Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
snitwitch

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

Recommended Posts

She's obviously smart, so I'm not sure what angle she sees coming from the district she does.  Maybe you could argue that if she won in 2018 it's unlikely Dems will ever take her seat, but it seems like she's dancing close to the edge by putting on the MAGA hat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Dinsy Ejotuz said:

Well for starters you can go to the stunt she and Nunes pulled at the start of Marie Yova's testimony.

She knew what the rules said and tried to interrupt when she didn't have the right to speak.  Then made a huge scene about "abuse of power" when the rules were observed despite her histrionics.

Yup, they knew exactly what they were doing and got the desired reaction.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Well, now you have. You tell lies to defend a psychologically unstable man who calls people “scum” for telling the truth about him. Good luck with your campaign.

Conway might make sense as a husband, knowing things, who feels his wife has had her reputation destroyed and abused by her by boss. At least the vitriol beyond sheer principle coupled with his continued marriage with her might make some sense that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the least surprising news ever...

Quote

Federal prosecutors in New York are investigating whether Rudy Giuliani stood to profit personally from a Ukrainian natural-gas business pushed by two associates who also aided his efforts there to launch investigations that could benefit President Trump, people familiar with the matter said.

Mr. Giuliani’s associates, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, pitched their new company, and plans for a Poland-to-Ukraine pipeline carrying U.S. natural gas, in meetings with Ukrainian officials and energy executives this year, (WSJ, paywalled)

Grifters gonna grift.  

Edited by Dinsy Ejotuz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is very much worth reading. It’s long, but not nearly as long as watching all the hearings or reading all the transcripts. It’s a good summary of everything we know so far in the form of a fairly dramatic narrative. It also makes clear that Sondland will be a very important witness.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/how-a-cia-analyst-alarmed-by-trumps-shadow-foreign-policy-triggered-an-impeachment-inquiry/2019/11/15/042684a8-03c3-11ea-8292-c46ee8cb3dce_story.html

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Conway might make sense as a husband, knowing things, who feels his wife has had her reputation destroyed and abused by her by boss. At least the vitriol beyond sheer principle coupled with his continued marriage with her might make some sense that way.

I honestly don't know how she puts up with him.  He is disrespectful and spread lies constantly.  Crazy

  • Like 2
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So earlier today Trump tweeted about the stock market’s record numbers, for which he deservedly can take a bow. But he then went on to predict, as he has many times before, that if this impeachment were to go through and if he was removed from office, the stock market would collapse and there would be a new Great Depression. 

Of course this is hyperbole as usual from our President. But I think it sets up a great question that I would love to hear a reporter ask him at his next impromptu press conference: 

“Mr. President, you tweeted that if the impeachment results in you being removed from office the stock market will collapse. What is it about a Mike Pence administration that would cause this to happen?” 

  • Love 1
  • Laughing 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Don't Noonan said:

No, there were no bombshells at all last week a gigantic waste of time.  None of these people helped the Dems case at all as they have no first hand knowledge and admitted when asked they knew of no crime or impeachable offense.

Yes because Holmes listening in on on the Sondland/Trump phone call was not first hand knowledge, and Taylor direct conversations and texts with Sondland was not first hand knowledge.🤣

Edited by lazyike
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

The decision to trot out Stefanik was interesting in its own right. She was like a burner or hockey defenseman sent out to consume time and beat up the star but not caring if he gets penalized:

they are called goons.

 

  • Laughing 2

Share this post


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

Yes because Holmes ilistening in on on the Sondland/Trump phone call was not first hand knowledge, and Taylor direct conversations and text  with Sondland was not first hand knowledge.🤣

agreed 

Share this post


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

they are called goons.

After seeing "Taxin' Tedra" I was thinking stooge.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Dinsy Ejotuz said:

In the least surprising news ever...

Grifters gonna grift.  

America’s Grifter - The story of the rise and fall of Rudy Giuliani.
 

Stanley Tucci’s signature role. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, bicycle_seat_sniffer said:

they are called goons.

(I realize that I just that it might be taken the wrong way)

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Schiff didn't interrupt her, she interrupted the hearing. She had no business opening her mouth until her five minutes. Btw, which she spent reading headlines about Adam Schiff and couldn't even be bothered to utilize all of her time.

Good lord. :lmao:

I heard her interrupt while I was listening on the radio. She was one of the better GOP examiners in the Taylor/Kent hearing. Sad that is what she caused a scene over

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Apple Jack said:

After seeing "Taxin' Tedra" I was thinking stooge.

Sounds like an insult Sarah Palin would use

Share this post


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

So earlier today Trump tweeted about the stock market’s record numbers, for which he deservedly can take a bow. But he then went on to predict, as he has many times before, that if this impeachment were to go through and if he was removed from office, the stock market would collapse and there would be a new Great Depression. 

Of course this is hyperbole as usual from our President. But I think it sets up a great question that I would love to hear a reporter ask him at his next impromptu press conference: 

“Mr. President, you tweeted that if the impeachment results in you being removed from office the stock market will collapse. What is it about a Mike Pence administration that would cause this to happen?” 

Trump is proposing his own Quid Pro Quo to We the People. He wants us to call our Congressional leaders to let them know we don't want Trump to be impeached and/or removed because the economy will collapse. Trump is threatening us with a collapsing economy unless we give in to his demands to remain in power. The guy can't stop.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Trump is proposing his own Quid Pro Quo to We the People. He wants us to call our Congressional leaders to let them know we don't want Trump to be impeached and/or removed because the economy will collapse. Trump is threatening us with a collapsing economy unless we give in to his demands to remain in power. The guy can't stop.

How is he a businessman? He has no concept of how the economy actually works, does he?

Share this post


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

Good lord. :lmao:

I heard her interrupt while I was listening on the radio. She was one of the better GOP examiners in the Taylor/Kent hearing. Sad that is what she caused a scene over

Yeah, and today several conservative sites are touting her as a new star, slated for higher office. Lol. 

Share this post


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

Yeah, and today several conservative sites are touting her as a new star, slated for higher office. Lol. 

The rising GOP star I see is governor Ron DeSantis. As governor, he's a big contrast with Rick Scott - that's easy -  he's taking a pragmatic approach to many problems. I didn't like his  build the wall campaign ad with his kid, and he's on the wrong side of Amendment 4 to restore voting rights to felons, but he proposed a big increase in teacher salaries, acknowledges climate change and dropped some stupid litigation initiated during the Scott regime. He's former military and Harvard, young, handsome  family, but he's not a charismatic speaker. In 2024, I could see him running for president.

Share this post


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

Yeah, and today several conservative sites are touting her as a new star, slated for higher office. Lol. 

Did you watch the hearings?  She was very, very good.

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Don't Noonan said:

Did you watch the hearings?  She was very, very good.

She lied during the hearing, proving that she is a partisan hack. Nothing she ever says or does from this point forward can be trusted due to her blatant bias.

  • Like 2
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

Did you watch the hearings?  She was very, very good.

Right up til she wasn’t.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dkp993 said:

Right up til she wasn’t.  

If you are a Schiff fan I can see why you wouldn't like her.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Checking in on the whistle blower thread and all the talk is about rising stars in the GOP?  Sounds about right. Veggie burger of nothingbugers. lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Don't Noonan said:

If you are a Schiff fan I can see why you wouldn't like her.  

I’m not, he’s a partisan hack like the lot of’em.  But that BS game she’d played was weak and easily seen though by anyone willing pay attention.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dkp993 said:

I’m not, he’s a partisan hack like the lot of’em.  But that BS game she’d played was weak and easily seen though by anyone willing pay attention.  

Disagree, public saw Schiff throw a tantrum and he looked horrible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Don't Noonan said:

Disagree, public saw Schiff throw a tantrum and he looked horrible.

As I said, “anyone willing to pay attention”.  

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

Disagree, public saw Schiff throw a tantrum and he looked horrible.

I have a question for you @Widbil83 and any other Trump supporters who have posted in this thread: 

Virtually all of you have stated that there is no clear evidence that President Trump directed that money intended for Ukraine be withheld until and unless Ukraine agreed to publicly announce an investigation into Burisma and the Bidens. My question is: if there was clear evidence of this, would you then be in favor of the impeachment and removal of President Trump? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Don't Noonan said:

Did you watch the hearings?  She was very, very good.

She's very good at fundraising for her opponent. That much is for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, dkp993 said:

As I said, “anyone willing to pay attention”.  

Anyone paying attention saw how bad Schiff looked.

Share this post


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

She's very good at fundraising for her opponent. That much is for sure.

That is a good quality, Dems are scared of her.

Share this post


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

I have a question for you @Widbil83 and any other Trump supporters who have posted in this thread: 

Virtually all of you have stated that there is no clear evidence that President Trump directed that money intended for Ukraine be withheld until and unless Ukraine agreed to publicly announce an investigation into Burisma and the Bidens. My question is: if there was clear evidence of this, would you then be in favor of the impeachment and removal of President Trump? 

I would be very disappointed in Trump for sure.  Not sure that should be considered an impeachable offense no.  Leave it to the voters to decide in 2020.

Military aid was ultimately delivered with no investigation.  Obama withheld aid himself over Congress wishes.

Edited by Don't Noonan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

Disagree, public saw Schiff throw a tantrum and he looked horrible.

He laid out the rules of the hearing, when each side got to speak and who would speak in those times before the hearing started. It was abundantly clear that she was out of line

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


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

He laid out the rules of the hearing, when each side got to speak and who would speak in those times before the hearing started. It was abundantly clear that she was out of line

No it wasn't clear and even if Schiff was technically correct he looked horrible.  Public perception is big and he continues to embarrass himself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Don't Noonan said:

No it wasn't clear and even if Schiff was technically correct he looked horrible.  Public perception is big and he continues to embarrass himself.

It was very clear. I’m watching the hearing now and literally just heard him explain it. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Don't Noonan said:

No it wasn't clear and even if Schiff was technically correct he looked horrible.  Public perception is big and he continues to embarrass himself.

I don’t agree with any of this other than “public perception is big”. 

But even if you were correct, it wouldn’t matter because the only thing that most people are going to remember about yesterday’s hearing is Schiff reading Trump’s tweet attacking Yovanovich. And in that exchange, Schiff comes off as the good guy. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I don’t agree with any of this other than “public perception is big”. 

But even if you were correct, it wouldn’t matter because the only thing that most people are going to remember about yesterday’s hearing is Schiff reading Trump’s tweet attacking Yovanovich. And in that exchange, Schiff comes off as the good guy. 

Schiff's parody where he lied about the phone call made him really good too right?

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

Goldman was very impressive yet again. 

Goldman is excellent, much better than the Democratic congresspeople. With the Republicans the opposite is true. Because they are trying to refute the story rather than tell it, they are better suited with the 5 minutes questioning rather than the 45 minute. I didn’t realize this until after the hearings began. @Sinn Fein also made a great point yesterday that the 45 minute questioning is greatly to the Democrats’ advantage because a lot of people turn it off after the initial questioning by Goldman. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Don't Noonan said:

Schiff's parody where he lied about the phone call made him really good too right?

No it didn’t. If you recall I was quite critical about that. I wouldn’t use the word parody or lie; it was an interpretation of the call, and IMO a pretty correct one. But it was unnecessary and played into Republican’s hands. A bad error. 

On the whole however I think Schiff has handled these hearings pretty brilliantly. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

On the whole however I think Schiff has handled these hearings pretty brilliantly. 

yes

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Goldman is excellent, much better than the Democratic congresspeople. With the Republicans the opposite is true. Because they are trying to refute the story rather than tell it, they are better suited with the 5 minutes questioning rather than the 45 minute. I didn’t realize this until after the hearings began. @Sinn Fein also made a great point yesterday that the 45 minute questioning is greatly to the Democrats’ advantage because a lot of people turn it off after the initial questioning by Goldman. 

Do you have a link to show a lot if people turn it off after questioning by Goldman?  Seems like you are making assumptions here.

Share this post


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

No it didn’t. If you recall I was quite critical about that. I wouldn’t use the word parody or lie; it was an interpretation of the call, and IMO a pretty correct one. But it was unnecessary and played into Republican’s hands. A bad error. 

On the whole however I think Schiff has handled these hearings pretty brilliantly. 

Schiff should have never been put in this position and it was a very poor one.  His actions so far were predictable as he has a horrible history of lying and embarrassing the Democratic party with pure partisan shenanigans.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

Goldman is excellent, much better than the Democratic congresspeople. With the Republicans the opposite is true. Because they are trying to refute the story rather than tell it, they are better suited with the 5 minutes questioning rather than the 45 minute. I didn’t realize this until after the hearings began. @Sinn Fein also made a great point yesterday that the 45 minute questioning is greatly to the Democrats’ advantage because a lot of people turn it off after the initial questioning by Goldman. 

He may be right. I don’t think very many people watch the whole thing start to finish, but I’m not convinced they tune in at the start either.

The 5-minute examinations definitely play to the Republicans’ strengths more than the 45 minutes. They can score quick soundbites by asking questions they know the witness can’t answer. In real time it comes off as ridiculous because you get the full context, but on twitter they play well to the less informed. 

Castor IMHO is doing (I’m watching now) better than he did with Taylor/Kent, but he is still bad. The part that didn’t come across when I was listening to part of his examination on the radio is how uncomfortable he looks. It looks like he dreads being the person tasked with this job. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

Do you have a link to show a lot if people turn it off after questioning by Goldman?  Seems like you are making assumptions here.

He told you it was Sinn Fein’s opinion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We got him this time! It’s over. He’s done for. Standing ovation. A woman ambassador got her feelings hurt. And you thought lying over a ####### was a joke. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Dr Oadi said:

We got him this time! It’s over. He’s done for. Standing ovation. A woman ambassador got her feelings hurt. And you thought lying over a ####### was a joke. 

Don't troll.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

This is very much worth reading. It’s long, but not nearly as long as watching all the hearings or reading all the transcripts. It’s a good summary of everything we know so far in the form of a fairly dramatic narrative. It also makes clear that Sondland will be a very important witness.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/how-a-cia-analyst-alarmed-by-trumps-shadow-foreign-policy-triggered-an-impeachment-inquiry/2019/11/15/042684a8-03c3-11ea-8292-c46ee8cb3dce_story.html

Sondland will have so many memory problems they’ll evaluate him for neurological disorders. 

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.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.