Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

TRUMP TO INFINITY AND BEYOND HQ - The Great and Positive Place


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 33.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • knowledge dropper

    2484

  • timschochet

    1845

  • SaintsInDome2006

    1688

  • The General

    1647

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

For anyone who has ever wondered how authoritarians manage to take power in "modern" democracies, here's your first hand evidence that the USA is not immune. Thankfully it appears that the system is h

Following in the footsteps of Twitter, Facebook, MySpace, Friendster, and Google Plus, the Footballguys Forum hereby suspends President Trump's posting privileges. The suspension takes effect immediat

Are we sure it isn't Alamo Landscaping?

1 minute ago, Godsbrother said:

Whether it does or not doesn't matter to me, I don't give a damn about the Democrats.  The important thing is that that President be held accountable for his actions.  If he is guilty of wrongdoing then he should be removed from office.  I am not sure why any American would be opposed to that.

A couple reasons:

1- It won't lead to him being removed from office.

2- Might just cost the Dems the election.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Opie said:

You actually believe that being impeached by Congress is going to be w "win" for the Democrats and the country....maybe bolster the Dems chances of taking the White House?

Really?

I think the Dems are threading on dangerous ground putting so much effort in impeaching DT.  If it fails the Dems fail in 2020.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, tonydead said:

A couple reasons:

1- It won't lead to him being removed from office.

2- Might just cost the Dems the election.

We don't know that either of those will be the case but it is the job of Congress to oversee the executive branch and investigate potential abuses of power.   That's what they are doing and I have no problem with that.  If the President is innocent he has nothing to hide and should help him in the upcoming election. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, tonydead said:

A couple reasons:

1- It won't lead to him being removed from office.

2- Might just cost the Dems the election.

It might win the Dems the election.  The Mueller probe was an optical dud for Democrats, but Trump's approval remained flat. An aging Mueller will be replaced by actual witnesses, including impeccable people like Vindman, and Yvanovich.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Godsbrother said:

We don't know that either of those will be the case but it is the job of Congress to oversee the executive branch and investigate potential abuses of power.   That's what they are doing and I have no problem with that.  If the President is innocent he has nothing to hide and should help him in the upcoming election. 

Yes we do.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Opie said:

You actually believe that being impeached by Congress is going to be w "win" for the Democrats and the country....maybe bolster the Dems chances of taking the White House?

Really?

 

On 9/26/2019 at 12:49 PM, knowledge dropper said:

Much like when Darth Vader struck down Obi Wan Kenobi, impeachment will only make Trump more powerful than the left can possibly imagine.  

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gopher State said:

I think the Dems are threading on dangerous ground putting so much effort in impeaching DT.  If it fails the Dems fail in 2020.

I think at this point everyone has formed an opinion on the president.   My guess is that he is likely impeached but not removed from office and I don't think it will change many votes either way.   In any case there is enough smoke here that it warrants investigation.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Shula-holic said:

Trump has taken the lead in the latest USA Today poll over a generic Democrat. I’ll admit I’m a bit surprised it’s this way now. Usually the challengers party has an advantage with an unnamed nominee. From my recollection the unnamed Republican led President Obama until Romney was locked in as the nominee. 
 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2019/10/30/poll-biden-slips-warren-rises-sanders-buttigieg-top-tier/4096461002/

This is a giant DANGER sign for Democrats in 2020. You’re supposed to be kicking butt in a poll like this. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, tonydead said:

A couple reasons:

1- It won't lead to him being removed from office.

2- Might just cost the Dems the election.

Somebody pro-Trump here posted a video of a Dem Rep saying back in March or April or so after the Mueller report came out that if the Dems did not impeach then they would be sure to lose the election. Because he said Trump and the GOP would say 'see no there there, they had nothing.'

Trump and the GOP will say that anyway, aside from the Constitutional issue Dems really do need to make a statement that Trump has committed crimes or acted unconstitutionally in violation of his oath. The talk about being alpha isn't really all that silly, can't let people push you around all the time or else it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Gopher State said:

I think the Dems are threading on dangerous ground putting so much effort in impeaching DT.  If it fails the Dems fail in 2020.

I love how we think its just the Dems that are on dangerous ground.  IMO if the GOP Senate does not impeach (if the public is for it and that is 50/50 at this point) then you are going to see the Republicans voted out.  

The question to me is if Dems, Independent and Republicans voters all  turn out in record numbers who does that help the most?    

 

Both sides have a lot at risk, no matter how this turns out. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Somebody pro-Trump here posted a video of a Dem Rep saying back in March or April or so after the Mueller report came out that if the Dems did not impeach then they would be sure to lose the election. Because he said Trump and the GOP would say 'see no there there, they had nothing.'

Trump and the GOP will say that anyway, aside from the Constitutional issue Dems really do need to make a statement that Trump has committed crimes or acted unconstitutionally in violation of his oath. The talk about being alpha isn't really all that silly, can't let people push you around all the time or else it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

They're desperately hoping they catch something on the flop this time.  They lost the hand with Mueller and are now going all in with a silly phone call.  

  • Like 3
  • Laughing 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, tonydead said:

They're desperately hoping they catch something on the flop this time.  They lost the hand with Mueller and are now going all in with a silly phone call.  

Well you see my point though, right?

Trump and the GOP would just say: "If you had something you would have done something about it."

The problem is that Trump had essentially gotten away with it. He hid behind Barr and that ridiculous OLC memo that prevents him from being indicted and they walled off Mueller's witnesses and evidence. Ok, so great there ya go. - And then Trump did it again.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, tonydead said:

They're desperately hoping they catch something on the flop this time.  They lost the hand with Mueller and are now going all in with a silly phone call.  

Good thing its not just about that one phone call.

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://rules.house.gov/bill/116/h-res-PIH-inquiry

The new resolution directs the six committees of the House to “continue their ongoing investigations” but only lays out rules governing the discovery process – issuing subpoenas, submitting questions, etc. – for the Intelligence and Judiciary Committees, leaving the four other committees – Financial Services, Foreign Affairs, Oversight and Reform, and Ways and Means – to operate however they see fit.

Under the previous Clinton and Nixon impeachment resolutions, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee and the ranking minority member could issue subpoenas for witnesses and documents by acting “jointly.” If one of them disagreed, the other member had to first refer the matter to the committee before acting on his own.

The Pelosi resolution gives the chairmen of the Intelligence and Judiciary Committees the power to act unilaterally – without the approval of the ranking Republican member, and if a Republican wants to issue subpoenas, he or she can only do so with the concurrence of the chairman. If the chairman refuses to agree, the Republican can submit his or her request to the entire committee, but the committee has majority Democratic membership.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Opie said:

You actually believe that being impeached by Congress is going to be w "win" for the Democrats and the country....maybe bolster the Dems chances of taking the White House?

Really?

This is great for team Trump then.  Not sure why they keep telling people not to cooperate with the investigation if all it's going to do is help him win in 2020?  He should be shouting from his twitter machine how great this investigation is and telling everyone to cooperate like any innocent person would, especially since it's going to guarantee his victory next year.

Edited by yak651
typo
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, John Blutarsky said:

https://rules.house.gov/bill/116/h-res-PIH-inquiry

The new resolution directs the six committees of the House to “continue their ongoing investigations” but only lays out rules governing the discovery process – issuing subpoenas, submitting questions, etc. – for the Intelligence and Judiciary Committees, leaving the four other committees – Financial Services, Foreign Affairs, Oversight and Reform, and Ways and Means – to operate however they see fit.

Under the previous Clinton and Nixon impeachment resolutions, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee and the ranking minority member could issue subpoenas for witnesses and documents by acting “jointly.” If one of them disagreed, the other member had to first refer the matter to the committee before acting on his own.

The Pelosi resolution gives the chairmen of the Intelligence and Judiciary Committees the power to act unilaterally – without the approval of the ranking Republican member, and if a Republican wants to issue subpoenas, he or she can only do so with the concurrence of the chairman. If the chairman refuses to agree, the Republican can submit his or her request to the entire committee, but the committee has majority Democratic membership.

Elections have consequences?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, John Blutarsky said:

https://rules.house.gov/bill/116/h-res-PIH-inquiry

The new resolution directs the six committees of the House to “continue their ongoing investigations” but only lays out rules governing the discovery process – issuing subpoenas, submitting questions, etc. – for the Intelligence and Judiciary Committees, leaving the four other committees – Financial Services, Foreign Affairs, Oversight and Reform, and Ways and Means – to operate however they see fit.

Under the previous Clinton and Nixon impeachment resolutions, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee and the ranking minority member could issue subpoenas for witnesses and documents by acting “jointly.” If one of them disagreed, the other member had to first refer the matter to the committee before acting on his own.

The Pelosi resolution gives the chairmen of the Intelligence and Judiciary Committees the power to act unilaterally without the approval of the ranking Republican member, and if a Republican wants to issue subpoenas, he or she can only do so with the concurrence of the chairman. If the chairman refuses to agree, the Republican can submit his or her request to the entire committee, but the committee has majority Democratic membership.

What a joke,  just more of the same . If I was a betting man when all the dust settles I would bet the following is proven true.

 

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy says Democrats are abusing their power and discrediting democracy by “trying to impeach the president because they are scared they can’t defeat him at the ballot box.”

The California Republican is speaking out against a package of impeachment rules approved Thursday.

McCarthy says that ever since Donald Trump’s election, Democrats have waged a “permanent campaign to undermine his legitimacy. They have predetermined the president’s guilt. They have never accepted the voters’ choice to make him president. So, for 37 days and counting, they have run an unprecedented, undemocratic and unfair investigation. This resolution only makes it worse.”

McCarthy says Democrats are “using secret interviews and selective leaks” to portray Trump’s legitimate actions as an impeachable offense. He is referring to the closed-door hearings in the House as Democrats gather evidence in the impeachment inquiry.

Edited by GoBirds
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Were they talking about the INF? Trump just cancelled it altogether, inviting a new arms race.

No one wants to get in an arms race with Donald, no one. Best guns on the planet. Rub a little baby oil on Do s guns and they will be glistening, who would dare do a pose down with him.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, knowledge dropper said:

Rational voters see what the Democrats are doing.  This is a kangaroo court.  

Yes. I believe rational people understand congressional oversight.

Or is this an attempt to call those that don't support Trump irrational?

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, HellToupee said:

No one wants to get in an arms race with Donald, no one.

Quote

 

Here’s what we have: the naive former Russian leadership went ahead and eliminated intermediate-range land-based missiles. The Americans eliminated their Pershing missiles, while we scrapped the SS-20 missiles. There was a tragic event associated with this when the chief designer of these systems committed suicide believing that it was a betrayal of national interests and unilateral disarmament.

Why unilateral? Because under that treaty we eliminated our ground complex, but the treaty did not include medium-range sea- and air-based missiles. Air- and sea-based missiles were not affected by it. The Soviet Union simply did not have them, while the United States kept them in service.

What we ultimately got was a clear imbalance: the United States has kept its medium-range missiles. It does not matter whether they are based at sea, in the air, or on land; however, the Soviet Union was simply left without this type of weapons.

Putin.

- Reagan did that deal. Trump killed it.

Congratulations.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, HellToupee said:

No one wants to get in an arms race with Donald, no one. Best guns on the planet. Rub a little baby oil on Do s guns and they will be glistening, who would dare do a pose down with him.

Talk of Donald in this way so near lunch isn’t cool. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, John Blutarsky said:

Yes the majority of the country.

The polling you are quoted there though is very important. It’s what keeping Republicans from bouncing the guy. All things being equal they’d cut him loose in a heartbeat.

  • Laughing 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, John Blutarsky said:
Quote

A New York Times–Siena College battlegrounds poll released Wednesday found that majorities in Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Arizona and Florida oppose removing the president from office through impeachment. Majorities or pluralities do support an investigation of Trump, however.

Hm, these states being in favor of investigation of the president probably means they're open minded and will wait to hear the evidence.

  • Like 1
  • Thinking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, GoBirds said:

Russia 2.0?

This isn’t even close to Russia 2.0, there isn’t even a patty inside this nothing Burger. This entire Schiff/Pelosi circus with the phone call was over the second the administration released the transcripts of the phone call.  

  • Like 1
  • Love 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, John Blutarsky said:

Hm, yet they oppose removing him through impeachment.

This is a sensible approach. Being in favor of investigation but awaiting the evidence is the best course. I won't even say myself I'm in favor of impeachment & removal until I see the evidence.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Widbil83 said:

This isn’t even close to Russia 2.0, there isn’t even a patty inside this nothing Burger. This entire Schiff/Pelosi circus with the phone call was over the second the administration released the transcripts of the phone call.  

This is chock full of fake news.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Widbil83 said:

This isn’t even close to Russia 2.0, there isn’t even a patty inside this nothing Burger. This entire Schiff/Pelosi circus with the phone call was over the second the administration released the transcripts of the phone call.  

It’s a disturbing pattern none the less, when the tables do turn there will be no holds barred after this constant manufactured craziness. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Rep. Meadows: Dems' impeachment witnesses contradict quid pro quo narrative

https://www.foxnews.com/media/democrats-impeachment-trump-panic-meadows

The impeachment narrative built by House Democrats is beginning to collapse, as witnesses continue to contradict the quid pro quo claim being made against President Trump, said Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., on "Fox & Friends" Thursday.

"All of a sudden what you're starting to see is some contradictions between witnesses that we had yesterday [and] witnesses that we're having today," he said. "You're starting to see a different side of the story.

"And what we are finding and what your viewers need to understand is that each time that the witnesses are asked about holding up aid and [if] it was held up for improper purposes — the answer is no," Meadows continued. "So anybody who's talked to the president is able to articulate that in a real way."

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Widbil83 said:

This isn’t even close to Russia 2.0, there isn’t even a patty inside this nothing Burger. This entire Schiff/Pelosi circus with the phone call was over the second the administration released the transcripts of the phone call.  

Vegan Veggienothingburger

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, John Blutarsky said:

Rep. Meadows: Dems' impeachment witnesses contradict quid pro quo narrative

https://www.foxnews.com/media/democrats-impeachment-trump-panic-meadows

The impeachment narrative built by House Democrats is beginning to collapse, as witnesses continue to contradict the quid pro quo claim being made against President Trump, said Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., on "Fox & Friends" Thursday.

"All of a sudden what you're starting to see is some contradictions between witnesses that we had yesterday [and] witnesses that we're having today," he said. "You're starting to see a different side of the story.

"And what we are finding and what your viewers need to understand is that each time that the witnesses are asked about holding up aid and [if] it was held up for improper purposes — the answer is no," Meadows continued. "So anybody who's talked to the president is able to articulate that in a real way."

He's referring to Tim Morrison, who actually confirmed the investigation demand, but said he didn't believe what happened was illegal.

"Taylor testified that Morrison told him Sondland had demanded the Ukrainian president announce an investigation into Burisma, while Morrison said he remembered Sondland saying an announcement by the country's top prosecutor would suffice. Taylor also indicated Morrison met with the Ukrainian national security adviser in his hotel room, while Morrison said it was in the hotel's business center.

Morrison said he learned about a delay in military aid to Ukraine shortly after assuming his post, and was tasked with coordinating with various agencies to demonstrate why the aid was needed.

"I was confident that our national security principals — the Secretaries of State and Defense, the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, and the head of the National Security Council — could convince President Trump to release the aid," he said.

Morrison testified he had "no reason to believe" the Ukrainians knew of a delay in military aid until August 28, and said he was unaware the aid may have been tied to the demand for an investigation into Burisma until he spoke to Sondland on September 1."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/tim-morrison-testimony-read-the-full-text-of-white-house-officials-opening-statement-to-impeachment-committees-today/

Edited by mrip541
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, mrip541 said:

He's referring to Tim Morrison, who actually confirmed the quid pro quo, but said he didn't believe what happened was illegal.

"Taylor testified that Morrison told him Sondland had demanded the Ukrainian president announce an investigation into Burisma, while Morrison said he remembered Sondland saying an announcement by the country's top prosecutor would suffice. Taylor also indicated Morrison met with the Ukrainian national security adviser in his hotel room, while Morrison said it was in the hotel's business center.

Morrison said he learned about a delay in military aid to Ukraine shortly after assuming his post, and was tasked with coordinating with various agencies to demonstrate why the aid was needed.

"I was confident that our national security principals — the Secretaries of State and Defense, the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, and the head of the National Security Council — could convince President Trump to release the aid," he said.

Morrison testified he had "no reason to believe" the Ukrainians knew of a delay in military aid until August 28, and said he was unaware the aid may have been tied to the demand for an investigation into Burisma until he spoke to Sondland on September 1."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/tim-morrison-testimony-read-the-full-text-of-white-house-officials-opening-statement-to-impeachment-committees-today/

He uses the term witnesses not witness.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, John Blutarsky said:

Rep. Meadows: Dems' impeachment witnesses contradict quid pro quo narrative

https://www.foxnews.com/media/democrats-impeachment-trump-panic-meadows

The impeachment narrative built by House Democrats is beginning to collapse, as witnesses continue to contradict the quid pro quo claim being made against President Trump, said Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., on "Fox & Friends" Thursday.

"All of a sudden what you're starting to see is some contradictions between witnesses that we had yesterday [and] witnesses that we're having today," he said. "You're starting to see a different side of the story.

"And what we are finding and what your viewers need to understand is that each time that the witnesses are asked about holding up aid and [if] it was held up for improper purposes — the answer is no," Meadows continued. "So anybody who's talked to the president is able to articulate that in a real way."

This Meadows guy seems like a leaker.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • knowledge dropper changed the title to TRUMP TO INFINITY AND BEYOND HQ - The Great and Positive Place

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...