Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

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


snitwitch

Recommended Posts

41 minutes ago, pecorino said:

Something I haven’t posted yet but I’m bored waiting for the closing arguments: when the tape was released with Trump saying “Take her out”, for just a moment I truly thought the implication was to kill her. A failing on my part, watching too many crime movies, but scary that that’s even remotely plausible to consider re: a comment made by a sitting President about one of his ambassadors.

And it was directed at Lev Parnas, a known underworld thug. You know who had the power to fire her at any time? Trump.  So what exactly is he instructing Parnas to do?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, mrip541 said:

I don't have squeegee kids around me but do see guys providing full service mobile car wash in your parking space. Squeegee kids, evolved!

I have a buddy who runs a detailing business around here. Apparently he does pretty well with it, but it's not for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JuniorNB said:

And it was directed at Lev Parnas, a known underworld thug. You know who had the power to fire her at any time? Trump.  So what exactly is he instructing Parnas to do?

I've been trying to keep up but have certainly missed some things (pages)...who else was in the room when Trump said "get rid of her, take her out"? Was he speaking TO Parnas or just with him in the room? More specifically, could Trump have been speaking to Pompeo or Barr?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, JuniorNB said:
46 minutes ago, pecorino said:

Something I haven’t posted yet but I’m bored waiting for the closing arguments: when the tape was released with Trump saying “Take her out”, for just a moment I truly thought the implication was to kill her. A failing on my part, watching too many crime movies, but scary that that’s even remotely plausible to consider re: a comment made by a sitting President about one of his ambassadors.

And it was directed at Lev Parnas, a known underworld thug. You know who had the power to fire her at any time? Trump.  So what exactly is he instructing Parnas to do?

Yep.  He didn't say "I'm going to fire her for that".  It is, IMO, exactly what @pecorino first instinct was.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Amused to Death said:

I've been trying to keep up but have certainly missed some things (pages)...who else was in the room when Trump said "get rid of her, take her out"? Was he speaking TO Parnas or just with him in the room? More specifically, could Trump have been speaking to Pompeo or Barr?

He was at a private dinner with DJ Jr., Parnas and two others.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Biff84 said:

Listening to MSNBC this morning all the chatter in the Senate seems to point towards Bolton testifying and now looking how to respond. There’s talk about witness exchange and also bringing the manuscript into to a SCIF for Senators to read before voting. The circus McConnell wanted to avoid is here.

It would be awesome. I’ll believe it when I see it. 

This Kelly comment might make a difference; who knows? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, timschochet said:

It would be awesome. I’ll believe it when I see it. 

This Kelly comment might make a difference; who knows? 

Maggie Haberman Retweeted

Manu Raju

“Mr Bolton probably has some things that would be helpful for us and we‘ll figure out how we might be able to learn that,” Lisa Murkowksi says

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Sheriff Bart said:

Yep.  He didn't say "I'm going to fire her for that".  It is, IMO, exactly what @pecorino first instinct was.

He also told someone that she's going to be 'going through some things' shortly.  He speaks exactly like a mobb boss. And this is about an American citizen. A great one with years of service to our country.  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Juxtatarot said:

It seems this small group of Republicans have all the power on deciding who the witnesses are.  I hope they only want Bolton and the Democrats get on board.

I also want to hear from Mulvaney, Barr, and Pompeo, with a little Rudy for Dessert.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Amused to Death said:

I've been trying to keep up but have certainly missed some things (pages)...who else was in the room when Trump said "get rid of her, take her out"? Was he speaking TO Parnas or just with him in the room? More specifically, could Trump have been speaking to Pompeo or Barr?

Parnas’ lawyer said that they didn’t believe it was directed a Parnas but a WH aide that was also there. Still not someone in a position to do anything. Of course if it was Trump ordering a hit, Parnas probably wouldn’t want to implicate himself in the scheme. 

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

Just now, Biff84 said:

Parnas’ lawyer said that they didn’t believe it was directed a Parnas but a WH aide that was also there. Still not someone in a position to do anything. Of course if it was Trump ordering a hit, Parnas probably wouldn’t want to implicate himself in the scheme. 

Yeah, we he categorically denied the surveillance stuff, I began to really wonder what nefarious things he might have been up to

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, cosjobs said:

 with a little Rudy for Dessert.

This would be so much must watch TV. This guy is such a trainwreck yet can't not talk about all the illegal/stupid things he has done. You just need to give him the mic and an audience and ask him to explain all his Ukraine dealings and. 3 hours later we would still all be glued to our televisions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Juxtatarot said:

It seems this small group of Republicans have all the power on deciding who the witnesses are.  I hope they only want Bolton and the Democrats get on board.

They have all the power because they're the only ones vulnerable to losing their seat in November.

I'm not sure if the Senators individually have a vote on which witnesses are called.  I could be wrong. I just haven't heard how that will go. There will definitely be negotiations (or a big stand off) where Republicans will want to call a bunch of non-relevant witnesses like Hunter and Joe Biden, the whistleblower, and Adam Schiff in excahnge for actual material witnesses like Bolten.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, JuniorNB said:

He also told someone that she's going to be 'going through some things' shortly.  He speaks exactly like a mobb boss. And this is about an American citizen. A great one with years of service to our country.  

He said that to Zelensky. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Biff84 said:

Listening to MSNBC this morning all the chatter in the Senate seems to point towards Bolton testifying and now looking how to respond. There’s talk about witness exchange and also bringing the manuscript into to a SCIF for Senators to read before voting. The circus McConnell wanted to avoid is here.

Stop teasing me!

  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Biff84 said:

Parnas’ lawyer said that they didn’t believe it was directed a Parnas but a WH aide that was also there. Still not someone in a position to do anything. Of course if it was Trump ordering a hit, Parnas probably wouldn’t want to implicate himself in the scheme. 

Even if it wasn't directed at Parnas, it seems like something the President probably shouldn't be discussing in the presence of someone without security clearance.

This is a very complicated case. You know, a lotta ins, lotta outs, lotta what-have-you's. And, uh, lotta strands to keep in my head, man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, E Street Brat said:

Serious question. Adam Schiff bored to death on day 1 and I haven't watched since,  

Has anything been proven that DJT asked for or demanded a public announcement by the Ukrainians of a Biden investigation?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Information just came out yesterday that Bolten directly heard Trump say it several times.  Now the GOP will fight to keep him from saying it under oath.

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

2 minutes ago, JuniorNB said:

He also told someone that she's going to be 'going through some things' shortly.  He speaks exactly like a mobb boss. And this is about an American citizen. A great one with years of service to our country.  

She was the white hat fighting corruption in Ukraine. The people wanting to benefit from corruption in Ukraine wanted her gone and that included Trump, Rudy and their associates.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, snitwitch said:

dems making a play for release of mueller GJ materials in connection with impeachment proceedings: https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/480289-house-dems-say-trump-impeachment-defense-contradicts-doj-in-mueller

Oh what a tangled web we weave...

Lawyers for the House Democrats sought to use remarks by Trump lawyer Ken Starr on Monday to its advantage in a case over access to grand jury materials from former special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia probe.

In that case, lawmakers and the White House have argued over whether the impeachment trial qualifies as a "judicial proceeding," which would give House Democrats a stronger claim to the Mueller evidence. The Justice Department, on behalf of the Trump administration, has argued that impeachment is not a judicial proceeding

“The Senate is a court," Starr said Monday during the impeachment proceedings. "In fact, history teaches us that for literally decades, this body was referred to in this context as the high court of impeachment. So we are not a legislative chamber during these proceedings. We are in a tribunal. We are in court.”

 

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

9 minutes ago, JuniorNB said:

They have all the power because they're the only ones vulnerable to losing their seat in November.

I'm not sure if the Senators individually have a vote on which witnesses are called.  I could be wrong. I just haven't heard how that will go. There will definitely be negotiations (or a big stand off) where Republicans will want to call a bunch of non-relevant witnesses like Hunter and Joe Biden, the whistleblower, and Adam Schiff in excahnge for actual material witnesses like Bolten.

My understanding is that they will first vote on allowing witnesses. If that passes then they go to voting on each individual witness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, E Street Brat said:

Serious question. Adam Schiff bored to death on day 1 and I haven't watched since,  

Has anything been proven that DJT asked for or demanded a public announcement by the Ukrainians of a Biden investigation?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If Schiff's indiferrence bothered you, I'm surprised you did not smash your tv as the Repubs strolled back and forth to the cloak room and the chocolate desk during the Dem managers' testimony.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, JuniorNB said:

And it was directed at Lev Parnas, a known underworld thug. You know who had the power to fire her at any time? Trump.  So what exactly is he instructing Parnas to do?

Exactly...doesn't say fire her...doesn't instruct someone who can actually do it...so it should be something Trump should have to answer the question...what do you expect Parnas to do when saying that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Commish said:

I know this isn't a literal statement, but I have a hard time envisioning this administration having the capabilities to remove all traces given how the digital platforms are set up, protected and backed up.  They better start on that right now if they want any shot of being done by November  :lmao: 

"Where does the bleach go?"

  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mrip541 said:

I don't have squeegee kids around me but do see guys providing full service mobile car wash in your parking space. Squeegee kids, evolved!

Noice.

Also, I knew there was a reason I liked NOLA.  I thought it was the good food and good booze, but maybe I just feel at home there.

Edited by The Z Machine
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, cosjobs said:
10 minutes ago, E Street Brat said:

Can ya please point me towards a link or something.  

Look at the front page of any newspaper from the past week

And Ambassador Sondland's testimony. And Ambassador Taylor. And Chief of Staff Mulaney. And...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Don pretty much has to abandon the argument that he didn't do it now; his credibility pales against almost anyone else's. So he's left with only the "it's all right for a president to do" argument. If he's not censured somehow for suborning the smear of  an election rival, then the things he's going to do during the real campaign this year will make you throw up. Because if he gets away with it, he's going to do it even worse.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, JuniorNB said:

He's trolling. Leave him be. He's ignored every Bolton comment because it doesn't fit his agenda. Just ignore.

No I'm not. I stated from the beginning that I haven't been paying attention. Since the Dems opening statements. 

I'm just now/today hearing about the leaked Bolton book and was hoping for a link that would prove or disprove the demand for a public announcement.  When I got nothing but the same ole ####. I figured I got my answer.  

 

JFC you guys are too much,  

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

5 minutes ago, roadkill1292 said:

Well, Don pretty much has to abandon the argument that he didn't do it now; his credibility pales against almost anyone else's. So he's left with only the "it's all right for a president to do" argument. If he's not censured somehow for suborning the smear of  an election rival, then the things he's going to do during the real campaign this year will make you throw up. Because if he gets away with it, he's going to do it even worse.

What's telling is that if he truly thought that the behavior he vehemently lied about was actually within his powers, he would have just come out and told the truth from the beginning. He obviously knew it was unconstitutional and impeachable or he wouldn't have tried several lies before needing to admit the whistleblower was 100% correct.

  • 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...