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

[Subduction Zone]

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?

Or forgot. By your standard you "lie" in almost every post. It is better to assume that you screwed up. Even if he lied what does that have to do with the topic? That was not the error that you were called out on.

 

[Jollybear]

Or forgot. By your standard you "lie" in almost every post. It is better to assume that you screwed up. Even if he lied what does that have to do with the topic? That was not the error that you were called out on.

Biden forgot! Lol. His son is working at a ukrainian gas company and biden just somehow conveniently forgot he taljed to his son about it!? Lol

Ya, keep telling yourself that.

At a minimum biden KNEW his son was on the board.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Biden forgot! Lol. His son is working at a ukrainian gas company and biden just somehow conveniently forgot he taljed to his son about it!? Lol

Ya, keep telling yourself that.

At a minimum biden KNEW his son was on the board.

Busy people sometimes do not delve too deeply in the actions of their own family. Why do you think that it is not possible for him to have forgotten.

At any rate now you are deflecting from the foolish claim that you made. I could go back and quote it for you, or you could man up and own up to your error.

 

[metis]

I disagree with both of those articles.

And of course you present nothing to support your position, plus you lied when you said that this was not a violation of federal law.

You got to prove INTENT for a crime.

That was already presented even by Trump himself, let alone several others.

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

But those "conditions" cannot be in violation of American federal laws, which you seem to either be totally unaware of or you believe that Trump is above the law.

An honest response from you would have involved presenting evidence that such an action is not in violation of the law, which you didn't do. You should get over the fact that just because you may believe in X doesn't intrinsically make X a fact. IOW, maybe get over yourself.

 

[Jollybear]

And of course you present nothing to support your position, plus you lied when you said that this was not a violation of federal law.

All throughout this thread ive been giving evidence.

I didnt lie at all. Trump did not break any law. And i already in a earlyer post quoted USAs contract agreement with ukraine and trump was perfectly aligned with it.

That was already presented even by Trump himself, let alone several others.

Ya, trump said his intent was to look into corruption. Thats totally proper.

But those "conditions" cannot be in violation of American federal laws, which you seem to either be totally unaware of or you believe that Trump is above the law.

I am aware and im also aware that the democrats are phonies and twist the laws to there selfish advantages.

An honest response from you would have involved presenting evidence that such an action is not in violation of the law, which you didn't do. You should get over the fact that just because you may believe in X doesn't intrinsically make X a fact. IOW, maybe get over yourself.

Get over yourself.

What he did was proper, logically and was within the contract usa had with ukraine.

If you dont like it, too bad.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That was already presented even by Trump himself, let alone several others.

I agree, but his premise was false. One does not need to show intent for a crime. That was a claim that he could not support and he may have realized that he was in error when I brought up the example of manslaughter versus murder. In one intent must be proved, but not the other. One can be punished for being an idiot if that idiocy harms others. "But I did not know that the gun was loaded" is not a legal defense. Trump claiming that he did not know it was illegal to ask for an illegal investigation would not be a valid defense either.

 

[Jollybear]

Busy people sometimes do not delve too deeply in the actions of their own family. Why do you think that it is not possible for him to have forgotten.

At any rate now you are deflecting from the foolish claim that you made. I could go back and quote it for you, or you could man up and own up to your error.

His son is working in another country on a gas company, gets paid 50 thousand or more a month and biden conveniantly "forgot" where his son was working?

Give me a break. You dont even believe that yourself. Dont lie to me and say uou do, because you dont.

What, is biden getting altimers here? Lol

 

[Subduction Zone]

All throughout this thread ive been giving evidence.

I didnt lie at all. Trump did not break any law. And i already in a earlyer post quoted USAs contract agreement with ukraine and trump was perfectly aligned with it.



Ya, trump said his intent was to look into corruption. Thats totally proper.



I am aware and im also aware that the democrats are phonies and twist the laws to there selfish advantages.



Get over yourself.

What he did was proper, logically and was within the contract usa had with ukraine.

If you dont like it, too bad.

You need to find valid sources that support you. You are about as far from being an expert as possible. Empty claims are worthless. We know that we had to support our claims which is why the specific laws broken for you were cited.

 

[Subduction Zone]

His son is working in another country on a gas company, gets paid 50 thousand or more a month and biden conveniantly "forgot" where his son was working?

Give me a break. You dont even believe that yourself. Dont lie to me and say uou do, because you dont.

What, is biden getting altimers here? Lol

LOL! Dude, you really need some to work on your spelling if you want people to take your claim about Alzheimer's seriously.

Biden is a busy man, and they are wealthy. Though a tidy sum it would not be a huge factor in his son's earnings.

 

[ecco]

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.

Sure.

 

[ecco]

All throughout this thread ive been giving evidence.

If you say you have been giving evidence and you have not given evidence, is that evidence of a lie?

 

[SkepticThinker]

Ya......if you say so. Keep tellin yourself that.

Why do you think so many people in the White House were concerned enough about the call to report it to someone and then later testify to Congress about how their concern?

 

[SkepticThinker]

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.

I have no idea why you ignored pretty much everything I said and just pasted this again.

 

[SkepticThinker]

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.

Intent like, wanting to get dirt on an opponent in order to win an upcoming election? That kind of intent?

Think, man.

 

[metis]

All throughout this thread ive been giving evidence.

I didnt lie at all. Trump did not break any law. And i already in a earlyer post quoted USAs contract agreement with ukraine and trump was perfectly aligned with it.



Ya, trump said his intent was to look into corruption. Thats totally proper.



I am aware and im also aware that the democrats are phonies and twist the laws to there selfish advantages.



Get over yourself.

What he did was proper, logically and was within the contract usa had with ukraine.

If you dont like it, too bad.

 

[Prometheus85]

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.

smh you didn’t address any of the points that made.

 

[Jollybear]

smh you didn’t address any of the points that made.

Ya, i did, its right there in the post you quoted.

 

[Jollybear]

Article 1 sets forth a non-exclusive list of the major
types of assistance to be provided under the Treaty, including
taking the testimony or statements of persons; providing
documents, records and other items of evidence; locating or
identifying persons or items; serving documents; transferring
persons in custody for testimony or other purposes; executing
requests for searches and seizures; assisting in proceedings
related to immobilization and forfeiture of assets,
restitution, and collection of fines; and, rendering any other
form of assistance not prohibited by the laws of the Requested
State. The scope of the Treaty includes not only criminal
offenses, but also proceedings related to criminal matters,
which may be civil or administrative in nature."

Text - Treaty Document 106-16 - Treaty with Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters

There, i gotta work TWICE by reposting that.

 

[Jollybear]

I have no idea why you ignored pretty much everything I said and just pasted this again.

You said you wer flipping back to look for it and couldnt find it. So, i found it for you. There it is.

Basically, you punish EVIL itself, not the appearence of evil.

 

[Jollybear]

Intent like, wanting to get dirt on an opponent in order to win an upcoming election? That kind of intent?

Think, man.

No, you think....man.....

Trump said why he asked. He said it right in the call. To see if there was potential corruption going on. That was his intent.

Now, does he want to win realection? No doubt about it, but, so does all the other candidates.

And heres the thing, and you may not like this, but, i dont give a dam, every political opponent points out flaws about there opponents. But, somehow if trump does it, its off limits?

And look, if ukraine investigates the issue, thats not messing with our ellection because there not hacking voting booths and changing voting numbers. There not telling americans who to vote for. There not making adds to advertize who they would like america to vote for. All they would be doing is investigating a potential crime. And that is perfectly inline with the contract the USA has with ukraine.

Again, i dont care if you dont like this, too bad, accept it.