Jump to content

impeachment inquiry hearings thread


henrygandorf

Recommended Posts

Rumor is that many pubs would vote to impeach if they didn't have to do it publicly.  Basically they'd be able to hide behind plausible deniability for reelection.
And there's no downside because if he were acquitted everyone would know it was the gop who voted to acquit 


Pretty much this. If it fails, it’s effectively the same result as a public vote. Call out every R for voting no. What’re they gonna do in response? Publicly announce that they voted yes? It’s all upside for Ds and (if rumor is to believed) at least a handful of Rs. I don’t love the idea that it gives some of the traitorous bootlickers a free pass, but it still wins the war.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dbeasy said:

 


I feel a lot better about the quality of some of our govt talent after listening to her. I envisioned a bunch of Ricky Perry’s running around.

 

 

2 hours ago, Jiggy-Z said:

Well they are working on it.  Look how many good people have left the Commerce, Agriculture, EPA, Interior, and Treasury depts.

This. Ms. Hill's replacement was Morrison and while he seemed somewhat adept, he pales next to her. Yovanovitch is out, Taylor won't be in his role much longer. More and more of them are being replaced by partisans by design. (To overlook any semblance of criminal activity.) One party, one country, one dear leader for life. I don't think the GOP believes Trump will live all that much longer, but he is useful to their installation of the judicial biases, and all the other irons they have in the fire. Graham is now using the DOJ as his own investigative unit to go after political rivals, Miller is using the DHS as his own unit to implement his Aryan nation. Mnuchin is up to Lord knows what but it's probably something even I don't want to know. Once the Brad Parscale/Zuckerburg 2020 elections are out of the way, as another Emperor put it:

"Once more the Sith will rule the galaxy, and we shall have peace."

Except we won't. Darth Sidious was wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Ronald Reagan broke the law as president long before Donald Trump did.

 

9 minutes ago, horncyclist said:

But it wasn't out there for all to see and the country said "okay, cool." This is much different. 

But Ed Meese and Bill Barr supported both, so there's that. The Federalists will continue to support Trump because he has enabled them to get what they want. We will be paying for this long past my time on earth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, SquishMitten said:

 


Pretty much this. If it fails, it’s effectively the same result as a public vote. Call out every R for voting no. What’re they gonna do in response? Publicly announce that they voted yes? It’s all upside for Ds and (if rumor is to believed) at least a handful of Rs. I don’t love the idea that it gives some of the traitorous bootlickers a free pass, but it still wins the war.

 

A bunch of Nazi scientists helped us build the bomb...sometimes you have to make a deal with the devil

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

Pssssssst - The Republicans have always been like this. They just used to mask it with joviality like Reagan & Bush the Second or gravitas like Bush the First and they used to not say the quiet parts out loud in mixed company.


Also,

 

I get that.  I am a follower of the work of David Cay Johnson. His work is pretty broad but he deals mostly with tax and fraud issues.  As such, back in the 80s he was working on the NJ casino business where he first me DJ and has since written a couple of books on him and has become rather disturbed at our propensity for fascist.  Nevertheless, most of his work is based on scouring the public record and following actual actions rather than the palace intrigue.  Being a CPA and a business owner, I dig the cut of his jib, as it were. 

I was watching one of his lectures just last night and one of the questions after his lecture involved  the long term plight of the Republican party (first cited back in the early 70s) which  points out the the increasing diversity of of the populace and the rural flight to the major metropolitan areas be it in the burbs or city limits which in turn would bite into the traditional Republican voting base.

His answer was interesting. He told a story about a candid conversation he had with some republicans at a party he was invited to where he first remarked that heir scotch was much better than his.  But this very question about adaptation was raised and the answer was simply from a factual point of view that they would not change.  What I found most interesting is that, according to his telling, his republican friend all but admitted some pretty disturbing deep underlying racist issues, which I would have thought would have been lower on the priorities list.  Keep in mind also, that this conversation took place in upstate New York and not in Alabama.

I am sure that I am not giving justice the tale, but I would encourage the Surl to check out his work, take what is valuable and meaningful and and ask some serious questions about the rest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Republican party has no policy positions or moral standards...other than if it benefits Donald Trump, then it is a position and a moral standard which has to be backed up.
The only consistent Republican policy I have seen in my 40 years of following politics and policy is that the very wealthy are are not nearly wealthy enough.  Not abortion, not fiscal responsibility, not even real entrepreneurial business.


That’s my point. They’ve always talked about, for example, fiscal responsibility and family values going way back in time but haven’t acted according to those values. It took awhile to figure that out.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm having trouble managing my hatred.

giphy.gif

9D9K.gif

ccdfw.gif?w=674&h=378

travis-taxi-driver-ifwdrm.gif?resize=500

 

Adam Schiff speaks my soul. I'm not a great citizen. I'm not a great man. I haven't done that much for my country.

But I am a man, and the notion of duty is not alien to me. I don't like belonging to a society where shamelessness is becoming the norm. Where you have to explain duty. Where Jim Jeffords and Devin Nunez are taken seriously. It's insane. We've elevated a crotch fungus to the highest office in the land, and people in positions to be taken seriously celebrate him.

Of course, this is the Pollyanna view point. It's not just partisan politics on the right. It's covering up a vast criminal conspiracy conducted by those sworn to uphold the Constitution of the US. We watch crooks just trying to keep the light pointed at anything but themselves.

I won't go Travis Bickle. But I feel Travis Bickle. WTF?

 

 

 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sbbruin said:

Not sure I am a Republican anymore.  Not this version of it anyway.

i'm 100% certain i'm not a republican anymore and i'm ashamed that i ever was. it was a complete farce. whatever you thought the party was, or might still hold out hope that it is, was complete and utter horse shit.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

I'm having trouble managing my hatred.

giphy.gif

9D9K.gif

ccdfw.gif?w=674&h=378

travis-taxi-driver-ifwdrm.gif?resize=500

 

Adam Schiff speaks my soul. I'm not a great citizen. I'm not a great man. I haven't done that much for my country.

But I am a man, and the notion of duty is not alien to me. I don't like belonging to a society where shamelessness is becoming the norm. Where you have to explain duty. Where Jim Jeffords and Devin Nunez are taken seriously. It's insane. We've elevated a crotch fungus to the highest office in the land, and people in positions to be taken seriously celebrate him.

Of course, this is the Pollyanna view point. It's not just partisan politics on the right. It's covering up a vast criminal conspiracy conducted by those sworn to uphold the Constitution of the US. We watch crooks just trying to keep the light pointed at anything but themselves.

I won't go Travis Bickle. But I feel Travis Bickle. WTF?

 

 

 

You talkin' to me?  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Jiggy-Z said:

I get that.  I am a follower of the work of David Cay Johnson. His work is pretty broad but he deals mostly with tax and fraud issues.  As such, back in the 80s he was working on the NJ casino business where he first me DJ and has since written a couple of books on him and has become rather disturbed at our propensity for fascist.  Nevertheless, most of his work is based on scouring the public record and following actual actions rather than the palace intrigue.  Being a CPA and a business owner, I dig the cut of his jib, as it were. 

I was watching one of his lectures just last night and one of the questions after his lecture involved  the long term plight of the Republican party (first cited back in the early 70s) which  points out the the increasing diversity of of the populace and the rural flight to the major metropolitan areas be it in the burbs or city limits which in turn would bite into the traditional Republican voting base.

His answer was interesting. He told a story about a candid conversation he had with some republicans at a party he was invited to where he first remarked that heir scotch was much better than his.  But this very question about adaptation was raised and the answer was simply from a factual point of view that they would not change.  What I found most interesting is that, according to his telling, his republican friend all but admitted some pretty disturbing deep underlying racist issues, which I would have thought would have been lower on the priorities list.  Keep in mind also, that this conversation took place in upstate New York and not in Alabama.

I am sure that I am not giving justice the tale, but I would encourage the Surl to check out his work, take what is valuable and meaningful and and ask some serious questions about the rest.

Oh! Thank you for the author reference. I already have fmr Admiral McRaven's book in my reading queue thanks to a poster here on Surly, but I will add this to it. I have found some of the ways in which Trump hides/shelters his $$ to be intriguing. His creation of (I don't know terminology very well so excuse the errors I'm about to make) LLCs or holding companies or whatever who he then loans money to from another one of his companies. It's probably legal(?) but seems shady and rather tax avoidancy to my inexperienced eyes. One of the ones floating around the net of ideas was for something like $50 million. So, again, thanks for the tip on a potential good read.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

i'm 100% certain i'm not a republican anymore and i'm ashamed that i ever was. it was a complete farce. whatever you thought the party was, or might still hold out hope that it is, was complete and utter horse shit.

I am in the same boat.

Ronny was a God to me.  Although, at the time he was first elected President, I was only in 8th grade and by November of '84 I was not yet able to vote. I was young impressionable and manipulated by my parents.

But more than that, at the time, we had just gotten out of 'nam ('75), had been through 2 gas shortages, 20% interest rates, hostages in Iran, and Manhattan was burning nightly.  Carter was a good guy and a smart guy but seemed powerless in light of the conditions.

Reagan came along with his slick speech, down home letters,  and his balanced California budget, and it seemed like the second coming of FDR except as a Republican.

Really, without saying it, his slogan was MAGA. Except that he was actually somewhat competent, although lazy, and despite his other flaws, was a leader. His administrations still reverberate today for better or worse. 

So aside from the "deplorables" , there is still a sizable number of people my age and mostly older, that cannot shake this influence. It is like a religion they were taught as children that still holds sway over them.  Despite having the entirety of world history at their fingertips and more than enough time to explore they chose to be lazy and have their thoughts dictated to them.  

 

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

Oh! Thank you for the author reference. I already have fmr Admiral McRaven's book in my reading queue thanks to a poster here on Surly, but I will add this to it. I have found some of the ways in which Trump hides/shelters his $$ to be intriguing. His creation of (I don't know terminology very well so excuse the errors I'm about to make) LLCs or holding companies or whatever who he then loans money to from another one of his companies. It's probably legal(?) but seems shady and rather tax avoidancy to my inexperienced eyes. One of the ones floating around the net of ideas was for something like $50 million. So, again, thanks for the tip on a potential good read.

 

DJ does all of that stuff, but that is legit.  What is not legit is his straight out money laundering. My frustration and DCJ's is that all of this was known and documented in the public record but hardly touched on by the press prior to 2016. It was a massive failing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And Chris Cuomo, off all people, blows David Holmes testimony out of the water.  Granted he did it in the most Fredo way possible.

https://thefederalist.com/2019/11/21/watch-cnns-chris-cuomo-accidentally-prove-trump-right-about-overheard-phone-call/

Watch CNN’s Chris Cuomo Accidentally Prove Trump Right About Overheard Phone Call
NOVEMBER 21, 2019 By Chrissy Clark
CNN Anchor Chris Cuomo forced his super panel of pundits and his audience to endure a segment of cringeworthy live television on Thursday, all for the sake of arguing with a Trump tweet.

During the impeachment hearings, David Holmes, an aide to diplomat Bill Taylor claims he overheard a phone conversation between European Union Ambassador Gordon Sonland and President Trump.

In his testimony, Holmes explained how during a dinner with Ambassador Sondland and two other, Sondland placed a call to Trump. Holmes claims he overheard the phone conversation because the two spoke loudly, despite the phone call not being on speakerphone.

“While Ambassador Sondland’s phone was not on speakerphone, I could hear the President’s voice through the earpiece of the phone. The President’s voice was very loud and recognizable, and Ambassador Sondland held the phone away from his ear for a period of time, presumably because of the loud volume,” Holmes said.

Trump does not believe Holmes overheard the depth of his conversation with Sondland, he claims he’s never been able to hear a phone conversation if it wasn’t on speakerphone.

“Never have I been watching a person making a call, which was not on speakerphone, and been able to hear or understand a conversation. I’ve even tried, but to no avail. Try it live!” the president tweeted.

While on live TV, CNN’s Chris Cuomo tried to prove a person can hear a conversation on another person’s cell phone without being on speakerphone.

Cuomo called his mother and tried to have Dana Bash see if she could overhear the conversation. As Cuomo and Bash struggled to hear, Cuomo turned on speakerphone.

“Can you just say hello? Mom? She probably can’t hear me. Mom, can you hear me? Mom? Say hello to Dana Bash,” Cuomo said.

Cuomo’s entire segment proved Trump’s point that it is difficult to overhear a call when it’s not on speakerphone. Thank you CNN, for this wonderful reporting.

  • Fuck You 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And calling Republicanism a “religion” is insightful, in the sense that the label itself defines a central part of many people’s’ identities and is thus very difficult to abandon even after any substantive agreement has waned.  Those of you who have found the intellectual courage to abandon that identity on principle, and to recognize your loyalty to a higher identity (American, human being, non-criminal, non-hypocrite, or whatever the case may be) should be proud of yourselves.  It ain’t easy to give up part of your identity, even when it’s clearly for the best.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, EMAWesome said:

And Chris Cuomo, off all people, blows David Holmes testimony out of the water.  Granted he did it in the most Fredo way possible.

https://thefederalist.com/2019/11/21/watch-cnns-chris-cuomo-accidentally-prove-trump-right-about-overheard-phone-call/

 

 

 

spacer.png

 

Eta - we've all heard conversations through other's phones, so fuck off you troll 

Edited by Doc Sam Beckett
Cholas 4 life
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Schiff's closing today. Probably posted up thread but reposting because this should be a rallying cry through 2020. Just don't forget that Trump is not the disease, just a symptom. You need to get rid of whatever rot allowed such corruption to come to power. We are better than that.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RomaVicta said:

I'm having trouble managing my hatred.

giphy.gif

9D9K.gif

ccdfw.gif?w=674&h=378

travis-taxi-driver-ifwdrm.gif?resize=500

 

Adam Schiff speaks my soul. I'mI not a great citizen. I'm not a great man. I haven't done that much for my country.

But I am a man, and the notion of duty is not alien to me. I don't like belonging to a society where shamelessness is becoming the norm. Where you have to explain duty. Where Jim Jeffords and Devin Nunez are taken seriously. It's insane. We've elevated a crotch fungus to the highest office in the land, and people in positions to be taken seriously celebrate him.

Of course, this is the Pollyanna view point. It's not just partisan politics on the right. It's covering up a vast criminal conspiracy conducted by those sworn to uphold the Constitution of the US. We watch crooks just trying to keep the light pointed at anything but themselves.

I won't go Travis Bickle. But I feel Travis Bickle. WTF?

 

 

 

You are not crazy. You are not alone.

Abusive behavior has been normalized. The President tweet-denigrated a witness as she testified at his impeachment hearing, for christsake. 

The good news? That you still possess principles and can see the naked emperor.  That's the bad news too, because you've seen Donald Trump nude and you can't unsee it.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, EMAWesome said:

And Chris Cuomo, off all people, blows David Holmes testimony out of the water.  Granted he did it in the most Fredo way possible.

https://thefederalist.com/2019/11/21/watch-cnns-chris-cuomo-accidentally-prove-trump-right-about-overheard-phone-call/

 

 

So if a criminal commits a crime in the forest and nobody hears it, it’s not a crime!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DixonHur said:

Rumor is that many pubs would vote to impeach if they didn't have to do it publicly.  Basically they'd be able to hide behind plausible deniability for reelection.

And there's no downside because if he were acquitted everyone would know it was the gop who voted to acquit 

And as soon as they convict him he's no longer a thread.  My guess is a secret vote = the knives are out. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And Chris Cuomo, off all people, blows David Holmes testimony out of the water.  Granted he did it in the most Fredo way possible.
https://thefederalist.com/2019/11/21/watch-cnns-chris-cuomo-accidentally-prove-trump-right-about-overheard-phone-call/


Watch CNN’s Chris Cuomo Accidentally Prove Trump Right About Overheard Phone Call
NOVEMBER 21, 2019 By Chrissy Clark
CNN Anchor Chris Cuomo forced his super panel of pundits and his audience to endure a segment of cringeworthy live television on Thursday, all for the sake of arguing with a Trump tweet.
During the impeachment hearings, David Holmes, an aide to diplomat Bill Taylor claims he overheard a phone conversation between European Union Ambassador Gordon Sonland and President Trump.
In his testimony, Holmes explained how during a dinner with Ambassador Sondland and two other, Sondland placed a call to Trump. Holmes claims he overheard the phone conversation because the two spoke loudly, despite the phone call not being on speakerphone.
“While Ambassador Sondland’s phone was not on speakerphone, I could hear the President’s voice through the earpiece of the phone. The President’s voice was very loud and recognizable, and Ambassador Sondland held the phone away from his ear for a period of time, presumably because of the loud volume,” Holmes said.
Trump does not believe Holmes overheard the depth of his conversation with Sondland, he claims he’s never been able to hear a phone conversation if it wasn’t on speakerphone.
“Never have I been watching a person making a call, which was not on speakerphone, and been able to hear or understand a conversation. I’ve even tried, but to no avail. Try it live!” the president tweeted.
While on live TV, CNN’s Chris Cuomo tried to prove a person can hear a conversation on another person’s cell phone without being on speakerphone.
Cuomo called his mother and tried to have Dana Bash see if she could overhear the conversation. As Cuomo and Bash struggled to hear, Cuomo turned on speakerphone.
“Can you just say hello? Mom? She probably can’t hear me. Mom, can you hear me? Mom? Say hello to Dana Bash,” Cuomo said.
Cuomo’s entire segment proved Trump’s point that it is difficult to overhear a call when it’s not on speakerphone. Thank you CNN, for this wonderful reporting.


He should have called some of my wife’s friends. Even the camera operators would have been able to hear.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, horncyclist said:

Schiff's closing today. Probably posted up thread but reposting because this should be a rallying cry through 2020. Just don't forget that Trump is not the disease, just a symptom. You need to get rid of whatever rot allowed such corruption to come to power. We are better than that.

 

Schiff is my Congressman, and I'm proud to have him as my representative.

He's a a perfect representation of "We are better than that," but unfortunately around 40% of this country isn't, due to ignorance, misguided ways, or plain selfish corruption.

But Democrats seem to be bringing knives to a gun fight.  Republicans are willing to do whatever is necessary, including bringing in a foreign nation to assist them in their agenda and power grab. Lying, cheating, gerrymandering - whatever the fuck it takes.

Yet Shiff's final response is, "We are better than that."  Yeah I get it's a nice nod to Cummings, but Schiff is trying to appeal to a vision that seems a little out of reach right now.  

I'm leaning toward bringing a Howitzer to the gun fight from here out.  Not sure how to do it, but it's time.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Mach 1 said:

Schiff is my Congressman, and I'm proud to have him as my representative.

He's a a perfect representation of "We are better than that," but unfortunately around 40% of this country isn't, due to ignorance, misguided ways, or plain selfish corruption.

But Democrats seem to be bringing knives to a gun fight.  Republicans are willing to do whatever is necessary, including bringing in a foreign nation to assist them in their agenda and power grab. Lying, cheating, gerrymandering - whatever the fuck it takes.

Yet Shiff's final response is, "We are better than that."  Yeah I get it's a nice nod to Cummings, but Schiff is trying to appeal to a vision that seems a little out of reach right now.  

I'm leaning toward bringing a Howitzer to the gun fight from here out.  Not sure how to do it, but it's time.

Chemical and biological warfare is under-rated. While unethical, when you have as many anti-vaxxers as does the GOP and then Rep Swalwell aiding the Inquiry, play to your strengths and fight dirty and smelly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Mach 1 said:

Schiff is my Congressman, and I'm proud to have him as my representative.

He's a a perfect representation of "We are better than that," but unfortunately around 40% of this country isn't, due to ignorance, misguided ways, or plain selfish corruption.

But Democrats seem to be bringing knives to a gun fight.  Republicans are willing to do whatever is necessary, including bringing in a foreign nation to assist them in their agenda and power grab. Lying, cheating, gerrymandering - whatever the fuck it takes.

Yet Shiff's final response is, "We are better than that."  Yeah I get it's a nice nod to Cummings, but Schiff is trying to appeal to a vision that seems a little out of reach right now.  

I'm leaning toward bringing a Howitzer to the gun fight from here out.  Not sure how to do it, but it's time.

This poor motherfucker. No way could he possibly envision the environment he's in right now. He's been thrust into a position where he is genuinely hated by ~35% of the population just for being in the position he's in. They would kill him if they could. He's handled it amazingly well, and hasn't needed to stoop to the level of the GOP to make his points. 

God damn, can you imagine these proceedings if the roles were reversed and Donald was a Dem? Would they have the decorum of Schiff orrrrr

spacer.png

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe you know the answer to that @Doc Sam Beckett

This is the same group that has been lying about the “rules” prior to the inquiry even beginning.

Nunes sat during all the depositions knowing he and others could ask questions, knowing that the depositions weren’t secret but were closed in part to keep it from becoming more of a circus than it already was, a circus that was of his and his colleagues own making. That he sat there smug and fatuous and sanctimonious while his conniving brain was seared with the images of his meetings with Lev and Igor and Rudy and Ron and whatever other oligarchs or consigliere of oligarchs he consorted with on his tour of Ukraine and Europe that “blew up” as Fiona Hill testified today is not hearsay or circumstantial; it is evidentiary proof that the Republican Congresspeople would behave like the jackals they are. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The blind Senate vote will not work.  Trump would never honor it.  And I don't trust Republicans to vote to remove anyway.  That plausible deniability thing cuts both ways.

Plus, those who do the right thing and those who don't deserve to have their names and votes recorded in history.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...