ADVERTISEMENT

White House announces it will not comply with illegitimate and unconstitutional impeachment inquiry

UCFWayne said:
now that the vote has been taken and its official, its time for the whistleblower to come forward.
Click to expand...
This is an example of the Red Hats parroting the stupidity of their leader.

The whistleblower's account has been confirmed by a sizable number of people who were directly involved, including two ambassadors for crying out loud. If this scandal was a fire, the only thing that the whistleblower did was sound the alarm and alert the authorities..
 
DaShuckster said:
This is an example of the Red Hats parroting the stupidity of their leader.

The whistleblower's account has been confirmed by a sizable number of people who were directly involved, including two ambassadors for crying out loud. If this scandal was a fire, the only thing that the whistleblower did was sound the alarm and alert the authorities..
Click to expand...

Give just one reason why he shouldnt come forward. Everybody already knows who he is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UCFWayne
Crazyhole said:
Give just one reason why he shouldnt come forward. Everybody already knows who he is.
Click to expand...

Reason: To limit the damage already done to the willingness of potential future whistelblowers to come forward. Plain and simple. If you don't see the underlying message Trump is sending - If you expose information on my administration me and my goons will publicly make your life miserable - then you're not seeing the obvious here. It's intimidation.

Should the whisteblower expect this? From Trump, absolutely. In normal times? No way.

Interesting info from Whistleblowers attorney. Represented Benghazi whisteblowers working closely with Nunes and Gowdy. No democrats were demanding identify then...

 
Crazyhole said:
So not one single reason?
Click to expand...
If you don't want to deal with the troubling facts, apparently Trump believes that focusing his minions' attention on the whistleblower is the way to go in an effort to "make this thing political"
 
Crazyhole said:
Give just one reason why he shouldnt come forward. Everybody already knows who he is.
Click to expand...
Second Reason: Notice how, even though the name is being reported in a few places, there's a hesitancy across the board to run with it, including Republican politicians? The goal is to intimidate the the Whistleblower into voluntarily revealing their identity so that Trump and crew can't take direct blame. So if you are the whistleblower, why give them that? Maybe you have to come forward eventually, but let them eat the political consequences of publicly shaming you by name first.
 
Boosted87 said:
The goal is to intimidate the the Whistleblower into voluntarily revealing their identity so that Trump and crew can't take direct blame.
Click to expand...
Intimidation is the very reason for having whistleblower legislation in the first place.

Common sense tells you that if the whistleblower is 'making sh*t up,' he'll be uncovered as a fraud when all is said and done. In this case, the whistleblower's report was only the tip of the iceberg to the corruption that went on.

So why is the whistleblower's identity important to Trump?

My answer: A typical Trump distraction from what really matters. If his Trumpsters are parroting his obsession with the whistleblower, they're not paying attention to all the crazysh*t that went down inside the State Dept. regarding US-Ukraine relations.
 
beelit47 said:
As predicted, the dumbocrats fantasy is becoming more and more exposed as we peel back layers of the onion. This is why everything being used to try to impeach trump is coming from people with ties to the democrat party and mostly people with 3rd hand info.
Click to expand...
One hell of an insight! Yeah, you really nailed it, beelit47!

Instead of impeaching the guy on ‘3rd hand info’ from dumbocrats, they need to hear what the true Americans (I.e. Trump people) directly involved have to say. Let’s find out what the ambassadors that Trump appointed say about this stupid quid-quo-pro fantasy.

What’s that? They’ve already talked and confirmed the whistleblower’s account? Okay, nevermind.
 
beelit47 said:
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/nov/6/mark-zaid-whistleblower-attorney-tweeted-trump-cou/

As predicted, the dumbocrats fantasy is becoming more and more exposed as we peel back layers of the onion. This is why everything being used to try to impeach trump is coming from people with ties to the democrat party and mostly people with 3rd hand info.

anyone who buys any of this nonsense is either TDS delusional, stupid, or probably both
Click to expand...

The whistleblower is irrelevant, that's like asking who pulled the fire alarm while the firefighters are putting out the blaze.

The jewish guy heard the call but not sure that he can be trusted.
 
Last edited:
DaShuckster said:
One hell of an insight! Yeah, you really nailed it, beelit47!

Instead of impeaching the guy on ‘3rd hand info’ from dumbocrats, they need to hear what the true Americans (I.e. Trump people) directly involved have to say. Let’s find out what the ambassadors that Trump appointed say about this stupid quid-quo-pro fantasy.

What’s that? They’ve already talked and confirmed the whistleblower’s account? Okay, nevermind.
Click to expand...

The ambassador is working with Shifty Shift now, can't trust him anymore.
 
Everybody already knows his name. He wouldn't be at any greater risk.

Rand Paul is exactly right too. This guy is a material witness to possibly corruption on the left so he needs to be called to testify.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UCFWayne
Another line of defense for Trump is crumbling. One of the arguments (a poor one) is that if Ukraine officials never viewed this is as a quid-pro-quo, and the aid was ultimately delivered without Zelensky making the public announcement, then no harm no foul.

The evidence from the Ukraine side is going to be difficult to weigh as its not like we're going to get their sworn testimony, but this NYT article is finally digging into what was happening on that side. From the reporting, Zelensky and his aids were weighing the cost/benefit of ceding to Trump's demands. The story fleshes out something Taylor had testified to - that Zelensky was planning to make the announcement during a CNN interview.

Only Mr. Trump could unlock the aid, he had been told by two United States senators, and time was running out. If the money, nearly $400 million, were not unblocked by the end of the fiscal year on Sept. 30, it could be lost in its entirety.

In a flurry of WhatsApp messages and meetings in Ukraine’s capital, Kiev, over several days, senior aides debated the point. Avoiding partisan politics in the United States had always been the first rule of Ukrainian foreign policy, but the military aid was vital to the war against Russian-backed separatist forces in eastern Ukraine, a conflict that has cost 13,000 lives since it began in 2014.

By then, however, Mr. Zelensky’s staffers were already conceding to what seemed to be the inevitable, and making plans for a public announcement about the investigations. It was a fateful decision for a fledgling president elected on an anticorruption platform that included putting an end to politically motivated investigations.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/07/world/europe/ukraine-trump-zelensky.html​
 
Boosted87 said:
Another line of defense for Trump is crumbling. One of the arguments (a poor one) is that if Ukraine officials never viewed this is as a quid-pro-quo, and the aid was ultimately delivered without Zelensky making the public announcement, then no harm no foul.

The evidence from the Ukraine side is going to be difficult to weigh as its not like we're going to get their sworn testimony, but this NYT article is finally digging into what was happening on that side. From the reporting, Zelensky and his aids were weighing the cost/benefit of ceding to Trump's demands. The story fleshes out something Taylor had testified to - that Zelensky was planning to make the announcement during a CNN interview.

Only Mr. Trump could unlock the aid, he had been told by two United States senators, and time was running out. If the money, nearly $400 million, were not unblocked by the end of the fiscal year on Sept. 30, it could be lost in its entirety.

In a flurry of WhatsApp messages and meetings in Ukraine’s capital, Kiev, over several days, senior aides debated the point. Avoiding partisan politics in the United States had always been the first rule of Ukrainian foreign policy, but the military aid was vital to the war against Russian-backed separatist forces in eastern Ukraine, a conflict that has cost 13,000 lives since it began in 2014.

By then, however, Mr. Zelensky’s staffers were already conceding to what seemed to be the inevitable, and making plans for a public announcement about the investigations. It was a fateful decision for a fledgling president elected on an anticorruption platform that included putting an end to politically motivated investigations.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/07/world/europe/ukraine-trump-zelensky.html​
Click to expand...

The interesting part of this to me is the value of "intent". Two examples the show a bit of a dichotomy:

Trump intended to commit a crime but ultimately didn't.

Hillary committed a crime but didn't intend to.

Which one is more prosecutable? Do both need to be present to prosecute?
 
  • Like
Reactions: UCFWayne
Crazyhole said:
The interesting part of this to me is the value of "intent". Two examples the show a bit of a dichotomy:

Trump intended to commit a crime but ultimately didn't.

Hillary committed a crime but didn't intend to.

Which one is more prosecutable? Do both need to be present to prosecute?
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, so much of that depends on the discretion of whoever is in charge of an investigation, especially when it relates to criminal charges. This is why it's so important for the good of the country that DOJ isn't politicized.

That said, I'm pretty sure it's illegal to plan most crimes at the Federal level, particularly if two or more people are involved (conspiracy). That's charged all the time whether the crime was ever completed or not.

Personal opinion: While I believe Trump isn't fit to be president, and I'd be happy if this particular scenario lead to his removal, I would in no way support an overt effort by the next President to criminally prosecute him personally for already politicized events. Why? Once something like this - or Hillary's emails - enter the realm of politics all pretenses of Justice Being Blind are gone. I'm no fan of Hillary but as soon as Trump was leading "lock her up chants" I was opposed to any efforts at criminal prosecution under his administration.

The worst the Senate can do is fire you from your job. They can't take away your freedom.
 
  • Like
Reactions: firm_bizzle
beelit47 said:
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/nov/6/mark-zaid-whistleblower-attorney-tweeted-trump-cou/

As predicted, the dumbocrats fantasy is becoming more and more exposed as we peel back layers of the onion. This is why everything being used to try to impeach trump is coming from people with ties to the democrat party and mostly people with 3rd hand info.

anyone who buys any of this nonsense is either TDS delusional, stupid, or probably both
Click to expand...

Doesn't this fit the definition of sedition? Openly stating that you are involved in an attempt at a coup while representing someone who is leaking information from the govt seems to be something that could be prosecuted.
 
Boosted87 said:
So you're arguing that that the Democrat's entire case is based on how they're interpreting a few words. I see this completely opposite. I think Trump's entire defense HAS to be based on how you interpret those words. There's a ton of circumstantial evidence painting a pretty grim picture, outside of the transcript.

I see the defense of Trump right now is to point at the transcript and say "that might be inappropriate but not impeachable." I'm OK with that stance if we're in a vacuum, but we're not. We have substantial reporting indicating that multiple administration officials were concerned about Giuliani's work in Ukraine, concerned about events leading up to the call, the call itself, and actions after the call. There is ample justification for an investigation.

Now, if the inquiry can't validate the public reporting through testimony and evidence, then he won't be removed. However, that investigation cannot be carried out properly without reasonable cooperation from the White House.
Click to expand...
You cannot talk to these people. They do not use common sense, logic, or reason.
 
DaShuckster said:
One hell of an insight! Yeah, you really nailed it, beelit47!

Instead of impeaching the guy on ‘3rd hand info’ from dumbocrats, they need to hear what the true Americans (I.e. Trump people) directly involved have to say. Let’s find out what the ambassadors that Trump appointed say about this stupid quid-quo-pro fantasy.

What’s that? They’ve already talked and confirmed the whistleblower’s account? Okay, nevermind.
Click to expand...
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ma...-emails-house-democrat-staffer-delicate-issue

collusion delusion part 2
 
UCFWayne said:
the coup has started.
Click to expand...
I'm curious. Since this is 'a coup', by those regime-challenging Congressional Democrats, how do you explain away the bald-faced bribery and extortion documented by multiple high-ranking officials inside the Trump Administration?

Inquiring minds want to know.
 
Last edited:
DaShuckster said:
I'm curious. Since this is 'a coup', by those regime-challenging Congressional Democrats, how do you explain away the bald-faced bribery and extortion documented by multiple high-ranking officials inside the Trump Administration?

Inquiring minds want to know.
Click to expand...
everyone knows who the leaker, ops i meant whistleblower is. why would his lawyer make that tweet?
 
UCFWayne said:
you are what 65 - 68 years old? have you lived under a rock your entire life? do you really think any of this is new and exclusive to trump?
Click to expand...
Let me get this straight: Other Presidents have engaged in bribery and extortion for their own personal gain so it's no big deal???!?

Is THAT what you're trying to get me to understand since I've been living under a rock?
 
DaShuckster said:
Let me get this straight: Other Presidents have engaged in bribery and extortion for their own personal gain so it's no big deal???!?

Is THAT what you're trying to get me to understand since I've been living under a rock?
Click to expand...
please feel free to look up the net worth of all the previous presidents before they were elected and after. im curious as to what you will find.
 
UCFWayne said:
please feel free to look up the net worth of all the previous presidents before they were elected and after. im curious as to what you will find.
Click to expand...
I find book deals, speaking tours, and board seats.

Personally, I find this "everybody does it" line of Trump defense disgusting. America should be better than this. If corruption exists everywhere, then DEAL WITH IT, not excuse it.
 
Did anybody else catch the Nikki Haley interview? She implicated Rex Tillerson in trying to undermine the president. That's pretty disconcerting. If trump's own SOS is capable of this, just think about where the State Dept in general is. Some of you guys were calling it a conspiracy theory when I said the state dept was complicit in trying to "get" trump but every week something new comes out that proves it to be true.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UCFWayne
Crazyhole said:
Did anybody else catch the Nikki Haley interview? She implicated Rex Tillerson in trying to undermine the president. That's pretty disconcerting. If trump's own SOS is capable of this, just think about where the State Dept in general is. Some of you guys were calling it a conspiracy theory when I said the state dept was complicit in trying to "get" trump but every week something new comes out that proves it to be true.
Click to expand...
Two comments:

1) Nikki Haley has Presidential aspirations so she'd be stupid to blast Trump and risk pissing off the Republican base.

2) There's two ways of looking at this "undermining" business with Tillerson and Kelly. Either they were trying to "get" Trump OR they thought he was batsh*t crazy and wanted to save the President from himself.
 
DaShuckster said:
I find book deals, speaking tours, and board seats.

Personally, I find this "everybody does it" line of Trump defense disgusting. America should be better than this. If corruption exists everywhere, then DEAL WITH IT, not excuse it.
Click to expand...
all these politicians are corrupt. all of them. but you are outraged this one time. why not the others?
 
Crazyhole said:
Did anybody else catch the Nikki Haley interview? She implicated Rex Tillerson in trying to undermine the president. That's pretty disconcerting. If trump's own SOS is capable of this, just think about where the State Dept in general is. Some of you guys were calling it a conspiracy theory when I said the state dept was complicit in trying to "get" trump but every week something new comes out that proves it to be true.
Click to expand...

I think it made her look horrible. She tossed Tillerson and Kelly under the bus without any proof only to make herself look good. What did she accomplish? Disagreeing about policy (which Kelly claims) is not "undermining the president". I've lost all respect that I had for her. Snitch.
 
DaShuckster said:
Two comments:

1) Nikki Haley has Presidential aspirations so she'd be stupid to blast Trump and risk pissing off the Republican base.

2) There's two ways of looking at this "undermining" business with Tillerson and Kelly. Either they were trying to "get" Trump OR they thought he was batsh*t crazy and wanted to save the President from himself.
Click to expand...

She knows what she is doing. She is implying that they were trying to form a coup against the POTUS.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Brandon

***LB Cam White talks UCF visit; building connection with Ted Roof***

Replies
4
Views
640
The Dungeon - Knights Only
Gvilleknight
G
DaShuckster

House Panel votes to hold Hunter Biden in Contempt...

Replies
8
Views
129
The Water Cooler
DaShuckster
DaShuckster
UCFBS

[OT] Starlink for Internet

Replies
6
Views
204
The Dungeon - Knights Only
UCFBS
UCFBS
K

UCF vs OU Crowd Shots (includes recruits, rollercoasters, new courtside tables added and even a Dungeon Legend)

Replies
8
Views
523
The Dungeon - Knights Only
SCLSU Mud Dogs
SCLSU Mud Dogs
Knightbengal

The Knighted Ones Podcast - Episode 28: Cyclones, Cowboys, and The Combine (Oh My!)

Replies
0
Views
52
UCF Fan Forum
Knightbengal
Knightbengal
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back