What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Disrespecting Donald Trump vs disrespecting the office of the Presidency (1 Viewer)

Opie said:
"dig up dirt on Biden".....using the words....

" I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike... I guess you have one of your wealthy people... The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation. I think you’re surrounding yourself with some of the same people. I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it."

"Get to the bottom of it"....translates to "dig up dirt on Biden"?

How foolish of me...unless maybe one, leads you to the other.

If they "got to the bottom of it", would they find Trump....or would they find Biden?
Click to expand...
This might be important: Top Ukraine diplomat Bill Taylor testified Tuesday that he was told a military aid package to Ukraine had been withheld by President Donald Trump pending an agreement by that country to launch investigations into Trump’s political rivals.

 
It's not as if he didn't court this situation by narrowly trying to favor only his "base" and the 1%'ers, so while it us regrettable that any president loses so much support he (or maybe one day she) is boo'ed in public, he brought it on himself

 
Sinn Fein said:
Maybe - but also, maybe, Trump understands the impact of the "lock him/her up" a little more, and discourages his base from going down that path  
Click to expand...
No chance 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
ClownCausedChaos2 said:
Come on.  No one is booing or disrespecting the Office of the Presidency.  That's ridiculous.  They were booing the man.  And the fact that they can openly do it without repercussions is one of the founding principles of this country and what makes it great.
Click to expand...
Getting booed in the middle of the swamp?  It makes me even more proud to support him.

At the price of those tickets, that place was full of politicians, lobbyists, and the MSM.

I wouldn't expect roaches to cheer the exterminator either.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Opie said:
as important as any other headline from the MSM since President Trump took office.....

These "witnesses" are useless since we ourselves, can read what was said.
Click to expand...
Well...you can read part of what was said anyway...the part the administration wants you to see.  The witnesses can bring very important context to the table that has, more than likely, been left out of what this administration has provided.

 
The Commish said:
Well...you can read part of what was said anyway...the part the administration wants you to see.  The witnesses can bring very important context to the table that has, more than likely, been left out of what this administration has provided.
Click to expand...
important context = spin....the part the Left wants you to think.

I can read what was said.  I really don't need anyone else's opinion in order to paint the picture.

"While he was on the phone, he was drowning kittens.in a bucket next to his desk" has nothing to do with the conversation.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Opie said:
as important as any other headline from the MSM since President Trump took office.....

These "witnesses" are useless since we ourselves, can read what was said.
Click to expand...
Not useless.  Important part of a process that's been in the Constitution since this country's birth.  

Even if the memo were a transcript and we could assume it was complete, the witnesses add context and allow the Committee to understand the intent of speaker of the words therein.  

 
munga30 said:
Not useless.  Important part of a process that's been in the Constitution since this country's birth.  

Even if the memo were a transcript and we could assume it was complete, the witnesses add context and allow the Committee to understand the intent of speaker of the words therein.  
Click to expand...
....so...the "witnesses" opinion.

 
Opie said:
important context = spin.

I can read what was said.  I really don't need anyone's opinion in order to paint the picture.
Click to expand...
Not really..given we know it's not an actual transcript rather "notes" of the call and probably not all the notes from the call, it's important to remember that.  To the point you're attempting to make, I could also staunchly say the earth was flat because that's all I've ever been taught by the people I trust and anyone saying any different is a liar.  That wouldn't mean I am correct. 

The irony of this post, of course, is you are in fact reading an "opinion" (or at minimum ONE of the versions of what happened) and forming your opinion based on that single perspective.  I think I am still a fan of hearing as much evidence as possible, then forming my opinion over predetermining what the outcome is that I want, then going and searching for that one version of the story that fits my preconceived narrative.  I don't begrudge people this approach, but just be honest in what you're doing.  It's not my cup of tea, but to each his own.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Commish said:
Not really..given we know it's not an actual transcript rather "notes" of the call and probably not all the notes from the call, it's important to remember that.  To the point you're attempting to make, I could also staunchly say the earth was flat because that's all I've ever been taught by the people I trust and anyone saying any different is a liar.  That wouldn't mean I am correct. 

The irony of this post, of course, is you are in fact reading an "opinion" (or at minimum ONE of the versions of what happened) and forming your opinion based on that single perspective.  I think I am still a fan of hearing as much evidence as possible, then forming my opinion over predetermining what the outcome is that I want, then going and searching for that one version of the story that fits my preconceived narrative.  I don't begrudge people this approach, but just be honest in what you're doing.  It's not my cup of team, but to each his own.
Click to expand...
It was a phone call.

The President was not winking or making hand gestures at the other guy while he was talking.

I can read the words that were spoken and draw my own conclusions....I don't need anyone to tell me what to think....apparently, some do.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Opie said:
"dig up dirt on Biden".....using the words....

" I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike... I guess you have one of your wealthy people... The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation. I think you’re surrounding yourself with some of the same people. I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it."

"Get to the bottom of it"....translates to "dig up dirt on Biden"?

How foolish of me...unless maybe one, leads you to the other.

If they "got to the bottom of it", would they find Trump....or would they find Biden?
Click to expand...
It’s this part:

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.
Click to expand...

 
Opie said:
The Commish said:
Not really..given we know it's not an actual transcript rather "notes" of the call and probably not all the notes from the call, it's important to remember that.  To the point you're attempting to make, I could also staunchly say the earth was flat because that's all I've ever been taught by the people I trust and anyone saying any different is a liar.  That wouldn't mean I am correct. 

The irony of this post, of course, is you are in fact reading an "opinion" (or at minimum ONE of the versions of what happened) and forming your opinion based on that single perspective.  I think I am still a fan of hearing as much evidence as possible, then forming my opinion over predetermining what the outcome is that I want, then going and searching for that one version of the story that fits my preconceived narrative.  I don't begrudge people this approach, but just be honest in what you're doing.  It's not my cup of team, but to each his own.
Click to expand...
It was a phone call.

The President was not winking or making hand gestures at the other guy while he was talking.

I can read the words that were spoken and draw my own conclusions....I don't need anyone to tell me what to think....apparently, some do.
Click to expand...
yes...you said this before...my comments above still apply.  Sources still matter to a lot of people even if they don't to you.

 
Juxtatarot said:
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.
Click to expand...
Exactly what is the job of the POTUS when it comes to corruption?

SInce anything that Biden did, happened while he was VP....wouldn't that fall under the umbrella of "corruption"?

Why is the Left so gung-ho about election interference...when it comes to the Right yet they show no concern whatsoever, that it just may have been their own party that was involved?

 
timschochet said:
As I just wrote in the other thread, arguments like ones that Opie is making are already dated and going to be irrelevant after the public hearings have taken place. 
Click to expand...
I don't think this is true....every day in this country court decisions are made by juries.  Each juror picks and chooses how they are going to approach the data provided them.  Some people listen to everything, then make a decision.  Some people make a decision then look for evidence to support that decision.  That's not going to change here.  We've already seen that it's well within the abilities of people to completely ignore some data while clinging to other data.  That's not going to change and the arguments will continue based on those approaches.  The only question that remains is how successful will the spin in the latter approach be with those who are genuinely undecided.  In this case, I believe it's pretty difficult to hide the approach and it's rather obvious, but we'll see.

 
munga30 said:
In every courtroom, every day, all over the country.  That's how it works.  
Click to expand...
LOL....the courtroom....you mean that place that ISN'T in the basement, closed off to the accused....THAT place??

THAT place...where testimony isn't "leaked out" drip by drip at the discretion of the prosecution....THAT place??

Please....I just peed a little.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Opie said:
Exactly what is the job of the POTUS when it comes to corruption?

SInce anything that Biden did, happened while he was VP....wouldn't that fall under the umbrella of "corruption"?

Why is the Left so gung-ho about election interference...when it comes to the Right yet they show no concern whatsoever, that it just may have been their own party that was involved?
Click to expand...
The reason I posted the portion of the call I did was because you wrote:

"Get to the bottom of it"....translates to "dig up dirt on Biden"?
Click to expand...
I wanted to point out the specific part about Biden because I think you had that part confused.

I don’t have the time at the moment to answer your other questions. Hopefully someone else will in my absence.

 
Opie said:
as important as any other headline from the MSM since President Trump took office.....

These "witnesses" are useless since we ourselves, can read what was said.
Click to expand...
A few things here.

A.  We can't read what was said...we read a memorandum off of notes of what the White House will release what was said.  

B.  The witnesses are very much important because they talk about more than just one call...because the whole complaint and impeachment is about more than one call despite the attempts of Trump to claim its all about his "perfect" phone call.

 
Opie said:
Getting booed in the middle of the swamp?  It makes me even more proud to support him.

At the price of those tickets, that place was full of politicians, lobbyists, and the MSM.

I wouldn't expect roaches to cheer the exterminator either.
Click to expand...
Why is a baseball game the swamp?  Calling a crowd of people roaches?  This seems unsupported by anything here as to the make up of the crowd.

 
timschochet said:
I ask because I'm torn on this. I really dislike President Trump, no shocker there. I think he has committed a high crime and deserves to be impeached and removed. I think he's a liar and a bigot and his actions have been, overall, harmful to this country.  I think he's a disgrace to the White House, and I hope to heck the voters reject him next year.

But he's also, currently, the President of the United States. And booing him seems like it's disrespectful to the office of the Presidency.

Now I've gone back and forth on this. A few weeks ago in this forum, I was cheering on the protestors in Minnesota, and I laughed heartily at the idea that people would chant "lock him up!" I thought, how awesome is that? But then, when I actually saw them do it, and it was the President of the United States being loudly booed and disrespected I thought...this doesn't seem right. So I don't know.
Click to expand...
I'm kind of conflicted about this in the same way that you are.  A few thoughts:

1. People have the right to boo the president.  I'm glad we live in a country where people can do this.

2. That said, booing the president is pretty bush-league.  If this were any other living president, I would say that the hecklers disgraced themselves.  But then again, no other living president would get heckled like this.

3. Trump brings this on himself.  He's literally a national disgrace in the sense that everyone else around the world sees him as either a joke or a stain on the US, and I think it's probably helpful for a crowd to send a message of disapproval.  

4. This is yet another way in which Trump is worsening our national discourse.  Thanks to this administration, there is now a precedent for heaping disrespect on the office.  That is not a good thing.

 
Most of these people that are arguing that we should have had more respect for the president went to Trump rally and other conservative rallys in 2008-2016 with a picture of Obama with a Hitler mustache or a watermelon or other black racist stereotypes.  Telling people that Obamacare was going to kill your grandmothers with death panels.  People were bringing a noose to these events but yeah I am sure they believe the president should be respected

At least be honest and say that your believe in respect for the president only applies to what team they are on.  

 
Opie said:
as important as any other headline from the MSM since President Trump took office.....

These "witnesses" are useless since we ourselves, can read what was said.
Click to expand...
You have read a curated version of the call.

The article was not about the call It was about the testimony from a Ukrainian diplomat who testified that Gordon Sondland, U.S. ambassador to the European Union, told him that Trump said he wants Ukraine’s president “to state publicly that Ukraine will investigate [natural-gas company Burisma Holdings] and alleged Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election".

 
Opie said:
LOL....the courtroom....you mean that place that ISN'T in the basement, closed off to the accused....THAT place??

THAT place...where testimony isn't "leaked out" drip by drip at the discretion of the prosecution....THAT place??

Please....I just peed a little.
Click to expand...
I know, right?  The threat of impeachment has been the scourge of every President ever elected.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Opie said:
Getting booed in the middle of the swamp?  It makes me even more proud to support him.

At the price of those tickets, that place was full of politicians, lobbyists, and the MSM.

I wouldn't expect roaches to cheer the exterminator either.
Click to expand...
Lol.  Yeah Trump has been hell on lobbyists all right.  

Trump has named more ex-lobbyists to Cabinet in 3 years than Obama, Bush did in full terms: report

https://thehill.com/regulation/lobbying/461860-trump-has-named-more-ex-lobbyists-to-cabinet-in-3-years-than-obama-bush

 
joffer said:
Your honor, I don’t need to hear the witness testimony, I’ve already read the paper.  Not guilty!
Click to expand...
He would testify that a phone call was made.
He would testify as to what he heard.
Unless he had audio evidence, it would be his recollection of every word hat was said....IF he was listening to both sides of the conversation.

It would be his opinion that it was appropriate or not.

It would be the court's decision whether it was illegal or not.

Of course, a court would want to hear testimony from both sides.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Opie said:
He would testify that a phone call was made.
He would testify as to what he heard.
Unless he had audio evidence, it would be his recollection of every word hat was said....IF he was listening to both sides of the conversation.

It would be his opinion that it was inappropriate.

It would be the court's decision whether it was illegal or not.
Click to expand...
Exactly...which is why there are multiple witnesses and corroborating evidence.

 
We don't need witnesses if the content of the call is public.

Have any of these witnesses disagreed with what was reported as being said in the conversation?

The person on the other side of the call said that he didn't feel pressured....will the witness say different?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Opie said:
We don't need witnesses if the content of the call is public.

Have any of these witnesses disagreed with what was reported as being said in the conversation?

The person on the other side of the call said that he didn't feel pressured....will the witness say different?
Click to expand...
Why not discuss this in the Whistleblower thread? I'm guessing this got started because someone pointed out that people are angry at Trump for Ukraine, but it's a lot more than that.

 
Here's another thing about booing the President; hopefully it can serve as something of a message to other Republicans.  I mean, yes they are completely tone deaf and delusional for the most part, but they are also concerned with their own survival (that's really ALL they are concerned with).  Maybe people publicly booing Trump will maybe start to wake them up to the idea that maybe unquestioning fealty to the Clown in Chief maybe might not be the best long term plan.  Maybe.  Probably not.  But maybe.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's disrespectful to boo. I've never seen someone less deserving of respect than this corrupt, self-serving bigot. I wish they'd have left him on the jumbo-tron until he got booed out of the stadium. He needs to know the majority of America despises him. I hope he spends his last days in a for-profit prison. 

 
He deserves to be booed everywhere he goes. He's a terribly indecent and ugly human being on just about every observable level.

 
Opie said:
We don't need witnesses if the content of the call is public.

Have any of these witnesses disagreed with what was reported as being said in the conversation?

The person on the other side of the call said that he didn't feel pressured....will the witness say different?
Click to expand...
But the full content of the call is not public.  IT says so on the document that was released...it tells us what the memorandum is.

Also, bowing out as this is a conversation for the whistleblower thread moreso than here.

 
Opie said:
He would testify that a phone call was made.
He would testify as to what he heard.
Unless he had audio evidence, it would be his recollection of every word hat was said....IF he was listening to both sides of the conversation.

It would be his opinion that it was appropriate or not.

It would be the court's decision whether it was illegal or not.

Of course, a court would want to hear testimony from both sides.
Click to expand...
According to the memorandum that you read, President Trump asked the leader of Ukraine for dirt on a political opponent. 

How can that be OK with you? Or with anyone? I don’t get this. 

 
I would not have booed him. I would have just sat in silence. I think that sends a stronger message. Think of him standing there waving in complete silence. Now THAT would have been a message to send. Respects the office, sends the right message. JMHO.

 
I don't think I understand the "respect the office" angle - he is not fulfilling an official function - he is at a baseball game.

I can understand not booing the State of the Union Address.  

Being able to boo the president with out fear of incrimination is what makes the country great.  Others have said it more eloquently than I, but if you want to show the world, that American democracy is not broken - its standing up to boo the president at the World Series.

You know where they disapprove of booing the leaders - North Korea.  Russia.  China.  Turkey.  Saudi Arabia.

 
Sinn Fein said:
I don't think I understand the "respect the office" angle - he is not fulfilling an official function - he is at a baseball game.

I can understand not booing the State of the Union Address.  

Being able to boo the president with out fear of incrimination is what makes the country great.  Others have said it more eloquently than I, but if you want to show the world, that American democracy is not broken - its standing up to boo the president at the World Series.

You know where they disapprove of booing the leaders - North Korea.  Russia.  China.  Turkey.  Saudi Arabia.
Click to expand...
I agree.  I don't see how booing him at a baseball game is disrespecting the office.  It sounds so weird to even say that when Trump disrespects the office more than anyone repeatedly.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

timschochet
Will the Justice Department indict Donald Trump?
2 3
Replies
116
Views
3K
quick-hands
quick-hands
GordonGekko
OP/ED: J6 Committee's Liz Cheney Embodies The Worst Character Traits Of Donald Trump (6/24/22 18:05 PST)
Replies
26
Views
818
GordonGekko
GordonGekko
dozer
****Official DOJ Investigation into Trump, Fake Electors, Fraud, Etc.****
5 6 7
Replies
348
Views
11K
Sabertooth
Sabertooth

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top