Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

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


snitwitch

Recommended Posts

35 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.

has he apologized for his handling of the Baylor rape scandal?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm trying to discern his point.  Is he saying that the only single thing that's changed between past impeachment processes and this one is the partisanship and all the acts leading to them are similar enough that we should maintain the status quo?  Is he saying not ENOUGH articles were brought?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Dinsy Ejotuz said:
19 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.

Ultimately, what Ken Starr is doing today is continuing – if not completing – the rehabilitation of Bill Clinton's reputation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, The Commish said:

I'm trying to discern his point.  Is he saying that the only single thing that's changed between past impeachment processes and this one is the partisanship and all the acts leading to them are similar enough that we should maintain the status quo?  Is he saying not ENOUGH articles were brought?  

My takeaways of his points in shorthand:

  • Impeachment should be bipartisan.
  • Trump can't have obstructed justice by listening to his white house lawyers and by protecting the office of the presidency.
  • Impeachment subpoenas were invalid that were issued before a house vote on impeachment.
  • Due process wasn't honored because testimony/subpoenas weren't dragged out in the courts.
Edited by adonis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, The Commish said:

I'm trying to discern his point.  Is he saying that the only single thing that's changed between past impeachment processes and this one is the partisanship and all the acts leading to them are similar enough that we should maintain the status quo?  Is he saying not ENOUGH articles were brought?  

He seems to be making some sort of argument that the concept of impeachment is inherently harmful and against common law. With Mueller the argument was the President could not be inducted, he could only be impeached by Congress. With Ukraine, the argument is the President can’t be impeached because parliaments really don’t have that power. It’s shadow authoritarianism.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 2
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, adonis said:

Impeachment should be bipartisan.

Well, I agree to an extent, but not for the reason he seems to be offering which seems to be "because that's how it has been done in the past".  That falls flat on its face primarily because it requires the assumption that the political climate of the day is the same as it was in the past.  Clearly it isn't.

2 minutes ago, adonis said:

Trump can't have obstructed justice by listening to his white house lawyers and by protecting the office of the presidency.

Not sure I understand this.  White House lawyers now supercede the Constitution and the laws of the land?

3 minutes ago, adonis said:

Impeachment subpoenas were invalid that were issued before a house vote on impeachment.

I'm not sure I understand this either...don't even know where to start here.  Lawyers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, adonis said:

My takeaways of his points in shorthand:

  • Impeachment should be bipartisan.
  • Trump can't have obstructed justice by listening to his white house lawyers and by protecting the office of the presidency.
  • Impeachment subpoenas were invalid that were issued before a house vote on impeachment.
  • Due process wasn't honored because testimony/subpoenas weren't dragged out in the courts.

So again, lots of procedural arguments but nothing on the substance.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Amused to Death said:

So again, lots of procedural arguments but nothing on the substance.

I'm not a lawyer and was half listening, but those were my takeaways...folks with more knowledge or more attention to his talk can elaborate or correct.

Have it on in background as I'm working.

...BUT

There's really no engagement on the issues.  Just a lot of misdirection and procedural complaints.

Edited by adonis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You almost have to admire the conviction of the GOP.  They are now going to have to pivot once again and call Bolton a liar (which Trump has already done).  Notwithstanding, of course, that Bolton is known as a total straight shooter, to a fault, and Trump can't open his mouth without lies pouring out of it.  

They should simply just retreat to the last line of defence:  He did it, we don't care.  It is what they all believe anyway.  And the faithful will have their back.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, The Commish said:

Well, I agree to an extent, but not for the reason he seems to be offering which seems to be "because that's how it has been done in the past".  That falls flat on its face primarily because it requires the assumption that the political climate of the day is the same as it was in the past. 

It’s not just that, it’s a lie. Johnson and Nixon were impeached (Nixon was facing draft articles) for non-crimes as well, ie violation of their oaths and disqualification from office.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Purpura is splitting hairs that Ukraine aid was released before an investigation was announced.  The real question is whether it was released before a whistle blower complaint was known to have been submitted.

Edited by adonis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Lutherman2112 said:

Trump has two tells. When he states that he "knows more than __________", he doesn't have a clue. When he states that he "doesn't know ____________, never heard of him/her", he knows that person.

I believe it was also found that a preponderance of his anecdotal claims are false/unfounded in which someone addresses him as "sir."

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Peter Suderman @petersuderman

Trump didn't do the thing he's accused of doing, but if he did it was fine, and in fact that's exactly what he did, get over it, because it's not only fine, it's precisely what we want from a president, and can you believe that Biden did the same thing, shame on him.

 

Edited by Dinsy Ejotuz
  • Like 3
  • Love 1
  • Laughing 2
  • Thinking 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours 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. 

 

Being a longtime conservative means nothing since it became the trump party.  He tells them who to like and not like. John McCain was a revered member of the party and won the presidential nomination in 2008. 8 years later, Trump said he wasn't a war hero because he got caught and when he died, no one in the party cared. Many were happy. Bolton falls into the same slot that Cohen did now that his statement was leaked. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Godsbrother said:

If what Trump did was perfect and Biden did the same thing then why does the GOP want Biden investigated?

You're looking for consistency in their defense? These are the same people who are arguing Trump was so concerned about corruption that he wanted the corrupt country to investigate Biden.

Edited by Amused to Death
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given how popular Clinton was when the Impeachment ended and the general disapproval of Starr at the time, I'm surprised they rolled him out for this.  I know the choices were constrained by the fact that most lawyers wanted nothing to do with this #### show, but probably not the best choice.  That clip will go viral and every late-night show will have a field day with it.

Edited by Dinsy Ejotuz
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still confused on this argument that POTUS due process rights were violated in the House impeachment proceedings. If the House proceedings are the indictment and the Senate proceedings are the trial, what rights does the POTUS have in the indictment process? Doesn't the indictment merely lay out a case to jurors whether to pursue legal actions against a defendant? Isn't the trial (Senate) where further witnesses, documents, and the square off between prosecution and the defense is supposed to take place? This outrage over process seems not grounded in reality to me. Am I misunderstanding what an indictment process is supposed to look like?

 

Also this blanket defense of executive privilege is BS and dangerous.

Edited by cap'n grunge
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, cap'n grunge said:

I'm still confused on this argument that POTUS due process rights were violated in the House impeachment proceedings. If the House proceedings are the indictment and the Senate proceedings are the trial, what rights does the POTUS have in the indictment process? Doesn't the indictment merely lay out a case to jurors whether to pursue legal actions against a defendant? Isn't the trial where further witnesses, documents, and the square odd between prosecution and the defense supposed to take place? This outrage over process seems not grounded in reality to me. Am I misunderstanding what an indictment process is supposed to look like?

 

Also this blanket defense of executive privilege is BS and dangerous.

You’re not confused.  It’s 100% pure, Grade-A BS.

  • Thanks 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Quote

Quinn Sutherland @ReelQuinn

  • ABC: Bolton’s book
  • NBC: Bolton’s book
  • CNN: Bolton’s book
  • Cartoon Network: Bolton’s book
  • Animal Planet: Bolton’s book
  • FOX News: Fun decorations for Groundhog Day
  • Groundhog Channel: Bolton’s book
  •  
Edited by Dinsy Ejotuz
  • Like 2
  • Laughing 11
  • Thinking 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...