(10-24-2019, 10:14 AM)jj82284 Wrote:

(10-24-2019, 09:49 AM)mikesez Wrote: Maybe you're right that there's no evidence that the Ukrainians realized aid was withheld, but what the Ukrainians thought is immaterial to the question of if power was abused.
The question is, were we trying to influence the Ukrainians in an abusive way? Whether or not we succeeded is besides the point.
To take your example, if I accuse you of hiring a hitman to kill your own wife, saying "look! She's still alive!" isn't much of a defense.  Trying to hire a hitman is illegal whether or not the hitman takes your money, and whether or not the hitman actually kills the target.

Here we go again.  

Trump did x.

Completely empirically and verifiably disprove it.  

Well he WANTED TO.  

In determining an extortive act you have to demonstrate that the subject felt pressure, they didnt.  

To demonstrate corrupt intent you have to demonstrate that there is no evidence that the Ukrainian or bidens past behavior could conceivably meet the reasonable suspicion standard for corrupt illicit or illegal activity.  There is evidence.  Moreover, the witnesses who are testifying their interpretations of corrupt intent are demonstrating consistent ignorance of the evidence.  

To establish attempt to extort, all you need are statements or testimony that illuminate the suspects intents and motives.  We're getting that more and more every day.

If the intent was actually to investigate either Biden for violations of US law, DoJ would have handled that.  Rudy of course has a right to play the role of private investigator to investigate his own suspicions, but you can't use the carrots and sticks of government if you're only wearing the hat of a private citizen.

---