J. Gary DiLaura, FBI, retired.
There is nothing wrong with “You do this and in return, I’ll do that” deal, so long as, in the case of elected officials, it benefits their employer, the US government.
That is what is called a Quid Pro Quo. However, it could also be Hobbs Act- Extortion or a variety of other crimes. I’ve taken some to trial against elected officials, won 2 lost 1.
Joe Biden’s case is a slam dunk and I have been calling for the president to order his Attorney General to have the FBI investigate and convene a Grand Jury, since I first became aware of Biden’s admissions.
If it benefits the elected official like former Vice President Biden or his relatives, it’s called a CRIME, a very serious felony!
In order for there to be a Quid Pro Quo, both parties must know that there IS a Quid and a Quo! If either side is “unaware”, that there is a “deal”, then there is NO deal and no Quid Pro Quo!
In order for you to file a complaint for assault, you must know that you were assaulted. In order for you to file a complaint for harassment, you must know you were harassed! That makes sense, doesn’t it?
Those are factual, common sense, statements, under our Rule of Law, but not under Adam Schiff’s new “Adam’s Rule of Law”, by the council of Adam!
Examining the Law… let’s for a moment, assume the President told John Bolton that the President wanted to know if what Joe Biden said on video is true or false, an investigation into corruption (Quid), BEFORE he releases any money to Ukraine (the Quo) .
Did John Bolton or any other government employee tell any Ukraine Official that the aid is dependent upon anything else, like getting dirt on Biden, before it came out in Politico, six weeks later? According to the President of Ukraine, Bolton did not.
Other Ukraine officials say there was no pressure and no Quid pro Quo.
If you read and take the transcript for what it says, there was no Quid Pro Quo and the request was to “get a handle” on Ukraine corruption to help the US/us! That’s what he said!
Now if you want to believe that what the President meant is that, “he wants to build a new Trump Towers in the Ukraine and put his son in charge and if you don’t agree to give him a plot of acres to build, before the President hangs up the phone, you aren’t getting the millions”…you can say that…but that doesn’t make it true, does it?
Our law does not allow any person to testify that another person didn’t mean exactly what they said! The Judge will stop you or Adam Schiff, cold. It’s just not allowed as testimony!
Was it the duty and responsibility of the President and is he the Sole Person Authorized by the Constitution, to set and enforce foreign policy? Is there another US Government official who can set foreign policy to demand no corruption before financial aid is rendered and tell Ukraine anything about policy to Ukraine or any other country?
The answer is an astounding, NO!
So the bottom line is this: Two people can talk about anything they want, legal or illegal, moral or immoral AND as long as they don’t act upon their illegal discussion it’s not a crime. On the other hand, act on that conversation of the crime and commit two overt acts, and you may be in trouble!
No matter what the President said to Bolton, who took an oath to keep private conversations with the President private, Bolton cannot disclose anything the President said to him about foreign policy and he knows that!
Bolton did not take the “Quid” to anybody Ukraine! Therefore Quid Pro Quo never happened!
I, for one, am very disappointed that we seem to have lost John Bolton to the dark side. I used to admire him. Now he’s just a lost little boy, who couldn’t have his way!