impeachment inquiry hearings thread

[Bama Chick 28,596]

You did (I believe). The official memorandum was put on the secure server when it normally would not have been.

It was likely captured by a dictation machine and then edited (non nefarious) by a stenographer. What happened between their edits and storage is unknown.

My guess is that a recording exists somewhere within the IC. Ukraine almost certainly has a recording as well.

I doubt anything significant was removed. What we saw was damning already.

Well Trump and his confederates have all been reported to be using non-government issued phones and personal email for communication and he’s invited freaking Russian intelligence people in the White House so I’m sure there’s recordings of lots of shit.

(Recorded by someone other than our government)

[suddenly shaggy 929]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

I am not a member of the GOP and have not been since prior to 2016.  I probably did vote for an odd republican in the last state election.

I am aware of the allegations that it was stored somewhere different than usual.  I maintain that it's not terribly material.

I will no longer engage with you because you have a habit of reading into my posts things that are not there because you think you know what my politics are.

Good day.

 

I don't really give a shit if you're registered GOP or not. Your posting history is unquestionably right wing and you consistently nibble the corners of anything that's bad for the GOP, while conveying full knowledge of the details of anything involving the left. I'm not reading anything that you haven't clearly shown over and over and I'm far from the only person that's noticed it. 

You are continuing to display it here. You are either woefully ignorant, while not letting it stop you from repeatedly arguing an issue you are ignorant of, or you are being willfully obtuse. End result is the same either way.  

[Dahobbs 17,534]

5 hours ago, suddenly shaggy said:

I don't really give a shit if you're registered GOP or not. Your posting history is unquestionably right wing and you consistently nibble the corners of anything that's bad for the GOP, while conveying full knowledge of the details of anything involving the left. I'm not reading anything that you haven't clearly shown over and over and I'm far from the only person that's noticed it. 

You are continuing to display it here. You are either woefully ignorant, while not letting it stop you from repeatedly arguing an issue you are ignorant of, or you are being willfully obtuse. End result is the same either way.  

He is actually saying something completely different: that the fact that was/is stored on a secure server is immaterial in the face of the evident corruption. 

[Biff Tannen 45,685]

25 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

He is actually saying something completely different: that the fact that was/is stored on a secure server is immaterial in the face of the evident corruption. 

It’s not immaterial because it exposes the use of that server for nefarious means. God knows what else is on there that shouldn’t be. 
 

Rs have shown that the evident corruption isn’t enough for them. 

[Mrs Whiggins 13,050]

This is a tangent to the serious discussion, but it is relevant due to the focus on impeachment by the protestors. Apparently there was a "March for Trump" yesterday in DC. This was the march wherein the organizers were complaining that the chartered bus service was trying to suppress them because the marchers were for Trump. The truth was that the organizers had not paid the bus company. Anyway, they went to the offices in the Capitol and shouted at the interns.

Scroll down through his twitter thread if you are interested:

 

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12,301]

8 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

The server is not a given.  Is it beyond the reach of legal process?  If things were handled in the "normal way" is there any evidence that it would be public?  I suppose it might reduce the number of readers of any transcript.

The corruption, the election violation, and the abuse of power are evident on the face of the "memorandum."  We don't need anything else.  It's like quid pro quo.

So we don’t want to investigate crimes committed by multiple people within the administration to hide damning evidence? I’d sure like to know who authorized moving that transcript (and others) on to a classified server. I’d also like to know the subject of those transcripts and what other crimes were detailed in them that they felt were so dangerous that they decided to break the law to hide them.

we’re dealing with a criminal organization at this point. Find all of the crimes and criminals and put the screws to them until they roll over on the big fish.

[elfenix 34,241]

https://twitter.com/wolsson/status/1185528108109221890

 

 

 

 

[jimmyjazz 45,954]

I'd like to know if a crime can be attached to the use of that server for unintended means.  I doubt this is the case, but so far I haven't heard much besides "that server is only to be used to store the most sensitive information related to national security".  OK, we get that.  Is using it to hide the Aunt Becky's recipe for gingersnaps a crime, or just a policy violation?

Regardless, I disagree with twicehorn's general take here -- every misstep, criminal or otherwise, needs to be catalogued and considered as to whether or not it's a criminal or impeachable offense.  I'm fine if plenty of things get left out of the ultimate charges, but everything needs to be carefully considered.

[Bama Chick 28,596]

Yeah I don’t get the take that the server stuff is immaterial.

That’s in your face evidence of the administration’s attempt to hide and cover up the contents of conversations.

Why put the records on something so inaccessible if there’s nothing wrong with them?

[texastough 1,129]

I don't know if it has been discussed yet, but it dawned on me that Mulvaney talking about a quid pro quo might have actually been calculated and pretty subtle. The whistleblower described a quid pro quo where military aid was conditioned on dirt/investigation of a political rival -- obviously a huge no-no and counter to the most basic principles of democracy. What Mulvaney "admitted" to was much different -- conditioning Ukraine aid on investigation of interference into the 2016 election. If true (which I don't believe for a second) that would make the entire Ukraine thing a nothing berder. So I think it was intentional, part of the administration's strategy of lying about everything and throwing everything they can think of against the wall to see what sticks. Fuckers

[Homercles 10,205]

Twice seems to occasionally piss some of y’all off, but I’m not one of them.  He’s a long recovering alcoholic who has reached a point of neutrality that comes across in his legal analysis...I’ve always valued that, having someone familiar with the law but rarely putting much slant on interpretation, if any.  
 

My take on his statement is that, while putting the memo on a code word server is absolutely reflective of this administration’s constant grifting and cover ups, legally it’s not seen as damning as maybe some of us would like it to be.  I may not like it or agree with it, but I can respectfully consider his intent and knowledge as a balance to my own.  
 

Besides, even if he bends right (or is secretly a far right), his input is certainly much better than a sheeeit, CLH, Texashammer, Icono or anyone else who drives by to call us all crazy for our outrage at the embarrassment the GOP has become.  

Edited October 19, 2019 by Homercles

[Homercles 10,205]

Dr. pepper.  

Edited October 19, 2019 by Homercles

[TwiceHorn 31,471]

My problem with it is that a certain segment of the population, here and elsewhere, tends to get lost in the weeds trying to find that big smoking gun somewhere, when you have shell casings and powder residue all over the place and the dipshit in chief has these big black stains on his hands.

It may not be exactly the same thing, but the endless and breathless conspiracying regarding the subjects of the Mueller investigation ended up blunting the impact of obvious criminality and impeachable offenses.

Where is the need for speculation about further criminality and corruption when it's staring you right in the face.  Some of it is the natural tendency of message boards to drill down on something and tear it to absolute pieces.  But that tendency has spilled off the internet into the public debate and is befouling the whole process, imo.

[jimmyjazz 45,954]

I absolutely agree that Joe Citizen rarely has the intellectual chops or even the incentive to see the big picture when constantly confronted with minutiae that are damning in and of themselves.  This should inform the Democrats' policy, and to some degree it does -- they are focusing on the Biden issue along with Mulvaney's bizarre spew the other day.  They aren't really digging into the misuse of the server, at least in public.

[Mrs Whiggins 13,050]

2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

My problem with it is that a certain segment of the population, here and elsewhere, tends to get lost in the weeds trying to find that big smoking gun somewhere, when you have shell casings and powder residue all over the place and the dipshit in chief has these big black stains on his hands.

It may not be exactly the same thing, but the endless and breathless conspiracying regarding the subjects of the Mueller investigation ended up blunting the impact of obvious criminality and impeachable offenses.

Where is the need for speculation about further criminality and corruption when it's staring you right in the face.  Some of it is the natural tendency of message boards to drill down on something and tear it to absolute pieces.  But that tendency has spilled off the internet into the public debate and is befouling the whole process, imo.

That's some Hercule Poirot level analysis right there, and I mean that as a compliment.

Carry on...

[Horn Dog 9,855]

It’s  is kinda like when the detective investigating your wife’s murder finds out you had a secret burner phone that you used to text your mistress, and a couple of mobsters, but the detective of course is not interested in looking at the texts you sent on that burner phone cause having a burner phone or texting shady people is  not illegal,  so who gives a shit.

[Junior Miller 1,502]

On 10/19/2019 at 12:12 PM, jimmyjazz said:

I absolutely agree that Joe Citizen rarely has the intellectual chops or even the incentive to see the big picture when constantly confronted with minutiae that are damning in and of themselves.  This should inform the Democrats' policy, and to some degree it does -- they are focusing on the Biden issue along with Mulvaney's bizarre spew the other day.  They aren't really digging into the misuse of the server, at least in public.

Just think about that. This country is filled with people so lazy and so stupid they can't be troubled to care even a little that a political party and president in power are actively committing and covering up crimes while they steal from US taxpayers. 

That's how stupid the average American has become, and then realize half the country is dumber than that. 

[Irwin F Fletcher 3,550]

On 10/19/2019 at 10:14 AM, jimmyjazz said:

I'd like to know if a crime can be attached to the use of that server for unintended means.  I doubt this is the case, but so far I haven't heard much besides "that server is only to be used to store the most sensitive information related to national security".  OK, we get that.  Is using it to hide the Aunt Becky's recipe for gingersnaps a crime, or just a policy violation?
Regardless, I disagree with twicehorn's general take here -- every misstep, criminal or otherwise, needs to be catalogued and considered as to whether or not it's a criminal or impeachable offense.  I'm fine if plenty of things get left out of the ultimate charges, but everything needs to be carefully considered.

It is a crime to store unclassified material on this specific classified server. I'd need to dig to find it, but there was an article that came out when this was revelled saying that this was a crime.

 

Edit: Found one article that addresses this. From Politico: https://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/26/trump-lockdown-transcript-1514714

Quote

Doss said it would be “highly unusual” for this kind of routine call between world leaders to be placed into a system that’s used for information about the nation’s most highly compartmented programs. “It risks undermining a whole host of important national security activities,” she said, noting that “most if not all” officials who would need to have access to call readouts as part of carrying out their regular duties in advising on foreign affairs and implementing the administration’s policies “would not have access” to the codeword system.

The president has ultimate classification authority and it’s an open legal question whether he’s bound by executive orders, including one signed by Obama in 2009 that says information can’t be classified in order to “conceal violations of law, inefficiency, or administrative error” or “prevent embarrassment to a person, organization, or agency.”

 

Edited October 22, 2019 by Irwin F Fletcher

[jimmyjazz 45,954]

That raises the question of whether storing a document on that server automatically renders it "classified". 

The President has ultimate authority, as he can declassify anything at any time.  That doesn't mean he is the only one who can classify anything at any time.  That ability is granted to multiple departments and personnel.  If Obama's executive order still stands, it would appear that a granting authority might still commit a crime if they classify a document which couldn't reasonably be argued as needing to be classified.  (I'm not sure if that's the test, but it would seem there would need to be some means to identify information that runs afoul of that order.)

My guess is that POTUS would have a pretty good argument that he gets to classify anything, which doesn't even get into the DOJ standard under which the President is immune to prosecution while in office.

[Mrs Whiggins 13,050]

@Irwin F Fletcher- I recall reading something along those lines w/respect to the server and I don't dispute that criminal or not, it was wrong but at this point in time, I am concerned that the crimes are piling up so thick and high that the House is going to have to pick a few and go with that. If not for the legal part (which I know nothing of substance) but for simplicity of message. Sort of a "he committed numerous wrongdoings, so many that we are focusing on the main ones," kind of message. I thought that might be what TwiceHorn was getting at, but I can't speak for another, but that was my view of the server story: it was wrong and implies that the perps knew it was wrong but were hiding evidence and (we) may use that to support (our) 'case,' but won't focus on it. Otherwise, the average public gets way off track.

[sachick 1,189]

5 hours ago, Junior Miller said:

Just think about that. This country is filled with people so lazy and so stupid they can't be troubled to care even a little that a political party and president in power are actively committing and covering up crimes while they steal from US taxpayers. 

That's how stupid the average American has become, and then realize half the country is dumber than that. 

It's not that there dumb. They just don't care. If it doesn't immediately impact them, they just don't care. As long as they get theirs, it's all that matters. They have the privilege of not caring and not being affected.

[sachick 1,189]

Schedule for this week.

[triplehorn 2,664]

On 10/19/2019 at 9:15 AM, TwiceHorn said:

My problem with it is that a certain segment of the population, here and elsewhere, tends to get lost in the weeds trying to find that big smoking gun somewhere, when you have shell casings and powder residue all over the place and the dipshit in chief has these big black stains on his hands.

It may not be exactly the same thing, but the endless and breathless conspiracying regarding the subjects of the Mueller investigation ended up blunting the impact of obvious criminality and impeachable offenses.

Where is the need for speculation about further criminality and corruption when it's staring you right in the face.  Some of it is the natural tendency of message boards to drill down on something and tear it to absolute pieces.  But that tendency has spilled off the internet into the public debate and is befouling the whole process, imo.

My understanding is that impeachment is a political process, while criminal law is much less so.  Your criticisms miss the important subject of the judges - a corrupt GOP Senate.  Shell casings, powder residue, and stained hands are being systematically neutralized, scrubbed, and swept away.  In a case of impeachment, a smoking gun has more impact on the conduct of the 'judges' than it does the certainty about a criminal's guilt.  And scoffing at "endless and breathless conspiracying" ignores the basic reality that wholesale shifts in public opinion are incremental and can take a long time, and involve many apparent dead-ends even if it's only a result of obstruction.  That eventual public shift is an important pre-set to have before even being able to accept the significance of a smoking gun.  So really, for impeachment in this case, you need both - a major shift in public sentiment and a smoking gun to then put the judges on notice.  Without the shift in public sentiment, judges don't worry so much about misinterpreting the evidence.

It's also a lot easier to jape about "breathless conspiracying" given a backdrop of mass lying and obstruction of justice.  

[DDD Dad 14,339]

27 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

My understanding is that impeachment is a political process, while criminal law is much less so.  Your criticisms miss the important subject of the judges - a corrupt GOP Senate.  Shell casings, powder residue, and stained hands are being systematically neutralized, scrubbed, and swept away.  In a case of impeachment, a smoking gun has more impact on the conduct of the 'judges' than it does the certainty about a criminal's guilt.  And scoffing at "endless and breathless conspiracying" ignores the basic reality that wholesale shifts in public opinion are incremental and can take a long time, and involve many apparent dead-ends even if it's only a result of obstruction.  That eventual public shift is an important pre-set to have before even being able to accept the significance of a smoking gun.  So really, for impeachment in this case, you need both - a major shift in public sentiment and a smoking gun to then put the judges on notice.  Without the shift in public sentiment, judges don't worry so much about misinterpreting the evidence.

It's also a lot easier to jape about "breathless conspiracying" given a backdrop of mass lying and obstruction of justice.  

And, of course, circumstantial evidence isn't admissible.

[jimmyjazz 45,954]

I learned a new word today:  "jape"

[Junior Miller 1,502]

1 hour ago, sachick said:

It's not that there dumb. They just don't care. If it doesn't immediately impact them, they just don't care. As long as they get theirs, it's all that matters. They have the privilege of not caring and not being affected.

IMO thinking they won't be affected makes them dumb. Like an animal being led to slaughter and not capable of even realizing what's happening 5 feet in front of them. 

[Biff Tannen 45,685]

1 hour ago, sachick said:

It's not that there dumb. They just don't care. If it doesn't immediately impact them, they just don't care. As long as they get theirs, it's all that matters. They have the privilege of not caring and not being affected.

*they're.  

 

sorry.  had to.

[sachick 1,189]

15 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

*they're.  

 

sorry.  had to.

Ugh. Totally justified. Embarrassing. I swear I know the difference.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

Buckle up 

 

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3,861]

One thing I like is that Trump positioned himself forcefully “no quid pro quo,” implicitly admitting that was a line you cannot cross. All the right wingers echoed it.  Mulvaney tried qpq is v cool and v legal, but it was too late to go that route.  
now there is an actual target to shoot at. 

[High Plains Drifter 11,049]

On 10/19/2019 at 10:10 AM, elfenix said:

https://twitter.com/wolsson/status/1185528108109221890

 

 

 

 

 

lofuckinl: They're hangry.

 

I would've went with " Need a snickers?"

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

 

[triplehorn 2,664]

 

[Doc Sam Beckett 5,793]

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

 

Eh, texaggy told me that investigation into Biden is bad, but investigation into the election corruption is total legal and totally cool. 

[texastough 1,129]

1 minute ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

 

Eh, texaggy told me that investigation into Biden is bad, but investigation into the election corruption is total legal and totally cool. 

This is the same thing I mentioned with Mulvaney. I think one part of the "throw shit against wall, see what sticks" strategy is to portray the quid pro quo as related to the 2016 election interference instead of an investigation into Hunter Biden. The Biden angle was blatantly using the office and military aid to attack a political opponent. Investigation of the 2016 election interference -- which benefitted Trump -- is 180 degrees different. Its obviously bogus but if the strategy was successful it would do several things 1) shift focus away from Trump looking for dirt on an opponent 2) shift focus away from Russia and onto Ukraine w.r.t. election interference, and 3) makes his meddling in Ukraine not nearly as "impeachable."

[Ted Lange 16,085]

 

we got em dot gif

[DDD Dad 14,339]

1 minute ago, Ted Lange said:

 

we got em dot gif

Ah well nevertheless.

[SimonBolivar 10,958]

44 minutes ago, DDD Dad said:

Ah well nevertheless.

I can't wait to see what will top all this in 5 months after nothing comes of this investigation. Live boy or dead girl?

Edited October 22, 2019 by SimonBolivar

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3,861]

you're going to take the word of some lib who is [checks notes]  a west point grad who served in nam and went to the kennedy school?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

 

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3,861]

says that Sondland is the one that told him military aid was dependent on the investigation.  i hope Sondland testified to that yesterday, but it seems like we'd know about that if he did.

[Biff Tannen 45,685]

17 minutes ago, SimonBolivar said:

I can't wait what will top all this in 5 months after nothing comes of this investigation. Live boy or dead girl?

Yep.  Nothing fucking matters.

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3,861]

this is fucking riveting reading.  lulz at bolton being the moral compass.

[sachick 1,189]

It's not "quid pro quo" but if you don't do what I want you to do, you're not getting your money.

 

[Red Five 40,858]

“look this isn’t a robbery, I’m just going to point this gun at your face until you open that safe, and if you don’t I’ll shoot you.”

[Michael Knight 12,978]

full opening statement

https://games-cdn.washingtonpost.com/notes/prod/default/documents/542ee36f-eafc-4f2b-a075-b3b492d981a5/note/75965f57-6561-42f8-af40-a9e984a85660.pdf

[Michael Knight 12,978]

[Biff Tannen 45,685]

11 minutes ago, Red Five said:

“look this isn’t a robbery, I’m just going to point this gun at your face until you open that safe, and if you don’t I’ll shoot you.”

This is exactly what Cohen was saying in his testimony when he was talking about "code".  The dotard is dumb as fuck, but he does understand how the mafia works and how to imply something without saying it directly.

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3,861]

in addition to being interesting corruption stuff, it is just cool to peek behind the curtain about how international relations work.

[4th&Five 41,552]

 

Edited October 22, 2019 by 4th&Five