• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: House Impeachment Inquiry - part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1218900270236815361

Schiff says on ABC the National Security Agency is starting to “withhold documents” on Ukraine from the House, saying the documents could be relevant in the Senate trial. There are “signs the CIA may be on the same tragic course,” Schiff said.

Schiff also confirmed that Intelligence Committee officials are resisting testifying at an annual open hearing on worldwide threats for fear of “angering the president”
Click to expand...
 
"I'n not saying there was an abuse of power. But if there was, it's OK because as your favorite President, who won by a landslide, I can do whatever I want."
 
Meadmaker said:
I think that was the previous impeachment trial.
Click to expand...

Did Clinton run on a "I didn't know I couldn't do that" type of defense? That's what Trump is pushing here. He's not denying he did it, he's saying that there's no reason he shouldn't have been able to do it. That's how he works, he's incapable of saying he was wrong about anything. Even glaringly obvious things. I know you're huge on this middlemanning but that doesn't work on this topic.
 
Meadmaker said:
I think that was the previous impeachment trial.
Click to expand...

I thought he tried to lie and say it didn't happen? My main objection was how rude he was about it, calling Monica "that woman". When someone is nice enough to do that activity to one then one owes that person courteous treatment.
 
Again the fact that Bill Cinton didn't get impeached for a blowjob doesn't mean that Trump gets to do whatever he wants or else it isn't "fair."

Even if I get a passport to this magical fantasy land where the crimes of Bill Clinton and the crimes of Donald Trump are the same, one doesn't make the other right.

"You didn't smack your side on the pee-pee this one time, therefore our side gets to run wild" is a mentality that is going to destroy this country.
 
TragicMonkey said:
I thought he tried to lie and say it didn't happen? My main objection was how rude he was about it, calling Monica "that woman". When someone is nice enough to do that activity to one then one owes that person courteous treatment.
Click to expand...

Indeed. He was quite the cad.

I must not have been following the thread closely enough, because I didn't think my comment had anything to do with who ought to be impeached. I just thought that having sex on the desk at work was more relevant to last time than this time. I must have missed some context where that was already made obvious, and so it looked like I was making a comment about some more significant point.

My bad. Please disregard.
 
From: https://apnews.com/d62eab2291688a96acc7a3bb48a3eec2
A White House adviser on Europe and Russia issues has been placed on administrative leave pending a security-related investigation, two people with knowledge of his exit said Sunday. Andrew Peek was escorted off the White House compound on Friday, according to one of those familiar with his departure.

Information is pretty light here... the government isn't really giving any information about what the 'security-related' issue is. Anyone want to hazzard a guess?

- The person was either suspected of being the whistleblower or was cooperating with the impeachment proceedings, and this is the Trump administration trying to punish him and/or stop the leak

- He was involved in the Ukraine scandal, and his breaking of security protocols was part of that.

- He did violate security, but it was unrelated to the Ukraine issue (and it was just a coincidence)
 
Segnosaur said:
From: https://apnews.com/d62eab2291688a96acc7a3bb48a3eec2
A White House adviser on Europe and Russia issues has been placed on administrative leave pending a security-related investigation, two people with knowledge of his exit said Sunday. Andrew Peek was escorted off the White House compound on Friday, according to one of those familiar with his departure.

Information is pretty light here... the government isn't really giving any information about what the 'security-related' issue is. Anyone want to hazzard a guess?

- The person was either suspected of being the whistleblower or was cooperating with the impeachment proceedings, and this is the Trump administration trying to punish him and/or stop the leak

- He was involved in the Ukraine scandal, and his breaking of security protocols was part of that.

- He did violate security, but it was unrelated to the Ukraine issue (and it was just a coincidence)
Click to expand...

- The coffee he brought was cold.
 
Yep. And the worst part of it is how many people think Clinton getting a rusty trombone from the chubby Jewish chicks that brought the mail means no evil deed a President ever does again can be punished.

I swear if we start a national drinking game based on how many times Clinton's goddamn blowjob is gonna get mentioned in some "whatabouta" way during the proceedings the entire country would be dead of cirrhosis of the liver by next Friday, tops.

Seriously just go get Bill Clinton and just literally crucify him for that goddamn blowjob. Just hammer and nails, right up on the goddamn steps of the Capitol. Just so we can goddamn move on as a country and hold the psycho manchild in power accountable.
 
Hard to see this as the whistleblower:
Peek, former deputy assistant secretary of state for Iraq and Iran, has been in the position since November. His two predecessors in that position — Tim Morrison and Fiona Hill — both testified in the House impeachment inquiry of President Donald Trump.
Click to expand...
So he took the position after the fact.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Hard to see this as the whistleblower:
Peek, former deputy assistant secretary of state for Iraq and Iran, has been in the position since November. His two predecessors in that position — Tim Morrison and Fiona Hill — both testified in the House impeachment inquiry of President Donald Trump.
Click to expand...
So he took the position after the fact.
Click to expand...
True, the whistleblower complaint was made in August, months before he took the position.

Although the article didn't really give a good timeline about what he was doing prior to November... Perhaps he was working with the state department (but at a lower level), made the whistleblower report, and then ended up getting promoted. (Just a possibility, although it could easily be disproved if we knew what he was doing in the summer.)
 
CNN runs a headline that they did a poll asking people if the Senate should remove Trump for office.

Me, not even looking at the article. "50% are going to say yes, 40% are going to say no within a 5% margin of error."

Opens the article: "About half of Americans say the Senate should vote to convict President Donald Trump and remove him from office in the upcoming impeachment trial (51%), according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS, while 45% say the Senate should vote against conviction and removal"

*Sighs* Nothing is ever going to break his 50/40 support numbers.
 
BTW nothing to me breaks down how broken our system is then the simple fact that we have a President who a slim majority of feel should be removed from office, not just "We shouldn't vote for him again in 2020" or "Damn I wish we hadn't voted him in back in 2016" but actually think he should be removed from office now... and I still think he's probably gonna get re-elected.

Most Americans do no support this man as President. We shouldn't be stuck with him.
 
https://twitter.com/KlasfeldReports/status/1219359491151552523

Lev Parnas’ attorney Joseph Bondy filed a motion calling for Attorney General Bill Barr’s recusal and the appointment of a special prosecutor outside @TheJusticeDept for his client’s case.

In his letter, Bondy claims that prosecutors have refused to meet with Parnas “to receive his information regarding the President, Mssrs. Giuliani, Toensing, diGenova and others—all of which would potentially benefit Mr. Parnas” if he were convicted and sentenced.

To be clear, the request is to AG Barr in a letter, and Bondy informed SDNY Judge Oetken of his request in a separate letter.
Click to expand...

Documents embedded in tweets.
 
JoeMorgue said:
CNN runs a headline that they did a poll asking people if the Senate should remove Trump for office.

Me, not even looking at the article. "50% are going to say yes, 40% are going to say no within a 5% margin of error."

Opens the article: "About half of Americans say the Senate should vote to convict President Donald Trump and remove him from office in the upcoming impeachment trial (51%), according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS, while 45% say the Senate should vote against conviction and removal"

*Sighs* Nothing is ever going to break his 50/40 support numbers.
Click to expand...

What were the numbers before the House investigation?

Look again after the Senate trial because it's going to get live wall to wall news coverage. It will depend somewhat on whether the news presents people like Dershy as some legit expert or some old idea has-been. Hopefully people will point out Dershy et al got OJ off, not that they were right and OJ was not guilty.

Both Jonathan Turley and Dershy are offering extreme POVs and selling them as mainstream expertise.

Not many polls I get searching polls include undecided. There are bound to be a lot of people not paying that much attention. They might affect the poll numbers.

I do agree a lot of voters have decided the election is soon enough, or, that the corruption is that bad it can't wait. They aren't likely to change much. But a couple bombshells we haven't seen yet could do it.
 
I don't know if it even needs to be stated, but even the citations invoke by Dershowitz are infirm. The writings of Madison and Hamilton make it very clear that they would use impeachment in a case like this. Arguing at the convention for impeachment being included...

Madison argued that the Constitution needed a provision “for defending the community against the incapacity, negligence, or perfidy of the Chief Magistrate.” Waiting to vote him out of office in a general election wasn’t good enough. “He might pervert his administration into a scheme of peculation”— embezzlement—“or oppression,” Madison warned. “He might betray his trust to foreign powers.”
Click to expand...

And Hamilton wasn't much lighter on it either.

It doesn't seem Dershowitz is trying to make a good faith actual argument, but rather just reasonable sounding enough for the people who don't know and refuse to learn that he's basically just lying about what the founders argued.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom