It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The new dem charges: Extortion and Bribery (no more quid pro quo)

page: 1
27
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+13 more 
posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 05:34 AM
link   
Quid pro quo is out (probably because quid pro joe was too catchy) and extortion or bribery are the replacements.

The thing about quid pro quo, that was positive for the dem narrative, is that it was never a crime but they could make it sound insidious. See, it's beneficial that it's not a crime because when something is an actual crime there are statutes and thresholds we can measure them against. It's the same reason they settled on russian collusion rather than conspiracy.

So lets take a look at the standards for both extortion and bribery:

Extortion:

So here's what the legal dictionary says extortion is:


Virtually all extortion statutes require that a threat must be made to the person or property of the victim. Threats to harm the victim's friends or relatives may also be included. It is not necessary for a threat to involve physical injury. It may be sufficient to threaten to accuse another person of a crime or to expose a secret that would result in public embarrassment or ridicule.


So, in the alleged extortion scheme by trump did he threaten the person or property (or reputation) of the victim? No he threatened aid money that was ours to decide what to do with. So that's pretty much debunked right from the start.

Now on to bribery, here's the cornell law explanation:



Bribery refers to the offering, giving, soliciting, or receiving of any item of value as a means of influencing the actions of an individual holding a public or legal duty. This type of action results in matters that should be handled objectively being handled in a manner best suiting the private interests of the decision maker.


Well, this one is a little more murky. Trump did not offer the foreign aid for anything in particular (that we know of). In fact trump never brought up the aid at all. He did ask for zelenskyy to look into 2016 meddling and the biden's corruption, but at no point did he offer anything in exchange. It is also worth noting that trump was not offering zelenskyy anything personally. I'm not convinced a state withholding aid for corruption purposes could ever be accurately described as bribing them.

Since we are operating in unknowns, let's look a little deeper into the statute U.S. Code § 201.Bribery of public officials and witnesses:



(b)Whoever—
(1)directly or indirectly, corruptly gives, offers or promises anything of value to any public official or person who has been selected to be a public official, or offers or promises any public official or any person who has been selected to be a public official to give anything of value to any other person or entity, with intent—


Well there we have it, to be a bribe it has to be a government official. This is a reference to american officials, a ukranian president is not a government official in this statute.

Lest you believe otherwise, here's the definition of government official from the same statute:



(a)For the purpose of this section—
(1)the term “public official” means Member of Congress, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner, either before or after such official has qualified, or an officer or employee or person acting for or on behalf of the United States, or any department, agency or branch of Government thereof, including the District of Columbia, in any official function, under or by authority of any such department, agency, or branch of Government, or a juror;


No bribery. No extortion. No collusion (conspiracy). No obstruction.

When acting and narrating with innuendo, dems are far more effective. Once they get into law where they can be definitively proven correct or incorrect, they lose.

Of course this won't stop the sham impeachment they're running. But it's good to know the actual law and that no, your president isn't a criminal.




posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 05:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

I gave you an S&F for “quid pro Joe.”

Now that’s funny.


+3 more 
posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 05:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

wow, that kind of makes it look like Joe extorted Ukraine.



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 05:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

I wish I could take credit, I've seen it a few different places now.



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 05:54 AM
link   
Heres the thing with this whole line.....foreign aid is given to a country so that country will fall in line with whatever policy the US has in mind for it. It is used to influence(bribe) foreign leaders.

Always has been...so why is it now different with Trump? Cuz of Joe? Puhleeze....Ukraine seems to be the epicenter of dirt...from Russian money laundering to provinding dossier material.


I think the Tman is doing some swamp draining......except the swamp is in the Ukraine.



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 05:58 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Nah, he didn't threaten the president or his property (or loved ones). What biden did (if what we think he did is accurate) is corruption. The legal definition for that:



Public corruption involves a breach of public trust and/or abuse of position by federal, state, or local officials and their private sector accomplices.


If joe simply had the guy fired because he was corrupt and we didn't like giving money to a country with a corrupt AG, then he's all good. That's well within the powers and responsibilities he had. If joe had the guy fired because he was investigating burisma and joe wanted to protect his son and or his money flow from burisma, then it's flat out corruption.



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 06:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

quid pro quo is not a crime, however, joe biden obstructed justice to help his son, so that is the crime.



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 06:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite



So lets take a look at the standards for both extortion and bribery:


I think we should look at the standards for TREASON instead.

Definition of treason: the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 06:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: shawmanfromny
a reply to: Dfairlite



So lets take a look at the standards for both extortion and bribery:


I think we should look at the standards for TREASON instead.

Definition of treason: the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government


You know we are talking Trump here , not Barry
The Barry thread is down the hall



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 06:10 AM
link   
Thing is...is it bribery or extortion when conducting foreign policy? Have we not withheld funds before? Yes...yes we have.


a reply to: shawmanfromny



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 06:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

You know that Joe Biden didn’t have Shokin fired.

Is being a messenger “corrupt”?


+1 more 
posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 06:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Dfairlite

You know that Joe Biden didn’t have Shokin fired.

Is being a messenger “corrupt”?





posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 06:28 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Hey look! It’s a YouTube video we’ve all seen a hundred times.

Yep, Joe Biden said he delivered a message for the President.

Where’s the corruption? (I ask again.)



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 06:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: network dude

Hey look! It’s a YouTube video we’ve all seen a hundred times.

Yep, Joe Biden said he delivered a message for the President.

Where’s the corruption? (I ask again.)


Did this have anything at all to do with Hunter Biden, Pelosi's kid, ROmney's kid, and Burisma?

If you can't honestly say "absolutely not", then with all that's going on, there needs to be an investigation.

If Biden (who is the first Vice president in history to ever have a prosecutor of another nation fired) did this to protect his kid or something else, it's a crime.



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 06:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

I'm sorry but the definition of bribery does not say it has to be a US government official.
Please stop treating us like we are stupid.
The Ukrainian PRESIDENT...is a member of government.
This is bribery and extortion. I have been saying it all along.
Nice to see MSM catching up with me.



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 06:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: network dude

Hey look! It’s a YouTube video we’ve all seen a hundred times.

Yep, Joe Biden said he delivered a message for the President.

Where’s the corruption? (I ask again.)


Did this have anything at all to do with Hunter Biden, Pelosi's kid, ROmney's kid, and Burisma?

If you can't honestly say "absolutely not", then with all that's going on, there needs to be an investigation.

If Biden (who is the first Vice president in history to ever have a prosecutor of another nation fired) did this to protect his kid or something else, it's a crime.


Pelosi and Romney’s kids? What are you on about now?

Joe Biden delivered a message for the President, after working on diplomatic solutions to concerns about Ukrainian corruption for months. Is it corrupt to try and diminish corruption? Was it wrong to try to help Ukraine do better?

Again, what crime did Joe Biden or Hunter Biden or Barack Obama commit? That’s usually the place to start when discussing “corruption” ...

And why the hell are you talking about Pelosi’s and Romney’s kids?



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 06:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Dfairlite

I'm sorry but the definition of bribery does not say it has to be a US government official.
Please stop treating us like we are stupid.
The Ukrainian PRESIDENT...is a member of government.
This is bribery and extortion. I have been saying it all along.
Nice to see MSM catching up with me.


Silly, it’s not bribery or extortion ... it’s the powers and implied powers given to the President in the Constitution.

The President is our chief diplomat. These negotiations are strictly within his wheelhouse.

There’s plenty to impeach Trump on ... but this ain’t it. It’s a loser.



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 06:40 AM
link   
There were actually three threats.
One) Mike Pence would not appear at Zelenski's inauguration if he didn't make the announcement.
Two) Rudy Guiliani told Zelenski's aid that he (Zelenski) would not get to visit the president in the oval office if he didnt
make the announcements.
Three) Mick Mulvaney told Zelenski's aid that the money for military aid would be withheld if they didnt make the announcements.
And the announcements they wanted made are all made up lies which is why Zelenski has still not made them.



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 06:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Not based on the language used.

The transcripts of the depositions is daunting. There are over a thousand pages I think.
I have read portions that were included in other news articles but have not sat down to go through all of that.

I will eventually. I have some of it downloaded.

Next week when this all goes on live TV will change how america is seeing this and I think they can show this as an abuse of power.



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 06:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Hunter was working as a diplomat for the US, and being paid 80K a month from Burisma? Can you source that?



new topics

top topics



 
27
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join