The debate "Dem Impeachment Report is Out and it Lies by Saying that Trump Demanded Ukraine Investigations" was started by
December 5, 2019, 4:43 pm.
3 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 2 people are on the disagree side.
There needs to be more votes to see what the common perception is.
It looks like most of the people in this community are on the agreeing side of this statement.
jrardin12 posted 19 arguments to the agreers part.
Nemiroff posted 3 arguments to the disagreers part.
jrardin12 and 2 visitors agree.
2 visitors disagree.
I am sure those gang members are in jail because of solid evidence of wrongdoing.
so do you plan on releasing all those gang members from prison?
You need beyond a doubt evidence.
If there is no proof of bribary you can't convict anyone.
1. You say the president demanded an investigation. This is not true non of the witnesses say that he demanded. 2. All witnesses agree they did not hear Trump say that he would only give aid if they did an investigation.
do you plan on releasing from prison every gang member who was found guilty despite only mentioning vague unrelated consequences or heavily reminding his targets how dependant they are on him?
what does borrowing something have to do with anything? wtf are you talking about. trump didnt borrow, he withheld. he demanded, in his own words, dirt on his opponent. he verifiably hid many phone calls on a secret server not used for such phone calls. he has refused for anyone to witness many of his meetings with foreign leaders, especially autocrats of nations that are our traditional enemies.
the witnesses testimony supported the evidence on the ground, it wasnt some random trolls making random accusations about people who they only know the screen name of.
Also Neimrof, you could say you borrowed something from historybuff. Then I go to court and say that I interpreted it as you stole it. Would you like to go to jail for that?
Interpretations and assumptions don't count.
Ok, so what solid evidence do you have that Trump bribed Ukraine.
unfortunately you are not someone who works with me, who i hired, who took an oath (to the nation, not to the king). you also lack any details, like trump hiding these conversations in a secure server, or any details.
you have not addressed the fact that by your standard, large portion of the criminals in our jails should be released because they didnt declare their crimes explicitly to their victims. including many mobsters and gang members. Good Job!
He asked him to do it. But he didn't attach any aid to the investigation.
Ok Neimrof, if I heard from someone that you stole I will report you.
Again their is no proof for extortion.
Trump explicitly told the president of Ukraine that he needed to do trump a favor. He then told him that he wanted him to investigate joe and Hunter, by name. Here are the quotes:
" I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it."
"There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it... It sounds horrible to me."
He tells him Ukraine has to do Trump a favor. Then tells them to investigate biden. How can you possibly think trump didn't do what his own transcript says he did?
so because the extortion failed due to the whistleblower, no crime was commited?
attempted murder or theft still lands you in jail even if you fail.
You charge people on assumptions only on facts.
It sounded like, but it wasn't.
The bottom line is Trump asked for investigations into Burisma, but did not bribe or quid pro quo for it. Also, the Ukrainians didn't launch an investigation.
Lastly, Volker, who did talk to Trump said their was no demand for investigations in return for aid.
Next we have Sondland, which the report mainly relies on and he said that beside his own presumptions there was no link between aid and investigations.
Also Vindman said the call could be interpreted in different ways.
except the transcript of the call sounded like a mobster's extortion pitch. weve taken care of you, now we need a favor in return. and not a favor for us benefit, but for trumps benefit.
why is the only claim of corruption in the entire world that interests him is the one related to his political rival? sounds fishy.
Next we have Morrison who say there was NO demand from Trump.
How about facts? We have Lt. Col. Vindman saying that he "interpreted" the call as a demand. That is a presumption.
TDS to the max
by your standard, every gang member commiting extortion should be free to leave jail because their promise of "protection" wasnt an explicitly threat. thats stupid.
jrardin, your living in a different world. there is no point in discussing since you just declare a conclusion and refuse to defend it with logic. i recommend a blog website for you, not a debate platfirm.
No one has evidence that Trump demanded anything.