Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

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


snitwitch

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, jm192 said:

I give the Senators the benefit of the doubt.  And I think Bolton’s testimony is exactly what Trump couldn’t have from a witness.

If they say he is a liar or motivated by alternative forces—I think the Senate will vote for witnesses and want to question him.  This opens the flood gates to all witnesses and documents.

Alternatively:  If they say his testimony is fine, there’s no reason to bring him in.  We accept his testimony via the book.  We know what he’s going to say.  We believe it.  Here’s why it doesn’t mean the President is bad.

Or

Quote

Trump denies telling Bolton that Ukraine aid was tied to investigations, as explosive book claiming otherwise leaks

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, The Commish said:

:lmao:  Agree 100%

But given what we know and his actions, if I had to bet, I'd be betting on him being serious...as absurd as that might be.

It’s just that things could go sideways for the GOP on this. Things like IRS, Fast & Furious & Benghazi were complicated issues, no matter what people thought of them. The Burisma situation is pig & poke stuff.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something I want to add about Bolton: I’m hearing some journalists speculate that because he is such a longtime conservative, he could have an impact on Trump’s base of support. 

This is IMO a misconception. Bolton is a neocon, arguably THE neocon; he’s never been trusted by the Bannon nationalist base. He has nothing in common with them. They were horrified when he was hired in the first place. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, timschochet said:

Something I want to add about Bolton: I’m hearing some journalists speculate that because he is such a longtime conservative, he could have an impact on Trump’s base of support. 

This is IMO a misconception. Bolton is a neocon, arguably THE neocon; he’s never been trusted by the Bannon nationalist base. He has nothing in common with them. They were horrified when he was hired in the first place. 

 

I thin the arguement is that Bolton has a core of supporters within the Repub party and those could follow him out the door.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, timschochet said:

Something I want to add about Bolton: I’m hearing some journalists speculate that because he is such a longtime conservative, he could have an impact on Trump’s base of support. 

This is IMO a misconception. Bolton is a neocon, arguably THE neocon; he’s never been trusted by the Bannon nationalist base. He has nothing in common with them. They were horrified when he was hired in the first place. 

 

One thing I am certain on in all this, no debate: There's a percentage of people out there, that is shockingly large, that Trump is their ride or die.

There is nothing he could do to lose these people.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Something I want to add about Bolton: I’m hearing some journalists speculate that because he is such a longtime conservative, he could have an impact on Trump’s base of support. 

This is IMO a misconception. Bolton is a neocon, arguably THE neocon; he’s never been trusted by the Bannon nationalist base. He has nothing in common with them. They were horrified when he was hired in the first place. 

 

Yet Trump hired him. Go figure. It certainly cuts into the liberal conspiracy beeswax, the guy was a Fox spokeshead when drafted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

Roberts breaks the tie.

Apparently McConnell doesn't agree:

Quote

Li Zhou

@liszhou

From McConnell spokesperson re: potential 50-50 tie on an impeachment rules resolution: "Anything that is put to a vote during an impeachment trial, ties lose." Asked whether Chief Justice Roberts would be able to break the tie — and got the same response.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, adonis said:

Didn't this conversation happen not only with Lev and Igor in the room, but other folks in the administration?

Quote

The hour-long recording from April 2018 captures a meeting between Trump and a group of donors that includes two associates of his personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, who in recent weeks have emerged as central figures in the impeachment inquiry: Igor Fruman and Lev Parnas. 

In the recording, Parnas can be heard telling Trump that the ambassador, Marie Yovanovitch, had been disparaging the president, and that he should "get rid" of her. "She's basically walking around telling everybody, 'Wait, he's going to get impeached, just wait,' " Parnas says in the recording. 

Get rid of her," the president responds. "Get her out tomorrow. I don't care. Get her out tomorrow. Take her out." 

In an interview with NPR on Saturday, Deputy White House Press Secretary Steven Groves said the president's comments were directed to then-aide John DeStefano, not to Parnas.

 

:shrug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Something I want to add about Bolton: I’m hearing some journalists speculate that because he is such a longtime conservative, he could have an impact on Trump’s base of support. 

This is IMO a misconception. Bolton is a neocon, arguably THE neocon; he’s never been trusted by the Bannon nationalist base. He has nothing in common with them. They were horrified when he was hired in the first place. 

 

It may certainly impact his base of support in the Senate as there’s a decent chunk of “neo-conish” Senators there who were more or less are just going along this for expediency sake, but trust Bolton more than Trump.  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Juxtatarot said:
55 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

Roberts breaks the tie.

Apparently McConnell doesn't agree:

Quote

Li Zhou

@liszhou

From McConnell spokesperson re: potential 50-50 tie on an impeachment rules resolution: "Anything that is put to a vote during an impeachment trial, ties lose." Asked whether Chief Justice Roberts would be able to break the tie — and got the same response.

Here's a fuller analysis:

"The Constitution speaks sparingly to the contours of an impeachment trial but specifies unambiguously that the chief justice must 'preside.' The Senate rules, which incorporate this command, make no distinction between the chief justice’s role as presiding officer in this context and the vice president’s in all others. There is no apparent reason the presiding officer’s responsibility would include breaking 50-50 ties in one context but not the others.

"A presiding officer presides; that means keeping order and moving proceedings along, at least somewhat analogous to the role of a district court judge. The reason the chief justice and not the vice president plays this role in an impeachment of the president alone is that the vice president would have an automatic conflict of interest. If the presiding officer had no substantive role to play, there would be no conflict. It’s precisely because the presiding officer might make substantive decisions that the chief justice must step in.

Finally, the chief justice played a substantive role in both previous impeachment trials of the president. Most notably, Chief Justice Salmon Chase twice broke ties in the Andrew Johnson trial."

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

Is Pam Bondi ever gonna get to talk?  I’m sick of all these old white guys.  Ken Starr has been speaking less than five minutes and I’m about to pass out.

Starr said it all before in the Clinton trial. Only the opposite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, lod001 said:

Trump people are "Winners" Been winning now for 3+ years non stop. Those not "Winners" are... well, you know...gotta be the opposite. "Losers". Not everyone is gonna get a trophy in this one.

If Trump is a winner, then the 2008 Detroit Lions are the best team in history.

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cosjobs said:

Then you go ahead and take Irkutsk, Kamchatka, and Yakutz and I'll take Ukraine as a wall for Europe or Asia

If you knew the spelling of all 3 countries, that's impressive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, lod001 said:

Trump people are "Winners" Been winning now for 3+ years non stop. Those not "Winners" are... well, you know...gotta be the opposite. "Losers". Not everyone is gonna get a trophy in this one.

Not that I don't appreciate being called a loser, but I think you're forgetting that in 2018 Democrats had the BIGGEST HOUSE MIDTERM WIN EVER.

Edited by Skoo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ll admit that in 1999 and maybe until 2015 or so I really thought that someone like Starr could believe what they were saying and doing was right, even if the right/wrong was endlessly debatable. Sad to reach this point of ultimate nihilism on such an important thing.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, the moops said:

But he just throws his hands up in the air and says what? I don't know how he can't get involved should there be a tie on a vote

Not saying I agree but This from an article in The Hill;

“he chief justice is supposed to preside, not make decisions for the Senate,” said a senior Senate GOP aide. 

“It would be a conundrum for the chief justice,” the aide added. “Let’s say [Roberts] says, ‘I’m going to break the tie,’ and John Bolton has to testify. Wouldn’t he have to recuse himself when the Supreme Court gets the question as to whether executive privilege applies?”

The aide said it “would be an unprecedented interference of the third branch into the first branch.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, lazyike said:

“It would be a conundrum for the chief justice,” the aide added. “Let’s say [Roberts] says, ‘I’m going to break the tie,’ and John Bolton has to testify. Wouldn’t he have to recuse himself when the Supreme Court gets the question as to whether executive privilege applies?”

I don't think it would go to the Supreme Court. Bolton wants to testify. If the President files an action in Superior Court asking for a preliminary injunction prohibiting Bolton from testifying until the issue of executive privilege is litigated, I suspect the court would say: "No. It's a political question. We're not getting involved. And even if we were to get involved, we believe the President cannot show a likelihood of prevailing on the merits." With no preliminary injunction pending a decision on the merits (followed by appeals, etc.), the testimony would go forward and that would be that.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

I’ll admit that in 1999 and maybe until 2015 or so I really thought that someone like Starr could believe what they were saying and doing was right, even if the right/wrong was endlessly debatable. Sad to reach this point of ultimate nihilism on such an important thing.

Welcome aboard.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, timschochet said:

Something I want to add about Bolton: I’m hearing some journalists speculate that because he is such a longtime conservative, he could have an impact on Trump’s base of support. 

This is IMO a misconception. Bolton is a neocon, arguably THE neocon; he’s never been trusted by the Bannon nationalist base. He has nothing in common with them. They were horrified when he was hired in the first place. 

 

For those who actually have an ideology, sure, maybe. But for the bulk of the Trump base, when Trump hires him, he's great. When Trump fires him or he quits, he's garbage.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...