• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

House Impeachment Inquiry

Status
Not open for further replies.
It's amazing that after two months everyone, including the news media, is falling for this Republican spin that "quid pro quo" is in any way required. It is not.

The President only has to GET something for it to be illegal. He does not have to get something AND give something. That second part is in NO WAY required for it to be illegal.


52 U.S. Code §&#8239 said:
It shall be unlawful for a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election
Click to expand...


The "thing of value" was dirt on a political opponent. Trump, by his own admission, ask a foreign national to violate US law. Trump doing that is a violation of campaign law.

The icing on the cake fact that Trump did it via extortion is IN NO WAY required for it to be illegal. It is just another illegal act.



Now here is the absolutely deviously amazing part. Not only have the Republicans tricked the entire country with that lie, they hid an even better one in the spin!! And it is this:

quid pro quo has a specific meaning:

"a favor or advantage granted or expected in return for something"

What Trump did was threaten to withhold something that was ALREADY rightfully belonging to the other party. That's not what "quid pro quo" is at all

That is another word entirely. extortion

"the practice of obtaining something through force or threats"


So two months ago the Republicans realized that OH CRAP The President was involved in extortion. What they did was absolutely genius. They tricked the entire country, including the news media, into using a completely different term "quid pro quo"; which for appearances sake is a much less damaging term than the actual term "extortion". And as an added bonus they hid doing that in an attempt to act like it was required to make the act illegal, which it isn't.
 
Last edited:
This is The End said:
It's amazing that after two months everyone, including the news media, is falling for this Republican spin that "quid pro quo" is in any way required. It is not.
Click to expand...
You are correct, but for the wrong reasons.

United States Code does not govern the meaning of constitutional terms such as treason, bribery, and high crimes. Indeed, the relevant constitutional passages predate any federal law you might care to name.

The relevant question here is whether one can commit the 18th c. common law offense of bribery merely by soliciting a bribe. IMO, yes.
 
Last edited:
Belz... said:
Yeah, I've been saying that for a while, but I'm not sure I worded it that way here. It's clearly extortion.
Click to expand...


How does a Democratic congressman not take a minute to address that every time a Republican using the incorrect phrase??

It just blows my mind. Take one minute to read the definition of "quid pro quo" and "extortion" into the record.

But even doing that falls into the other part of the spin... that "quid pro quo" or "extortion" are required for it to be illegal. They are not required.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Trump Tweets

I WANT NOTHING!
Click to expand...

He's embraced Stoicism or Buddhism and freed himself from desire? I'd have thought he'd be among the very least likely candidates for that achievement!

Or perhaps it's a primal scream of nihilistic urge to destroy the self and be free of the ego? Again, not the path I'd have considered for him.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Rudy Giuliani Tweeted

@RudyGiuliani
Republican lawyer doesn’t do his own research and preparation, and is instead picking up Democrat lies, shame.
Allow me to inform him: I have NO financial interests in Ukraine, NONE! I would appreciate his apology.

I came into this at Volker’s request. Sondland is speculating based on VERY little contact. I never met him and had very few calls with him, mostly with Volker.
Volker testified I answered their questions and described them as my opinions, NOT demands. I.E., no quid pro quo!
Click to expand...
Giuliani refused subpoena to appear before inquiry. Maybe he will change his mind.
 
Last edited:
Childlike Empress said:
Garrison is maybe today's best cartoonist, technically, worldwide (and I know quite a few).
His views are sometimes far off, even very crude (see "Greta Thunberg" thread), but often close to the point, like in this case.
He always manages to rile up the right people, though, which is why I enjoy spreading his work so much :thumbsup::)
Click to expand...

That post was a lot funnier than the nonsensical cartoon. On planet Earth, I believe Garrison is generally known as a hateful little jerk, which is not to say that some such don't have impressively large fan clubs. But really, what "point" do you imagine he was "close to" with that cartoon?
 
Last edited:
d4m10n said:
You are correct, but for the wrong reasons.

United States Code does not govern the meaning of constitutional terms such as treason, bribery, and high crimes. Indeed, the relevant constitutional passages predate any federal law you might care to name.

The relevant question here is whether one can commit the 18th c. common law offense of bribery merely by soliciting a bribe. IMO, yes.
Click to expand...

This.When it comes to impeachment, those terms are pretty much what the congress says they are.
Now with actual criminal charges it's a different story.
 
Garrison is a talented artist who uses his talent to disguise the fact that he is a lousy political cartoonist. I mean, forget politics, they are just bad. Most of his stuff is unintelligible, or relies on obscure, fringe assumptions to get any sort of coherent point across.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Trump Tweets

Impeachment Witch Hunt is now OVER! Ambassador Sondland asks U.S. President (me): “What do you want from Ukraine? I keep hearing all these different ideas & theories. What do you want? It was a very abrupt conversation. He was not in a good mood. He (the President) just said,”...

....”I WANT NOTHING! I WANT NOTHING! I WANT NO QUID PRO QUO! TELL PRESIDENT ZELENSKY TO DO THE RIGHT THING!” Later, Ambassador Sondland said that I told him, “Good, go tell the truth!” This Witch Hunt must end NOW. So bad for our Country!
Click to expand...

The man has lost it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom