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)

Mr. Ham said:
It’s not about shouting down free speech, it’s about calling out lies being propagated as facts. It’s about identifying bad faith attempts to gaslight and make corruption a team sport. 
Click to expand...
I have no problem with anyone challenging lies. Maybe I jumped to conclusions on people’s ideology, but referring to seeing people demonstrating and yelling to prevent a speech by someone like at a college, or preventing people from attending speeches, companies preventing ads by organizations preventing ads being displayed, colleges not allowing open free speech by all sides, etc...I am assuming the above mentioned people lean liberal. Generally not government agencies. In the 60’s they were supporting free speech.

eta: totally support the right to demonstrate-any side.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Widbil83 said:
President Trump’s approval rating today is higher than Obama’s at this point in this presidency in the RCP average of polls for the first time. Wonder why?

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_vs_president_obama_job_approval.html
Click to expand...
Why would you attempt to tell such an obvious lie? Your own link shows that Trump (temporarily) went ahead of Obama on several previous dates. :lol:

But that would tend to go against the narrative that impeachment is making Trump more popular........wouldn't it?

 
[scooter] said:
Why would you attempt to tell such an obvious lie? Your own link shows that Trump (temporarily) went ahead of Obama on several previous dates. :lol:

But that would tend to go against the narrative that impeachment is making Trump more popular........wouldn't it?
Click to expand...
The assumption on the internet is that people will not click on links and just assume the person posting is accurately describing what's in the link.  It's actually a pretty valid assumption.  There was a huge study done that showed it's correct about 87% of the time done by this institute in a recent news story..

 
I do think there's some evidence Trump has benefited from Impeachment.  He was at -14 net approval a month ago and he's at -9 now.

But we're still on the edges of the long-run approval/disapproval bands we've been in forever.  i.e. it's not clear that any of this has really moved the needle yet either way.

 
Hawley just admitted that Russia interfered in the election and will continue to do so but congreff has done nothing about it. 

Russia has been doing it (meddling in our elections) for years. Russia has been doing it, China has been doing it, and we know what steps to take, .........we need to take them more effectively.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Henry Ford said:
I can give a likely explanation for this.  It's about closing arguments from the Clinton impeachment.

Basically, the argument came down to "does this look like the kind of thing that 1. affects the country and 2. the President would do again?  If not, why impeach him?"

After the Mueller report, it appeared unlikely that a President who had just gone through that would ever do something like what he did in 2016.  However, funny story, he did.  All over again.  And worse, this time.  
Click to expand...
This is your reasoning for not going through with impeachment. I laughed out loud at my desk.

 
Weebs210 said:
This is your reasoning for not going through with impeachment. I laughed out loud at my desk.
Click to expand...
Oh, I definitely would have gone through with impeachment.  It's a weak argument that comes down to "some Senate Democrats wouldn't have even voted for impeachment if they'd used the same defense Bill Clinton did."  Which is definitely ridiculous.

 
Don't Noonan said:
No, they don't have current bipartisan or public support for Ukraine.  Nothing burger.  Now, if during the Senate trial we have Bolton or Rudy testify and it is damaging to Trump you may be correct.  As of now it is a nothing burger.
Click to expand...
Will you join us in demanding that Bolton, Mulvaney, Pompeo, and Giuliani testify? 

 
timschochet said:
Will you join us in demanding that Bolton, Mulvaney, Pompeo, and Giuliani testify? 
Click to expand...
That is a decision that Trump needs to make.  I certainly would not mind hearing from them.  I would also like to hear from the whistleblower (protecting his identity of course), Schiff, Chulupa and the Bidens. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Henry Ford said:
Plus, now you know you're part of my made-up top 13% of internet readers.
Click to expand...
I smelled a rat.  I clicked on the link because I thought you would do something clever like transpose the polling numbers from the article.  But you had to behave like a philistine.  SHAME.  SHAME. 

 
Don't Noonan said:
That is a decision that Trump needs to make.  I certainly would not mind hearing from them.  I would also like to hear from the whistleblower (protecting his identity of course), Schiff, Chulupa and the Bidens. 
Click to expand...
I'd also like to hear from Devin Nunes, Eric and Donald, Jr., Ivanka, Jim Jordan, Mark Burnett, and Geraldo Rivera.

 
Sweet J said:
I smelled a rat.  I clicked on the link because I thought you would do something clever like transpose the polling numbers from the article.  But you had to behave like a philistine.  SHAME.  SHAME. 
Click to expand...
I'm sorry that I let you down.

And made you cry.

That I told a lie and hurt you.

 
Don't Noonan said:
Why?
Click to expand...
Because Nunes and Jim Jordan have been heavily aiding in obstructing justice, Nunes also went to Ukraine to get dirt on Joe Biden in what appears to be a coordinated effort, Don, Jr. published the name of the alleged whistleblower, Eric has spent time in Ukraine while President of his father's company, Ivanka was with the organization at that time and is now in the White House, which seems pretty shady to me, Mark Burnett employed all three during that time period, and Geraldo Rivera has been helping get the false narratives and obstructionist statements into the media.

I'd be fine with Hannity instead of Geraldo.

 
Henry Ford said:
Because Nunes and Jim Jordan have been heavily aiding in obstructing justice, Nunes also went to Ukraine to get dirt on Joe Biden in what appears to be a coordinated effort, Don, Jr. published the name of the alleged whistleblower, Eric has spent time in Ukraine while President of his father's company, Ivanka was with the organization at that time and is now in the White House, which seems pretty shady to me, Mark Burnett employed all three during that time period, and Geraldo Rivera has been helping get the false narratives and obstructionist statements into the media.

I'd be fine with Hannity instead of Geraldo.
Click to expand...
So no reasons just trolling.  Well done!

 
Henry Ford said:
Oh, I definitely would have gone through with impeachment.  It's a weak argument that comes down to "some Senate Democrats wouldn't have even voted for impeachment if they'd used the same defense Bill Clinton did."  Which is definitely ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Just seems odd doesn't it. Over the course of the investigation every tiny piece of news that emerged you guys ran with it and pumped it up. Just waiting for the end report to wrap up so Trump could be impeached and potentially jailed. The report comes out and all of you go on and on about 10 potential obstruction instances. But then your party doesn't try to impeach because the Dems believe the man they hate and believe is a criminal "won't do it again"

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Weebs210 said:
Just seems odd doesn't it. Over the course of the investigation every tiny piece of news that emerged you guys ran with it and pumped it up. Just waiting for the end report to wrap up so Trump could be impeached and potentially jailed. The report comes out and all of you go on and on about 10 potential obstruction instances. But then you don't try to impeach because the Dems believe the man they hate and believe is a criminal "won't do it again"
Click to expand...
Who's "you" in this?  I think probably 75-80% of Democrats would vote to impeach.  And very few Democrat senators would defect.  But any that do just make it silly to bring the articles.  You don't bring them unless you can pass them.

Yes, I agree that some Democrats are as gutless as the Republicans.  I'm also not a registered Democrat for many reasons.  That is definitely one.

 
Bruce Dickinson said:
Im open to the possibility that circa December 2011 unemployment was 7% or so (even with a bunch of seasonal hiring) and that likely had a negative effect on Obama’s approval rating at the time.
Click to expand...
Most definitely. Given how dug in people are, it would be absolutely shocking to see a President top 65% approval rating short of an all-uniting occurrence such  attack by a foreign nation on US soil or an alien invasion. And even then the President might have to pilot a jet and fire the kill shot themselves to top 65% approval.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It might be instructive - for at least some - if we had a concrete definition of what trolling actually is.  Because I don't think some posters know what the word means.  And that's okay.  I'm dumber than a box of hair and can admit being ill-informed.  So, perhaps that might be an exercise worth pursuing.  

 
Maude said:
This simply isn’t true. 
Click to expand...
I would like to hear from those people.  I won't, and I shouldn't, but I would like to.  However, the impeachment of the President doesn't need that testimony, despite the fact that I would like to hear from them.  Similarly, the fact that some people want to hear from the Bidens doesn't mean they should be testifying.

 
General Malaise said:
It might be instructive - for at least some - if we had a concrete definition of what trolling actually is.  Because I don't think some posters know what the word means.  And that's okay.  I'm dumber than a box of hair and can admit being ill-informed.  So, perhaps that might be an exercise worth pursuing.  
Click to expand...
Not here.

 
Henry Ford said:
I would like to hear from those people.  I won't, and I shouldn't, but I would like to.  However, the impeachment of the President doesn't need that testimony, despite the fact that I would like to hear from them.  Similarly, the fact that some people want to hear from the Bidens doesn't mean they should be testifying.
Click to expand...
Just yankin yer chain. It was a line from Noonan just a few posts up. 

Was briefly entertaining the thought of responding to posts by quoting Noonan, but that would waste entirely too much energy. 

 
Henry Ford said:
Because Nunes and Jim Jordan have been heavily aiding in obstructing justice, Nunes also went to Ukraine to get dirt on Joe Biden in what appears to be a coordinated effort, Don, Jr. published the name of the alleged whistleblower, Eric has spent time in Ukraine while President of his father's company, Ivanka was with the organization at that time and is now in the White House, which seems pretty shady to me, Mark Burnett employed all three during that time period, and Geraldo Rivera has been helping get the false narratives and obstructionist statements into the media.

I'd be fine with Hannity instead of Geraldo.
Click to expand...


Don't Noonan said:
So no reasons just trolling.  Well done!
Click to expand...


Henry Ford said:
I actually did just list reasons for every single person on that list.  All of them are more relevant to the current impeachment than Schiff or the Bidens.
Click to expand...
MT, I still don't know wtf you want us to do with exchanges like this. I guess I don't have very much empathy.

 
Amused to Death said:
Well, except for the "significant evidence of obstruction".
Click to expand...
Also too except for the part about how he knew about Russian interference, welcomed it, and then lied about it and obstructed to keep people from fiding out about it. 

If that is a nothingburger to you look into the mirror. That's where the problem is. 

 
Henry Ford said:
Who's "you" in this?  I think probably 75-80% of Democrats would vote to impeach.  And very few Democrat senators would defect.  But any that do just make it silly to bring the articles.  You don't bring them unless you can pass them.

Yes, I agree that some Democrats are as gutless as the Republicans.  I'm also not a registered Democrat for many reasons.  That is definitely one.
Click to expand...
I knew you would concentrate on the highlighted part but wasn't fast enough to edit it. 

 
General Malaise said:
It might be instructive - for at least some - if we had a concrete definition of what trolling actually is.  Because I don't think some posters know what the word means.  And that's okay.  I'm dumber than a box of hair and can admit being ill-informed.  So, perhaps that might be an exercise worth pursuing.  
Click to expand...
Joe and Maurile have both defined trolling before:

Joe: "someone posting something with the intent of getting a reaction out of another."

Maurile: "write something you didn’t actually believe just to get a rise out of others."

Both definitions require proof of intent, which is difficult to ascertain.

 
[scooter] said:
Joe and Maurile have both defined trolling before:

Joe: "someone posting something with the intent of getting a reaction out of another."

Maurile: "write something you didn’t actually believe just to get a rise out of others."

Both definitions require proof of intent, which is difficult to ascertain.
Click to expand...
Thanks.  In the future instead of accusing someone of trolling I will just ignore them as @Maurile Tremblay has asked.  

 
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