Impeachment

Seattle Husker said:
@Mr. Deez Did you see the NYT story about Volkers/Sondlands efforts to write a press release for Ukraine that committed them to the desired Trump investigations? This included follow-up texts that pushed Zelinsky reps to say they needed to release it in order to lock down a 1:1 meeting between Zelensky and Trump.

Volker reportedly supplied the Press Release and text messages to Schiff's committee. Given he immediately resigned as special envoy and has been so forthcoming Volker appears to be singing.

Rudy Guliani is already denying any knowledge of the Press Release which is expected. Given Rudy's claim that Volker was coordinating meetings with Guiliani/Ukrainian contacts and Rudy's public push of the investigation it's a little far fetched to think he had no knowledge of the Press Release.

Previously I thought this was simply Trump and Guiliani being overconfident idiots. Now I'm concerned they msy have coopted others into their hair brained political scheme.
Click to expand...

I hadn't when you posted. I've since read them. It's hard to say for sure what Giuliani knew, because of how murky and weird his role is, but I don't think it's unreasonable to presume that he did. However, two things that are absent in the exchanges. First, I don't see a mention of Joe or Hunter Biden. Second, I see an explicit rejection of tying the funding to the investigations. Could that be BS? Sure, but we need a piece of evidence to make that leap.

Here's what this can't become. The case can't be "Trump should be impeached because he wanted the Ukraine to help investigate Ukrainian involvement in 2016." We spent 2 years investigating the hell out of Russian involvement and entertained all kinds of conspiracy theories, most of which ended up being wrong, out of context, or wildly exaggerated. There's enough of a case to warrant at least looking into the Ukrainian angle. If that's where Schiff is going, this isn't going to fly.
 
Question on Tucker’s video; what was the ‘Barbara Jordon’ reference after the Hillary quote. Did she originally say it sometime? Caught my ear.
 
nashhorn said:
Question on Tucker’s video; what was the ‘Barbara Jordon’ reference after the Hillary quote. Did she originally say it sometime? Caught my ear.
Click to expand...
Apparently. But the context used by Hillary is likely wrong. Jordan was probably saying you can’t use the constitution to hide from crimes. In this case, Nancy is ignoring House tradition by not holding a vote. Also, what is the crime by Trump? Again, Trump haters can’t distinguish between features and bugs of Trump when he pushes the envelope.
 
mchammer said:
Apparently. But the context used by Hillary is likely wrong. Jordan was probably saying you can’t use the constitution to hide from crimes. In this case, Nancy is ignoring House tradition by not holding a vote. Also, what is the crime by Trump? Again, Trump haters can’t distinguish between features and bugs of Trump when he pushes the envelope.
Click to expand...
Not that I believe a word Pelosi says, but she does say there is no Constitutional requirement, tradition, or precedent for a vote before an inquiry.

Is she just flat out lying and tainting, as usual?
 
Mr. Deez said:
I hadn't when you posted. I've since read them. It's hard to say for sure what Giuliani knew, because of how murky and weird his role is, but I don't think it's unreasonable to presume that he did. However, two things that are absent in the exchanges. First, I don't see a mention of Joe or Hunter Biden. Second, I see an explicit rejection of tying the funding to the investigations. Could that be BS? Sure, but we need a piece of evidence to make that leap.

Here's what this can't become. The case can't be "Trump should be impeached because he wanted the Ukraine to help investigate Ukrainian involvement in 2016." We spent 2 years investigating the hell out of Russian involvement and entertained all kinds of conspiracy theories, most of which ended up being wrong, out of context, or wildly exaggerated. There's enough of a case to warrant at least looking into the Ukrainian angle. If that's where Schiff is going, this isn't going to fly.
Click to expand...

Would you also tell SH that just because these two went off the record doesn't automatically mean there is some grand conspiracy happening behind the scenes?
 
Garmel said:
Would you also tell SH that just because these two went off the record doesn't automatically mean there is some grand conspiracy happening behind the scenes?
Click to expand...

Do you think he's more likely to believe your comment if I simply repeat it?
 
Article makes good points:
- Asking foreign governments to help with DOJ investigations is the norm
- Asking Giuliani to investigate corruption for political purposes is okay too since Hillary campaign did the same with a law firm that hired Fusion GPS which hired Christopher Steele, etc. Everyone in that chain knew it was to help Hillary who would be president. I don’t see a difference with Trump. In fact, foreigners may think Trump has a lesser chance of winning the 2020 election than Hillary did in 2016.

https://nypost.com/2019/10/04/sorry...ign-help-in-a-criminal-justice-investigation/
 
Nunes with the reminder of why the Dems chose to run this nonsense through the House Intel Committee -- so they can hide the testimony from the people - and just supply the media with their talking points instead

“By running it in the House Intel Committee, they’re trying to keep all of the information from the American public. And I understand why, because every witness we have that comes in bombs out for them." ​

Secret 'show trial': Nunes charges Democrats using intelligence panel to cloak process
 
So it sounds like the purported “whistleblower” is a disgruntled former Obama CIA analyst who worked on the Ukraine desk with anti-Trump operatives. When he was fired by the Trump administration, he sought ways to get revenge

Time to unmask him or them. And there are already people who saw them (one male, one female) coming out of the hearing and recognized them. And they say the guy at least has some baggage. So probably going to happen soon

Also, Ive read that these same two people have tried something like this before, but failed
 
Last edited:
How do idiots like this make it into the Congress?

Trump’s daughter is Jewish
Trump’s son in law is Jewish
Trump’s grandkids are Jewish
Trump moved the US embassy to Jerusalem
Trump recognized the Golan Heights in Israel
Trump literally deported a real Nazi that Obama had refused to

 
Not that I believe a word Pelosi says, but she does say there is no Constitutional requirement, tradition, or precedent for a vote before an inquiry.
Click to expand...

So now the Dems revere the constitution?
 
mchammer said:
- Asking foreign governments to help with DOJ investigations is the norm
Click to expand...

Yes, this is true. That's why the impeachment should fail if all Trump did was ask Ukraine to assist in the DOJ investigations of the 2016 election

mchammer said:
Asking Giuliani to investigate corruption for political purposes is okay too since Hillary campaign did the same with a law firm that hired Fusion GPS which hired Christopher Steele, etc. Everyone in that chain knew it was to help Hillary who would be president.
Click to expand...

Giuliani can investigate corruption for political purposes. He can even look overseas. However, that doesn't mean he can't go wrong in that process. He can't conspire with others to break the law. (For example, he can't try to get a foreign government or anyone else to hack his opponent's emails.) He can't solicit campaign contributions from foreigners. He also can't enlist the American government to use its official capacity and authority to help him do his work. That's why Trump should have kept Giuliani out of his discussion with Zelensky. It's not per se illegal, because nobody has nailed down exactly what Giuliani was doing or what Zelensky was going to do for Giuliani. However, it could be. It looks bad. Again, it's just another example of Trump doing something sloppy and stupid that gets him into hot water.

It's unbelievable. With the current economy, the Mueller report fizzling out, and no unpopular wars going on, Trump should be on track for an easy reelection. Furthermore, the radicalism and nuttiness his opposition is embracing should make his reelection even easier. He's vulnerable basically because of his mouth (including his Twitter account) and his own sloppiness.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Yes, this is true. That's why the impeachment should fail if all Trump did was ask Ukraine to assist in the DOJ investigations of the 2016 election



Giuliani can investigate corruption for political purposes. He can even look overseas. However, that doesn't mean he can't go wrong in that process. He can't conspire with others to break the law. (For example, he can't try to get a foreign government or anyone else to hack his opponent's emails.) He can't solicit campaign contributions from foreigners. He also can't enlist the American government to use its official capacity and authority to help him do his work. That's why Trump should have kept Giuliani out of his discussion with Zelensky. It's not per se illegal, because nobody has nailed down exactly what Giuliani was doing or what Zelensky was going to do for Giuliani. However, it could be. It looks bad. Again, it's just another example of Trump doing something sloppy and stupid that gets him into hot water.

It's unbelievable. With the current economy, the Mueller report fizzling out, and no unpopular wars going on, Trump should be on track for an easy reelection. Furthermore, the radicalism and nuttiness his opposition is embracing should make his reelection even easier. He's vulnerable basically because of his mouth (including his Twitter account) and his own sloppiness.
Click to expand...

The State Department asked Guiliani to get involved in the process. As far as I know it wasn't Trump.
 
It seems clear that no matter who is POTUS, if they are republican, Democrats will vilify them and try any means necessary to harm them.
 
I35 said:
So the second hand informer didn’t workout so now they’ve moved to Plan B and recruited a first hand informer.
Click to expand...

This is such a joke. This is going to be so much fun to watch our libs here BS and spin the next few days. WE GOT TRUMP NOW!!! :lmao:
 
I was right about my whistleblower prediction. Here's my next prediction: This whistleblower will somehow have texts or info that wasn't on the transcript.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-HOGS *
Sat, Nov 16 • 11:00 AM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top