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*** (1 Viewer)

Sinn Fein said:
Sounds like Trump found some dirt on Vindman:

Kelly O'Donnell @KellyO

Here I asked the president, as Commander in Chief do you regret calling Lt Col. Vindman a “Never Trumper?”

His response: “Well you’ll be seeing very soon what comes out and then you can ask the question in a different way.”
Click to expand...
Yeah, and he'll be releasing it very soon, right after he's able to release his income tax returns.

 
apalmer said:
Yeah, and he'll be releasing it very soon, right after he's able to release his income tax returns.
Click to expand...
He has to get those two investigators back from Hawaii first. You remember, the guys who were looking at Obama’s birth certificate and found the most amazing stuff which we wouldn’t believe? I think they’re still there, they’ve been stunned for years now. When they get back they can look into Vindman. 

 
Allan Lichtman, whose model only missed one of the last 8 presidential elections (Gore), says impeachment won't hurts dems in 2020. Impeachment moves the scandal lever, even more, against Trump in his model. 

 
Widbil83 said:
We already have the transcripts of the call and both leaders on the same page of this being a complete nothing burger.
Click to expand...
Are we supposed to just take people's word when they are accused of wrongdoing? Of course Trump is going to plead his innocence - and if there is indeed anything to all this, of course Zelensky will plead the same, for this gives him leverage in the future.

 
SoBeDad said:
Allan Lichtman, whose model only missed one of the last 8 presidential elections (Gore), says impeachment won't hurts dems in 2020. Impeachment moves the scandal lever, even more, against Trump in his model. 
Click to expand...
Do you have a link to this?  I'd be curious if they go in to any detail about how he models this. 

 
Sinn Fein said:
Sounds like Trump found some dirt on Vindman:

Kelly O'Donnell @KellyO

Here I asked the president, as Commander in Chief do you regret calling Lt Col. Vindman a “Never Trumper?”

His response: “Well you’ll be seeing very soon what comes out and then you can ask the question in a different way.”
Click to expand...
Or he has no clue what he is talking about

 
SoBeDad said:
Allan Lichtman, whose model only missed one of the last 8 presidential elections (Gore), says impeachment won't hurts dems in 2020. Impeachment moves the scandal lever, even more, against Trump in his model. 
Click to expand...
While I agree with his conclusion, I am very skeptical that the election of 2020 will live up to any model of previous elections. I think we’re living in a pretty unique time. 

 
timschochet said:
While I agree with his conclusion, I am very skeptical that the election of 2020 will live up to any model of previous elections. I think we’re living in a pretty unique time. 
Click to expand...
Lichtman's model, which has been criticized by real statisticians, predicted Trump in 2016.  But Lichtman at the time said Trump is unique and he wasn't sure his model applied. 

Here is his model from wikipedia, which is based on judgement, not polling, with many components yet to be determined.:

The Keys are statements that favor victory (in the popular vote count) for the incumbent party. When five or fewer statements are false, the incumbent party is predicted to win the popular vote; when six or more are false, the challenging party is predicted to win the popular vote.[4]

  1. Party Mandate: After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives than after the previous midterm elections.
  2. Contest: There is no serious contest for the incumbent party nomination.
  3. Incumbency: The incumbent party candidate is the sitting president.
  4. Third party: There is no significant third party or independent campaign.
  5. Short term economy: The economy is not in recession during the election campaign.
  6. Long term economy: Real per capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms.
  7. Policy change: The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy.
  8. Social unrest: There is no sustained social unrest during the term.
  9. Scandal: The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal.
  10. Foreign/military failure: The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs.
  11. Foreign/military success: The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs.
  12. Incumbent charisma: The incumbent party candidate is charismatic or a national hero.
  13. Challenger charisma: The challenging party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero.
 
John Blutarsky said:
In Friday's poll, 49% of Americans indicated that Trump should be impeached and removed from office, while 47% indicated that he should not be as the House's impeachment inquiry into Trump's dealings with Ukraine head into its next phase.
Click to expand...
This is an extraordinarily high number. Has anyone had this number before or after Nixon? And Nixon hit that number, IIRC, after public impeachment hearings began. We haven't even started that process yet and this is where we are starting. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
This is an extraordinarily high number. Has anyone had this number before or after Nixon? And Nixon hit that number, IIRC, after public impeachment hearings began. We haven't even started that process yet and this is where we are starting. 
Click to expand...
Those numbers are not accurate in my opinion.

 
Until support for Impeachment and removal breaks through ~56%/57% it's still just Dems and Never Trumpers.  Maybe a little worrying for Trump is that his he's getting close to his worst numbers in the last couple years (during the shutdown).  He's -14 right now.  But every time he's gotten into this range since the start of 2018 he's rallied back to -10/-12.

But even if only 5% of people are truly persuadable, moving from -14 to -24 would be a killer next November.  Republicans can hold onto the Senate at -14, and it's not impossible Trump ekes out another EC win (though I'd bet against it), but at -24 (say +38/-62) it'd be a clean sweep.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
TripItUp said:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
This is an extraordinarily high number. Has anyone had this number before or after Nixon? And Nixon hit that number, IIRC, after public impeachment hearings began. We haven't even started that process yet and this is where we are starting. 
Click to expand...
Those numbers are not accurate in my opinion.
Click to expand...
SiD's point seems to be that Trump supporters are citing 49% as being a good thing for Trump. Even if you think that the number is off by X%, why would you think that it's good for Trump?

 
[scooter] said:
SiD's point seems to be that Trump supporters are citing 49% as being a good thing for Trump. Even if you think that the number is off by X%, why would you think that it's good for Trump?
Click to expand...
Which Trump supporters  said it was a good thing? 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wondering what the thoughts of KAC not being able to say "no" to the quid pro quo question rather saying "I don't know".  Is she out in the next couple days after that?

 
timschochet said:
He has to get those two investigators back from Hawaii first. You remember, the guys who were looking at Obama’s birth certificate and found the most amazing stuff which we wouldn’t believe? I think they’re still there, they’ve been stunned for years now. When they get back they can look into Vindman. 
Click to expand...
Don’t forget about all the voter fraud. That’s a huge investigation that’s probably taking up too much of his time. 

 
Don's numbers are also heading south with non-college white women and older voters in general. Still doing great with white non-college evangelical men who don't actually attend church, though.

 
[scooter] said:
SiD's point seems to be that Trump supporters are citing 49% as being a good thing for Trump. Even if you think that the number is off by X%, why would you think that it's good for Trump?
Click to expand...
A good thing for Trump?  I haven't seen anyone put forth that position.

 
matuski said:
A good thing for Trump?  I haven't seen anyone put forth that position.
Click to expand...
Actually I will. 

Its not a great thing and it certainly contradicts the claim, made by some people here early on, that the public would be so against impeachment that it would lead to a Republican landslide in 2020. Obviously that hasn’t happened. 

But so long as the impeachment numbers don’t exceed Trump’s overall disapproval numbers (which have been around 51% since the first day of his Presidency) he’s not really threatened, because all it means is that those who didn’t like him already are now unified in believing he committed an impeachable offense. Which means those who liked him already are all still with him, which means that Republicans in the Senate are still with him and he won’t be removed. And it further means that, so long as this number holds, impeachment is unlikely to affect the dynamics of the election: in the end it will still come down to the key states of Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, and if Trump can win those as before he will be re-elected: all of this good news for Trump. 

BUT- if after the public hearings, the support for removal exceeds the disapproval numbers, even by a few percentage points (say 53-55% in favor of removal) then Trump is in real trouble. The dynamics of 2020 will have changed and he’s probably doomed, IMO. 

 
timschochet said:
Actually I will. 

Its not a great thing and it certainly contradicts the claim, made by some people here early on, that the public would be so against impeachment that it would lead to a Republican landslide in 2020. Obviously that hasn’t happened. 

But so long as the impeachment numbers don’t exceed Trump’s overall disapproval numbers (which have been around 51% since the first day of his Presidency) he’s not really threatened, because all it means is that those who didn’t like him already are now unified in believing he committed an impeachable offense. Which means those who liked him already are all still with him, which means that Republicans in the Senate are still with him and he won’t be removed. And it further means that, so long as this number holds, impeachment is unlikely to affect the dynamics of the election: in the end it will still come down to the key states of Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, and if Trump can win those as before he will be re-elected: all of this good news for Trump. 

BUT- if after the public hearings, the support for removal exceeds the disapproval numbers, even by a few percentage points (say 53-55% in favor of removal) then Trump is in real trouble. The dynamics of 2020 will have changed and he’s probably doomed, IMO. 
Click to expand...
Gotcha, I agree.

 
Over the weekend Trump tweeted that any transcripts of witness testimony released by Schiff would be fake and that Republicans should release their own versions of the testimony. 

I wonder how he’s going to handle the public hearings. Will he simply tell his supporters not to watch? No doubt some of them won’t anyhow. 

 
timschochet said:
Over the weekend Trump tweeted that any transcripts of witness testimony released by Schiff would be fake and that Republicans should release their own versions of the testimony. 

I wonder how he’s going to handle the public hearings. Will he simply tell his supporters not to watch? No doubt some of them won’t anyhow. 
Click to expand...
My guess is he will aggressively lie.

 
Did you guys discuss the whistleblower reaching out via attorneys to do a direct 1:1 with them via written questions and answers?  I'm puzzled as to why the GOP would reject that.  What is their excuse, er defense, for that decision?  Sorry...wasn't around a ton this weekend and wasn't really keeping up with the current events.

 
timschochet said:
Over the weekend Trump tweeted that any transcripts of witness testimony released by Schiff would be fake and that Republicans should release their own versions of the testimony. 

I wonder how he’s going to handle the public hearings. Will he simply tell his supporters not to watch? No doubt some of them won’t anyhow. 
Click to expand...
It will simply be character assassination over and over and over and over and over and over.

 
The Commish said:
Did you guys discuss the whistleblower reaching out via attorneys to do a direct 1:1 with them via written questions and answers?  I'm puzzled as to why the GOP would reject that.  What is their excuse, er defense, for that decision?  Sorry...wasn't around a ton this weekend and wasn't really keeping up with the current events.
Click to expand...
Well...written Q&A can't be accurate, right...oh wait, that is what POTUS did in the Mueller investigation.

 
The Daily Mail is reporting on an allegation that kushner gave MBS the green light to arrest Khashoggi, Turkey knew, and Erdogan used that as blackmail to get trump to pull troops out. 

If this is true, impeachment and removal can't wait.  Our commander in chief being compromised and making military decisions for his personal gain is the nightmare scenario. 

But even if it's not true, the president actually withheld military aid from a country for personal gain. 

"It's just Ukraine" is a horrifying argument to begin with.  But if this is true then who knows how many other mysteries will be solved when we find out what trump got in return for selling out our country. This is a guy who just privations to withhold aid from a state while it's on fire. Is that because he disagrees with their politics?  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
bostonfred said:
The Daily Mail is reporting that kushner gave MBS the green light to arrest Khashoggi, Turkey knew, and Erdogan used that as blackmail to get trump to pull troops out. 

If this is true, impeachment and removal can't wait.  Our commander in chief being compromised and making military decisions for his personal gain is the nightmare scenario. 

But even if it's not true, the president actually withheld military aid from a country for personal gain. 

"It's just Ukraine" is a horrifying argument to begin with.  But if this is true then who knows how many other mysteries will be solved when we find out what trump got in return for selling out our country. This is a guy who just privations to withhold aid from a state while it's on fire. Is that because he disagrees with their politics?  
Click to expand...
Fred, appreciate you following up with the link, but need to be VERY careful here.  The Daily Mail isn't REPORTING anything.  They are merely relaying the WH denial of an accusation made by a gossip columnist in a conservative magazine.  Maybe there's some truth to the accusation, maybe there isn't.  The fact that it SEEMS credible to so many of us is obviously a problem, but lots more needs to be done to determine its credibility.  Again, thanks for the link.  

 
timschochet said:
Over the weekend Trump tweeted that any transcripts of witness testimony released by Schiff would be fake and that Republicans should release their own versions of the testimony. 

I wonder how he’s going to handle the public hearings. Will he simply tell his supporters not to watch? No doubt some of them won’t anyhow. 
Click to expand...
This is pretty amazing: Trump is telling his followers that Schiff "will change the words that were said to suit the Dems purposes," meaning the words of the transcripts.

Words like shocking, unacceptable, disturbing are just so trite and oft-repeated now. This is authoritarian behavior.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Morton Muffley said:
Fred, appreciate you following up with the link, but need to be VERY careful here.  The Daily Mail isn't REPORTING anything.  They are merely relaying the WH denial of an accusation made by a gossip columnist in a conservative magazine.  Maybe there's some truth to the accusation, maybe there isn't.  The fact that it SEEMS credible to so many of us is obviously a problem, but lots more needs to be done to determine its credibility.  Again, thanks for the link.  
Click to expand...
It's not just an accusation, it's the allegation that one of the whistleblowers came forward with this.  If this is true, and if they have evidence, it's enormous. 

 
bostonfred said:
Link to Khashoggi news
Click to expand...
This is the actual linked source and quote:

According to Cockburn’s source about the seven whistleblowers, there’s more. It is that Kushner (allegedly) gave the green light to MBS to arrest the dissident journalist, Jamal Khashoggi, who was later murdered and dismembered in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. A second source tells Cockburn that this is true and adds a crucial twist to the story. This source claims that Turkish intelligence obtained an intercept of the call between Kushner and MBS. And President Erdogan used it to get Trump to roll over and pull American troops out of northern Syria before the Turks invaded. Cockburn hears that investigators for the House Intelligence Committee know this whole tale and the identities of some of the people telling it. Whether any of is true is another matter but Adam Schiff certainly seems to be smiling a lot these days.
Click to expand...
I've read this guy Cockburn before and I really can't recall what the story is on him or his scoops.

- eta - Looking back on it, Cockburn correctly reported that the Mueller report coming out was imminent and that Trump would not be hit with conspiracy/collusion allegations, but he also had a source that his kids would be indicted. A bit of a mix.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sinn Fein said:
DJ Judd @DJJudd · Nov 2

Pete Buttigieg tells me he does play “Risk” online, so if you play the mobile version of the conquest and strategy game, you may be playing against a presidential candidate.

His screenname? “I’m not telling you that.”

:coffee:
Click to expand...
Come at me bro @DaUkraineIzWeak

 
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
13K
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
6K
timschochet
timschochet

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top