Jump to content

impeachment inquiry hearings thread

henrygandorf

By henrygandorf
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Red Five

Red Five 41742

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Hiphopopotamos said:

Just tremendous closing remarks there by Rep Nunes.  Really demonstrated just how prepared and competent the R's have been thus far,

It's amazing the contrast between Schiff's closing remarks and Nunes', "well I guess we're going back downstairs. This sucks. Later."

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

kevwun

kevwun 16440

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, tantric superman said:

Seriously.  What is it with that Jordan and his shirt sleeves?

That's pretty disrespectful, unless the man has excema or leprosy.    Why the fuck doesn't he put a jacket on?

Jackets impede his ability to ignore sexual assault accusations.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
lemonlime

lemonlime 5503

Posted
Posted

While I stand by nothing matters anymore, and nothing will move the needle, if there is anything that could it's trump tweeting at the witness.  The one thing that even his cult members criticize him for is the nasty tweets.  Now he's doing that at a witness who's testifying, feeding into his one weakness among the kool aid drinkers.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Biff Tannen

Biff Tannen 46168

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

While I stand by nothing matters anymore, and nothing will move the needle, if there is anything that could it's trump tweeting at the witness.  The one thing that even his cult members criticize him for is the nasty tweets.  Now he's doing that at a witness who's testifying, feeding into his one weakness among the kool aid drinkers.

The problem is the cult has bought in that this entire exercise is illegitimate, so they don't care what he does or how he does it, because the big bad Dems deserve it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mdmost

mdmost 44059

Posted
Posted (edited)

Jim Jordan is the sniveling character in the 80s movie that betrays the main character and you spend the rest of the movie hoping he gets his just desserts in the cruelest way possible. Like Burke in Aliens. 

Edited by mdmost
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Texas Jeff

Texas Jeff 1999

Posted
Posted (edited)
28 minutes ago, SizzleChest said:

Probably Gohmert.

I think it was Mike "Mr Chairman" Conaway there at the end.

Conaway also complained at the beginning of the second half that the witnesses had paper copies of the slides everyone was seeing so perhaps the witness was working together with the Dems on the committee and wanted to know if they were working together. Schiff replied that the witness's TV was broken so they gave her paper slides since she could not see the slides on TV like the committee could.  Conspiracy averted...

Edited by Texas Jeff
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chad Fuck

Chad Fuck 18136

Posted
Posted
45 minutes ago, tantric superman said:

Seriously.  What is it with that Jordan and his shirt sleeves?

That's pretty disrespectful, unless the man has excema or leprosy.    Why the fuck doesn't he put a jacket on?

He's a man of the people...

 

...who don't know how to dress themselves.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 47219

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Texas Jeff said:

I think it was Mike "Mr Chairman" Conaway there at the end.

Conaway also complained at the beginning of the second half that the witnesses had paper copies of the slides everyone was seeing so perhaps the witness was working together with the Dems on the committee and wanted to know if they were working together. Schiff replied that the witness's TV was broken so they gave her paper slides since she could not see the slides on TV like the committee could.  Conspiracy averted...

Yep, same guy.  He looked absolutely deflated when Schiff told him that the monitor wasn't working so they handed out hard copies.  It was as if he had lost his last chance at a career-defining "gotcha".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13733

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Chad Fuck said:

Criminals think squares are fools, or lying about being square.  

Projection is real.

Exactly. Trump may truly believe that Joe Biden is guilty of putting his son on a company board for a big payout because that is 100% what Trump would do in that position. He can't believe that Biden wouldn't be using the VP position for personal gain.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DixonHur

DixonHur 11960

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Exactly. Trump may truly believe that Joe Biden is guilty of putting his son on a company board for a big payout because that is 100% what Trump would do in that position. He can't believe that Biden wouldn't be using the VP position for personal gain.

Let's say it's true...Biden put his son on the board for personal gains.  That has fuck all to do with the impeachment.  The US doesn't ask foreign governments to investigate US citizens.  Period.

And especially not in the form of bribery.  

But hey, I guess, when you have no real defense you might as well throw some shit at the wall to see if it sticks.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tuco

Tuco 5094

Posted
Posted
33 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Exactly. Trump may truly believe that Joe Biden is guilty of putting his son on a company board for a big payout because that is 100% what Trump would do in that position. He can't believe that Biden wouldn't be using the VP position for personal gain.

Yeah, Republicans pretending to be shocked that the children of the rich and powerful are given plum positions:

spacer.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dnaguy

Dnaguy 12632

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Let's say it's true...Biden put his son on the board for personal gains.  That has fuck all to do with the impeachment.  The US doesn't ask foreign governments to investigate US citizens.  Period.

And especially not in the form of bribery.  

But hey, I guess, when you have no real defense you might as well throw some shit at the wall to see if it sticks.

 

Trump is a useful idiots for his supporters that are smart enough to know this. They don’t care because they’re getting what they want.

His idiot supporters fall for his idiotic defenses / explanations because ‘like attracts like’. They believe him. They somehow 

That’s why his defense is powerful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kevwun

kevwun 16440

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Tuco said:

Yeah, Republicans pretending to be shocked that the children of the rich and powerful are given plum positions:

spacer.png

And they say it with a straight face while the Trump children pretend to be important government officials while making millions off of foreign countries currying favor with their father.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tuco

Tuco 5094

Posted
Posted

And it's not just the Trumps or Bidens.  You could probably go through every kid of every President, VP, Senator, Fortune 500 CEO, etc. for the last 50 years and 80% have gotten shit they didn't deserve.  (The other 20% were just too high.) College entrance.  Internships.  TV shows.  Board of Directors.  It's endemic to our corporate culture that runs completely counter to our pretend value of being a meritocracy.  If Republicans want to open discussions on how to counter it, I say fuck yeah.  And while we are at, we can discuss the estate tax.  Generational wealth is just aristocracy by a different name. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BradInATX

BradInATX 9208

Posted
Posted

 

 

 

 

 

If Republicans want to open discussions on how to counter it, I say fuck yeah.

  

I mean obviously they don't, but I agree 100%. Take all the corruption down. Trump, Biden, Hillary, whoever. Most people on the right side of things would have no issue with prosecuting the Bidens if they did something illegal. Fuck em.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dahobbs

Dahobbs 18326

Posted
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, Tuco said:

And it's not just the Trumps or Bidens.  You could probably go through every kid of every President, VP, Senator, Fortune 500 CEO, etc. for the last 50 years and 80% have gotten shit they didn't deserve.  (The other 20% were just too high.) College entrance.  Internships.  TV shows.  Board of Directors.  It's endemic to our corporate culture that runs completely counter to our pretend value of being a meritocracy.  If Republicans want to open discussions on how to counter it, I say fuck yeah.  And while we are at, we can discuss the estate tax.  Generational wealth is just aristocracy by a different name. 

True. But, and I keep going back to this, Hunter Biden was a fucking Yale Law School graduate with 20 years of experience. Sure, he probably got the gig in part because of who is dad is, but he also was more qualified to be corporate board member than probably 90 95% of board members for companies. Compare that to Trump's kids who have no qualifications for any position above shit shovel-er other than their relationship to Trump.   

Edited by Dahobbs
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mrs Whiggins

Mrs Whiggins 13050

Posted
Posted

There was a lot in the deposition that could have been addressed, perhaps by some of the Reps who didn't ask too many questions but instead focused on the removal of Yovanovitch. I missed a little of Goldman's questioning, but spending some time (almost like Hurd did) on a few key facts in the January through May 20th timeline that were aside from the tweets, Hill article (after which Lutsenko later recanted about the 'do not prosecute' list).

Yovanovitch made it clear that a lot that was going on was outside the State Department's purview, that Giuliani was not an employee, and I thought she did well when she tried to explain that one of her roles is to support American business interests and here were people tiptoeing around saying "we're concerned about corruption," and then not following through the channels to pursue that. We know that it was because Giuliani, Purnas and Furman were up to no good, but I do wish that point was driven home again and again. They were trying to enrich Trump the person, not  America the country. So, of course, they wouldn't want to meet with her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
burntorangebongos

burntorangebongos 10826

Posted
Posted

No wonder they picked Schiff's committee to do this in. The man is very talented. Kudos to him for laying everything out in a masterful way. Great storytelling. If I were his grand kid, I'd be begging grandpa for bed time stories every night. 

Once upon a time in the kingdom, there was this big fat orange ogre......

  • Haha 1
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...