Mega-Thread: Impeachment Proceedings & Inquiry of Trump

[Edge-]

Can't trust really either side since their side of the story is just more dirty politics and deflection.

Trust the whistleblower and the IC IG, then. Who Democrats are largely echoing, actually.

I read the official transcript and I don't see anything that is as damning as the democrats want to believe.

Again, it's not a transcript. It's based off of notes, and not a word for word readout.

And he literally asked a foreign leader to look into a political opponent as a favor to him. That's not legal. I'm not sure how you missed that part.

Pushing this impeachment nonsense is going to do nothing but get Donald reelected.

Because it backfired for Republicans so hard when they failed to impeach Clinton that...they won the next election.

Is that what this country wants?

Holding leaders accountable should they violate the law? Yes, absolutely.

[TexasRules]

Asking a foreign country to interfere in the election is 100% ok with you then?

The democrats did it in 2016 and you are okay with it, Feel free to link me where you said you weren't okay with it.

[Ripster42]

McConnell didn’t control the senate until January 2015. Ginsberg should have been retired in 2013, just after Obama’s re-election.

He still controlled his caucus. Dems had their 60 votes for a few months total during obama's presidency.

[Zaydin]

Again, this assumes the GOP is acting in good faith and actually cares about the integrity of government.

Trump is not yet so poisoned a chalice that they aren't willing to take sips now and then. Because as bad as this looks to people on the left and in the middle, the right is still fairly behind the whole shitshow - and those are the people Congressional Republicans want to appease, not the public at large.

My line of thought is that the 25th is the 'safest' way of getting rid of Trump, since it means Congressional Republicans won't be forced to vote to either impeach Trump because of his criminal behavior and piss off the cult of Trump or vote to protect him and upset moderates disgusted by his criminal behavior. They can say 'it wasn't me, it was Pence and Trumps cabinet that took him from you!'.

[Poopymonster]

Well...I'm having a hard time following this, big surprise, there's a lot going on. But I can't see the benefit for Putin to say "you can't release the calls without my permission" and then "you have my permission" within 24 hours. There's no specific Russia allegations by the whistleblower, and while those conversations shouldn't be in the protected folder/file/safe, that's not enough probable cause to read them. It sounds like Putin either knows there's a problem in those calls and wants Trump removed -- makes sense, Trump isn't worth what Putin paid him -- or he's trying to troll Congress -- also makes sense, Putin wants US chaos. But this was never about him, and it could easily never come up.

POLITICAL OPINTION, those are protected, right Thwart? It speaks bad of the republicans. But as a POLITICAL OPINION it's OK. I'm just looking for the rules being enforced equally for all. Regardless of political affiliation. Right?

Vladdy realizes that his pet dictaster is becoming a larger liability and is cutting his losses. Vladdy has shit on Dolan, but these days, who doesn't. Vladdy MAY have shit on Pence. Who's image is so squeeky clean even with his ALL money he could go through the eye of a needle into heaven. Dolan is throwing gas inside his house. Which is on fire. Screaming "this is fine". Pence, under threat of his own level of THE PEEPEE TAPES, possibly having dinner with 2 women, without his wife present *clutches pearls, where's my fainting couch...* would make him more readily harnessed to follow blackmail rules than his current boss. Dolan. Not Jeebus.

[Elegiac]

My line of thought is that the 25th is the 'safest' way of getting rid of Trump, since it means Congressional Republicans won't be forced to vote to either impeach Trump because of his criminal behavior and piss off the cult of Trump or vote to protect him and upset moderates disgusted by his criminal behavior. They can say 'it wasn't me, it was Pence and Trumps cabinet that took him from you!'.

Yes, you've said this. It doesn't change that none of them currently have an interest in doing so.

[cubby]

@cubby as always your insight is welcome.

Giuliani's unusual role key to exposing internal Trump documents



If I'm reading this right,
1) Giuliani can't hide behind executive privilege because he doesn't work for the White House, and
2) Giuliani can't hide behind lawyer-client privilege because he was working on behalf of the White House and not giving legal advice to a client

So...I mean, if that's not correct, what part did I miss?

And if that is correct, wow, how the fuck did he thread those uprights?

That's exactly how I read it too. Rudy painted himself into a corner, where he's fucked either way. Not that any legal analysis will force these morons to actually follow the law. I would expect 100% obstruction and delay from anyone still willing to back Trump.

[Edge-]

The democrats did it in 2016 and you are okay with it, Feel free to link me where you said you weren't okay with it.

Citation needed*

If it was such an issue in 2016, why did the Republicans do nothing to investigate the matter in 2017? Why did they do nothing in 2018? They held both houses of Congress, surely they could have taken action? Why hasn't the Senate investigated in 2019 up until *checks notes* Trump is deeply embroiled in a Ukraine scandal of his own?

[zEmini]

Trust the whistleblower and the IC IG, then. Who Democrats are largely echoing, actually.



Again, it's not a transcript. It's based off of notes, and not a word for word readout.

And he literally asked a foreign leader to look into a political opponent as a favor to him. That's not legal. I'm not sure how you missed that part.



Because it backfired for Republicans so hard when they failed to impeach Clinton that...they won the next election.



Holding leaders accountable should they violate the law? Yes, absolutely.

So cliff notes versus some leaker who says otherwise? Why should someone blindly take the whistle blowers word? Besides being a political opponent doesn't' make one immune to investigations right? If Biden did something sketchy - then America should hear about it.

Also, Clinton had his impeachment whatever in his second term did he not?

[Zan15]

republicans have a huge opp if they play this right


Let the impeachment go through
go to trial in senate.
choose a few senators from lock in states to vote for impeachment.

bam trumps gone.

Pence walks in.
rally around the "do it for trump" banner. "revenge the coup!"

republicans win because of a fractured democratic party.

[Poopymonster]

They offered to pay for them to go to college... COLLEGE! Where they'd be turned into LIBERALS and PERSECUTED for their beliefs! How dare you offer them free job training it's just PRESIDENTIAL HARASSMENT at a local level.

But think about the students! If they get a bigly yuge education in a field, Experts you might call them, they know they'll be ignored. Why set them to be ignored?

[Zan15]

The democrats did it in 2016 and you are okay with it, Feel free to link me where you said you weren't okay with it.

huh? where? what?

[Skroe]

@Skroe

Because I'm tired of these Biden conspiracies and want the thread back on track, let's talk timelines for impeachment. How do you think Pelosi and Co. are planning to deploy this to cause maximum electoral damage?

So this is a complicated question, for something that has nothing to do with the impeachment.

The budget.

We're currently operating until a Continuing Resolution that began October 1st (for the Government funding year 2020 that runs 10/1/2019 to 9/30/20) and lasts until Mid November. If there is no completed budget or another CR, there will be a government shut down.

The 2 year deal model defined the budget shape, and FY2020 is pretty close to the FY2019 budget that just ended. But there are differences. And while the framework may be done, the details are laborious and require hearings, votes and a lot of very time-consuming work. The way we do budgets in this country - annually - is an antiquated disaster in itself. A bunch of it has been done already, but there is more to do before November passage. A lot more. It probably won't happen. Which means we'll get a CR into late January or early February 2020. They'll REALLY want it to be done by then because voting later in an election year can be politically perilous, which is one reason the two year deal model started in the first place - to make budget fights basically off-year political struggles that will fade away during election years.

So, the question is, does Congress pass a budget for 2020 in full by February? Or do we short-term CR our way through 2020? Or do we just do a full-year CR, treat the 2020 budget the same as 2019, and do as we did back in the early 2010s and write an ex post facto Omnibus budget for FY2020 and a post-election FY2021 budget at the same time?

I don't know which way this is going to go yet, but it's crucial to bring up because the committees and staff that are tasked with righting budgets for crucial government organs are also the ones doing impeachment.

So do they have the bandwith for both? I bet they don't. If you put a gun to my head, I bet we're looking at a full year CR. The question is, when does it drop?

I think regardless, Pelosi will have the Judiciary Committee draft the articles and hold a committee-level vote before the end of the year. Probably mid-December. I think there will be a full House vote in early January. Based off the Clinton trial, regardless of how much McConnell wants to speed run it (the Clinton trial was quick), the prep took a lot of time and dragged on 3.5 months. So we may see a trial in April.

I think that's a good time table. April will not leave enough time for Trump to recover by November, especially if we slip into recession as expected late next year.

I want to add a unlikely but possible situation. If there is something truly damaging in one of the hidden transcripts that shows him self dealing, like in a call he demanded a foreign leader stay at a Trump Hotel when they came to the US, I think he and his henchmen will see the jig is up and resign by the end of the year (or be forced to resign). I think they are the type of people that *know* the wrong doing they did, but will dishonorably hang on for dear life and try to out last it until the last possible moment. If that is going to happen - and I don't think it will - I think it'll have to happen by the end of December.

[TexasRules]

What does this even mean? Who gave who a platform? What platform? Speculation about an ongoing investigation is not the same as making shit up about a years-old event that was already reported on and forgotten since it was an actual "nothingberder"



Again, you seem to confuse media speculation about an ongoing investigation with a political party and the current administration actively promoting a debunked conspiracy theory.

They're two very, very different things.



Were you looking over my shoulder the whole investigation?

No? Cool, so don't tell me what I was or wasn't doing.

No, he criticizes the media for continuing to allow an unhinged conspiracy theorist on their programs to mislead the American people. That's not "censorship" in the slightest, and I'd suggest you take a primer on what censorship is because you seem confused.

So Adam Schiff never said he had evidence? FOR YEARS he said he had direct evidence and never produced it. I can find multiple links, but I am sure you are conveniently forgetting that. CNN had multiple "experts" inlcuding tapper and comey who said that mueller would find ample evidence and Trump was going to get impeached. All of it conspiracy by people in office or people who held offices that should know. You can pretend all you want that none of that happened, but you know it did. You are being dishonest.

And a politician having his campaign write letters to new organizations to not have someone on is not censoring? Tell me honsetly, if Trump did this, how much whining on this shit board would there be about censorship. Tell me honestly if you can, I doubt you can.

- - - Updated - - -

huh? where? what?

It was reported in January of 2017 before Trump took office and was recently brought back up. Feel free to read more then one thread on this message board

[Skroe]

He still controlled his caucus. Dems had their 60 votes for a few months total during obama's presidency.

They got Kagan and Sotamayor passed without 60 Democrats. Centrist Republicans voted for them. And the Democratic position in the Senate was still strong in 2013. They would have only needed a few of them. It was 2014 when it fell apart.

There is no way to paint RBG still being on the bench as anything other than an Obama Administration fuck up. Many Administrations have pressured judges off the federal bench to appoint successors. The fact Obama didn't RBG is purely on Democrats and they need to own it and the consequences of it, or they'll never learn from it.

[TexasRules]

Citation needed*

If it was such an issue in 2016, why did the Republicans do nothing to investigate the matter in 2017? Why did they do nothing in 2018? They held both houses of Congress, surely they could have taken action? Why hasn't the Senate investigated in 2019 up until *checks notes* Trump is deeply embroiled in a Ukraine scandal of his own?

Feel free to read other threads on this very message board.


Infracted.

[nonameelf]

So cliff notes versus some leaker who says otherwise? Why should someone blindly take the whistle blowers word? Besides being a political opponent doesn't' make one immune to investigations right? If Biden did something sketchy - then America should hear about it.

Also, Clinton had his impeachment whatever in his second term did he not?

No one is blindly taking the whistleblower's word. The TRUMP APPOINTED ICIG investigated the whistleblower's claims and determined them to be credible.

Unless the TRUMP APPOINTED ICIG is somehow a Democrat plant you have no ground to stand on.

And no, Biden did nothing wrong. It's a conspiracy theory. Trump did something wrong though.

[Fahrenheit]

Are those the same polls that had Hillary winning against him as well?

Yup. Consequently, they're also the same ones that had Democrats winning by 36+ seats in 2018. You clowns don't bring that up much though, do you?

Imagine thinking the best tool for something failed (ever so slightly) once, and now no one can reliably use the best tool for that job ever again.

[Zan15]

It was reported in January of 2017 before Trump took office and was recently brought back up. Feel free to read more then one thread on this message board

huh? where? what?

care to show me the investigation findings? the documents? the trial? anything?

humor me, link me the thread. You know how bad the search function is on this forum

- - - Updated - - -

Are those the same polls that had Hillary winning against him as well?

Still waiting for you to link me one poll that was wrong...…
waiting....
waiting......

[cubby]

So he WON'T be the hero?

He'll the be the hero the GOP deserves.