“Your honor, my client could not have committed that crime. He is…”

https://www.businessinsider.com/lindsey-graham-trump-ukraine-too-incoherent-quid-pro-quo-2019-11

“What I can tell you about the Trump policy toward Ukraine: It was incoherent. It depends on who you talk to; they seem to be incapable of forming a quid pro quo,” L. Graham, Senator

Geez, a “Gang That Couldn’t Shoot Straight” redux. Are we supposed to accept that the regime is just a bunch of harmless buffoons so just smile and be kind.

Somehow that defense is disconcerting in so many ways.

6 thoughts on ““Your honor, my client could not have committed that crime. He is…”

  1. I don’t think that is the defense.

    Trump is responsible for what he said to the Ukrainian President, or what he told an intermediary to convey, not what somebody else thought he meant.

    Sondland and Volker heard the same conversation and interpreted it very differently. Taylor didn’t hear it at all, and he has his own interpretation.

    So, whose version do we believe, or do we just read the transcript, which is as close to hearing it ourselves as we will get, and go with that?

    Foreign aid is nearly always given with some conditions, at least that it go to its intended purpose and not disappear down some corrupt official’s rat-hole. If as Sondland says, the aid was conditioned on a public statement on investigating prior corruption, that is entirely appropriate, even if an inquiry into the Biden’s role is a part of it, so long as the proposed investigation is to be honest and fair.

    If the investigation were to show that Biden used withholding US aid to protect his son from being exposed as receiving a bribe, is that not something the voters should know?

    So, what is the big deal? After all, political candidates are not above the law.

    Like

  2. I know what you are saying.

    But I also know that is just plain wrong. If corruption investigation is the impetus, there are lots of countries we deal with that are corrupt. Saudi Arabia is a prime example. They even murdered a journalist from an American paper and we still sent them arms. And 3000 US military personnel to boot.

    It was all about getting political dirt on Biden and the DNC. Do you really think it was coincidental? The amount of effort with Giuliani, his two cohorts, the EU ambassador, etc., was way over the top for a country that Trump couldn’t find on a map unless it was pointed out.

    The funny part is the shifting BS Republican defense every week or so. First Trump didn’t say it. Then he said it according to a rough, edited transcript. Then it was not quid pro quo. Then quid pro quo was the norm. Then it was “so what if it was”. And now the “incoherent” defense.

    I think it was Mark Twain who said that it was better to tell the truth because you don’t have to remember so much.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Saudi Arabi didn’t meddle in the 2016 election, Ukraine did. On Hillary’s behalf. So, of course Trump wanted to be sure of the new Ukraine regime.

      https://www.cbsnews.com/news/did-ukraine-try-to-interfere-in-the-2016-election/

      At the least, the DNC, if not Hillary herself, colluded with a foreign government in the 2016 election. The Ukrainians had a new President too, so it was entirely reasonable for Trump to want public assurances that the new government was a clean break from the old.

      Like

      1. You might read your link again. The link between Ukraine and DNC was spurious at best. Manafort’s link with a Ukraine was his support of a Putin puppet who had to flee to Moscow.

        “ As part of that effort, she discussed Manafort with the high-ranking officials at the Ukrainian embassy in Washington, D.C.” That is pretty much it.

        Then Manafort became the number one man in the Trump campaign.

        As the article said, Ukraine had so much corruption, plus it was weak and, of course it was an ally.

        Our intelligence confirmed that Putin’s folks were firmly in control of all the interference in our election. This was reiterated in the Mueller Report.

        I think the regime should stick with the incompetence, I mean incoherent, defense. Sort of like the insanity defense.

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s