I think it really boils down to the following:

1. If Republicans do it, it's ok because their supporters want to crush the opposition
2. If Democrats do it, it's outrageous because Republicans are now victims.

Politicians tend to rely on people being either disengaged or having warped memories. In my view, the problem rests with the people. We always get the government we deserve.

Imho, it is because Trump is the first Republican president in 30 years who forcefully pushes back against the adverse effects of globalization, and against what I would call "the liberal transformation" of the country. The whole "cuckservative" things gets at this: for decades, Republican leaders saw their role only in slowing down the leftward lurch of the country, but never in actually stopping it or even rolling it back.

A ton of conservative rank and file voters felt and still feel like the country has taken the wrong turn a long time ago, and has in a lot of ways been moving in the wrong direction for decades. Trump is the first Republican president or presidential nominee who actually promised to reverse course instead of just gently stepping on the brake a little.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Dec 19 2019 01:17pm

Investigating possible corruption and abuse of (vicepresidential) power by the man who might very well become the next president is not in the interest of the nation?

You are a true believer.

Trump obviously only cared about the Biden ivnestigation because of self-interest. He obviously acted with a corrupt motive.

Thundercock's argument, however, was that the interest of the nation and the personal interest of its political leader often times align, and that pressuring foreign governments can be ok in this case - but that Trump's case doesnt fit this description. I pointed out that this case actually fits it perfectly.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Dec 19 2019 01:21pm

Trump only wanted an announcement. He didn't care about an actual investigation...

But let's pretend that Trump has noble motives. Why did he not go through the State Department's Office of Inspector General to investigate anything shady going on in the State Department? Why didn't he have the DOJ work with NABU (Ukrainian agency) to see if there was any corruption?

The answer is painfully obvious. The Trump administration believes that people are so fucking stupid that they will buy into all of it. Turns out, they were right for a large portion of this country. I just feel bad for people who are true believers that Trump is some dude who is draining the swamp. He's insulting their intelligence and they don't even KNOW it.

But going back to my original point...IF the accusations had ANY merit to them, then sure, you could probably make the argument but you'd have to be REALLY careful to make sure it didn't come across as partisan. If I were in Trump's shoes, I would have cast a MUCH wider net.

This post was edited by thundercock on Dec 19 2019 01:24pm

Not really. No signs of corruption. Just nepotism. It isn't like Biden's son collaborated with diplomats of a foreign government to get dirt on an opponent or anything. Nepotism isn't new, and you might as well investigate Trump for trying to give his son in law security clearance and giving him more power than his cabinet.

Lol dude.

This post was edited by Skinned on Dec 19 2019 01:26pm

Politics these days is pretty depressing to follow so any time the system stands up for reasonableness is a good day.



Some amount of political calculation is always present in foreign policy and national security decisions, but to use the power of his office in the form of a White House meeting and Congressionally approved military aid to pressure a vulnerable ally to investigate his likely 2020 rival seems to me a blatant violation of his oath of office. I don't know of any similar circumstance in modern history. It's more serious than what Nixon and Clinton did.



Agreed. I've come to dislike the American voters just as much as the politicians.

This post was edited by IceMage on Dec 19 2019 01:28pm

A castrated former man calling a factual and reasonable narrative 'laughable' is not an argument.



1. Are you really going to pretend the reaction to Trump wasn't on a different level?

2. Recognizing that other people also wanted to impeach past presidents or former candidates doesn't refute my true statement.
I never pretended the only people to ever want to impeach a president were Republican.

Other people wanting to impeach past presidents doesn't refute the obvious and undeniable truth that many democrats wanted to impeach Trump regardless of the issue, and set out to do so. They openly declared it.


To pretend this Ukraine nonsense rises to the level of 'blatantly obvious abuse of power' is embarrassing, particularly in the context of past abuses of power.
Trump was justified asking Ukraine to look into the 2016 security issues and biden corruption.

On the other hand the Bush administration lied us into the disastrous Iraq War.
The democrat leader openly admits that and opposed impeachment.

Which is the worse offense to you?

Of all the heinous offenses committed by people in government, this is the one that sticks out as particularly bad? fuck off.


Irrelevant fantasy speculation based on your feelings.



The reality is your establishment government worshiping is pathetic and nothing in your post demonstrated anything I said was untrue.

we're glad you admitted to your self-loathing, you useless, filled with unwarranted self-importance pale pasty privileged lefty

icepeon loves wars of establishment aggression - it's the only thing (other than the loser of the 2016 election) that gets him hot and bothered