Impeachment Thread: Trump retaliating at anyone who wasn't willing to commit criminal obstruction

[UCFKnight85]

So saying "you cant make someone a Barron" is an attack to you? If I say, "you can't make UCFKnight85 a Barron in America" you would feel like I personally attacked you?

She apologized due to triggered outrage culture, nothing more. And yes, republicans can be just as triggered as liberals, and here is an example of it.

Her statement was braindead and idiotic no matter how you want to spin this. There was no relevant legal guidance provided in that statement, it was included purely for this dolt to show her D buddies how "for the cause" she is that she's not afraid to include a political swipe in a setting where it'd be totally inappropriate.

My guess is she was auditioning for a SCOTUS nom should some left winger make it to the White House.

 

[Cubs79]

Her statement was braindead and idiotic no matter how you want to spin this. There was no relevant legal guidance provided in that statement, it was included purely for this dolt to show her D buddies how "for the cause" she is that she's not afraid to include a political swipe in a setting where it'd be totally inappropriate.

My guess is she was auditioning for a SCOTUS nom should some left winger make it to the White House.

Okie dokie, remember that next time you accuse a liberal of being triggered.

 

[DaShuckster]

By the way, this is so super serious and not all politically motivated by the Dems. So much so that one of their star legal witnesses yesterday decided to take a shitty political swipe at Trump's 13 year old kid as a way to ding Trump and his family.

I laughed when I read this because when it came up during yesterday's proceedings, I smiled to myself and thought, THAT will be the Usual Suspects' big takeaway from the day.

As usual, I was dead-on right.

 

[DaShuckster]

Not a single witness said there was bribery involved. You're projecting your own views as fact.

The one of us requiring some serious projecting to validate their view is you.

Anyone with half a brain who listened to the inquiry testimony knows that the bribery attempt wasn't a lone wolf deal but a State Department effort that was supported by the President and a number of his top aides.

If it wasn't and everything was on the up-and-up, why didn't the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Energy, Guliani, Bolton, and Trump's Chief of Staff testify under oath. If this was really all about the Dems' "projecting" their views, those individuals could have shut down this whole thing by 'setting the record straight.'

It's really hard figuring out why that didn't happen, huh?

 

[UCFWayne]

I just don't see how anyone could have paid attention to these hearings and come to the conclusion it is a witch hunt. It seems pretty clear that it happened.

Biden isn't being impeached, you realize that right? Even if you think Biden did something wrong, that doesn't mean that Trump's quid pro quo isn't impeachable.

The House has a job to do. And they should do their job no matter what they think the Senate might do. They have passed numerous bills that the Senate wont even vote on, but that doesn't mean the House should just quit passing bills. This is the same basic idea.

all the main witnesses said they never heard trump say he wanted quid pro quo. the rest of it was all hearsay. of course you and other libs bought the hearsay because that is what you wanted to hear. the reality is that there is no hard evidence.

of course biden isnt being impeached. i never said he was. what i did say was that mcconnell is a seasoned politician and he knows how to game the system. oh and get this, mcconnell is the one that is going to set the rules. he can call anyone he wants for any reason he wants.

if you think the impeachment proceedings have been a wild circus, just wait a month or two.

 

[UCFWayne]

A witch hunt? Really Wayne? So all the people who testified in the impeachment inquiry are guilty of lying to Congress?

Trump didn't put the screws to Zelensky to get him to announce a Biden investigation in exchange for Ukraine's military aid and a visit to the WH?

didnt zelensky himself clear that up? i mean why go to other sources when we have the main guy involved. what did he say about the quid pro quo?

 

[Cubs79]

all the main witnesses said they never heard trump say he wanted quid pro quo. the rest of it was all hearsay. of course you and other libs bought the hearsay because that is what you wanted to hear. the reality is that there is no hard evidence.

of course biden isnt being impeached. i never said he was. what i did say was that mcconnell is a seasoned politician and he knows how to game the system. oh and get this, mcconnell is the one that is going to set the rules. he can call anyone he wants for any reason he wants.

if you think the impeachment proceedings have been a wild circus, just wait a month or two.

I don't buy it because it is what I wanted to hear, I buy it because the people closest to the situation say this is what happened.

What you do think is going to happen at the hearings? You keep implying it is going to be some type of a wild circus, so what exactly do you think is going to happen?

 

[UCFWayne]

I don't buy it because it is what I wanted to hear, I buy it because the people closest to the situation say this is what happened.

What you do think is going to happen at the hearings? You keep implying it is going to be some type of a wild circus, so what exactly do you think is going to happen?

at the very end of all they hearsay and his own interpretation, what did sondland actually say? nothing, trump wanted nothing in return. what did zelensky say? nothing. all the other witnesses dont really matter. but none of them said trump wanted quid pro quo or bribery or extortion or whatever word the think tank comes up with next.

what do i think is going to happen. mcconnell is going to make great political theater and its goign to do more damage to the dem 2020 candidates than they think.

 

[Cubs79]

at the very end of all they hearsay and his own interpretation, what did sondland actually say? nothing, trump wanted nothing in return. what did zelensky say? nothing. all the other witnesses dont really matter. but none of them said trump wanted quid pro quo or bribery or extortion or whatever word the think tank comes up with next.

what do i think is going to happen. mcconnell is going to make great political theater and its goign to do more damage to the dem 2020 candidates than they think.

Sondland said there was quid pro quo. "I know that members of this committee frequently frame these complicated issues in the form of a simple question: Was there a ‘quid pro quo’?” Sondland said. “. . . With regard to the requested White House call and the White House meeting, the answer is yes.”

I disagree. I think if McConnell goes out of his way to make over the top political theater, it is going to show how unserious the Republican party has become. I think McConnell will make it a quick process, but we will see.

 

[DaShuckster]

at the very end of all they hearsay and his own interpretation, what did sondland actually say? nothing, trump wanted nothing in return.

...It should be noted that this conversation with the President came AFTER word got to the President that some insider was blowing the whistle on his little scheme. In addition to telling Sondlund on the phone: "NO QUID PRO QUO," the White House released the military aid that they had previously put on hold.

But what did Ambassador Sondland say about what was going on BEFORE the Whistleblower came forward?

He testified that Giuliani, acting at Trump's direction, made a White House visit by Zelensky dependent on him announcing a new investigations into Ukraine's involvement in the 2016 election and the Bidens. Sondland also said he came to believe that the military aid to the Ukraine would be suspended until Zelensky issued this public announcement.

 

[fried-chicken]

So saying "you cant make someone a Barron" is an attack to you? If I say, "you can't make UCFKnight85 a Barron in America" you would feel like I personally attacked you?

She apologized due to triggered outrage culture, nothing more. And yes, republicans can be just as triggered as liberals, and here is an example of it.

85 accused me of "attacking his wife" when I said he was probably not attentive and that she deserved an emotionally available husband and not a raging political lunitic. His reaction to this proves that just daring to talk about someone, even if you are saying neutral or positive things is an attack in his mind.

 

[NinjaKnight]

Imagine being so goddamn stupid you think you can have a rational debate with Wayne crazy or 85

Also imagine still supporting Trump in Dec 2019

Y'all are a special breed of stupid.

 

[fried-chicken]

Y'all know this MF trump was trying to just get dirt on a political rival. You probably missed the part of sondlands testimony where he said an investigation didn't have to actually happen to release the aid, it just had to be announced.

The WH says, "we can't be held criminally responsible, this is the responsibility of congress."

Then they say, "we don't need to participate in congressional oversite, this should be decided in an election."

Then they try to use tax payer money to bribe countries into meddling in the election.

Y'all know this isn't how our government is supposed to work. You're choosing not to care because caring would require admitting you made a mistake by supporting this clown. You're so dug in that the only option is to find a way to rationalize in anyway that allows you to pretend your values are intact.

 

[UCFWayne]

Sondland said there was quid pro quo. "I know that members of this committee frequently frame these complicated issues in the form of a simple question: Was there a ‘quid pro quo’?” Sondland said. “. . . With regard to the requested White House call and the White House meeting, the answer is yes.”

I disagree. I think if McConnell goes out of his way to make over the top political theater, it is going to show how unserious the Republican party has become. I think McConnell will make it a quick process, but we will see.

"He said, 'I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo. I just want Zelensky to do the right thing, to do what he ran on,'" Sondland testified.

Sondland also said Trump never directly told him that aid was conditioned on Ukraine announcing that the investigations had been opened.

but why take sondlands word for it, lets see exactly what the president of ukraine had to say about it:
“Look, I never talked to the president from the position of a quid pro quo,” Zelensky said. “But you have to understand. We’re at war. If you’re our strategic partner, then you can’t go blocking anything for us. I think that’s just about fairness. It’s not about a quid pro quo. It just goes without saying.”

Zelensky was asked if he “felt any pressure from President Trump to investigate Joe Biden and Hunter Biden?”
“I’m sorry, but I don’t want to be involved to democratic, open elections — elections of USA,” he said. Then he insisted that “nobody pushed me.”


could you point me in the direction of quid pro quo/bribery/extortion in the transcript at all? i cant seem to find it...

 

[firm_bizzle]

By the way, this is so super serious and not all politically motivated by the Dems. So much so that one of their star legal witnesses yesterday decided to take a shitty political swipe at Trump's 13 year old kid as a way to ding Trump and his family.

Yep. This is all serious stuff by Pelosi & Co

That was uncalled for. She apologized.

 

[Cubs79]

"He said, 'I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo. I just want Zelensky to do the right thing, to do what he ran on,'" Sondland testified.

Sondland also said Trump never directly told him that aid was conditioned on Ukraine announcing that the investigations had been opened.

but why take sondlands word for it, lets see exactly what the president of ukraine had to say about it:
“Look, I never talked to the president from the position of a quid pro quo,” Zelensky said. “But you have to understand. We’re at war. If you’re our strategic partner, then you can’t go blocking anything for us. I think that’s just about fairness. It’s not about a quid pro quo. It just goes without saying.”

Zelensky was asked if he “felt any pressure from President Trump to investigate Joe Biden and Hunter Biden?”
“I’m sorry, but I don’t want to be involved to democratic, open elections — elections of USA,” he said. Then he insisted that “nobody pushed me.”


could you point me in the direction of quid pro quo/bribery/extortion in the transcript at all? i cant seem to find it...

As Shuckster already pointed out, this was after all of this information came out. That call between Trump and Sondland was on 9/9. The whistleblower complaint was filed well before that and had nothing to do with the Sondland-Trump call on 9/9.

 

[Crazyhole]

at the very end of all they hearsay and his own interpretation, what did sondland actually say? nothing, trump wanted nothing in return. what did zelensky say? nothing. all the other witnesses dont really matter. but none of them said trump wanted quid pro quo or bribery or extortion or whatever word the think tank comes up with next.

what do i think is going to happen. mcconnell is going to make great political theater and its goign to do more damage to the dem 2020 candidates than they think.

Barr will be the wildcard in the trial. If he presents evidence from his investigations that implicate the democrat party for the 2016 russian interference, we could see an awful lot of party officials brought in to testify. It would be interesting to see who gets thrown under the bus in that scenario.

 

[Cubs79]

Barr will be the wildcard in the trial. If he presents evidence from his investigations that implicate the democrat party for the 2016 russian interference, we could see an awful lot of party officials brought in to testify. It would be interesting to see who gets thrown under the bus in that scenario.

Wait, what? The Democrats aided Russia in interfering?

 

[UCFWayne]

As Shuckster already pointed out, this was after all of this information came out. That call between Trump and Sondland was on 9/9. The whistleblower complaint was filed well before that and had nothing to do with the Sondland-Trump call on 9/9.

so do the words from president of ukraine mean nothing? the dems have nothing. this is going to blow up in their face.

 

[UCFWayne]

Barr will be the wildcard in the trial. If he presents evidence from his investigations that implicate the democrat party for the 2016 russian interference, we could see an awful lot of party officials brought in to testify. It would be interesting to see who gets thrown under the bus in that scenario.

i cant wait for a discovery phase that lasts 3 or 4 months alone with no real defined scope. its going to be great.

 

[Cubs79]

so do the words from president of ukraine mean nothing? the dems have nothing. this is going to blow up in their face.

Not really, THe president of Ukraine obviously wants a good relationship with Trump (or whoever the US president is), so I don't think it is reasonable to think he was going to throw Trump under the bus.

 

[Cubs79]

i cant wait for a discovery phase that lasts 3 or 4 months alone with no real defined scope. its going to be great.

That isn't going to happen. Republican's don't want to draw this out closer to the election anymore than Democrats do.

 

[UCFWayne]

Not really, THe president of Ukraine obviously wants a good relationship with Trump (or whoever the US president is), so I don't think it is reasonable to think he was going to throw Trump under the bus.

but i thought none of the world leaders respected trump and laughed at him?

That isn't going to happen. Republican's don't want to draw this out closer to the election anymore than Democrats do.

we shall find out

 

[Cubs79]

but i thought none of the world leaders respected trump and laughed at him?

we shall find out

I don't really understand your first point. Wanting aid doesn't really have anything to do with respect, it is about wanting aid.

Yes we will.

 

[Crazyhole]

As Shuckster already pointed out, this was after all of this information came out. That call between Trump and Sondland was on 9/9. The whistleblower complaint was filed well before that and had nothing to do with the Sondland-Trump call on 9/9.

You have to take into consideration the fact that sondland brought it up, not trump. If trump had unilaterally just told sondland that he doesnt want a quid-pro-quo that would be really suspicious. Being asked somewhat diminishes the gravity of the situation

 

[Crazyhole]

Wait, what? The Democrats aided Russia in interfering?

Are you unfamiliar with the Steele Dossier?

 

[Cubs79]

Are you unfamiliar with the Steele Dossier?

I am not unfamiliar with the Steele Dossier.

 

[Crazyhole]

I am not unfamiliar with the Steele Dossier.

So do you think McConell may subpoena the people from the DNC who paid for it?

 

[Cubs79]

So do you think McConell may subpoena the people from the DNC who paid for it?

Why? WHat does that have to do with this impeachment process? Barr doesn't need congress or the senate to investigate that.

 

[Crazyhole]

Why? WHat does that have to do with this impeachment process? Barr doesn't need congress or the senate to investigate that.

Because its political theater and he will use the accusation against Trump to bring up negative information against the party that is opposing him.

 

[DaShuckster]

You have to take into consideration the fact that sondland brought it up, not trump. If trump had unilaterally just told sondland that he doesnt want a quid-pro-quo that would be really suspicious. Being asked somewhat diminishes the gravity of the situation

Huh???!?

Word spreads throughout DC that the whistle has been blown and the gig is up. So when Ambassador Taylor directly asked Sondland about this crap, Sondland gets nervous and calls Trump to get The Word on how he should proceed and Trump famously responds with "No Quid Pro Quo. Nothing."

Given everything that had happened up to that point, if THAT doesn't sound like a kid who's just gotten caught with his hand in the cookie jar, I don't know what does. "NO COOKIE, MOM. SEE? EMPTY-HANDED. I WUZ JUST FEELING THE INSIDE OF THE JAR"

 

[Cubs79]

Because its political theater and he will use the accusation against Trump to bring up negative information against the party that is opposing him.

The Mueller report already discussed the Steele Dossier. You think they want to get back into the merits of the Mueller report? What good do you think that would do for them?

 

[Crazyhole]

People who will be subpoenaed in the first round:

Chalupa
Ciaramella
Schiff
Biden Sr
Biden Jr
Schiff
Clinton's IT guy
Devon archer
Chris Heinz

 

[Cubs79]

You’re a damn liar, man. That’s not true and no one has ever said that.

You want to check my shape man, let’s do push-ups together here, man. Let’s run. Let’s do whatever you want to do. Let’s take an IQ test. Ok?

I have no clue what you are talking about.

 

[UCFWayne]

I have no clue what you are talking about.

sorrry cubs, i meant to put that in a different thread.

 

[Cubs79]

sorrry cubs, i meant to put that in a different thread.

lol, I was wondering.

 

[fried-chicken]

People who will be subpoenaed in the first round:

Chalupa
Ciaramella
Schiff
Biden Sr
Biden Jr
Schiff
Clinton's IT guy
Devon archer
Chris Heinz

 

[UCFWayne]

lol, I was wondering.

its a joe biden quote. and i just deleted the original post

 

[DaShuckster]

Because its political theater .

If the Senate wants to make this political theater, they do so at their own peril.

Trump claims he will happily allow his top aides to testify in a Senate trial because "it will be fair, unlike the House hearings." Pardon me if I don't hold my breath waiting for new information such as: 1) the WH Chief of Staff, the Secretary of State, and the Secretary of Energy testifying under oath; 2) State Department files and emails on the Ukraine matter to be turned over to Congress; and 3) Trump's errand boy, Rudy Guliani, testifying under oath.

For all the bluster about subpoenaing Hunter Biden, the Senate leadership will have a very hard time defending themselves if the people I mentioned above who were directly involved are not asked to testify.

 

[Cubs79]

If the Senate wants to make this political theater, they do so at their own peril.

Trump claims he will happily allow his top aides to testify in a Senate trial because "it will be fair, unlike the House hearings." Pardon me if I don't hold my breath waiting for new information such as: 1) the WH Chief of Staff, the Secretary of State, and the Secretary of Energy testifying under oath; 2) State Department files and emails on the Ukraine matter to be turned over to Congress; and 3) Trump's errand boy, Rudy Guliani, testifying under oath.

For all the bluster about subpoenaing Hunter Biden, the Senate leadership will have a very hard time defending themselves if the people I mentioned above who were directly involved are not asked to testify.

Not to mention, Hunter Biden has nothing to do with this. This is about Trump and the potential quid pro quo, there is absolutely nothing Hunter Biden, Joe Biden, etc could say that would have anything what so ever to do with that. If the Republican's want to go that route and make it a complete circus, they certainly run the risk that those moderate swing voters out there will see right through their schtick, and decide they can't vote for people who aren't serious about their jobs.