|
Post by Marshall on Sept 26, 2019 8:54:01 GMT -5
What seems to be the biggest difference between Ukraine/Biden and Steel Dossier/Trump is that one involves a candidate for president and the other involves a sitting president. In these cases I have a tendency to look past some of the finer points of things and focus on what the thing actually is. When you break it down this is two incidents that are remarkably similar; a political figure attempting to gain negative information about a political opponent. What bothers me is that I am too dumb to understand the nuances that make one acceptable and the other an impeachable offense. It would be OK to go thru back channels to try to find this information. But when the sitting President is talking to another leader to discuss aid and their national security, it takes on a quid-quo-prophylactic possibility. That's part of Trump's problem(s). He can't delegate. He wants to run everything from the seat of his pants. Everything is mashed together in the same stew. He don't know no stinkin' boundaries on any behavior. He's Omnipotent. (or so he believes). Is it impeachable? Impeachment is a political process. And I don't think the planets are aligned for that. Is it conduct becoming of a President? I don't think so. But will the process enhance or deter the possibility of getting him out of office. I don't know.
|
|
|
Post by Marshall on Sept 26, 2019 9:02:29 GMT -5
I've got my eyes on Boris Johnson & Briton, & Brexit. It seems the Parliament and the populace(?) is possibly going to reject his abrupt exit plans. The British Supremes shut down his lock-out. And if the P'ment forces an election, I want to see if this "Fuck-Everybody-in-the-establishment" attitude is finally passed like the bad bout of diarrhea it is.
That could be a harbinger for Mr T in 2020.
|
|
|
Post by jdd2 on Sept 26, 2019 9:13:43 GMT -5
Like in the DC comics, I wonder if there's an earth-2 out there so that things that are happening here on earth-1 can actually merge with earth-2 and end up having some continuity....
|
|
|
Post by Rob Hanesworth on Sept 26, 2019 10:39:47 GMT -5
Like in the DC comics, I wonder if there's an earth-2 out there so that things that are happening here on earth-1 can actually merge with earth-2 and end up having some continuity.... You are hoping for a planet B? Don't count on it.
|
|
|
Post by Marshall on Sept 26, 2019 10:47:13 GMT -5
Well, I've read what I can find on the Shokin affair in Ukraine. And I have to say, Biden's conduct in the matter would seem to be as bad as Trump's. The sources (wikipedia) say The Western World (EU, US, etc) all wanted Shokin out. Reports are sketchy about why, other than he was considered bad by everyone. They say he was actually going too slow on investigatin Burisma, not pursuing it too aggressively, as Trump camp says (thus calling for his ouster).
I can't judge the facts, because everything I see is filtered through a point of view. But I don't like Joe's cocky pronouncements to the, then, PM of Ukraine about firing Shokin. That strikes me as bullying as much as what I see from Trump. Don't know if it is truly self interest and protecting hsi son or not. But it doesn't sound Vice-Presidential.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Sept 26, 2019 11:03:09 GMT -5
"I want to congratulate the Democrats on the rollout of their latest information warfare operation against the President, and their extraordinary ability once again to enlist the mainstream media in their campaign.
This operation began with media reports—from the prime instigators of the Russian collusion hoax—that a whistleblower is claiming President Trump made a nefarious “promise” to a foreign leader. The released transcript of the call has already debunked that central assertion, but that didn’t matter. The Democrats simply moved the goalposts and began claiming that there doesn’t need to be a quid pro quo for this conversation to serve as the basis for impeaching the president.
Speaker Pelosi went even further when asked earlier if she’d put the brakes on impeachment if the transcript turned out to be benign. She responded, “We have many other candidates for impeachable offenses.” So there you go—if their whistleblower operation doesn’t work out, the Democrats and their media assets can always drum up something else.
And what other information has come to light since the original false report of a “promise” being made? We’ve learned the following:
*The complaint relied on hearsay evidence provided by the whistleblower. *The Inspector General did not know the contents of the phone call at issue. *The Inspector General found that the whistleblower displayed “arguable political bias” against Trump. *The Department of Justice investigated the complaint and determined no action was warranted.
*The Ukrainian President denies being pressured by President Trump. So, once again, this supposed scandal ends up being nothing like what we were told. And once again, the Democrats, their media mouthpieces, and a cabal of leakers are ginning up a fake story, with no regard to the monumental damage they’re causing to our public institutions and to trust in government, and without acknowledging all the false stories they propagated in the past, including countless allegations that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to hack the 2016 election. We’re supposed to forget about all those stories but believe this one. In short, what we have with this storyline is another Steele dossier.
I’ll note here that, in the Democrats’ mania to overturn the 2016 elections, everything they touch gets hopelessly politicized. With the Russia hoax it was our intelligence agencies, which were turned into a political weapon to attack the president. And today, the whistleblower process is the casualty. Until about a week ago, the need to protect that process was a primary bipartisan concern of this committee. But if the Democrats were really concerned with defending that process, they would have pursued this matter with quiet and sober inquiries, as we always do for whistleblowers.
But that would’ve been useless for them. They don’t want answers, they want a public spectacle. And so we’ve been treated to an unending parade of press releases, press conferences, and fake news stories." - Devin Nunes
Nice job assholes.
|
|
|
Post by casualplayerpaul on Sept 26, 2019 11:14:30 GMT -5
Devin Nunes tried to sue a cow.
The man gives tools a bad name.
|
|
|
Post by lar on Sept 26, 2019 11:48:27 GMT -5
I'll make this point again; there are a large number of people that have never liked Trump, asserted that he was not their president, and, without evidence as the networks tend to say, have called for his impeachment from day one. Now they are getting their wish.
This is what used to be called "frontier justice" . . . give Trump a fair trial and then hang him.
Much as I think Trump may well be a scummy human being there's no law against that and there are plenty of other scummy human beings running loose in D.C. He may well have done something that is truly impeachable. If so, then let's prove it and hang him high. This stinks of politics at it's worst and regardless of whether Trump gets what he deserves or not, the country deserves, and should demand, a lot better from it's elected representatives.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Sept 26, 2019 12:06:36 GMT -5
I just read the transcript. The PDF. If you read the "transcript" from the major news sources, it is truncated without noting that it is. The "do us a favor" was not the antecedent to "...Biden" at all. The press cut out over 500 words and made it appear as though the favor was about "getting" Biden.
|
|
|
Post by majorminor on Sept 26, 2019 12:15:44 GMT -5
Whether impeachment sticks or not, I'm of the mind that the dems just definitively lost the 2020 election for the office of president. My reasoning is that if Trump won in 2016 by polarizing the voters and turning out the "deplorables" then this is the same principle on steroids innit?
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Sept 26, 2019 12:17:33 GMT -5
Whether impeachment sticks or not, I'm of the mind that the dems just definitively lost the 2012 election for the office of president. My reasoning is that if Trump won in 2016 by polarizing the voters and turning out the "deplorables" then this is the same principle on steroids innit? You'd think that would be obvious to anyone.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Sept 26, 2019 12:19:44 GMT -5
Whether impeachment sticks or not, I'm of the mind that the dems just definitively lost the 2012 election for the office of president. My reasoning is that if Trump won in 2016 by polarizing the voters and turning out the "deplorables" then this is the same principle on steroids innit? Only if they've mastered time travel.
|
|
|
Post by TKennedy on Sept 26, 2019 13:34:09 GMT -5
Well he definitely pressured a foreign power to dig up dirt on a rival and offered the services of his lawyer and attorney general and his staff tried to cover up the conversation.
Maybe and probably other presidents have done similar things and not gotten caught but in this day and age his actions even if not deemed criminal demonstrate a man too stupid to be president.
I think sometimes you have to do the right thing even if it may not be in your best interests and I have come to feel that an impeachment inquiry is the right thing to do even if it hurts the Democrat’s chances in 2020.
I think that like an adrenaline junky rock climber or extreme skier Trump loves to see how far he can push the envelope and get away with it.
There is no downside to impeachment for him. Win or lose he will dominate the headlines for the foreseeable future and if he does get impeached (unlikely) or loses in 2020 he can monopolize cyberspace with conspiracy theories and remain on the front page and wallow in narcissism without the burden of He presidency.
|
|
|
Post by Rob Hanesworth on Sept 26, 2019 13:38:07 GMT -5
The DNI, under oath, confirmed something I have long believed. He said Trump was not a member of the intelligence community.
|
|
|
Post by brucemacneill on Sept 26, 2019 13:42:02 GMT -5
Well he definitely pressured a foreign power to dig up dirt on a rival and offered the services of his lawyer and attorney general and his staff tried to cover up the conversation. Maybe and probably other presidents have done similar things and not gotten caught but in this day and age his actions even if not deemed criminal demonstrate a man too stupid to be president. I think sometimes you have to do the right thing even if it may not be in your best interests and I have come to feel that an impeachment inquiry is the right thing to do even if it hurts the Democrat’s chances in 2020. I think that like an adrenaline junky rock climber or extreme skier Trump loves to see how far he can push the envelope and get away with it. There is no downside to impeachment for him. Win or lose he will dominate the headlines for the foreseeable future and if he does get impeached (unlikely) or loses in 2020 he can monopolize cyberspace with conspiracy theories and remain on the front page and wallow in narcissism without the burden of He presidency. The Ukrainian guy said he wasn't pushed for anything. That's first hand, I saw him say it. The whistle blower's stuff was all hearsay which is only admissible in a Democrat controlled investigation. SO far, I'm agreeing with "Witch hunt".
|
|
|
Post by casualplayerpaul on Sept 26, 2019 13:45:43 GMT -5
Whether impeachment sticks or not, I'm of the mind that the dems just definitively lost the 2012 election for the office of president. My reasoning is that if Trump won in 2016 by polarizing the voters and turning out the "deplorables" then this is the same principle on steroids innit? You'd think that would be obvious to anyone. Both bases need to turn out, and the Democrats base is bigger than Trump's. Democrats would be pretty pissed if they won the House in 2018 only to dither and have Trump play them for chimps. That part of the game ended Tuesday afternoon. Independents? They never liked Trump much, and will like him even less after they figure out he's trying to influence the 2020 election via foreign heads of state.
|
|
|
Post by casualplayerpaul on Sept 26, 2019 13:49:53 GMT -5
Well he definitely pressured a foreign power to dig up dirt on a rival and offered the services of his lawyer and attorney general and his staff tried to cover up the conversation. Maybe and probably other presidents have done similar things and not gotten caught but in this day and age his actions even if not deemed criminal demonstrate a man too stupid to be president. I think sometimes you have to do the right thing even if it may not be in your best interests and I have come to feel that an impeachment inquiry is the right thing to do even if it hurts the Democrat’s chances in 2020. I think that like an adrenaline junky rock climber or extreme skier Trump loves to see how far he can push the envelope and get away with it. There is no downside to impeachment for him. Win or lose he will dominate the headlines for the foreseeable future and if he does get impeached (unlikely) or loses in 2020 he can monopolize cyberspace with conspiracy theories and remain on the front page and wallow in narcissism without the burden of He presidency. The Ukrainian guy said he wasn't pushed for anything. That's first hand, I saw him say it. The whistle blower's stuff was all hearsay which is only admissible in a Democrat controlled investigation. SO far, I'm agreeing with "Witch hunt". The whistleblower said about a dozen White House officials were on the president's July 25 call and that White House officials later intervened to "lock down" records of the call. That's a lot of witnesses. Good luck with the whole witch hunt narrative, now that the damn has broken.
|
|
|
Post by Rob Hanesworth on Sept 26, 2019 13:52:22 GMT -5
Well he definitely pressured a foreign power to dig up dirt on a rival and offered the services of his lawyer and attorney general and his staff tried to cover up the conversation. Maybe and probably other presidents have done similar things and not gotten caught but in this day and age his actions even if not deemed criminal demonstrate a man too stupid to be president. I think sometimes you have to do the right thing even if it may not be in your best interests and I have come to feel that an impeachment inquiry is the right thing to do even if it hurts the Democrat’s chances in 2020. I think that like an adrenaline junky rock climber or extreme skier Trump loves to see how far he can push the envelope and get away with it. There is no downside to impeachment for him. Win or lose he will dominate the headlines for the foreseeable future and if he does get impeached (unlikely) or loses in 2020 he can monopolize cyberspace with conspiracy theories and remain on the front page and wallow in narcissism without the burden of He presidency. The Ukrainian guy said he wasn't pushed for anything. That's first hand, I saw him say it. The whistle blower's stuff was all hearsay which is only admissible in a Democrat controlled investigation. SO far, I'm agreeing with "Witch hunt". The Democrats aren't hunting witches, they are hunting Trump. Or is he admitting he is one?
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Sept 26, 2019 13:54:45 GMT -5
The Ukrainian guy said he wasn't pushed for anything. That's first hand, I saw him say it. The whistle blower's stuff was all hearsay which is only admissible in a Democrat controlled investigation. SO far, I'm agreeing with "Witch hunt". The Democrats aren't hunting witches, they are hunting Trump. Or is he admitting he is one? So I guess the whole thing will come down to whether or not Trump weighs more than a duck.
|
|
|
Post by brucemacneill on Sept 26, 2019 14:00:46 GMT -5
The Ukrainian guy said he wasn't pushed for anything. That's first hand, I saw him say it. The whistle blower's stuff was all hearsay which is only admissible in a Democrat controlled investigation. SO far, I'm agreeing with "Witch hunt". The whistleblower said about a dozen White House officials were on the president's July 25 call and that White House officials later intervened to "lock down" records of the call. That's a lot of witnesses. Good luck with the whole witch hunt narrative, now that the damn has broken. No, that's a lot of hearsay accusations. Legally, that's all it is.
|
|