3 ms·

My understanding, and I confess I haven't followed things very closely, is that the Russia meddling claim is somehow connected with the current impeachment of T

by yters 7y ago

My understanding, and I confess I haven't followed things very closely, is that the Russia meddling claim is somehow connected with the current impeachment of Trump. True? If so, does this report on the FBI at all relate to said impeachment? As an aside, I have absolutely no idea why Trump is being impeached. Every time I open Google News all the top headlines are "Impeach Trump!". But I never see anything about why exactly he is being impeached. Granted, I haven't really read any of these articles, more than just skimming, but I'd expect at least something in the title or summary that I see in Google News. Very bizarre thing going on. When Clinton was impeached it was very clear it was related to Monica Lewinsky and lying under oath. But regarding Trump, I mostly just see articles about who wants him impeached. Nothing about why. Anyone know the particular reason Trump is being impeached? What law he violated? UPDATE: I googled it, and someone claims he pressured Ukraine to investigate Biden's son. Perhaps impeachable, but not obviously so. I guess that's why the reason is not more widely promoted, since on the face of it does not sound particularly egregious, compared to what other presidents have done.

davidw 7y ago
> I haven't followed things very closely, is that the Russia meddling claim is somehow connected with the current impeachment of Trump. No. You could read the articles of impeachment themselves if you want to inform yourself: https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2019/12/politics/impeachment-articles-annotated/ https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2019/12/politics/impeach... "It is absolutely illegal for anyone to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with any election in the United States."
- yters 7y ago
  According to your link, there is a connection: "he asked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to look into a discredited conspiracy theory that it was Ukraine and not Russia that interfered in the 2016 presidential election by hacking the Democratic National Committee." And the document further continues the narrative that Trump is having outside powers interfere with the US election, "These actions were consistent with President Trump’s previous invitations of foreign interference in United States elections." So, it is definitely related to the overall narrative of Trump colluding with foreign powers to have them interfere. Also weird, dems been pushing to impeach Trump for quite awhile, but this is a recent event. It looks like the Dems have been on an impeachment hunt in search of a reason. Which also makes this allegation weird. Searching for reasons to impeach also sounds contrary to law and order, which is the reason given for impeaching Trump in this document.
  - davidw 7y ago
    Yes, it is related, there's a common theme, but the 2016 election is not why he was impeached.
    - yters 7y ago
      The current allegations seem shaky, based on claims of some insider, so my impression is the impeachment uproar is riding on the 'collusion' updraft and moral fervor rather than hard data. Seems very different than say Watergate or with Clinton where the allegations could be unequivocally substantiated with objective evidence such as recordings. None of this to say I like the guy or even believe the allegations to be false. However, the impeachment does not seem to be carefully following due process, which is much more undermining of rule by law than whatever Trump may have done.
      - davidw 7y ago
        It's based on the sworn testimony of numerous witnesses, including his own ambassador to the EU. The aid was delayed, and he even asked on live TV for them to open an investigation. And the obstruction charge is quite verifiable as well. This is very thorough, and not credibly rebutted anywhehere: https://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20191216/CRPT-116hrpt346.pdf https://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20191216/CRPT-116hrpt34...
        yters 7y ago
        I hope it is as solid as you say, because an overturned conviction will pretty much guarantee Trump 2020. A bunch of testimonies sounds convincing, but that depends on whom the people are and what they exactly observed. E.g. why would the ambassador to the UK know what Trump said to Ukraine? I personally am still not getting a solid feeling from all this.
        davidw 7y ago
        Sorry, I edited it. Ambassador to the EU, Sondland. He was on various phone calls. You'd really want to go read and review some of this. There are some decent summaries like https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/12/10/case-impeachment/?arc404=true https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/12/10/case-impe... This is no 'conviction'. He has been impeached, and that's forever, as with Clinton. More likely than not, he will not be removed from office. No one really knows what the political consequences are, but the people running the investigation felt compelled to act since what he was doing represents a clear and present threat to free and fair elections.

by yters 7y ago

davidw 7y ago

> I haven't followed things very closely, is that the Russia meddling claim is somehow connected with the current impeachment of Trump. No. You could read the articles of impeachment themselves if you want to inform yourself: https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2019/12/politics/impeachment-articles-annotated/ https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2019/12/politics/impeach... "It is absolutely illegal for anyone to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with any election in the United States."

yters 7y ago
According to your link, there is a connection: "he asked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to look into a discredited conspiracy theory that it was Ukraine and not Russia that interfered in the 2016 presidential election by hacking the Democratic National Committee." And the document further continues the narrative that Trump is having outside powers interfere with the US election, "These actions were consistent with President Trump’s previous invitations of foreign interference in United States elections." So, it is definitely related to the overall narrative of Trump colluding with foreign powers to have them interfere. Also weird, dems been pushing to impeach Trump for quite awhile, but this is a recent event. It looks like the Dems have been on an impeachment hunt in search of a reason. Which also makes this allegation weird. Searching for reasons to impeach also sounds contrary to law and order, which is the reason given for impeaching Trump in this document.
- davidw 7y ago
  Yes, it is related, there's a common theme, but the 2016 election is not why he was impeached.
  - yters 7y ago
    The current allegations seem shaky, based on claims of some insider, so my impression is the impeachment uproar is riding on the 'collusion' updraft and moral fervor rather than hard data. Seems very different than say Watergate or with Clinton where the allegations could be unequivocally substantiated with objective evidence such as recordings. None of this to say I like the guy or even believe the allegations to be false. However, the impeachment does not seem to be carefully following due process, which is much more undermining of rule by law than whatever Trump may have done.
    - davidw 7y ago
      It's based on the sworn testimony of numerous witnesses, including his own ambassador to the EU. The aid was delayed, and he even asked on live TV for them to open an investigation. And the obstruction charge is quite verifiable as well. This is very thorough, and not credibly rebutted anywhehere: https://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20191216/CRPT-116hrpt346.pdf https://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20191216/CRPT-116hrpt34...
      - yters 7y ago
        I hope it is as solid as you say, because an overturned conviction will pretty much guarantee Trump 2020. A bunch of testimonies sounds convincing, but that depends on whom the people are and what they exactly observed. E.g. why would the ambassador to the UK know what Trump said to Ukraine? I personally am still not getting a solid feeling from all this.
        davidw 7y ago
        Sorry, I edited it. Ambassador to the EU, Sondland. He was on various phone calls. You'd really want to go read and review some of this. There are some decent summaries like https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/12/10/case-impeachment/?arc404=true https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/12/10/case-impe... This is no 'conviction'. He has been impeached, and that's forever, as with Clinton. More likely than not, he will not be removed from office. No one really knows what the political consequences are, but the people running the investigation felt compelled to act since what he was doing represents a clear and present threat to free and fair elections.