Posts Tagged ‘Pro Bono Publico’

Pro Bono Publico

October 1, 2019

short url to this post: https://wp.me/pGfx1-HQ

Quid pro quo?

By Dahni

©️2019, all rights reserved

Well, we are either learning, re-learning, using or abusing Latin again. What does the Latin term, “quid pro quo” mean? Quite simply it is translated in English as: “something for something” or “favor for favor.”

If I were to agree to mow your yard for a month and in exchange for this, you agree to take and care for my Lady dog 🐶 for a week, while I go out of town, that’s quid pro quo. If you agree to pay 💰 a $1.00 to the grocery store and they, in exchange, agree to give you a loaf of bread, this is also, quid pro quo. In legal and political use, the term just descends into hell from there. Then, in the hell of, subject to what you believe and interpret, we hear or learn such things as: coercion, harassment, “shakedown”, force and ideas like some mafia godfather, asking for a favor or an offer, you cannot refuse. Such is the public scenario being used or abused, as grounds to impeach, a sitting US president.

Oh, it does not matter that that a transcript of a conversation between two presidents of two different countries and its release was agreed upon by both, declassified and released to the public. And it does not matter that both presidents, publicly agreed that there was no “pressure” put on anyone, to do anything.

What matters to some politically, who paint this exchange as criminal is, the word “favor” (do “us” the USA “our country”, and not “me” personally), was used in the conversation. And to further this interpretation, just mentioning the name of a person that just happens to be running in 2020, in opposition to president Donald Trump, is grounds for impeachment? Why this just further proves the demand for this favor to impugn the integrity of one, for the sole benefit of another, to win an election? It’s a violation of campaign finance law? It’s opposition research or digging for dirt on your potential challenger? But you can forget about a threat of you either do us this favor or you won’t get money or aide from us because, it does not exist in this transcription! There is no mention or implication that any money is at stake or being withheld, unless this “favor” is done!

This transcript only factually shows two things: congratulations for winning an election and the context of the “favor” involves corruption, to which both presidents have had and are, having to presently deal with. Don’t take my word for this or what the media paints and want you to believe, read it for yourself!

Click above to view the transcript

Now as to “word for word”, one US senator wants to see this conversation “word for word.” This implies that she believes what has been released to the public, is not. Not only does this call into question the honesty of our president, all those involved that heard the actual phone conversation and prepared the transcription, it also, questions the honesty and integrity of, the president of Ukraine.

Is there a word-for-word or actual recording of this call? Franklin Delano Roosevelt was the first US president to record his private calls. This practice ever since continued until president Nixon, whose refusal to turn over tapes, was leading to his potential impeachment, led to his willful destruction of US property and ended with his resignation, as president of the United States.

But, no, this senator and others now question and do not accept this publicly released transcription. Surely there must be one more complete? There must be a recording? The speaker of the house has gone so far as to suggest that taking private and classified documents and placing them on a more secure server with limited access, but still maintained as governmental property, amounts to nothing more than a cover up?  Do you see seeds of mistrust and association with another president that did indeed, try to cover up? Do you see the grounds for impeachment being set down? Do you see that government is not trusted even by itself? Do you recall a former Secretary of State and 2016 nominee running for president, set up her own private server? Moving private and/or classified information to a more secure server in the government, is this to cover up or perhaps to protect the information and limit access to it? Why? I don’t know, maybe because conversations of the president of the US, the president of Mexico and now Australia twice, have been released or leaked to the press?

The more secure server, is it to cover up or protect the information from unauthorized and illegal leaking? I would think an illegal and unauthorized private server would be used because: you don’t trust the government and/or you are trying to limit access, trying to hide it or cover it up?

Now what about the whistle blower? There is a law designed to protect them and procedures to follow, to make their complaint credible and urgent. Prior to August of 2019, just days before the transcription was publicly released, someone(s) in the Intelligence community, uploaded a change in the form to submit such a complaint. Prior to this, the complainant had to have “first hand knowledge.”  The complaint now seen, freely admits that the complainant did not/does not have “first hand knowledge.’ Rightfully so, they were not one of over 12 people that were privy to the call between two presidents. This means that those (someone or someones), that were present, leaked this information to someone that was not authorized to have it! In other words, the information was leaked to someone unauthorized to have it and they were not authorized to leak it or even submit the proper form required, for whistle blowers.

This is called hearsay, second-hand and third-hand information, gossip and etc. Prior to August 2019, hearsay is not allowed as, it is not allowed in any court of law. Why? The accused has the constitutional right to confront their accusers and anything less than first-hand knowledge, is not allowed. But this was changed without date, reason or whom(s), made the change, for submitting the complaint.

This is precisely why people don’t trust lawyers (the legal profession as a whole), the mainstream media and politicians, even far, far less! Law, which exists to protect the rights of the people, is tainted (abused), and question the very people, they are elected by and are supposed to serve. The mindset is, guilty until if and whenever if, proven innocent? Facts do not matter? Guilt or innocence does not matter, only what can be proved? And the only proof required is, what do you believe and what can you get others to believe?

Well, this is what I believe. I’ll add some more Latin words for you to consider. The context of this entire conversation between the president of the United States and the president of Ukraine is, the mutual need for cooperation against corruption, plaguing both countries! In Latin this is, Pro Bono Publico, “for the public good”!!!!

I can think of two other things that are also, Pro Bono Publico “For the public good”!

 

1 of WE,