(11-16-2019, 04:49 PM)jj82284 Wrote:

(11-16-2019, 03:02 PM)mikesez Wrote: 1) No, in fact if protecting his son was the motive, it would be an abuse of power, but probably not a crime.

2) it would be inbounds to investigate a crime from the previous administration, but not a mere abuse of power. However, the evidence read into the record so far is that Biden's withholding of aid had nothing to do with his son and in fact was meant to restart an investigation into some of his son's colleagues.

3) absolutely not. The claim is that there is no probable cause for a crime under US law. and that if there is a crime under Ukrainian law, that is none of our government's business unless the Ukrainian government asks first. That is how the treaty between us and the Ukraine works.

2.) Debunked lie.  Investigation was advanced a month before the prosecutor was fired.  Home of the owner was raided.  Son scheduled to testify.  

3.) Debunked lie.  Obstruction of justice, foreign corrupt practices, technically it would also count as an impoundment violating the law that appropriated the money in the first place, 

A.) under our joint cooperation treaty with ukraine the US head of state is under an obligation to report instances of corrupt practices.  

B.) Under US statute the president has am affirmative responsibility to ensure that foreign aid doesnt ho yo corrupt countries or serve an illicit purpose.