Red Faced, Trump Backs Out Of Using Doral Resort As Host Of G7 summit

[Jollybear]

Please, I am a fiscal conservative. Your questions were answered. You denied the answer. You could not refute the facts given to you. Denial is not adding to the conversation.

Your a fiscal conservative? Really now?

Ok, so you should be ok with trumps tax cuts on businesses, yes, no?

 

[Jollybear]

Some conservatives are intelligent. They can see when the laws are being broken.

By the way, some conservatives are for a national healthcare system. They can see that the massive insurance bureaucracy is a dinosaur. It contributes little and cost quite a bit of money.

So, all those republican conservatives that voted against the impeachment resolution, there all none intelligent? Every single one of them?

 

[Jollybear]

I’d prefer you respond to the parts that are relevant to the conversation but okay. ..



No, those are actual verifiable facts that actually occurred. You really have nothing to say about any of it? Do you not think fraud is a criminal action? You’re perfectly fine with people enriching themselves through their own charities? You’re okay with people violating campaign laws and paying off porn stars that they sleep with?

You have some pretty low standards there.



LOL So you’re just going to double down on the name calling? You were pressed for time, so this is what you focused on instead of the actual substance of the discussion? Wow.



Now you’re turning to “I know you are but what I am?” This is getting sad.

Missing the point doesn’t make a person dishonest, by the way.



Go ahead, I’m not scared of your threats.

I’m here to talk about the subject of the thread. You said you were pressed for time, so instead of focusing on the substance of the discussion, you’re going to spend your little time with this nonsense?

You don’t really care about getting to the bottom of the truth, do you?



You assumed he would give a discount. What I assume is that liars gonna lie. That’s a reference to Trump, not you.



It’s about avoiding the appearance of impropriety; and it’s about avoiding influence from foreign governments.

When did you answer the question, “how can you not see how even the appearance of impropriety is a problem?” What was your answer?



The emoluments clause? I just went back 4 pages and didn’t see it anywhere.

So you have nothing to say about the link I posted? Absolutely nothing?



We’re talking legality on this one. I’d like you to answer the question please. This isn’t an answer.

Has Congress approved of Trump’s gifts? If they haven’t, then why would you say it’s legal for him to accept gifts, when the specific wording states that they must be approved by Congress?



Yeah, he wants to make money.

The problem, for the one millionth time, is that the President is not supposed to enrich himself while holding the office of the President of the US. It’s obvious Trump is trying to boost his slumping sales at that particular resort.



Sure.

Keep going on about how Demcrats are commies, and I’ll have to keep pointing out your bias. Sorry.

The fact of the matter is, that if Obama had done it, it would also be wrong.

I responded DIRECTLY to it in the very post you JUST responded to. YOU ignored my response.

What the US Constitution Article 1, Section 9 Restricts

"Clause 8: No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State."


Explanation: Congress can't make you a Duke, Earl, or even a Marquis. If you are a civil servant or elected official, you can't accept anything from a foreign government or official, including an honorary title or an office. This clause prevents any government official from receiving foreign gifts without the permission of Congress.


What are Emoluments?
Clause 8, the so-called “Emoluments Clause,” specifies that no elected or appointed U.S. government official—including the president of the United States—may accept payments from foreign governments during their terms in office.


The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines emoluments as “returns arising from office or employment usually in the form of compensation or perquisites.”


Constitutional scholars suggest the Emoluments Clause was added to prevent American ambassadors of the 1700s, living abroad from being influenced or corrupted by gifts from wealthy European powers."

Foreign leaders paying a hotel room is not a bribe. Its a innocent transaction. Period.

 

[Prometheus85]

Hold on.....how would zelenski's reputation be destroyed with the ukraine people by him saying trump pressured him?

Because Scandals involving corruption and abuse of power are nothing new in Ukraine.

The call embarrassed Zelensky because it showed him as eager to please Trump and critical of European partners whose support he needs to strengthen Ukraine’s economy and to end the conflict with Russia. Mind you Zelensky strongly objected to the White House’s decision to release the transcript of his half of the conversation.

Zelensky told trump the next prosecutor general will be 100 percent my person, my candidate, and that person “will look into the situation.”

The “100 percent” comment regarding the prosecutor general has prompted a lot of discussion because “the topic of justice and law enforcement reform is very sensitive for Ukrainians, after all the pervious prosecutor was fired for being corrupt.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So, all those republican conservatives that voted against the impeachment resolution, there all none intelligent? Every single one of them?

You forgot the other half of the post.

 

[Prometheus85]

No matter how many times you and all the rest of the lefties deny it, its not going to be false.

no your the one that’s in denial, because the joe/hunter Biden Ukraine conspiracy has been debunked 1 millions times already. Either your being willfully ignorant or extremely dishonest.

 

[Prometheus85]

Ya, the proper institutions doing it is good. Trump didnt do wrong.



Ya, we have a right to know. We also have a right to know why the constant witch hunt too.

Curious? Did u consider the hearings on Hillary Clinton’s emails, or the Benghazi hearings to be witch-hunt’s?

 

[Jollybear]

Because Scandals involving corruption and abuse of power are nothing new in Ukraine.

The call embarrassed Zelensky because it showed him as eager to please Trump and critical of European partners whose support he needs to strengthen Ukraine’s economy and to end the conflict with Russia. Mind you Zelensky strongly objected to the White House’s decision to release the transcript of his half of the conversation.

Zelensky told trump the next prosecutor general will be 100 percent my person, my candidate, and that person “will look into the situation.”

The “100 percent” comment regarding the prosecutor general has prompted a lot of discussion because “the topic of justice and law enforcement reform is very sensitive for Ukrainians, after all the pervious prosecutor was fired for being corrupt.

What your saying makes no sense to me.

If zelenski said he was pushed how would that do anything to him? It would do nothing. His people would be like, ok, he said he was pushed. Trump did HIM wrong, HE didnt do wrong himself.

Its like if my money got stolen and i said "ya, joe stole my money" am i saying i did wrong? Obviously not. Im saying joe did wrong.

This is why what your telling me makes no sense.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What your saying makes no sense to me.

If zelenski said he was pushed how would that do anything to him? It would do nothing. His people would be like, ok, he said he was pushed. Trump did HIM wrong, HE didnt do wrong himself.

Its like if my money got stolen and i said "ya, joe stole my money" am i saying i did wrong? Obviously not. Im saying joe did wrong.

This is why what your telling me makes no sense.

Don't blame others when you won't let yourself understand. The president of the Ukraine is in a no win situation. Trump made him look bad when the phone call was made pubblic. He cannot offend Trump since he may be dependent on him for aid for perhaps a bit over five years. He cannot offend the Democrats since they might win. And he cannot look weak to those of his country. All he can do is deny, deny, deny.

 

[metis]

No, its not against the law to do what he did.

You are clearly lying because if you had really looked it up you'd see that it is a felony: The “Quid” is a Crime: No Need to Prove “Pro Quo” in Ukrainegate

Also: Trump Ukraine call 'criminal and impeachable,' Fox's Napolitano says

 

[Jollybear]

You are clearly lying because if you had really looked it up you'd see that it is a felony: The “Quid” is a Crime: No Need to Prove “Pro Quo” in Ukrainegate

Also: Trump Ukraine call 'criminal and impeachable,' Fox's Napolitano says

I disagree with both of those articles.

You got to prove INTENT for a crime.

Trump is proper in having potential crime investigated. The american people have a right to know about biden. To stop that IS TO meddle in ellection due to manipulating americas perceptions of biden.

Also USA giving aid to ukraine does come with conditions and that is perfectly reasonable.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I disagree with both of those articles.

You got to prove INTENT for a crime.

Trump is proper in having potential crime investigated. The american people have a right to know about biden. To stop that IS TO meddle in ellection due to manipulating americas perceptions of biden.

Also USA giving aid to ukraine does come with conditions and that is perfectly reasonable.

Really? Show us the law that says one must prove intent. And there was no crime to investigate. Trump is either an idiot or a liar. In neither case was it his job to ask for an illegal investigation.

 

[Jollybear]

Don't blame others when you won't let yourself understand. The president of the Ukraine is in a no win situation. Trump made him look bad when the phone call was made pubblic. He cannot offend Trump since he may be dependent on him for aid for perhaps a bit over five years. He cannot offend the Democrats since they might win. And he cannot look weak to those of his country. All he can do is deny, deny, deny.

No, trump didnt make him look bad. Further, he approved the call being made public.

Also on video, he said he was not pushed or pressured.

There is no looking bad one way or the other.

If he said trump did not push him, ok, fine, if he wer to say trump pushed him, well, ok, that makes trump look bad, not him.

 

[Jollybear]

Really? Show us the law that says one must prove intent. And there was no crime to investigate. Trump is either an idiot or a liar. In neither case was it his job to ask for an illegal investigation.

Stop with the BS and making stuff up.

Crime requires intent. This is obvious. If not, then you can make a crime out of anything.

And you dont know if biden did wrong.

We already know biden lied about talking to his son about the gas company.

We already know shoktin the prosecuter he got fired said he WAS investigating bidens son.

So, whos lying, biden or shoktin?

We dont know yet.

Stop pretending you are the investigater because your not.

Also there is no illegal investigation. Thats incoherent gibberish.

He asked for an investigation. A perfectly fine thing to ask.

 

[Jollybear]

Curious? Did u consider the hearings on Hillary Clinton’s emails, or the Benghazi hearings to be witch-hunt’s?

I never followed closely to the news on any of that. So i cannot say one way or the other.

But, again, i dont promote double standards.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, trump didnt make him look bad. Further, he approved the call being made public.

Also on video, he said he was not pushed or pressured.

There is no looking bad one way or the other.

If he said trump did not push him, ok, fine, if he wer to say trump pushed him, well, ok, that makes trump look bad, not him.

Trump approved only after he was caught. They tried to hide it earlier.

And the claims of the President of Ukraine has been explained to you.

Try again.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Stop with the BS and making stuff up.

Crime requires intent. This is obvious. If not, then you can make a crime out of anything.

And you dont know if biden did wrong.

We already know biden lied about talking to his son about the gas company.

We already know shoktin the prosecuter he got fired said he WAS investigating bidens son.

So, whos lying, biden or shoktin?

We dont know yet.

Stop pretending you are the investigater because your not.

Also there is no illegal investigation. Thats incoherent gibberish.

He asked for an investigation. A perfectly fine thing to ask.

I love how when you make a foolish claim rather than support it you have to go into a long personal attack.

You made a claim. You need to support it. "Everyone knows" is not support.

Edit: And to refute your "crime requires intent" BS I suggest that you study the difference between murder and manslaughter.

 

[Jollybear]

I love how when you make a foolish claim rather than support it you have to go into a long personal attack.

You made a claim. You need to support it. "Everyone knows" is not support.

I ussumed youv been watching the news and already knew this.

Apparently not.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I ussumed youv been watching the news and already knew this.

Apparently not.

Not only have I been watching the news, unlike some here I understand it.


You made a post with a foolish claim in it. Please support it or admit that you are wrong.

 

[Jollybear]

Not only have I been watching the news, unlike some here I understand it.


You made a post with a foolish claim in it. Please support it or admit that you are wrong.

Biden claim that he and son 'never' spoke about Ukraine comes after son admitted they did 'once'

Biden lied. There, i just supported it. Happy now?