The Impeachment Thread

[0nelilreb]

We are a lot alike in this.

That is my honest assessment of myself and of the whole thing . It’s fun to banter back and forth , pick and prod ( I like to aggravate by nature ) . Only because when we get down to the truth , our politics and politicians suck . They all come with strings attached. They are all controlled by something or someone and it’s not the will of the people that is served , Its the will of the lobbyists . Everything is about money and power , the rest is cannon fodder , placating and pandering . Round and round we go .

 

[McDad]

Because he is a Trump guy who didn't want to testify and had to amend his statements as additional info came to light.
He had no desire to implicate Trump, just the opposite. And given all that, he still had to implicate Trump.

Makes sense. More believable than an opponent.

You do not see any of his quotes and testimony contradictory?

 

[volinbham]

Thank you.

Is everything you posted about his testimony factually accurate?

So far as I know - he did testify that Trump told him no quid pro quo and as I understand it that's the only time Sondland talked to Trump about the situation.

 

[RockyTop85]

Wasn't Pelosi et al beating a bribery drum pretty hard? What happened to it?

“What’s in a name? That which we call a rose

By any other name would smell as sweet:

So Bribery would, were it not Bribery called

Retain that dear corruption which it owes

Without that title.”

A Shakespearean reply which translated means, Pelosi lied about the pretense. No surprise to me she did.

Can you explain how you translated that to mean she lied, for me?

Because in English that’s not what it means.

Do you recollect why aid has been delayed in past?

From my convo with rockytop85, it looks like bribery is no longer mentioned in the consideration of impeachment even though is wad a key point back in November.

This isn’t what I said and you never explained why/how you misconstrued what I said.

I felt an explanation wasn't necessary or helpful.

So you knew that wasn’t what I said but misrepresented it (again) to @luthervol, anyways?

 

[luthervol]

In the absence of evidence, then we are left only with his credibility.

I cannot understand why anyone finds him credible based solely on what has been shared with me in the last few pages. Dude is all over the map on testimony and quotes.

Maybe because his testimony was supported by every other witness that testified?????
Let the 4 who were named by Sonland testify.
Let Giuliani testify.
We all know that will not happen. McConnell is terrified of that potentiality. That's why the senate will shut it down ASAP.

 

[1972 Grad]

Rudy is laying it down on Ingraham.

 

[VolnJC]

 

[McDad]

So you knew that wasn’t what I said but misrepresented it (again) to @luthervol, anyways?

I understood you to say bribery is there, it just is no longer being called bribery. Which doesn't make sense because it is more easily understandable by laymen like me.

I apologize I misrepresented you to luth. It wasn't my intention.
@luthervol, i apologize for misleading you about my discussion with rockytop85.

 

[volinbham]

Maybe because his testimony was supported by every other witness that testified?????
Let the 4 who were named by Sonland testify.
Let Giuliani testify.
We all know that will not happen. McConnell is terrified of that potentiality. That's why the senate will shut it down ASAP.

None of them were ever told there was a quid pro quo. None of them talked to Trump except Sondland and the one time he did he was expressly told there is no quid pro quo.

They all stated under oath that they were never told the money was contingent upon the investigation. It's all their speculation that it was. Maybe they're right but they never were told or heard that from Trump.

 

[McDad]

Maybe because his testimony was supported by every other witness that testified?????
Let the 4 who were named by Sonland testify.
Let Giuliani testify.
We all know that will not happen. McConnell is terrified of that potentiality. That's why the senate will shut it down ASAP.

Did you say earlier Sondland was the only person besides trump and Ukrainian president to hear the convo?

 

[Orangeburst]

Rudy is laying it down on Ingraham.

We need a Special Investigator for this crap.

 

[McDad]

View attachment 246300View attachment 246301

Is article 2 really obstruction of congress???

 

[McDad]

None of them were ever told there was a quid pro quo. None of them talked to Trump except Sondland and the one time he did he was expressly told there is no quid pro quo.

They all stated under oath that they were never told the money was contingent upon the investigation. It's all their speculation that it was. Maybe they're right but they never were told or heard that from Trump.

How do you know this without their testimony under oath?

 

[volinbham]

How do you know this without their testimony under oath?

don't understand the question

 

[VolnJC]

Is article 2 really obstruction of congress???

Yep

 

[McDad]

don't understand the question

You're saying the 4 and Guiliani were never told there was a qpq, how do you know this?

 

[McDad]

Yep View attachment 246303

If obstruction of congress is impeachable, what happens in the future when there is political gridlock between a president and congress? Would that be considered obstruction?

 

[volinbham]

Is article 2 really obstruction of congress???

As Jonathan Turley told them during his testimony - article 2 is essentially obstruction ON THE PART OF Congress. Charging the Exec Branch for saying let the courts decide on Exec privilege is entirely within the Constitution.

The Dems screwed the pooch on this. Should have taken it to court and maybe won compelled testimony from Team Trump and maybe they would have found something. Instead they not only punted on that but decided to build a charge around it. Sucks for them too that the Horowitz testimony happened in the middle of it. The polls clearly show a reduction in support for impeachment post Horowitz. If they thought they really had something they'd have done it properly. Too late.

 

[volinbham]

You're saying the 4 and Guiliani were never told there was a qpq, how do you know this?

I wasn't saying that - I was saying that those that did testify "felt" it was qpq but were never told that by anyone. The only person who did testify (Sondland) who did ask about it was explicitly told by Trump "I want nothing; no quid pro quo". I have no idea about the 4 that did not testify. No one does since the Dems punted on trying to get them to testify.

 

[volinbham]

If obstruction of congress is impeachable, what happens in the future when there is political gridlock between a president and congress? Would that be considered obstruction?

yes.

 

[McDad]

As Jonathan Turley told them during his testimony - article 2 is essentially obstruction ON THE PART OF Congress. Charging the Exec Branch for saying let the courts decide on Exec privilege is entirely within the Constitution.

The Dems screwed the pooch on this. Should have taken it to court and maybe won compelled testimony from Team Trump and maybe they would have found something. Instead they not only punted on that but decided to build a charge around it. Sucks for them too that the Horowitz testimony happened in the middle of it. The polls clearly show a reduction in support for impeachment post Horowitz. If they thought they really had something they'd have done it properly. Too late.

That is either a monumental mistake on their part or an intentional move because of the lack of a case. Could be either.

 

[volinbham]

That is either a monumental mistake on their part or an intentional move because of the lack of a case. Could be either.

I think intentional because they wanted to impeach no matter what. Agree it's a mistake.

 

[McDad]

I wasn't saying that - I was saying that those that did testify "felt" it was qpq but were never told that by anyone. The only person who did testify (Sondland) who did ask about it was explicitly told by Trump "I want nothing; no quid pro quo". I have no idea about the 4 that did not testify. No one does since the Dems punted on trying to get them to testify.

Thanks. I misunderstood.

Im confused tho. Someone posted Sondland was the only one to hear the phone call. In that position he could get a feeling that is seemed like qpq.

The others who testified it felt like qpq did or did not hear the conversation between presidents?

 

[Orange_Vol1321]

 

[luthervol]

Thanks. I misunderstood.

Im confused tho. Someone posted Sondland was the only one to hear the phone call. In that position he could get a feeling that is seemed like qpq.

The others who testified it felt like qpq did or did not hear the conversation between presidents?

It's more than the phone call. It's the back channels headed by Rudy that made it clear. Trump may be a complete moron, but he does know how to break the law, especially when it comes to bribery and strong arming.