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*** (6 Viewers)

Marauder said:
I tend to agree with Tim's take here.   It seems likely that Trump's recent recent bump in the betting markets odds has more to do with Bernie's rise in the polls than anything else.
Click to expand...
I think it has more to do with the historical connection of good economy + incumbent = re-election than anything else. Bernie does only slightly worse than Biden vs. Trump in polling, IIRC.

 
timschochet said:
Two points:

1. I never stated that my own viewpoint is representative of the majority. In fact it usually isn’t. What I wrote was that the person I was responding to, HIS viewpoint was not representative of the majority- not that Trump would win the election, but specifically that Trump’s popularity would increase as a result of the impeachment and that the Democrats would be crushed because of it, a prediction he has made several times now. 

2. As far as the betting markets go, they do not accurately represent Trump’s chances of re-election against a single candidate- they are rating his chances against the entire field. I believe that so long as the single candidate is not Sanders or Warren, the Democrat will be favored by the betting markets. But we won’t know this until a single candidate has been chosen, so let’s see if I am right about this. 
Click to expand...
The first part in bold there is absolutely true, if we are still talking about betting markets.  Look at the charts MT linked you to, straight up since this fiasco started.  There is zero argument to be had.

 
Sorry if already mentioned, but apparently the DOJ argued in court today that the solution to resolving ignored subpoenas is not the court system, but impeachment.

What's this about: The court hearing in Washington was about the House’s lawsuit to enforce subpoenas for documents from the Justice and Commerce departments related to the 2020 Census. When asked by the judge what the House could do when the executive branch stonewalls, the DOJ lawyer James Burnham jumped right to “impeachment” as a powerful punitive example.

Some context: The topic came up in court hearing about the 2020 census. The House Oversight Committee sued the Justice Department and Commerce Department in November, asking a judge to enforce its subpoenas for documents. The case revolves around the controversial and ultimately unsuccessful attempt by the Trump administration to add a citizenship question to the census. 
Click to expand...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
McConnell spent his entire lunch time talking to Murkowski. Apparently there is still a great deal of uncertainty about what Roberts might do, so they don't want to take a chance of a tie vote. (Jeffrey Toobin just speculated that Roberts would call for briefs from both sides, which would further delay things.)

So this is not QUITE over yet. 99% over, but...

 
Gr00vus said:
I wonder if this will cause the Democrats to finally realize the game has changed. Trump is about to get carte blanche to do whatever he wants to get re-elected. If the Democrats are not prepared to get seriously dirty, Trump is getting another term. The whole "when they go low, we go high thing" - not sure it every really worked, but I'm certain it won't work now.

China, I hope you're listening...
Click to expand...
The scary thing is I'm sooooo sure our enemies would prefer him in office. Absolutely positive. 

 
quick-hands said:
Are you unaware that starr testified?   I find that hard to believe.    Why wouldnt you want the guy who acted as lead investigator to testify?
Click to expand...
Im aware that Starr did not testify as a witness. 
He presented as part of the defense.  Schiff has as a House manager as part of the prosecution.

 
quick-hands said:
Schiff should testify as lead prosecutor.
Click to expand...
Schiff has dome as much as Start.  There aren't witnesses and lead prosecution doesn’t testify.  His report is there the articles of impeachment are there.  The conclusions have been presented.

For what purpose would he testify?  So we can try smearing him as knowing the wb?

 
snitwitch said:
GOP may have enough votes now to block witnesses https://twitter.com/LisaDNews/status/1222994236221665288?s=19
Click to expand...
Lamar Alexander was warned that his family would suffer if he didn't surrender. However, he's been told that if he votes no on witnesses, he can retire quietly and join the Night's Watch.

However, on Tuesday when Trump visits for the State of the Union, he's going to announce, "Alexander, my family and McConnell here tell me that I should pardon you for your treacherous thoughts. But they are weak women and while I am your President there will be no forgiveness! LINDSAY, BRING ME HIS HEAD!!"

 
Ditkaless Wonders said:
Henry Ford said:
This board still has conservatives, you guys just generally don't identify as Republican anymore.  
Click to expand...
In my case I never did.
Click to expand...
I did, before I knew better.  I fixed that prior to being able to vote.  If an 18 year old kid can figure it out.....

 
2Squirrels1Nut said:
DOJ mad Trump cucked them with Rudy. 
Click to expand...
I don't think it is that at all. I think it is the 'talking out of both sides of the mouth' for WH counsel to argue "should have gone through the courts" in impeachment and DOJ to argue "should use impeachment" in the courts. I hope that tact is considered by the courts. ETA, not that DOJ is defending Trump... but it is pretty hard to distinguish them from WH counsel at this point.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Gr00vus said:
There's no mystery about it. They're the reason he's in office now.
Click to expand...
I think that's a bridge too far, but I get the distinct feeling they prefer it, we've gotten soft, and they'll test any Democratic president to the nth if we elect one. We're in for a bumpy ride.

 
rockaction said:
I think that's a bridge too far, but I get the distinct feeling they prefer it, we've gotten soft, and they'll test any Democratic president to the nth if we elect one. We're in for a bumpy ride.
Click to expand...
They ran bot armies that basically dictated the level of discourse, provided a lot of funding through back channels, stole and shared all kinds of intel, and cracked voting machines.

How much smoke do you need?

 
Gr00vus said:
They ran bot armies that basically dictated the level of discourse, provided a lot of funding through back channels, stole and shared all kinds of intel, and cracked voting machines.

How much smoke do you need?
Click to expand...
They did that, but I don't think they fundamentally changed the election. That's really a lay opinion. I know they were messing with the elections and the lack of response on our end was significant and stupid and I hold it against the Rs in the Senate for holding up House bills.

Paper ballots next time. Caveat emptor on Facebook and social media. Watch freaking PBS News. That'll solve the problem. 

 
quick-hands said:
Well maybe  they should have put someone in that spot.  But they didnt.  So schiff has to man up.  Hth
Click to expand...
The DOJ buried the complaint. They are the ones to appoint a special prosecutor. The House doesn’t appoint a special prosecutor. So the difference is Starr was an independent counsel looking into the matter, gave a report to Congress, and then answered questions about his findings, and Congress voted to impeach. Hth.

eta: If a special counsel were appointed by the doj we wouldn’t have the “partisan witch hunt” bs either.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Warren's Question, as read by CJ Roberts: "At a time when large majorities of Americans have lost faith in government, does the fact that the Chief Justice is presiding over an impeachment trial in which Republican senators have thus far refused to allow witnesses or evidence contribute to the loss of legitimacy of the chief justice, the supreme court, and the constitution?"
Click to expand...
Local Fox.

 
OrtonToOlsen said:
Schiff should testify...so should John Roberts, Ted Cruz, Don Lemon, Hunter Biden, Hillary, Jim Belushi, the lead singer of The New Radicals, and this guy.
Click to expand...
"Health insurance, rip-off lying
FDA, big bankers buying
Fake computer crashes dining
Cloning while they're multiplying
Fashion shoots with Beck and Hanson
Courtney Love and Marilyn Manson
You're all fakes, run to your mansions
Come around, we'll kick your asses!"

- Bernie Sanders in Dubuque, Iowa on Jan 7, 2020

 
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
12K
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: 7 (members: 0, guests: 7)
Top