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*** (1 Viewer)

SCHIFF:

In August, when you worked with Rudy Giuliani and a top Ukrainian aid to draft a public statement for President Zelensky to issue ... you understood that was required by President Trump before he would grant a W.H. meeting with Pres. Zelensky?

SONDLAND:

That's correct.
Why was the us involved on drafting the Ukrainian statement?

 
I'd also note that if I ever gave an opening statement similar to Nunes,' whereby I'd speak in pure rhetoric and hyperbole, I'd very likely be found in contempt, my entire opening struck, my law license in jeopardy, and possibly sitting in a jail cell if I didn't apologize and quickly change my tune. 

Crazy to me that it's, at least to some extent, okay on the House floor. 

 
I predict that all of the folks in here having their hopes up for some bombshell testimony by Sondlund are going to be severely disappointed.  At the end of the day, Tim will post in here like in the Russia thread that this hoax is over with and it is just best for the Dems to accept defeat and to move on and try and focus on the 2020 election.
No reason to post this again except that I wanted to post it again. 

 
Sondland wants to help you out here ffs. Just ask him the questions. 
I suspect everyone had a plan today that went out the window when they saw Sondland's opening statement.

In some ways the GOP may be better prepared, only because they get an extra 45 minutes to shift gears.  I think the damage will be done before the GOP try to rehabilitate, but FoxNews will likely help their narrative with the GOP base.

 
  • Smile
Reactions: Ned
FOXNEWS: FOLLOW LIVE: Sondland testifies ‘everyone was in the loop,’ implicates top echelon on Ukraine talks

:jawdrop:
Paul Ryan is on their board.  Maybe he's thinking of a 2020 run with the full backing of Hanitiy and Co.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sondland wants to help you out here ffs. Just ask him the questions. 
I suspect everyone had a plan today that went out the window when they saw Sondland's opening statement.

In some ways the GOP may be better prepared, only because they get an extra 45 minutes to shift gears.  I think the damage will be done before the GOP try to rehabilitate, but FoxNews will likely help their narrative with the GOP base.
like mike tyson said everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face take that to the bank bromigos

 
"No, it was an open line," Sondland says of the type of phone conversation he had with @realDonaldTrump on July 26th aka it was not a secure line.

 
I suspect everyone had a plan today that went out the window when they saw Sondland's opening statement.

In some ways the GOP may be better prepared, only because they get an extra 45 minutes to shift gears.  I think the damage will be done before the GOP try to rehabilitate, but FoxNews will likely help their narrative with the GOP base.
I’m trying to think of a way for them to argue this. Having trouble. 

 
"It sounds like something I would say," Sondland says, when asked if he told Trump that Zelensky "loves your ###." Says he communicates with Trump in a lot of four-letter words. "This case, three letters."

 
Steve Peoples@sppeoples·18m

Key Trump ally says Sondland is "going to get chopped up"

Jason Miller@JasonMillerinDC· 19m

Nothing in here that claims, let alone proves, @realDonaldTrump did anything improper. Sondland got way too cute and had too selective a memory in trying to make himself look good in opening, and he’s going to get chopped up for it...but that’s not the President’s problem.

 
SCHIFF:

There was a logjam in which the president would not write that U.S. check [for $400 million in military aid], you believed, until Ukraine announced these two investigations ... ?

SONELAND:

That was my belief.

 
I'd also note that if I ever gave an opening statement similar to Nunes,' whereby I'd speak in pure rhetoric and hyperbole, I'd very likely be found in contempt, my entire opening struck, my law license in jeopardy, and possibly sitting in a jail cell if I didn't apologize and quickly change my tune. 

Crazy to me that it's, at least to some extent, okay on the House floor. 
THANK YOU. It's embarrassing this guy holds such a prominent position. 

 
:lmao:   :lmao:

Trump supporters have been knocked for a loop, and can't think straight right now:

Brent Bozell@BrentBozell · 39m

Listen to Sondland and you'll understand why America elected Donald Trump president to get rid of people like Sondland.

Psst - TRUMP HIRED SONDLAND....
just about time for the Barr DOJ to announce they are investigating Comey and McCabe some more.....

 
And the bank robbers note to the teller specifically stated, "this is not a robbery."
You know what’s funny? John Dillinger used to say exactly that. He would proclaim, while pointing a gun at the teller “this ain’t a robbery. It’s a just redistribution of wealth!” 

 
 Key point from Sondland: Zelensky "had to announce the investigations, he didn't actually have to do them, as I understood it."

In other words, whether or not Ukraine actually investigated Biden/Burisma/2016 was less important to Trump than their *saying* they were being investigated. It wasn't about rooting out corruption, it was about publicizing information helpful to Trump.

 
The fact that the Senate will not remove him based on this should be everything anyone needs to know about whether the GOP supports the rule of law or the basic tenets of our system of government.  

Assuming they don't remove him based on all of this, there will never be a Republican who gets my vote again.

 
:lmao:   :lmao:

Trump supporters have been knocked for a loop, and can't think straight right now:

Brent Bozell@BrentBozell · 39m

Listen to Sondland and you'll understand why America elected Donald Trump president to get rid of people like Sondland.

Psst - TRUMP HIRED SONDLAND....
Does he mean to get rid of people who will stand up and tell the truth?  Even those he hired...

And it now appears Bozell deleted the tweet.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
reading the opening statement, sondland explicitly calls it quid pro quo WRT white house visit in exchange for public announcements of investigations.  He says he assumed the military aide followed suit and made that clear to the Ukranians but he didn't hear that directly from the president.

If there's any wiggle room, its that - there was QPQ for a whitehouse visit but not military aide.  Of course, that begs the question: why was the aide held up? 
BUT HE DIDN'T SAY "BRIBERY"!
-Ratcliffe probably 

 
 Key point from Sondland: Zelensky "had to announce the investigations, he didn't actually have to do them, as I understood it."

In other words, whether or not Ukraine actually investigated Biden/Burisma/2016 was less important to Trump than their *saying* they were being investigated. It wasn't about rooting out corruption, it was about publicizing information helpful to Trump.
This was to be the WikiLeaks press conference Part II.

 
The fact that the Senate will not remove him based on this should be everything anyone needs to know about whether the GOP supports the rule of law or the basic tenets of our system of government.  

Assuming they don't remove him based on all of this, there will never be a Republican who gets my vote again.
Exactly...this is exactly why that opening statement should be a part of every Democrat's campaign website...they won't hold Trump accountable for that...what else will they let him get away with.  Im talking candidates from POTUS to Senate and House candidates.  This statement should be played over and over and over.

 
Does he mean to get rid of people who will stand up and tell the truth?  Even those he hired...
Trump has gotten rid of dozens of people he appointed so I say affirmative. 

ETA probably because he was scared they would tell the truth and certainly because they wouldn't agree to perform illegal acts. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The fact that the Senate will not remove him based on this should be everything anyone needs to know about whether the GOP supports the rule of law or the basic tenets of our system of government.  

Assuming they don't remove him based on all of this, there will never be a Republican who gets my vote again.
As someone smarter than me said (though I cannot recall who) - poorly paraphrased: "The GOP will abandon democracy before they abandon the GOP" or something to that effect. It is already visible with demographic change causing them to focus more on voter suppression and gerrymandering than actually gaining new voters. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sondland confirms again that it was a quid pro quo and Pres. Zelensky needed to convince Pres. Trump he would do investigations in order to get a meeting with the White House. He says aid was conditioned on announcement of the investigations

 
 Key point from Sondland: Zelensky "had to announce the investigations, he didn't actually have to do them, as I understood it."

In other words, whether or not Ukraine actually investigated Biden/Burisma/2016 was less important to Trump than their *saying* they were being investigated. It wasn't about rooting out corruption, it was about publicizing information helpful to Trump.
If this is true, it kills any "corruption concern" arguments and confirms that it was a smear job attempt from the get go. And for that alone he's gotta go.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top