Jump to content

impeachment inquiry hearings thread


henrygandorf

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

There is hardly a better person for whom to assert inherent contempt on the spot than Giuliani.  Dems should arrive prepared to do it.

Whatever the odds are on Rudy going to jail, they aren't high enough.  He's either going to not show up or show up and lie under oath. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, triplehorn said:

On the face of it, it sounds like Mitch is serving an invitation to the House to impeach; that they will cooperate with the impeachment process if the House so desires.  However, Mitch may have just tipped his hand with the "How long we're on it is a whole different matter" remark.  If Trump is going to be formally impeached (he is), best case scenario -today- for GOP is for it happen as soon as possible.  Mitch will then weigh if they can acquit and still survive.  Chances of survival include minimizing time spent having the case prosecuted before them (and the world) and maximizing the time afterwards for people to forget/move on until the election.

If Dems take this 'invitation' as an incentive to move to impeachment faster by keeping it focused and narrow, they run the risk of not letting all the evidence coalesce around the magnitude of Trump's offenses, and increasing odds for Mitch  of survival if they go nuclear and basically trap door it in short order after taking it up.

If I were Dems, I'd use use this narrow issue of the whistleblower report and closely related matters to maintain public focus and to deepen support for impeachment, and let  public understanding marinate in that narrow focus.  It will allow more time needed to root out the wider corners of Trump abuse and criminality. 

The longer it takes formal articles to be presented, the more restricted Mitch's options become.  Dems can't wait too long, obviously, but the sweet spot for time needed to let the courts do their thing, gather evidence, and prosecute is probably a window between February to April 2020.  imo.

Seems like not long ago, Trump was talking about extending his presidency by a year.  He's been too preoccupied with other matters to continue dangling this idea in the public.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

All Watergate references are now insulting and unfair to Watergate.  This is much much worse.

Call it Spillgate. Cause someone at some point in some time with some amount of power or fear is going to spill the beans and everything is going to flow over and around that giant orange pile of obstruction sitting in the Lincoln Bedroom watching Fox.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

 

To me the story about Trump and the Australian PM gives hope that the media will not keep their tunnel vision on the single call to the new Ukrainian president whom had not been a participant in Trump's collaboration with outgoing, corrupt prosecutor Lutsenko and defeated President Poroshenko.

That call was the end point of the conspiracy where Trump is 1) trying to persuade new President Zelensky to keep Lutsenko as prosecutor and 2) try to enlist Zelensky who was surely aware that a US aid package had been halted prior to the call.

What went on prior to Trump's call to Zelensky is the real story to me. I will also remind that the US Ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, was recalled and relieved in the middle of Trump's machinations. I very much hope we hear from her. She is a foreign service professional.

Maybe the dull minds of TV news will see the Australian angle as a clue of the broader story beyond a single phone call.

One thing that helps Trump is the difficulty of keeping Russian and Ukrainian names straight. I have to look them up every time I post about this. If it ends in enko, it's probably the name of an important villain. -Ensky and -ovitch are likely good guys.

This scandal may not persuade many of Trump's constant 40%, but it may galvanize the feelings of the other 60%. I never really know what the American electorate will do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

To me the story about Trump and the Australian PM gives hope that the media will not keep their tunnel vision on the single call to the new Ukrainian president whom had not been a participant in Trump's collaboration with outgoing, corrupt prosecutor Lutsenko and defeated President Poroshenko.

That call was the end point of the conspiracy where Trump is 1) trying to persuade new President Zelensky to keep Lutsenko as prosecutor and 2) try to enlist Zelensky who was surely aware that a US aid package had been halted prior to the call.

What went on prior to Trump's call to Zelensky is the real story to me. I will also remind that the US Ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, was recalled and relieved in the middle of Trump's machinations. I very much hope we hear from her. She is a foreign service professional.

Maybe the dull minds of TV news will see the Australian angle as a clue of the broader story beyond a single phone call.

One thing that helps Trump is the difficulty of keeping Russian and Ukrainian names straight. I have to look them up every time I post about this. If it ends in enko, it's probably the name of an important villain. -Ensky and -ovitch are likely good guys.

a few days ago i compared this to the watergate timeline.  i think you're definitely right.  the way i put it, was that the ukraine call was the break-in.  it was the first time most people knew anything he was up to.  but the "dirty tricks" had been going on for over a year.  same same.  these are not outliers or isolated incidents.

 

9 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

This scandal may not persuade many of Trump's constant 40%, but it may galvanize the feelings of the other 60%. I never really know what the American electorate will do.

galvanize the 60 needs to be the new call to action.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, longhornmatt said:

This is a man who sent pictures of his hands to a journalist for like 20 years after said journalist once wrote that he had short fingers.  Letting things go is not his strong suit.

Yep, Trump is a short-fingered vulgarian. He'll lie about it and obsess over it until the end of his days.  

TrumpsHand-outlineEMBED.jpg

Edited by suddenly shaggy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

it's like he got elected, and someone said, "congratulations, you're the most powerful man in the world."

and in his head, he's like, "you hear that, donald, everyone in the world works for us now."

That’s a really good encapsulation of his worldview.  He doesn’t acknowledge allegiances, sovereignty, or history.  The World should serve him and his interests without questions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

That’s a really good encapsulation of his worldview.  He doesn’t acknowledge allegiances, sovereignty, or history.  The World should serve him and his interests without questions. 

and you're either with him 100% and willing to sell your own soul, or you have ulterior motives, are not credible, and cannot be trusted.  also you probably hate your own country and are actively trying to destroy it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The New Yorker has an article about Barr, and one thing it mentioned that I had forgotten was the Janet Reno had recused herself from the Clinton hearing (since he appointed her) and to show that she served the American people and not the President. Barr is not doing that at all. This is a regime in every sense of the word. Barr is old enough to remember John Mitchell. I hope Barr goes to prison and serves a longer term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The New Yorker has an article about Barr, and one thing it mentioned that I had forgotten was the Janet Reno had recused herself from the Clinton hearing (since he appointed her) and to show that she served the American people and not the President. Barr is not doing that at all. This is a regime in every sense of the word. Barr is old enough to remember John Mitchell. I hope Barr goes to prison and serves a longer term.


Well of course not because the only reason Barr has his current gig is because his predecessor actually did recuse himself from the Russia investigation.

Barr has seen what happens if you put justice and patriotism over Trump.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Bill Barr was easily Trump’s best hire for Trump.  That dude makes gangsters jealous.  

By best, I mean worst for America. 

If only our duly elected representatives spent five seconds on his confirmation looking  into his history covering other executive abuses of power before he took office.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, suddenly shaggy said:

Trump knew about Wikileaks.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/30/trump-mueller-house-democrats-lie-1520156

Trump may have lied to Mueller, House Democrats say

Dems believe the special counsel's grand-jury materials could aid their Ukraine investigation, according to a court filing.

Lol. May have. I may have taken a shit this morning too. Of course he lied to Mueller. Mueller knew he did also. Laid it all out for Congress, but didn't want to be the investigator and jury. Congress didn't do shit.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...