A question the left won't answer?

originally posted by: toolgal462

originally posted by: ManFromEurope
If there was evidence against Biden, why didn't the defense bring it up?

They have time enough. Bring it or it does not exist.

You do realize that they have not finished yet, don't you?

Don't speak until they have finished their opening arguments.

McConnell explitictely told us that he will not need to call up witnesses.
Time will tell, they still have time.

My forecast: no witnesses, no evidences from the defense.

Because they KNOW they do not need it, the majority will keep him in place.

originally posted by: ManFromEurope

originally posted by: toolgal462

originally posted by: ManFromEurope
If there was evidence against Biden, why didn't the defense bring it up?

They have time enough. Bring it or it does not exist.

You do realize that they have not finished yet, don't you?

Don't speak until they have finished their opening arguments.

McConnell explitictely told us that he will not need to call up witnesses.
Time will tell, they still have time.

My forecast: no witnesses, no evidences from the defense.

Because they KNOW they do not need it, the majority will keep him in place.

He doesn't need to call witnesses, that is true. And Biden can be investigated outside of the impeachment trial, which probably makes more sense.

After all, it isn't Biden being impeached, is it?

a reply to: gortex

Didnt we give them some nice tank destroying bombs? As well as the money? They got more than what you may think.

a reply to: gortex

I think Biden is seen as a safe pair of hands for those who on either side can't vote for Trump but don't want the far left vision ...

Snipped.


Aargh! Why did you have to phrase it that way in your post! The vision of Biden's hands gives me the heebie jeebies! Safe...is definitely not a word I associate with Biden's hands!

a reply to: network dude

Even if Both Joe & Hunter are guilty as hell, what Trump did was still wrong.
There are channels to address corruption but Trump acted outside of those channels, in a corrupt manner, and for his own personal gain.

People keep saying that if Hillary or Biden or someone else has broken the law it excuses Trump from doing something similar. It doesn't. Let them all share a cell if they are all guilty.

Lets drain the swamp from both ends!

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: network dude

Trump used the power of Presidency for his own personal gain by blackmailing an ally to dig for dirt on his political opponent , that is wrong regardless of the reason.

If nothing else it shows how scared he is of a fair fight in this election.

Now do Joe Biden and the Ukrainian prosecutor investigating Burisma!

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: network dude

Blackmail? I'm afraid I'll need you to explain how Zalinsky was pressured, or forced to......not comply with Trump's request.

Ukraine is under pressure from Russia so the threat by Trump of withholding military funding and with the risk of distancing Ukraine from an important ally like the US would seem to me to be pressure enough.

Isn't that exactly what Biden was accused of doing? He gets a pass? Why? He's running for president, so shouldn't his past dealings be vetted to insure he isn't as corrupt as the Democrats are saying Republicans are?

originally posted by: ManFromEurope

originally posted by: Alien Abduct

originally posted by: network dude
I know I have asked it a few time, and never seen a response. But perhaps others have and there is a reasonable answer to this.

Question:
If any evidence exists that Either Joe Biden or Hunter Biden did ANYTHING corrupt while in Ukraine, anything at all, would't that totally negate the impeachment, and all the arguments over what Trump did or said? If corruption exists, or existed, his asking that it be looked into would not only be important, but necessary.

If that idea is off base, I'd love to hear why.

The real question is...
WHAT LAW DID PRESIDENT TRUMP BREAK?

You wouldn't understand, or we all could not understand it unless we are experienced lawyers in this field. Which no-one here is.

He broke laws, and if you insert your question into google and read news besides the-hill.com, you might get the idea.

We can tell you the laws he broke because some lawyer told us. We cannot defend this, because we are no lawyers ourselves, and this includes you, too. But we cannot attack this, because see above.

Lawyers tell us that the Impeached Idiot broke laws. Thats their job, to tell us that he did.
Other lawyers tell us differently, and that is their job, too.

Now you are unsatisfied, and that is okay, too. Nobody wins in this worst-of-all-possible scenarios:

- a majority of senate is hellbent to keep "winning", even telling everyone they will do so, whatever comes their way.
- the Impeached Idiot is far too narcisstic and egomanical to accept defeat, he would never step down.
- "we do not need witnesses" okay, why not? are there none?

All of this and you still didn't cite one law President Trump broke. Guess what? The impeachment "managers" did not cite any laws that Trump broke either. Why is that? What is the "high crime or misdemeanor or treason" that Trump committed? Why did his accusers not cite a law that was broken?

Then you sit there and assume that I nor anyone else here on ATS is a lawyer? Hilarious.

So here we go I'll give you one last try, let's see if you can quote where the prosecution claimed President Trump broke a law. Give us all you got buddy.

originally posted by: network dude
I know I have asked it a few time, and never seen a response. But perhaps others have and there is a reasonable answer to this.

Question:
If any evidence exists that Either Joe Biden or Hunter Biden did ANYTHING corrupt while in Ukraine, anything at all, would't that totally negate the impeachment, and all the arguments over what Trump did or said? If corruption exists, or existed, his asking that it be looked into would not only be important, but necessary.

If that idea is off base, I'd love to hear why.

You should have googled your question because the left, moderates, and non voters have answered your question.

originally posted by: game over man

originally posted by: network dude
I know I have asked it a few time, and never seen a response. But perhaps others have and there is a reasonable answer to this.

Question:
If any evidence exists that Either Joe Biden or Hunter Biden did ANYTHING corrupt while in Ukraine, anything at all, would't that totally negate the impeachment, and all the arguments over what Trump did or said? If corruption exists, or existed, his asking that it be looked into would not only be important, but necessary.

If that idea is off base, I'd love to hear why.

You should have googled your question because the left, moderates, and non voters have answered your question.

So you are saying you have no answer, gotcha.

wasn't the house supposed to be the evidence finding portion?

too bad they did not have the stones to take bolton to court and make him testify......

seems the house dems always let everyone down....

a reply to: Alien Abduct

You quoted me what I said, so why are you trolling me? I gave my answer. Took me two seconds to debunk the OP. Give it a shot. www.google.com "left proves Biden no corruption" search that. That's what the OP said, "the left never answered" and they did, GOOGLE IT. You might not like their answer, but the OP said they NEVER answered, which is WRONG.

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: network dude

Trump used the power of Presidency for his own personal gain by blackmailing an ally to dig for dirt on his political opponent , that is wrong regardless of the reason.

If nothing else it shows how scared he is of a fair fight in this election.

If he is corrupt, does it matter he's a political opponent?
How do you know his actions were for political gain?

too much projecting going on here.

originally posted by: network dude
I know I have asked it a few time, and never seen a response. But perhaps others have and there is a reasonable answer to this.

Question:
If any evidence exists that Either Joe Biden or Hunter Biden did ANYTHING corrupt while in Ukraine, anything at all, would't that totally negate the impeachment, and all the arguments over what Trump did or said? If corruption exists, or existed, his asking that it be looked into would not only be important, but necessary.

If that idea is off base, I'd love to hear why.

No. One selfish act doesn't justify another. His intention was not sincere. He wanted what was good for him in the election.

originally posted by: Willtell

originally posted by: network dude
I know I have asked it a few time, and never seen a response. But perhaps others have and there is a reasonable answer to this.

Question:
If any evidence exists that Either Joe Biden or Hunter Biden did ANYTHING corrupt while in Ukraine, anything at all, would't that totally negate the impeachment, and all the arguments over what Trump did or said? If corruption exists, or existed, his asking that it be looked into would not only be important, but necessary.

If that idea is off base, I'd love to hear why.

No. One selfish act doesn't justify another. His intention was not sincere. He wanted what was good for him in the election.

Still not a crime or an impeachable offense

a reply to: Willtell

Weird seeing how the investigation began before Quid Pro Joe even announced his candidacy.

In fact the only reason he is a candidate is to try and escape punishment for his crimes.

a reply to: JoseGarcia

Biden was asked by many officials world wide to do what he did. There was nothing illegal or sinister about it. Plus, at the time the pm of Ukraine was in bed with russia, so whose side you on? The people who wanted to see ukra8je become little russia or the people who want Ukraine to be whole again?

If anything, Hunter is the sketchy one.

originally posted by: network dude
I know I have asked it a few time, and never seen a response. But perhaps others have and there is a reasonable answer to this.

Question:
If any evidence exists that Either Joe Biden or Hunter Biden did ANYTHING corrupt while in Ukraine, anything at all, would't that totally negate the impeachment, and all the arguments over what Trump did or said? If corruption exists, or existed, his asking that it be looked into would not only be important, but necessary.

If that idea is off base, I'd love to hear why.

It’s not complicated reasoning.

If a bank is guilty of robbing people does it make it legal for me to rob a bank?

originally posted by: network dude

but does it negate the entire process regardless of the method used?

Yes, as you might recall from any number of cop shows (or cases tossed out of courts.) FindLaw has a nice summary of this: criminal.findlaw.com...

I suspect that some readers are not aware that it's actually a violation of the 4th Amendment of the Constitution: en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: Willtell

originally posted by: network dude
I know I have asked it a few time, and never seen a response. But perhaps others have and there is a reasonable answer to this.

Question:
If any evidence exists that Either Joe Biden or Hunter Biden did ANYTHING corrupt while in Ukraine, anything at all, would't that totally negate the impeachment, and all the arguments over what Trump did or said? If corruption exists, or existed, his asking that it be looked into would not only be important, but necessary.

If that idea is off base, I'd love to hear why.

No. One selfish act doesn't justify another. His intention was not sincere. He wanted what was good for him in the election.

Trump is being impeached because he asked Zalinsky to look into the corruption to include Burisma and Hunter Biden.
I suspect he did so because of this:
www.tampabay.com...

Note the date of the article.

If that is true, and if it's not, I'm going to need you to explain what Trump actually is being impeached for, then if Biden (either) did corrupt things or is linked to corrupt things in Ukraine, then isn't what Trump did (asking that it be looked into) not only necessary, but a good thing? If not, why?