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 GOP’s Four-Point Defense Of Trump Is Devastating

page: 1
19
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 08:18 AM
link   
The GOP’s Four-Point Defense Of Trump Is Devastating

This isn't my title, but I don't disagree. I am posting more for informational purposes just in case this actually goes to trial, though I doubt it will. It gives a simple but informative description of the President's purported wrongdoing, and the defense essentially already presented for Trump in regards to the first impeachment charge of Abuse of Power.

Essentially the Democrats are accusing Trump of shaking down Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky by withholding aid and demanding announcement of investigations, including one involving Joe Biden’s son, Hunter.

This was what they first called the "quid pro quo" which literally means "something for something," or "a favor for a favor." So Democrats are accusing Trump of demanding investigations ("something") for monetary aid ("something"), and this is considered bad (as opposed to legitimate foreign policy negotiations) because it would benefit Trump in the election if Biden were investigated.

The four-point defense referred to essentially disproves the essential foundation of the allegations:

First, both Trump and Zelensky say there was no pressure applied.

If no pressure was applied, then no power was used, and therefore no power could be abused.

Second, the transcript does not indicate Trump making any demands or setting any conditions.

There is a very big difference between "asking" and "telling"; likewise between "asking" and "demanding." "Asking" leaves the power to say "yes" or "no" with the other party. "Demanding" presumes the power of "yes" over the other party.

Third, Ukraine was not aware that the aid was delayed.

Not much of a "demand" or "abuse of power" if Ukraine had no idea what was going on.

And fourth, aid flowed without any announcement of investigations.

No harm, no foul. No aid withheld, no abuse of power.

To one extent or another, I wish Trump had done one or more of the above, so that debate focused on relevant legal and Constitutional issues. But nope. This is all political -- at best. And at worst, it's just a few criminally corrupt critters at the top hijacking two branches of government to protect their own sorry butts from necessary and proper criminal investigations.




posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 08:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea
no defense is required for a bs party line partisan vote from the "judiciary" committee
treatment in kind should be fully expected from the gop majority senate



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 08:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Boadicea
no defense is required for a bs party line partisan vote from the "judiciary" committee
treatment in kind should be fully expected from the gop majority senate


The impeachment hearings have been nothing more than a Star Chamber...

But I still want and expect the Senate to handle this responsibly and in accordance with the law. A far greater victory can be won by using facts and truth to obtain a righteous acquittal. Not just for the president, but for the people and the nation.



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 09:12 AM
link   
When the transcript was released and all of a sudden the whistleblowers, that told a different story disappeared, anyone with common sense should have seen what was really going on.

They never expected the transcript of the President and a foreign leader being released and it threw their entire game plan on its head. That's why this all looks absolutely ridiculous now because the Democrats are just trying to save as much face as possible.

I just wonder if Biden only jumped into the race to try and protect himself and his son from an investigation. The Ukraine phone call was April 21st and Biden jumped in the race on April 25th. Seems pretty fishy to me.
edit on 16-12-2019 by Middleoftheroad because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 09:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Middleoftheroad
When the transcript was released and all of a sudden the whistleblowers, that told a different story disappeared, anyone with common sense should have seen what was really going on.


The refusal to name the Whistle blower was the first huge red flag for me... the release of the transcript surprised me, but just added to the alarm I already felt.


They never expected the transcript of the President and a foreign leader being released and it threw their entire game plan on its head. That's why this all looks absolutely ridiculous now because the Democrats are just trying to save as much face as possible.


No, they probably didn't. And they're still trying to get around the truth: Democrats Get Trump Phone Call Transcript Wrong Again

These critters -- Schiff, Nadler, Pelosi, Biden, etc -- are destroying their own party's credibility -- well, what little they had left.


I just wonder if Biden only jumped into the race to try and protect himself and his son from an investigation. The Ukraine phone call was April 21st and Biden jumped in the race on April 25th. Seems pretty fishy to me.


That wouldn't surprise me at all. Remember too that Zelensky was elected on the 21st as well... Zelensky ran on the same platform of "draining the swamp" that Trump did. Biden had to know that Zelensky's efforts would be a threat to him as well. So even without Trump's requests, Zelensky's promise of investigations were already a threat to Biden.



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 09:52 AM
link   
"Nobody is allowed on the calls," a White House official said, describing the new effort to limit those with access to the President's senior-most aides. "The barn door officially closed after the horse escaped."

Man, if thats not telling us all that there are "no" illegal topics to be discussed, I do not know how this could be any more obvious.
Source



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 09:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea

agreed. Graham and McConnel need to shut the hell up,and at least pretend to be serious about doing their job here.

This "we are already decided" is only arming the opposition.



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 10:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Boadicea

agreed. Graham and McConnel need to shut the hell up,and at least pretend to be serious about doing their job here.

This "we are already decided" is only arming the opposition.


Yes!!! I don't like this at all. By all means let them point out how the facts belie the accusations... by all means let them point out the very unjust rules and methods of the House impeachment hearings... by all means threaten/promise to conduct a fair and thorough trial on the charges...

They can even posit that they are leaning "no" based upon their understanding of the evidence and totality of the circumstances, and they they will vote "no" unless and until the facts change.

But don't play fast and loose with your own rules to "get back" at the House for playing fast and loose with their rules. This is supposed to be We The People's business, and it should be conducted responsibly. It's not their own little vindictive playground.

All that tells me is that they don't want the public to know the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 10:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: ManFromEurope
"Nobody is allowed on the calls," a White House official said, describing the new effort to limit those with access to the President's senior-most aides. "The barn door officially closed after the horse escaped."

Man, if thats not telling us all that there are "no" illegal topics to be discussed, I do not know how this could be any more obvious.
Source
I have ZERO interest in what my LEADER says in their convos with other world leaders.

It is NONE of my business because I care not for it.

Do I want the President and others listening in on me? I say some nasty stuff to the wife, my business.

I voted Trump to do what he does, this micro managed BS ends there.

Also, the reason no one is allowed to hear is "Need to know" and "Sensitive topics".

Dude, a bit of advice, we have a saying here,

"Mind your own damn business".



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 10:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Boadicea

agreed. Graham and McConnel need to shut the hell up,and at least pretend to be serious about doing their job here.

This "we are already decided" is only arming the opposition.
Because the opposition "already decided", this is simply responding with the same fire.

Good for Graham and McConnel, we need GOP defenders if the Dems are going to abuse their positions and power, the least we can do is respond to that abuse with "DOA".

Did you forget that this is a PARTISAN impeachment sham? Only dems voted.



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 10:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: ManFromEurope
"Nobody is allowed on the calls," a White House official said, describing the new effort to limit those with access to the President's senior-most aides. "The barn door officially closed after the horse escaped."

Man, if thats not telling us all that there are "no" illegal topics to be discussed, I do not know how this could be any more obvious.


Not necessarily.

There are valid reasons for presidents and foreign leaders to want and need to talk privately, with some level of assured confidentiality from media and the public.

There are also (obvious) reasons why this president would have serious doubts about the ulterior motives and deeds of some who might be listening to his conversations with other leaders.

There needs to be some checks and balances to prevent such privacy and confidentiality from being abused, but that goes both ways. We need to be sure the president et al does not abuse their privilege, and we need to be sure the listeners do not abuse their position.



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 10:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea

Why do you doubt there is going to be a trial?
The question is not whether there will be a trial but whether that trial will be long or short.
Unless the house does not vote to impeach on wednesday. I think the chances of that are quite slim.



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 10:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Arnie123


I have ZERO interest in what my LEADER says in their convos with other world leaders.

It is NONE of my business because I care not for it.


I don't believe that for a minute. I don't even think YOU believe that! Of course you care.

And, of course, it is our business that the president is conducting, so yes, it is your business as well. And you know that too.



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 10:16 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

No defense is necessary when the jury is rigged and the results are in the bag.
Too bad they wont do what the american people want them to do which is to impeach and remove from office.



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 10:17 AM
link   

Rep. Jerrold Nadler, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, wrote that President Trump is a threat to the Constitution and should be removed from office, according to the committee's 658-page report on the articles of impeachment resolution against Trump that was submitted early Monday.




"The facts are contested, and, in many areas, the majority's claims are directly contradicted by the evidence," the Republicans wrote.They continued that "not one of the criminal accusations leveled at the president over the past year—including bribery, extortion, collusion/conspiracy with foreign enemies, or obstruction of justice—has found a place in the articles.Some of these arguments are just holdovers from an earlier disingenuous attempt by the majority to weaponized the Russia collusion investigation for political gain."


Trumps got a solid case for malicous prosecution.

The left is going to get their come upens they in desperate need of.



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 10:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme




No defense is necessary when the jury is rigged and the results are in the bag.


That's clearly backasswards.

The Schiff and Nalder show was the most gross case of rigging I've ever seen.



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 10:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: shooterbrody

No defense is necessary when the jury is rigged and the results are in the bag.
Too bad they wont do what the american people want them to do which is to impeach and remove from office.


Voting to impeach is political suicide. They HAVE to know it. Comey and Schiff's interviews over the weekend both make Prince Andrew look brilliant by comparison, and you can bet your ass that each will have a role to play in the Senate hearing if it makes it that far.

Most hard core liberals are just sold on the idea that the IG report was bad for the GOP narrative, when the opposite is true. The people who can actually have a vote swayed will or already are horrified at the reality of what happened. You have to screw up REALLY bad to make Trump a sympathetic player, that is for sure. But ill be damned if they haven't done it.



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 10:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: Arnie123


I have ZERO interest in what my LEADER says in their convos with other world leaders.

It is NONE of my business because I care not for it.


I don't believe that for a minute. I don't even think YOU believe that! Of course you care.

And, of course, it is our business that the president is conducting, so yes, it is your business as well. And you know that too.
FALSE.

We voted for our leaders, yes? Get to work Trump, that's all.

I am not going to micro manage every single aspect of his life and leadership, barring DEATH, RAPE AND SERIOUS CRIMES, he is free to do whatever.

You may be SCARED, FEAR the unknown ,but that doesn't give you the excuse to micro manage a leader ensuring YOUR way of life.

To me, results and actions determine how much I pay attention to our leaders. As long as the lights are on and we are doing good, I could care less how things are done.



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 10:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: shooterbrody

No defense is necessary when the jury is rigged and the results are in the bag.
Too bad they wont do what the american people want them to do which is to impeach and remove from office.

see house judicial committee heraring

only the trashy dumpster party want the president removed
bamn


what you will get is #walkaway

edit on 16/12/2019 by shooterbrody because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 10:21 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96

No evidence supports them other than witness testimony. Witnesses who can be shown to have prejudice.

Lets not even mention that "obstruction of congress" is sort of the Presidents job.



new topics

top topics



 
19
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join