The Donald Trump Score Card

Trump Didn’t Bribe Ukraine. It’s Actually Worse Than That.
Mislabeling what the president has done could make impeachment more difficult to achieve.
By RENATO MARIOTTI
September 21, 2019

Trump Didn’t Bribe Ukraine. It’s Actually Worse Than That.

excerpt:

"Let’s look at the actual law. Even if Trump explicitly offered $250 million in military aid to Ukraine in exchange for an investigation of Biden’s son, that wouldn’t fit the federal bribery statute, which prohibits public officials from taking or soliciting bribes. In this case, Trump would be “bribing” the Ukrainians, who are not “public officials” for purposes of the statute.

The argument would have to be that Trump is soliciting a bribe in exchange for granting foreign aid to the Ukraine, with the investigation of Biden’s son being the thing of value demanded in exchange for granting the aid. While the statute defines “anything of value” very broadly, it is odd to think of a foreign government launching an investigation as “payment” of a bribe. The investigation itself would be an official governmental act and the result of the investigation would be uncertain. What if the investigation turned up no wrongdoing by either Hunter Biden or his father? Would that still be a thing of value?

Besides, presidents push foreign governments to take official acts all the time. The Constitution contemplates that the president will interact with foreign leaders and use his or her power to persuade them to do things that help the United States. What is abhorrent about the alleged conduct here is not that Trump is pushing a foreign government to do something, but rather that he might have used his presidential power to get a foreign government to help him win the next election.

This is self-serving and corrupt, but it is difficult to think of this alleged activity as “extortion.” It is true that there are multiple federal statutes that make extortion a crime, but extortion is defined as “the extraction of anything of value from another person by threatening or placing that person in fear of injury to any person or kidnapping of any person.”

It is hard to construe the alleged conduct as a “threat” against Ukraine in the manner contemplated by the extortion statute. Presidents threaten to withhold aid, send troops, or impose sanctions against foreign governments. I have trouble believing that a federal judge would permit an indictment to move forward against a president for “extorting” a foreign government through his or her official duties as president.

This is not to say there aren’t crimes on the books that better match what Trump is alleged to have done. For instance, it is a campaign finance crime to knowingly and willfully solicit a campaign contribution from a foreign national. Given that Biden could be Trump’s next political opponent, an argument can be made that the Ukrainian investigation would be an in-kind contribution—a “thing of value,” as defined by the statute—to Trump’s campaign. The bribery of a foreign official, such as the Ukrainian president, can also be a criminal violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

But both of these statutes contain at least some of the problems presented by the bribery and extortion statutes. Courts won’t send presidents to prison for cajoling foreign governments to do things, even if that involves horse trading an official act by our government in exchange for an official act by someone else’s.

What Trump is alleged to have done is not a garden variety crime; it’s worse. It involved misusing $250 million in aid appropriated by Congress for his benefit—the kind of gross misconduct that easily clears the bar of high crimes and misdemeanors set by the Constitution when impeaching a president. Which means the best way to hold Trump accountable for that misconduct isn’t a criminal trial; it’s for Congress to impeach him."

 

When Biden was VP, he and his son could have taken steps to avoid the conflict of interest of which Trump is now accusing them. They could have made money other ways.

They could have opened up their own hotel about a block from the White House and used it to curry favors and accrue revenue from foreign dignitaries who lodged there for political meetings at the White House.

They could have given their young, politically inexperienced family members with their own businesses senior level positions in their administration and made them 'ministers of everything'.

Biden could have stayed neutral by giving his son a senior level position at the White House instead of the much worse case of him being on the board of a company..

They could have made the CEO of a mammoth petroleum company the Secretary of State.

They could have built apartments in Saudi Arabia and later raved about how they love the Saudis because they buy apartments from them, all while denying U.S. intelligence info and instead believing a young Saudi prince that Saudia Arabia had nothing to do with the murder of a Washington Post journalist as well as numerous other victims.

They could have purchased a mansion in Florida and used it as much as possible for luxury relaxation (while complaining that other presidents didn't spend enough time at the White House) and used it to obtain favors and revenue from foreign dignitaries.

They could have:started up businesses that imported clothing from China and sold it at an extreme markup at Macy's (while complaining about U.S. jobs going to China) and used the press briefing room of the White House to promote their merchandise on live national TV.

They could have bought Israel a new embassy in the controversial Jerusalem, financed in part by a billionaire casino magnate who donated to their campaign and who people think is part of Biblical prophecy

 

Nah... Nobody would do shyt like that.



Wait!

 

Trump’s pardon offer may have violated federal bribery laws
By Randall D. Eliason
August 30, 2019

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...offer-may-have-violated-federal-bribery-laws/

excerpt:

"But it’s one thing to flout normal procedures for granting pardons to those already convicted of past crimes unrelated to the president. It’s quite another for a president to use the promise of future pardons to encourage unlawful behavior by members of his own administration. The latter is truly corrupt: signaling to aides that they may freely disregard the nation’s laws because the rules don’t apply to those who do the president’s bidding.

This isn’t the first time Trump has been accused of unlawfully wielding the pardon power. Then-special counsel Robert S. Mueller III investigated allegations that the president may have obstructed justice by dangling pardons in front of potential witnesses against him, including former campaign chairman Paul Manafort. Although Mueller declined to reach a conclusion on obstruction, he found that “the President intended to encourage Manafort to not cooperate with the government” by repeatedly praising Manafort and holding out the possibility of a pardon.

This more recent offer of pardons for breaking the law to build the wall probably would not constitute obstruction of justice, because it is not connected to any official proceeding. But offering a pardon for such illegal acts could easily violate the federal bribery statute, 18 U.S.C. 201. That law makes it a crime to give, offer, or promise “anything of value” to a federal public official to influence the official in the performance of an official act or induce the official to violate his or her lawful duty."

 

When will the ignorati give up on this very deranged dude?

 

Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross falls asleep at United Nations during Trump’s speech
Dan Mangan
September 24, 2019

Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross falls asleep at United Nations during Trump's speech

excerpt:

"The 81-year-old Ross took a nap — a very long nap — as his boss addressed the U.N. General Assembly on Tuesday.

Television footage of Ross showed the wealthy businessman sleeping soundly as Trump talked about a possible trade deal with China — which is part of the Commerce chief’s portfolio — and the U.S. stance on Iran.

Ross had his eyes firmly closed for as long as 15 minutes, video suggested, as Vice President Mike Pence and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo gave the impression of listening intently to Trump."

 

the closer trump gets to bringing the deep state cabal to justice, the more they are going crazy trying to get him out of office.

 

Yawn

 

I think a deep state is when a presidential administration buries a whistleblower report

 

Member Log In | Subscribe Now
Tuesday, September 24, 2019

John Kerry’s son cut business ties with Hunter Biden over Ukrainian oil deal
by Alana Goodman
| August 27, 2019 06:30 AM


John Kerry’s stepson rushed to play damage control at the State Department after his business partner Hunter Biden cut a deal with an oligarch-owned Ukrainian gas company in 2014, according to internal State Department correspondence obtained by the Washington Examiner.

The correspondence adds to the questions about Biden's business activities, which have dogged the 2020 Democratic primary campaign of his father Joe. Hunter Biden's long history of drug and alcohol abuse, which contributed to his divorce and his dismissal from the Navy Reserve, has also attracted unwelcome publicity for the Democratic front-runner.

An email released to the Washington Examiner shows that Biden’s decision to join the board of Ukraine’s Burisma Holdings sparked immediate concern within his inner circle about the political optics. Biden’s father Joe — now vying for the 2020 Democratic Party nomination — was then vice president and overseeing the Obama administration’s Ukraine policy.

At the time, Hunter Biden, now 49, and Christopher Heinz, the stepson of then-Secretary of State John Kerry, co-owned Rosemont Seneca Partners, a $2.4 billion private equity firm. Heinz’s college roommate, Devon Archer, was managing partner in the firm. In the spring of 2014, Biden and Archer joined the board of Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian gas company that was at the center of a U.K. money laundering probe. Over the next year, Burisma reportedly paid Biden and Archer’s companies over $3 million.

Hours after Biden’s board appointment went public on May 13, 2014, Heinz emailed Matt Summers and David Wade, two of his stepfather’s top aides at the State Department.

“Apparently Devon and Hunter both joined the board of Burisma and a press release went out today,” wrote Heinz. “I cant speak why they decided to, but there was no investment by our firm in their company.”

The email was obtained through a public information request filed by the conservative nonprofit group Citizens United. The organization said the email raises questions about why Heinz was in touch with the State Department about Biden’s business dealings.

“This email raises a lot of questions. Why would Chris Heinz distance himself from Hunter Biden’s decision to join Burisma’s board in an email to John Kerry’s senior staff at the State Department?” said Citizens United President David N. Bossie in a statement to the Washington Examiner. “It’s time for Joe Biden to answer questions about his family’s business in the Ukraine and what his own role was in those dealings.”



John Kerry’s son cut business ties with Hunter Biden over Ukrainian oil deal

 

YIPPY!

 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Finally………….IMPEACH THE PUSSY GRABBING S.O.B.

 

Congress is the reason Donald Duck got elected, against the wishes of his own party leaders. Fuck em. Congress insisted on a three ring circus, and got PT Barnum's Freak Show. Its not like your vote actually matters after all the gerrymandering. I hope Donald Duck costs the tax payers their fucking life savings. At least then we might have a little honesty in our politics, when the idiots storm the white house with knives and pitchforks.