Opinion: Trump wanted to RE-corrupt Ukraine

Babba

Former Staff
Jul 2007
78,496
70,700
So. Md.
I dont think he is that deep. He just prefers it to be more like mob run places where bribery and money rule. If the judges and Constitution get in the way, then its a problem. But he prefers to run under the radar. He has for years. Its just that now that he is president, we all hear his conversations. Prior he did the same, but nobody cared. I honestly think thats why he often appears baffled, he feels "I have always behaved this way, why now is it wrong?"
That's my theory, too. it's why I say he should have just stayed in NYC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bajisima

kmiller1610

Former Staff
Mar 2007
33,500
6,735
This is exactly what I saw in Trump in 2015. Gray-market business is all he knows. His only skill in work life has been his ability to skirt laws or obfuscate the illegality of his actions.


But to call Trump uninterested in corruption in Ukraine is to flatter him. Trump’s policy was in fact to roll back the country’s reforms and recorrupt its judicial system and, especially, its energy sector.

To that end, Trump dispatched Rudy Giuliani, who in turn was hired by Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, two figures linked to the Russian underworld. If you’re looking to fight corruption, you obviously don’t ignore official diplomatic channels and hand over diplomacy to Russian mobsters...

...There is zero evidence of Trump advancing the anti-corruption cause in any instance other than the smearing of his domestic rivals. There is wide evidence of him undermining anti-corruption efforts. Trump’s intentions in pressuring Ukraine to investigate his enemies could not possibly be more transparent.
Does the President have the right to define corruption or doesn't he? Does he have to get permission by some outside agency to pass muster on his definition of corruption in order to pursue it under this treaty? Does he require evidence? I totally understand questioning any President's judgement, but I don't think asking Ukraine to look into Burisma is controversial.

“To the Senate of the United States: With a view to receiving the advice and consent of the Senate to ratification, I transmit herewith the Treaty Between the United States of America and Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters with Annex, signed at Kiev on July 22, 1998. I transmit also, for the information of the Senate, an exchange of notes which was signed on September 30, 1999, which provides for its provisional application, as well as the report of the Department of State with respect to the Treaty. The Treaty is one of a series of modern mutual legal assistance treaties being negotiated by the United States in order to counter criminal activities more effectively. The Treaty should be an effective tool to assist in the prosecution of a wide variety of crimes, including drug trafficking offenses. The Treaty is self-executing. It provides for a broad range of cooperation in criminal matters. Mutual assistance available under the Treaty includes: taking of testimony or statements of persons; providing documents, records, and articles of evidence; serving documents; locating or identifying persons; transferring persons in custody for testimony or other purposes; executing requests for searches and seizures; assisting in proceedings related to restraint, confiscation, forfeiture of assets, restitution, and collection of fines; and any other form of assistance not prohibited by the laws of the requested state. I recommend that the Senate give early and favorable consideration to the Treaty and give its advice and consent to ratification.”

WILLIAM J. CLINTON.
 

Davocrat

Former Staff
Apr 2007
54,685
44,760
Orangemanbad
Does the President have the right to define corruption or doesn't he? Does he have to get permission by some outside agency to pass muster on his definition of corruption in order to pursue it under this treaty? Does he require evidence? I totally understand questioning any President's judgement, but I don't think asking Ukraine to look into Burisma is controversial.

“To the Senate of the United States: With a view to receiving the advice and consent of the Senate to ratification, I transmit herewith the Treaty Between the United States of America and Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters with Annex, signed at Kiev on July 22, 1998. I transmit also, for the information of the Senate, an exchange of notes which was signed on September 30, 1999, which provides for its provisional application, as well as the report of the Department of State with respect to the Treaty. The Treaty is one of a series of modern mutual legal assistance treaties being negotiated by the United States in order to counter criminal activities more effectively. The Treaty should be an effective tool to assist in the prosecution of a wide variety of crimes, including drug trafficking offenses. The Treaty is self-executing. It provides for a broad range of cooperation in criminal matters. Mutual assistance available under the Treaty includes: taking of testimony or statements of persons; providing documents, records, and articles of evidence; serving documents; locating or identifying persons; transferring persons in custody for testimony or other purposes; executing requests for searches and seizures; assisting in proceedings related to restraint, confiscation, forfeiture of assets, restitution, and collection of fines; and any other form of assistance not prohibited by the laws of the requested state. I recommend that the Senate give early and favorable consideration to the Treaty and give its advice and consent to ratification.”

WILLIAM J. CLINTON.
You're right. But asking Ukraine to look into Joe and Hunter Biden is impeachable. Trump assumes he can use the office of POTUS to advance his personal grudges. That's what authoritarians do in second-world semi-democracies.
 

Babba

Former Staff
Jul 2007
78,496
70,700
So. Md.
Does the President have the right to define corruption or doesn't he? Does he have to get permission by some outside agency to pass muster on his definition of corruption in order to pursue it under this treaty? Does he require evidence? I totally understand questioning any President's judgement, but I don't think asking Ukraine to look into Burisma is controversial.

“To the Senate of the United States: With a view to receiving the advice and consent of the Senate to ratification, I transmit herewith the Treaty Between the United States of America and Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters with Annex, signed at Kiev on July 22, 1998. I transmit also, for the information of the Senate, an exchange of notes which was signed on September 30, 1999, which provides for its provisional application, as well as the report of the Department of State with respect to the Treaty. The Treaty is one of a series of modern mutual legal assistance treaties being negotiated by the United States in order to counter criminal activities more effectively. The Treaty should be an effective tool to assist in the prosecution of a wide variety of crimes, including drug trafficking offenses. The Treaty is self-executing. It provides for a broad range of cooperation in criminal matters. Mutual assistance available under the Treaty includes: taking of testimony or statements of persons; providing documents, records, and articles of evidence; serving documents; locating or identifying persons; transferring persons in custody for testimony or other purposes; executing requests for searches and seizures; assisting in proceedings related to restraint, confiscation, forfeiture of assets, restitution, and collection of fines; and any other form of assistance not prohibited by the laws of the requested state. I recommend that the Senate give early and favorable consideration to the Treaty and give its advice and consent to ratification.”

WILLIAM J. CLINTON.
No one denies that we have that treaty. The fact is, it had been found that Ukraine had cleaned up the corruption considerably. Enough so that they were certified for those funds.

Earlier this week, President Trump cited concerns about corruption as his rationale for blocking security assistance to Ukraine. But in a letter sent to four congressional committees in May of this year and obtained by NPR, Undersecretary of Defense for Policy John Rood informed lawmakers that he "certified that the Government of Ukraine has taken substantial actions to make defense institutional reforms for the purposes of decreasing corruption [and] increasing accountability."

The certification was required by law for the release of $250 million in security assistance for Ukraine. That aid was blocked by the White House until Sept. 11 and has since been released. It must be spent before Sept. 30, the end of the fiscal year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Devil505
Jul 2013
41,983
28,269
On a happy trail
I think he wants it in America. He hates the judicial system and the Constitution. So meddlesome!
He likes the treasury though and the creation of currency. And the military that protects trade and the procurement of commodities, often by force, in foreign lands
 
  • Like
Reactions: Davocrat

Davocrat

Former Staff
Apr 2007
54,685
44,760
Orangemanbad
He likes the treasury though and the creation of currency. And the military that protects trade and the procurement of commodities, often by force, in foreign lands

All handy operatives for his tong.
 

Macduff

Moderator
Apr 2010
98,504
34,966
Pittsburgh, PA
Hilarious. Biden's son was paid $50k a month for a job he had no expertise in and showed up for maybe twice and the company used his name in negotiations. Now Biden directly threatened to withhold foreign aid from a government until they did something that benefitted the company that pays Hunter Biden for nothing. And the geniuses on the left who spent the past few years inventing Russian collusion conspiracy theories can't connect those dots. And somehow they also want to tell us that Biden was fighting corruption. Maybe liberals actually like having their intelligence insulted and think that everyone else does too.