gotten? Is he the Grand Poobah of Mauritania now? What gifts has he been given? I think his hotel provides a service just like any other. Does he check where everyone who cones to the White House is staying?

You are priceless silly and an example why many people think the dem party is totally insane. You can cling to your fantasy, but I don't see me going anywhere near the democrat party anytime soon. And I am not alone.

And, surprise, surprise. You didn't answer my questions.

[silverscreenselect]

How does it work? Does he come out in favor of policies that benefit the country who pays the most for their rooms? Or who books the most rooms?

You clearly don't understand the purpose of the emoluments clause, which applies to us here at the Georgia Lottery (in a statutory form) and just about every other elected official in one form or another. You can't accept gifts in any form beyond whatever limits are set. Period. No exceptions. No question about whether you acted upon the gift or not. And as I mentioned a few posts ago, the Founding Fathers drafted these clauses because they came from an environment in which gift-giving, bribery, extortion, and currying favor with government officials was common practice. The whole purpose wasn't just to remove outright bribery, but anything that could lead to favoritism or the appearance of favoritism.

[silverscreenselect]

I don't see me going anywhere near the democrat party anytime soon. And I am not alone..

No, you're not alone. There's just not that many of you left.

[Bob78164]

How does it work? Does he come out in favor of policies that benefit the country who pays the most for their rooms? Or who books the most rooms?

You clearly don't understand the purpose of the emoluments clause, which applies to us here at the Georgia Lottery (in a statutory form) and just about every other elected official in one form or another. You can't accept gifts in any form beyond whatever limits are set. Period. No exceptions. No question about whether you acted upon the gift or not. And as I mentioned a few posts ago, the Founding Fathers drafted these clauses because they came from an environment in which gift-giving, bribery, extortion, and currying favor with government officials was common practice. The whole purpose wasn't just to remove outright bribery, but anything that could lead to favoritism or the appearance of favoritism.

But it's only a part of the Constitution so it doesn't count. It's not as though it has anything to do with e-mails. --Bob

[flockofseagulls104]

How does it work? Does he come out in favor of policies that benefit the country who pays the most for their rooms? Or who books the most rooms?

You clearly don't understand the purpose of the emoluments clause, which applies to us here at the Georgia Lottery (in a statutory form) and just about every other elected official in one form or another. You can't accept gifts in any form beyond whatever limits are set. Period. No exceptions. No question about whether you acted upon the gift or not. And as I mentioned a few posts ago, the Founding Fathers drafted these clauses because they came from an environment in which gift-giving, bribery, extortion, and currying favor with government officials was common practice. The whole purpose wasn't just to remove outright bribery, but anything that could lead to favoritism or the appearance of favoritism.

But it's only a part of the Constitution so it doesn't count. It's not as though it has anything to do with e-mails. --Bob

Of couse I don't understand anything. It's me after all. ( I feel a new addition to my signature coming up.) That's why I ask specific questions which both of you avoid like the plague.
What gifts are trump receiving, and how does he use those gifts to show favoritism? How does that fit with your definition? Did he run for president to increase occupancy of his hotel?
Explain to me how giving Biden's son millions of dollars to sit on a board for which he has zero qualifications does not fit your definition.

[Estonut]

You really are like the voters who were asked if they'd change their mind about Donny if he shot someone on Fifth Avenue and replied: "You'd have to know why he shot him."

What kind of lawyer doesn't understand that the reason for shooting someone is paramount to whether or not the shooting was legal and justified?

[tlynn78]

You really are like the voters who were asked if they'd change their mind about Donny if he shot someone on Fifth Avenue and replied: "You'd have to know why he shot him."

What kind of lawyer doesn't understand that the reason for shooting someone is paramount to whether or not the shooting was legal and justified?

[Estonut]

It's not as though it has anything to do with e-mails.

You keep on bringing this up. Far worse than "private e-mails" was the use of her own server. She controlled back-ups and retention. That's what allowed her to have 30,000 subpoenaed e-mails destroyed. Do you really believe those e-mails were about her daughters wedding? Perhaps she was exchanging recipes so she could stay home, bake cookies and have teas!

[silverscreenselect]

What gifts are trump receiving, and how does he use those gifts to show favoritism?

Representatives of dozens of foreign governments have spent time and money in Trump properties since he's been elected. That's income. Emoluments doesn't necessarily mean a gift. The definition is "a salary, fee, or profit from employment or office." He is profiting from these foreign governments doing business from him. The emoluments clause doesn't say he has to grant favors in exchange for the emoluments. Accepting them is illegal in and of itself. Granting favors in exchange for the business turns it into bribery.

Biden's adult son is not subject to the emoluments clause of the constitution or any other law that prohibits him from taking a cushy job that he got because his name was Biden.

I answer your questions. You either ignore or don't understand the answers.

[flockofseagulls104]

What gifts are trump receiving, and how does he use those gifts to show favoritism?

Representatives of dozens of foreign governments have spent time and money in Trump properties since he's been elected. That's income. Emoluments doesn't necessarily mean a gift. The definition is "a salary, fee, or profit from employment or office." He is profiting from these foreign governments doing business from him. The emoluments clause doesn't say he has to grant favors in exchange for the emoluments. Accepting them is illegal in and of itself. Granting favors in exchange for the business turns it into bribery.

Biden's adult son is not subject to the emoluments clause of the constitution or any other law that prohibits him from taking a cushy job that he got because his name was Biden.

I answer your questions. You either ignore or don't understand the answers.

So what you are saying is he ran for president so he could rent rooms in his hotels.
If this is what you think, you are insane.

VP Biden was subject to emoluments as much as trump, and his actions are much more relevant to the statute than trump's.

You didn't answer the question why would they pay him so much for nothing? What were they getting for their money?

[silverscreenselect]

So what you are saying is he ran for president so he could rent rooms in his hotels.
If this is what you think, you are insane.

VP Biden was subject to emoluments as much as trump, and his actions are much more relevant to the statute than trump's.

You didn't answer the question why would they pay him so much for nothing? What were they getting for their money?

If you don't think that Trump considered the commercial possibilities associated with a run for the Presidency then you're insane..

I'm not sure why you think Biden's actions are "much more relevant" to the emoluments clause than Trump's are, but you are correct in that he was subject to the clause while in office. However, (1) Joe Biden did not receive anything. His son, a man in his 40s, did. (2) Burisma is a PRIVATE company and the emoluments clause applies to foreign governments. (3) Everyone who has looked into the Biden/Burisma situation found nothing wrong. That includes Ukrainian authorities and the various people who testified before Schiff's committee.

Of course, Burisma felt that by hiring Hunter Biden, they might gain by that. But that's not illegal, in and of itself. It's a tacky practice but a common one among both parties and including the three adult Trump children. And they are deeply tied into the management of Trump Sr.'s business holdings while Hunter Biden was not involved in any business interests with his father.

You have this idea that because Trump is "rich," that he has no need to engage in shady or illegal tactics that "poor" people like Joe Biden do. Trump has been a cheap huckster all his life. When he was running for president, he was pitching Trump steaks at his campaign rallies. Many of Trump's holdings have been in financial trouble and the money they have brought in since he has been elected has helped keep them afloat. Why do you think he won't release his tax returns?

The difference between Trump and other crooks like Warren Harding is that Trump doesn't try to hide what he's doing. He just says so what, and gullible rubes like you go right along with him.