Trump Impeachment

[samedm9]

24 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

This is an important transition from red to blue. If you want to develop above blue in Orange and Green, you will need to expand and add in some nuances and complexity. I wrote a bit about this in the post above.

Re-framing using the "What about XYZ?" is a defense of deflection from this development process. It is a form of resistance found in every stage of consciousness development. 

@tenta

Aye aye captain. 

Thread has gone rather off topic though.

[Bodigger]

30 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

Notice how there are nuggets of truth within their narrative. It's a key part of the game they are playing. Those nuggets of truth provide grounding for the devilry. Without those nuggets of truth, grounding would be lost and the whole thing collapses. Many Trump opponents think Trump is 100% lying and delusional. He isn't. He needs a small percentage of truth as grounding for deflection and obfuscation. 

What if the accuser isn't about the truth?  Does this make a difference in the nuggets of truth Trump is claiming?

I do not think Adam Schiff is truthful.  In fact, he has shown his lack of truth consistently during the Russia investigation and lead many people to believe he had hard evidence against Trump.  Maybe Schiff should be on trial as well.

I don't see the Dems letting up at all on Trump in the future.  If Trump gets another term we will see more of the same......Impeach Trump....

 

[tenta]

46 minutes ago, samedm9 said:

What do you mean by “it”?

Anything trump could want concealed, his supporters just aren't willing to admit his flaws or maybe will admit something minor but nothing really other than that

And yes trump broke the law, it's illegal to coerce with a foreign nation against a candidate

Edited October 2, 2019 by tenta

[Forestluv]

@Bodigger An aspect of Adam Schiff is a nugget of truth used as grounding for broader deflection and obfuscation. Part of this framing is to create a binary construct of honesty. Schiff is either honest or dishonest. If Schiff is dishonest, then one can extrapolate that the charges against Trump are dishonest. As well, if Schiff is dishonest then one can create a deflection in which Schiff should be the one undergoing a criminal investigation, not Trump. This is a simple blue-level binary message Trump is using and it resonates with a certain percentage of people. . . At Orange, we would add in nuances - like a continuum of honesty, degrees of honesty, a mosaic of honesty. As well, critical thinking enters at orange and orange is able to see how dots are connected. Yet not nearly at the Yellow level, yellow is a master at connecting dots. Green becomes aware of underlying emotional energies driving behavior as well as cultural relativity. Green also has new abilities of empathy and intuition. The combination of logical reasoning (orange) and empathy/intuition (green) allows green to see more clearly than blue - such as being able to detect underlying intent.  As well, Green has a more expansive meta view relative to blue and orange, since green has evolved through blue and orange.  

It is a fascinating interplay between red/blue, center orange and upper orange/green. 

[tenta]

48 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

This is an important transition from red to blue. If you want to develop above blue in Orange and Green, you will need to expand and add in some nuances and complexity. I wrote a bit about this in the post above.

Re-framing using the "What about XYZ?" is a defense of deflection from this development process. It is a form of resistance found in every stage of consciousness development. 

@tentaYes, that is part of the dynamic. Notice how there are nuggets of truth within their narrative. It's a key part of the game they are playing. Those nuggets of truth provide grounding for the devilry. Without those nuggets of truth, grounding would be lost and the whole thing collapses. Many Trump opponents think Trump is 100% lying and delusional. He isn't. He needs a small percentage of truth as grounding for deflection and obfuscation. 

True, there are dumb people who are anti-trump, but trump supporters will try to use this to strengthen their position, while ofc ignoring anything negative about trump and also using their mob mentality to bump up their pro-trump position, such as someone listening to a pro trump youtuber make one good point, then use this as fuel to not even consider the other side

[Forestluv]

35 minutes ago, tenta said:

such as someone listening to a pro trump youtuber make one good point, then use this as fuel to not even consider the other side

Yes. A nugget of truth is used as grounding to frame deflection and obfuscation. Green also does this, yet to a much lesser degree of intensity than red/blue. 

For example, notice the reaction red/blue, orange and green has to trump.

Red/blue binary: Trump's base of support. FoxNews and Briebert.  Strong tribal identity. This is a witch-hunt. Trump did nothing wrong. Biden is corrupt and should be the one being investigated for his criminality. red/blue will not use much rational thinking and are not primarily interested in evidence. red/blue is immersed into a cultural identity dynamic of "us vs. them". Tribal identity and subconscious emotions drive behavior. A lack of critical thinking. 

Orange. Corporate dems. CNN, MSNBC. Evidence-based. Self-centered motivation for personal power and financial success. Desire to maintain status quo. . . Capacity for critical thinking. Trump has behaved wrongly based on this evidence. However, underlying motivation for personal gain and maintain status quo clouds judgement. . . Joe Biden has done nothing wrong (evidence is suspended by desire to maintain corporate status quo). Aspects of dishonesty motivated by desire to maintain power and status quo. Yet to a lesser degree than red/blue. Some motivation to do the right thing - mostly to uphold underlying blue values - such as governmental traditions, rule of law, hierarchies, checks and balances. 

Green. Progressives. TYT, Majority Report, Rebel HQ, Krystal Ball. . . Desire to maintain status quo is absent - this allows a clearer critical analysis of both republicans and corporate democrats. Better able to see degrees of wrongdoing and more conscious of how underlying emotions drive behavior. Can more clearly see wrong doings of both Trump and Biden and is critical of both - yet can see various degrees of wrong doing.

[SerpaeTetra]

7 hours ago, samedm9 said:

Thank you so much. You get it.

STILL no one has produced a legitimate reasoned argument that demonstrates, with reference to WH released transcript, a correlation between a quote/s from the call, and a law that has been broken.

The only somewhat understandable claim so far, is that trump acted to “solicit” a “thing” of “value”, from Ukraine, in behalf of his administration, for increased reelection-ability.

What is the “thing” you claim is valuable?

How is the “thing”, explicitly of “value” to the Trmp admins re-election, or as some say for trumps “personal gain”.

So again, I ask that anyone who believes that Trump broke a law, to:

1. State the law you believe he broke.

2. Give a quote/s from the transcript correlating to that.

3. Explain with Reference to the quote/s, how the law was broken.

Should be Simple Enough if you claim he broke a law. all you have to do, is provide 3rd dimensional proof!

I’m not asking for any tangents of political discussion. 

I have no biases to trump..As some may claim, as if they can read my mind, k. I’m just as suspicious about him as I am of anything. I just don’t like being manipulated to adhere to what people like Adam Schiff want me to correspond to politically, when they’re obviously lying.

btw, still no comments on Adam Schiffs opening statement, k.

1. Illegally soliciting campaign help from a foreign government -Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971. 

He is asking for dirt on Biden, his possible future opponent in the 2020 election, on the phone call.  The transcript is long, but one quote from Trump is -"The other thing, There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it... It sounds horrible to me."

**  He also has his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani ask Ukranian officials for dirt.  This is just one of the Ukranian officials that have made similar comments.

*Yuriy Lutsenko, Ukraine's former prosecutor general, told the Los Angeles Times that President Donald Trump's personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, was "obsessed" with potential misconduct on the part of former Vice President Joe Biden or his son, Hunter.

*Lutsenko said he repeatedly pushed back on Giuliani's requests to investigate the Bidens.

*Lutsenko and Giuliani met in person twice this year, he told the LA Times, in addition to "numerous" phone conversations.

*Lutsenko's comments are linked to broader concerns tied to a July 25 phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky — a conversation at the heart of a whistleblower complaint that sparked an impeachment inquiry. 

https://www.businessinsider.com/former-ukraine-prosecutor-giuliani-pressed-him-biden-probe-2019-9

 

 

 

Edited October 2, 2019 by SerpaeTetra

[Bodigger]

7 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

@Bodigger An aspect of Adam Schiff is a nugget of truth used as grounding for broader deflection and obfuscation. Part of this framing is to create a binary construct of honesty. Schiff is either honest or dishonest. If Schiff is dishonest, then one can extrapolate that the charges against are dishonest. As well, if Schiff is dishonest then one can create a deflection in which Schiff should be the one undergoing a criminal investigation, not Trump. This is a simple blue-level binary message Trump is using and it resonates with a certain percentage of people. . . At Orange, we would add in nuances - like a continuum of honesty, degrees of honesty, a mosaic of honesty. As well, critical thinking enters at orange and orange is able to see how dots are connected. Yet not nearly at the Yellow level, yellow is a master at connecting dots. Green becomes aware of underlying emotional energies driving behavior as well as cultural relativity. Green has a more expansive meta view relative to blue and orange, since green has evolved through blue and orange. Yet the meta view of green is nowhere near the expansive meta view of Yellow.  

You had me at obfuscation.....LOL

So, do you see Schiff as being truthful?  For two years I was lead to believe that he had hard evidence and when it all came out with the Mueller report and testimony, it wasn't anything like he had made it out to be.  In this case, I am reserved and patient with what Schiff is alleging.  I hope it doesn't take two years....

[samedm9]

21 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

@Bodigger An aspect of Adam Schiff is a nugget of truth used as grounding for broader deflection and obfuscation. Part of this framing is to create a binary construct of honesty. Schiff is either honest or dishonest. If Schiff is dishonest, then one can extrapolate that the charges against Trump are dishonest. As well, if Schiff is dishonest then one can create a deflection in which Schiff should be the one undergoing a criminal investigation, not Trump. This is a simple blue-level binary message Trump is using and it resonates with a certain percentage of people. . . At Orange, we would add in nuances - like a continuum of honesty, degrees of honesty, a mosaic of honesty. As well, critical thinking enters at orange and orange is able to see how dots are connected. Yet not nearly at the Yellow level, yellow is a master at connecting dots. Green becomes aware of underlying emotional energies driving behavior as well as cultural relativity. Green also has new abilities of empathy and intuition. The combination of logical reasoning (orange) and empathy/intuition (green) allows green to see more clearly than blue - such as being able to detect underlying intent.  As well, Green has a more expansive meta view relative to blue and orange, since green has evolved through blue and orange.  

It is a fascinating interplay between red/blue, center orange and upper orange/green. 

No I’m not trying to create a binary construct of honesty, where: “if Schiff is lying then trump is exonerated”... that’s not what I’m trying to do here. 

I want people to question why Schiff felt the need to lie.

[Forestluv]

27 minutes ago, Bodigger said:

So, do you see Schiff as being truthful?  

This is still using a binary construct. My answer is yes and no. It is more nuanced than "Schiff is either honest or dishonest". As well, personality dynamics are only one component. 

I explain different levels of conscious awareness from red to green above. Trump is red/blue and Schiff is orange. 

[samedm9]

22 minutes ago, SerpaeTetra said:

1. Illegally soliciting campaign help from a foreign government -Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971. 

He is asking for dirt on Biden, his possible future opponent in the 2020 election, on the phone call.  The transcript is long, but one quote from Trump is -"The other thing, There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it... It sounds horrible to me."

 

How is investigating actual corruption(that just so happens to involve Biden) seen as “soliciting help” or “asking for dirt” for re-election purposes.

If someone is involved in illegal corruption, then there sure as hell will be dirt that arises, but it’s not that it’s at the behest of trumps “solicitation” for the dirt, for political value. It’s simply to make an enquire into true corruption.   As if the Trump admin needed any help at all to “off” Bidens chances, other than to just let him wither away on his own accord.

[Bodigger]

46 minutes ago, SerpaeTetra said:

He is asking for dirt on Biden, his possible future opponent in the 2020 election, on the phone call.  The transcript is long, but one quote from Trump is -"The other thing, There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it... It sounds horrible to me."

This sounds horrible.....?  It sounds to me like an after thought at the end of a conversation.  Are you not interested in what transpired here with the Bidens?

50 minutes ago, SerpaeTetra said:

**  He also has his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani ask Ukranian officials for dirt.  This is just one of the Ukranian officials that have made similar comments.

*Yuriy Lutsenko, Ukraine's former prosecutor general, told the Los Angeles Times that President Donald Trump's personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, was "obsessed" with potential misconduct on the part of former Vice President Joe Biden or his son, Hunter.

*Lutsenko said he repeatedly pushed back on Giuliani's requests to investigate the Bidens.

*Lutsenko and Giuliani met in person twice this year, he told the LA Times, in addition to "numerous" phone conversations.

*Lutsenko's comments are linked to broader concerns tied to a July 25 phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky — a conversation at the heart of a whistleblower complaint that sparked an impeachment inquiry. 

These statements seem to be falling apart as we discuss this.  You may want to be patient until things settle and the actual truth gets out there.

[SerpaeTetra]

27 minutes ago, samedm9 said:

How is investigating actual corruption(that just so happens to involve Biden) seen as “soliciting help” or “asking for dirt” for re-election purposes.

If someone is involved in illegal corruption, then there sure as hell will be dirt that arises, but it’s not that it’s at the behest of trumps “solicitation” for the dirt, for political value. It’s simply to make an enquire into true corruption.   As if the Trump admin needed any help at all to “off” Bidens chances, other than to just let him wither away on his own accord.

Because the corruption claim is fairly irrelevant and baseless **The alleged incident happened several years ago in 2015**.  Why would he be asking about this now? and its widely believed Trump could care less about this if not for Biden being an opponent.  It lines up perfectly that he has his personal lawyer consistently asking Ukrainian officials for information on Biden.  Of course Trump doesn't say exactly, "I'll give you military aid if you give me some information I want"-since he knows the call is being listened to by others.  There will be more evidence coming out in the next several weeks either supporting the democratic or republican side, so I think one might have to wait.  Its basically pre-trial.

Edited October 2, 2019 by SerpaeTetra

[Bodigger]

8 minutes ago, Keyhole said:

In my opinion, I hope he gets impeached.  It is pretty late in the game, but it will prevent him from trying to run again.  My question is, how will they decide the new republican candidates if it goes through?

Are you sure....?  This may get people fired up to the point that the Dems may not have a chance.

[samedm9]

4 minutes ago, SerpaeTetra said:

Because the corruption claim is fairly irrelevant and baseless, and its widely believed Trump could care less about this if not for Biden being an opponent.  

It could as easily be argued that, trump couldn’t care less about Biden being an opponent. If he beat Hillary, then Biden is a ship that never even set float. He’s only running to spice up/add colour to the dem flock. 

With all his kiddy touching tendencies to be exposed, his campaign was never viable and is completely self destructive.

[Bodigger]

Why would the Democrat House change the rules so whistle-blowers don't need to have first hand evidence?  The Dems have one thing in mind.....Impeach.  If what the Dems are doing is Green, I'm thinking this may not be the direction to go.......for me personally.

[samedm9]

1 minute ago, Bodigger said:

Why would the Democrat House change the rules so whistle-blowers don't need to have first hand evidence?  

?????? 

[SerpaeTetra]

4 minutes ago, Bodigger said:

Why would the Democrat House change the rules so whistle-blowers don't need to have first hand evidence?  The Dems have one thing in mind.....Impeach.  If what the Dems are doing is Green, I'm thinking this may not be the direction to go.......for me personally.

Actually, the law was changed in May of 2018, not right before the whistleblower complaint like Trump claimed.  Also, the whistle blower had both first hand and second hand evidence, so it didn't matter if the law was changed or not.

https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/463737-intel-community-watchdog-clarifies-processing-of-whistleblower

 

The Hill is a non-partisan news outlet.

[Mason Riggle]

@samedm9 which rule was changed? 

"Although the form requests information about whether the Complainant possesses first-hand knowledge about the matter about which he or she is lodging the complaint, there is no such requirement set forth in the statute." - ICIG ( the inspector general of the intelligence community)

"In fact," the ICIG's statement continues, "by law the Complainant...need not possess first-hand information in order to file a complaint or information with respect to an urgent concern. The ICIG cannot add conditions to the filing of an urgent concern that do not exist in law."

[Forestluv]

11 minutes ago, Bodigger said:

If what the Dems are doing is Green, I'm thinking this may not be the direction to go.......for me personally.

There are two tiers of the Dem party: Orange Corporate establishment Dems (Neal, Pelosi, Schiff, Biden etc.) and Green progressive dems (Bernie Sanders, AOC). Green progressive Dems are highly critical of corporate Dems - ideally Green progressives want to break free of Orange establishment corporate dems. 

Green progressive dems want to impeach Trump, yet not as an isolated incident. Green progressive dems want to fundamentally restructure the government. For example, to shift power from the corporations to the people. This includes removal of Trump, yet that is just the beginning. They also seek to remove corporate corruption in politics and return the power to the people. I would say this is the core structural change for progressives because without neutralizing corporate corruption, none of their other major aims are possible.  Progressives do not like Pelosi or Biden. They want to knock Biden out and elevate Bernie. Progressives view Biden more like an old school republican. They would also like to knock out corporate dems, such as Richard Neal and Pelosi - progressives are supporting primary opponents to corporate dems. . . Bernie is the purist example of a progressive dem. He is in a class by himself. A distant second is Elizabeth Warren. She has some legit progressive cred. - such as fighting against corporate corruption - yet she is not nearly as pure a progressive as Bernie.