House Impeachment Inquiry

[plague311]

Some of the new facts were damning. The facts of how the July 10 meeting fell apart, followed by a new meeting which then fell apart, were new to me, though maybe Hill covered them. The fact that Vindman personally took Sondland to task was new and contradicted Sondland's testimony. That is important.

I'm not saying that Vindman was a bust. I think it was a very important appearance.

I agree, but I truly don't think that he was brought in for new information as much as to reinforce the previous statements. The fact that he knew of a few other things that weren't named, or changes that weren't made, was more of just icing on the cake.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Stacy said they were willing to release the transcript because it didn't include everything said. The things that Vindman said were not part of the transcript really wouldn't have made it any more damning.
Look, this is proof (as if any were needed) that the transcript isn't verbatim as Trump has claimed. Other than that, this part of Vindman's testimony is not particularly important. Yes, the two bits he mentioned had to do with Burisma/Biden, but we knew he had brought that up.

Assuming you are referring to the edited transcript that was released, we don't see this the same way.

Maybe it only reinforces some of the details but that reinforcement is important. The released transcript has a few vague references that Vindman sharpened up. And the emphasis Trump had on what he wanted Zelinski to do is muted in the released transcript compared to Vindman's version. Burisma was specifically named while it was left out of the released transcript.

 

[phiwum]

Assuming you are referring to the edited transcript that was released, we don't see this the same way.

Maybe it only reinforces some of the details but that reinforcement is important. The released transcript has a few vague references that Vindman sharpened up. And the emphasis Trump had on what he wanted Zelinski to do is muted in the released transcript compared to Vindman's version. Burisma was specifically named while it was left out of the released transcript.

In the released transcript, Zelensky referred to Burisma as "the company". I don't think there was any doubt which.

 

[acbytesla]

I agree, but I truly don't think that he was brought in for new information as much as to reinforce the previous statements. The fact that he knew of a few other things that weren't named, or changes that weren't made, was more of just icing on the cake.

I think it does a great job of refuting Trump's constant whine that an actual transcript was released to the press. It clearly wasn't.

It also demonstrates consciousness of guilt. Not only did they move the actual transcript to a secure server for no apparent reason, they edited key sentences out of the transcript.

If you thought this was fine, you wouldn't be trying to hide it.

 

[PhantomWolf]

To the Trumpers, that’s a perfectly OK thing to do, apparently.

Of course it is. They know that all Democrats are inherently corrupt and evil, and so any method to expose them is acceptable, even if it is illegal or immoral. All that is important is preventing the Democrats from gaining enough power that they can attack the US and destroy the America way of life to bring about a socialist nightmarescape. And if that means standing behind a lying, adulterous, white nationalist, conspiracy believing, conman, then they are going to do it and do it proudly.

 

[Stacyhs]

I think it does a great job of refuting Trump's constant whine that an actual transcript was released to the press. It clearly wasn't.

It also demonstrates consciousness of guilt. Not only did they move the actual transcript to a secure server for no apparent reason, they edited key sentences out of the transcript.

If you thought this was fine, you wouldn't be trying to hide it.

Agreed. They deliberately removed certain things. Why? What was their motive?

 

[JoeMorgue]

I wonder what the next completely idiotic idea that Trump cooks up will be?

Government shutdown near the end of November. Won't be surprised if it lasts longer then the last one.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Here is the defense of Trump as articulated by the Tea Party:

A coalition of conservative groups have filed an ethics complaint against Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), claiming that she has usurped authority from the executive branch and "weaponized" the impeachment process.

In a complaint to the Office of Congressional Ethics, 40 conservative groups led by Jenny Beth Martin of Tea Party Patriots Action wrote to board chairman David Skaggs, arguing that Pelosi was carrying out an unconstitutional, partisan investigation.

And the letter argues that a vote scheduled for Thursday on a House resolution laying out the process and some procedures for impeachment was "insufficient" to dispel their worries about a partisan investigation.

"Speaker Pelosi’s conduct is an encroachment across the constitutionally-mandated separation of powers. She has no business examining or investigating the president’s legitimate exercise of his authority to determine the foreign and national security policy of the United States," the complaint argues.

"In launching her 'official' impeachment inquiry without benefit of a vote of the full House of Representatives and without indicating anything remotely qualifying as “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors” that is the subject of the inquiry, Speaker Pelosi has weaponized impeachment," the complaint continued.

...

"The genie cannot be put back in the bottle. All that ‘evidence' that has been gathered before the casting of a single vote is tainted by the corrupt, secret process in which it was gathered. It is poisoned, and must be discarded for the sake of fairness," Martin added.

Linky.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Government shutdown near the end of November. Won't be surprised if it lasts longer then the last one.

Trump's petty revenge.

 

[acbytesla]

Here is the defense of Trump as articulated by the Tea Party:

The genie cannot be put back in the bottle. All that ‘evidence' that has been gathered before the casting of a single vote is tainted by the corrupt, secret process in which it was gathered. It is poisoned, and must be discarded for the sake of fairness," Martin added.

Linky.

ROFLMAO. As if having votes would change the evidence. Conducting investigations and depositions in secret is done by EVERY COP and EVERY GRAND JURY. And the rules for the private hearings are EXACTLY the same as they were under the House under Republican rule during the last session.

Talk about whining.....pathetic.

 

[Venom]

Government shutdown near the end of November. Won't be surprised if it lasts longer then the last one.

What about a government shutdown before the general election?

I'd love to see that.

 

[crescent]

A bunch of right-wing news outlets and twitterers are claiming to have identified the whistleblower, including the person's name.

I won't bother linking to the name, as it is not yet confirmed and they might just be hounding the wrong person. I would not want to contribute to that. Time will tell, I suppose.

 

[PhantomWolf]

Here is the defense of Trump as articulated by the Tea Party:
Linky.

LOL. I can just imagine them coming before a Judge and arguing that all the evidence that the Police and Prosecutor collected in private was tainted by the corrupt, secret process in which it was gathered, and must be discarded for the sake of fairness.

I can also imagine how hard the Judge would laugh as he was dismissing the complaint.

 

[Molinaro]

ROFLMAO. As if having votes would change the evidence. Conducting investigations and depositions in secret is done by EVERY COP and EVERY GRAND JURY. And the rules for the private hearings are EXACTLY the same as they were under the House under Republican rule during the last session.

Talk about whining.....pathetic.

But Trump said it was wrong therefore it must be wrong!

 

[quadraginta]

In the released transcript, Zelensky referred to Burisma as "the company". I don't think there was any doubt which.

There isn't any doubt that Trump was using extortion to demand a quid pro quo, but since he didn't actually say "quid pro quo" in those specific words the Trumpistas claim with a straight face that it shows he didn't mean it that way.

By the same token they could claim that "the company" could have meant any company.

Now they can't.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

Reminder: Formal impeachment vote in about an hour, scheduled for 9AM EDT.

Main interest to me is will any Republicans vote in favor and incur Trump’s wrath.

 

[Belz...]

Government shutdown near the end of November.

I've said it before, but American government is so weird. I don't remember the Canadian government ever 'shutting down'. It makes no sense.

 

[Belz...]

Here is the defense of Trump as articulated by the Tea Party:

"Speaker Pelosi’s conduct is an encroachment across the constitutionally-mandated separation of powers. She has no business examining or investigating the president’s legitimate exercise of his authority to determine the foreign and national security policy of the United States," the complaint argues."

What nonsense. It's absolutely the business of Congress to keep the executive in check.

 

[Belz...]

Talk about whining.....pathetic.

Maybe that's what Trump meant when he said we'd be tired of winning. Maybe he mispelled it and meant "whining".

 

[Delvo]

LOL. I can just imagine them coming before a Judge and arguing that all the evidence that the Police and Prosecutor collected in private was tainted by the corrupt, secret process in which it was gathered, and must be discarded for the sake of fairness.

I can also imagine how hard the Judge would laugh as he was dismissing the complaint.

Actually, when it's police & prosecutors in criminal cases, there ARE rules about how to acquire evidence, and failing to follow those rules DOES invalidate the evidence to take away their incentive to break the rules in the first place, and defendants, including guilty ones, ARE set free as an indirect result. (Breaking the rules doesn't kill the whole case by itself, but being unable to use that evidence can.)

The flaw in the argument isn't the concept of such rules or the termination of the case against the suspect when those rules are applied. It's that nobody's breaking any such rules in this case.