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*** (4 Viewers)

One of the most prolific  arguments I’ve heard in the last week from various Republican sources is that Zelensky was never pressured to investigate the Bidens. As proof, they quote statements by Zelensky himself and also his foreign minister recently that there was no pressure placed on them. I have heard Jim Jordan, Kevin McCarthy, and Ron Johnson make this point and it was tweeted by President Trump as well. But it looks like the the facts contradict it: 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/11/18/politics/ukraine-zelensky-pressure-trump-investigations/index.html

I honestly don’t know where Trump defenders go from here, if they want to maintain an ounce of integrity. Every time they come up with a defense it is refuted within a few days. In the end, they’re going to be left with “we know he did it but we don’t care.” That will be enough for the Trump base, but not, I suspect, for the American people. 

 
timschochet said:
One of the most prolific  arguments I’ve heard in the last week from various Republican sources is that Zelensky was never pressured to investigate the Bidens. As proof, they quote statements by Zelensky himself and also his foreign minister recently that there was no pressure placed on them. I have heard Jim Jordan, Kevin McCarthy, and Ron Johnson make this point and it was tweeted by President Trump as well. But it looks like the the facts contradict it: 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/11/18/politics/ukraine-zelensky-pressure-trump-investigations/index.html

I honestly don’t know where Trump defenders go from here, if they want to maintain an ounce of integrity. Every time they come up with a defense it is refuted within a few days. In the end, they’re going to be left with “we know he did it but we don’t care.” That will be enough for the Trump base, but not, I suspect, for the American people. 
Click to expand...
Wasn’t this Mulvaney’s defense?

 
Dickies said:
Wasn’t this Mulvaney’s defense?
Click to expand...
Yes, but then he backtracked after Trump got pissed off. Trump will not accept this as a defense because he can’t admit any wrongdoing or mistakes, ever. In the 3 years that Donald Trump has been President, he has done nothing that could be criticized at any time. All of his decisions have been brilliant. 

 
timschochet said:
One of the most prolific  arguments I’ve heard in the last week from various Republican sources is that Zelensky was never pressured to investigate the Bidens. As proof, they quote statements by Zelensky himself and also his foreign minister recently that there was no pressure placed on them. I have heard Jim Jordan, Kevin McCarthy, and Ron Johnson make this point and it was tweeted by President Trump as well. But it looks like the the facts contradict it: 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/11/18/politics/ukraine-zelensky-pressure-trump-investigations/index.html

I honestly don’t know where Trump defenders go from here, if they want to maintain an ounce of integrity. Every time they come up with a defense it is refuted within a few days. In the end, they’re going to be left with “we know he did it but we don’t care.” That will be enough for the Trump base, but not, I suspect, for the American people. 
Click to expand...
Did Taylor mention that Hill brought these concerns to him during his testimony?

Is Hochstein on the list being called to testify? Seems like someone we should hear from.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet said:
One of the most prolific  arguments I’ve heard in the last week from various Republican sources is that Zelensky was never pressured to investigate the Bidens. As proof, they quote statements by Zelensky himself and also his foreign minister recently that there was no pressure placed on them. I have heard Jim Jordan, Kevin McCarthy, and Ron Johnson make this point and it was tweeted by President Trump as well. But it looks like the the facts contradict it: 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/11/18/politics/ukraine-zelensky-pressure-trump-investigations/index.html

I honestly don’t know where Trump defenders go from here, if they want to maintain an ounce of integrity. Every time they come up with a defense it is refuted within a few days. In the end, they’re going to be left with “we know he did it but we don’t care.” That will be enough for the Trump base, but not, I suspect, for the American people. 
Click to expand...
This is where they are going to have to go much to the dismay of the Donald. He did it but it is not impeachable. Trump is going with the old they are either Never Trumpers or part of the Deep State and all lying. At the end of this week sane people will shake their heads and say “good Lord”. Polls will jump a whomping 1-2% more saying he should be impeached and removed from office.

 
timschochet said:
I honestly don’t know where Trump defenders go from here, if they want to maintain an ounce of integrity. Every time they come up with a defense it is refuted within a few days. In the end, they’re going to be left with “we know he did it but we don’t care.” That will be enough for the Trump base, but not, I suspect, for the American people. 
Click to expand...
I'll not comment on Trump's supporters other than they'll go where ever the talking points take them, if history is any indication

 
What is the House Judiciary Committee's role?

The committee is tasked with evaluating the findings from the Intelligence Committee. It is likely to hold hearings of its own as it considers drafting articles of impeachment. The committee released its own procedures that would allow the president and his counsel to attend any hearings, ask questions of witnesses and respond to questions. The panel could then move to hold a hearing to consider articles of impeachment. If it approves any, they would then go to the full House of Representatives for a vote.

I didnt realize that there might be additional hearings.

 
jamny said:
What is the House Judiciary Committee's role?

The committee is tasked with evaluating the findings from the Intelligence Committee. It is likely to hold hearings of its own as it considers drafting articles of impeachment. The committee released its own procedures that would allow the president and his counsel to attend any hearings, ask questions of witnesses and respond to questions. The panel could then move to hold a hearing to consider articles of impeachment. If it approves any, they would then go to the full House of Representatives for a vote.

I didnt realize that there might be additional hearings.
Click to expand...
Maybe even hearings where the people whose actions are under investigation will appear and testify under oath!

Nah.

 
Tuesday, first panel at 9 a.m. ET

Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, the top Ukraine specialist on the National Security Council. Vindman listened to the July 25 telephone conversation in the White House Situation Room and reported his concerns about the president's mention of political investigations to the top NSC attorney, John Eisenberg. He said the attorney decided to move the record of the call onto a highly classified system that few could access.

Jennifer Williams, a foreign service aide detailed to Vice President Pence's office who listened in on the July 25 call between Trump and Zelenskiy.

Tuesday, second panel at 2:30 p.m. ET

Kurt Volker, the former special envoy to Ukraine, who along with Sondland and Energy Secretary Rick Perry was part of the "three amigos" tasked by the president to handle Ukraine policy. He was on the list of witnesses requested to appear by Republican members of the Intelligence Committee.

Tim Morrison, the former National Security Council aide who heard the July 25 call but in closed-door testimony told the committees conducting the impeachment inquiry that he didn't view the president's actions as illegal or inappropriate. Republicans say his testimony supports the president's position that there was nothing improper about the July 25 call, and they included him on a list of witnesses they asked the Intelligence Committee chairman, Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., to call.

 
Rick Perry refused to testify in a closed door session but was willing to consider it in an open session. Was he called to testify here?

 
timschochet said:
No and I don’t see why not. I also don’t know why they haven’t subpoenaed Bolton. 
Click to expand...
Why would they subpoena Bolton?

He won't honor the subpoena.  So it wastes time even trying.  Dems really don't know what he would say - so they can't be sure a lengthy court battle would even be worth it.

So, the Dems have decided that the best course of action is the make the allegation that testimony from Bolton, Mulvaney, Pompeo et al would be extremely damaging to the President, otherwise they would appear voluntarily.  Its also the Dems defense to the GOP saying - "No first-hand witnesses!" - "There are no first-hand witnesses because the President has blocked each of them from testifying - you tell me why that is!"

 
  • Smile
Reactions: Zow
Sinn Fein said:
I think you need to think more creatively.

"Your Honor, answering this question may tend to incriminate me, so I choose to plead the 5th Amendment"
Click to expand...
I’m sure it’s been addressed by Henry or Maurile but wouldn’t the logical conclusion of this idea be that no one would ever have to testify because they could lie?

 
Sinn Fein said:
Why would they subpoena Bolton?

He won't honor the subpoena.  So it wastes time even trying.  Dems really don't know what he would say - so they can't be sure a lengthy court battle would even be worth it.

So, the Dems have decided that the best course of action is the make the allegation that testimony from Bolton, Mulvaney, Pompeo et al would be extremely damaging to the President, otherwise they would appear voluntarily.  Its also the Dems defense to the GOP saying - "No first-hand witnesses!" - "There are no first-hand witnesses because the President has blocked each of them from testifying - you tell me why that is!"
Click to expand...
They invited Bolton to appear but didn’t formerly subpoena him. What I didn’t understand is why not take the next step. You’re probably right that he still wouldn’t show up but why not take the shot; I can’t see the harm. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Starting today at 9: 00am EST. Earlier and earlier. I get that they have a lot to go through but the west coast isn’t going to get much of this. 

 
timschochet said:
They invited Bolton to appear but didn’t formerly subpoena him. What I didn’t understand is why not take the next step. You’re probably right that he still wouldn’t show up but why not take the shot; I can’t see the harm. 
Click to expand...
This might help explain.

- IIRC they did issue a subpoena but then withdrew it.

- I think in this specific instance they’re worried about Judge Leon, who could do just about any damned thing, they don’t want to fall into the WH strategy of killing time, and they have the goods anyway.

 
timschochet said:
Starting today at 9: 00am EST. Earlier and earlier. I get that they have a lot to go through but the west coast isn’t going to get much of this. 
Click to expand...
Most people - east coast and west coast -  get the highlights only.  Very few people will even have it on in the background.

 
timschochet said:
Senator Ron Johnson attempting to attack Vindman’s integrity: 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.com/amp/news/2019/11/18/johnson-credibility-vindman-impeachment-inquiry-071400

Pretty despicable. Responding to this attack, Joe Scarborough says this morning, “the Republicans have gone off the cliff.” 
Click to expand...
Aug. 30. Sondland told Johnson the aid would go to Ukraine after the country demonstrated its intention to fight corruption and possibly investigate whether Ukrainians interfered in the 2016 election, Johnson wrote. 

"I have stated that I winced when that arrangement was described to me," Johnson wrote. "I felt U.S. support for Ukraine was essential, particularly with Zelenksy's new and inexperienced administration facing an aggressive Vladimir Putin (or Russia). ... It was the time to show maximum strength and resolve."

Aug. 31. Johnson called Bolton, who told him to talk to Trump and Pence. Johnson was unable to get through to Pence but reached Trump the same day. ...
Click to expand...
- MJS

- I don't think it gets mentioned enough that Sen. Ron Johnson (R) says himself that he was told directly by Sondland what the witnesses are saying he said.

- And neither Bolton nor Johnson would talk to him about it but told him to talk to Trump.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet said:
I don't see things this way. IMO, Donald Trump is not part of a linear path for the Republican Party- he is a populist. Joe McCarthy was a populist. Nixon was not.

Populists emerge in our political system rarely, but when they do it's like an volcano that keeps spewing lava until it's done. Once they're done the movement they represented becomes dormant and disappears, maybe for decades, until the next populist comes along. Populists generate great, intense loyalty among their followers that can't be compared to a politician's normal support. It has nothing to do with the political party, it has to do with the person.

So what I'm saying is that if Donald Trump had been President in 1973, and had committed Watergate, he would not have been convicted. And if Richard Nixon were President today, and had committed the Ukraine scandal, he would have been forced to resign. It's not the players in the House and Senate who have changed; nor is it the voters. It's the personalities and charisma and style of the two men in question.
Click to expand...
That's an interesting contradictory theory. I guess once Trump is gone for good we'll find out definitively. I'll stick to my guns, however; this movement towards crazy has been building for decades and the desperation and concurrent loss of ethics will only accelerate as the GOP slides deeper into minority party status. The end of conservative and traditional America is within sight if they don't take drastic action now (in their view).

 
Nunes immediately attacks the media. It’s all their fault. To prove it he quotes old headlines regarding the Mueller investigation. The media are “puppets of the Democratic Party.” 

 
timschochet said:
Starting today at 9: 00am EST. Earlier and earlier. I get that they have a lot to go through but the west coast isn’t going to get much of this. 
Click to expand...
I live on the west coast and I was looking at it the opposite way.  The early start is better for us.  It gives me a chance to see some of it before going to work and listen on the way to work.

 
timschochet said:
Nunes immediately attacks the media. It’s all their fault. To prove it he quotes old headlines regarding the Mueller investigation. The media are “puppets of the Democratic Party.” 
Click to expand...
This is amazing. He hasn't once defended Trump or countered any of the testimony.

 
timschochet said:
Nunes immediately attacks the media. It’s all their fault. To prove it he quotes old headlines regarding the Mueller investigation. The media are “puppets of the Democratic Party.” 
Click to expand...
The differences are pretty stark between Schiff’s and Nunes’ opening statements. 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

timschochet
New York Magazine: Donald Trump is running for President again.
9 10 11
Replies
522
Views
12K
BladeRunner
BladeRunner
dozer
****Official DOJ Investigation into Trump, Fake Electors, Fraud, Etc.****
5 6 7
Replies
348
Views
11K
Sabertooth
Sabertooth
knowledge dropper
***OFFICIAL Trump vs. DeSantis Thread***
2 3 4
Replies
197
Views
5K
timschochet
timschochet

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 5 (members: 0, guests: 5)
Top