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*** (7 Viewers)

No, Maguire was pressed repeatedly by Schiff and he said he couldn't verify anything because it is an allegation.  He also proved he acted correctly and it went through the proper channels.
Maguire: 

The decision and the recommendation by the Inspector General that in fact the allegation was credible.

I had no reason to doubt a career Inspector General lawyer in his determination on whether or not it was credible. That is something for Michael to determine.

As I said, I don’t disagree with the IGIC’s assessment that it was a credible matter.

I believe that as I said before, Mr. Chairman, I believe the whistleblower is operating in good faith and has followed the law.

 
Didn't take long for this to start blowing up in your faces. :D

https://www.yahoo.com/news/republicans-see-impeachment-backfiring-democrats-230222466.html

Now we know you guys are full on Trump haters and will grasp any carrot that dangles in front of ya but this is not going to work out even close to what you hoped.
If you read that article, all of the interviews were conducted on Monday and Tuesday, before the transcript was released, before the whistleblower report was released. 

Lets revisit this in a few days time. I don’t think this is going to work out close to what YOU hoped. 

 
They cannot “query” the database. It contains compartmentalized intel. Stuff like the identity of the spy we had in the Kremlin, for example. There is a reasons secrets were dropped in there. It’s because there is, with good reason, extreme eyes only projections on who can see what, and where. I don’t know the remedy here, but don’t think you can even let the Gang of 8 just query the things. Don’t know the answer, but it’s a good reason for severe consequences for dropping anything in here to hide it from transparency. 10,000x worse than what Hillary did with her emails. 
I'm talking about the phone call that was recorded.  It allegedly takes a search warrant.  The existence of the call and it's summary has already been declassified.  None of what I think you're saying above applies unless you think I am suggesting they allow anyone and everyone on to the network where the transcript was kept.  I am not suggesting that.

 
So now we’re hearing, from anonymous sources, that Mike Pence was against releasing the phone call transcript and tried to talk Trump out of it. 

This has gotta be coming from Pence’s camp, right? I have to think he’s trying to create a little distance here, just in case. 

 
Also very interesting: Ted Cruz was asked, “Are you going to be on the front lines in defense of the President?” Cruz replied, “I’m working for the people of Texas.” 

 
Didn't take long for this to start blowing up in your faces. :D

https://www.yahoo.com/news/republicans-see-impeachment-backfiring-democrats-230222466.html

Now we know you guys are full on Trump haters and will grasp any carrot that dangles in front of ya but this is not going to work out even close to what you hoped.
I asked this to another poster so I’ll ask you too...if polls next week show the majority in favor of the impeachment inquiry, will you change your opinion?

 
Susan Collins playing her little game she developed during the Kavanaugh hearings: “Since if the President is impeached I will be a Juror, it’s not appropriate for me to make any comments on this matter one way or another until it’s finally resolved.” 

 
So about this Rudy thing, is it really possible the State Department was asking him to talk to the Ukrainian government on behalf of the US? When he first said that I thought he was a raving lunatic with clear signs of dementia. But now he is providing text messages that say as much? I can't fathom how this could be possible but it wouldn't be the first time I was shocked in the past couple of years.
If you're referring to that exchange with Ingraham on her show, I take it the "Kurt" is Kurt Volker. Volker is the US representative to the Ukraine-Russia war negotiations. He is not the ambassador, but he is under State. I don't think the WB complaint really contradicts that short thread of communications that Giuliani was talking about:

On 26 July, a day after the call, U.S. Special Representative for Ukraine Negotiations Kurt Volker visited Kyiv and met with President Zelenskyy and a variety of Ukrainian political figures. Ambassador Volker was accompanied in his meetings by U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland. Based on multiple readouts of these meetings recounted to me by various U.S. officials, Ambassadors Volker and Sondland reportedly provided advice to the Ukrainian leadership about how to “navigate” the demands that the President had made of Mr. Zelenskyy.

...Starting in mid-May, I heard from multiple U.S. officials that they were deeply concerned by what they viewed as Mr. Giuliani’s circumvention of national security decisionmaking processes to engage with Ukrainian officials and relay messages back and forth between Kyiv and the President.

These officials also told me:

that State Department officials, including Ambassadors Volker and Sondland, had spoken with Mr. Giuliani in an attempt to “contain the damage” to U.S. national security; and

that Ambassadors Volker and Sondland during this time period met with members of the new Ukrainian administration and, in addition to discussing policy matters, sought to help Ukrainian leaders understand and respond to the differing messages they were receiving from official U.S. channels on the one hand, and from Mr. Giuliani on the other.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thought you were suggesting that, because it’s not unreasonable to have an inquiry into everything that’s been dropped in there since swearing in. Whistleblower alleges that they were told protocols for labeling Intel were violated more than once to hide inappropriate and potentially illegal behavior by the President. As this behavior is a threat to national security, I think it should be searched. But who would search and the process is beyond a difficult, an perhaps an impossible, proposition. This is why people should go away for a very long time for this kind of law breaking. 
There is a hierarchy for that entire portion of the network.  I forget the steps and the order, but if I remember correctly, there's even a special court for it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
So now we’re hearing, from anonymous sources, that Mike Pence was against releasing the phone call transcript and tried to talk Trump out of it. 

This has gotta be coming from Pence’s camp, right? I have to think he’s trying to create a little distance here, just in case. 
Should have Melania stand between them.

 
It is an allegation at this point.  Nothing is verified.  Full stop.  You are better than this.
The phone call was verified...the white house verified that they hid the evidence of the call.

There has been nothing about the complaint again that has been shown to be inaccurate.

You are spinning...just like Trump...its not a good look.

 
If you read that article, all of the interviews were conducted on Monday and Tuesday, before the transcript was released, before the whistleblower report was released. 

Lets revisit this in a few days time. I don’t think this is going to work out close to what YOU hoped. 
Im sure he will admit that too...best move on.

 
So, if I am following the logic here.  The White House is so concerned about the Deep State that they are now resorting to putting completely harmless (in their view) documents on some of the most secure portions of the WH network?  Because?  I think that's probably the BEST one will come up with.  Unfortunately, being in that sort of paranoid state of mind now brings the 25th Amendment into play.  

Personally, I think there is a much neater, cleaner explanation.
I'm not talking about my logic or your logic. And maybe the 25th is something that should be looked at again.  

I think Trump is so butt-hurt pissed over the constant investigations and is looking to get back at the democrats.and is digging for dirt/corruption anywhere he can.A lot of the Russia stuff looks like it flowed through Ukraine. So it’s a good friendly place to start.

I’s my opinion that Trumps wrath is mostly targeted at Obama and Hillary over the Fussion GPS dossier and all it lead to. And if Joe and Hunter Biden get caught also, well so that’s just icing on the cake.

I heard Beck call this a Battle of the Titans and if it’s true, then I can see why Trump would want the phone call kept from the “Deep State” Trump is like that kid from the 6th sense but instead of dead people he sees enemies. And I don’t think I can blame him for it.  

 
If you're referring to that exchange with Ingraham on her show, I take it the "Kurt" is Kurt Volker. Volker is the US representative to the Ukraine-Russia war negotiations. He is not the ambassador, but he is under State. I don't think the WB complaint really contradicts that short thread of communications that Giuliani was talking about:
Thank you. After reading that all in context it makes more sense. The State Dept wasn't asking Rudy to go to Ukraine and talk to people. They were trying to do damage control after his "diplomatic" missions. And Rudy is nuts. 

 
I'm not talking about my logic or your logic. And maybe the 25th is something that should be looked at again.  

I think Trump is so butt-hurt pissed over the constant investigations and is looking to get back at the democrats.and is digging for dirt/corruption anywhere he can.A lot of the Russia stuff looks like it flowed through Ukraine. So it’s a good friendly place to start.

I’s my opinion that Trumps wrath is mostly targeted at Obama and Hillary over the Fussion GPS dossier and all it lead to. And if Joe and Hunter Biden get caught also, well so that’s just icing on the cake.

I heard Beck call this a Battle of the Titans and if it’s true, then I can see why Trump would want the phone call kept from the “Deep State” Trump is like that kid from the 6th sense but instead of dead people he sees enemies. And I don’t think I can blame him for it.  
I don't think Trump knew anything about the specifics of where it was moved to.  IF he was aware enough to understand what he was doing was completely wrong (and I am nowhere close to believing that personally), his comment was probably (at best) "uh...we need to get rid of this or hide it" and the minions did the needful.  I don't think he has a clue on how that security setup works.  I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't even know it exists.  It will not shock me at all to see a staff member's credentials as checking it in and there are only a handful who would have that access.  And I will not be shocked when he tries to use the "I didn't do it, he did it" defense.

 
Do you think the enemies he in your supposition sees are real?
I don’t believe there is a “starchamber” like cabal that meets twice a week. But yes he has enemies that want him to fail just like any other President . probably even more then normal considering his personality 

 
So now we’re hearing, from anonymous sources, that Mike Pence was against releasing the phone call transcript and tried to talk Trump out of it. 

This has gotta be coming from Pence’s camp, right? I have to think he’s trying to create a little distance here, just in case. 
If you haven't already, check out NPR's Fresh Air episode on Pence....it's pretty eye opening.  There is no question in my mind that if this is out there it was put out there by his camp.  He has a genuine belief that he can be President.

 
I don't think Trump knew anything about the specifics of where it was moved to.  IF he was aware enough to understand what he was doing was completely wrong (and I am nowhere close to believing that personally), his comment was probably (at best) "uh...we need to get rid of this or hide it" and the minions did the needful.  I don't think he has a clue on how that security setup works.  I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't even know it exists.  It will not shock me at all to see a staff member's credentials as checking it in and there are only a handful who would have that access.  And I will not be shocked when he tries to use the "I didn't do it, he did it" defense.
I agree with that. I just think he or someone close was trying to hide it because of him digging around the the whole Crowdstrike affair. Not necessarily because of the Biden stuff.  

I find this whole thing very intriguing and the stuff history will be writing about for years. Call me a conspiracy spreader if you want, but this is one deep rabbit hole. 

 
I agree with that. I just think he or someone close was trying to hide it because of him digging around the the whole Crowdstrike affair. Not necessarily because of the Biden stuff.  

I find this whole thing very intriguing and the stuff history will be writing about for years. Call me a conspiracy spreader if you want, but this is one deep rabbit hole. 
I can't help but wonder if Trump understands that when he leaves office, all the #### he did remains behind for the next President/administration to see.  I'm not sure he gets that.

 
Funniest part of all this is Trump doing this to himself to get dirt on Biden, who history has shown to be uniquely qualified to #### up his own Presidential campaigns. 
 He just can't help himself. Pelosi and the squad where in a public catfight looking like stooges, when he had to take the spotlight back.   He get what he deserves.  

 
Even national security whistleblowers who rigorously follow protocol often undergo vicious legal and professional reprisal. In 2007, for instance, after four senior National Security Agency officials and a member of the House Select Committee on Intelligence blew the whistle through official channels to the Defense Department inspector general about massive fraud and misconduct at the agency that they believed had facilitated the 9/11 attacks, officials at the inspector general’s office itself apparently identified them to the Department of Justice as potential leakers.

This revelation led to FBI raids of their homes at dawn, threats of criminal prosecution and the permanent end to five illustrious careers in public service. One of the five whistleblowers, Thomas Drake, was actually indicted on 10 criminal counts under laws including the Espio­nage Act, and was threatened with 35 years in prison after the FBI discovered documents in his home that they alleged were “highly classified.” (They were in fact unclassified documents that NSA officials retroactively pronounced as classified after they were seized from Drake.) The DOJ’s case was so feeble and overblown that it collapsed on the eve of trial, leading Judge Richard Bennett to condemn the prosecution’s treatment of Drake as “unconscionable.” “It is at the very root of what this country was founded on—against general warrants of the British,” Bennett exclaimed. “It was one of the most fundamental things in the Bill of Rights that this country was not to be exposed to people knocking on the door with government authority and coming into their homes.” Nevertheless, Drake lost his job and his security clearances, and became permanently unemployable in national defense.

We already know what happens- they get professionally blackballed, subjected to legal nightmares and have their lives ruined.  You don't need to wait for this CIA guy's story to play out to know that.  
No question there are huge problems with the whistleblower process and how whistleblowers are treated. 

Sadly, a huge, public insanity where a whistleblower does everything right and refuses to go away is the only way that will begin to change. 

 
I can't help but wonder if Trump understands that when he leaves office, all the #### he did remains behind for the next President/administration to see.  I'm not sure he gets that.
maybe he's hoping there won't be a next President/administration.  half kidding :oldunsure:   

I got to think the plan at this point is to have someone rig the election for him and actually change some votes to make that happen.  I know these people aren't smart, but they can't really think they're going to win a free and fair election in 2020

 
maybe he's hoping there won't be a next President/administration.  half kidding :oldunsure:   

I got to think the plan at this point is to have someone rig the election for him and actually change some votes to make that happen.  I know these people aren't smart, but they can't really think they're going to win a free and fair election in 2020
I think Donald does. Because of the way he packs 'em in at the rallies.

Or maybe yard signs, I'm not sure.

 
Giuliani is just not a smart lawyer. I mean, I guess he was at one time, but he definitely isn't anymore. 

First, he tweets - 

Why does this text and date render the hearsay so-called whistleblower useless and not credible? If you get even one reason I might recommend you for Law School. Two and it’s LawReview. Answers later. Watch Laura at 10 pm.

--

That tweet included a copy of a text between him and Kurt Volker - the US Special Representative to Ukraine. So...

FOIA to State for U.S. Special Representative to Ukraine Kurt Volker’s text messages with President Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani. Giuliani asserted that a trail of such messages exists.

 
No question there are huge problems with the whistleblower process and how whistleblowers are treated. 

Sadly, a huge, public insanity where a whistleblower does everything right and refuses to go away is the only way that will begin to change. 
Yeah, I can see what you and SID are saying now.  In the meantime however, there ought to be a public interest defense of people who went outside the system because they felt it was the only tenable choice they could make.

 
I kid you not.  This afternoon, Limbaugh claimed that this is a plot to install Hillary.  It was kind of hard to follow his inane ramblings, but I think it goes like this:

  1. Impeach Trump.
  2. impeach Pence.
  3. Pelosi names Hillary as VP
  4. Pelosi resigns.
He also seemed to propose that this was all a scheme to bring down Biden, but the Democrats couldn't do it becase they are all just as corrupt (or more) than Trump, who is the least corrupt president of our time.  not a single scandal coming from the Trump White House!

It's insane.

 
Yeah, I can see what you and SID are saying now.  In the meantime however, there ought to be a public interest defense of people who went outside the system because they felt it was the only tenable choice they could make.
I agree. Unfortunately that defense would require that the person stay in this country and face the system. 

 
moleculo said:
I kid you not.  This afternoon, Limbaugh claimed that this is a plot to install Hillary.  It was kind of hard to follow his inane ramblings, but I think it goes like this:

  1. Impeach Trump.
  2. impeach Pence.
  3. Pelosi names Hillary as VP
  4. Pelosi resigns.
He also seemed to propose that this was all a scheme to bring down Biden, but the Democrats couldn't do it becase they are all just as corrupt (or more) than Trump, who is the least corrupt president of our time.  not a single scandal coming from the Trump White House!

It's insane.
Like a lot of conservative talk - he's preaching fear to rile the base.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
TheMagus said:
Thank you. After reading that all in context it makes more sense. The State Dept wasn't asking Rudy to go to Ukraine and talk to people. They were trying to do damage control after his "diplomatic" missions. And Rudy is nuts. 
It's also worth noting that in the course of all this Trump fired (er, recalled) the US Ambassador to Ukraine, who, apparently, was not playing ball.

Trump never nominated a replacement, currently the US does not have an Ambassador to Ukraine.

5/7/19 Wapo

U.S. ambassador to Ukraine is recalled after becoming a political target

The Trump administration has recalled the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine abruptly and ahead of her scheduled departure, after she became a target of political attacks by conservative media outlets and Donald Trump Jr. Democrats see her early departure under pressure as the unfair targeting of a career Foreign Service officer by Team Trump.

According to an internal State Department management notice that I obtained, U.S. Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch will leave her post permanently on May 20, with no replacement in place and no nominations to fill that position. “We expect the Department to appoint a long-term Chargé d’Affaires to lead the mission until a new Chief of Mission is nominated and confirmed,” said the notice, which was sent to all mission personnel at the U.S. Embassy in Kiev. Incoming Deputy Chief of Mission Kristina Kvien plans to arrive in Kiev on May 28, and Joseph Pennington will continue to serve as chargé d’affaires and acting deputy chief through the transition period, the notice said.

A State Department spokesman told me, “Yovanovitch is concluding her three-year diplomatic assignment in Kiev in 2019 as planned.” One senior administration official told me that she had been previously scheduled to depart at the beginning of July and that her new May departure was a change in that plan. Another administration official said that Yovanovitch was given a choice whether to stay until July or leave early and she chose to leave early, due to the ongoing political attacks. Yovanovitch did not respond to a direct request for comment.

“Her confirmed departure date in May aligns with the presidential transition in Ukraine,” the State Department spokesperson said. The senior administration official told me that’s true but irrelevant because the State Department doesn’t rotate ambassadors to align with political transitions in host countries.

The House Democratic leadership thinks that Yovanovitch’s early departure under pressure is a clear sign that the White House is responding to calls from Trump allies, Trump family members and conservative media sites that have accused Yovanovitch, without firm evidence, of being part of a conspiracy that involves anti-corruption probes in Ukraine and efforts by the Trump team to investigate ties between Ukrainian officials and the Hillary Clinton campaign.

“Ambassador Yovanovitch is a dedicated public servant and a diplomat of the highest caliber who has represented the United States under both Republican and Democratic administrations. The White House’s outrageous decision to recall her is a political hit job and the latest in this Administration’s campaign against career State Department personnel,” said a statement released Tuesday morning by House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) and House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Eliot L. Engel (D-N.Y.). “It’s clear that this decision was politically motivated, as allies of President Trump had joined foreign actors in lobbying for the Ambassador’s dismissal.”

On March 24, Donald Trump Jr. tweeted that Yovanovitch was a “joker,” and he linked to an article in the Daily Wire headlined “Calls Grow To Remove Obama’s U.S. Ambassador To Ukraine.” That article is a roundup of conservative media figures leveling thinly sourced allegations against Yovanovitch on Fox News. Former federal prosecutor Joe diGenova said on Fox that she had “bad mouthed the President of the United States to Ukrainian officials.” Fox News’ Laura Ingraham reported that former congressmen Pete Sessions (R-Tex.) wrote to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to say that Yovanovitch “reportedly demonstrated clear anti-Trump bias.”

Four days before Don Jr.’s tweet, the Hill’s John Solomon published an interview with Ukrainian Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko, who alleged that Yovanovitch had given him a “do not prosecute list,” ostensibly to protect Obama-Clinton allies, back in 2016. The State Department told Solomon that that allegation was “an outright fabrication.”

Lutsenko also told Solomon that he would open up an investigation into allegations that the Ukrainian government helped the Clinton campaign in 2016, perhaps by providing information on corrupt payments from the administration of then-President Viktor Yanukovych to former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort.

Last week, the New York Times reported that Lutsenko has met with President Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani multiple times in New York this year. Lutsenko also told Solomon that he was reopening an investigation into Burisma Holdings, an energy company owned by a Ukrainian oligarch that for a time had Hunter Biden, son of Joe Biden, on its board.

Solomon wrote a column on April 1 drawing connections between Biden’s work to fight corruption in Ukraine as vice president and his son’s interest in Burisma. The allegation is that Biden pressured Kiev to fire Lutsenko’s predecessor in an effort to stop the Burisma probe. Initially, Lutsenko had cleared Burisma of any wrongdoing, but he told Solomon that he had reopened the investigation.

The Times also reported that the case had been reopened. “Some see [Lutsenko’s] decision as an effort to curry favor with the Trump administration,” the Times reported. On Tuesday, Bloomberg quoted Lutsenko’s own spokesperson saying that the case had not been reopened.

Biden has said he never discussed Burisma or his son’s business with Ukrainian officials. Bloomberg also reported that the case against Burisma had been shelved at least a year before Biden called for the firing of the general prosecutor at the time, which undermines the theory that he was trying to influence that investigation. The Biden campaign declined to comment. Trump campaign spokeswoman Erin Perrine doubled down on the accusation that Biden tried to intervene in Ukraine on behalf of his son and Burisma, sending me a statement Tuesday accusing Biden of “blackmailing a foreign government to drop an investigation.”

As for Ambassador Yovanovitch, several officials told me that she was indeed involved in and strongly supportive of Ukraine’s anti-corruption efforts. But there’s no public evidence that she was directly involved in anything related to Burisma, Manafort or providing information to the Clinton campaign that would help it against the Trump campaign.

The clear and coordinated effort to smear a sitting U.S. ambassador has now resulted in her early departure under attack after 33 years of service to administrations in both parties. But that’s just the beginning of the larger effort to create a cacophony of allegations by the Trump team and its allies to highlight Ukraine to attack Biden, help Manafort and re-litigate the 2016 election.


 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Don't Noonan said:
No, Maguire was pressed repeatedly by Schiff and he said he couldn't verify anything because it is an allegation.  He also proved he acted correctly and it went through the proper channels.
You're saying that Maguire didn't say that the IG determined the complaint was credible?

 
Don't Noonan said:
No, Maguire was pressed repeatedly by Schiff and he said he couldn't verify anything because it is an allegation.  He also proved he acted correctly and it went through the proper channels.
But you told the prior poster that he was wrong for saying that Maguire said the IG found it credible. 

 
moleculo said:
I kid you not.  This afternoon, Limbaugh claimed that this is a plot to install Hillary.  It was kind of hard to follow his inane ramblings, but I think it goes like this:

  1. Impeach Trump.
  2. impeach Pence.
  3. Pelosi names Hillary as VP
  4. Pelosi resigns.
He also seemed to propose that this was all a scheme to bring down Biden, but the Democrats couldn't do it becase they are all just as corrupt (or more) than Trump, who is the least corrupt president of our time.  not a single scandal coming from the Trump White House!

It's insane.
You don't say?

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top