***Official Donald J. Trump Impeachment (Whistleblower) Thread*** (7 Viewers)

[timschochet]

It’s already begun: 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.com/amp/story/2019/09/26/poll-support-impeachment-trump-1515012

This poll was taken Tuesday night- after Pelosi’s announcement but before the phone transcript was released, and before the whistleblower report was released. And you guys think it’s going to go down? By Monday it’s going to be through the roof! 

Now AFTER Monday with Congress taking 2 weeks off it may go down a little from there with nothing happening. But once the hearings start up again, and especially once we get some of the main players testifying: Atkinson, the whistle blower, Giuliani, Pompeo, etc.,- this thing is going to go nuclear. 

 

[Gr00vus]

This poll was taken Tuesday night- after Pelosi’s announcement but before the phone transcript was released, and before the whistleblower report was released. And you guys think it’s going to go down? By Monday it’s going to be through the roof! 

Now AFTER Monday with Congress taking 2 weeks off it may go down a little from there with nothing happening. But once the hearings start up again, and especially once we get some of the main players testifying: Atkinson, the whistle blower, Giuliani, Pompeo, etc.,- this thing is going to go nuclear. 

I'm a pessimist. I figure by Monday many will have forgotten about this (relatively) in favor of whatever goes on this weekend. MLB season end, whatever. The Dems will have to keep this in the news, aggressively, for the next two weeks for it to remain near the top of peoples' consciousness, and retain any momentum. Or, Trump and his clowns could just keep saying stupid, self incriminating stuff during that time...

 

[sho nuff]

Oh boy, "impeachment inquiry" isn't even a legal term and Nadler started it well before Nancy made her jump. It's a nothing step because what they want to be there just isn't there. I'm starting to feel sorry for some of you. Brace yourselves please.

So...pretty much going with spout off some rhetoric...be shown to be wrong with facts...and now spout more disingenuous rhetoric.

Injuries are not a nothing step.  Ive shown you what they are.  Formal inquiry is what started each proceeding against Nixon and Clinton as well.

Nadler didn't start it...you are confusing what he has done with the formal process started by the speaker of the house.

Feeling sorry for us?  Why?  Because we are taking the time to put proper information out there and believed you were here for an actual serious discussion?

 

[sho nuff]

Not struggling at all.  From what has been presented so far I know he did nothing criminal or worthy of impeachment.  

Who said criminal?  Why add the strawman?

 

[Gr00vus]

What I find lacking in most discussions here is that what Trump is currently facing impeachment for is nearly EXACTLY what he was accused of doing with Russia.

I've mentioned a few times in prior posts that this incident is just another instance of the same pattern of behavior exposed with the Russian election interference. There's not really much room for doubt he knowingly conspired with elements of the Russian government to influence the 2016 election. That's why I've been saying, while it's good to start with a narrow focus on this Ukraine incident, they have to remain open to expanding the nature of the inquiry as the dots inevitably get connected to other instances of similar behavior.

 

[Mr Anonymous]

Why would the average man need this? Politics are a big, huge reality show and we pick our sides.

Do yourself a favor and get out in the world and see if people are even talking about this. Spending too much time in this forum warps minds.

 

[sho nuff]

What the average man or woman on the street needs is a slam dunk. This isn't even close to one. It's more like a half-court shot attempt.

The average man or woman on the street doesn’t determine impeachment.

 

[The Commish]

Yes, yes there is. 

As I said before, unless they see "I will give you X for Y" or "I am not giving you X unless you do Y" it's going to be full on, head in the sand even though that's not remotely the standard.

 

[Tom Skerritt]

Is America great again?!? It’s difficult to keep track. 

#MAGA

 

[Gr00vus]

I guess the old saying is true.

Absolute power, corrupts absolutely. 

I think, in this particular case, the person in question was absolutely corrupt (obviously so IMO) looooooooooong before obtaining absolute power.

 

[ClownCausedChaos2]

Do yourself a favor and get out in the world and see if people are even talking about this. Spending too much time in this forum warps minds.

People aren't talking about it because politics has become so divisive and hostile to the point where people can't talk about it for fear of the discussion becoming argumentative and heated.  But you can damn sure bet people are following this closely.

 

[The Commish]

I thought Elissa Slotkin's comments on CNN a bit ago were pretty good. Very narrow in scope. I think that is the way to go. Otherwise the weeds start to get real tall. 

The fact that things have to be parsed and so carefully crafted should be your first clue that this doesn't rise to level Dems WANT it to.

It's more about having the average person understand these things unfortunately.  That's where we're at with our knowledge levels in this country.

 

[Mr Anonymous]

People aren't talking about it because politics has become so divisive and hostile to the point where people can't talk about it for fear of the discussion becoming argumentative and heatdd..  But you can damn sure bet people are following this closely.

Lol

#bubble

 

[timschochet]

Do yourself a favor and get out in the world and see if people are even talking about this. Spending too much time in this forum warps minds.

Everybody is taking about it. It’s the #1 issue right now. News ratings are through the roof. I think maybe you’re the one that needs to get out  more. 

 

[Don't Noonan]

Who said criminal?  Why add the strawman?

You do know what or means right?

 

[Mr Anonymous]

The average man or woman on the street doesn’t determine impeachment.

Oh really, any you're questioning if I know how this works?

 

[sho nuff]

Oh really, any you're questioning if I know how this works?

Im not questioning...I've proven you don't know the process.

 

[Mr Anonymous]

Everybody is taking about it. It’s the #1 issue right now. News ratings are through the roof. I think maybe you’re the one that needs to get out  more. 

tim, you're never going to get anyone to believe that you get out a whole lot. Unless, you're paying a team to post here for you, that's one you're just going to have to wear.

 

[sho nuff]

You do know what or means right?

That doesn't answer my question.  There was no need to even add criminal in this case.  

 

[KCitons]

If you think about it, the Ukraine call makes perfect sense. Trump didn't win the election in 2016 without outside help. He knew he was going to have to have help if he wanted to repeat in 2020. 

Why change a winning formula?

 

[adonis]

Lol

#bubble

If Fox News is internally divided about this and taking to their airwaves to attack folks on their own network over this, you can bet it has entered the mainstream public sphere.

 

[ClownCausedChaos2]

Lol

#bubble

And your response is to laugh at me and post some pathetic hashtag.  

 

[sho nuff]

And your response is to laugh at me and post some pathetic hashtag.  

Right before getting personal with tim.

Ignoring all facts presented him to do so.

That isn't honest discussion IMO.

 

[Mr Anonymous]

And your response is to laugh at me and post some pathetic hashtag.  

Have you seen or heard the average person on the street speak lately.

 

[timschochet]

tim, you're never going to get anyone to believe that you get out a whole lot. Unless, you're paying a team to post here for you, that's one you're just going to have to wear.

Lol OK. 

 

[Ranethe]

There are some really terrible, ignorant takes in here and I’m not talking about the usual suspects. I’m talking about those rare (supposedly) True independents who portray themselves as “above the fray” and truly objective. Hint: speaking confidently or authoritatively about something does not constitute “objectivity”, particularly when that confidence and authority is misplaced. There’s 4 or 5 of these posters and they are as annoying as the usual suspects.

 

[KCitons]

Thanks

Just to be clear, this isn't a new feeling that I've had. Twice I made comments about Trump impeachment, long before the Mueller Report or Ukraine.

Last August

September 2017

For some reason, I'd been labeled as a Trump supporter this whole time. Even though I've never supported him as a person. 

 

[ClownCausedChaos2]

Have you seen or heard the average person on the street speak lately.

Every day.

 

[timschochet]

Damn @Mr Anonymous is right. Nobody is paying attention to this. Nobody cares! 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vulture.com/amp/2019/09/trump-impeachment-inquiry-cable-news-ratings.html

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

No, it is audio from his interview on Tucker Carlson last night.  I wrote in down as I listened quickly..

I’m being serious when I give you credit for diligence and attribution, at least in this instance.

 

[Juxtatarot]

Have you seen or heard the average person on the street speak lately.

What street is this average man on? I’m getting the impression you walk down the same streets a lot.

 

[Slapdash]

If you think about it, the Ukraine call makes perfect sense. Trump didn't win the election in 2016 without outside help. He knew he was going to have to have help if he wanted to repeat in 2020. 

Why change a winning formula?

IIRC, the call in question happened the day after Mueller testified.  

 

[Gr00vus]

IIRC, the call in question happened the day after Mueller testified.  

Just a coincidence.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

 Classic double-barreled question.  In fact, bad enough you wonder about the person who wrote it.

I'm all aboard the Impeachment investigation train.  But I don't think he should be removed from office today.  

I do, and I think you probably do too.  It's nice that you want to bend over backwards to not jump to the "removed from office" conclusion, but every scrap of evidence that we have in front of us is that he colluded with a foreign government to interfere in our electoral process.  And that's setting aside all the other stuff, like his attacks on the first amendment, collusion with Russia, obstruction of justice in the investigation of his collusion with Russia, overall dangerous incompetence, etc.  We should all be rooting for removal from office at this point.  It's the right thing to do for the country.

 

[KCitons]

IIRC, the call in question happened the day after Mueller testified.  

And didn't Pelosi make a statement that same day that she was not in favor of starting impeachment proceedings? 

I may be incorrect, old age makes it hard to remember all the dates exactly.

 

[Gr00vus]

I do, and I think you probably do too.  It's nice that you want to bend over backwards to not jump to the "removed from office" conclusion, but every scrap of evidence that we have in front of us is that he colluded with a foreign government to interfere in our electoral process.  And that's setting aside all the other stuff, like his attacks on the first amendment, collusion with Russia, obstruction of justice in the investigation of his collusion with Russia, overall dangerous incompetence, etc.  We should all be rooting for removal from office at this point.  It's the right thing to do for the country.

Agree with your overall take here. I read @Dinsy Ejotuz's quote as "But I don't think he should be removed from office prior to the impeachment process completing with an indictment of wrongdoing worthy of expulsion from office."

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Agree with your overall take here. I read @Dinsy Ejotuz's quote as "But I don't think he should be removed from office prior to the impeachment process completing with an indictment of wrongdoing worthy of expulsion from office."

Okay, I very possibly misread this.  It wasn't a hit on Dinsy regardless, because I do think we're coming from the same general place.

 

[timschochet]

On CNN they’re all speculating  about what’s going to happen when the White House forces the House to go to court for every witness like before- will the House wait the 4-5 months it will take? 

Here is another prediction: the Trump refusal to cooperate worked before because the public wasn’t paying attention. If Trump tries this with Ukraine, the public won’t stand for it. So I don’t think getting these people to testify is going to be a problem. Start sending the subpoenas. 

 

[Zow]

If he really said those, he should be disbarred for not knowing how to spell counsel.

Yeah wtf. That's far worse than not knowing what a Motion in Limine is. 

 

[Zow]

No that was me 

Ah. That explains it. That's like spelling judgment with two "e"'s. 

 

[Gr00vus]

On CNN they’re all speculating  about what’s going to happen when the White House forces the House to go to court for every witness like before- will the House wait the 4-5 months it will take? 

Here is another prediction: the Trump refusal to cooperate worked before because the public wasn’t paying attention. If Trump tries this with Ukraine, the public won’t stand for it. So I don’t think getting these people to testify is going to be a problem. Start sending the subpoenas. 

Doesn't invoking the impeachment process establish a fast track for necessary court decisions? I thought someone had implied something like that in a previous post, but I'm not sure.

 

[Ranethe]

On CNN they’re all speculating  about what’s going to happen when the White House forces the House to go to court for every witness like before- will the House wait the 4-5 months it will take? 

Here is another prediction: the Trump refusal to cooperate worked before because the public wasn’t paying attention. If Trump tries this with Ukraine, the public won’t stand for it. So I don’t think getting these people to testify is going to be a problem. Start sending the subpoenas. 

This has been one of my beefs with Dems. They are getting steamrolled and appear impotent. This is an old article but it mentions some of the same things in a more recent article I read by someone involved in Watergate. In the recent article this guy spoke about how Sam Ervin threatened to have stonewalling witnesses arrested by the Sergeant at Arms during Watergate.  Why are Dems allowing all these people to ignore subpoenas and instead choosing to go through the court system to gain compliance? It’s very likely I don’t understand these procedures but there has to be teeth somewhere other than protracted court battles/appeals. Play hardball, start arresting these people.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/05/15/house-has-power-arrest-people-who-defy-its-orders/

 

[badmojo1006]

Just a reminder, DN thinks people that are anything but heterosexual are mentally ill.  So you may want to reconsider the use of your time arguing with him.   Cheers! 

Really?

 

[Kal El]

tim, you're never going to get anyone to believe that you get out a whole lot. Unless, you're paying a team to post here for you, that's one you're just going to have to wear.

In Tim's defense, there are mobile devices capable of connecting to this forum. 

 

[KCitons]

tim, you're never going to get anyone to believe that you get out a whole lot. Unless, you're paying a team to post here for you, that's one you're just going to have to wear.

The bigger concern is that traffic drops off in the evenings and on weekends. Lot's of lost work productivity due to posting here.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

So...pretty much going with spout off some rhetoric...be shown to be wrong with facts...and now spout more disingenuous rhetoric.

Injuries are not a nothing step.  Ive shown you what they are.  Formal inquiry is what started each proceeding against Nixon and Clinton as well.

Nadler didn't start it...you are confusing what he has done with the formal process started by the speaker of the house.

Feeling sorry for us?  Why?  Because we are taking the time to put proper information out there and believed you were here for an actual serious discussion?

A whole post of falsehoods

 

[Don't Noonan]

A whole post of falsehoods

It is really sad he feels the need to try and argue everything and constantly tout opinions as facts.  So weird.

 

[Don't Noonan]

Ah. That explains it. That's like spelling judgment with two "e"'s. 

Not all of us are lauwyers!

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Ah. That explains it. That's like spelling judgment with two "e"'s. 

Wtf spells it judgmeet?

 

[dozer]

It is really sad he feels the need to try and argue everything and constantly tout opinions as facts.  So weird.

Do you feel actual sadness?