October 05, 2019

What is the Value Trump Solicited?

Timothy Birdnow

On Facebook Judson Phillips reposted this:

If Trump cannot investigate Biden because he's a political opponent who is running for president, then the Democrats in Congress cannot investigate Trump, because he's their political opponent who is running for president.
Post stolen from Melody H

A commenter shot back at Judson:

It may seem logical.... but it is not the law. Congress has the Constitution .... the law, saying they can do it. When we do not like the law, change it. Example: I am a life member of the NRA. If you do not like the 2nd Amendment change it. But until it is changed, it is the law.

I replied:

BUT Henry Hine the Constitution requires that there be an underlying crime "high crimes and midemeanors". The Democrats are going to impeach this President for a non crime. They have the transcript of the conversation; there was no quid pro quo offered.The President does not give up his freedom of speech because he's running for office. He has the right to make a suggestion if there is no compulsion of offer made.

He didn't like that and responded:

Timothy BirdnowI believe there must be a crime because the Constitution requires "...Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” Art II, Sec 4. Impeachment is in the House... the DEMS control the House... many DEMS are citing: 52 USC Sec 30121. "It shall be unlawful...to solicit...a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make...((a)) thing of value...in connection with a federal... election.” 52 USC Code Sec 30121. In the transcript our president requested a "favor” = solicitation. From a foreigner = foreign national. For a thing of value. (The value is already here.... as scandal about Biden and hurting Biden.) in connection with a federal election. Both Trump and Biden are in this federal election. The statute requires no quid pro quo. There is no quo pro quo in that statute. From the DEMS point of view they have the crime. I would guess that when we get to the Senate.... they may not see the same why as the House.

And here is my answer:

Except Henry Hine the President was a.not asking for anything of value but rather suggesting Ukraine continue an investigation that Mr. Biden himself aborted in violation of the very legal code you now cite and b. Mr. Trump was faithfully executing his duties as chief law enforcement officer as he was duty bound by a mutual legal assistance treaty with Ukraine (signed by Bill Clinton).

The "favor" was in no way a thing of material value to him. He had no assurances, and asked none, of a conviction or of planting evidence or whatnot. He only suggested they resume the investigation that Biden strongarmed them out of. Biden is the one who should be investigated over this.

The Democrats know that; they've read the transcript. This is not just their way of viewing it,. If it were so why did Pelosi give this to Intel Chair Adam Schiff rather than to the House Judiciary Committee? To keep the proceedings secret, to maintain a star chamber atmosphere. Why did Adam Schiff lie about details in the transcript? It's clear that this is a coup attempt. I repeat; there is no underlying crime.

Except on the part of Mr. Biden, and of the intelligence people who leaked this (they are not "whistleblowers").

No doubt he will respond, and probably be rather cheesed about this.

I suspect I'm arguing with a lawyer here, and of course I am not one. But the law is obviously murky where "value" is concerned in the statute. I stick with my original statement; nothing of value is being offered or asked for here. As such there is no underlying crime.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 11:19 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 636 words, total size 4 kb.

1 Having Biden investigated and perhaps knocked out of the race might be considered a "thing of value" if (a) Trump were a weak candidate and (b) Biden were a strong candidate. But the exact opposite is true.

And Biden is manifestly guilty, by his own admission, of a corrupt act in the Ukraine -- that of demanding a quid pro quo: the firing of a Ukrainian prosecutor who just might have been turning up the heat under Biden's son or his employer. And the firing of that prosecutor was to be contingent on the Ukraine's receiving of monetary gifts from the U.S. under the Obama/Biden Administration. Why is that so hard for the Jackass Party to understand?

Posted by: Dana Mathewson at October 06, 2019 02:24 PM (S9H0S)

2 Exactamundo, Dana!  At this point there is nothing to really be gained by Trump. He just wants to get the corruption cleaned up, as it was this very same corruption that has hounded him for three years.

The guy I was arguing with answered me with a weak "stupidity is usually the cause of being prosecuted" as though Trump were so stupid. If he is so stupid why have they had to go after him for three years? Trump says a lot of things that outrage the Left,  but he's pretty cagey about how he does it. He KNOWS they are gunning for him, so why would he brazenly violate the law? It's a stupid argument for dull people.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at October 07, 2019 07:48 AM (te8RN)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

What colour is a green orange?

19kb generated in CPU 0.04, elapsed 0.3339 seconds.
37 queries taking 0.3174 seconds, 109 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Always on Watch
The American Thinker
Bird`s Articles
Old Birdblog
Birdblog`s Literary Corner
Canada Free Press
Christian Daily Reporter

Daren Jonescu
Dana and Martha Music On my Mind Conservative Victory
Infidel Bloggers Alliance
The Reform Club
FTP Student Action
Veritas PAC
The Galileo Movement
Intellectual Conservative
br /> One Jerusalem
Publius Forum
The Gateway Pundit
The Jeffersonian Ideal
Thinking Democrat
Ultima Thule
Young Craig Music
Contact Tim at bgocciaatoutlook.com

Monthly Traffic

  • Pages: 51915
  • Files: 22404
  • Bytes: 1248.7M
  • CPU Time: 150:01
  • Queries: 2133736


  • Posts: 18651
  • Comments: 54771


RSS 2.0 Atom 1.0