Posted on 01/13/2020 6:19:25 AM PST by USA Conservative
Remember when Joe Biden bragged about how he coerced Ukraine into firing its top prosecutor by threatening that the Obama administration would pull $1 billion in U.S. loan guarantees from them.
While this type of interference in a foreign government by the then-Vice President of the United States is highly inappropriate in itself, what makes it even worse is that the prosecutor he got fired was probing a firm for which his son Hunter Biden worked.
It was a huge money laundering. Ukraine, Biden’s to the DNC, all starting to make sense after Paul Sperry’s latest tweets.
(Excerpt) Read more at rightjournalism.com ...
That would be awfully entertaining. :)
The entire body is corrupt to the point of filth.
The Chief Injustice is corrupt to the point of filth.
The impeachment process has been corrupted to the point of filth.
Our entire government not named Trump is a bunch of criminals.
Democrats don’t recuse themselves. Only Republicans do that.
Rats never recuse rats never resign.
Trump doesn’t need recusal to be acquitted in the Senate, as 67 votes are required for removal and that was never going to happen.
But what the Dems were hoping to get was 51 votes (peeling off 4 Republicans) to say a ‘majority’ of the Senate voted for removal. But with recusal, even that number, which was unlikely to start with, becomes a pipe dream.
What would also be affected would be the RULES used in the Senate, such as witness calling. If the Senators have to recuse from the trial...then, it seems, they have to recuse from the rules of the trial. So Bolton may not have to cancel his trip to whatever convention he was planning to go to in the next few weeks (that’s all they do).
Beautiful........now we're cooking with gas.
Until our government decides to actually hold these people accountable it will continue to be like that...
Correct. But it doesn’t matter.
The Speaker should simply provide a public list of the implicated senators and recommend, to avoid the appearance of impropriety, each such senator should voluntarily recuse him/her self.
The votes don’t matter; only exposure of the corruption.
Nice deconstruction——all very valid points.
But most people wont know the intricate details you outlined
.....just raising the issue might be enough.......
“It was a huge money laundering. Ukraine, Biden’s to the DNC”
No doubt.
Trying to think of the last Democrat that recused.
I got nothin’. I can’t think of one.
In order for this to happen, a Democrat would have to be held publicly accountable for glaring hypocrisy, and I have never seen that happen.
He’s the establishment chosen nominee. Recusal? Never happen.
Common sense would dictate any senator that’s a candidate should recuse. Especially those on record publicly opposed to accused aka President.
If Dems say Prez can’t ask nations about the corruption of a candidate ...
Nothing will come of this. These will be treated as “de minimus” contributions by someone who is interested in politics.
Now, if Hunter had organized million-dollar fundraisers or PACs for some of those senators, that would be a different matter.
They don’t seem inclined to hold themselves accountable.
We don’t seem inclined to hold them accountable either.
Furthermore, even if trial did occur, how does one obtain convictions for Democrats in DC? Republicans, no problem, all will be convicted, but Democrats?
I don’t know if this is even possible.
Nah, they’ll do what Hillary did. - just return money & say “sorry”.
BTW, did Hunter's donations come from the money he made from his and Joe's Ukrainian shakedown.....
........or did Hunter use money gleaned from the billion-dollar China shakedown?
ROTFLOL.
Madison Debates
Saturday June 2, 1787
IN COMMITTEE OF WHOLE
Sir. It is with reluctance that I rise to express a disapprobation of any one article of the plan for which we are so much obliged to the honorable gentleman who laid it before us. From its first reading I have borne a good will to it, and in general wished it success. In this particular of salaries to the Executive branch I happen to differ; and as my opinion may appear new and chimerical, it is only from a persuasion that it is right, and from a sense of duty that I hazard it. The Committee will judge of my reasons when they have heard them, and their judgment may possibly change mine. -I think I see inconveniences in the appointment of salaries; I see none in refusing them, but on the contrary, great advantages.
Sir, there are two passions which have a powerful influence on the affairs of men. These are ambition and avarice; the love of power, and the love of money. Separately each of these has great force in prompting men to action; but when united in view of the same object, they have in many minds the most violent effects. Place before the eyes of such men, a post of honour that shall be at the same time a place of profit, and they will move heaven and earth to obtain it. The vast number of such places it is that renders the British Government so tempestuous. The struggles for them are the true sources of all those factions which are perpetually dividing the Nation, distracting its Councils, hurrying sometimes into fruitless & mischievous wars, and often compelling a submission to dishonorable terms of peace. And of what kind are the men that will strive for this profitable pre- eminence, through all the bustle of cabal, the heat of contention, the infinite mutual abuse of parties, tearing to pieces the best of characters? It will not be the wise and moderate; the lovers of peace and good order, the men fittest for the trust. It will be the bold and the violent, the men of strong passions and indefatigable activity in their selfish pursuits. These will thrust themselves into your Government and be your rulers. -And these too will be mistaken in the expected happiness of their situation: For their vanquished competitors of the same spirit, and from the same motives will perpetually be endeavouring to distress their administration, thwart their measures, and render them odious to the people.
Besides these evils, Sir, tho' we may set out in the beginning with moderate salaries, we shall find that such will not be of long continuance. Reasons will never be wanting for proposed augmentations. And there will always be a party for giving more to the rulers, that the rulers may be able in return to give more to them. -Hence as all history informs us, there has been in every State & Kingdom a constant kind of warfare between the governing & governed: the one striving to obtain more for its support, and the other to pay less. And this has alone occasioned great convulsions, actual civil wars, ending either in dethroning of the Princes, or enslaving of the people. Generally indeed the ruling power carries its point, the revenues of princes constantly increasing, and we see that they are never satisfied, but always in want of more. The more the people are discontented with the oppression of taxes; the greater need the prince has of money to distribute among his partizans and pay the troops that are to suppress all resistance, and enable him to plunder at pleasure. There is scarce a king in a hundred who would not, if he could, follow the example of Pharoah, get first all the peoples money, then all their lands, and then make them and their children servants for ever. It will be said, that we don't propose to establish Kings. I know it. But there is a natural inclination in mankind to Kingly Government. It sometimes relieves them from Aristocratic domination. They had rather have one tyrant than five hundred. It gives more of the appearance of equality among Citizens, and that they like. I am apprehensive therefore, perhaps too apprehensive, that the Government of these States, may in future times, end in a Monarchy. But this Catastrophe I think may be long delayed, if in our proposed System we do not sow the seeds of contention, faction & tumult, by making our posts of honor, places of profit. If we do, I fear that tho' we do employ at first a number, and not a single person, the number will in time be set aside, it will only nourish the foetus of a King, as the honorable gentleman from Virginia very aptly expressed it, and a King will the sooner be set over us.
It may be imagined by some that this is an Utopian Idea, and that we can never find men to serve us in the Executive department, without paying them well for their services. I conceive this to be a mistake. Some existing facts present themselves to me, which incline me to a contrary opinion. The high Sheriff of a County in England is an honorable office, but it is not a profitable one. It is rather expensive and therefore not sought for. But yet, it is executed and well executed, and usually by some of the principal Gentlemen of the County. In France, the office of Counsellor or Member of their Judiciary Parliaments is more honorable. It is therefore purchased at a high price: There are indeed fees on the law proceedings, which are divided among them, but these fees do not amount to more than three per Cent on the sum paid for the place. Therefore as legal interest is there at five per Ct. they in fact pay two per Ct. for being allowed to do the Judiciary business of the Nation, which is at the same time entirely exempt from the burden of paying them any salaries for their services. I do not however mean to recommend this as an eligible mode for our Judiciary department. I only bring the instance to shew that the pleasure of doing good & serving their Country and the respect such conduct entitles them to, are sufficient motives with some minds to give up a great portion of their time to the public, without the mean inducement of pecuniary satisfaction.
Another instance is that of a respectable Society who have made the experiment, and practised it with success more than an hundred years. I mean the Quakers. It is an established rule with them, that they are not to go to law; but in their controversies they must apply to their monthly, quarterly and yearly meetings. Committees of these sit with patience to hear the parties, and spend much time in composing their differences. In doing this, they are supported by a sense of duty, and the respect paid to usefulness. It is honorable to be so employed, but it was never made profitable by salaries, fees, or perquisites. And indeed in all cases of public service the less the profit the greater the honor. To bring the matter nearer home, have we not seen, the great and most important of our offices, that of General of our armies executed for eight years together without the smallest salary, by a Patriot whom I will not now offend by any other praise; and this through fatigues and distresses in common with the other brave men his military friends & Companions, and the constant anxieties peculiar to his station? And shall we doubt finding three or four men in all the U. States, with public spirit enough to bear sitting in peaceful Council for perhaps an equal term, merely to preside over our civil concerns, and see that our laws are duly executed. Sir, I have a better opinion of our Country. I think we shall never be without a sufficient number of wise and good men to undertake and execute well and faithfully the office in question.
Sir, The saving of the salaries that may at first be proposed is not an object with me. The subsequent mischiefs of proposing them are what I apprehend. And therefore it is, that I move the amendment. If it is not seconded or accepted I must be contented with the satisfaction of having delivered my opinion frankly and done my duty.
The motion was seconded by Col. HAMILTON with the view he said merely of bringing so respectable a proposition before the Committee, and which was besides enforced by arguments that had a certain degree of weight. No debate ensued, and the proposition was postponed for the consideration of the members. It was treated with great respect, but rather for the author of it, than from any apparent conviction of its expediency or practicability. Source: http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/debates_602.asp
Old Ben tried to warn us but we did not listen.
As usual, it will lead to a “nothing to see here, move on” moment by the media and their Democrat fellow travelers. Meanwhile watch Republicans scatter and hide in the tall grass...
As AG, he also recused himself from Roger Clemens' contempt of Congress prosecution because the pitcher was once a client of his law firm.) WIKI
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.