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*** (11 Viewers)

Just to be clear, are you and @Don't Noonan posting this in the whistleblower thread because you think trump withheld hundreds of millions of dollars of aid from Ukraine because he wanted zelensky to look into things like Hunter Biden's sexual relationships and failure to pay child support?  Or are you just going off topic?
Looking into sketchy folks like Hunter Biden getting paid $70k a month for a job he is unqualified for because his Dad is VP.
It is un-American to use the power of the Federal government to investigate private citizens without probable cause.

 
Professor Turley also said 

“It is not wrong because President Trump is right — his call was anything but ‘perfect.’ It’s not wrong because the House has no legitimate reason to investigate Ukrainian controversy,” he said. “It’s not wrong because we are in an election year — there is no good time for an impeachment. No, it’s wrong because this is not how you impeach an American president.”

The call was anything but perfect?  Turley also feels like there is a legitimate reason to investigate. The Republican witness was far from using Trump talking points
I wish one of the Democrats would have asked “Do you think that if the committee had had access to the documents subpoenaed and Bolton, Giuliani, Pompeo and  Mulvany would have testified they might of found enough evidence to impeach.”

 
Pretend its over supeanas
Like the President is obstructing justice related to a hearing of a Congressional committee?

Sounds like the President is acting like a king.  I guess if I were Speaker of the House I’d tell him if he didn’t stop I’d introduce articles of impeachment for obstruction.  
 

And if he still didn’t stop I’d file articles of impeachment for obstruction.  

 
https://time.com/5746417/ukraine-andriy-yermak-impeachment-interview/

Exclusive: Top Ukraine Official Andriy Yermak Casts Doubt on Key Impeachment Testimony
>>Andrey Yermak: Hi Kurt. Please let me know when you can talk. I think it’s possible to make this declaration and mention all these things. Which we discussed yesterday. But it will be logic to do after we receive a confirmation of date. We inform about date of visit and about our expectations and our guarantees for future visit. Let discuss it<<
 

- Unfortunately for Yermak he has texts that say otherwise. And there was the meeting in Madrid.

I don’t blame the Ukrainians. They’re in a lousy situation.

 
Im gonna report this to a moderator to see if i can get an idea of just what the rules on spelling and grammar  guys for the future.   If its fine ill go back to correcting spelling

   Besides that im cool with being mocked.  Just want some guidance. 
I apologize.  I assumed you were okay with a corny joke.  I won't bother you again.

 
It is un-American to use the power of the Federal government to investigate private citizens without probable cause.
It is un-American to illegally spy on an opposing party's campaign.
I would agree, but thankfully the Horowitz Report did not find anything illegal about the investigation into the Trump campaign.

I would also state that it's un-American to justify one illegal act because you think that another illegal act took place. (For reference, please see the famous Supreme Court case of Two Wrongs v One Right.)

 
He isnt the first president to push back.    Is there no remedy?  No norm to fall back on.   Your argument  is impeachment the proper and only response?
The courts have ruled on this issue as a result of Congress requesting that they do so in the past. In Nixon and in Meiers. When we’re dealing with allegations that the President is trying to get a foreign power to interfere in an upcoming election, it is ridiculous to suggest that Congress should ask them to rule on it again 2 years or so from now. 
 

The short answer is, there is no correlary in political history to the allegations currently on the table.  Allegations which have no counter because the President is obstructing any information from his office and administration.  
 

He is also welcome to file a lawsuit to declare himself correct in not having to turn over anything at all.  He has not done so to my knowledge. Likely because he is obviously wrong and the Courts have previously ruled on this issue. And because delay is the point of what he’s doing. 
 

He simply refused. And Congress is simply going to impeach him. 

 
>>Andrey Yermak: Hi Kurt. Please let me know when you can talk. I think it’s possible to make this declaration and mention all these things. Which we discussed yesterday. But it will be logic to do after we receive a confirmation of date. We inform about date of visit and about our expectations and our guarantees for future visit. Let discuss it<<
 

- Unfortunately for Yermak he has texts that say otherwise. And there was the meeting in Madrid.

I don’t blame the Ukrainians. They’re in a lousy situation.
I mean, that's it right there, right? What am I missing?

 
@quick-hands

Let’s say your wife finds lipstick on your collar and a woman’s underwear in your pocket.  She demands to see your phone and wants to question you as to where you have been. 
 

If you refuse those do you think she will try to force you or just leave you?

 
I would agree, but thankfully the Horowitz Report did not find anything illegal about the investigation into the Trump campaign.

I would also state that it's un-American to justify one illegal act because you think that another illegal act took place. (For reference, please see the famous Supreme Court case of Two Wrongs v One Right.)
President has full authority on foreign issues.

 
I would agree, but thankfully the Horowitz Report did not find anything illegal about the investigation into the Trump campaign.

I would also state that it's un-American to justify one illegal act because you think that another illegal act took place. (For reference, please see the famous Supreme Court case of Two Wrongs v One Right.)
Well if the attorney  general  says it was spying im sure you will change your position.
If it was spying, then it was legal spying. That's what the Horowitz Report has essentially concluded.

You know how we know that it was legal? Because the AG hasn't charged anyone with a crime for spying.

This is similar to the wishcasting over Hillary's emails. (Remember "Lock her up"? Seems so long ago doesn't it.) The conspiracy is fueled by promises of a great reveal soon (very soon!). And when the reveal doesn't happen, the goalposts are moved and new promises are made.

 
I would agree, but thankfully the Horowitz Report did not find anything illegal about the investigation into the Trump campaign.

I would also state that it's un-American to justify one illegal act because you think that another illegal act took place. (For reference, please see the famous Supreme Court case of Two Wrongs v One Right.)
President has full authority on foreign issues.
The President does not have full authority to violate the Constitution to pursue his foreign issues.

 
Co-equal in part means some autonomy. You don’t get to force someone into the acts you want them to, but you do get to choose your own behavior. 
 

In exigent circumstances, knowing we know the law on subpoenas and such, there is no need for a court filing.  It’s time to impeach him for obstruction. And it’s the easiest vote I’d ever make if I were in the Senate unless he provides some evidence on his behalf. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Looking into sketchy folks like Hunter Biden getting paid $70k a month for a job he is unqualified for because his Dad is VP.
If there were any legitimacy behind this angle then there were vehicles at his disposal to do this correctly. He chose not to. Because he does not really care about Hunter Biden. And he knows there is nothing there. If there was something there then his DoJ would find it and he wouldn't have to manufacture anything. But since there isn't...how do I smear my opponent and keep my hands off it? I got it! I have Rudy run point while we with hold congressionally approved aid until they announce an investigation into my opponent - even though I know they are not going to actually do it. But that's okay. Because I don't really care if they do or not. I just want the appearance of one. 

But all of that requires a willingness to want the truth. Republicans quite simply don't. 

 
If there were any legitimacy behind this angle then there were vehicles at his disposal to do this correctly. He chose not to. Because he does not really care about Hunter Biden. And he knows there is nothing there. If there was something there then his DoJ would find it and he wouldn't have to manufacture anything. But since there isn't...how do I smear my opponent and keep my hands off it? I got it! I have Rudy run point while we with hold congressionally approved aid until they announce an investigation into my opponent - even though I know they are not going to actually do it. But that's okay. Because I don't really care if they do or not. I just want the appearance of one. 

But all of that requires a willingness to want the truth. Republicans quite simply don't. 
Democrats know quite well how to smear an opponent, just look at the illegal spying on Trump's campaign.  Democrats have no shame and put party over country.

 
Co-equal in part means some autonomy. You don’t get to force someone into the acts you want them to, but you do get to choose your own behavior. 
 

In exigent circumstances, knowing we know the law on subpoenas and such, there is no need for a court filing.  It’s time to impeach him for obstruction. And it’s the easiest vote I’d ever make if I were in the Senate unless he provides some evidence on his behalf. 
Where does privilege  fit into this?

 
I see we have moved on to the point of the story where "sure Trump did all kinds of illegal things but he was busted illegally!". 
Yes...which is a claim contrary to what Horowitz just reported.  In fact, has there been any legal reporting that the investigation was illegal?  Not some pundits opinion, but a legal ruling.

 
So.  We can't unwind the clock.  But we got our wake up call.  Voter registration trends up.  Several signs are non political centrists are starting to pay attention; e.g. the number of R governors [some good, but guilt by association] getting voted out.  I believe people right from wrong.   At the risk of beating a dead horse, I wouldn't want this guy for a neighbor, a colleague at work, and I certainly wouldn't work for him.  Leader of the free world?  We can do better.  Much better. 
I reeeeally hope you are right.

 
It is un-American to illegally spy on an opposing party's campaign.
It’s Un-American 

    - for an Attorney General to act like the President’s personal lawyer

   - to attack and not support our nation’s institutions (FBI, the press)

   - to attack Veterans and American war heros because you disagree with them ....McCain, Mueller, Vindman etc

  - for a President to lie to the American people daily

- to call justified surveillance spying

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Precedent set by what Trump did has the power to forever change the Republic. If it isn’t punished, our chances of survival diminish greatly. 
That's what I'm saying. The punishment should fit the crime. Abuse of power and Obstruction of Congress? I think the Republic will survive if Trump gets impeached. Punishment enough. I don't think it deserves removal from office, imo.

 
That's what I'm saying. The punishment should fit the crime. Abuse of power and Obstruction of Congress? I think the Republic will survive if Trump gets impeached. Punishment enough. I don't think it deserves removal from office, imo.
That depends on how he responds to impeachment. 

 
If Trump responds by providing all relevant documents and sending witnesses to be deposed behind closed doors for their testimony to go in front of the Senate and everyone appears truthful and he shows contrition, you’re absolutely right. 
 

Now, do you think that’s what he’ll do?

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top