Mega-Thread: Impeachment Proceedings & Inquiry of Trump

[Endus]

McConnell is indicating that he will likely allow BOTH sides to call witnesses. What a novel concept!

As the House did.

And?

[Shadowferal]

As the House did.
And?

The GOP's "friendly" witnesses turned against them. So naturally rather than admit that they'd just as soon call those unfriendly witnesses "theirs" and just claim they weren't allowed to call Hunter Biden...who has zero to do with Trump.

[cubby]

McConnell is indicating that he will likely allow BOTH sides to call witnesses. What a novel concept!

It's amazing how out of touch you are with the reality that surrounds you. Or did you honestly not know that the GOP called witnesses in the House Impeachment?

- - - Updated - - -

The GOP's "friendly" witnesses turned against them. So naturally rather than admit that they'd just as soon call those unfriendly witnesses "theirs" and just claim they weren't allowed to call Hunter Biden...who has zero to do with Trump.

Precisely. The false narrative the Trump/GOP spins is so contrived. Lies stacking on lies. How many different excuses did Cheeto and Co try on? And the Trumpkins just conveniently forget each time.

[Endus]

The GOP's "friendly" witnesses turned against them. So naturally rather than admit that they'd just as soon call those unfriendly witnesses "theirs" and just claim they weren't allowed to call Hunter Biden...who has zero to do with Trump.

Right. The only witnesses that weren't permitted to testify were about the Bidens, who had absolutely no connection to the inquiry and thus shouldn't have been called, or the whistleblower, who rightly had their anonymity protected. And had admitted they only had secondhand information, which had all been backed up by firsthand accounts from the actual witnesses; the whistleblower's relevant testimony was already on record.

[Martymark]

Pelosi's actions are partisan? McConnell's isn;t?

Yeah, they are both hyper-partisan and making a joke of impeachment from opposite directions.

[Bodakane]

Yeah, they are both hyper-partisan and making a joke of impeachment from opposite directions.

Do you feel the reason for impeachment was partisan and not at all justified?

[Edge-]

Yeah, they are both hyper-partisan and making a joke of impeachment from opposite directions.

Again, if this was true then Pelosi should have supported impeachment efforts since the start then, no? At least since Democrats took back the House earlier this year.

But she didn't, because she knew there wasn't a case for it. Up until the Ukraine scandal, which has presented a pretty clear case for impeachment that grows stronger as additional information leaks out.

I won't pretend she's totally non-partisan, because she's not. But she's actually been pretty fair overall with this process, and withholding the articles from the Senate until they figured out rules was part of a calculated political play to pressure Republicans to allow witnesses. She hasn't remotely been as partisan as McConnell, who was openly bragging about how closely they were working with the White House and how he won't be an impartial juror.

[pathora44]

It's amazing how out of touch you are with the reality that surrounds you. Or did you honestly not know that the GOP called witnesses in the House Impeachment?

His/her handlers only gave him/her orders to say that Democrats denied all Republican witnesses. It doesn't matter that it is false it only matters that he/she parrots it ad-nauseam.

[kaid]

As the House did.

And?

I think people forget that the ambassador and sondland were both GOP witnesses. The fact that they agreed with it being quid pro quo and shady is why they pretend that they were called by democrats.

[Martymark]

Do you feel the reason for impeachment was partisan and not at all justified?

My opinion: To justify impeachment? No, I wouldn't consider it a "high crime". Censure would have been fine though.

[Shadowferal]

Sell the office to the not-so-high bidder...

[Belize]

My opinion:

Literally irrelevant when discussing facts.

[Cthulhu 2020]

DocSavage, Texasrules, and many other posters have posted,

"wHaTeVeR hApPeNnEd To TrUmP rUsSiA cOnSpIrAcY?!?!?!?!!!!!!"

about 100 times now.

Each time they are given a very thorough answer about the Mueller report and what it established.

Each time they peace out and decide to stop talking about it when they are overwhelmed by the facts.

Each time, 10-30 pages later, they come back and ask the same question, AGAIN.

I realize it's important for lurkers to see the truth, but I seriously don't get how people don't tire of these shenanigans. They're constantly posting conspiracy theories about Trump when doing this, which is against the forum rules, as is the thing they are doing which is explicitly against the rules, but nobody can call it out, because THAT is also against the rules, and you can report them, but no punishment is doled because "pOlItIcAl OpInIoNs"

At this point, aren't "wHaTeVeR hApPeNnEd To TrUmP rUsSiA cOnSpIrAcY?!?!?!?!!!!!!" posts just off topic at this point? Serious question. I realize Trump's ENTIRE team having communicated heavily with Russia for aid is tangentially related to impeachment, but in the context of just straight up denying anything happened simply because Trump was not removed over it (and thus, in their minds, is completely innocent of all crimes) it feels incredibly off-topic.

[Edge-]

https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/...15352754577409

UHHHHH.....am I reading this right? Because to me, this looks like Trump's personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, hired shady foreign nationals to spy on a US diplomat.

[Paranoid Android]

Among the evidence just produced by the House Intelligence Committee - a note from Parnas saying "get Zalensky to Annonce that the Biden case will be investigated" https://t.co/nswPgc1kmF

https://twitter.com/nicholaswu12/sta...114285574?s=19

Seems much evidence breaking tonight. 1)Parnas and get this...a background actor on The Sapronos and Congressional candidate trying to get rid of Yovanovitch.

Also Rudy was pressing to meet Zalensky?

[Drutt]

My opinion: To justify impeachment? No, I wouldn't consider it a "high crime". Censure would have been fine though.

"High crimes and misdemeanors" is the bar, though. While I would agree Trump's actions with Ukraine don't fit my personal definition of "high crime", it sure as Hell shoots past "misdemeanor" in seriousness.

Here are some examples of "misdemeanors" (C+P job):

Class A:

Assault causing bodily injury
Burglary
DUI with no bodily injury
Resisting arrest
Perjury
Possession of a controlled substance
Unlawful possession of a weapon
Violation of a restraining order

Class B:

Criminal trespass
Certain types of terroristic threats
Certain types of assault
Indecent exposure
Prostitution
Graffiti
Theft of property worth more than $50, but less than $500

Class C:

Disorderly conduct
Certain types of assault
Reckless damage or destruction
Leaving a child unattended in a vehicle
Criminal trespass
Theft of property worth less than $50
Issuing a bad check
Falsely reporting a missing child or person

Trump's actions are objectively worse than a significant number of the above. "Misdemeanor" is a low bar, because the President's actions are supposed to be beyond reproach.

[Masark]

Trump supporter =

That first emoji doesn't belong there.

[Dacien]

How do you interpret this part?

"Paul Manafort and aide Rick Gates, both pleaded guilty to 'conspiracy against the United States' both actively seeking to cultivate a relationship with the Russian government and willing to work with it to acquire damaging information about its political opponents. That willingness included explicitly sharing information with or soliciting information from Russian operatives.”

What page in the Mueller report is that excerpt from?

[Shadowferal]

What page in the Mueller report is that excerpt from?

oh, so they shouldn't have plead guilty...

[Dacien]

oh, so they shouldn't have plead guilty...

I just can't even find the excerpt. It's a voluminous report, so I don't have every detail memorized. Looking for that passage or something similar so I can read the context and perhaps comment on it.

Each time they peace out and decide to stop talking about it when they are overwhelmed by the facts.

I apologize if I can't continue a conversation straight through; I'm running inch and a half rigid conduit at an electrical substation, it sort of takes priority over arguing on Gen-OT.

Edit: I guess this whole Mueller sidebar is way off topic, I'll probably just let it rest. Edge-, Endus, Elegiac, and others have at least acknowledged my points while offering their own, instead of just getting outraged and frustrated and name-calling like we've seen over the past few pages, so I appreciate that.