Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

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


snitwitch

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, timschochet said:

He always does that. But there seems to be a new frustration; he wants to order them banished from the realm. 

First he wants to tear off their epaulettes and break their swords in a public ceremony of humiliation. 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKmJPnAGUJk

Edited by Ditkaless Wonders
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Update in polling: 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-the-first-few-post-ukraine-polls-say-about-impeachment/amp/

Still early, but public opinion is definitely moving in favor of impeachment. And unlike jon here, a  growing majority of Americans agree that what Trump did in that phone call is very wrong. 

  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

 If you are only asking about finding out if something was true, I don't see the issue

I don't either...but it's crystal clear this isn't what was going on in that call, and you know that.  For starters, we already know the answer to that question based on the previous investigation that was done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Update in polling: 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-the-first-few-post-ukraine-polls-say-about-impeachment/amp/

Still early, but public opinion is definitely moving in favor of impeachment. And unlike jon here, a  growing majority of Americans agree that what Trump did in that phone call is very wrong. 

Quote

 

When the House launched its formal impeachment hearings against Nixon in February 1974, only 38% of Americans supported it.

Today, polling shows that 49% of Americans support launching formal impeachment hearings against Trump.

Kevin Kruse.

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

1 minute ago, Ditkaless Wonders said:

See, that's the difference between us.  You are literate and informed and I have old 60's T.V. shows rattling around in an unorganized noggin.

Old 60s TV can leave you very well informed. For instance, Donald Trump is easier to understand if you think of him as a cross between Eva Gabor’s character in Green Acres and Sergeant Schulz.  

  • Laughing 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Old 60s TV can leave you very well informed. For instance, Donald Trump is easier to understand if you think of him as a cross between Eva Gabor’s character in Green Acres and Sergeant Schulz.  

Well New York is where he'd rather stay, he gets allergic, smelling hay.  He just adores a penthouse view. America he loves you but give him Park Avenue.

 

Between that and his ability to see nothing, nothinnngg! I may have to agree.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

You were ok with Hillary hiring one. 

I’m quoting Jon here but this is a question for anyone:

I assume this is about Christopher Steele.  Is the difference that Hillary technically hired Fusion GPS which is an American company?  It does bring up an interesting question though.  Could a candidate bypass getting “something of value” from a foreigner to aid in an election simply by running it through an American shell company? (I’m not claiming Fusion GPS is such a company.)

I suppose this was all discussed in the Russia thread but I don’t read that often.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

They are arguing that because that was the talking point out.  We saw the distribution of those points.

The masterful thing Trump has done (as bad as he is) has always been marketing. Push the buzz words to the point they sink in...no matter how false and BS and meaningless it really is.

 

Exactly--just like showing a clip of Trump saying something despicable or stupid is labeled as "Fake News" and suddenly is disbelieved.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

Well, people who lead countries tend to be pretty powerful, and asking someone to abuse their power for your personal benefit is pretty bad.  That said, you're right that foreign leaders aren't unique.

Impeachable.  If Trump asked Zuckerberg to manipulate Facebook to improve his reelection chances, that would be a clear abuse of office.

Impeachable.  The president should not be working with foreign intelligence agencies to undermine our electoral process.  How can you not understand that?

 

I did not associate finding out if something is true or not as undermining our election process.  The truth is not the enemy of democracy, it should be the basis of Democracy.  Now  asking for something like sabotaging or hacking would be different.  You seem to want to equate the later stuff with the first, which it is not.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

 

The system where the transcript was allegedly stored is for highly classified information, such as covert operations, and can only be accessed with a code word and has to be approved by a senior White House official with a written record, according to current and former administration officials. The call with Zelensky did not contain classified information, which was why the White House was able to release it this week.

To transfer a call from the normal storage system to the National Security Council's code-word-protected network, a very senior White House official - someone as high as the chief of staff or the national security adviser - must make a formal written request to do so, according to two people who worked with memos of foreign leader calls.

Four former U.S. officials - including aides in previous administrations and the Trump administration - said they were not aware of any calls that did not contain highly classified information being housed in this type of storage system. One former Trump administration official said such calls were sometimes kept on the "high side," only available to aides with high clearances and separate laptops, but not the secure system the whistleblower alleges was used. "Never heard of anything like that," said this official, who was privy to some of Trump's calls with foreign leaders.

There is no evidence that Trump ordered the move. But he has repeatedly fixated on disclosures to the news media, and his aides have spent considerable time trying to limit who hears his interactions with not only foreign leaders but also lawmakers, friends and anyone else Trump consults with.

Wapo (by way of Duluth)

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Old 60s TV can leave you very well informed. For instance, Donald Trump is easier to understand if you think of him as a cross between Eva Gabor’s character in Green Acres and Sergeant Schulz.  

He's far closer to Klink than Schultz. Shultz intentionallly avoided knowing things. Klink and Trump believe they know everything even though everyone around them recognizes them as total fools.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

I did not associate finding out if something is true or not as undermining our election process.  The truth is not the enemy of democracy, it should be the basis of Democracy.  Now  asking for something like sabotaging or hacking would be different.  You seem to want to equate the later stuff with the first, which it is not.  

There’s a process for investigating. The prez doesn’t get to freewheel to investigate his tinhat beliefs. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, The General said:

There’s a process for investigating. The prez doesn’t get to freewheel to investigate his tinhat beliefs. 

I am more of a results guy than a process guy.  If Trump's crackpot theory was correct and Biden did something wrong, it deserves to be exposed.   Trump has a lot of mental issues no doubt.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

I am more of a results guy than a process guy.  If Trump's crackpot theory was correct and Biden did something wrong, it deserves to be exposed.   Trump has a lot of mental issues no doubt.  

Yet the "crackpot theory" that Trump was attempting to buy help with his re-election from a foreign country shouldn't be investigated? If true, doesn't it deserve to be exposed?

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

1 minute ago, apalmer said:

Yet the "crackpot theory" that Trump was attempting to buy help with his re-election from a foreign country shouldn't be investigated? If true, doesn't it deserve to be exposed?

Sure it should be investigated, but the impeachment train is already in running at full speed when there are key components missing.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

Sure it should be investigated, but the impeachment train is already in running at full speed when there are key components missing.  

The "impeachment train" is currently an impeachment investigation. The only things running at full speed are Trump's paranoia and his talking points.

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

3 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Soros is really missing a unique opportunity by not having a hidden island lair, or does he?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Juxtatarot said:

I’m quoting Jon here but this is a question for anyone:

I assume this is about Christopher Steele.  Is the difference that Hillary technically hired Fusion GPS which is an American company?  It does bring up an interesting question though.  Could a candidate bypass getting “something of value” from a foreigner to aid in an election simply by running it through an American shell company? (I’m not claiming Fusion GPS is such a company.)

I suppose this was all discussed in the Russia thread but I don’t read that often.

A campaign could have hired Orvis (Steele's UK-based firm) directly provided they paid for the opposition research (in money, not promises of favors once the candidate won the Presidency,)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, timschochet said:

You and about five thousand commenters on this "article."

It must be true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ramsay Hunt Experience said:

A campaign could have hired Orvis (Steele's UK-based firm) directly provided they paid for the opposition research (in money, not promises of favors once the candidate won the Presidency,)

So could the Trump campaign pay a Ukrainian company to try to get dirt on Biden?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Juxtatarot said:

I’m quoting Jon here but this is a question for anyone:

I assume this is about Christopher Steele.  Is the difference that Hillary technically hired Fusion GPS which is an American company?  It does bring up an interesting question though.  Could a candidate bypass getting “something of value” from a foreigner to aid in an election simply by running it through an American shell company? (I’m not claiming Fusion GPS is such a company.)

There are at least 3 key differences:

1. Hillary was insulated by at least one layer of legal activity. Had she gone directly to Christopher Steele (a foreigner), then you could argue that she was committing a crime. But no law requires campaign vendors (such as Fusion GPS) to hire only U.S. citizens for every single task.

2. Hillary was not a person holding office in the United States, and she did not attempt to accept something of value from a foreign state.

3. There was no quid pro quo. Hillary did not say to a foreign state, "Do me a favor before I give you money to buy more weapons."

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Juxtatarot said:

So could the Trump campaign pay a Ukrainian company to try to get dirt on Biden?

I don't think the Trump campaign could directly hire a Ukrainian company, but they could hire a U.S. firm to get dirt on Biden, and that U.S. firm could talk to and hire almost anyone they wanted to. Which has probably already happened.

(I suppose that there's probably a law which prevents a U.S. firm from going directly to the president of Ukraine, though.)

Edited by [scooter]
  • Like 1
  • Thinking 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

I am more of a results guy than a process guy.  If Trump's crackpot theory was correct and Biden did something wrong, it deserves to be exposed.   

Trump has a lot of mental issues no doubt.  

Gosh if only there were some agencies or whole departments where there are best of the best minds and millions are spent to do just this.

Compare the second sentence Vs the first.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Raylan said:

Speaking of Schiff, remember when he was colluding with what he thought was a Ukrainian official to get dick pics of Trump? Sounds like interference in an election.

Schiff on tape asking for dick pics of Trump

He was encouraging a prank caller to stay on the line so that their conversation could be documented and traced. No rational and non-disingenuous human being thinks that Schiff was doing anything wrong here.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:
Quote

 

The system where the transcript was allegedly stored is for highly classified information, such as covert operations, and can only be accessed with a code word and has to be approved by a senior White House official with a written record, according to current and former administration officials. The call with Zelensky did not contain classified information, which was why the White House was able to release it this week.

To transfer a call from the normal storage system to the National Security Council's code-word-protected network, a very senior White House official - someone as high as the chief of staff or the national security adviser - must make a formal written request to do so, according to two people who worked with memos of foreign leader calls.

Four former U.S. officials - including aides in previous administrations and the Trump administration - said they were not aware of any calls that did not contain highly classified information being housed in this type of storage system. One former Trump administration official said such calls were sometimes kept on the "high side," only available to aides with high clearances and separate laptops, but not the secure system the whistleblower alleges was used. "Never heard of anything like that," said this official, who was privy to some of Trump's calls with foreign leaders.

There is no evidence that Trump ordered the move. But he has repeatedly fixated on disclosures to the news media, and his aides have spent considerable time trying to limit who hears his interactions with not only foreign leaders but also lawmakers, friends and anyone else Trump consults with.

Wapo (by way of Duluth)

To put this "location" in a bit of perspective.  The phone conversations the day of and shortly after 9/11 didn't even make it to this level of security.  There is no positive explanation for moving this Ukraine documentation to that area if that is indeed what happened.

  • 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...