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*** (10 Viewers)

Who knows what they’re talking about behind the scenes but I don’t believe they’ll ever let Bolton testify in public. Not for a hundred Hunter Bidens. 

And if they did agree the Dems better make sure that includes a public agreement beforehand that Trump won’t claim executive privilege. Otherwise it’s just another sham. 
Dems have been claiming for a while now that Bolton is the smoking gun and Hunter did nothing wrong and has nothing to hide.  I don't see why they aren't jumping on this offer, 

 
Dems have been claiming for a while now that Bolton is the smoking gun and Hunter did nothing wrong and has nothing to hide.  I don't see why they aren't jumping on this offer, 
Maybe there is more to Hunter’s story? I am surprised we don’t have a leak on the general information Bolton has to say.

 
Dems have been claiming for a while now that Bolton is the smoking gun and Hunter did nothing wrong and has nothing to hide.  I don't see why they aren't jumping on this offer, 
If such an offer really existed, then it's much better for Democrats to simply allow it to hang out in the open. It makes the Republicans and Trump look bad for making such an offer in the first place.

 
Who knows what they’re talking about behind the scenes but I don’t believe they’ll ever let Bolton testify in public. Not for a hundred Hunter Bidens. 

And if they did agree the Dems better make sure that includes a public agreement beforehand that Trump won’t claim executive privilege. Otherwise it’s just another sham. 
I only trust Bolton about 40% He could absolutely blow up in the Dems' faces, 

Never put someone on the witness stand if you don't already know what they are going to say.  If they cannot depose him prior, they should leave it be. 

As a bonus, if the Dems refuse call him as a witness, the Repubs may call him themselves,  just to piss off the Dems.

 
I only trust Bolton about 40% He could absolutely blow up in the Dems' faces, 

Never put someone on the witness stand if you don't already know what they are going to say.  If they cannot depose him prior, they should leave it be. 

As a bonus, if the Dems refuse call him as a witness, the Repubs may call him themselves,  just to piss off the Dems.
that would mean they would allow witnesses.

 
Joe Lockhart

Overheard convo between two Republican Senators who only watch Fox News. "is this stuff real? I haven't heard any of this before. I thought it was all about a server. If half the stuff Schiff is saying is true, we're up ####'s creek. Hope the White House has exculpatory evidence
I'll take things that never happened for 100.

 
Dems have been claiming for a while now that Bolton is the smoking gun and Hunter did nothing wrong and has nothing to hide.  I don't see why they aren't jumping on this offer, 
Did you happen to see the 12 hour interrogation they delivered on Hillary? The one where she was exonerated this week? Why send anyone as a sacrificial lamb to that bs, when NO ONE can show how he was anything but a contrived distraction.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dems have been claiming for a while now that Bolton is the smoking gun and Hunter did nothing wrong and has nothing to hide.  I don't see why they aren't jumping on this offer, 
I’m ok with it too but I think they view Hunter Biden as a circus unbecoming of the impeachment trial. I have a feeling we will see both not because of a deal but because they get enough votes for Bolton.

 
Depends on what any of the rules end up on witnesses. Will they both agree to know who the witnesses are prior to calling them, or just you can pick a witness then we can pick a witness.
Imagine a scenario where McConnell can lie about trying to get witnesses (but not ) and then adding whatever he can think of to make the Dems look as vile as possible.

That's your answer.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dems have been claiming for a while now that Bolton is the smoking gun and Hunter did nothing wrong and has nothing to hide.  I don't see why they aren't jumping on this offer, 
Which Dems have been claiming this?  Provide quotes if you can.   
I'm asking because the resistance I've heard about Hunter Biden as a witness in this trial from the House managers is because Hunter Biden is irrelevant to the case.  That's not a commentary on Hunter Biden's character.  It's accurately saying he's not a fact witness in this case.   That's a much different claim than "did nothing wrong and has nothing to hide".  
Which Dems have been claiming Bolton is the smoking gun?  The House managers have mentioned Bolton specifically as a witness with relevant first-hand information about the case, but as one of several potential witness that have not testified or cooperated with the investigation.

 
  • Smile
Reactions: Ned
I’m ok with it too but I think they view Hunter Biden as a circus unbecoming of the impeachment trial. I have a feeling we will see both not because of a deal but because they get enough votes for Bolton.
This is why the Dems tried to pass Amendment 9 last night, which would allow Justice Roberts to decide the validity of any witnesses. Why the hell would the Repub caucus vote to disallow the Bush-appointed SCJ from deciding which proposed witnesses appear?  I think its pretty clear to all parties that SCJ Roberts would call BS on the Hunter invitation. You might extrapolate the real validity of his testimony is dubious at best.

 
Dems have been claiming for a while now that Bolton is the smoking gun and Hunter did nothing wrong and has nothing to hide.  I don't see why they aren't jumping on this offer, 
Bolton called Trump's Ukraine blunder a "drug deal" and resigned soon after. Not sure why anyone would need the Dems to interpret those actions

 
Dems have been claiming for a while now that Bolton is the smoking gun and Hunter did nothing wrong and has nothing to hide.  I don't see why they aren't jumping on this offer, 
Because Hunter Biden is completely irrelevant to the impeachment, but would still derail the democrats efforts to present facts?

 
This is why the Dems tried to pass Amendment 9 last night, which would allow Justice Roberts to decide the validity of any witnesses. Why the hell would the Repub caucus vote to disallow the Bush-appointed SCJ from deciding which proposed witnesses appear?  I think its pretty clear to all parties that SCJ Roberts would call BS on the Hunter invitation. You might extrapolate the real validity of his testimony is dubious at best.
It's too bad Van Hollen's amendment was introduced and voted down at the end of the night.  Allowing Roberts to rule on relevancy of witnesses would have been good for the trial. 
The Amendment did get Trump's lawyers to argue that impeachment was the job of Congress and the courts shouldn't get involved, which was a nice touch for anyone arguing the House should have waited for the courts to rule on subpoenas they issued during the inquiry.

 
Say hunter is guilty. It doesn’t excuse trump. It’s a distraction. If you want hunter investigate it through proper channels. 
GUILTY OF WHAT? Being  a privileged son of a politician? That would be a hell of a long line and Hunter would be nowhere near the front of it.

 
Dems have been claiming for a while now that Bolton is the smoking gun and Hunter did nothing wrong and has nothing to hide.  I don't see why they aren't jumping on this offer, 
Very few Dems have claimed Hunter did nothing wrong. The consensus, by far, has been “go ahead and investigate and if he did something wrong punish him.”

But, as you are well aware, Hunter’s guilt or innocence is irrelevant to the Trump impeachment 

 
Who knows what they’re talking about behind the scenes but I don’t believe they’ll ever let Bolton testify in public. Not for a hundred Hunter Bidens. 

And if they did agree the Dems better make sure that includes a public agreement beforehand that Trump won’t claim executive privilege. Otherwise it’s just another sham. 
They don’t have to agree to anything. If they want Hunter to testify, they’ll issue a subpoena. They have the numbers and set up the rules that way. 

 
  • Thanks
Reactions: Ned
Dems have been claiming for a while now that Bolton is the smoking gun and Hunter did nothing wrong and has nothing to hide.  I don't see why they aren't jumping on this offer, 
Very few Dems have claimed Hunter did nothing wrong. The consensus, by far, has been “go ahead and investigate and if he did something wrong punish him.”

But, as you are well aware, Hunter’s guilt or innocence is irrelevant to the Trump impeachment 
The very act of bringing up Hunter Biden is an admission of guilt.

 
They don’t have to agree to anything. If they want Hunter to testify, they’ll issue a subpoena. They have the numbers and set up the rules that way. 
Does a Senate committee have the power to have Hunter Biden come in and testify to committee? For example, could Lindsey Graham call for Hunter Biden to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee?

 
Do you have a link to anything reputable?
I'm searching...

CNN Headline - Schiff shows officials' messages seeking Biden probe

Cool, maybe they are getting somewhere.  Click on the link and don't find anything about this but do find an article why milk is allowed on the Senate floor and who is drinking two glasses and sneaking in chocolate.

 
Not to my knowledge. Do you have a link?
I had an alert earlier today on my phone making the same headline and it was from USA Today, FWIW.

Who knows what they’re talking about behind the scenes but I don’t believe they’ll ever let Bolton testify in public. Not for a hundred Hunter Bidens. 

And if they did agree the Dems better make sure that includes a public agreement beforehand that Trump won’t claim executive privilege. Otherwise it’s just another sham. 
Can't the executive privilege thing be worked through under the judgment from the Nixon investigations and Supreme Court case? I thought they defined what could truly fall under that category. 

 
I'm searching...

CNN Headline - Schiff shows officials' messages seeking Biden probe

Cool, maybe they are getting somewhere.  Click on the link and don't find anything about this but do find an article why milk is allowed on the Senate floor and who is drinking two glasses and sneaking in chocolate.
The candy desk is very popular. Tradition in the Senate. Currently Toomey (PA) sits at it and its filled with Hershey chocolates.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Lol this case by Schiff is slam dunk. This is an amazing piece of work.
In essence:

the President’s lawyers are denying while they simultaneously refusing to release records which would quickly confirm and refute those accusations! These are cases in which we know there are contemporaneous notes or other records. The answers are there. But they refuse to release them. It is a damning indictment not only of the President but even more his Senate accomplices.

The President is stonewalling and his Senate accomplices are backing him up. They’re supposed to be jurors but they want to help him keep the proof secret. There’s really nothing else to say.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
:yawn:    this is wearing me out.   No way average guy/girl is watching is this.
Most likely not.  My local news channels have all been doing decent recaps though.

Schiff is absolutely amazing right now.  Prime time!

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dems have been claiming for a while now that Bolton is the smoking gun and Hunter did nothing wrong and has nothing to hide.  I don't see why they aren't jumping on this offer, 
I would agree.  As long as no restrictions on Bolton testifying, pull the trigger.  If Biden did something wrong, too bad.  He should get called out for it.  If he didn't it would make great waves for his Presidential bid.  He could run on the person that took Trump down.

 
Lol this case by Schiff is slam dunk. This is an amazing piece of work.

Am I right that there are at least 30-40 Republican Senators are in the chambers all the time? I really don’t know.
I’ve been trying to imagine what it would be like to hear all of this for the first time.  It’s so broad and so deep and so obvious it’s kinda weird it all actually happened.

At one point today Bennet was gesturing at all the empty seats on the floor, wondering why the hell it was allowed and trying to express his displeasure without talking.  At the time, there were 23 Senators not present, 21 of them Republicans.  

 
I’ve been trying to imagine what it would be like to hear all of this for the first time.  It’s so broad and so deep and so obvious it’s kinda weird it all actually happened.

At one point today Bennet was gesturing at all the empty seats on the floor, wondering why the hell it was allowed and trying to express his displeasure without talking.  At the time, there were 23 Senators not present, 21 of them Republicans.  
Ok, still 32 Republicans stuck in there like some grownup penance hall. 

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top