Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
snitwitch

***Official Donald J. Trump Impeachment (Whistleblower) Thread***

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Opie said:

No.
My impression is that it is just about the 2016 election.

That is an odd impression given Trump's actions and requests of Ukraine didn't happen during the election.

Ive read the complaint and the impeachment documentation...none of it talks about it just being about the 2016 election.  Can you unpack that a bit?

Edited by sho nuff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, sho nuff said:

That is an odd impression given Trump's actions and requests of Ukraine didn't happen during the election.

Ive read the complaint and the impeachment documentation...none of it talks about it just being about the 2016 election.  Can you unpack that a bit?

I'm sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jamny said:

I pointed this out the other day. They are going to have to get someone who heard it directly from Trump. Assuming that's what he meant and him saying "do me a favor" is not enough, imo.

Chris Christie is a former state Attorney General. He said this before the summary of the call was released:

"For instance, if he's saying, listen, do me a favor, go investigate Joe Biden, that's one thing," [Chris] Christie offered, adding "If he's saying, listen, I'm concerned about corruption, you've just gotten elected. we send hundreds of millions of dollars over there, you need to start looking at this, for instance, one of the things that occurred was the Hunter Biden situation, that becomes totally different."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So all these people understood there was QPQ but it wasn't coming from Trump. That's hard to buy.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Opie said:

I am sure you did everything to sway her....except to simply print out the phone call, let her read it, and make up her own mind.

Printer was broken. So, I wrote down what I could remember and let her read that. 

She will always make up her own mind. After 29 years of marriage, that's the only think I know as fact.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, timschochet said:

The change that I predicted will be in the form of public opinion. I certainly wish and hope it will affect Republican Senators as well but that doesn’t seem likely. 

Are you seriously believing that republican voters will no longer support Trump after these hearings? 

I'm not so optimistic. There was no spin machine in full effect during watergate

Edited by msommer
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if the Crowdstrike tinhat nonsense that Trump mentioned on the call will get mentioned and fleshed out a bit.

Would like to know what the average voter would think about our President discussing insane conspiracy theories with our allies. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, The General said:

So all these people understood there was QPQ but it wasn't coming from Trump. That's hard to buy.

From the many Law and Order mob episodes I’ve seen over the years that’s a common tactic.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Opie said:

I am sure you did everything to sway her....except to simply print out the phone call, let her read it, and make up her own mind.

Probably listen to these people that are about to testify that it was clearly understood there was QPQ.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, zoonation said:

The fact that the whistleblower testifying (or not) at the hearings is still a live issue with theoretical independents following this impeachment suggests to me that the GOP is again winning on controlling the narrative. 
 

Further, KC’s wife’s comments, while anecdotal, likely represent (unfortunately in my view) how a lot of people look at this issue.  If Biden was corrupt, then Trump gets a pass for using non-state actors to expose that corruption.  
 

And, it is the assumption under-pining that view - Biden being corrupt -  that actually has no evidentiary support or foundation.  But that is where Rush and Hannity come in.  They will spread misinformation on that topic with such regularity and without any foundation, that it becomes part of the underlying fabric informing opinion on the whole investigation.  
 

 

I suppose the Democrats could counter this by claiming (over and over) that the Trumpers refusal to comply with subpeonas is proof that they are guilty.   

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

I've been convinced for a long time that most people are terrible when it comes to "process" arguments.  If there's an established process that stands in the way of getting the outcome they want, 90% of so of folks will gleefully toss the process overboard.  The political class in particular is becoming much more open about that.  

I think this is a fairly solid observation. From the Dems' side (I know you aren't one of us down deep inside), it fuels our suspicions that the Repubs will shortchange voting rights in order to keep winning elections with a minority of votes cast. We think that they fear the consequences of losing an election much more than they're concerned with limiting the rights of all our citizens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, msommer said:

Are you seriously belueving that republican voters will no longer support Trump after these hearings? 

I'm not so optimistic. There was no spin machine in full effect during watergate

Not a chance.   In my opinion the only thing that could swing a few Republican voters would be a significant downturn in the economy and even then they would likely blame it on the Democrats.   Everyone is dug in and I don't think a clear quid pro quo or anything else regarding this impeachment is going to matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Insomniac said:

I suppose the Democrats could counter this by claiming (over and over) that the Trumpers refusal to comply with subpeonas is proof that they are guilty.   

Dems should be pounding this idea every day. Everyone believes that the innocent don't dodge subpoenas. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The biggest issue with this process is that probably 80% of the people have made their minds up.  So they probably won't watch.  Or they will watch something that is tied to their team.   Hell I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of Republicans Senators don't even watch the hearings.  At least Graham admits he won't pay attention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, timschochet said:

I wish I could read that phone call. Unfortunately all we have is a very edited summary. But even that was terrible. Hopefully these witnesses will fill us in on the larger policy involved. 

It’s not edited. It’s reconstructed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, msommer said:

Are you seriously belueving that republican voters will no longer support Trump after these hearings? 

I'm not so optimistic. There was no spin machine in full effect during watergate

Here’s what I seriously believe: Republican voters will support Trump throughout these impeachment proceedings. They will unite with the diehard Trump supporters and strongly support the Republican Senators when they unanimously vote not to convict. 

And then...they will know that they did something wrong. They will know that they allowed this President to get away with it. And though very few of them will vote for the Democrat, a whole lot of them will stay home in November. There will be little enthusiasm for another 4 years of Trump. That’s what I seriously believe. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, The General said:

I wonder if the Crowdstrike tinhat nonsense that Trump mentioned on the call will get mentioned and fleshed out a bit.

Would like to know what the average voter would think about our President discussing insane conspiracy theories with our allies. 

Average informed voter...probably not very happy with it.

Average voter that seems to be into what ever Trump does?  Yeah...look at Crowdstrike.  Why were they the only ones to look at anything...why did the FBI only rely on their partial report...(and yes, I know those things aren't what actually happened...but excuses I have seen by the Trump crowd in places).

 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, timschochet said:

Here’s what I seriously believe: Republican voters will support Trump throughout these impeachment proceedings. They will unite with the diehard Trump supporters and strongly support the Republican Senators when they unanimously vote not to convict. 

And then...they will know that they did something wrong. They will know that they allowed this President to get away with it. And though very few of them will vote for the Democrat, a whole lot of them will stay home in November. There will be little enthusiasm for another 4 years of Trump. That’s what I seriously believe. 

I don't share your belief. At all.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let the fair an impartial firing squad begin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, timschochet said:

Do you believe this will be unfair? 

It's been in plan since summer 2016.  The outcome is predetermined.  Al Green laid it all out for us.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sand said:

It's been in plan since summer 2016.  The outcome is predetermined.  Al Green laid it all out for us.

Trump’s extortion of Ukraine was planned in summer 2016?

  • Like 2
  • Laughing 2
  • Thinking 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Sand said:

It's been in plan since summer 2016.  The outcome is predetermined.  Al Green laid it all out for us.

You believe the Democrats planned to impeach Trump so that he could be cleared in the Senate? And that if they planned it in 2016, they would wait until 2019? 

If that was the plan, it seems like a pretty stupid plan. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

George Conway just now on MSNBC:

"I don't frankly want to be on television. But I just don't get why people can't see this and why people are refusing to see this. It's appalling to me." 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, timschochet said:

You believe the Democrats planned to impeach Trump so that he could be cleared in the Senate? And that if they planned it in 2016, they would wait until 2019? 

If that was the plan, it seems like a pretty stupid plan. 

You shouldn't set up soft balls like this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Sand said:

  Al Green laid it all out for us.

Was that in “Let’s Stay Together”? Or “Love and Happiness”? 

(Al Green was so awesome.) 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sand said:

It's been in plan since summer 2016.  The outcome is predetermined.  Al Green laid it all out for us.

The Dems made Trump hold up funds to Ukraine to conjure up dirt on his political rival? That's some jedi stuff there. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The General said:

The Dems made Trump hold up funds to Ukraine to conjure up dirt on his political rival? That's some jedi stuff there. 

If Trump plays 8D chess, then the Dems have to as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Sand said:

It's been in plan since summer 2016.  The outcome is predetermined.  Al Green laid it all out for us.

"Here's the plan.  We'll wait for Trump to do something impeachable, and then we'll impeach him"

"BRILLIANT!"

  • Like 5
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/what-do-the-democrats-have-to-prove

Nice piece here. Excerpt:

The reality of the situation is that there is overwhelming evidence of the basic facts of the situation. More than a dozen witnesses, almost all of them Trump appointees, tell a consistent story. There’s actually a near transcript of the President doing the deed. The only notional gaps in the evidence come from the absence of people who refuse to testify on the President’s authority. The plot itself involves using extortion to coerce a foreign government to sabotage a federal election on the President’s behalf. This violates two or three major federal laws in addition to being almost a definitional abuse of presidential power.

Certainly it is important to air the evidence publicly, clear up good faith confusions and nudge as many people who believe the President did something wrong but are hesitant about the upheaval of impeachment in the direction of supporting impeachment and removal. But the basic case simply makes itself. The evidence is overwhelming.

These points are all obvious and we owe the President’s defenders the respect of accepting that they realize it’s obvious too. They just have a mix of political, partisan and ideological reasons for justifying the President’s actions and preserving him in power.

As I said above, navigating life, politics and really anything requires understanding where you are and what you’re trying to do. The challenge the country faces today isn’t how well Democrats make some case. It’s that about 35% to 40% of the population wants to maintain a lawless President in office no matter what. That is a political problem not a persuasion problem, with profound roots that long predate Donald Trump and equally profound dangers for the future.

The case, rather than needing to be made in some heroic fashion, really makes itself. The evidence is overwhelming. It’s not the Democrats who are on trial here, needing to prove themselves with some magisterial performance. Indeed, it’s not even really the President whose guilt is obvious and not even questioned with serious arguments. Who and what is on trial here is the Republican party, which has made it pretty clear that they are willing to countenance any level of law breaking and abuses of power so long as it is done by a Republican or at least as long as it is Donald Trump.

The Democrats’ job is to lay out the evidence in a public setting and get elected Republicans to sign on the dotted line that this is presidential behavior they accept and applaud. That won’t be difficult. They have one last chance to change their answer. Democrats real job is to clarify and publicize that that is their answer.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All these people who understood there was QPQ are deep state. Oh and even if Trump did it it's ok. And, if he did do it he's supposed to do this because his job is to investigate corruption.

These are the only 3 options. Pick one Republican Senators.

Preface with "the call is deeply concerning but" if you like.

Edited by The General
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this will be a waste of everyone's time and money.  Do we expect any bombshells or anything we didn't already know?

 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, timschochet said:

You believe the Democrats planned to impeach Trump so that he could be cleared in the Senate? And that if they planned it in 2016, they would wait until 2019? 

If that was the plan, it seems like a pretty stupid plan. 

This is why Pelosi dragged her feet for months as she knows that Trump will not be convicted with the current Senate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I expect to happen is what I expected to happen during every Roadrunner/Coyote cartoon.

The Democrats have been building another Acme rocket.
They will strap their butts to it....then launch themselves into the side of a mountain.
The roadrunner will give us a "beep beep"....then get soundly reelected in 2020.

The first president to be impeached by Congress then reelected by a landslide.

It will ring well in the history books as something else the Democrat party can be proud of!

 

Edited by Opie
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Max Power said:

I think this will be a waste of everyone's time and money.  Do we expect any bombshells or anything we didn't already know?

Kind of a loaded question, imo.

 

I would guess a large percentage of the public don't know much about this at all.  I would also say that hearing someone testify is different than reading about that testimony.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, squistion said:

Fun Fact!

The Democrats’ lead impeachment hearing lawyer made his bones as a prosecutor by sending mobsters, stock swindlers and a multimillion-dollar inside trader to prison, cases in which colleagues said he mixed brains and "swagger" to win convictions.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/democrats-impeachment-lawyer-cut-his-teeth-prosecuting-mobsters-wall-street-cheats/2019/11/12/f19759e4-04cf-11ea-ac12-3325d49eacaa_story.html

Quote

 

After the mobster cases, Goldman prosecuted a sprawling auto insurance fraud case involving Russian organized crime figures. Dozens of suspects were charged in the scheme to rip off insurance companies for more than $100 million by submitting false bills for fake injuries. Officials said the key players in the group were all named Mike, so the gang used nicknames: Russian Mike, Skinny Mike, Fat Mike and Mike B.

Goldman also won convictions in that case.

Pretty specific skill set.

I don't think it's so much the mobster or even Russian OC angle that matters here though, I think it's having someone who understands how corrupt bargains are confected, the language and mechanics of it and drawing that out.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Max Power said:

I think this will be a waste of everyone's time and money.  Do we expect any bombshells or anything we didn't already know?

 

what is it costing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Max Power said:

I think this will be a waste of everyone's time and money.  Do we expect any bombshells or anything we didn't already know?

 

What would be the alternative?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Opie said:

My impression is that it is just about the 2016 election.

This is a refrain from President Trump. - Just something to point out here is that none of this would have been possible without Trump's own actions. It's somewhat like the Flynn situation, which triggered so much, because all Trump had to do was take advice of his own people and others and just not hire the guy. But he did and then he took other steps. I don't want to revisit that, but right after Mueller's testimony completed Trump launched into this maneuver with Ukraine almost immediately.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like the GOP led by Jim Jordan is starting the clown show with silly signs by the GOP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Max Power said:

I think this will be a waste of everyone's time and money.  Do we expect any bombshells or anything we didn't already know?

 

We aren’t the audience. Everybody reading this thread knows far more about this subject than does the public. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Sand said:

It's been in plan since summer 2016.  The outcome is predetermined.  Al Green laid it all out for us.

Lets humor you and say that's true. So what. Does it make him any less guilty? The facts are pretty clear. 

We're gonna see a lot of razzle dazzle today but the facts are overwhelming.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Done in committee hearings....this has to be done in the open

Done in public hearings.....this is a waste of time and money.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Max Power said:

 Do we expect any bombshells or anything we didn't already know?

 

As an added point, this argument is almost always made when bad news is delivered: “well so what? We knew that already.” 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

Kind of a loaded question, imo.

 

I would guess a large percentage of the public don't know much about this at all.  I would also say that hearing someone testify is different than reading about that testimony.

Do you think a large % of the public is really going to tune into a week+ of 6 hour days to listen to this?  I feel like most people watching this in length have already made up their minds. 

IMO unless something big or new comes out, I don't think these hearings sway a lot of voters. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Max Power said:

Do you think a large % of the public is really going to tune into a week+ of 6 hour days to listen to this?  

Yes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.