https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/editorials/ct-editorial-trump-impeach-censure-congress-ukraine-20191126-gqq2bszaqzhffkd6ybieuxyw2y-story.html

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

First President ever under the threat of impeachment or censure just because the opposing party hates him.

---

Impeachment and censure have always been political. Andrew Jackson was censured when his party was in the minority; the move was expunged after the next election when his party was back in power.
Andrew Johnson was a Democrat when there were close to 0 dems. in congress. He was impeached because he defied an act of Congress which was ultimately deemed unconstitutional. Historians have looked back on his impeachment as entirely political and an over reach by Congress. (it didn't help that Johnson was probably the most disagreeable person ever to attain the office of POTUS).

Nixon, is still the single most hated American Political leader in my lifetime--a hatred almost entirely emanating from Democrats. The changing point in the Watergate investigations came when Congress realized two things: The merits of the case for Presidential Abuse, and when polling data indicated the majority of Americans were turning against Nixon.

All of these events were motivated by political animus. The legal/constitutional justification that brought on the process of censure or impeachment was Presidential Abuse of Power, which happened to lesser or greater extent in all of the above incidences. Decrying the process as being political is like hating a dog show because they are too doglike. The entire proceedings in the House and ultimately in the Senate will be conducted by Politicians. You are expecting them to be something else than what they are?

Quote:

---

Trump didn't explain his motives, which of course were self-serving. First, he asked Zelenskiy to "find out what happened" with Ukraine's supposed meddling, alongside Russia, in the 2016 U.S. election.

---

Well no doubt an incredibly slanted article, but is this really an unusual request.

I bet it gets much much much worse than this from virtually every President that has ever served, if you are talking about "hard hitting" requests.

But it's Trump. The far lefts Kryptonite.

The wording of the article though sounds as slanted as Alex Jones when he discusses the left. The problem is "as should be" Jones gets no credence. The article which again is incredibly slanted, must get some credence or it wouldn't be on here.

Pretty good post, twd. I agree with most of what you have said. But Nixon was investigated for breaking into the Democratic Party headquarters at the Watergate Hotel. Bill Clinton was originally investigated for his part in the fraudulent Whitewater debacle. The Oval Office BJ and stained blue dress were just added bonuses. In both instances, it was not the crime itself, but the cover-up that was the flashpoint.

Donald Trump is being investigated for being Donald Trump. Although the special council has been disbanded, the relentless attacks from the Democrats and MSM on the President continue. The difference is, instead of investigating a crime, they continue to search for a crime.

Booray said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

First President ever under the threat of impeachment or censure just because the opposing party hates him.

I really worry how the Liberals are going to react in 2020 after Trump gets reelected. Their behavior these last three years has been abhorrent.

---

Trump has done plenty to encourage this.

Simple questions: if everything was so above board, why did Trump's people hide the transcript? Why has almost every career service diplomat testified that they were at least concerned by Trump's actions? Why won't the White House let Trump's inner circle testify?

It is as plain as day. Trump tried to leverage American foreign policy for a political favor. That is wrong and and should be called out in some manner.

I think censure and defeat at the box office are more appropriate remedies than impeachment. But pretending Trump is blameless here is willful ignorance.

---

Okay, here goes.

1. Why put into a top-secret server? I think probably to protect against leaks. It appears there are very few people in D.C. that Trump can trust. He released the same transcript for all the world to see for crying out loud!

2. Six months ago Democrats were crying about foreign corruption and interference into our 2016 elections and demanding action. Trump makes an effort to do just that with the new Ukranian President and the Dems lose their collective minds. The goalposts are in perpetual motion.

Yes, let's have an election and let the people decide. On that we can agree.

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Booray said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

First President ever under the threat of impeachment or censure just because the opposing party hates him.

I really worry how the Liberals are going to react in 2020 after Trump gets reelected. Their behavior these last three years has been abhorrent.

---

Trump has done plenty to encourage this.

Simple questions: if everything was so above board, why did Trump's people hide the transcript? Why has almost every career service diplomat testified that they were at least concerned by Trump's actions? Why won't the White House let Trump's inner circle testify?

It is as plain as day. Trump tried to leverage American foreign policy for a political favor. That is wrong and and should be called out in some manner.

I think censure and defeat at the box office are more appropriate remedies than impeachment. But pretending Trump is blameless here is willful ignorance.

---

Okay, here goes.

1. Why put into a top-secret server? I think probably to protect against leaks. It appears there are very few people in D.C. that Trump can trust. He released the same transcript for all the world to see for crying out loud!

2. Six months ago Democrats were crying about foreign corruption and interference into our 2016 elections and demanding action. Trump makes an effort to do just that with the new Ukranian President and the Dems lose their collective minds. The goalposts are in perpetual motion.

Yes, let's have an election and let the people decide. On that we can agree.

---

Partial transcript. That's important and constantly overlooked by the Trump defenders.

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Pretty good post, twd. I agree with most of what you have said. But Nixon was investigated for breaking into the Democratic Party headquarters at the Watergate Hotel. Bill Clinton was originally investigated for his part in the fraudulent Whitewater debacle. The Oval Office BJ and stained blue dress were just added bonuses. In both instances, it was not the crime itself, but the cover-up that was the flashpoint.

Donald Trump is being investigated for being Donald Trump. Although the special council has been disbanded, the relentless attacks from the Democrats and MSM on the President continue. The difference is, instead of investigating a crime, they continue to search for a crime.

---

From what I remember, investigators in the Watergate hearings also searched for the precise crime Nixon had committed--which finally came out in the tapes as Obstruction of Justice when he is telling the FBI not to investigate. Remember, if Nixon had not bugged himself, he would have finished his term of office.

What I see as common in Watergate, Ukrainegate, and even with Andrew Jackson is a President who has taken action or efforts that supercede the constitutional norms of Presidential Powers. This is at the core of the Constitutional grounds of impeachment: What the founders were most concerned about is a President who becomes a tyrant, a law unto himself. Nixon accomplished this by setting up the plumbers, his own extra-legal intelligence unit spying on his political opponents. Jackson, to a much lesser extent, extended his powers in his efforts to destroy the Bank of the US, which was created by Congress and was seen as within their power.
Trump-- as alleged by the Dems., has created an extra-legal investigative group headed by Giuliani, dealing with a foreign government, seeking information against his political opponent. While President have often used private citizens for diplomacy, intelligence, and negotiations with Foreign nations, this is normally done in consultation with Congress, and is defended as being performed in the National Interest-- not for an apparent personal political gain.

In all of the above cases, it is difficult to locate a criminal act. The abuse of power, however, is argument for Impeachment with Nixon, and Censure with Jackson. I am leaning toward the latter for Trump. I have come to think we would be better off if Congress delivers a censure or two to every President. --reminds him that folks are watching.

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Booray said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

First President ever under the threat of impeachment or censure just because the opposing party hates him.

I really worry how the Liberals are going to react in 2020 after Trump gets reelected. Their behavior these last three years has been abhorrent.

---

Trump has done plenty to encourage this.

Simple questions: if everything was so above board, why did Trump's people hide the transcript? Why has almost every career service diplomat testified that they were at least concerned by Trump's actions? Why won't the White House let Trump's inner circle testify?

It is as plain as day. Trump tried to leverage American foreign policy for a political favor. That is wrong and and should be called out in some manner.

I think censure and defeat at the box office are more appropriate remedies than impeachment. But pretending Trump is blameless here is willful ignorance.

---

Okay, here goes.

1. Why put into a top-secret server? I think probably to protect against leaks. It appears there are very few people in D.C. that Trump can trust. He released the same transcript for all the world to see for crying out loud!

2. Six months ago Democrats were crying about foreign corruption and interference into our 2016 elections and demanding action. Trump makes an effort to do just that with the new Ukranian President and the Dems lose their collective minds. The goalposts are in perpetual motion.

Yes, let's have an election and let the people decide. On that we can agree.

---

He released the call summary only after the whistle blower made it an issue and it was obvious that eventually it would have to be produced. He certainly did not do so willingly. And yes it was to protect against "leaks." As in every in the room knew it would be bad for the President if the world heard what he actually said. In other words, those around Trump immediately recognized the call was far from "perfect."In fact it was damaging.

Everyone should be alarmed about Russian interference in our elections. Note the difference: it was Russian interference, not "foreign interference." The worst part of the call is that Trump is still so obviously searching for a way to minimize the Russian part of it all. By using a complete fantasy. The Ukraine did not interfere in our elections and will not interfere in our elections. You are buying a smoke screen there.

Booray said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Booray said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

First President ever under the threat of impeachment or censure just because the opposing party hates him.

I really worry how the Liberals are going to react in 2020 after Trump gets reelected. Their behavior these last three years has been abhorrent.

---

Trump has done plenty to encourage this.

Simple questions: if everything was so above board, why did Trump's people hide the transcript? Why has almost every career service diplomat testified that they were at least concerned by Trump's actions? Why won't the White House let Trump's inner circle testify?

It is as plain as day. Trump tried to leverage American foreign policy for a political favor. That is wrong and and should be called out in some manner.

I think censure and defeat at the box office are more appropriate remedies than impeachment. But pretending Trump is blameless here is willful ignorance.

---

Okay, here goes.

1. Why put into a top-secret server? I think probably to protect against leaks. It appears there are very few people in D.C. that Trump can trust. He released the same transcript for all the world to see for crying out loud!

2. Six months ago Democrats were crying about foreign corruption and interference into our 2016 elections and demanding action. Trump makes an effort to do just that with the new Ukranian President and the Dems lose their collective minds. The goalposts are in perpetual motion.

Yes, let's have an election and let the people decide. On that we can agree.

---

He released the call summary only after the whistle blower made it an issue and it was obvious that eventually it would have to be produced. He certainly did not do so willingly. And yes it was to protect against "leaks." As in every in the room knew it would be bad for the President if the world heard what he actually said. In other words, those around Trump immediately recognized the call was far from "perfect."In fact it was damaging.

Everyone should be alarmed about Russian interference in our elections. Note the difference: it was Russian interference, not "foreign interference." The worst part of the call is that Trump is still so obviously searching for a way to minimize the Russian part of it all. By using a complete fantasy. The Ukraine did not interfere in our elections and will not interfere in our elections. You are buying a smoke screen there.

---

The Steele dossier used for FISA warrants was Russian disinformation...but I don't see you concerned about it whatsoever. So why should we be concerned?

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Booray said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

First President ever under the threat of impeachment or censure just because the opposing party hates him.

I really worry how the Liberals are going to react in 2020 after Trump gets reelected. Their behavior these last three years has been abhorrent.

---

Trump has done plenty to encourage this.

Simple questions: if everything was so above board, why did Trump's people hide the transcript? Why has almost every career service diplomat testified that they were at least concerned by Trump's actions? Why won't the White House let Trump's inner circle testify?

It is as plain as day. Trump tried to leverage American foreign policy for a political favor. That is wrong and and should be called out in some manner.

I think censure and defeat at the box office are more appropriate remedies than impeachment. But pretending Trump is blameless here is willful ignorance.

---

Okay, here goes.

1. Why put into a top-secret server? I think probably to protect against leaks. It appears there are very few people in D.C. that Trump can trust. He released the same transcript for all the world to see for crying out loud!

2. Six months ago Democrats were crying about foreign corruption and interference into our 2016 elections and demanding action. Trump makes an effort to do just that with the new Ukranian President and the Dems lose their collective minds. The goalposts are in perpetual motion.

Yes, let's have an election and let the people decide. On that we can agree.

---

He released the call summary only after the whistle blower made it an issue and it was obvious that eventually it would have to be produced. He certainly did not do so willingly. And yes it was to protect against "leaks." As in every in the room knew it would be bad for the President if the world heard what he actually said. In other words, those around Trump immediately recognized the call was far from "perfect."In fact it was damaging.

Everyone should be alarmed about Russian interference in our elections. Note the difference: it was Russian interference, not "foreign interference." The worst part of the call is that Trump is still so obviously searching for a way to minimize the Russian part of it all. By using a complete fantasy. The Ukraine did not interfere in our elections and will not interfere in our elections. You are buying a smoke screen there.

---

The Steele dossier used for FISA warrants was Russian disinformation...but I don't see you concerned about it whatsoever. So why should we be concerned?

---

I just said we should all be concerned about Russian interference. Did my statement somehow exclude Russian disinformation being fed to our intelligence services?

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Booray said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

First President ever under the threat of impeachment or censure just because the opposing party hates him.

I really worry how the Liberals are going to react in 2020 after Trump gets reelected. Their behavior these last three years has been abhorrent.

---

Trump has done plenty to encourage this.

Simple questions: if everything was so above board, why did Trump's people hide the transcript? Why has almost every career service diplomat testified that they were at least concerned by Trump's actions? Why won't the White House let Trump's inner circle testify?

It is as plain as day. Trump tried to leverage American foreign policy for a political favor. That is wrong and and should be called out in some manner.

I think censure and defeat at the box office are more appropriate remedies than impeachment. But pretending Trump is blameless here is willful ignorance.

---

Okay, here goes.

1. Why put into a top-secret server? I think probably to protect against leaks. It appears there are very few people in D.C. that Trump can trust. He released the same transcript for all the world to see for crying out loud!

2. Six months ago Democrats were crying about foreign corruption and interference into our 2016 elections and demanding action. Trump makes an effort to do just that with the new Ukranian President and the Dems lose their collective minds. The goalposts are in perpetual motion.

Yes, let's have an election and let the people decide. On that we can agree.

---

He released the call summary only after the whistle blower made it an issue and it was obvious that eventually it would have to be produced. He certainly did not do so willingly. And yes it was to protect against "leaks." As in every in the room knew it would be bad for the President if the world heard what he actually said. In other words, those around Trump immediately recognized the call was far from "perfect."In fact it was damaging.

Everyone should be alarmed about Russian interference in our elections. Note the difference: it was Russian interference, not "foreign interference." The worst part of the call is that Trump is still so obviously searching for a way to minimize the Russian part of it all. By using a complete fantasy. The Ukraine did not interfere in our elections and will not interfere in our elections. You are buying a smoke screen there.

---

The Steele dossier used for FISA warrants was Russian disinformation...but I don't see you concerned about it whatsoever. So why should we be concerned?

---

I just said we should all be concerned about Russian interference. Did my statement somehow exclude Russian disinformation being fed to our intelligence services?

---

I've never seen you concerned about the Steele dossier. Your lack of concern excludes it so far.

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Booray said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Booray said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

First President ever under the threat of impeachment or censure just because the opposing party hates him.

I really worry how the Liberals are going to react in 2020 after Trump gets reelected. Their behavior these last three years has been abhorrent.

---

Trump has done plenty to encourage this.

Simple questions: if everything was so above board, why did Trump's people hide the transcript? Why has almost every career service diplomat testified that they were at least concerned by Trump's actions? Why won't the White House let Trump's inner circle testify?

It is as plain as day. Trump tried to leverage American foreign policy for a political favor. That is wrong and and should be called out in some manner.

I think censure and defeat at the box office are more appropriate remedies than impeachment. But pretending Trump is blameless here is willful ignorance.

---

Okay, here goes.

1. Why put into a top-secret server? I think probably to protect against leaks. It appears there are very few people in D.C. that Trump can trust. He released the same transcript for all the world to see for crying out loud!

2. Six months ago Democrats were crying about foreign corruption and interference into our 2016 elections and demanding action. Trump makes an effort to do just that with the new Ukranian President and the Dems lose their collective minds. The goalposts are in perpetual motion.

Yes, let's have an election and let the people decide. On that we can agree.

---

He released the call summary only after the whistle blower made it an issue and it was obvious that eventually it would have to be produced. He certainly did not do so willingly. And yes it was to protect against "leaks." As in every in the room knew it would be bad for the President if the world heard what he actually said. In other words, those around Trump immediately recognized the call was far from "perfect."In fact it was damaging.

Everyone should be alarmed about Russian interference in our elections. Note the difference: it was Russian interference, not "foreign interference." The worst part of the call is that Trump is still so obviously searching for a way to minimize the Russian part of it all. By using a complete fantasy. The Ukraine did not interfere in our elections and will not interfere in our elections. You are buying a smoke screen there.

---

The Steele dossier used for FISA warrants was Russian disinformation...but I don't see you concerned about it whatsoever. So why should we be concerned?

---

I just said we should all be concerned about Russian interference. Did my statement somehow exclude Russian disinformation being fed to our intelligence services?

---

I've never seen you concerned about the Steele dossier. Your lack of concern excludes it so far.

---

What you saw was me consistently saying that I would evaluate the collusion claims against Trump when Mueller issued his report. I'll do the same with the dossiers when Horowitz issues his report.

Booray said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Booray said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

First President ever under the threat of impeachment or censure just because the opposing party hates him.

I really worry how the Liberals are going to react in 2020 after Trump gets reelected. Their behavior these last three years has been abhorrent.

---

Trump has done plenty to encourage this.

Simple questions: if everything was so above board, why did Trump's people hide the transcript? Why has almost every career service diplomat testified that they were at least concerned by Trump's actions? Why won't the White House let Trump's inner circle testify?

It is as plain as day. Trump tried to leverage American foreign policy for a political favor. That is wrong and and should be called out in some manner.

I think censure and defeat at the box office are more appropriate remedies than impeachment. But pretending Trump is blameless here is willful ignorance.

---

Okay, here goes.

1. Why put into a top-secret server? I think probably to protect against leaks. It appears there are very few people in D.C. that Trump can trust. He released the same transcript for all the world to see for crying out loud!

2. Six months ago Democrats were crying about foreign corruption and interference into our 2016 elections and demanding action. Trump makes an effort to do just that with the new Ukranian President and the Dems lose their collective minds. The goalposts are in perpetual motion.

Yes, let's have an election and let the people decide. On that we can agree.

---

He released the call summary only after the whistle blower made it an issue and it was obvious that eventually it would have to be produced. He certainly did not do so willingly. And yes it was to protect against "leaks." As in every in the room knew it would be bad for the President if the world heard what he actually said. In other words, those around Trump immediately recognized the call was far from "perfect."In fact it was damaging.

Everyone should be alarmed about Russian interference in our elections. Note the difference: it was Russian interference, not "foreign interference." The worst part of the call is that Trump is still so obviously searching for a way to minimize the Russian part of it all. By using a complete fantasy. The Ukraine did not interfere in our elections and will not interfere in our elections. You are buying a smoke screen there.

---

Ukraine was deeply involved in dirt-digging on the Trump campaign at the behest of the Obama administration.

Trump used the secret server routinely because of the unprecedented volume of leaks. It was by no means clear that the summary would have to be produced. Producing it without a fight may be the only really unusual thing he's done here.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Booray said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Booray said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

First President ever under the threat of impeachment or censure just because the opposing party hates him.

I really worry how the Liberals are going to react in 2020 after Trump gets reelected. Their behavior these last three years has been abhorrent.

---

Trump has done plenty to encourage this.

Simple questions: if everything was so above board, why did Trump's people hide the transcript? Why has almost every career service diplomat testified that they were at least concerned by Trump's actions? Why won't the White House let Trump's inner circle testify?

It is as plain as day. Trump tried to leverage American foreign policy for a political favor. That is wrong and and should be called out in some manner.

I think censure and defeat at the box office are more appropriate remedies than impeachment. But pretending Trump is blameless here is willful ignorance.

---

Okay, here goes.

1. Why put into a top-secret server? I think probably to protect against leaks. It appears there are very few people in D.C. that Trump can trust. He released the same transcript for all the world to see for crying out loud!

2. Six months ago Democrats were crying about foreign corruption and interference into our 2016 elections and demanding action. Trump makes an effort to do just that with the new Ukranian President and the Dems lose their collective minds. The goalposts are in perpetual motion.

Yes, let's have an election and let the people decide. On that we can agree.

---

He released the call summary only after the whistle blower made it an issue and it was obvious that eventually it would have to be produced. He certainly did not do so willingly. And yes it was to protect against "leaks." As in every in the room knew it would be bad for the President if the world heard what he actually said. In other words, those around Trump immediately recognized the call was far from "perfect."In fact it was damaging.

Everyone should be alarmed about Russian interference in our elections. Note the difference: it was Russian interference, not "foreign interference." The worst part of the call is that Trump is still so obviously searching for a way to minimize the Russian part of it all. By using a complete fantasy. The Ukraine did not interfere in our elections and will not interfere in our elections. You are buying a smoke screen there.

---

Ukraine was deeply involved in dirt-digging on the Trump campaign at the behest of the Obama administration.

Trump used the secret server routinely because of the unprecedented volume of leaks. It was by no means clear that the summary would have to be produced. Producing it without a fight may be the only really unusual thing he's done here.

---

Two points of clarification.

First, are you saying Ukraine did the dirt digging or that Ukrainians did the dirt digging?

Second, I would say that Trump routinely misused the secret server, which is supposed to be for code word sensitive matters that if revealed would put intelligence assets at risk. It seems that he he has expanded the use of that server to things that might be politically embarrassing to him. And that is my point. At least the people around him knew immediately that this call (and the related conduct) would be politically embarrassing.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Ukraine was deeply involved in dirt-digging on the Trump campaign at the behest of the Obama administration.

---

Wow, a Russian propaganda talking point being spread right here on sicem365. They really got everything they wanted out of their election interference plus more, didn't they?

Porteroso said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Ukraine was deeply involved in dirt-digging on the Trump campaign at the behest of the Obama administration.

---

Wow, a Russian propaganda talking point being spread right here on sicem365. They really got everything they wanted out of their election interference plus more, didn't they?

---

Thats not Russian propaganda.

Ukraine was involved in Crossfire Hurricane. A Department of Justice team led by U.S. Attorney John Durham is separately exploring the extent to which a number of countries, including Ukraine, played a role in the counterintelligence investigation. This was confirmed by the DOJ. It's also confirmed that it's a criminal investigation.

Please don't spread false DNC narratives.

Doc Holliday said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Ukraine was deeply involved in dirt-digging on the Trump campaign at the behest of the Obama administration.

---

Wow, a Russian propaganda talking point being spread right here on sicem365. They really got everything they wanted out of their election interference plus more, didn't they?

---

Thats not Russian propaganda.

Ukraine was involved in Crossfire Hurricane. A Department of Justice team led by U.S. Attorney John Durham is separately exploring the extent to which a number of countries, including Ukraine, played a role in the counterintelligence investigation. This was confirmed by the DOJ. It's also confirmed that it's a criminal investigation.

Please don't spread false DNC narratives.

---

It is Russian propaganda. Ukraine was tangentially related to Operation Crossfire Hurricane. Let's wait for Durham's conclusions before we jump to unwarranted conclusions.

Booray said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Booray said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Booray said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

First President ever under the threat of impeachment or censure just because the opposing party hates him.

I really worry how the Liberals are going to react in 2020 after Trump gets reelected. Their behavior these last three years has been abhorrent.

---

Trump has done plenty to encourage this.

Simple questions: if everything was so above board, why did Trump's people hide the transcript? Why has almost every career service diplomat testified that they were at least concerned by Trump's actions? Why won't the White House let Trump's inner circle testify?

It is as plain as day. Trump tried to leverage American foreign policy for a political favor. That is wrong and and should be called out in some manner.

I think censure and defeat at the box office are more appropriate remedies than impeachment. But pretending Trump is blameless here is willful ignorance.

---

Okay, here goes.

1. Why put into a top-secret server? I think probably to protect against leaks. It appears there are very few people in D.C. that Trump can trust. He released the same transcript for all the world to see for crying out loud!

2. Six months ago Democrats were crying about foreign corruption and interference into our 2016 elections and demanding action. Trump makes an effort to do just that with the new Ukranian President and the Dems lose their collective minds. The goalposts are in perpetual motion.

Yes, let's have an election and let the people decide. On that we can agree.

---

He released the call summary only after the whistle blower made it an issue and it was obvious that eventually it would have to be produced. He certainly did not do so willingly. And yes it was to protect against "leaks." As in every in the room knew it would be bad for the President if the world heard what he actually said. In other words, those around Trump immediately recognized the call was far from "perfect."In fact it was damaging.

Everyone should be alarmed about Russian interference in our elections. Note the difference: it was Russian interference, not "foreign interference." The worst part of the call is that Trump is still so obviously searching for a way to minimize the Russian part of it all. By using a complete fantasy. The Ukraine did not interfere in our elections and will not interfere in our elections. You are buying a smoke screen there.

---

Ukraine was deeply involved in dirt-digging on the Trump campaign at the behest of the Obama administration.

Trump used the secret server routinely because of the unprecedented volume of leaks. It was by no means clear that the summary would have to be produced. Producing it without a fight may be the only really unusual thing he's done here.

---

Two points of clarification.

First, are you saying Ukraine did the dirt digging or that Ukrainians did the dirt digging?

Second, I would say that Trump routinely misused the secret server, which is supposed to be for code word sensitive matters that if revealed would put intelligence assets at risk. It seems that he he has expanded the use of that server to things that might be politically embarrassing to him. And that is my point. At least the people around him knew immediately that this call (and the related conduct) would be politically embarrassing.

---

The Ukrainian government opened an investigation involving Paul Manafort, which had already been closed by the FBI. One of their legislators leaked information about it, which led to Manafort's resignation from the Trump campaign.

My understanding is that conversations with foreign leaders were placed on the secret server regardless of their content. In any case, the fact that they were potentially embarrassing doesn't mean there was anything nefarious about them. The leaked conversations with Nieto and Turnbull were both embarrassing and completely appropriate. That is often the nature of negotiations and the reason why, for example, settlement negotiations aren't admissible in court. All presidents expect this kind of confidentiality, and they've all had it until Trump came along and politically motivated leaks became an almost daily occurrence. And neither server was accessible to Congress anyway; protecting the information from leakers was the only thing accomplished by storing it differently.

Doc Holliday said:

---

Thats not Russian propaganda.

Ukraine was involved in Crossfire Hurricane. A Department of Justice team led by U.S. Attorney John Durham is separately exploring the extent to which a number of countries, including Ukraine, played a role in the counterintelligence investigation. This was confirmed by the DOJ. It's also confirmed that it's a criminal investigation.

Please don't spread false DNC narratives.

---

Really? I say something, you say it back at me?

You posted a bold faced lie. Manafort is closely linked to several kgb agents, and yes, Ukraine investigated him after Russia invaded them.

The Ukraine did not meddle with Trump's campaign. Trump doesn't like the Ukrainians because Giuliani has some Russian clients who would benefit financially from a poor US - Ukraine relationship. The Russians trying to blame their actions on Ukraine is hilarious, but apparently working.

edit:I get carried away, sorry. It is so incredible to know people are so convinced of a lie. Whether you are watching Fox or CNN, please give it up people.

Porteroso said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Thats not Russian propaganda.

Ukraine was involved in Crossfire Hurricane. A Department of Justice team led by U.S. Attorney John Durham is separately exploring the extent to which a number of countries, including Ukraine, played a role in the counterintelligence investigation. This was confirmed by the DOJ. It's also confirmed that it's a criminal investigation.

Please don't spread false DNC narratives.

---

Please employ some level of maturity.

Manafort is closely linked to several kgb agents, and yes, Ukraine investigated him Trump doesn't like the Ukrainians because Giuliani has some Russian clients who would benefit financially from a poor US - Ukraine relationship.

---

wow

Did you watch any of the hearings, or just let Sean Hannity tell you what happened?

Why was Trump concerned about leaks from his second conversation with Zekensky if it was perfect?

Porteroso said:

---

Did you watch any of the hearings, or just let Sean Hannity tell you what happened?

---

Yes we watched some of the hearings .

One needs a broad sense of humor to share your conclusions.

Canada2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Did you watch any of the hearings, or just let Sean Hannity tell you what happened?

---

Yes we watched some of the hearings .

One needs a broad sense of humor to share your conclusions.

---

So when people are saying they were worried Giuliani was poisoning Trump against Ukraine, how do you interpret that? That they were desperately trying to connect trump to Ukraine officials to renew the relationship Giuliani had soured?

Just trying to get a sense of how a humorless person like you sees it.

Porteroso said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Did you watch any of the hearings, or just let Sean Hannity tell you what happened?

---

Yes we watched some of the hearings .

One needs a broad sense of humor to share your conclusions.

---

So when people are saying they were worried Giuliani was poisoning Trump against Ukraine, how do you interpret that? That they were desperately trying to connect trump to Ukraine officials to renew the relationship Giuliani had soured?

Just trying to get a sense of how a humorless person like you sees it.

---

I see it as unsubstantiated conjecture.

You don't try to remove a sitting POTUS for the first time in American history with this kind of pulp .

Absolutely ridiculous.

Booray said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Did you watch any of the hearings, or just let Sean Hannity tell you what happened?

---

Trumpkins like Canada are in full bore denial of reality mode.

---

Not remotely a Trumpkin......told you before he was my 3rd or 4th choice initially.

Regardless this 'proceeding' is not remotely justified.

Merely 100% political theater

Canada2017 said:

---

I see it as unsubstantiated conjecture.

You don't try to remove a sitting POTUS for the first time in American history with this kind of pulp .

Absolutely ridiculous.

---

I can halfway appreciate this, but the only thing unsubstantiated is that he never carried out this plan. The plan was well known by many, including several that defied House subpoenas, but there were enough Americans who desired for a strong American Ukrainian relationship, that were able to get Trump to meet with Ukrainian officials, and the plan was scrapped.

What is not unsubstantiated, but thoroughly documented, is that Giuliani was the main force behind this plan, and that he has strong ties with Russian businesses.

By the way, if you've never read of the Russian stranglehold on natural gas, it is very interesting, and the main driving force behind a lot of their politics.

Porteroso said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

I see it as unsubstantiated conjecture.

You don't try to remove a sitting POTUS for the first time in American history with this kind of pulp .

Absolutely ridiculous.

---

I can halfway appreciate this, but the only thing unsubstantiated is that he never carried out this plan. The plan was well known by many, including several that defied House subpoenas, but there were enough Americans who desired for a strong American Ukrainian relationship, that were able to get Trump to meet with Ukrainian officials, and the plan was scrapped.

What is not unsubstantiated, but thoroughly documented, is that Giuliani was the main force behind this plan, and that he has strong ties with Russian businesses.

By the way, if you've never read of the Russian stranglehold on natural gas, it is very interesting, and the main driving force behind a lot of their politics.

---

By your rational FDR,Truman, JFK, LBJ, Bush, Obama and Ronald Reagan should have all faced similar impeachment proceedings.

This is a total farce .

Canada2017 said:

---

By your rational FDR,Truman, JFK, LBJ, Bush, Obama and Ronald Reagan should have all faced similar impeachment proceedings.

This is a total farce .

---

I don't think so. If any had done this, yes, but they did not. If evidence had been uncovered, for example, that Obama had ordered the IRS to target Republicans, I would have totally supported these kinds of public hearings. However there are no known whistle-blower complaints of this nature, against Obama.

If serious ethics breaches are discovered, Americans deserve to know about them. One of my main criticisms of Obama was that he promised more transparency, but his administration was actually less transparent than the previous.

Trump however, puts his expansion of power, and attempts to hide the bad stuff, to shame. Trump has expanded the power of the executive office faster and more than any other non-wartime president in our history.

That is not a good thing.

Again, he was trying to use foreign aid for selfish political purposes, and got caught. Ask yourself, if he had done nothing wrong, why stop everyone he can from testifying? A common repub talking point is if you have nothing to hide, why are you hiding something, right?

Thankfully, the judicial system acknowledges he isn't a king who can order people to not speak out. He is a public servant who cannot restrict the free speech of others. America wins when people can be transparent and honest.

We will see what others such as Bolton say, but Trump so far, just looks worse and worse in this situation.

Porteroso said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

By your rational FDR,Truman, JFK, LBJ, Bush, Obama and Ronald Reagan should have all faced similar impeachment proceedings.

This is a total farce .

---

I don't think so. If any had done this, yes, but they did not. If evidence had been uncovered, for example, that Obama had ordered the IRS to target Republicans, I would have totally supported these kinds of public hearings. However there are no known whistle-blower complaints of this nature, against Obama.

If serious ethics breaches are discovered, Americans deserve to know about them. One of my main criticisms of Obama was that he promised more transparency, but his administration was actually less transparent than the previous.

Trump however, puts his expansion of power, and attempts to hide the bad stuff, to shame. Trump has expanded the power of the executive office faster and more than any other non-wartime president in our history.

That is not a good thing.

Again, he was trying to use foreign aid for selfish political purposes, and got caught. Ask yourself, if he had done nothing wrong, why stop everyone he can from testifying? A common repub talking point is if you have nothing to hide, why are you hiding something, right?

Thankfully, the judicial system acknowledges he isn't a king who can order people to not speak out. He is a public servant who cannot restrict the free speech of others. America wins when people can be transparent and honest.

We will see what others such as Bolton say, but Trump so far, just looks worse and worse in this situation.

---

Let's see what happens in 2020.