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)
- Thread starter snitwitch
- Start date
Zow
Footballguy
Lutherman2112
Footballguy
Thanks. Just got home and trying to catch up and have it on tv in background....just heard two magazine articles, unanimous consent, and then a Democrat start asking questions.
Isn't he the head of the committee? By that token, he can do what he feels is necessary to maintain order in the proceedings, and how does that hurt his side?
Mr Anonymous
Footballguy
"Hey everybody, the accusation that I coordinated with and assisted the whistleblower, is false but I'm going to take this moment to remind everyone that the accusation is out there."
Gr00vus
Footballguy
I haven't been able to watch/listen. I assume those are not his exact words - do you have the actual quote handy?
I believe that is called "getting ahead of the story." The republicans are going to try and do something with that, but I doubt it does anything.
Mr Anonymous
Footballguy
No it's absolutely not a direct quote but he used his very brief closing statement to bring that up and remind everyone that it's getting thrown around out there. It would be best not to give the notion the time of day.
jamny
Footballguy
Mr Anonymous
Footballguy
As expected initial reaction on both sides is that they think they won bigly.
Last edited by a moderator:
Amused to Death
Footballguy
You're leaving out the part where members of the GOP tried to directly question Schiff about his contact with the WB. GOP members tried to directly involve him. He used part of his closing statement to address that.
Lutherman2112
Footballguy
The only way anyone wins bigly on this? When everyone realizes that the President broke the law by withholding funds allocated by Congress. He does not have the power.
You are an intelligent guy Mr. Anonymous and I would think you would realize this.
Mr Anonymous
Footballguy
Not left out, I made it very clear it was an "accusation". Schiff simply keeps using his time to remind everyone of it. Making himself a bigger part of the story is a losing idea no matter how he says it.
Mr Anonymous
Footballguy
I didn't say anyone won bigly, I said the initial news coming out indicates both sides "THINK" they hit home runs today.
I don't think anything field-tilting happened for either side today.
The General
Footballguy
Sheriff Bart
Footballguy
He has been breaking the law before he was even elected. Nobody is a winner here.
Amused to Death
Footballguy
Point being, he didn't just bring it up unnecessarily to insert himself into the story, as you claimed. He brought it up because the GOP directed that line of questioning directly to him. You can debate if he was smart to address it, but it certainly was not unnecessarily to insert himself. The GOP needs to stop trying to make it an issue.
Let's not do the back and forth victory claiming each day on this. Both sides I'm sure will claim victory. It's roughly a 9:1 ratio here for sides so each side claiming victory is going to be just a shoutdown. Let's not do that.
Last edited by a moderator:
Jackstraw
Footballguy
The timeline for the record. For the "well the aid got there" crowd. The aid was sent because the jig was up.
8/12/19--whistleblower files complaint
9/9/19- House told of whistleblower complaint.
9/9/19--Sondland and Taylor exchange text messages and Sondland sends scripted "no quid pro quo" text
9/10/19-House asks for info about whistleblower complaint
9/11/19--Ukraine aid released
8/12/19--whistleblower files complaint
9/9/19- House told of whistleblower complaint.
9/9/19--Sondland and Taylor exchange text messages and Sondland sends scripted "no quid pro quo" text
9/10/19-House asks for info about whistleblower complaint
9/11/19--Ukraine aid released
Kyle Cheney@kyledcheney·12m
GOP has decided that their best argument is that the military aid was released on Sept. 11.
This requires ignoring two things
Sept. 9: Dems announce investigation into Trump/Giuliani involvement in Ukraine.
Sept. 10: Dems ask the DNI for whistleblower complaint
GOP has decided that their best argument is that the military aid was released on Sept. 11.
This requires ignoring two things
Sept. 9: Dems announce investigation into Trump/Giuliani involvement in Ukraine.
Sept. 10: Dems ask the DNI for whistleblower complaint
E Street Brat
Footballguy
You missed the Pence, President Z meeting I think on the 5th. That might be important.
yak651
Footballguy
E Street Brat
Footballguy
I thought both witnesses presented themselves well with one exception
It seems Taylor was pretty irked over this “Irregular channel” Him being from State comes off as a territory fight.
“Back Channel” diplomacy deals happen all the time.
It seems Taylor was pretty irked over this “Irregular channel” Him being from State comes off as a territory fight.
“Back Channel” diplomacy deals happen all the time.
Dickies
Footballguy
He confirmed that it's not necessary to go through the normal channels as long as it's in done with Congress' stated foreign policy goals, if I am remembering it correctly.
bostonfred
Footballguy
Summary of the timeline
Withhold aid
Ask for investigation into burisma/Biden
Use back channel with private attorney to arrange details
Reiterate quid pro quo specifically for investigation and public announcement of the investigation
Arrange details of the public announcement
Learn of whistleblower complaint
Deny quid pro quo
Release funds
Claim they weren't really going to go through with withholding the aid, we just arranged all that stuff to feel out the new president
Is any of that inaccurate?
Withhold aid
Ask for investigation into burisma/Biden
Use back channel with private attorney to arrange details
Reiterate quid pro quo specifically for investigation and public announcement of the investigation
Arrange details of the public announcement
Learn of whistleblower complaint
Deny quid pro quo
Release funds
Claim they weren't really going to go through with withholding the aid, we just arranged all that stuff to feel out the new president
Is any of that inaccurate?
A general observation/question. Knowing that independent/moderate voters are largely going to be the only ones these hearings impact in terms of public opinion (the left and right tribes are not going to change their minds no matter what is said or revealed), why would the Republicans go the comic route, throwing around "sham, witch hunt, etc."? I know Trump does it, but his approval rating is below 50%. Is that what they are trying to shoot for? I love a good coach rant as much as anyone, but it is startling to see it happening on TV by people that are charged with governing our country. I'm just not seeing how the hyperbole is going to help them convince people that Trump is a victim here.
I know very little of the details you guys are talking about. But from a pure "game play" strategy angle, I think absolutely the play for Republicans is the "witch hunt" angle.
I was in New Orleans this weekend and the Republican candidate for something (Governor maybe?) was running TV ads accusing the opponent of being in favor of the "Washington Impeachment Squad". And right or wrong, I'd say that strategy is pretty effective for them.
jamny
Footballguy
I support these proceedings, don't think it's a witch hunt and think Trump very likely did hold up aid for investigating Biden. That said, I don't think it was a strong start for the Dems. I'm not seeing a blazing headline for tomorrow's papers ( I know, who reads papers anymore) Maybe I expected too much.
tommyGunZ
Footballguy
I understand your point, but I don't agree with your assertion that "the left and the right tribes are not going to change their minds no matter what is said or revealed". I'm a member of the left tribe, and I would absolutely change my mind if the evidence overwhelmingly suggested that there was no there there, a la the Benghazi charade. I think it's a disservice to equate the left and the right as mindlessly disregarding the facts, just because the right is currently doing so. It's a false equivalency that disincentivizes people to be open minded if they're simply going to be characterized as a bad actor because the other side is acting badly.
Dickies
Footballguy
The lack of blazing headline is a positive for me. Goldman's examination had no "gotcha" moments or zingers, but it was a calculated series of questions that held the viewers' hands as he walked them through all of the problems with what Trump did.
Don Quixote
Footballguy
I thought Taylor's testimony about his aide who overheard the call with Trump asking Sondland asking about the status of the "investigations" was pretty big. The substantive defense has seemed focused on no one being able to directly tie Trump (besides the "transcript"), and trying to put it on Giuliani or Sondland going rogue. That is another direct link (currently hearsay, but sounds like they are bringing in the aide himself).
whoknew
Footballguy
jamny
Footballguy
I agree. The biggest comment of the day and I'm glad to see it appears the staffer will be called to testify.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Eddie Rispone, and yes for Governor. He's a terrible candidate. One of the support ads for him attacking the current governor was so false it was removed from the airwaves in Louisiana for falsehood.
timschochet
Footballguy
Trump has already been asked about this at his press conference. He said “I don’t know anything about that. I don’t remember having that conversation, but all you need to know about Sondland is that I told him no quid pro quo.”
Sand
Footballguy
Where is the timeline for when the whistleblower (which is generous - he/she doesn't qualify as one) went to Schiff? Timeline for Schiff's office crafting that legalese complaint?
Are we going to see Schiff as a witness on this part of it?
moleculo
Footballguy
sho nuff
Footballguy
The WB didnt go to schiff unless you have new information.
Why would schiff be called as a witness?
His office crafted the complaint? Again, could you please provide a link to this assertion?
Also, why does the person not qualify as a whistleblower?
Fair enough, but looking at polls, the vast majority (80+%) identifying on one side or the other are sticking on their side regarding impeachment. It's reasonable to make the case that overall public opinion moving is going to be based on independents being convinced one way or the other. I don't know that the bombastic over the top approach is the best way to win them over. Might be my personal preference, but a reasoned argument is more persuasive to me than someone shouting about how crazy the other side is. The difference in tone today was stark and while it might have played to the R base, I would guess it turned off some people who don't have a strong opinion yet and just wanted to hear some actual details on what happened.
I think you are also proving my point on tribalism a bit in saying that because you are on the left you are rational enough to change your mind but all on the right are acting badly and swallowing the talking points without thought. Having that mindset is basically stating that you wouldn't actually change your mind because you are already convinced they are wrong.
tommyGunZ
Footballguy
Those on the right who are ignoring the mountain of evidence of wrongdoing and instead spreading conspiracy theories about the deep state and Trump appointees engaged in a coup are proving that they aren't rational enough to change their mind. it's actually happening right in front of our faces.
Would Democrats do the same under similar circumstances? Perhaps a small % would, but this just wouldn't fly with the majority of us on the Democratic side, at all.
Last edited by a moderator:
I think the answer to both questions is "Yes" - but I am drawing a blank right now on the name of the lawyer who ordered the transcript moved.
Starts with an "E" - I think...
Moments after President Trump ended his phone call with Ukraine’s president on July 25, an unsettled national security aide rushed to the office of White House lawyer John Eisenberg.
Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, the top Ukraine adviser at the White House, had been listening to the call and was disturbed by the pressure Trump had applied to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate his political rivals, according to people familiar with Vindman’s testimony to lawmakers this week.
Vindman told Eisenberg, the White House’s legal adviser on national security issues, that what the president did was wrong, said the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the ongoing investigation.
Scribbling notes on a yellow legal pad, Eisenberg proposed a step that other officials have said is at odds with long-standing White House protocol: moving a transcript of the call to a highly classified server and restricting access to it, according to two people familiar with Vindman’s account.
per wapo - https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/white-house-lawyer-moved-transcript-of-trump-call-to-classified-server-after-ukraine-adviser-raised-alarms/2019/10/30/ba0fbdb6-fb4e-11e9-8190-6be4deb56e01_story.html
I agree with this. Kent's and Taylor's testimony, if it were new information, would be jaw-dropping. But it's mostly not new information. It's stuff that has already trickled out and has already been reported on and spun, and is therefore already baked in to people's thoughts. I predict that these hearings won't change Trump's approval ratings.
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
