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.

***Official Donald J. Trump Impeachment (Whistleblower) Thread*** (7 Viewers)

So I just saw a Dem representative paraphrasing the conversation between Trump and Zelensky. NO, NO, NO. That's not how this should work. If you have something so damning, read it direct from the transcript. Bias spin should not and CANNOT be the standard to impeach with. That's what all the Dems here, (this forum included) are doing. Interpreting, spinning, paraphrasing, implying. That's just not good enough. Find a damn smoking gun or drop this nonsense.
Your personal standard of a smoking gun has no relationship to any standard of proof found in law. Even under the no reasonable doubt standard, the trier of fact is entitled to make any reasonable inference from the evidence presented. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It doesn’t really matter what his intentions are because there is no quid pro quo, he only asks Zelensky to find the truth, he invokes the proper channels of working through the DOJ, and the case involves the public admission of Joe Biden about extorting Ukraine - which is also a legitimate foreign relationship issue.

Honorable intentions or not, the ask is very reasonable, appropriate and ethical.
I think many would disagree with you on that.  

 
These are consecutive sentences by the President of the United States.
And the elipsis between the last two sentences indicates that something was omitted there. I'd bet money that the whistleblower will fill in that gap and it won't be pretty for the POTUS.

 
NY Post questions journalistic integrity of  WaPo and NYT . :lmao:   :lmao:   :lmao:  " 

" Reports have said Biden used his VP position to demand that the inquiry be dropped and the prosecutor involved fired, or America would withhold aid." nice journalism here. Reports from whom? 
Well, that reporter you just were discussing for one.  And... uh... the President.  Probably Rudy.  That's three sources right there.  Run the story!

 
And the elipsis between the last two sentences indicates that something was omitted there. I'd bet money that the whistleblower will fill in that gap and it won't be pretty for the POTUS.
Yeah, I don't know if that's just "President trailed off and started a new sentence" or a missing statement.  It really doesn't matter.  There's no telling what will actually happen, but this is spectacular corruption.

 
The difficult part, in my estimation, was going to be showing that Trump specifically asked for Joe Biden to be re-investigated, rather than for the situation to be investigated or for "Biden" to be investigated where he could say he meant Hunter.  And of course I never anticipated he'd bring Mueller and the Russia investigation into it.
This is odd to me.  He directly asked a foreign govt to investigate Biden.  I too was shocked when I read that and that it was released directly from the WH.  I mean, at this point the only thing their base believes is directly what he says "Here's the transcript, no quid pro quo" and people believe it, despite what's in it.

I'm actually surprised he released it, after reading it.

 
Think about this time yesterday. People were remarking how fast this was developing. The assumption was that with all these Congressional men and women jumping in so rapidly to support the impeachment inquiry that the evidence must be crystal clear. Turns out it was just exuberance. They jumped without even seeing evidence. That's so indescribably dangerous. This country has to start operating with it's head and not it's wants and wishes. 

 
This is wrong. The lines themselves are impeachable. 
The more I read it, yes perhaps you are right.  My point was that the two sides read things totally differently. One with an "honorable voice" and one with a "nefarious voice".  But in this case, it seems that he's clearly asking Ukraine to investigate Biden.  Not much ambiguity there.

 
This can’t be stressed enough. 
Or he could still be obsessed with the Russian collusion issue & wants Bidens son to be put under as much scrutiny as his family was.  I remember hearing the scrutiny about that deal years ago when it happened, and thought it looked bad then.  I'm actually kind of hoping that Biden has to drop out because of this so Warren can get the spotlight.

 
Of course not. I never said anything about banning countries from doing something, so I'm not sure why you would even bring it up.
If Joe Biden committed a crime, then our own DOJ should be the one to handle that investigation.

OK, so Ukraine could investigate and/or our own DOJ could investigate.  That makes sense.

 
Where does he mention "truth" to Zelensky? I don't see that word used by Trump. Or are you suggesting he doesn't have to say that because it's implied?
“I would like to get to the bottom of it”  “if you can look into it” is generally synonymous 

adding “I would like to find out what happened”

 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Thinking
Reactions: Ned
“I would like to get to the bottom of it”  “if you can look into it” is generally synonymous 
No it isn't, and it doesn't matter. The President asked a foreign leader to meet with his personal lawyer to discuss trying to investigate a political opponent. 

 
Think about this time yesterday. People were remarking how fast this was developing. The assumption was that with all these Congressional men and women jumping in so rapidly to support the impeachment inquiry that the evidence must be crystal clear. Turns out it was just exuberance. They jumped without even seeing evidence. That's so indescribably dangerous. This country has to start operating with it's head and not it's wants and wishes. 
They were only a handful of votes holding it up prior.  All it took was a nudge.

Under the current circumstances an impeachment proceeding seems fairly meh.  I think it was largely inevitable.

 
Think about this time yesterday. People were remarking how fast this was developing. The assumption was that with all these Congressional men and women jumping in so rapidly to support the impeachment inquiry that the evidence must be crystal clear. Turns out it was just exuberance. They jumped without even seeing evidence. That's so indescribably dangerous. This country has to start operating with it's head and not it's wants and wishes. 
Many democratic congressman were quetioned why they supported impeaching Trump yesterday and they said they didn't like his policies.  That is not what impeachment was for and a dangerous precedent to set.

 
I’m curious why Trump asked Ukraine to meet with his personal attorney (Rudy) rather than the state department.  That seems a little odd.  Why is his personal attorney getting involved in international affairs?


Because it's campaign related.  
I've asked Trump followers this same question a few times, @Mr Anonymous most recently. Crickets. I'd like to hear a benign reason for involving his personal attorney in a foreign policy matter if it has nothing to do with Trump's campaign.

 
Think about this time yesterday. People were remarking how fast this was developing. The assumption was that with all these Congressional men and women jumping in so rapidly to support the impeachment inquiry that the evidence must be crystal clear. Turns out it was just exuberance. They jumped without even seeing evidence. That's so indescribably dangerous. This country has to start operating with it's head and not it's wants and wishes. 
I don’t know how to make this any clearer. The memorandum of conversation has far more explicit evidence of impeachable conduct than even the most enthusiastic Democrats anticipated yesterday. Not one Democrat on the Hill is disappointed or underwhelmed. Ok, let’s exclude Tulsi Gabbard. 

 
When the public learns that Trump mentioned Biden, they’re going to realize that this is a bad thing, an impeachable thing, right? They’re not going to act like Mr. Anonymous in this thread right? Because it seems to me that the whole reason this is different is because most people don’t need an explanation as to why this is wrong. And if that’s not the case we’re really ####ed as a nation, IMO. 

 
No it isn't, and it doesn't matter. The President asked a foreign leader to meet with his personal lawyer to discuss trying to investigate a political opponent. 
Lets not forget that said personal lawyer has said he was meeting with Ukrainians to "help his client":

May 2019

Mr. Giuliani said he plans to travel to Kiev, the Ukrainian capital, in the coming days and wants to meet with the nation’s president-elect to urge him to pursue inquiries that allies of the White House contend could yield new information about two matters of intense interest to Mr. Trump.

One is the origin of the special counsel’s investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election. The other is the involvement of former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s son in a gas company owned by a Ukrainian oligarch.

Mr. Giuliani’s plans create the remarkable scene of a lawyer for the president of the United States pressing a foreign government to pursue investigations that Mr. Trump’s allies hope could help him in his re-election campaign. And it comes after Mr. Trump spent more than half of his term facing questions about whether his 2016 campaign conspired with a foreign power.

“We’re not meddling in an election, we’re meddling in an investigation, which we have a right to do,” Mr. Giuliani said in an interview on Thursday when asked about the parallel to the special counsel’s inquiry.

“There’s nothing illegal about it,” he said. “Somebody could say it’s improper. And this isn’t foreign policy — I’m asking them to do an investigation that they’re doing already and that other people are telling them to stop. And I’m going to give them reasons why they shouldn’t stop it because that information will be very, very helpful to my client, and may turn out to be helpful to my government.”

Side note - I don't know how this will square with Rudy's recent proclamation that he only got involved at the behest of the State Department - but that is an issue for another day.

 
Think about this time yesterday. People were remarking how fast this was developing. The assumption was that with all these Congressional men and women jumping in so rapidly to support the impeachment inquiry that the evidence must be crystal clear. Turns out it was just exuberance. They jumped without even seeing evidence. That's so indescribably dangerous. This country has to start operating with it's head and not it's wants and wishes. 
There is enough evidence in that transcript alone for Democrats to impeach.  So any danger that it would be a nothing burger is already alleviated.  

Another point is part of the reason the Democrats did this was because the Administration wasn’t providing requested documents timely or at all.  This transcript wouldn’t have come out today without yesterday’s action.

 
Looks like Rudy thinks the State Department asked him to step in, but they seem to have claimed otherwise.

Rudy Giuliani told Sean Hannity on Fox News Monday night that his recent dealings with Ukraine were initiated by the State Department.

"The State Department called me and said would I take a call from Mr. [Andriy] Yermak, who's No. 2 or three to the president-elect who is now the president," said Giuliani, one of President Trump's personal attorneys.

Giuliani said he then spoke with Yermak and that he then passed along the "enormously important facts" to the State Department.

When reached for comment, a State Department spokesperson said, "Mr. Giuliani is a private citizen and acts in a personal capacity as a lawyer for President Trump. He does not speak on behalf of the U.S. Government."

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/462761-giuliani-says-state-department-asked-him-to-take-call-from-ukrainian-official

 
When the public learns that Trump mentioned Biden, they’re going to realize that this is a bad thing, an impeachable thing, right? They’re not going to act like Mr. Anonymous in this thread right? Because it seems to me that the whole reason this is different is because most people don’t need an explanation as to why this is wrong. And if that’s not the case we’re really ####ed as a nation, IMO. 
I still wonder about that.  I’m concerned that swing voters might still think a quid pro quo is needed.  Hopefully we’ll start seeing polls on this stuff.  What happens with Trump’s approval rating will also be interesting.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top