impeachment inquiry hearings thread

[Homercles 10205]

Waiting for a mention of Uranium One next

Edited November 20, 2019 by Homercles

[Fozzz 152]

Did Sondland ever say that Trump told him that money for weapons was in exchange for investigations or was that just an inference Sondland made on his own?  That appears to me to be a rather important distinction.

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13546]

29 minutes ago, YChang said:

Hmmm... found the GOP line to use now, "President Trump never told me directly that the aid was conditioned on” investigations."

"Did the president ever utter the words 'I, Donald J Trump, being of sound mind and body, hereby bribeth thee, Volodymyr Zelensky, president of Ukraine'"?

 

"No"

 

"No further questions"

[Biff Tannen 45491]

lol.  "Good heavens"

[DigglerontheHoof 21053]

Castor is ssstruggglinngg.

[jimmyjazz 45546]

Just now, Fozzz said:

Did Sondland ever say that Trump told him that money for weapons was in exchange for investigations or was that just an inference Sondland made on his own?  That appears to me to be a rather important distinction.

Your IQ being 20 points distinct from average -- on the south side -- seems important, too.

[Bama Chick 28596]

Ya may have to go through hundreds of lies and a bunch of rape but Ken Starr is eventually forced to say the right thing.

What a country.

[Homercles 10205]

Reddit TD clowns saying they think this is so embarrassing to Dems that they won’t even bother impeaching...ok good luck with that

[Chuckie Finster 22598]

Castor is so bad.

"He never said 'GO talk to Rudy,' he said 'Talk to Rudy.'"

Edited November 20, 2019 by Chuckie Finster

[Captainant 27442]

1 minute ago, Fozzz said:

Did Sondland ever say that Trump told him that money for weapons was in exchange for investigations or was that just an inference Sondland made on his own?  That appears to me to be a rather important distinction.

Everyone knows a crime isn't a crime unless you specifically outline why it's a crime as you're committing it, duh. 

[Fozzz 152]

Just now, Captainant said:

Everyone knows a crime isn't a crime unless you specifically outline why it's a crime as you're committing it, duh. 

When whether or not something is a crime is conditioned on specific intent, then yes, evidence of that intent is important.  

[Vito Andolini 9099]

Call me a ding dong, but I can’t help but presume the Senior Counsel behind Castor is constantly looking, down, checking her Twitter mentions.

[wildcat09 29226]

Rocko gonna Rocko.

[tantric superman 4667]

1 minute ago, Fozzz said:

When whether or not something is a crime is conditioned on specific intent, then yes, evidence of that intent is important.  

What evidence of intent do you feel is lacking?

[Fozzz 152]

Just now, tantric superman said:

What evidence of intent do you feel is lacking?

Ugh, the burden runs the other way bro.  I don't find Sondland's "guess" (as Sondland himself put it) to be all that powerful of evidence of Trump's intent.  

[Dahobbs 17437]

6 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Your IQ being 20 points distinct from average -- on the south side -- seems important, too.

You're being a bit generous. 

[Bama Chick 28596]

[HenryJames 65887]

 

[SizzleChest 8275]

Very generous.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13410]

2 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

When whether or not something is a crime is conditioned on specific intent, then yes, evidence of that intent is important.  

The evidence is subject to reasonableness. Do you think that Trump, or any leader in politics or business, speaks in 100% absolutes? We all interpret what people say, and people are still held responsible.

Do you think that every person ever convicted of telling a subordinate to commit a crime, had to explicitly make the request in order to be convicted?

[TexArcher 37508]

7 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

When whether or not something is a crime is conditioned on specific intent, then yes, evidence of that intent is important.  

Yes, Trump and Giuliani inadvertantly withheld Congressionally-approved aid from an ally in exchange for a political favor.

Of course there was intent.  And the proof is all over your tv right now.  If you still don't see it, it's because you don't want to.

Edited November 20, 2019 by TexArcher

[tantric superman 4667]

7 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

Ugh, the burden runs the other way bro.  I don't find Sondland's "guess" (as Sondland himself put it) to be all that powerful of evidence of Trump's intent.  

I'm not asking you what the burden of proof is, I'm asking you what kind of evidence you would need.

 I'm just vaguely curious. 

Edited November 20, 2019 by tantric superman

[sachick 1189]

Yes, Trump and Giuliani inadvertantly withheld Congressionally-approved aid from an ally in exchange for a political favor.

It was all just a funny coincidence.

[Fozzz 152]

Just now, Nice Guy Eddie said:

The evidence is subject to reasonableness. Do you think that Trump, or any leader in politics or business, speaks in 100% absolutes? We all interpret what people say, and people are still held responsible.

Do you think that every person ever convicted of telling a subordinate to commit a crime, had to explicitly make the request in order to be convicted?

Only a Sith deals in absolutes.  As to your question, I do not believe that to be true.  However, we are discussing the probity of Sondland's testimony and his testimony appears to be lacking with respect to the key ingredient of bribery.

[Horn Dog 9671]

2 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

 

In fairness, Starr is saying that this is Schiff’s position.  He is not saying it is his

[Dahobbs 17437]

Just now, Nice Guy Eddie said:

The evidence is subject to reasonableness. Do you think that Trump, or any leader in politics or business, speaks in 100% absolutes? We all interpret what people say, and people are still held responsible.

Do you think that every person ever convicted of telling a subordinate to commit a crime, had to explicitly make the request in order to be convicted?

Everyday people get convicted of crimes where the only evidence of specific intent is circumstantial. The informed opinion of the Sondland, who was involved in the day-to-day of this particular scheme, of what he believed Trump's intent to be is amazingly important and directly relevant. Fozzz remains an absolute moron. 

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13546]

Fozz couldn't understand how DeNiro knew Pesci was killed in Goodfellas.

[jimmyjazz 45546]

I'm gonna go WAY out on a limb and suggest that when the President directs someone to work with Rudy Giuliani and Giuliani conveys the quid pro quo nature of the task at hand, then that ties directly back to the President, Rocko's keen legal analysis notwithstanding.

[High Plains Drifter 10970]

On 11/15/2019 at 5:32 PM, Hugo Stiglitz said:

What this is really about is making it difficult for GOP Senators to acquit Trump.  I know everyone thinks it’s a foregone conclusion (probably is) but I guarantee you no senator really WANTS to acquit Trump in the face of overwhelming evidence.  They would actually prefer not to vote at all.

 

Then those spinless fucking weasels need to convince DOTARD to resign.

[Tuco 5076]

3 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

Ugh, the burden runs the other way bro.  I don't find Sondland's "guess" (as Sondland himself put it) to be all that powerful of evidence of Trump's intent.  

I think it's certainly reasonable cause to investigate a crime (ie, an impeachment hearing) and to gather evidence (turn over documents, get White House officials to testify.)  

It's an absurd position to assert that Sondland's limited access does not provide enough proof while arguing that others with more access can be barred from coming forward. Sondland, and the other witnesses, is who we have.  You want more certainty, then lets get more witnesses. 

[Nice Guy Eddie 13410]

1 minute ago, Horn Dog said:

In fairness, Starr is saying that this is Schiff’s position.  He is not saying it is his

good point. Starr will still most likely walk the line that he doesn't think that a crime occurred, and if even if that is proven to be true, it doesn't rise to the level of removing a president. That level being on a president lying about sex.

[Chuckie Finster 22598]

From the "who could have ever seen this coming?" files:

 

Edited November 20, 2019 by Chuckie Finster

[Red Five 40633]

2 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I'm gonna go WAY out on a limb and suggest that when the President directs someone to work with Rudy Giuliani and Giuliani conveys the quid pro quo nature of the task at hand, then that ties directly back to the President, Rocko's keen legal analysis notwithstanding.

We also have Trump admitting to it. But other than that I guess there's just no way of knowing his intent. 

[Goredho 17345]

1 hour ago, TexArcher said:

"Mr. Giuliani's requests were a quid pro quo."

"Mr. Giuliani was expressing the desires of the President."

"Everyone was in the loop."

 

BURN IT DOWN!!

 

[jimmyjazz 45546]

Just now, Red Five said:

We also have Trump admitting to it. But other than that I guess there's just no way of knowing his intent. 

I couldn't find that evidence, so I went with Rudy.  Link?  I need to keep a file.

[Dahobbs 17437]

Just now, Goredho said:

Jesus, that is terrifying. 

[HenryJames 65887]

1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

Jesus, that is terrifying. 

That's his O face.

[TexArcher 37508]

1 minute ago, HenryJames said:

That's his O face.

As in, "Oh boy, dicks!"

[Dahobbs 17437]

Back to the whole the aid was released after we got caught, so no big deal. 

[tantric superman 4667]

9 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

Only a Sith deals in absolutes.  As to your question, I do not believe that to be true.  However, we are discussing the probity of Sondland's testimony and his testimony appears to be lacking with respect to the key ingredient of bribery.

Siths are generally pretty good at distinguishing difference between credibility, types of evidence and elements of a crime, though.

[GSU&UT 1798]

Check out Trump's notes, definitely the sign of a business genius.

[kevwun 15624]

5 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Back to the whole the aid was released after we got caught, so no big deal. 

Someone should ask these idiots what happens if you attempt to rob a bank, but get caught in the act.

Edited November 20, 2019 by kevwun

[Biff Tannen 45491]

I feel like he writes with his entire hand around the marker.

[Foosters 17727]

35 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

 

Fucking libtard

[YChang 3430]

Haha... how is this an irregular channel?

[Dahobbs 17437]

Hahaha, he is dancing around Rudy and specifically not mentioning him as part of the "irregular channel". 

[Captainant 27442]

2 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

I feel like he writes with his entire hand around the marker.

well with hands that small, can you blame him?

[Mo Horn 8807]

Fozzz is a great example of why no matter what comes out of the hearings there will still be millions of people who hear what they want to hear and will never move away from what they believe. Back to the shooting someone in the middle of Times Square. 

[Lurch 5921]

So, uh, we got him?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

You know Trump is really thinking, “I can’t believe THIS is what they’re impeaching me over.  I have done so much far worse shit than this and everyone knows about most of it. SAD!”