The Impeachment Thread

#32,336
#32,336
NCFisher said:
Chortle! - that's a damned quantum leap to conclusion. Must I qualify every comment?

No, I'm advising him that his plan to bring it to Barr is not a good idea, which is likely why Barr wasn't subsequently approached.

So, you aren't aware presidents have used non-governmental persons they trust to do exactly what Giuliani is doing - and more - since Washington.

There were no "17 agencies" involved, just three - CIA, FBI, and NSA. That was a wild extrapolation by NYT (who retracted) and others, but like every lie propagated by press, many - perhaps most - do not retract and continue with fascist zeal propagating the lie. You're the evidence.
The good news; that indicates maybe, just maybe, all 17 agencies won't have to be sanitized, just the Big Three and purge DOJ of Rosenstein's ghost.

And what if it had been all 17 if they got the headline "Trump-Russia Conspiracy" so wrong as the three did? Consensus doesn't turn a crap premise into chocolate souffle.

"so that the NSC lawyers ultimately have to hide your conversations about it on a classified server..." - Yeah, that must be it.
I mean, surely having prior conversations with foreign leaders criminally leaked by Resistance! azzhats has nothing to do with it....good grief.
Click to expand...
There is no quantum leap involved, here. You have bounced around from (paraphrasing), “what Trump did was very cool and very legal” to “DOJ investigation would be preferable” to “if I were White House counsel, I would have advised him not to do the thing I just called preferable because it’s not a good idea.”

And, chortling aside, nothing you’ve said attempted to explain what you would have advised him to do differently. In fact, you’ve been continuously making excuses for what he did. And this post doesn’t offer an alternative, it attempts to paper over what he actually did with a bunch of demonstrably false statements. For example:

Multiple DNIs, NSC staff, and congressional committees have acknowledged that it was the consensus of the intelligence community that Russia, not Ukraine, attempted to interfere in the 2016 election.

The various statements about why the transcript was elevated to that server were made by the NSC lawyers who did it to, IIRC, Tim Morrison and Alex Vindman. If this were very cool, very legal as you initially said, why worry about it being leaked at all?

And the idea that “every president since Washington” has used private individuals to do what Giuliani has done is... unsubstantiated, at best.

So I naturally assumed that you would have advised him to do exactly what he did and your defensiveness about having your advice characterized that way makes it pretty apparent that you recognize that what he actually did is pretty messed up and needs an excuse.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: luthervol, Mick and zeppelin128
#32,339
#32,339
lawgator1 said:
Story is from 2017. Since then, no credible agency or source has concluded otherwise. The only entities to say that it is not true are partisan defenders of Trump or Russian agents. They are often the same thing.
Click to expand...

You still on that Russian agent crap?
I am just pointing out that it was the conclusion of 3 agencies, not 17 as has been reported.
So what if the story was in 2017 as that was after the fact. Three agencies attested to it including the CIA, FBI and NSA only and distributed to the others. Even Clapper admitted it was only 3 in front of Congress.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hjeagle1vol, ajvol01, W.TN.Orange Blood and 2 others
#32,340
#32,340
1972 Grad said:
It could also be that Nunes isn't a lawyer, and the other three are.
Click to expand...

Collins went to one of America's worst law schools (it's currently on probation and close to losing its accreditation), practiced law as a solo practitioner for just a few months, and is as inscrutable as Boomhauer. I guess with the brain drain in the GOP, he's about all that's left.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Velo Vol
#32,342
#32,342
evillawyer said:
Collins went to one of America's worst law schools (it's currently on probation and close to losing its accreditation), practiced law as a solo practitioner for just a few months, and is as inscrutable as Boomhauer. I guess with the brain drain in the GOP, he's about all that's left.
Click to expand...
Which school?
 
#32,343
#32,343
lawgator1 said:
Story is from 2017. Since then, no credible agency or source has concluded otherwise. The only entities to say that it is not true are partisan defenders of Trump or Russian agents. They are often the same thing.
Click to expand...

So by the same token the Politico story from Jan 17 claiming Ukraine did interfere in the 16 elections is not false because since no news organization has proven it true? Is it untrue that Obama would have more flexibility after 2012 elections or should we draw from our arses that he was a Russian agent?
 
  • Like
Reactions: ajvol01 and W.TN.Orange Blood
#32,344
#32,344
Orangeburst said:
You still on that Russian agent crap?
I am just pointing out that it was the conclusion of 3 agencies, not 17 as has been reported.
So what if the story was in 2017 as that was after the fact. Three agencies attested to it including the CIA, FBI and NSA only and distributed to the others. Even Clapper admitted it was only 3 in front of Congress.
Click to expand...
Orangeburst said:
You still on that Russian agent crap?
I am just pointing out that it was the conclusion of 3 agencies, not 17 as has been reported.
So what if the story was in 2017 as that was after the fact. Three agencies attested to it including the CIA, FBI and NSA only and distributed to the others. Even Clapper admitted it was only 3 in front of Congress.
Click to expand...

The statement was made by DNI and what the subject matter has nothing to do with “Russian agents.”
 
#32,346
#32,346
BowlBrother85 said:
I will only give you 1 reason why he will:

1) He is the best equipped to beat Trump. This one time.. that will be enough to override ideology for the Democratic Party nomination. Trump must agree with this or else he wouldn't be trying so hard to dig up dirt on Biden. I don't see him digging for dirt on Liz or Bernie. Do you?
Click to expand...
giphy.gif
 
#32,350
#32,350
As far as the recent stock market gains are concerned since impeachment, it is interesting watching both sides claim some form of victory. On our forum, it is seen as a vindication of Trump and his presidency. Head over to that cesspool of Bernie love r/politics, and it is a vindication of impeachment and removal of Trump from office. Interesting to watch two different sides use the same facts to push their agenda.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeslice13
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top