1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Was it legal for Trump to ask Ukraine to investigate the Bidens?

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by Rileydog, Nov 11, 2019.

?

Was it legal for Trump to ask Ukraine to investigate the Bidens?

  1. It was legal

    2.2%
  2. It was illegal

    97.8%
  1. Sweet Lou 4 2

    Sweet Lou 4 2 Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2007
    Messages:
    37,714
    Likes Received:
    18,912
    Specifically asking a foreign gov't to assist with making a political opponent look bad so you can win an election is a high crime and treasonous. Trump should not only be impeached, but he should face a charge of treason and we need to set the precedent so that no one (D or R) attempts anything like this again.
     
    FrontRunner and DaDakota like this.
  2. JuanValdez

    JuanValdez Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 1999
    Messages:
    34,059
    Likes Received:
    13,408
    I don't really like the way you asked the question. Is it possible to ask a foreign government to assist the United States with an investigation of one of our own high officials suspected of corruption even though he is now a presidential candidate? Sure, that's possible, but that's not what Trump did. So, if I assume you mean by the question, was it legal for Trump to ask Ukraine to investigate the Bidens for the reasons he had and in the way that he did it, then it is obviously illegal.

    I don't understand this argument. What is the basis for calling it treason? The Constitution says: "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court."
     
  3. LabMouse

    LabMouse Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2008
    Messages:
    3,662
    Likes Received:
    251
    Let put him in the jail.
     
  4. Jugdish

    Jugdish Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2006
    Messages:
    8,277
    Likes Received:
    8,136
    People are saying it's very cool and very legal.
     
    B-Bob likes this.
  5. KingCheetah

    KingCheetah Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Messages:
    55,883
    Likes Received:
    47,582
    *Important people
     
    ima_drummer2k likes this.
  6. DaDakota

    DaDakota If you want to know, just ask!

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 1999
    Messages:
    123,879
    Likes Received:
    32,767
    Stable genius people!!

    DD
     
    FrontRunner likes this.
  7. MystikArkitect

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2006
    Messages:
    10,481
    Likes Received:
    15,748
    Pretty sure the illegal part is leveraging military aid to make sure it happens. Or is that more illegal?

    But Trump reaching out to another foreign power to smear political rivals...I would've thought Republicans wouldve had an issue with this already but they clearly dont care.
     
  8. Sacudido

    Sacudido Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2002
    Messages:
    242
    Likes Received:
    142
    Perhaps there is a way to set a firm line as to what type of "quid pro quo" should be allowed, if any at all.

    Give me $X dollars or I will withhold the funds.
    Give my family member X or I will withhold the funds.
    Start an investigation of "US person's" activities in your country or I will withhold the funds.
    Start an investigation of general US activities in your country or I will withhold the funds.
    Allow us to set up multiple military bases in your country or I will withhold the funds.
    Formally join NATO or I will withhold the funds.
    Formally recognize Taiwan or I will withhold the funds.

    I'm sure there could be many more examples. Are all of these illegal? The first two are definitely illegal. The others, are they simply unethical, or fully illegal, or perfectly fine? Taken to a logical extreme, diplomacy would seldom get done if all requests involving X for Y become illegal.
     
  9. mtbrays

    mtbrays Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2007
    Messages:
    7,641
    Likes Received:
    6,390
    This wasn't diplomacy. He was clearly using Congressionally-approved funds to benefit himself. His supporters would love for us to think that he was doing this for the good of the country, but that is a very dangerous line of thinking to conflate the office of the presidency with its current occupant. A coequal branch of government appropriated funds for a specific purpose and another coequal branch decided to secretly attach strings to that appropriation for its personal benefit.
     
  10. superfob

    superfob Mommy WOW! I'm a Big Kid now.

    Joined:
    May 5, 2006
    Messages:
    2,025
    Likes Received:
    1,281
    To accurately describe what Trump was doing, these should be your examples.

     
  11. Sacudido

    Sacudido Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2002
    Messages:
    242
    Likes Received:
    142
    This I think is the bigger deal. Does the executive branch have the authority (beyond veto power if it was an appropriations bill) to even withhold the congressional approved funds in the first place?
     
  12. Rileydog

    Rileydog Contributing Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Messages:
    5,104
    Likes Received:
    5,390
    I was just trying to keep it simple and short, but the distinction you draw is correct. The facts available clearly indicate what he did and the way he did it, so I asked the question in a simple way. But I'll let others get into the tortured exercise of reinventing Trump's intent. People who are willing to manufacture an honorable/legal intent here basically don't care about facts, evidence, testimony. The only thing that will suffice is a written confession by Trump, or a contemporaneous recording or writing by Trump saying that my intent was political advantage.
     
    JuanValdez likes this.
  13. Rileydog

    Rileydog Contributing Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Messages:
    5,104
    Likes Received:
    5,390
    I applaud you voting/posting here. I really do since the Trump side has basically hidden from this question entirely. I do have a question though. How do you reconcile Trump's actions with this, from the Federal Election Commission? Is the argument that Trump's push for Ukraine to announce an investigation into the Bidens was all about foreign policy and had nothing to do with the 2020 election in which Biden was/is a frontrunner for the Democratic nomination?
    [​IMG]
     
    B-Bob and FranchiseBlade like this.
  14. dobro1229

    dobro1229 Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Messages:
    23,888
    Likes Received:
    19,690
    It's ridiculously dumb responses like this that will end up actually hurting Trump more in the Trumplican defense during impeachment.

    If Republicans were serious about getting Trump through this in the most effective way, it would be to have a central message that-

    "Yes this is wrong, but not impeachable because otherwise the Trump administration is widely effective on foreign policy, and this should be censured. If Trump continues this, then yes, I would vote for impeachment, but now I think its best for the to quickly censure, and move on to doing the work of the American people. Congressional leaders will work with the White House more closely from here on our to ensure future interests align to US interests, not personal political interests"

    That's an argument that Republicans could use like the Democrats used during the Clinton impeachment, that could get this over-with. But what we see here with cult supporters like yourself, and with Republicans in Congress, is that his followers are deathly afraid of ever saying that their cleric is wrong as if a bolt of lightning will strike you down from the heavens if you even type the words "Trump was wrong" on your keyboard. Everything he does is right even when he is wrong. To disagree with him is considered heresy.

    It's the danger of worshiping a false idol, and portraying cult like behavior. You and your arguments are devoid of reality to connect to the rest of the sane world, and instead of making a compelling argument, everyone not in the cult disregards your positions as Jim Jones level craziness.

    You saying what you just said, and what the Republicans like Jim Jordan will say tomorrow will ultimately be ineffective, and will just further hurt the presidents attempt to clear his name.
     
    #34 dobro1229, Nov 12, 2019
    Last edited: Nov 12, 2019
    Jayzers_100, B-Bob and JuanValdez like this.
  15. geeimsobored

    geeimsobored Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2005
    Messages:
    8,862
    Likes Received:
    3,159
    Probably not but it hasn't been tested. There have been laws passed in the 70s that largely formalize with the OMB can do in this situation. The OMB doesn't have the power to just halt spending of money that Congress appropriated but there is some room to temporarily withhold money if there are some questions or clarifications required from the agency that will spend the money.

    Now there is a procedure for OMB to actually request that Congress rescind funding for a program but Mulvaney never followed this procedure. Instead he halted the aid for a longer period than what is allowed. And his stated reason for holding the money clearly doesn't jive with the real story that witnesses (and the transcript) have told. But even Trump and Mulvaney were honest, OMB can't hold the money indefinitely and needed to go to Congress to get the appropriation rescinded.
     
  16. dobro1229

    dobro1229 Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Messages:
    23,888
    Likes Received:
    19,690
    The legal argument in Trump's favor on "was it a crime?" revolves around this notion of "Thing of value". I guess you could twist yourself into a pretzel to try, but you'd be arguing that there is no financial value in political propaganda that influences elections. US presidential elections are a multi-billion dollar enterprise at this point in our nations history. If there was no financial value in this level of election propaganda, I don't know what all that money is being spent on in election campaigns.
     
  17. Joshfast

    Joshfast "We're all gonna die" - Billy Sole
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2001
    Messages:
    6,473
    Likes Received:
    2,065
    This isn't accurate. There has to be some level ABOVE worship to describe their behavior.
     
    dobro1229 likes this.
  18. JuanValdez

    JuanValdez Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 1999
    Messages:
    34,059
    Likes Received:
    13,408
    This doesn't look too hard. The first 2 examples are clearly illegal. The next 2 examples will depend on the facts and motives. The final 3 are perfectly acceptable.

    I don't see why a president couldn't withhold the funds in the right circumstance. The executive branch conducts foreign policy. If Congress authorized funds that would hurt a president's foreign policy goals, you'd tread on his domain to say he had to fork it over anyway. What's more, I can easily google many other examples of presidents withholding aid to pressure foreign governments to do this or that (like Obama withholding aid from Egypt after the Sisi coup) -- not sure how this one would be different. The thing that is different about this one is motive -- he was not pursuing American interests but his own political interest.
     
  19. vlaurelio

    vlaurelio Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    21,310
    Likes Received:
    11,755
    we know the 3rd is actually more specific

    Start an investigation of my political rival's activities in your country to benefit my campaign

    or I will withhold the funds.
     
  20. mdrowe00

    mdrowe00 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    2,666
    Likes Received:
    3,889
    "With most people disbelief in a thing is founded on a blind belief in some other thing." — Georg C. Lichtenberg
     
    Nook likes this.

Share This Page

  • About ClutchFans

    Since 1996, ClutchFans has been loud and proud covering the Houston Rockets, helping set an industry standard for team fan sites. The forums have been a home for Houston sports fans as well as basketball fanatics around the globe.

  • Support ClutchFans!

    If you find that ClutchFans is a valuable resource for you, please consider becoming a Supporting Member. Supporting Members can upload photos and attachments directly to their posts, customize their user title and more. Gold Supporters see zero ads!


    Upgrade Now