(09-23-2019, 03:20 PM)Alabuckeye Wrote: (09-23-2019, 03:19 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: (09-23-2019, 12:03 PM)buckeyewalt Wrote: (09-23-2019, 11:53 AM)cincydawg Wrote: I have been wondering if it would be a crime for a US President to request another government to look into corruption charges, whether of a political opponent or anyone else. Is it? Can anyone cite a statute? I think that a president can ask another country to look into crime and corruption charges that happened on their soil, why not?
A president can't use his power to benefit himself personally. So, why does the US care if Joe Biden's son got paid for a job, in another country, for which he may not have been qualified?
Nepotism is a real problem, and if the VP, or any elected official, used his office to benefit his family, it is wrong. I read another one just this weekend where a congressman had his MIL on salary as part of his staff. That's wrong as well.
I agree that nepotism is an issue but, what it looks like Trump held back aid to try to force the Ukrainian president to investigate. Why? The US can investigate Biden/Hunter on their won.  Trump delayed the aid provided it AFTER the complaint was filed. It's not a good look.
I'll be very curious to see if Trump releases the transcript of the call. I'm going bet that he won't.
Posts: 7,100
Threads: 87
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation:
27
I have a notion "what it looks like" and what it REALLY is might be at variance here. I'm going to wait for further information.
But I don't think Trump's asking them to look into Biden is a crime. If he threatened them, it still isn't a crime.
Posts: 21,360
Threads: 250
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation:
81
yeah, I doubt he does.......
Trump is used to, as should we be at this point, of 'not good looks'. He does crap because he thinks it's a great idea at the moment, then once he's stepped in it he blusters his way out. That's been his MO for years.
It likely is a dud, even if he used the aid as a carrot. other than the political optics, which, surprise, people that love Trump will love this, and people that hate Trump will want him impeached over this.
Posts: 218
Threads: 2
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation:
1
(09-23-2019, 03:31 PM)cincydawg Wrote: I have a notion "what it looks like" and what it REALLY is might be at variance here. I'm going to wait for further information.
But I don't think Trump's asking them to look into Biden is a crime. If he threatened them, it still isn't a crime.
Biden threatened Ukraine over a Billion $ in aid to get a prosecutor fired that was looking into corruption involving his son. In my opinion that is worse.
Posts: 7,100
Threads: 87
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation:
27
It may be worse, but it is a separate issue. If Biden did it, let's get that surfaced as well. Was that a crime when he did it? Did he do it? Â
I keep noting how this "stuff" never gets resolved (rarely) and people don't get held to account in DC. When I left, McCabe was supposedly about to be charged with something, didn't happen, might happen, but hasn't.
The media keep spinning all this stuff up, oft times from nothing of real substance.
(09-23-2019, 03:35 PM)cobgrad1998 Wrote: (09-23-2019, 03:31 PM)cincydawg Wrote: I have a notion "what it looks like" and what it REALLY is might be at variance here. I'm going to wait for further information.
But I don't think Trump's asking them to look into Biden is a crime. If he threatened them, it still isn't a crime.
Biden threatened Ukraine over a Billion $ in aid to get a prosecutor fired that was looking into corruption involving his son. In my opinion that is worse.
The issue is that Trump is currently in office, currently up for re-election and is doing essentially the same thing to the Ukraine that Biden did.
As is too often the case, Trump has some good ideas, but is too impulsive, arrogant and stupid to execute his ideas correctly.
Posts: 21,360
Threads: 250
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation:
81
So, the core question is: Is it legal to threaten to withhold aid to a country if they do not do something you want them to do? Followup......is that tainted in any way when it impacts a political rival?
For the first question......I suspect we've been participating in that behavior for....say a couple hundred years to some degree or another. The second question is the dicey one, at least politically.
Posts: 9,102
Threads: 153
Joined: Jun 2019
Reputation:
22
(09-23-2019, 03:39 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: The issue is that Trump is currently in office, currently up for re-election and is doing essentially the same thing to the Ukraine that Biden did.
As usual, you are wrong.
Biden extorted the Ukrainians to defend his son. Trump attempted to withhold funds in order to defend the rule of law.
They aren't even close to "essentially the same thing"
Posts: 7,100
Threads: 87
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation:
27
I suppose acting to defend one's son and acting to damage a political rival could be viewed as somewhat similar.
Posts: 21,360
Threads: 250
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation:
81
(09-23-2019, 03:47 PM)cincydawg Wrote: I suppose acting to defend one's son and acting to damage a political rival could be viewed as somewhat similar. I think they could.....
Posts: 7,100
Threads: 87
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation:
27
The Hobbs Act prohibits actual or attempted robbery or extortion affecting interstate or foreign commerce "in any way or degree." Section 1951 also proscribes conspiracy to commit robbery or extortion without reference to the conspiracy statute at 18 U.S.C. § 371. The statutory prohibition of "physical violence to any person or property in furtherance of a plan or purpose to do anything in violation of this section" is confined to violence for the purpose of committing robbery or extortion. United States v. Franks, 511 F.2d 25, 31 (6th Cir. 1975) (rejecting the view that the statute proscribes all physical violence obstructing, delaying, or affecting commerce as contrasted with violence designed to culminate in robbery or extortion).
The extortion offense reaches both the obtaining of property "under color of official right" by public officials and the obtaining of property by private actors with the victim's "consent, induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear," including fear of economic harm. See this Manual at 2405 and Evans v. United States, 504 U.S. 255, 265, 112 S.Ct. 1181, 1188 (1992) (only a private individual's extortion of property by the wrongful use of force, violence, or fear requires that the victim's consent be induced by these means; extortion of property under color of official right does not require that a public official take steps to induce the extortionate payment).
Although the Hobbs Act was enacted in 1946 to combat racketeering in labor-management disputes, the extortion statute is frequently used in connection with cases involving public corruption, commercial disputes, and corruption directed at members of labor unions. Proof of "racketeering" as an element of Hobbs Act offenses is not required. United States v. Culbert, 435 U.S. 371, 98 S.Ct. 1112 (1978). However, a violation of the Hobbs Act may be part of a "pattern of racketeering activity" for purposes of prosecution under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) statute (18 U.S.C. § 1961, et seq.).
[cited in JM 9-131.010]
Posts: 18,301
Threads: 54
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation:
32
09-23-2019, 04:01 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-23-2019, 04:02 PM by 3rdgensooner.)
(09-23-2019, 03:39 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: (09-23-2019, 03:35 PM)cobgrad1998 Wrote: (09-23-2019, 03:31 PM)cincydawg Wrote: I have a notion "what it looks like" and what it REALLY is might be at variance here. I'm going to wait for further information.
But I don't think Trump's asking them to look into Biden is a crime. If he threatened them, it still isn't a crime.
Biden threatened Ukraine over a Billion $ in aid to get a prosecutor fired that was looking into corruption involving his son. In my opinion that is worse.
The issue is that Trump is currently in office, currently up for re-election and is doing essentially the same thing to the Ukraine that Biden did.
As is too often the case, Trump has some good ideas, but is too impulsive, arrogant and stupid to execute his ideas correctly. No. Threatening someone to not investigate crime is the opposite of threatening someone to investigate a crime. Not essentially the same thing at all. Never mind the Ukraine and Trump say there was no coercion and Biden bragged about the coercion.
|