Jump to content

impeachment inquiry hearings thread

henrygandorf

By henrygandorf
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • 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

hayden_horn

hayden_horn 11,360

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Red Five said:


I wasn’t watching at that point. Was that done on purpose so they could later spew this “we’re being silenced!” bullshit?

yes.

sidenote, current cnn chryon - "aide testifies eu ambassador told trump the ukranian president 'loves your ass'"

what a time to be alive.

then it switches to "eu ambassador said trump did not 'give a shit about ukraine'"

STRAIGHT INTO MY VEINS oooooooohhhhhhhhhhhhh shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiittttttttttt

Edited by hayden_horn
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mrs Whiggins

Mrs Whiggins 13,049

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

ouch

I agree with whomever stated that this was a ploy to get their "victim plight" sprayed across the FoxNews/OANN channels. Most folks simply do not have enough skepticism or want to take a little time to learn how the process works or even how it was changed by the GOP when they were in the majority. When some of the C-Span callers phoned in, it was apparent they do not understand or missed the instructions at the beginning and believed that the Republicans were being stifled. They were when they were out of order, but if anyone paid attention, they could see that when they had time to question, there was very little questioning.

I sure would be driving home the fact that the GOP is trying to manipulate the public through the media when the rules are clear and if the GOP doesn't understand the rules they created and after them being explained multiple times, then would they like one of those big posters on a stand?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
deech

deech 2,251

Posted
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

Without a doubt, and everyone knows and has been laughing at the attempt. She's getting shredded in that tweet. 

Especially since as soon as it happened - someone tweeted they all know the rules this is bullshit this is just a ploy using a female on the committee to do it andfor Fox News to run stories about. 

Then within five minutes it was up on Fox News.

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

Mrs Whiggins 13,049

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, deech said:

So two days into the impeachment hearings we have Trump live tweeting a witness and these gems.  At some point, this shit has to matter to Trump's base a little.

Won't move the needle. They are a cult and if I had a bright red GOP Kool-Aid stand they would pay $5  a cup and pay five more for a Trump straw to slurp it down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
deech

deech 2,251

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, 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.

Exactly.  You take the vote.  You force every R to side on the side of lawlessness.  Then you target every R that voted on the side of the abdication of their constitutional duties.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12,271

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, deech said:

Exactly.  You take the vote.  You force every R to side on the side of lawlessness.  Then you target every R that voted on the side of the abdication of their constitutional duties.

This is exactly the point. Make those fuckers go on record. You absolutely know that the majority of republican senators think trump is just as big of a piece of shit as we do. This aint the house republicans who are forced to suck on trump taint or they’re gone. Make the senators vote. They know history will judge them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Junior Miller

Junior Miller 1,502

Posted
Posted
43 minutes ago, burntorangebongos said:

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. 

bill nye nod GIF

44 minutes ago, burntorangebongos said:

If I were his grand kid, I'd be begging grandpa for bed time stories every night. 

disgusted bruce willis GIF

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Junior Miller

Junior Miller 1,502

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, deech said:

So two days into the impeachment hearings we have Trump live tweeting a witness and these gems.  At some point, this shit has to matter to Trump's base a little.

It would if they were any kind of rational, but they aren't because Fox news and social media propaganda have falsely programmed them to believe Democrat = take your guns away, turn your sons gay, give your job and all your tax money to foreigners. 

When in reality none of the first two have happened and it's republicans and have always been republicans who give your jobs to foreigners and take your tax money and give it away to the top 1 percent. 

It sounds crazy and is absolutely crazy but all this right now is nothing more than a fight for the dumbest, slowest, most disinterested idiots in small little podunk swing states that control the future of all of us more well established and educated. We already see how corrupt and horrible trump/republicans are and we're voting, and the hardcore brainwashed trumpers will never listen to anything rational or real because of the reason I posted above. It's all down somehow reaching people so dumb and/or disinterested they pay attention to nothing and do not care about the future of their own country. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28,700

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, burntorangebongos said:

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......

Not that one, grandpa, that one gives me nightmares. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12,271

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, Ted Lange said:

 

 

The worst part about it for Trump is this:

She speaks the truth.

And he knows it.

And because of his disease, his mind won’t allow him to accept it.

And will lash out accordingly, in order to protect itself.

Not much different than a drug addict. The drug addicted mind will do whatever it takes to fool the body to keep taking the drugs it wants, and in fact needs. 

That’s our president. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 104,465

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, JimmyJames said:

The worst part about it for Trump is this:

She speaks the truth.

And he knows it.

And because of his disease, his mind won’t allow him to accept it.

And will lash out accordingly, in order to protect itself.

Not much different than a drug addict. The drug addicted mind will do whatever it takes to fool the body to keep taking the drugs it wants, and in fact needs. 

That’s our president. 

And here's the thing -- a creature like that is one of stimulus-response.  If you want him to do a certain thing, you just provide the correct stimulus, and it will elicit the intended response.  Just like pushing the gas or the brakes, you can get him to do what you want with just the right input.

She just pushed the gas pedal.  He can't help but rev his engine of idiocy.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SquishMitten

SquishMitten 10,395

Posted
Posted
Won't move the needle. They are a cult and if I had a bright red GOP Kool-Aid stand they would pay $5  a cup and pay five more for a Trump straw to slurp it down.


Hold up a minute. Has anybody set up a Make Kool-Aid Great Again stand at a Trump rally? Seems like there’s an enormous amount of hilarious income to be made
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12,271

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

I'm thinking Sondland's memory might be jogged again over the weekend.  Especially in light of what just happened to Stone.

I’m not Sondland, but he seems to be guy with plenty of money. So if I was, I would paying for, and huddling with, a whole bevy of first rate white shoe DC criminal lawyers as to how to handle these next steps. And I would listen to whatever the fuck it is they had to say, and act accordingly. 

So unless we have some white shoe criminal defense DC lawyer on surly, I have no idea what to expect from the guy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29,174

Posted
  • Author
Posted

ok, i missed almost the entire day working instead of pretending to work, which is annoying.  now i'm catching up on clips, cnn, tweets, and this thread.  and one thing i keep hearing from trump, from gop congressmen - is how unfair (still) the process is.  yeah yeah.  but then they keep saying "we're not even allowed to call our own witnesses."

on its surface, it's just more of the same, but the witness part caught me as a little interesting/sad/entertaining, i can't decide.  they talk about having an attorney, and due process - so obviously they're trying to frame this like a criminal trial, because the olds watch fox news and procedurals on cbs.  i get it.

but the accusation is this: did donald trump hold up congressionally approved funds to further his own political interests? 

the other stuff is just background noise (although pretty impeachable noise).  so far, the 3 witnesses (and several more yet to testify publicly) have painted a picture of this ^^ happening.  whether it was done through rudy, or who spoke directly to whom, or whatever.  that sentence is the thesis, and the witnesses so far have supported the thesis, as plans go.  so if the gop is wanting so badly to call witnesses, one would think their witnesses would contradict the thesis, and refute the testimony that we've already heard, right?  i mean, that's what "rebuttal witnesses" are, correct?  or witnesses for the defense?  i'm no lawyer, clearly.

so who do they want to call to refute this evidence?  so far i've heard "the whistleblower" and "hunter biden."  ok.  well, the whistleblower probably won't help their case much, considering it was his report that started this, and has since been deemed credible, corroborated, and urgent (repeatedly, and by many).  so then hunter biden.  ok.  if they were to call hunter biden, is he going to testify that trump didn't withhold aid to ukraine, and why?  obviously they would attack him personally and talk about how unqualified he was to sit on some board.  essentially, he is a "but obama" witness, and not much else.  he has zero knowledge of the charge, and i would say there's a decent chance he would actually hurt their case on the stand.

so the gop bitches about hearsay, but won't let bolton, mulvaney, rudy, or pompeo testify.  trump bitches about facing his accuser, but god knows he'll never testify to defend himself.  they complain that they can't call their own witnesses, but the only witness who was remotely on their side (sondlond) has since walked back the meat of his statement.  i haven't heard anyone else's name who falls under that category.  (i would gladly trade hunter and the whistleblower for bolton and mulvaney.)

the other thing i've heard all day is "a president is allowed to hire and fire whomever he wants for no reason".  yeah, no fucking duh.  this isn't a wrongful termination suit.  i really would like to see the following exchange take place if some gop stooge was dumb enough to go on cuomo or something:

cnn - is the president allowed to hire whomever he wants?

gop - yes.

cnn - even without a reason?

gop - yes.

cnn - is the president allowed to fire whomever he wants?

gop - yes.

cnn - even without a reason?

gop - yes.

cnn - is the president allowed to withhold aid to a foreign country to further his own political interests?

 

bribery, intimidation, scare-tactics, smearing, hearsay, whistleblower, schiff, biden - none of it matters.  stick to the fucking thesis.  keep your eye on the ball.  ukranians were dying while trump waited for an announcement he thought would help him stay president longer.  that's it and that's all.

 

tl; dr - muledick. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12,271

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

ok, i missed almost the entire day working instead of pretending to work, which is annoying.  now i'm catching up on clips, cnn, tweets, and this thread.  and one thing i keep hearing from trump, from gop congressmen - is how unfair (still) the process is.  yeah yeah.  but then they keep saying "we're not even allowed to call our own witnesses."

on its surface, it's just more of the same, but the witness part caught me as a little interesting/sad/entertaining, i can't decide.  they talk about having an attorney, and due process - so obviously they're trying to frame this like a criminal trial, because the olds watch fox news and procedurals on cbs.  i get it.

but the accusation is this: did donald trump hold up congressionally approved funds to further his own political interests? 

the other stuff is just background noise (although pretty impeachable noise).  so far, the 3 witnesses (and several more yet to testify publicly) have painted a picture of this ^^ happening.  whether it was done through rudy, or who spoke directly to whom, or whatever.  that sentence is the thesis, and the witnesses so far have supported the thesis, as plans go.  so if the gop is wanting so badly to call witnesses, one would think their witnesses would contradict the thesis, and refute the testimony that we've already heard, right?  i mean, that's what "rebuttal witnesses" are, correct?  or witnesses for the defense?  i'm no lawyer, clearly.

so who do they want to call to refute this evidence?  so far i've heard "the whistleblower" and "hunter biden."  ok.  well, the whistleblower probably won't help their case much, considering it was his report that started this, and has since been deemed credible, corroborated, and urgent (repeatedly, and by many).  so then hunter biden.  ok.  if they were to call hunter biden, is he going to testify that trump didn't withhold aid to ukraine, and why?  obviously they would attack him personally and talk about how unqualified he was to sit on some board.  essentially, he is a "but obama" witness, and not much else.  he has zero knowledge of the charge, and i would say there's a decent chance he would actually hurt their case on the stand.

so the gop bitches about hearsay, but won't let bolton, mulvaney, rudy, or pompeo testify.  trump bitches about facing his accuser, but god knows he'll never testify to defend himself.  they complain that they can't call their own witnesses, but the only witness who was remotely on their side (sondlond) has since walked back the meat of his statement.  i haven't heard anyone else's name who falls under that category.  (i would gladly trade hunter and the whistleblower for bolton and mulvaney.)

the other thing i've heard all day is "a president is allowed to hire and fire whomever he wants for no reason".  yeah, no fucking duh.  this isn't a wrongful termination suit.  i really would like to see the following exchange take place if some gop stooge was dumb enough to go on cuomo or something:

cnn - is the president allowed to hire whomever he wants?

gop - yes.

cnn - even without a reason?

gop - yes.

cnn - is the president allowed to fire whomever he wants?

gop - yes.

cnn - even without a reason?

gop - yes.

cnn - is the president allowed to withhold aid to a foreign country to further his own political interests?

 

bribery, intimidation, scare-tactics, smearing, hearsay, whistleblower, schiff, biden - none of it matters.  stick to the fucking thesis.  keep your eye on the ball.  ukranians were dying while trump waited for an announcement he thought would help him stay president longer.  that's it and that's all.

 

tl; dr - muledick. 

All you need to know is trump tweeted at a very credible witness while she was testifying in an attempt to intimidate her. For the rest of the non surly, non Fox News peeps that have any way to be swayed, that’s all that really matters.

Whether that really effects anything remains to be seen, but Trump did himself no favors by ratcheting up the stakes and interest in the “nothingburger” proceedings by live tweeting during it. He himself is making the whole thing important. He’s making these proceedings must see tv all by himself. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eastwood

Eastwood 4,394

Posted
Posted
And here's the thing -- a creature like that is one of stimulus-response.  If you want him to do a certain thing, you just provide the correct stimulus, and it will elicit the intended response.  Just like pushing the gas or the brakes, you can get him to do what you want with just the right input.
She just pushed the gas pedal.  He can't help but rev his engine of idiocy.
It's also part of why the impeachment is a good idea. Apply and hold enough pressure and his lid will pop. Either he'll self incriminate at the most basic and irrefutable level or he'll do something that is universally hated. My grandparents, who are solidly in the pro-Trump demographic, thought he was an absolute Yankee clown from NY who didn't care about anything except himself. Becoming the Republican nominee running against Hillary seemed to have magically erased all of that, but he may just remind the Rs that he's still the same doofus from NY that rural Texas used to make fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29,174

Posted
  • Author
Posted
13 minutes ago, Eastwood said:

It's also part of why the impeachment is a good idea. Apply and hold enough pressure and his lid will pop. Either he'll self incriminate at the most basic and irrefutable level 

"i think he wants to say it.  i think he's pissed off he has to hide from us, i think he wants to say he made a command decision and that's the end of it."

similar to the "just look at the tower logs", this whole episode has a few good men parallels everywhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13,391

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, JimmyJames said:

I’m not Sondland, but he seems to be guy with plenty of money. So if I was, I would paying for, and huddling with, a whole bevy of first rate white shoe DC criminal lawyers as to how to handle these next steps. And I would listen to whatever the fuck it is they had to say, and act accordingly. 

So unless we have some white shoe criminal defense DC lawyer on surly, I have no idea what to expect from the guy. 

Holmes is forcing Sondland to remember. We are talking about phone calls with the presidents 2 months ago, not random phone calls from non-important people years ago.  Sondland will either have to recall or admit that he’s a moron.  And since Sondland has money, the biggest threat to him is jail time not trump tweets. If he claims he doesn’t remember, any jury will believe he’s lying.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Junior Miller

Junior Miller 1,502

Posted
Posted
38 minutes ago, horncyclist said:

So the facts are all there. This is done. Now 53 republicans decide if we have a Constitution or not. Or I guess 20 really. And probably fewer than that because if a few key Senators stand up, others will follow. 

What seems likely to me is that the politicians involved in this, especially on the republican side, are so used to violating the Constitution and using the office solely to enrich themselves that the idea of the President doing it seems normal to them. It's like we've reached a level of corruption so heinous that the corrupt officials don't even realize that their actions are corrupt anymore because they've been allowed to do them with impunity for so long. 

  • Like 2
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...