Jump to content

impeachment inquiry hearings thread

henrygandorf

By henrygandorf
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

triplehorn

triplehorn 2664

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

I've said for at least a year that if anyone can bring Trump down, it's probably got to be Vlad or Rudy.

Look at the fucking people who are controlling the destiny of this country.  My god, man.

Until Trump leaves office, the person(s) who brings Trump down is the person who threatens to bring down criminally complicit GOP.  Since it's all one circle of criminal compromise, it probably falls on someone already in prison/pleaded guilty awaiting sentencing.  Former Trump personal atty and fixer, and former RNC deputy regional finance chair, Michael Cohen, would qualify.  Rick Gates probably as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 10.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

TexasEd
TexasEd

I voted for Trump/Against Hilary Clinton.   He should be impeached for: Extortion of a foreign government by withholding military assistance to an ally (and benefitting Russia) in exchange

Paul Wesley
Paul Wesley

I'm a couple pages back in this fast-moving thread, but I wanted to respond to this.   I'm pretty close to you in demographics, and I was also a child who echoed his parents' pro-Reagan stance, a

Tailgate
Tailgate

Unreal. Biden’s son can take home $1m a year from a Ukrainian company he knows nothing about...but our president acts like the CEO of a company with leverage in cutting deals and this shit happens?

Posted Images

Bruh Man

Bruh Man 3160

Posted
Posted

The fact that he's already wealthy should be more incentive to just do the right thing and create an amazing legacy for yourself. I mean just imagine how history will remember him if he were to flip and provide information that led to Trump's removal. This has to be an enticing proposal right? Or is it better to remain loyal to a man he met 2 years ago. A man that would sell him out for a handful of Big Mac coupons. 

This seems like an easy decision to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2664

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I said that a couple of weeks ago, and yet here we are.  The guy hasn't been on the up and up.  Makes me think Trump has something on him.

You can be uncooperative/fudge the truth to a point.  Then when new evidence comes out - like yesterday from Taylor about Sondland taking that call from Trump in Kiev all about investigations and nothing about national security - you're screwed.  Sondland tried to be helpful to Trump, but now he no longer be helpful and his scalp is about to get lifted.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
conVINCEd

conVINCEd 21469

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Bruh Man said:

The fact that he's already wealthy should be more incentive to just do the right thing and create an amazing legacy for yourself. I mean just imagine how history will remember him if he were to flip and provide information that led to Trump's removal. This has to be an enticing proposal right? Or is it better to remain loyal to a man he met 2 years ago. A man that would sell him out for a handful of Big Mac coupons. 

This seems like an easy decision to me.

As a dead man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89778

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Anastasis said:

Can I get a line on him not testifying in an impeachment inquiry in uniform?

He'll be in uniform - there was a reason why he showed up in uniform before, and a big chunk of that is the fact that his position with the NSC, and his current position, is that of a uniformed member of the US military.

Plus he's a sharp guy, and he saw how the Republicans acted towards Kent and Taylor.  He knows some of them might not act like complete dipshits towards a uniformed, decorated active-duty member of the military who was listening to the actual fucking phone call.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89778

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I said that a couple of weeks ago, and yet here we are.  The guy hasn't been on the up and up.  Makes me think Trump has something on him.

 

15 minutes ago, Bruh Man said:

The fact that he's already wealthy should be more incentive to just do the right thing and create an amazing legacy for yourself. I mean just imagine how history will remember him if he were to flip and provide information that led to Trump's removal. This has to be an enticing proposal right? Or is it better to remain loyal to a man he met 2 years ago. A man that would sell him out for a handful of Big Mac coupons. 

This seems like an easy decision to me.

Whether he fudged/left out stuff, the point is that he testified and against Trump's orders, just as Kent and Taylor were ordered not to testify, and still showed up.

That wealth of his can buy some good legal counsel, and that dude has no intention of stepping foot in jail or jeopardizing his wealth over Trump.

Especially when somebody like him knows that Trump would turn on him in a heartbeat if it helped Trump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Francisco 2.0

Francisco 2.0 32416

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

He'll be in uniform - there was a reason why he showed up in uniform before, and a big chunk of that is the fact that his position with the NSC, and his current position, is that of a uniformed member of the US military.

Plus he's a sharp guy, and he saw how the Republicans acted towards Kent and Taylor.  He knows some of them might not act like complete dipshits towards a uniformed, decorated active-duty member of the military who was listening to the actual fucking phone call.

 

Lol.

They will literally shit on him publicly in order to attempt to prove a point, no matter what uniform or decorations he has pinned on.  All of 'em.  Because their audience of one needs impressed.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Doc Sam Beckett

Doc Sam Beckett 5797

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Paul Wesley said:

I watched Fox last night.

Every host took turns playing the clip where Jim Jordan asks the testifying diplomats what crime Trump committed that is impeachable (neither could answer), and then they cut back to Ingraham and Hannity shouting, "THERE ARE THE STAR WITNESSES WHO CANNOT EVEN NAME A CRIME!!!"

But that's a pretty stupid thing to celebrate, right?  

I mean, if somebody witnesses a murder, and they're testifying about what they saw, and the defense attorney says, "Can you name the criminal statute that was violated here," and the witness doesn't know the answer.... so fucking what?  It's not their job to name the crime.  They're just describing what they know.  

Fox News was one long string of these "HA HA HA!  GOTCHA!" when not a single fucking thing was "gotten."

And yet Fox and Rush and the rest... they will continue to reinforce the Trumpkins' belief that their savior is falsely accused.

 

I've seen this movie before. The Germans were kicking ass in the field and then all of a sudden they were told they lost. They couldn't figure out how, but a couple of years later a guy came along with a funny mustache and told them they actually didn't lose, but were stabbed in the back! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tuco

Tuco 5077

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

 

Whether he fudged/left out stuff, the point is that he testified and against Trump's orders, just as Kent and Taylor were ordered not to testify, and still showed up.

That wealth of his can buy some good legal counsel, and that dude has no intention of stepping foot in jail or jeopardizing his wealth over Trump.

Especially when somebody like him knows that Trump would turn on him in a heartbeat if it helped Trump.

My speculation: 

I read him as a rich guy who paid a million dollars to play with the big boys, either because he has some pet policy or because he thought it give him something: respect, political career, contacts for more money - who knows. 

He probably didn't really understand the implications of what he was doing with advancing Trump's Rudy agenda.  He was just sucking up to the boss.  When the shit blew up, whatever motivated him to get involved in the first place seemed unimportant.  He was now a central figure in an impeachment scandal. I think he wanted to run away as fast as he could with pissing off as few people as possible.  He didn't want to get into a legal battle over executive power.  His council probably told him to comply, tell your story, and go retire.  He did the first part.  Doing the second part without pissing off a bunch of people - Trump's people who run in the same political and business circles that Sondland does - was not easy.  So he softened his story, left out shit that seemed bad, and thought he could just get away with talking about things the whistleblower had already detailed.  He was being half-smart, and now he is looking at potential jail time for perjury.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mrs Whiggins

Mrs Whiggins 13050

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, deech said:

Here's hoping this sets the President off......

Giuliani may have been joking (as his lawyer stated during the interview) but Rudy knows enough.

For all the talking points about Hunter Biden that the GOP folks lob over the net, the Democrats should be serving up these two aces right here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2664

Posted
Posted

re above with Trump claiming he barely knew/didn't know Parnas despite all the invites and photo ops with all the usual suspects, Trump floated the same line regarding Sondland - Trump declared of Ambassador Sondland "I barely knew him."

This despite it being reported: Sondland was in 'frequent contact' with Trump, and called Trump personally in the middle of the night before the 'no quid pro quo' text.

It would a fairly straightforward line of public questioning of Sondland next week to get him to detail the nature, volume, and frequency of contacts he had personally with Trump around the Ukraine bribery scheme.  At a minimum, it will reduce Trump's lies about "barely knowing" Sondland to apple sauce.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28797

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Bruh Man said:

The fact that he's already wealthy should be more incentive to just do the right thing and create an amazing legacy for yourself. I mean just imagine how history will remember him if he were to flip and provide information that led to Trump's removal. This has to be an enticing proposal right? Or is it better to remain loyal to a man he met 2 years ago. A man that would sell him out for a handful of Big Mac coupons. 

This seems like an easy decision to me.

Nothing will bring about Trump's removal. The Senate is going to protect him. If you come at the king, you'd best not miss, and Sondland flipping on Trump would be guaranteed to miss. Then he'd be a Republican outcast with the most powerful man in the world out for vengeance against him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Biff Tannen

Biff Tannen 45712

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

It would a fairly straightforward line of public questioning of Sondland next week to get him to detail the nature, volume, and frequency of contacts he had personally with Trump around the Ukraine bribery scheme.  At a minimum, it will reduce Trump's lies about "barely knowing" Sondland to apple sauce.

Oh, so it definitely won't happen then?  Unless it comes from Goldman or whoever, you know no D is going to do this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2664

Posted
Posted (edited)
49 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Oh, so it definitely won't happen then?  Unless it comes from Goldman or whoever, you know no D is going to do this.

Given news today of the second person coming forward overhearing the direct call from Trump to Sondland in Kiev, it's low hanging fruit.  Use Trump's quote about "barely knowing him" against Trump in direct questioning of Sondland.  Use the questioning to highlight what a patently brazen lie Trump told in his attempt to cover up his bribery scheme.  Detail it.  Cell text messages, WhatsApp texts, cell to cell calls, middle of the night 1:1 calls, etc.  Blow that shit up.  

but yeah, that'll never happen, right ?

 

Edited by triplehorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bruh Man

Bruh Man 3160

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Nothing will bring about Trump's removal. The Senate is going to protect him. If you come at the king, you'd best not miss, and Sondland flipping on Trump would be guaranteed to miss. Then he'd be a Republican outcast with the most powerful man in the world out for vengeance against him. 

Good point Omar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

can a geneticist explain to me how russia/eastern europe consistently produces some of the ugliest men on the planet and the hottest women on the planet? that doesn't make any sense to me.

This is an excellent point that I had never considered before but its very true. Quite the conundrum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Spoilered for slightly NSFW:

  Reveal hidden contents

Related image

 

I just realized that was a young  Vanessa Angel.  My goodness, what great nipples.  Lindsey Graham would be jealous. 

Edited by Lobo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mrs Whiggins

Mrs Whiggins 13050

Posted
Posted
23 minutes ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

I love how the premise of this "joke" that makes the possibility of someone getting "thrown under the bus" by the president is just accepted by everyone involved in the interview. 

Sure. Nobody wants to wake up to the horse's head, so you gotta know the score from the get go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Prepuce of Doom

Prepuce of Doom 21101

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, EMAWesome said:

Rep. Mike Quigley (D) Illinois-"Hearsay 'can be much better' evidence than direct evidence."

 

Salem, Massachusetts has joined the chat.

The fact that you have the temerity to make a post related to rules of evidence suggests that your brainworms have eaten the portion responsible for self-awareness. 

See a neurologist. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89778

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Nothing will bring about Trump's removal. The Senate is going to protect him. If you come at the king, you'd best not miss, and Sondland flipping on Trump would be guaranteed to miss. Then he'd be a Republican outcast with the most powerful man in the world out for vengeance against him. 

Sondland is not going to go to jail for Trump.  He’s in his 60s and a millionaires many times over.   He will turn on Trump to cover his own ass in a heartbeat.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, atomheartbevo said:

Sondland is not going to go to jail for Trump.  He’s in his 60s and a millionaires many times over.   He will turn on Trump to cover his own ass in a heartbeat.

 

No doubt about this. 

I’m laying 50/50 odds on taking the fifth. With the under throwing trump under the bus, and the least likely scenario, he moons the cameras. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89778

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, JimmyJames said:

No doubt about this. 

I’m laying 50/50 odds on taking the fifth. With the under throwing trump under the bus, and the least likely scenario, he moons the cameras. 

Can he even do  that at this point?   And what if they decide to nail him for perjury as a result - bet he’d correct himself/roll real fucking fast if he’s facing jail time.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, atomheartbevo said:

Can he even do  that at this point?   And what if they decide to nail him for perjury as a result - bet he’d correct himself/roll real fucking fast if he’s facing jail time.  

Sure. Perjury is a tricky charge. Not that easy to prove. I’m guessing his lawyers last week had him walk back his initial testimony to reduce the likelihood of a perjury charge. What happens going forward now though is up in the air. If I was advising him, I’d tell him to tell trump to fuck off and plead the fifth. And spend a whole bunch of money on criminal lawyers (not me of course since I’m not a criminal lawyer) making damn sure I don’t get thrown in jail. 

Trump is probably on the phone with him right now offering him a pardon if he lies though, so there is that to consider. Plus good ole Billy Barr man backing up the trumpster’s criminal obstruction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...