Jump to content

ROMAD1

Directions and Objectives For A Future Mainstream Party

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

i'm not saying Hunter shouldn't take the job.  But I am saying Obama should not have let Joe have any role and/or Joe should have recused himself.  I think the following is an apples to apples comparison, but I guess we need to agree on one thing

Can you agree that Joe Biden was heading the US side in anti-corruption measures at any time that the world was actively working with Ukraine and if at any point, Joe Biden's timeline in the role overlapped with Hunter Biden's timeline at Burisma?

If you said yes, then here is my comparison.

If Trump saying 'do us a favor', when Ukraine knows hundreds of millions of dollars hasn't been delivered to them yet, is pressure to announce an investigation which directly leads to something unethical (actually illegal as it's the crux of the impeachment argument).  Then couldn't you surmise that the president of Ukraine, after getting off of calls with Biden, when he knew billions in aid was not delivered yet, and Biden is telling him to root out corruption, is it possible in the slightest he got off of the phone and said 'hey guys, we have to show something, but fyi, the same guy telling me to root this out, also has a son on Burisma, so take that as you will and lets do what is needed to get our aid'?

I honestly don't know whether Joe's time as anti-corruption chief overlapped with Hunter's time at Burisma, but I'm ok with accepting that they did for sake of discussion, and it generally seems to be accepted that they did, I just haven't researched it myself.

My understanding, again, from what I've read in passing, not really personally researched, is that the prosecutor general who was fired at Biden's request was NOT actively investigating Burisma, and Joe pressing for him to be fired was not beneficial to his son's $$$, it actually endangered it.    If this is true, then I don't think your hypothetical above is possible.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ewsieg said:

There is a bit of me that wonders if Trump believes there is something illegal with the Bidens/Ukraine.  Not sure if it matters in the grand scheme, but if he truly believes there was something illegal, I give Trump a little more sympathy as I push for removal.  The reason is, if he was trying to get it announced only for the political questions it puts on Biden, it's the exact "swamp" crap he claims he's trying to get rid of, if he truly believes there is something to an investigation, he may believe this is the only way to fight the swamp as he can't get it done in the US.

I do not believe Trump differentiates between legal and illegal.  He is a sociopath who is solely interested in himself.  If some activity benefits him in terms of wealth or status, then it's a good activity.  The legality of that activity is not a consideration to him.  I really do believe this.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, pfife said:

My understanding, again, from what I've read in passing, not really personally researched, is that the prosecutor general who was fired at Biden's request was NOT actively investigating Burisma, and Joe pressing for him to be fired was not beneficial to his son's $$$, it actually endangered it.    If this is true, then I don't think your hypothetical above is possible.

I believe that's a flawed angle to look at it even if as a whole, it's correct.

What if the pressure from the entire world made it impossible for Joe to go rogue and push for Ukraine to keep the prosecutor general?  So he has to follow suit and go with it.  It is entirely possible that the president put someone in charge and said I don't care who you hurt, root out corruption.  It's possible that he flat out said, go after everyone but Burisma as to not get him on the bad side of the US.  It's possible in the first scenario he was instructed to get everyone, yet underlings took it upon themselves to recognize Hunter was on the board of Burisma and without even mentioning it to higher ups, made sure to put that folder at the bottom of the pile.   The fact remains, there was a possible conflict of interest and it should have been dealt with.  The problem is, it's probably all to common, so no one thought twice about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

I believe that's a flawed angle to look at it even if as a whole, it's correct.

What if the pressure from the entire world made it impossible for Joe to go rogue and push for Ukraine to keep the prosecutor general?  So he has to follow suit and go with it.  It is entirely possible that the president put someone in charge and said I don't care who you hurt, root out corruption.  It's possible that he flat out said, go after everyone but Burisma as to not get him on the bad side of the US.  It's possible in the first scenario he was instructed to get everyone, yet underlings took it upon themselves to recognize Hunter was on the board of Burisma and without even mentioning it to higher ups, made sure to put that folder at the bottom of the pile.   The fact remains, there was a possible conflict of interest and it should have been dealt with.  The problem is, it's probably all to common, so no one thought twice about it.

I agree with you in principle and in practice, but the problem is that we live in a 'no-one is required to give something up for anyone' culture now. We simply are not allowed to demand that spouses, siblings, children, parents, S.O. etc, be kept arm's length from the business of their political relations on the grounds (which have a certain merit) that it ends up being discriminatory by class, for example against married women. And the problem for elected officials, (in the main - though NOT the particular case for Joe & Hunter Biden) is that an elected legislative official cannot recuse himself from a situation the way a LEO or judicial officer can - an elected official cannot delegate their legislative vote to any other person.

So the way it should work is that if the system can't demand that an LEO or Judicial person's near relatives can't work too close to what they do for ethical comfort, those people should recuse themselves when appropriate, though they often don't (see Thomas, Clarence; Scalia, Antonin for examples ). On the legislative side we are just stuck. We can't tell McConnell's wife she can't work on things related to legislation and McConnell cannot not vote on legislation his wife has an interest in. We have just baked ourselves a crooked cake on this. Now in Biden's case, he COULD and SHOULD have told Obama he had a conflict dealing with Ukraine and simply not taken the portfolio - or he should have persuaded Hunter to step away. I agree 100% that was what I regard as a lapse of good judgement on Joe's part. But the problem is that in Washington they are all so habituated to ignoring that kind of conflict I can understand (though not agree ) with why no-one ever considered it an issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I, for one, would actually like to see evidence or testimony to the effect that something unethical or illegal was going on with Hunter, and tie that into Joe.

For as much as I have heard about Hunter Biden, I have yet to actually see anything other than a bunch of hypotheticals from individuals who stand to benefit from deflecting attention away from the POTUS.

Individuals, I might add, who have collectively whined and bitched about the lack of due process in the impeachment process, dismissed out of hand testimony and public servants they didn't like as heresay and opportunistic liars, respectively.

But I should take their word on Hunter Biden of all people.  It just feels shady.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

I, for one, would actually like to see evidence or testimony to the effect that something unethical or illegal was going on with Hunter, and tie that into Joe

I believe you most certainly will not, because I see this as a pretty simple case of Hunter getting a sweetheart deal where he was simply the useful idiot. It's pretty obvious to anyone inside a system like the old east block that one way you insulate yourself from scrutiny is by taking the children of the power structure on board your org. It has been done that way by the commissars since there were commissars. To some degree or another, *everybody* projects their understanding of the world they know onto the rest of world they do not. Why wouldn't the managers of Burysma think that pulling Hunter into the org would protect them from any investigator who didn't want to embarrass a good patron like the US? Whatever corrupt intent there was would have been on the part of Burysma, which is why is was bad judgement either for Hunter go there or for Joe not to stay away from anything Hunter was tied to that didn't meed the Caesar's wife test.

Now, all that said, is any of this in a league with or relevant to a President trying to use foreign policy games to jemmy an election? No.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny, that.  The president didn't actually want an investigation.

So whose fault is that?

What I am saying is it either merits an investigation or we collectively can STFU about it.

It seems a touch disingenuous to me to choose not pursue an investigation and continue to float allegations that will never be investigated.

But it never was about uncovering corruption.  You are intelligent enough to know that.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

What I am saying is it either merits an investigation or we collectively can STFU about it.

What I don't get is that if you are running against Biden in 2020, I think raising the objection that Joe should have avoided working in policy areas where he could have collided with the interests of a member of his family is a perfectly reasonable critique to make, and that is already in the oppo-research bag for who ever runs against Joe. Trump's problem here is that he didn't know when to quit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Gehringer_2 said:

What I don't get is that if you are running against Biden in 2020, I think raising the objection that Joe should have avoided working in policy areas where he could have collided with the interests of a member of his family is a perfectly reasonable critique to make, and that is already in the oppo-research bag for who ever runs against Joe. Trump's problem here is that he didn't know when to quit.

Trump and 666 5th avenue are gonna try this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

Funny, that.  The president didn't actually want an investigation.

I honestly don't know if he wanted a true investigation or not.  To me, I can look at the Hunter/Joe/Burisma info and say, that's potentially shady, and wonder if there is more to it.  What is the one thing better than Ukraine publicly stating there is an investigation....them eventually finding some evidence that it might have affected investigations or even more.

4 minutes ago, Gehringer_2 said:

What I don't get is that if you are running against Biden in 2020, I think raising the objection that Joe should have avoided working in policy areas where he could have collided with the interests of a member of his family is a perfectly reasonable critique to make, and that is already in the oppo-research bag for who ever runs against Joe. Trump's problem here is that he didn't know when to quit.

This I can agree with.  Old politics would have just had someone bury that in a bag until you need it, then you can accuse without any need for facts when you feel it'll best serve you.  I really do feel Trump thinks there is something here, possibly why he's doubling down and sending Rudi to Ukraine as he's being impeached over it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, ROMAD1 said:

Trump and 666 5th avenue are gonna try this?

well, who am I kidding of course, he doesn't even see the issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ROMAD1 said:

well, who am I kidding of course, he doesn't even see the issue.

Touche

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

  I really do feel Trump thinks there is something here, possibly why he's doubling down and sending Rudi to Ukraine as he's being impeached over it.

I have a feeling the flow went the other way. I rather suspect Rudi is working his own get rich quick schemes in the east block and he put the buzz in Trump's ear that in turn got him a Presidential imprimatur to run around the ex-east block on a personal/client dual track. I don't see Trump as a guy curious enough to have self-started a dossier on  Hunter Biden working in Ukraine. Someone whose initials rhyme with BAR FEE brought it to him, probably pre-wrapped in an attractively appealing (to Trump)  conspiracy theory. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Gehringer_2 said:

I have a feeling the flow went the other way. I rather suspect Rudi is working his own get rich quick schemes in the east block and he put the buzz in Trump's ear that in turn got him a Presidential imprimatur to run around the ex-east block on a personal/client dual track. I don't see Trump as a guy curious enough to have self-started a dossier on  Hunter Biden working in Ukraine. Someone whose initials rhyme with BAR FEE brought it to him, probably pre-wrapped in an attractively appealing (to Trump)  conspiracy theory. 

Absolutely that could be the case.  As far as what level Trump was manipulated, I don't know, but I absolutely believe how you describe is is how it started.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Gehringer_2 said:

I have a feeling the flow went the other way. I rather suspect Rudi is working his own get rich quick schemes in the east block and he put the buzz in Trump's ear that in turn got him a Presidential imprimatur to run around the ex-east block on a personal/client dual track. I don't see Trump as a guy curious enough to have self-started a dossier on  Hunter Biden working in Ukraine. Someone whose initials rhyme with BAR FEE brought it to him, probably pre-wrapped in an attractively appealing (to Trump)  conspiracy theory. 

It's worth keeping in mind that at least one official (Sondland) testified that the goal wasn't an actual investigation, but the *appearance* of one. That's the political value add for his 2020 Campaign... 

So of course Trump wasn't curious enough to self start a dossier on Hunter Biden... regarding Rudy, perhaps he's deluded enough to believe the conspiracy theories, but I dont think Trump cares one way or another about whether they are true or not. He just wanted the attack line to use at his MAGA rallies and Rudy was (and still is!) a means to that end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL if Trump wanted a true investigation, he wouldn't send his private lawyer to act as some sort of shadow state department. He has all kinds of official resources at his disposal and used none of them. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/14/2019 at 9:38 AM, Motown Bombers said:

LOL if Trump wanted a true investigation, he wouldn't send his private lawyer to act as some sort of shadow state department. He has all kinds of official resources at his disposal and used none of them. 

You don't think there isn't any validity to the belief that maybe Trump doesn't trust the official resources?  Not saying you don't trust them, but that Trump doesn't trust them.

21 hours ago, Oblong said:


this was Scalias writing partner

Almost worth looking this up to see the responses.  I imagine 33% saying he wasn't a real conservative anyway, 33% raving about him being so strong to step out for 'truth', and 33% saying the fact it took him this long to switch proves how horrible of a person he really is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

You don't think there isn't any validity to the belief that maybe Trump doesn't trust the official resources?  Not saying you don't trust them, but that Trump doesn't trust them.

Almost worth looking this up to see the responses.  I imagine 33% saying he wasn't a real conservative anyway, 33% raving about him being so strong to step out for 'truth', and 33% saying the fact it took him this long to switch proves how horrible of a person he really is.

matches what I see here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is political courage.  Fighting in the face of a brewing media narrative that you are in a "trump district"

There is no suburban "trump district"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ewsieg said:

You don't think there isn't any validity to the belief that maybe Trump doesn't trust the official resources?  Not saying you don't trust them, but that Trump doesn't trust them.

Almost worth looking this up to see the responses.  I imagine 33% saying he wasn't a real conservative anyway, 33% raving about him being so strong to step out for 'truth', and 33% saying the fact it took him this long to switch proves how horrible of a person he really is.

There's no validity to Trump not trusting the official resources.  He's totally fine leveraging Durhman for his political gain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am 100% confident that Trump does not care about corruption in the Ukraine.  He is fine with any kind of corruption as long as he benefits from it.  Any interest is Ukraine's corruption would be how can he could benefit from it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


Motown Sports Blog



×
×
  • Create New...