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*** (9 Viewers)

squistion said:
Still think there was no quid pro quo?

The New York Times‏ @nytimes 2h2 hours ago

Breaking News: Mick Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff, said the U.S. froze aid partly to pressure Ukraine to investigate Democrats. He undercut President Trump's denials of a quid pro quo.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/17/us/politics/donald-trump-impeachment-news.html?smtyp=cur&smid=tw-nytimes#link-55fe453b
Click to expand...
100% no quid quo pro.  His testimony supports that theory.

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Mulvaney was point person in the whole thing and he just got up and testified that both were the causes of the demand for Ukraine to obligate itself to get the delivery of matériel they were already owed. The hilarious thing is the point he walked back was the one they feel they are safe about.
Click to expand...
This simply isn't true

 
By the way...I tend to agree with Mulvaney that there is going to be political influence in foreign policy.  I appreciate his carefully crafted phrasing.  It's the "state something true that isn't on topic" approach.  The issue is foreign INTERFERENCE in our ELECTORAL PROCESS....always has been an issue...always will be an issue.

 
Popeyecon said:
James Mattis goes there:

"I earned my spurs on the battlefield ... and Donald Trump earned his spurs in a letter from a doctor."
Click to expand...
I wouldn't have dumbed it down and would have cut out the second part to see who got it. Would've been a nice slow build during a pause. 

 
The Commish said:
By the way...I tend to agree with Mulvaney that there is going to be political influence in foreign policy.  I appreciate his carefully crafted phrasing.  It's the "state something true that isn't on topic" approach.  The issue is foreign INTERFERENCE in our ELECTORAL PROCESS....always has been an issue...always will be an issue.
Click to expand...
Yes- holding aid to influence immigration laws- acceptable even if I don’t agree with it. Withholding aid to try to generate negative headlines for your top political rival, not ok.

 
Don't Noonan said:
Skoo said:
Theory?

Maybe you missed the news conference yesterday, Mulvaney admitted Trump ordered the code red to the whole world.
Click to expand...
I am talking about his news conference yesterday where he shot down the quid pro quo theory.
Click to expand...
"The money was held up temporarily, OK? Three issues for that: the corruption in the country, whether or not other countries were participating in support of the Ukraine and whether or not they were cooperating in an ongoing investigation with our Department of Justice."

1. When Mulvaney admitted that the money was held up, he was admitting to a quid pro quo.

2. when Mulvaney referred to an "ongoing investigation with our DOJ", he was referring to Trump's request to Zelenskyy, "whatever you can do with the Attorney General [regarding the Bidens] would be great."

There's no other way to spin that.

 
Don't Noonan said:
I am talking about his news conference yesterday where he shot down the quid pro quo theory.
Click to expand...
I used to think that Trump supporters and the rest of us lived in different countries. Now I have to wonder if it isn’t different planets, or even universes. 

This is not a case of Rashoman. By that I mean this is not a case in which two reasonable people could watch the same event and come away with two very different interpretations of what occurred. Simply put, one cannot be a rational person and reach the conclusion you are claiming to have reached. 

 
timschochet said:
Don't Noonan said:
I am talking about his news conference yesterday where he shot down the quid pro quo theory.
Click to expand...
I used to think that Trump supporters and the rest of us lived in different countries. Now I have to wonder if it isn’t different planets, or even universes. 

This is not a case of Rashoman. By that I mean this is not a case in which two reasonable people could watch the same event and come away with two very different interpretations of what occurred. Simply put, one cannot be a rational person and reach the conclusion you are claiming to have reached. 
Click to expand...
"Agree to disagree"

 
What are we to do with this? The polls suggest there are nearly 40 million people in this country who “think” the way Don’t Noonan does. What are we to do with them? It’s a question that I’ve asked myself, with no good answer, since November of 2016. 

 
[scooter] said:
"The money was held up temporarily, OK? Three issues for that: the corruption in the country, whether or not other countries were participating in support of the Ukraine and whether or not they were cooperating in an ongoing investigation with our Department of Justice."

1. When Mulvaney admitted that the money was held up, he was admitting to a quid pro quo.

2. when Mulvaney referred to an "ongoing investigation with our DOJ", he was referring to Trump's request to Zelenskyy, "whatever you can do with the Attorney General [regarding the Bidens] would be great."

There's no other way to spin that.
Click to expand...
Not spin at all.  I am talking about if there was quid quo pro in regards to military aid to Ukraine for Biden investigation.  Mulvaney shot that theory down and said no quid pro quo.

 
Mike Walker@New_Narrative
Departing Energy Secretary Rick Perry says he's not sure he'll comply with subpoena in impeachment inquiry

This is what makes America great!  Subpoenas are optional!

 
timschochet said:
I used to think that Trump supporters and the rest of us lived in different countries. Now I have to wonder if it isn’t different planets, or even universes. 

This is not a case of Rashoman. By that I mean this is not a case in which two reasonable people could watch the same event and come away with two very different interpretations of what occurred. Simply put, one cannot be a rational person and reach the conclusion you are claiming to have reached. 
Click to expand...
I feel the same way about you guys so I don't know what to tell you.  I come hear and am constantly amazed at what you guys believe.   :shrug:

 
Norman Paperman said:
Mike Walker@New_Narrative
Departing Energy Secretary Rick Perry says he's not sure he'll comply with subpoena in impeachment inquiry

This is what makes America great!  Subpoenas are optional!
Click to expand...
The precedent they are setting is going to be awesome to watch when the shoe is on the other foot. But I'm sure they'll be able to wiggle out of it and find some reason it is different this time given their lack of a backbone. 

 
timschochet said:
What are we to do with this? The polls suggest there are nearly 40 million people in this country who “think” the way Don’t Noonan does. What are we to do with them? It’s a question that I’ve asked myself, with no good answer, since November of 2016. 
Click to expand...
You don't do anything with them....you focus on others actively engaged and you focus on getting more people actively engaged.

 
timschochet said:
What are we to do with this? The polls suggest there are nearly 40 million people in this country who “think” the way Don’t Noonan does. What are we to do with them? It’s a question that I’ve asked myself, with no good answer, since November of 2016. 
Click to expand...
Obviously the correct answer is to vote in 2020 who you prefer and not try and illegally oust a rightfully elected President.

 
timschochet said:
What are we to do with this? The polls suggest there are nearly 40 million people in this country who “think” the way Don’t Noonan does. What are we to do with them? It’s a question that I’ve asked myself, with no good answer, since November of 2016. 
Click to expand...
Divorce. Admit this isn't working and split this country and everyone move on with their lives.

 
Don't Noonan said:
[scooter] said:
"The money was held up temporarily, OK? Three issues for that: the corruption in the country, whether or not other countries were participating in support of the Ukraine and whether or not they were cooperating in an ongoing investigation with our Department of Justice."

1. When Mulvaney admitted that the money was held up, he was admitting to a quid pro quo.

2. when Mulvaney referred to an "ongoing investigation with our DOJ", he was referring to Trump's request to Zelenskyy, "whatever you can do with the Attorney General [regarding the Bidens] would be great."

There's no other way to spin that.
Click to expand...
Not spin at all.  I am talking about if there was quid quo pro in regards to military aid to Ukraine for Biden investigation.  Mulvaney shot that theory down and said no quid pro quo.
Click to expand...
Mulvaney already admitted that the money was held up. That's proof of the "quid" right there.

Mulvaney already admitted that the money was held up to get cooperation on a DOJ investigation. That's proof of the "quo" right there.

And we already know that the "DOJ investigation" refers to the Bidens, because Trump said so in the phone call with Zelenskyy.

 
Don't Noonan said:
Wrong.  He specifically denied any quid pro quo with military aid and Biden investigation.  Quit reading media as they are biased and try and spin falsehoods.
Click to expand...
The last sentence is particularly funny especially considering your crystal clear bias and spin. There is not a ounce of question in my mind that if Trump had a D next to his name instead of an R you would be roasting him to no ends.  Your glasses are so tinted rose they blot out the sun.  

 
[scooter] said:
Mulvaney already admitted that the money was held up. That's proof of the "quid" right there.

Mulvaney already admitted that the money was held up to get cooperation on a DOJ investigation. That's proof of the "quo" right there.

And we already know that the "DOJ investigation" refers to the Bidens, because Trump said so in the phone call with Zelenskyy.
Click to expand...
No.  Help with server on 2016 election interference.  The phone call transcript shows Trump asking him to comply with Barr's investigation.

 
Don't Noonan said:
[scooter] said:
Mulvaney already admitted that the money was held up. That's proof of the "quid" right there.

Mulvaney already admitted that the money was held up to get cooperation on a DOJ investigation. That's proof of the "quo" right there.

And we already know that the "DOJ investigation" refers to the Bidens, because Trump said so in the phone call with Zelenskyy.
Click to expand...
No.  Help with server on 2016 election interference.  The phone call transcript shows Trump asking him to comply with Barr's investigation.
Click to expand...
"The other thing, There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it."

Trump is asking Zelensky to cooperate with a DOJ investigation right there. And that DOJ investigation involves the Bidens.

You can't separate the requests, no matter how hard you try.

 
Don't Noonan said:
Wrong.  He specifically denied any quid pro quo with military aid and Biden investigation.  Quit reading media as they are biased and try and spin falsehoods.
Click to expand...
Ari Flieischer disagrees with you in the article at Foxnews.com:

Mulvaney seemed to contradict President Trump’s claim that there was no “quid pro quo” during his July 25 phone call  with Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky, by telling reporters at the White House Thursday that the release of military aid to Ukraine was tied to the administration’s demands that Kiev investigate purported corruption by the Democrats during the 2016 presidential election campaign.

The scramble for everyone to get their stories straight is fun to watch. To paraphrase Judge Judy, when the story doesn't make sense, someone's lying.

 
dkp993 said:
The last sentence is particularly funny especially considering your crystal clear bias and spin. There is not a ounce of question in my mind that if Trump had a D next to his name instead of an R you would be roasting him to no ends.  Your glasses are so tinted rose they blot out the sun.  
Click to expand...
It is obvious that Dems are so afraid of losing to Trump again in 2020 and have no confidence in any of the schmucks running now that their best chance is to try and make up enough conspiracy theories to try and oust the President.  Russia hoax failed and here is attempt 2.

 
[scooter] said:
"The other thing, There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it."

Trump is asking Zelensky to cooperate with a DOJ investigation right there. And that DOJ investigation involves the Bidens.

You can't separate the requests, no matter how hard you try.
Click to expand...
Nope.  Not related at all.  Sorry.

 
Don't Noonan said:
If Trump were to be impeached and removed by this yes.  Country would revolt.
Click to expand...
Define revolt?

As a country, we can't seem to take action on a number of very pressing issues like climate change, homelessness, etc. What makes you think a lazy population is going to revolt?

 
Amused to Death said:
Ari Flieischer disagrees with you in the article at Foxnews.com:

Mulvaney seemed to contradict President Trump’s claim that there was no “quid pro quo” during his July 25 phone call  with Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky, by telling reporters at the White House Thursday that the release of military aid to Ukraine was tied to the administration’s demands that Kiev investigate purported corruption by the Democrats during the 2016 presidential election campaign.

The scramble for everyone to get their stories straight is fun to watch. To paraphrase Judge Judy, when the story doesn't make sense, someone's lying.
Click to expand...
You have to understand the server issue is different than investigating Biden.  Looking into 2016 past election interference is perfectly fine.  Hillary did everything possible to try and hide what was on her server.  Why is that?

 
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
5K
timschochet
timschochet

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 10 (members: 0, guests: 10)
Top