House Impeachment Inquiry

Status
Not open for further replies.
Minoosh said:
WTF is a secure phone? And it doesn't matter anyway: He’s *tweeting,* for crying out loud. That’s not a stealth activity.
Click to expand...

Secure phones have their communications scrambled (encrypted) by a chip or software app and decoded by another secure telephone or network. But obviously "tweeting is not secure.
 
Segnosaur said:
I think some government phones have extra protections...

Certain apps removed that could cause security holes, software installed for doing secure communications, special modifications to the operating system to prevent things like unauthorized information being leaked (such as GPS coordinates.)

I am not sure if congress critters would have that, but it is a possibility.
Click to expand...
A "secure phone" in federal governmental parlance would be one equipped (connected to equipment, to be more accurate) to encrypt/decrypt voice communications when properly connected to another secure phone. Such a phone would almost certainly be wired or a dedicated non-smartphone device because of the inherent insecurity of transferring data through public cell networks. I doubt strongly that a smartphone allowing the installation of non-government applications (like Twitter) would qualify.
 
dudalb said:
Just read an article prediting the democracy will not survive the information age because the information age has made political splintering much worse.
Click to expand...

It has also over-democratised everything, to the point where the only reality that matters is the one in your head.
 
Belz... said:
It has also over-democratised everything, to the point where the only reality that matters is the one in your head.
Click to expand...

Part of the same problem:you can now just stick to information sources in your comfort zone where your opinions are never really chanllenged.
 
acbytesla said:
It's not because of dislike. At all. I would probably release them in an hour and drop the charges. Maybe you're right, maybe it would look terible. Better to make them look ineffectual.

I'm concerned that the Democrats are acting weak.
Click to expand...

Or just giving their opponents enough rope to hang themselves.

And, frankly, don't fall into an obsession with being tough all the time. Look as You Know Who....
 
The Don said:
...and of course if it was being conducted in public, they'd be complaining that allegations were being made before definitive proof had been provided.

Of course they really want is for the President's accusers to be named publicly so that their reputations can be destroyed - likely with half-truths an falsehoods.
Click to expand...
Yep. They would make up anything, that's what faux outrage is.

And yep, they are trying to intimidate whistleblowers.

Then there is the possibility they are just pandering to Trump who ordered them do more in a meeting shortly before the rampage.
 
Last edited:
plague311 said:
From the way I understand it, I'm positive I'll be corrected if I'm wrong, the impeachment of Clinton didn't go this same way. Starr delivered his report with the investigative process already completed, and that's what the House used to draw up the impeachment and vote on it. In this case, they just have the whistleblower complaint and they are now doing the investigating rather than having a completed report to work off of.

I don't believe the two processes have much in common.
Click to expand...

Demonstrates the difference between Starr and Mueller.
 
Armitage72 said:
They also ordered pizza. I suppose it shows that they have no intention to follow the rules, leave, and let the hearing proceed.
Click to expand...
The report I heard was they stalled the meeting for ~7 hours. But then the witness that was scheduled still testified afterward.

It appears they blinked.
 
dudalb said:
That would look terrible.
I think at times you dislike of Republicans really does blind you to reality.
And the GOPers look bad enough as it is. except for their base, it looks like a dumbass political stunt.
Click to expand...

Could even be the GOP wanted an arrest to add to their stunt. Schiff didn't take the bait.
 
acbytesla said:
It's not because of dislike. At all. I would probably release them in an hour and drop the charges. Maybe you're right, maybe it would look terible. Better to make them look ineffectual.

I'm concerned that the Democrats are acting weak.
Click to expand...
Or not.
 
dudalb said:
Or just giving their opponents enough rope to hang themselves.

And, frankly, don't fall into an obsession with being tough all the time. Look as You Know Who....
Click to expand...

I don't think I'm obsessed with the Dems being tough all the time. I'd settle for some of the time.

The stunt those GOP House members is representative of what happens in a devolving government. And I strongly believe it was orchestrated by Trump. Yesterday Trump met with many of those House members to plan a strategy to deal with the Democrats impeachment of him saying Republicans have to be tougher and fight.

This .government has refused to comply with subpoenas and the House has done nothing about it. Now maybe their stategy is better than what I think they should do which is arrest individuals who don't comply with subpoenas. Maybe its better doing what they are doing.

Who's to know for sure? Admittedly not me.
 
Apparently 13 out of the 41 Republicans who stormed the hearing are on the committees, and therefore permitted to attend.
 
I really have very little issue with this stunt.
Republicans can easily convince themselves that they are fighting for their rights as Representatives, not to provide cover for a criminal in the White House.

Compared to what McConnell or Nunes or other betrayers of their Oath of Office are doing, this is harmless.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
I really have very little issue with this stunt.
Republicans can easily convince themselves that they are fighting for their rights as Representatives, not to provide cover for a criminal in the White House.

Compared to what McConnell or Nunes or other betrayers of their Oath of Office are doing, this is harmless.
Click to expand...

It might be harmless in and of itself, but it's in my opinion, like acbytesla's, a symptom of a breakdown of the system.
 
Belz... said:
It might be harmless in and of itself, but it's in my opinion, like acbytesla's, a symptom of a breakdown of the system.
Click to expand...
It's a ludicrous stunt aimed at low information supporters. Keep saying that the Democrats are keeping Republicans out of the process and it'll stick, no matter how false it is.
 
For the record, I think the Dems should hold a vote on empowering the Impeachment proceedings, just to take the wind out of the GOP sails and take an issue away from them. I know they don't have to, but IMHO it's would be a smart tactic.
 
dudalb said:
For the record, I think the Dems should hold a vote on empowering the Impeachment proceedings, just to take the wind out of the GOP sails and take an issue away from them. I know they don't have to, but IMHO it's would be a smart tactic.
Click to expand...
As I understand, this step gives the GOP power to subpoena which enables all sorts of antics, such as calling Hunter Biden to testify. It will happen eventually, but I can see why they're holding off.
 
So, and I get there are no absolute firm answers here, who's better served by this whole process taking longer; the Republicans or the Democrats?
 
JoeMorgue said:
So, and I get there are no absolute firm answers here, who's better served by this whole process taking longer; the Republicans or the Democrats?
Click to expand...


The Dems IMHO the longer it last the more damage to Trump.
I think they know they will never get a conviction in the Senate;the tactic is to Show that Trump was guilty but was let off by a packed jury.
 
dudalb said:
The Dems IMHO the longer it last the more damage to Trump.
I think they know they will never get a conviction in the Senate;the tactic is to Show that Trump was guilty but was let off by a packed jury.
Click to expand...

From what I'm hearing, the chance of conviction in the senate depends on the voters. If Independents and Republican voters shift towards Impeachment and Removal it will give the Senate the ability to find guilt and remove him. People on the inside are suggesting that even now, of there was the ability to have a secret ballot, the result could easily be 90-10 for removal.
 
PhantomWolf said:
From what I'm hearing, the chance of conviction in the senate depends on the voters. If Independents and Republican voters shift towards Impeachment and Removal it will give the Senate the ability to find guilt and remove him.
Click to expand...
It would have to be such a massive shift in support of impeachment among republicans that the chance of it happening is unlikely.

The way I see it, republicans have a choice:
- Stick behind Trump. Probably lose the next election, but at least put in a decent fight
- Impeach Trump and get slaughtered in 2020. (Yes, many republicans will probably stuck with the party, but in elections, a few percentage points of support can make a big difference, and there are probably enough hard-core Trump fans that the republicans would be in real trouble if they turned on him.)
 
dudalb said:
For the record, I think the Dems should hold a vote on empowering the Impeachment proceedings, just to take the wind out of the GOP sails and take an issue away from them. I know they don't have to, but IMHO it's would be a smart tactic.
Click to expand...

There will be a vote. There were 5 months of inquiry before the house had an official vote on Nixon. It's been about a month so far.

This is ALL distraction.

The Republicans want to whine about the process because the facts don't help them. 47 Republicans had a right to be at the hearing yesterday and had equal time to ask questions. There is nothing, absolutely nothing unfair about the process. The President could have had Rudy testify, they could have had Pompeo testify, they could have had Perry testify. It's not like this administration has been deprived of any due process whatsoever.

I guarantee if they have an official vote, the Republicans will whine about something else.
 
Segnosaur said:
It would have to be such a massive shift in support of impeachment among republicans that the chance of it happening is unlikely.

The way I see it, republicans have a choice:
- Stick behind Trump. Probably lose the next election, but at least put in a decent fight
- Impeach Trump and get slaughtered in 2020. (Yes, many republicans will probably stuck with the party, but in elections, a few percentage points of support can make a big difference, and there are probably enough hard-core Trump fans that the republicans would be in real trouble if they turned on him.)
Click to expand...


I think the last is probably more true for the House races hten the Senate.
 
Segnosaur said:
It would have to be such a massive shift in support of impeachment among republicans that the chance of it happening is unlikely.

The way I see it, republicans have a choice:
- Stick behind Trump. Probably lose the next election, but at least put in a decent fight
- Impeach Trump and get slaughtered in 2020. (Yes, many republicans will probably stuck with the party, but in elections, a few percentage points of support can make a big difference, and there are probably enough hard-core Trump fans that the republicans would be in real trouble if they turned on him.)
Click to expand...

No, not necessarily. If they impeach Trump now, they can make their elections about something other than Trump. No chance if they don't do the right thing.
 
acbytesla said:
No, not necessarily. If they impeach Trump now, they can make their elections about something other than Trump. No chance if they don't do the right thing.
Click to expand...

I think a lot of GOPers will be doing some calculations about how much of their base are Full pledged members of the Trump personality cult and how many are Mickey Mouse Republicans. With the Mickey Mousers, you might convince them they are better off with Pence, but not the Personality cultests.
 
acbytesla said:
No, not necessarily. If they impeach Trump now, they can make their elections about something other than Trump. No chance if they don't do the right thing.
Click to expand...
But they can't impeach Trump now... They have to wait for the House to finish the investigation, which could take a month or 2, then the house has to vote, then the senate has to schedule the proceedings and have their trial. We may be looking at early 2020 before they could actually complete the impeachment process.

And remember, the GOP seems to be tying themselves to Trump, through things like cancelling primaries in some states, and linking his personal campaign to the GOP. All that will need to be undone in the event of an impeachment.

And of course, Trump is unlikely to go quietly if he is voted out... I'm sure he will be giving us hourly updates on how the GOP were all "never Trumpers" to begin with, which will keep his base riled up.
 
Segnosaur said:
But they can't impeach Trump now... They have to wait for the House to finish the investigation, which could take a month or 2, then the house has to vote, then the senate has to schedule the proceedings and have their trial. We may be looking at early 2020 before they could actually complete the impeachment process.

And remember, the GOP seems to be tying themselves to Trump, through things like cancelling primaries in some states, and linking his personal campaign to the GOP. All that will need to be undone in the event of an impeachment.

And of course, Trump is unlikely to go quietly if he is voted out... I'm sure he will be giving us hourly updates on how the GOP were all "never Trumpers" to begin with, which will keep his base riled up.
Click to expand...

Look. They can get together as a group of 20 Senators and go to Trump and say they will convict him no matter what and that Trump needs to step down. That he is only prolonging the inevitable. That is what happened to Nixon. They can come out together publicly and say that while they agree with Trump politically they cannot abide such an abuse of power. You think the walls are closing in on Trump now, imagine that happening.

There is a tipping point. We just don't know what it is.
 
dudalb said:
I think a lot of GOPers will be doing some calculations about how much of their base are Full pledged members of the Trump personality cult and how many are Mickey Mouse Republicans. With the Mickey Mousers, you might convince them they are better off with Pence, but not the Personality cultests.
Click to expand...

So? How many cultists do you actually believe are part of the House or Senate? IMV, they are few. This is about political calculation above everything.
 
acbytesla said:
So? How many cultists do you actually believe are part of the House or Senate? IMV, they are few. This is about political calculation above everything.
Click to expand...

I agree. And what is one thing Republican senators do NOT want to do? They do not want to make a stand one way or other. Especially those in states where the electorate could go one way or the other.
 
slyjoe said:
I agree. And what is one thing Republican senators do NOT want to do? They do not want to make a stand one way or other. Especially those in states where the electorate could go one way or the other.
Click to expand...


No they don't. But keep in mind we are really only talking about 22 Senators running in 2020. And Kyl of Arizona is not running for reelection. I can easily see Kyl flipping on Trump. Also Romney and maybe Murkowski. Collins might be damned either way.
 
acbytesla said:
Look. They can get together as a group of 20 Senators and go to Trump and say they will convict him no matter what and that Trump needs to step down. That he is only prolonging the inevitable. That is what happened to Nixon. They can come out together publicly and say that while they agree with Trump politically they cannot abide such an abuse of power. You think the walls are closing in on Trump now, imagine that happening.

There is a tipping point. We just don't know what it is.
Click to expand...
Trump is different than Nixon. Even if GOP senators tell him they are ready to convict him (I don't really see this happening) he won't give in, he will fight it out. Possibly all this will result in him losing the general, but the question is who will beat him? Bernie is shown to be too old and frail after his heart attack, Biden appears damaged and tired, front runner Warren, perhaps, but she isn't looking very strong.
 
acbytesla said:
No they don't. But keep in mind we are really only talking about 22 Senators running in 2020. And Kyl of Arizona is not running for reelection. I can easily see Kyl flipping on Trump. Also Romney and maybe Murkowski. Collins might be damned either way.
Click to expand...
Kyl is gone. He was a temporary stopgap. That seat is now Martha McSally's. She could go either way, I think.
 
Marcus said:
Trump is different than Nixon. Even if GOP senators tell him they are ready to convict him (I don't really see this happening) he won't give in, he will fight it out. Possibly all this will result in him losing the general, but the question is who will beat him? Bernie is shown to be too old and frail after his heart attack, Biden appears damaged and tired, front runner Warren, perhaps, but she isn't looking very strong.
Click to expand...

You may be right about Trump fighting until the end. But what good is fighting to an end which is him being impeached and removed from office? I don't buy that Trump is immune to that kind of pressure.

And Warren looks pretty damn good to me.
 
Minoosh said:
Kyl is gone. He was a temporary stopgap. That seat is now Martha McSally's. She could go either way, I think.
Click to expand...

You're right. She is facing a serious challenger. Astronaut John Kelly who is quite charismatic.
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
Apparently 13 out of the 41 Republicans who stormed the hearing are on the committees, and therefore permitted to attend.
Click to expand...

OMG!


Why weren't they already attending?

Let me guess, they skipped the hearing and met with Trump instead because when the hearing isn't in front of the cameras, they can't get their grandstanding and gaslighting out there. What good is asking a BS question trying to discredit a witness or testimony when it falls on deaf ears.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom