SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50246324
"The US House of Representatives has passed a resolution to formally proceed with the impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump.
The measure details how the inquiry will move into a more public phase. It was not a vote on whether the president should be removed from office.
This was the first test of support in the Democratic-controlled House for the impeachment process.
The White House condemned the vote, which passed along party lines.
Only two Democrats - representing districts that Mr Trump won handily in 2016 - voted against the resolution, along with all Republicans, for a total count of 232 in favour and 196 against."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Trump Impeachment: House Votes to Formalise Inquiry
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 319 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Is that really YOU that is reading this?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 05 2019, @05:16PM (1 child)
Except that you're wrong about the following things...
... Nepotism is when the party with higher power arranges or allows favors in exchange for a position. Like when Trump becomes President, and suddenly all his kids are working in the West Wing for him. Have you shown that Vice President Biden arranged the Burisma position for him? No. And the naval commission, well, all commissions are by direction of the President, so that's a non-starter.
... Corruption is when the party inside the corporation (Hunter) arranges or asks for favors in exchange. Like when Trump, in response to being told Ukraine wants to buy arms (and, implied in background, is waiting for money), asks for "a favor," instead of saying, "Yes, you get the money and the missiles just because we want you to win. Now could you do something for us in addition?" Did Hunter ask Daddy to intervene in Ukraine? No.
... The prosecutor, Shokin, was not investigating Burisma at all according to people who worked in his office. Burisma had been investigated by the prior prosector, and Shokin sat on that handed over investigation and did nothing with it, just like he did enough other investigations that the remainder of the world recognized Shokin was either incompetent or corrupt. That Shokin had problems was known to IMF, EU, and the State department.
The entire world knew that the US would play hardball, and approved.
As opposed to Rudy's continuing to persist in believing in theories that have already been defunct. And maneuvering in secret that nobody in the world knew about or approved of.
.... By the way, do you notice that what Biden did was a threat, yes, but one that was not carried out? It would be interesting to see what would have happened if Ukraine had called the bluff, but they didn't, and no aid was actually withheld. BIG difference.
You see, by Biden getting Shokin kicked out he did Burisma no favors. Shokin's successor actually did work the investigation, and found evidence that before Biden joined their board there were tax irregularities that were then settled by fine in 2017.
So, what you actually see with Biden is someone playing by the rules. (Yes, the very edge of the rules. And what Hunter did was not smart, but not illegal. And Daddy had nothing to do with that, unlike Trump.)
What quid pro quo looks like, by contrast:
1) Establish aid as approved by Congress - direct funds that will be given to them.
2) Actually withhold those funds, in contravention of Congress' orders. To a degree that responsibilities were shifted around when OMB wouldn't accept what the President wanted in withholding the funds because they weren't sure it was legal. Quid.
3) Ukraine needs weaponry which they'll by from the US, and needs the money to do it with. Quid.
4) Place Ukraine into a position where they desperately wanted reassurance from the United States about their partnership.
5) Make that reassurance (and future aid) conditional on their playing ball on Burisma/Cloudstrike/Biden, BY NAME. Quo.
6) (I wouldn't say that it's reciprocal necessarily because things are happening that are not good but the United States has been very very good to Ukraine.... [we want aid, says Ukraine]... 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." [whitehouse.gov]) - Pro.
7) President may actually believe he never established a this-for-that relationship because idiots on his staff tell him so. Yet Ukraine was indeed manipulated. And this is not about corruption, this is about political investigation in a way which benefits Donald J. Trump personally without providing any added benefit to the nation itself. "I'm not shooting at you, I'm not shooting at you..." as you pull the trigger. See?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 09 2019, @02:22PM
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/08/opinion/letters/quid-pro-quo.html [nytimes.com]
Extortion is the more accurate term.