Cont: House Impeachment Inquiry - part 3

Paul2 said:
Only if you ignore the larger context - his lack of contrition, as well as all the other anti-democratic moves he has made up to this point, and the anti-democratic moves he will no doubt feel empowered to undertake once he is acquitted.
Click to expand...

I think this is true, but listen carefully to your own words, and imagine how they sound to others. The "context" here, is Trump. His this, his that, all the things he does and will no doubt do later.

In other words, this is a big deal, because it's Trump.
 
Meadmaker said:
I think this is true, but listen carefully to your own words, and imagine how they sound to others. The "context" here, is Trump. His this, his that, all the things he does and will no doubt do later.

In other words, this is a big deal, because it's Trump.
Click to expand...

It's a big deal, because its a big ******* deal. PERIOD.

It's a bigger deal because of Trump's actions and his disdain of having his authority challenged. That Trump has shown ZERO contrition and stands by his statement that he did no wrong makes it huge.
 
OK, so John Bolton testifies that Trump ordered the Ukraine aid be withheld unless Ukraine agrees to investigate the "missing server" and Hunter Biden. And he testifies that Trump has Yovanovitch removed cause she would stand in the way of Trump's scheme.

What does this change? Would we get 66 votes to remove?

Would Trump resign?

Doubtful. Maybe this would bring us to 52, maybe 53 votes to remove from office.
 
Last edited:
TellyKNeasuss said:
Do you also think this about the obstruction charge? Do you believe that a president ordering people who work for him to ignore legally-issued subpoenas and refusing to turn over documents for inspection by Congress, essentially asserting that a president is immune from any oversight or investigation by Congress, does not rock America to its foundations?





How would not impeaching Trump help prevent Trump from getting away with it?
Click to expand...

I think the obstruction charge is laughable.

"Getting away with it", would mean staying in office. With or without impeachment, he isn't going to get thrown out by the Senate. We know the outcome of this trial before it ever starts.

So, the only question is how it affects votes in November. On this, of course, opinions vary. I think trying to get him thrown out, and failing, makes Democrats look bad and costs them votes. A long standing discussion about subverting foreign policy for his political interests might have had some effect, but I think by going for impeachment, they set the bar too high. However, I'm not a professional political consultant, so we'll just have to see in November.
 
Meadmaker said:
I think the obstruction charge is laughable.
Click to expand...


I don't. The premise that a president can unilaterally declare that anyone who might testify that he has committed criminal acts, violated the constitution, or abused his office is not allowed to testify is an extremely serious matter and one that IMHO has no constitutional or legal basis.
 
Meadmaker said:
I think the obstruction charge is laughable.

"Getting away with it", would mean staying in office. With or without impeachment, he isn't going to get thrown out by the Senate. We know the outcome of this trial before it ever starts.

So, the only question is how it affects votes in November. On this, of course, opinions vary. I think trying to get him thrown out, and failing, makes Democrats look bad and costs them votes. A long standing discussion about subverting foreign policy for his political interests might have had some effect, but I think by going for impeachment, they set the bar too high. However, I'm not a professional political consultant, so we'll just have to see in November.
Click to expand...

I think the obstruction charge is by far the more serious charge. The idea that it is laughable should be distressing to anyone who cares about checks and balances.

Do we think POTUS should have unchecked power and be unaccountable? Should we say "Screw it" and given into authoritarian rule?

Because that really is what you are saying.
 
Meadmaker said:
I think the obstruction charge is laughable.

"Getting away with it", would mean staying in office. With or without impeachment, he isn't going to get thrown out by the Senate. We know the outcome of this trial before it ever starts.
...
Click to expand...

Do you know what the evidence for obstruction is? :boggled:
 
acbytesla said:
Why not just go to those in the loop? I'm sure if Trump is innocent, he wouldn't mind if Mulvaney, Giuliani and Bolton testified. Trump can clear this all up if Schiff and the House made a mistake by providing the Senate with everything.

If us Democrats got it all wrong, be forthright with everything.

Its all a hoax. Except the fact that EVERYTHING has been corroborated.
Click to expand...
It would be great if Trump himself insisted on testifying. But he's cunning enough to never swear an oath to tell the truth.
 
And here we go. Surprise, turns out they were all in the loop.Mother Jones: Report: John Bolton’s Book Draft Says Trump Conditioned Ukraine Aid on Biden Investigations

He described not only the president’s private disparagement of Ukraine but also new details about senior cabinet officials who have publicly tried to sidestep involvement.

For example, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo acknowledged privately that there was no basis to claims by the president’s lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani that the ambassador to Ukraine was corrupt and believed Mr. Giuliani may have been acting on behalf of other clients, Mr. Bolton wrote.

Mr. Bolton also said that after the president’s July phone call with the president of Ukraine, he raised with Attorney General William P. Barr his concerns about Mr. Giuliani, who was pursuing a shadow Ukraine policy encouraged by the president, and told Mr. Barr that the president had mentioned him on the call. A spokeswoman for Mr. Barr denied that he learned of the call from Mr. Bolton; the Justice Department has said he learned about it only in mid-August.

And the acting White House chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, was present for at least one phone call where the president and Mr. Giuliani discussed the ambassador, Mr. Bolton wrote. Mr. Mulvaney has told associates he would always step away when the president spoke with his lawyer to protect their attorney-client privilege.
Click to expand...

This on the eve of the GOP lawyers about to brush everything under the rug and trash Schiff.

Oops. Now they have to rewrite their speeches, adding in this is all hearsay. We only have news accounts, Bolton isn't sworn in, yada yada.

I didn't watch the hearing Sat and I wasn't going to watch it tomorrow.

Now I am. Bwahahahahahahahaha.
 
Minoosh said:
It would be great if Trump himself insisted on testifying. But he's cunning enough to never swear an oath to tell the truth.
Click to expand...

It would be. Trump has said he'd love to testify, but he's protecting future presidents.

:rolleyes:
 
Meadmaker said:
So, the only question is how it affects votes in November. On this, of course, opinions vary. I think trying to get him thrown out, and failing, makes Democrats look bad and costs them votes. A long standing discussion about subverting foreign policy for his political interests might have had some effect, but I think by going for impeachment, they set the bar too high. However, I'm not a professional political consultant, so we'll just have to see in November.
Click to expand...
That's funny. Whenever I say that this impeachment is all about votes, others get up in arms about it. There is supposed to be a "higher principle" involved even though congress and principles are an oxymoron.
 
Maybe it's good that the machinations are so transparent. Everyone knows where everyone else stands. The House did the right thing. It's inconceivable that Senate Republicans aren't wise to the implications of Trump's foreign "policy" of admiring and enabling dictators. It wouldn't be so bad if Trump did it strategically, but he has no strategy, just a bottomless need for approval from hard men who will be happy to see democracy disappear.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
And here we go. Surprise, turns out they were all in the loop.Mother Jones: Report: John Bolton’s Book Draft Says Trump Conditioned Ukraine Aid on Biden Investigations
Click to expand...

More dirty tricks from the Democrats. They're releasing this information to distract from the defense's brilliant opening arguments. Dersh is going to go full-on Kavanaugh so low IQ Dems are trying to taint jurors with snippets from this for-profit memoir. Bolton isn't even making these claims under oath. How can we trust him? The only real solution is to dismiss this ridiculous trial, and possibly cancel the election. We'll save a lot of money (which is why fiscally reckless socialists would cry foul).
 
Cain said:
More dirty tricks from the Democrats. They're releasing this information to distract from the defense's brilliant opening arguments. Dersh is going to go full-on Kavanaugh so low IQ Dems are trying to taint jurors with snippets from this for-profit memoir. Bolton isn't even making these claims under oath. How can we trust him? The only real solution is to dismiss this ridiculous trial, and possibly cancel the election. We'll save a lot of money (which is why fiscally reckless socialists would cry foul).
Click to expand...

Bwahahahahahahahaha.
 
Meadmaker said:
Seriously?
Click to expand...

Very seriously.

The WH has the power to turn Bolton's book from a tome into a pamphlet "for national security reasons" whenever they want.
The fact that Bolton had his opinion leaked suggests that Trump was about to do exactly that, should Bolton not refuse to testify.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
Very seriously.

The WH has the power to turn Bolton's book from a tome into a pamphlet "for national security reasons" whenever they want.
The fact that Bolton had his opinion leaked suggests that Trump was about to do exactly that, should Bolton not refuse to testify.
Click to expand...

Kind of hard to call the ship back into the harbor when there's a party on board and it's well out to sea.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom