Donald Trump, Democrats, President Trump discussed on Dogma Debate

Dogma Debate


The Gao which is the government accountability office came out on January. I don't remember six Mr so and said that What trump did is a federal crime literally literally broke the law so this whole time and I kept getting frustrated today watching this if they would argue That crime doesn't have to be committed. This is fine. Make the argument but at least circle back and say but he did commit a crime. That's part of my problem with this. They're not they're not circling back and touching on the actual crime. He did commit. And when I tweeted needed that out today during the discussions around whether or not he committed a crime. Here's what I said I said please realize even if there was no call no quid pro quo. No blocking witnesses no blocking documents and no lies. Trump still violated federal law and deserves impeachment. Congress appropriated funds to Ukraine. He stopped it unconstitutionally. That is a crime someone very thoughtful reply. Apply to me and said Alexander Pope Replied and said what part of the Constitution did he violate late. I've only heard that his actions were illegal. I'm just wondering how that works. Here was my reply article. One section nine clause seven of the constitution. I'll say it again if you're taking notes the US Constitution Article One section nine clause seven gives Congress congress the sole right to appropriate funds to this foreign government for aid now. The president has the ability to veto that but in this case he did not when he signed it it became law. They proposed it. Congress approved it. The president signed it became federal law when the president then decides to hold that aid that has been appropriated by Congress it is a federal crime crime and the Government Accountability Office has confirmed that Donald Trump broke federal law by withholding this aid period. Now I'm going to move on. Here are the amendments that were proposed by the Democrats today. Here's what you missed in. This is a quick rundown. Trust me. This was twelve and a half hours of me sitting in front of this television Taking notes and just being focused So that I could do this. Show show at midnight The and some of them are very generic. The first one was The right to subpoena because keep good mind. Republicans have said from the beginning. You're not getting any evidence and part of Mitch. McConnell's resolution was whatever evidence you submitted in your articles as we're going to go by will Will vote on. Its on this other stuff later. The Democrats in the First Amendment said We want to subpoena documents from the White House. Anything having to do with Joe Biden Hunter Biden anything having to do with Ukraine. We WanNA see documents. We WanNA see emails back and forth from the president and I'm pretty clear no brainer. Right if he's on trial and he hasn't done anything wrong I wouldn't he say here. Are My emails look at them. I didn't do what you accused me of instead when they. They subpoenaed him in the house. He didn't respond when the they ask for the documents. He did not turn them over. He has stonewalled every single step of the way in. Here's the frustrating part. Here's the frustrating part. The his legal team is now standing up in the Senate going. You're not prepared. You have no evidence and it it it makes you wanna just throw the remote at the TV. Because you're going they requested. Did the evidence. The president blocked them so they added a second article of impeachment would which was obstruction of Congress for blocking evidence. And you have the nerve to stand here and go. You don't have any evidence. Why didn't you? Why didn't you appeal that and take that to court because because it takes months for years to go through that process and the house apparently somewhat trusted the Senate to do their job and that's been the frustrating part for me is he stonewalled every step of the way and then said look? You're a failure very similar to what happened with Obamacare obamacare started off offers beautiful plan. Republicans chipped away at it to the point that it wasn't that great of a deal and then when it got accepted in past and put in the cab going look how terrible it is and here. I am as a liberal telling you I hate obamacare. I liked it at first. I like it was gonna be didn't like what it turned out to be not surprisingly these this very basic idea of. Let's see your emails. Let us see the documents. Please let subpoena the stuff. Republicans voted unanimously fifty. Three all fifty three of them said Nope we're going to table this the word tabling comes up allot and all that means is set aside and vote on it later. At least that's what they say. Now Adam Schiff doesn't believe that that's the real plan he says that but they're they're saying will vote on it later. Have our argument than ask all the right questions and then ask for evidence now in what world does that make sense. It's why in the hell. Would you get twenty four hours to present a case when half of your were eighty percent of your evidence is tied up because the defendant obstructed your ability to get the evidence and then and and then and then the defendant works directly with the judges. And that's what these guys are to let them full. You are not jurors these judges ages in the Senate the Republicans working in and Mitch McConnell has said I'm working directly with the White House. I'm coordinating with the White House on what they want. I'm working with the president. Imagine the defendant working directly with the judge on what evidence will be allowed against him. That's what we're dealing with here. So whenever whatever he asked for whenever the Democrats asked for the White House documents and emails relating relating to Ukraine and Joe Biden Hunter Biden Him and Brisebois and Strike for a crowd strike in all these other. Republicans voted. Don't said No. You can't have the evidence we're GONNA WE'RE GONNA table that and talk about it later. They said look. We'll talk about rather not you need that evidence. After we hear your argument and review your evidence that was shot down fifty three to forty seven the next amendment was they wanted State Department documents and emails that were redacted now. You're talking about documents from the Office of the secretary and this one gets interesting and by the way in this his trial they were. They had a screen. They were doing a presentation. The Democrats did a beautiful job of flashing stuff up on the screen and essentially they kind of got away way with presenting some of the evidence they were not allowed to present so they would say. Here's an email and they would pop up on the screen and go. This is the email we wanna get because when we originally asked for it and it was a part of it was given to us. The whole thing was redacted except upped one-sentence at the bottom and it was considered. Oh at this is stuff. You're not supposed to be able to see because it's redacted because it's secret government stuff but then it was a separate lawsuit lawsuit On the American God what is it the whatever. The act is about Accessibility ability to information. I can't think of what it's called now Patriot Act as a Patriot anyway. whatever it was that that they actually won that lawsuit and got the email from the White House unredacted be through a different lawsuit and they saw that what had been previously. Redacted was not some sort of Secret classified government stuff it was incriminating things to Donald Trump. It was saying. This guy's withholding aid for political reasons. They were the people in the White House talking back and forth and through State Department's going. I'm not going to be part of this. This is an appropriate. Who is approving in this? Why is this being withheld? Why is the president doing this? This is inappropriate. People are arguing and they're showing these emails on the screen and and the Senate and they're saying we know there are more like this. We want to subpoena all of these documents from the State Department. We want these documents from the office of the secretary. We see that things were redacted. That shouldn't have been and we got the other full email through the other La suit. We saw it. The only thing that was hiding was stuff that was incriminating Donald Trump. So now we know that they were intentionally redacting things that they weren't supposed to so there's more to hide their. Let's dive in deeper. Let us go get more of those emails and the Republicans said No. Let's table it. Fifty three to forty seven straight party. Line vote why are they voting against the American people having access to this evidence now. One one person on twitter said David. They're not voting against it saying to just table it Adam Schiff said it best on the Senate floor. He said a vote to delay is vote to deny why. Why would you want to delay this? You want us to do our opening arguments and our twenty four hour presentation without evidence and then you want to constantly come back up to the podium and say all these Democrats don't have any evidence it is beyond frustrating. The third amendment was Oh embiid documents in emails. Now this one is one of the most damning A wimpy is the office of of think was it management and budget. I notice bottle. The B. is for budget It's their budget officials. They wanted to They wanted colby documents in email so there were emails and this is also related to the sixth amendments. While go ahead and do that now with Robert Blair and Michael Duffy Duffy. Duffy is the one that actually came in and stopped the aid to Ukraine. I believe Blair was an official that had been a long longtime budget official official. Who was actually in charge of releasing the funds bl Duffy was appointed by. Trump is a political appointee. Had No experience in the office of Management Budget and all he came in took over just the Ukraine portion and said. We're GONNA stop these funds and Blair didn't know why so. There was some confusion as to why it was being withheld the emails back and forth between Blair and his colleagues there are emails back and forth between Duffy. I'm Blair as to why Duffy was taken over this particular account. And he had no previous budget experience but he was a political appointee directly from Donald Trump. This is excruciatingly cruciate only important to get to the bottom of so democrats and let us see. Duffy's emails let us see Blaise. Communications let US see the communications between Donald Trump and Duffy and if there's even classified in their redacted but let us see the stuff pertaining to the withholding the Ukraine funding.

Coming up next