Christianity Today Op Ed

[little_monkey]

Considering how thoroughly Trump has been investigated by the Democrats, the MSM and Mueller, the fact that they found no evidence of any crimes being committed makes counting on something like money laundering seem less and less likely.

You have a point in that the Democrats are inept and clueless. But the SDNY is a different animal. They are zeroing on Trump's financial empire, and I wouldn't bet against them in finding what's cooking in Trump's closet.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...tigations.html

[lilpixieofterror]

Well prior entering politics, Trump had gone bankrupt 4 times, and then one day he suddenly shows up with hundreds of millions of dollars, buying such things as real estate, and golf courses, with Russian Oligarch money - it's called money laundering. But there are useful idiots who believe he is a savior, enough of them so he can win an election. But the truth will come out, regardless of his scheme to use the Oval office to cover up his crimes.

Do you know who else has gone bankrupt? Walt Disney, guess he was also a criminal too?

[Cow Poke]

Do you know who else has gone bankrupt? Walt Disney, guess he was also a criminal too?

My CPA used to say "if you've been in business for any time at all, you're bound to have a bankruptcy or a heart attack - and if you have one, it'll cause the other".

(he was a federal bankruptcy trustee)

[Mountain Man]

This, actually

https://www.nationalreview.com/magaz...hment/#slide-1

It's from the 19th and lays out the 4 hurdles that should be cleared to justify impeachment and removal and how Trump's actions clear them.

Well, not so much "clears them" as tries to find weaselly ways around them or, failing that, drive a bulldozer straight through.

Edit: This reader comment to the article is enlightening:

I want to thank Mr. Ponnuru for writing this column, because it proves to me that a Princeton education is not worth its exorbitant tuition.

Since Mr. Ponnuru has such high standards -- the common good versus singular narrow interests -- he should have informed his readers that he is a rabid Never-Trumper.

Knowing the bias and ethics of a writer is important. By hiding his hostile underlying opinions about President Trump, Mr. Ponnuru has shown he has minimal ethics.

Consequently, Mr. (Princeton) Ponnuru presents opinions that have been polluted by his bias: "it is pretty clear" that Trump used federal power to instigate a Biden investigation.

"Pretty clear" to whom, a Never-Trumper? A Democrat? The press? The Squad? Swalwell? Schiff? Is Mr. Princeton saying there is no other reasonable interpretation of the facts but his?

Apparently, Mr. Princeton concludes to a certainty that President Trump, by inquiring about a Biden investigation, showed himself "unable distinguish between the common good and narrow interests."

What the heck does that mean? That standard -- common good versus narrow interests -- can be used to impeach any official at any time.

The greater danger is that people like Mr. Princeton are enabling a fascist coterie (the Democrat Party and the press) to transmogrify the Constitution and threaten the existence of the United States as a constitutional republic.

Consequently, Mr. Ponnuru, no thanks for your nonsense.

And another worthwhile reader comment:

In addition to the author's financial self-interest being controlled partly by Bloomberg, it is also clear that his "four tests" routine is simply a clever lawyer's sophistry disguised as a quasi-logical rationale for his opinions about the evidence that favor the guy who pays him to write in that guy's news organization. The author repeatedly inaccurately states the facts and mashes up facts inside his opinions about what Trump was thinking - even though there is no evidence on the record (something a lawyer like the author should scrupulously follow) to support his opinions.

For example, the call memo shows Trump asking Zelensky to get to the bottom of "what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine." That's all. At the time he made this request, his attorney general was conducting a proper investigation into the 2016 election interference claims and their origins.

Also, the author takes the position that Biden's request to fire prosecutor Shokin was proper because it was the official policy of the United States and the EU. So what. Why did it become the official policy of our government? Did Hunter Biden's payment stream from Burisma and his potential legal jeopardy for assisting a money laundering scheme influence Joe Biden to lobby for making firing Shokin the official policy? These are legitimate questions for an investigation; and, legitimate reasons for asking Ukraine for assistance under our treaty.

The author's sophistry in his column is evidenced by his making final factual determinations about these issues not on their merits, but on a technicality that they were or were not the official policy. Or everyone knows that Ukraine did not hack the DNC servers.

The issues were: 1) are the DNC servers in Ukraine or were they ever in Ukraine after they were examined by Crowdstrike; and, 2) did the firing of the Ukraine prosecutor who was investigating Burisma become the official policy of the U.S.in order to protect the VP's son from a legitimate investigation into money laundering?

[little_monkey]

Do you know who else has gone bankrupt? Walt Disney, guess he was also a criminal too?

Wrong comparison... the fact is Trump had hundreds of millions to buy real estate after his 4 banckuptcies when no bank in America would lend him any money, and it was revealed by Don jr that the business was awash with Russian money from the Oligarch.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/12/21...umps-business/

[lilpixieofterror]

My CPA used to say "if you've been in business for any time at all, you're bound to have a bankruptcy or a heart attack - and if you have one, it'll cause the other".

(he was a federal bankruptcy trustee)

[lilpixieofterror]

Wrong comparison... the fact is Trump had hundreds of millions to buy real estate after his 4 banckuptcies when no bank in America would lend him any money, and it was revealed by Don jr that the business was awash with Russian money from the Oligarch.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/12/21...umps-business/

We can go on and on Little Monkey and find thousands of businessmen bouncing back after declaring bankruptcy. Welcome to the world of business, you must be new. Too bad the IRS nor the state New York seems to have ever charged him with any financial crimes. 3 years later and a bunch of assertions, yet no evidence that a crime took place. How many more years do you need before you declare no evidence of a single crime, exist?

[Terraceth]

This, actually

https://www.nationalreview.com/magaz...hment/#slide-1

It's from the 19th and lays out the 4 hurdles that should be cleared to justify impeachment and removal and how Trump's actions clear them.

Ah, thanks. That's interesting.

[demi-conservative]

Sure, but money laundering is a crime. Eventually, Trump's tax return will be known, and Deutsche bank will be investigated.

'Trump is going down this time, really!!!!!!!!!!!!!'

Make a resolution to give it up, it's just pathetic.

[seanD]

Sure, but money laundering is a crime. Eventually, Trump's tax return will be known, and Deutsche bank will be investigated.

I seriously doubt Trump's tax return will show any criminal activity. Being wealthy, he could afford the best tax attorneys which means they'll find legal loopholes for him, but they're not going to do anything outside the law that would risk his imprisonment. Best case scenario for his critics and worse case scenario for him is that his taxes won't reflect the amount of wealth attributed to him. I suspect it's a nothingburger, and he's fighting against it so hard to make it seem like he's hiding something so that when it's finally revealed and there's nothing there, his critics look even more embarrassing.

[Starlight]

I seriously doubt Trump's tax return will show any criminal activity. Being wealthy, he could afford the best tax attorneys which means they'll find legal loopholes for him, but they're not going to do anything outside the law that would risk his imprisonment. Best case scenario for his critics and worse case scenario for him is that his taxes won't reflect the amount of wealth attributed to him. I suspect it's a nothingburger, and he's fighting against it so hard to make it seem like he's hiding something so that when it's finally revealed and there's nothing there, his critics look even more embarrassing.

Criminals tend to employ criminals.

Trump's lawyer is currently in prison. Trump's campaign chairman is in prison. Trump's political adviser has been convicted. Trump's national security adviser is in prison. Trump's new lawyer is currently being investigated.

The man surrounds himself with criminals. So why would you think his accountants and tax attorneys were any less criminal than all the other people he employs and associates himself with?

[Tassman]

I seriously doubt Trump's tax return will show any criminal activity. Being wealthy, he could afford the best tax attorneys which means they'll find legal loopholes for him,

but they're not going to do anything outside the law that would risk his imprisonment. Best case scenario for his critics and worse case scenario for him is that his taxes won't reflect the amount of wealth attributed to him. I suspect it's a nothingburger, and he's fighting against it so hard to make it seem like he's hiding something so that when it's finally revealed and there's nothing there, his critics look even more embarrassing.

[lilpixieofterror]

Criminals tend to employ criminals.

Trump's lawyer is currently in prison. Trump's campaign chairman is in prison. Trump's political adviser has been convicted. Trump's national security adviser is in prison. Trump's new lawyer is currently being investigated.

The man surrounds himself with criminals. So why would you think his accountants and tax attorneys were any less criminal than all the other people he employs and associates himself with?

Guilt by association is the best kind of guilt.

[seanD]

That's why I said suspect. Obviously I don't know until his taxes are revealed. I believe it's highly unlikely attorneys are going to risk criminal prosecution of their clients, because then they'd be out of business as tax attorneys. And looking for legal loopholes to pay as less tax as possible is not immoral because A) whether or not the taxes are being used in a moral way and what it's being used for is highly debatable, and B) the morality in the way the entire US tax system is set up is itself highly debatable.

[Watermelon]

New politico polls suggest that evangelical support for Trump has fallen since this article with 43% of evangelicals now supporting impeachment and removal. Apparently that is a big turnaround so CT looks like it has some influence.