Cont: House Impeachment Inquiry - part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
BrooklynBaby said:
Nonsense. This impeachment fiasco has nothing to do with the law. They don't have a crime, and that is completely obvious to anyone who has been paying attention. It's one of the greatest political blunders in American history, if not the biggest. Right now, I would be surprised if the House even votes. All it will do is lock in their losing of the House in November. The voters in those 31 districts that Dems won but Trump carried did not send them to D.C. to impeach the guy they voted for. This is a no-brainer. All but two of them did vote for the impeachment inquiry disaster, and that may be enough to defeat them anyway. We'll have to see how things play out here, then wait until November to find out.
Click to expand...

Interesting to know that bribery, obstruction and more are not crimes.

Or are they only crimes if Democrats do them?
 
BrooklynBaby said:
Nonsense. This impeachment fiasco has nothing to do with the law. They don't have a crime, and that is completely obvious to anyone who has been paying attention. It's one of the greatest political blunders in American history, if not the biggest. Right now, I would be surprised if the House even votes. All it will do is lock in their losing of the House in November. The voters in those 31 districts that Dems won but Trump carried did not send them to D.C. to impeach the guy they voted for. This is a no-brainer. All but two of them did vote for the impeachment inquiry disaster, and that may be enough to defeat them anyway. We'll have to see how things play out here, then wait until November to find out.
Click to expand...

It's completely obvious to anyone who only limits their knowledge to the GOP rhetoric and talking points.

The majority of Americans support impeachment 47.7% for vs. 43.8% against.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/impeachment-polls/

HINT: Repeating HOAX, FAKE NEW, and WITCH HUNT ad nauseam is not a convincing argument for anyone other than those who think Floribama Shore is a Ken Burns documentary.
 
BrooklynBaby said:
Nonsense. This impeachment fiasco has nothing to do with the law. They don't have a crime, and that is completely obvious to anyone who has been paying attention. It's one of the greatest political blunders in American history, if not the biggest. Right now, I would be surprised if the House even votes. All it will do is lock in their losing of the House in November. The voters in those 31 districts that Dems won but Trump carried did not send them to D.C. to impeach the guy they voted for. This is a no-brainer. All but two of them did vote for the impeachment inquiry disaster, and that may be enough to defeat them anyway. We'll have to see how things play out here, then wait until November to find out.
Click to expand...

Talk about cognitive dissonance or blatant dishonesty.

Bribery is a crime and so is obstruction of justice and so is obstruction of Congress and so is perjury. Trump lied on his responses to Mueller. Trump is certainly guilty of breaking election laws as well. My bet is that a fair assessment is Trump is guilty of hundreds of criminal counts. I'd also bet every dollar that I have Trump has committed many acts of tax fraud and securities fraud.

The idea that crimes were not committed and proven in this investigation is just another lie told on behalf of the biggest liar of all.
 
Last edited:
acbytesla said:
Talk about dishonesty or maybe stupidity.

Bribery is a crime and so is obstruction of justice and so is obstruction of Congress and so is perjury. Trump lied on his responses to Mueller. Trump is certainly guilty of breaking election laws as well. My bet is that a fair assessment is Trump is guilty of hundreds of counts of these. I'd also bet every dollar that I have Trump has committed many acts of tax fraud and securities fraud.

The idea that crimes were not committed and proven in this investigation is just another lie told on behalf of the biggest liar of all.
Click to expand...

I wonder why Brooklyn thinks Trump has fought tooth and toenail to prevent his tax records and the documents Congress has subpoenaed from being released? Is it because the tax records will prove he's an upstanding, honest and successful businessman and the subpoenaed documents will vindicate his actions toward Ukraine showing it was only a 'perfect' phone call? I wonder why Brooklyn thinks Trump has ordered everyone not to cooperate with the hearings? Is it because Pompeo, Mulvaney, Giuliani, McGahn, etc will be able to prove there was no quid pro quo? Yeah...that's it! That's what they're going to show!
 
Stacyhs said:
I wonder why Brooklyn thinks Trump has fought tooth and toenail to prevent his tax records and the documents Congress has subpoenaed from being released? Is it because the tax records will prove he's an upstanding, honest and successful businessman and the subpoenaed documents will vindicate his actions toward Ukraine showing it was only a 'perfect' phone call? I wonder why Brooklyn thinks Trump has ordered everyone not to cooperate with the hearings? Is it because Pompeo, Mulvaney, Giuliani, McGahn, etc will be able to prove there was no quid pro quo? Yeah...that's it! That's what they're going to show!
Click to expand...

Defense attorneys, a classic democrat constituency, often say innocent people are not served by volunteering information to the cops. Don't talk to the police! Especially if you are innocent.
 
Last edited:
BobTheCoward said:
Defense attorneys a classic democrat constituency, often say innocent people are not served by volunteering information to the cops. Don't talk to the police! Especially if you are innocent.
Click to expand...

False equivalency. He's not 'volunteering' anything. He is actively fighting subpoenas all the way to the SC.

If the police are accusing you of robbing a bank in LA and you
can prove you were in NYC at the time, what attorney is going to advise you not to give that evidence to the police? Nah. He's hiding something.
 
Stacyhs said:
False equivalency. He's not 'volunteering' anything. He is actively fighting subpoenas all the way to the SC.

If the police are accusing you of robbing a bank in LA and you
can prove you were in NYC at the time, what attorney is going to advise you not to give that evidence to the police? Nah. He's hiding something.
Click to expand...

A good attorney would fight an unconstitutional subpoena, also.

And there is a reason the video is called, "don't talk to the police" and not, "unless you can help your case".
 
Stacyhs said:
I wonder why Brooklyn thinks Trump has fought tooth and toenail to prevent his tax records and the documents Congress has subpoenaed from being released? Is it because the tax records will prove he's an upstanding, honest and successful businessman and the subpoenaed documents will vindicate his actions toward Ukraine showing it was only a 'perfect' phone call? I wonder why Brooklyn thinks Trump has ordered everyone not to cooperate with the hearings? Is it because Pompeo, Mulvaney, Giuliani, McGahn, etc will be able to prove there was no quid pro quo? Yeah...that's it! That's what they're going to show!
Click to expand...

Bribery IS a Crime and so IS Obstruction. Brooklyn saying there was no crime is like me saying I had a threesome with Jessica Chastain and Jennifer Connelly. Both of us have fantasies of something that never happened. Congressman Nadler said it clearly today when he said today a jury would find Trump guilty in 3 minutes flat.

There is a reason that Pence , Pompeo, Giuliani and Mulvaney are refusing to testify. They would have to perjure themselves or expose Trump. It's important to remember that the order not to cooperate with Congress is as much a crime as the Ukraine bribery is.
 
BobTheCoward said:
A good attorney would fight an unconstitutional subpoena, also.

And there is a reason the video is called, "don't talk to the police" and not, "unless you can help your case".
Click to expand...

VBA= very bad analogy.

The courts have already agreed these are legal constitutional subpoenas. Just because Trump huffs and puffs and has minions huff and puff with him has zero bearing on whether those subpoenas are valid.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
VBA= very bad analogy.

The courts have already agreed these are legal constitutional subpoenas. Just because Trump huffs and puffs and has minions huff and puff with him has zero bearing on whether those subpoenas are valid.
Click to expand...

Then let a defendant exercise their right to appeal.
 
BobTheCoward said:
A good attorney would fight an unconstitutional subpoena, also.
Click to expand...


Oh, come on, Bob. These are not unconstitutional subpoenas and you know it. This is nothing but a delaying tactic and always has been. Trump can't release his tax returns while being audited was excuse #1. No law says he can't release them during an audit. So where are they?

And there is a reason the video is called, "don't talk to the police" and not, "unless you can help your case".
Click to expand...

Does that "Don't talk to the police" video advise you not to provide an exculpatory alibi? You don't talk to the police without a lawyer. Trump has tons of lawyers. Give me a break with the excuses.
 
Last edited:
I miss the days when Bob was the only once spouting off his sea-lioning insanity and it wasn't the official policy of the 85% of the government of the United States and their supporters.

It's like internet arguing leaked into the real world in the life few years. People are making trolling and gish galloping and endless pedantics work in real life in a way they never did before.
 
Stacyhs said:
Oh, come on, Bob. These are not unconstitutional subpoenas and you know it. This is nothing but a delaying tactic and always has been. Trump can't release his tax returns while being audited was excuse #1. No law says he can't release them during an audit. So where are they?



Does that "Don't talk to the police" video advise you not to provide an exculpatory alibi? You don't talk to the police without a lawyer. Trump has tons of lawyers. Give me a break with the excuses.
Click to expand...

What excuses? He should exhaust every defensive strategy possible for its own sake. Nothing needs to be excused. Everyone should pursue such a strategy if possible


As for "and you know it." I have mentioned repeatedly I am a coordinate construction and unitary executive advocate. If anyone here would oppose the subpoenas, it would be me.
 
Last edited:
JoeMorgue said:
I miss the days when Bob was the only once spouting off his sea-lioning insanity and it wasn't the official policy of the 85% of the government of the United States and their supporters.

It's like internet arguing leaked into the real world in the life few years. People are making trolling and gish galloping and endless pedantics work in real life in a way they never did before.
Click to expand...
They've been shoveling this same crap for decades. Don't you remember all that family values moralizing the GOP got up to in the late eighties/early nineties, only for half of them to wind up caught in bed with underage boys?
 
JoeMorgue said:
I miss the days when Bob was the only once spouting off his sea-lioning insanity and it wasn't the official policy of the 85% of the government of the United States and their supporters.
Click to expand...

If I were on a democratic or republican forum my questions would be rude. Which is why I don't post there. But this forum's only real value is skepticism and covers everything from solipsism to extremely flexible skepticism. That leaves few options to label persistent questioning as excessive.
 
JoeMorgue said:
I miss the days when Bob was the only once spouting off his sea-lioning insanity and it wasn't the official policy of the 85% of the government of the United States and their supporters.

It's like internet arguing leaked into the real world in the life few years. People are making trolling and gish galloping and endless pedantics work in real life in a way they never did before.
Click to expand...

[Trumpedant] Are you sure about the highlighted? I'm not sure there hasn't been a case before in history where trolling and Gish galloping have been used to stall the discussion.[/Trumpedant]
 
Venom said:
[Trumpedant] Are you sure about the highlighted? I'm not sure there hasn't been a case before in history where trolling and Gish galloping have been used to stall the discussion.[/Trumpedant]
Click to expand...

We just have a few forum members who have perfected it into a fine art.
 
BobTheCoward said:
A good attorney would fight an unconstitutional subpoena, also.

And there is a reason the video is called, "don't talk to the police" and not, "unless you can help your case".
Click to expand...

Congress has a right to subpoena witnesses for an impeachment trial. This is pro forma. Congressional oversight of the government is a constitutional duty. As a government employee, one has a responsibility to be transparent to Congress. The idea of just saying no to this is not really an option. The ONLY reason I can imagine that one would not be willing is the fear that they may have committed a crime.
 
acbytesla said:
Congress has a right to subpoena witnesses for an impeachment trial. This is pro forma. Congressional oversight of the government is a constitutional duty. As a government employee, one has a responsibility to be transparent to Congress. The idea of just saying no to this is not really an option. The ONLY reason I can imagine that one would not be willing is the fear that they may have committed a crime.
Click to expand...

Trying to drain them of a fight by stringing out appeals is a strategy, too.
 
Stacyhs said:
I wonder why Brooklyn thinks Trump has fought tooth and toenail to prevent his tax records and the documents Congress has subpoenaed from being released? Is it because the tax records will prove he's an upstanding, honest and successful businessman and the subpoenaed documents will vindicate his actions toward Ukraine showing it was only a 'perfect' phone call? I wonder why Brooklyn thinks Trump has ordered everyone not to cooperate with the hearings? Is it because Pompeo, Mulvaney, Giuliani, McGahn, etc will be able to prove there was no quid pro quo? Yeah...that's it! That's what they're going to show!
Click to expand...


This!

Trump has ...

Blocked all efforts from authorised committees see his tax records
Blocked all efforts to access his financial records
Blocked all efforts to access to all documents
Hidden phone call records in the top level secure server
Blocked witnesses from testifying
Intimidated witnesses

... and what do all these actions have in common? They all show a consciousness of guilt.

These are the actions of a guilty man.
 
smartcooky said:
This!

Trump has ...

Blocked all efforts from authorised committees see his tax records
Blocked all efforts to access his financial records
Blocked all efforts to access to all documents
Hidden phone call records in the top level secure server
Blocked witnesses from testifying
Intimidated witnesses

... and what do all these actions have in common? They all show a consciousness of guilt.

These are the actions of a guilty man.
Click to expand...

It's pretty messed up to describe a vigorous defense as actions of the guilty.

I would exercise every appeal I could if Congress came after my documents.
 
It has been the tradition for a long time in this country that you can either cheat on your taxes or run for High Office - but not both.
The trouble Trump's finances are causing the IRS to a degree that requires witness intimidation shows why that was a good tradition.
 
I have to admit that the more I watch Republicans being interviewed, the more depressed I get about this. They seem to have gelled onto a defense that is made from a mix of vague truth, twisted semantics, calling anything that would damage them hearsay, then happily using hearsay themselves, all mixed together with a lot of minor lies and a few really big whoppers, but stated with confidence and enough plausibility for those that haven't been paying attention that they could get them passed.

It has made their claims that "The President was only asking for the sake of the country (he said us) and that none of the witnesses have said that he committed a crime, and none of the witnesses have a first hand account other then Soundland who stated that the President said that there was no Quid Pro Quo. And it was totally fair that Trump asked for an investigation into Biden and his son because his son was being paid over $50K a month and Biden got the Prosecutor looking into his son and the company he worked for fired, threatening to hold up funding if he wasn't fired. Besides, Trump didn't hold up the funding for anything other than wanting to be sure that those he was giving it to weren't corrupt, and they got the money without announcing any investigation, so that clearly proves it was all good. Besides, President Zelensky has said that there was no pressure, so who do you believe, a whistleblower with second and third hand information, or President Zelensky?" almost impossible to take apart in the same time that it takes to spout it all, making it look solid to anyone not paying enough attention.

And that's what worries me, I'm not sure that the Democrats have the skills required to deal with this ball of garbage before it sinks them.
 
The thing about lies and nonsense such as the Republicans/Trump are pushing is that it takes very little time to spout them and much longer to refute them. And most people have the attention span of gnats. It really is true that a lie will go around the world before truth can even get its pants on.
 
BrooklynBaby said:
Nonsense. This impeachment fiasco has nothing to do with the law. They don't have a crime, and that is completely obvious to anyone who has been paying attention. It's one of the greatest political blunders in American history, if not the biggest. Right now, I would be surprised if the House even votes. All it will do is lock in their losing of the House in November. The voters in those 31 districts that Dems won but Trump carried did not send them to D.C. to impeach the guy they voted for. This is a no-brainer. All but two of them did vote for the impeachment inquiry disaster, and that may be enough to defeat them anyway. We'll have to see how things play out here, then wait until November to find out.
Click to expand...

With half of Americans being in favor of Trump's removal, it would seem that the voters in those 31 districts may actually have wanted their representative to impeach Trump. The 2018 results in the House would clearly indicate that the voters think the Trump experiment has failed. Why else would the Democrats have such a mandate to check Trump?
 
I'm putting this here because this is the real threat involving Ukraine and Russia that Trump is stupidly ignoring while he strokes his disturbed ego and we need to get this out there to wake a couple of those Republicans up as to what they are doing.

Wired 2017: How an Entire Nation Became Russia's Test Lab for Cyberwar Blackouts in Ukraine were just a trial run. Russian hackers are learning to sabotage infrastructure and the US could be next. - Russia's Cyberwar on Ukraine Is a Blueprint for What's to Come
Now, in Ukraine, the quintessential cyberwar scenario has come to life. Twice. On separate occasions, invisible saboteurs have turned off the electricity to hundreds of thousands of people. Each blackout lasted a matter of hours, only as long as it took for scrambling engineers to manually switch the power on again. But as proofs of concept, the attacks set a new precedent: In Russia’s shadow, the decades-old nightmare of hackers stopping the gears of modern society has become a reality.

And the blackouts weren’t just isolated attacks. They were part of a digital blitzkrieg that has pummeled Ukraine for the past three years—a sustained cyber* assault unlike any the world has ever seen. A hacker army has systematically undermined practically every sector of Ukraine: media, finance, transportation, military, politics, energy. Wave after wave of intrusions have deleted data, destroyed computers, and in some cases paralyzed organizations’ most basic functions. “You can’t really find a space in Ukraine where there hasn’t been an attack,” says Kenneth Geers, a NATO ambassador who focuses on cyber security.
Click to expand...

CSPAN Book TV: Sandworm
Wired magazine’s Andy Greenberg talked about Sandworm, a group of hackers working for Russia’s military intelligence agency that was responsible for the world’s largest cyberattack.

This is so worth the hour (free-streaming) if you care at all about the consequences we can expect as Trump fiddles.
 
DallasDad said:
One of my brothers named his first-born son after himself. So we have Steve and Steve. My brother is "proper Steve," while his son is "other Steve." Either one could be "our Steve" if other Steves were somehow within context. I guess you're correct that using "proper" this way isn't the same as using "our," but its similar enough that I brought it up.
Click to expand...

It seems like that's from Doctor Who, which had "Proper Dave" and "Other Dave". "Proper" would be more analogous to "original" in that context.
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
It seems like that's from Doctor Who, which had "Proper Dave" and "Other Dave". "Proper" would be more analogous to "original" in that context.
Click to expand...

[off topic]

My partner has a brother called Pete, as well as two sisters and and another brother. A couple of years ago, they found they had another half-brother that they never knew about; he is older than any other them, and strangely, his name is also Pete.

The younger Pete now calls himself "Repete"!
 
Hear that rumbling sound Rudy? that is the sound of a bus heading your way.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/08/politics/giuliani-trump-administration-foreign-clients/index.html
Attorney General William Barr counseled President Donald Trump that his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani has become a liability for his administration,*The Washington Post reported Sunday, citing people familiar with the conversations.

In one instance, the Post said, Barr warned Trump that Giuliani was not serving him well as his lawyer, according to one person with knowledge of the situation.

Giuliani has long stirred alarm among the President's advisers who worry his foreign business dealings often make it unclear who he is representing,*people familiar with the situation*told the Post. The concerns, the newspaper said, have escalated since Giuliani emerged as a key player in the House impeachment inquiry into Trump's dealings with Ukraine.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
smartcooky said:
You think intimidating witnesses and blocking them from testifying is a legal defence?
Click to expand...

A) I don't think what he did amounts to witness intimidation.

B) I was just saying I was a unitary executive position-holder. Obviously we are not going to see eye to eye on interpreting executive power.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom