What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

***Official Donald J. Trump Impeachment (Whistleblower) Thread*** (5 Viewers)

sho nuff said:
Its not...becaushe wb went to staff if the committee...we already know this...the information beyond the name of the wb has already been disclosed.
 Staff gave the complaint to schiff and they advised him to go to the ig

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/464077-whistleblower-contacted-schiffs-committee-before-filing-complaint?amp

So no...its not suspicious at all.
Click to expand...
Whistleblower Was Overheard in '17 Discussing With Ally How to Remove Trump

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2020/01/22/whistleblower_was_overheard_in_17_discussing_with_ally_how_to_remove_trump_121701.html

 
All good then? 

BladeRunner said:
So when you say the Executive branch no longer needs to react to Congressional subpeonas, you're including Eric Holder in this conversation right?  This was PRE-Trump.

Holder was even held in contempt.
Click to expand...
You miss the point completely.  I'm including everyone. Congressional subpoenas are about to become worthless forever. Reason for concern? Pro hint: this has nothing to do with politics and everything to do with core aspects of our Democracy.

 
BladeRunner said:
Sure we can start here with that, but an investigation will get us the nitty gritty details we don't have.  Biden's son being on the board in Ukraine is awfully suspicious.  We won't know until we look into it further.  That's my point.
Click to expand...
1. I dont believe republicans care about children of politicians being given jobs they aren't qualified for.

2. Google it.  Its all out there, why Hunter Biden was named to the board.  I think he shouldn't have taken the role purely for the bad optics, but no rules were broken.  Anywhere.

3. I don't really like the notion that person A should be prohibited from Job B because of person A's family.  That sounds so...anti-free market.

 
BladeRunner said:
I don't know, maybe?   The point is, it doesn't matter who wrote it.  It was the coordination between a anti-Trump CIA analyst and Shiff's office that's the problem.
Click to expand...
Ok and *then having chosen this course - it would be run through Bill Barr’s former law partner, a guy who before he was in the WH worked for a major Russian bank as a lawyer, a solid Trumper who would absolutely LUV to catch Schiff and a real live Deep Stater in the act, and you still would choose that course, is that right?

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Well I’m trying to get past that. If it *were true and if it were all a massive lie what they ended up allegedly doing was the worst possible method for doing that. It would maximize inspection, exposure and risk for the WBer.
Click to expand...
I think we should instead not entertain lies being spouted to deflect from Trumps actions.

There is zero evidence Schiff did as being claimed...i guess the conspiracy theory thread could work for that...

 
Dickies said:
I see we’ve completed the shift in narrative from “NO QUID PRO QUO” to “ the quid pro quo is completely justified”
Click to expand...
I believe the defense explained:  How is there a quid pro quo when the other side doesn't even know the aide is frozen?  How is there a this for that if you don't even know there is an aide held?  

Furthermore they explained the "I'd like you to do us a favor though, happened right after a conversation about Javelin missles--which Ukraine already had in it's possession.

 
moleculo said:
1. I dont believe republicans care about children of politicians being given jobs they aren't qualified for.

2. Google it.  Its all out there, why Hunter Biden was named to the board.  I think he shouldn't have taken the role purely for the bad optics, but no rules were broken.  Anywhere.

3. I don't really like the notion that person A should be prohibited from Job B because of person A's family.  That sounds so...anti-free market.
Click to expand...
1)  And Democrats do?  All we ever hear about is Ivanka and Jared not being qualified for their positions within the WH or in their Dad's other business dealings.  But not a peep from the left about Hunter Biden.  You see the hypocrisy, right?

2) Google it?  Do you think that's what the House, Senate, DOJ and Inspector General all did?  Or do you think they actually investigated by conducting interviews and paper trails?  I think we need an actual investigation, not some google searches.

3) I'm on board with you here, but if the Dems are going to go this route then we need to look into it all, not just their political rivals.

 
the moops said:
Holy #### this thread is horrific.

We don't investigate people just because someone wants them to be investigated. You know what kind of country's investigate their political opponents just because?
Click to expand...
It is an awful shame that becoming a democratic candidate for President makes you immune.

 
sho nuff said:
I think we should instead not entertain lies being spouted to deflect from Trumps actions.

There is zero evidence Schiff did as being claimed...i guess the conspiracy theory thread could work for that...
Click to expand...
Ok understood. You’re probably right. Obviously my point is that in a Snidely Whiplash scenario taking the course they did would have been the absolutely, worst, most dangerous course. It’s a completely senseless proposition.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
jm192 said:
I believe the defense explained:  How is there a quid pro quo when the other side doesn't even know the aide is frozen?  How is there a this for that if you don't even know there is an aide held?  

Furthermore they explained the "I'd like you to do us a favor though, happened right after a conversation about Javelin missles--which Ukraine already had in it's possession.
Click to expand...
Except, they likely did know the aid was frozen.  So the defense claiming that may have lied.

https://amp.businessinsider.com/ukraine-officials-knew-trump-froze-military-aid-in-august-2019-10

other reports say even earlier than that
 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/03/world/europe/ukraine-impeachment-military-aid.amp.html

 
moleculo said:
Does that mean Trump didn't do his corruption?  We are all good because someone who doesn't like Trump told on him? 
Click to expand...
In an unsourced article with no backing evidence...have we gotten the out of context coup story as well?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
BladeRunner said:
1)  And Democrats do?  All we ever hear about is Ivanka and Jared not being qualified for their positions within the WH or in their Dad's other business dealings.  But not a peep from the left about Hunter Biden.  You see the hypocrisy, right?

2) Google it?  Do you think that's what the House, Senate, DOJ and Inspector General all did?  Or do you think they actually investigated by conducting interviews and paper trails?  I think we need an actual investigation, not some google searches.

3) I'm on board with you here, but if the Dems are going to go this route then we need to look into it all, not just their political rivals.
Click to expand...
1. Of course.  I don't like any of it.  

2. That's for you.  A quick cursory review will show there's no there there.

3. Or, we simply let businesses hire whomever they find is best for their needs.  Unless you are a fan of more regulation, red tape, and oversight?

 
sho nuff said:
Except, they likely did know the aid was frozen.  So the defense claiming that may have lied.

https://amp.businessinsider.com/ukraine-officials-knew-trump-froze-military-aid-in-august-2019-10

other reports say even earlier than that
 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/03/world/europe/ukraine-impeachment-military-aid.amp.html
Click to expand...
The defense got up there and said they knew about it in August.

So your assertion is that Trump on a phone call, twisted Ukraine's arm into a political investigation--and the pressure from that July phone call was felt in August when they realized the aid was frozen?  

 
jm192 said:
The defense got up there and said they knew about it in August.

So your assertion is that Trump on a phone call, twisted Ukraine's arm into a political investigation--and the pressure from that July phone call was felt in August when they realized the aid was frozen?  
Click to expand...
So they knew about the aid being frozen...contrary to what you claimed.

Why has there been no push for an investigation now?  Why was. Ukraine about to announce an investigation...and then stopped when the aid was released.

 
Anyhow you guys don’t need to worry: I’m pretty confident there will be some sort of official investigation into Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, and Burisma. 

It will begin sometime after January of 2021. 

 
sho nuff said:
So they knew about the aid being frozen...contrary to what you claimed.

Why has there been no push for an investigation now?  Why was. Ukraine about to announce an investigation...and then stopped when the aid was released.
Click to expand...
They did not know during the phone call.  Which would be a key component in stating there was a quid pro quo.  It would be a key component to tying the aid to the requested Biden investigation.

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
BladeRunner said:
Predicate?  You mean like a whistleblower with an axe to grind who heard it 3rd hand?  Apparently, that's all you need nowadays.  Kind of like the Salem Witch Hunts!

"She's a witch!" was enough then, and it appears to be enough now.  Let's investigate!  
Click to expand...
Yes actually- the WBer complaint went to the DOJ’s criminal division after having gone through both an IG and a department chief counsel. That’s the kind of process I’m talking about.
Click to expand...
It's comical to see these bad faith arguments get randomly tossed into the fray, only to have people point out that it's the same thing Trump himself has done and condoned.

"But Hunter Biden wasn't qualified to have such a job!" (Oh, you mean like Ivanka?)

"We should investigate the source of Hunter Biden's loans!" (Oh, you mean like Jared?)

"But Joe Biden could have influenced his son's business!" (Oh, you mean like Donald Trump?)

"We should investigate Joe Biden based on third hand information!" (Oh, you mean like the Mueller report whistleblower?)

It's just a game of whack-a-mole. As soon as one bad-faith argument pops up, you whack it with logic, the Trump Supporter retreats, then pops back up in another proverbial hole with another bad-faith argument.

*all quotes paraphrased

 
Last edited by a moderator:
[scooter] said:
It's comical to see these bad faith arguments get randomly tossed into the fray, only to have people point out that it's the same thing Trump himself has done and condoned.

"But Hunter Biden wasn't qualified to have such a job!" (Oh, you mean like Ivanka?)

"We should investigate the source of Hunter Biden's loans!" (Oh, you mean like Jared?)

"But Joe Biden could have influenced his son's business!" (Oh, you mean like Donald Trump?)

"We should investigate Joe Biden based on third hand information!" (Oh, you mean like the Mueller report whistleblower?)

*all quotes paraphrased
Click to expand...
Yeah, we get it.  Your corrupt guys are OK, it's the other corrupt guys that are the problem.

 
Zelensky: so about that aid that was promised us...

Trump: I'd like you to do us a favor though...and another thing...

The aid was tied to investigations on July 25.  When ukraine asked about it, the very next thing Trump said was asking for investigations.  It's all very clear.  Read the transcript.

 
moleculo said:
Zelensky: so about that aid that was promised us...

Trump: I'd like you to do us a favor though...and another thing...

The aid was tied to investigations on July 25.  When ukraine asked about it, the very next thing Trump said was asking for investigations.  It's all very clear.  Read the transcript.
Click to expand...
Yes.  The defense read the transcipt.  There was a mention of "Thanks for the Javelin missles" which they already had.  And then Trump went into please do us a favor.  But the House has left that part out over and over because it doesn't fit the hoax narrative they need you to believe. 

 
Also I think at least one witness offered testimony that the Ukraine embassy contacted the State  Department in an email about the aid being withheld in early July before the phone call- we would know this for sure if we could see those emails- but the State Department refuses to release them and it looks like the Senate won’t ask for them. 

 
jm192 said:
They did not know during the phone call.  Which would be a key component in stating there was a quid pro quo.  It would be a key component to tying the aid to the requested Biden investigation.
Click to expand...
Not knowing during the phone call doesnt make it any better though.  The wb complaint and the whole thing is about more than one phone call.

Seriously...the defense that...well they didn't know during the one call so it was ok is the worst defense ever.

 
sho nuff said:
Not knowing during the phone call doesnt make it any better though.  The wb complaint and the whole thing is about more than one phone call.

Seriously...the defense that...well they didn't know during the one call so it was ok is the worst defense ever.
Click to expand...
Not that's it's ok--but that there's no wrong doing.  

You want to claim quid pro quo---but if they didn't even know the aide was frozen--then Ukraine isn't being offered something in turn for it.  

You want to claim the aide was conditioned on the investigation--but how can it be conditioned if Ukraine doesn't know what the conditions are?

 
jm192 said:
Yes.  The defense read the transcipt.  There was a mention of "Thanks for the Javelin missles" which they already had.  And then Trump went into please do us a favor.  But the House has left that part out over and over because it doesn't fit the hoax narrative they need you to believe. 
Click to expand...
It wasn't "Thanks for the Javelin missles," it was "we'd like more please."

 
jm192 said:
Not that's it's ok--but that there's no wrong doing.  

You want to claim quid pro quo---but if they didn't even know the aide was frozen--then Ukraine isn't being offered something in turn for it.  

You want to claim the aide was conditioned on the investigation--but how can it be conditioned if Ukraine doesn't know what the conditions are?
Click to expand...
#levremembers.

 
jm192 said:
Not that's it's ok--but that there's no wrong doing.  

You want to claim quid pro quo---but if they didn't even know the aide was frozen--then Ukraine isn't being offered something in turn for it.  

You want to claim the aide was conditioned on the investigation--but how can it be conditioned if Ukraine doesn't know what the conditions are?
Click to expand...
Wouldn’t you like to know for sure if Ukraine knew the aid was frozen? 

 
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
18K
BladeRunner
BladeRunner
dozer
****Official DOJ Investigation into Trump, Fake Electors, Fraud, Etc.****
5 6 7
Replies
348
Views
18K
Sabertooth
Sabertooth
knowledge dropper
***OFFICIAL Trump vs. DeSantis Thread***
2 3 4
Replies
197
Views
9K
timschochet
timschochet

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)
Back
Top