Poll

Where do you currently stand on the impeachment/removal from office of President Trump?

Against impeachment, and furthermore this is a witch hunt.
8 (12.9%)
Against impeachment, evidence evidence of wrongdoing is lacking
2 (3.2%)
Against impeachment, the wrongdoing is not worthy of impeachment
1 (1.6%)
For impeachment, but against removal (a rebuke of the presdients actions)
3 (4.8%)
For impeachment, for removal
44 (71%)
I can't decide. I will wait and see as inquiry proceeds.
4 (6.5%)
I haven't followed this closely enough to have an opinion.
0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 62

Author Topic: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)  (Read 72853 times)

feckless and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)
« Reply #1650 on: November 27, 2019, 06:19:04 PM »

Offline Neurotic Guy

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15173
  • Tommy Points: 1652
I don't think any sane person really believes that Trump withheld the aid for any other reason than to benefit himself politically.  But even if the reason was that he was some great corruption fighter (a big laugh, I know), he still broke the law by not notifying congress and thereby abused power. 

So for these reasons, I do not believe that hashing out Biden and whatever else is evidence that is relevant to the case at hand.  More so, this shows that Trump has no defense so his only recourse is to try and bring up as much unrelated noise as possible.

In this case, there's a pretty ambiguous standard:  high crimes and misdemeanors.  In figuring that out, I think you have to look at a wider context than you would in the typical criminal case.

You're right that a President can't unilaterally decide to disrupt aid.  But, it happens all the time, doesn't it?  Certainly, that's what Joe Biden threatened (and bragged about) to get the Ukranian prosecutor fired.  I think that it's probably a routine part of foreign policy, legitimate and non-legitimate.  *If* Trump's motivations were to actually fight corruption, I don't think that this is in any way an impeachable offense.

Now, we all know that this wasn't about corruption.  It was about the 2020 election.  But, I think Trump gets to argue his pretext, and that includes sharing what his administration knew or was concerned about regarding Ukranian corruption.

I understand your point, I don't agree with it, but as usual, you present a well constructed argument.  In terms of "it happens all the time", I don't know if that is in fact true (and I suspect you don't either), but even if it is true, isn't that like saying "people cheat on their taxes all the time" when you get caught cheating on your taxes?

In reference to Biden, I think the big fundamental difference is that Biden did not do this unilaterally or in secret.  Congress and the whole of NATO were in on this.  I feel he was a bit bombastic to brag about it in the way but he was just the spokesman carrying out policy that was legal.  At that time, Ukraine was corrupt and was not in compliance with the conditions of the funding.  I explained above that for Trump, Ukraine was deemed in compliance and the "anti-corruption" stipulation was met (there was first hand testimony about this during the hearings). 

These are in no way the same thing and if this is the basis of the defense of Trump, it is a very weak defense.  He alone is not allowed to decide if Ukraine gets the funding.  Biden alone did not decide this, he just bragged about it.

Great response re: the difference between Biden's brag and Trump's unilateral actions.  I too don't know the truth with regard to "it happens all the time". I don't really know how any of us would really know that.  But in some support of Roy's comment, it wouldn't surprise me if presidents have held out support for gains -- not sure that I think many POTUS' have held out for countries investigating political rivals, but who knows?   

What is most striking to me about Roy's comments and your response is the clarity with which level-headed people from different sides politically can/should be seeing the big picture here.  It has become unfathomable to me that anyone (let alone nearly 50% of the population) can see our president as an honorable man.  I don't really need to get into the litany of pejorative adjectives; he is simply not an honorable man and what he apparently did in the case of the Ukraine issue is consistent with a persistent pattern of dishonesty.   

I think Roy's comments (if I am reading them correctly) acknowledge what the preponderance of the evidence appears to be saying -- that Trump did wrong.  Fairly, Roy points out that the real issue to be decided is ultimately whether his actions rise to a level of severity that would require  removal from office. I could absolutely accept someone coming to the conclusion that the severity threshold has not been reached. What I can't grasp is the denial of wrongdoing.  We should be able to unite around that.  I actually don't care if Trump gets removed.  I want republicans to acknowledge his actions and his cover-up as unbefitting the office.  I want some movement among republican senators and representatives in that direction -- that would be fine with me.

To use a Clinton analogy, is there anyone, dem or republican, who doesn't think that Clinton lied and that his affair with Lewinsky was wrong?   Yes, probably there are some -- but certainly not half the population.   I think Clinton should have been removed from office.

Re: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)
« Reply #1651 on: November 28, 2019, 01:22:54 PM »

Offline mmmmm

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4268
  • Tommy Points: 713
I don't think any sane person really believes that Trump withheld the aid for any other reason than to benefit himself politically.  But even if the reason was that he was some great corruption fighter (a big laugh, I know), he still broke the law by not notifying congress and thereby abused power. 

So for these reasons, I do not believe that hashing out Biden and whatever else is evidence that is relevant to the case at hand.  More so, this shows that Trump has no defense so his only recourse is to try and bring up as much unrelated noise as possible.

In this case, there's a pretty ambiguous standard:  high crimes and misdemeanors.  In figuring that out, I think you have to look at a wider context than you would in the typical criminal case.

You're right that a President can't unilaterally decide to disrupt aid.  But, it happens all the time, doesn't it?  Certainly, that's what Joe Biden threatened (and bragged about) to get the Ukranian prosecutor fired.  I think that it's probably a routine part of foreign policy, legitimate and non-legitimate.  *If* Trump's motivations were to actually fight corruption, I don't think that this is in any way an impeachable offense.

Now, we all know that this wasn't about corruption.  It was about the 2020 election.  But, I think Trump gets to argue his pretext, and that includes sharing what his administration knew or was concerned about regarding Ukranian corruption.

I understand your point, I don't agree with it, but as usual, you present a well constructed argument.  In terms of "it happens all the time", I don't know if that is in fact true (and I suspect you don't either), but even if it is true, isn't that like saying "people cheat on their taxes all the time" when you get caught cheating on your taxes?

In reference to Biden, I think the big fundamental difference is that Biden did not do this unilaterally or in secret.  Congress and the whole of NATO were in on this.  I feel he was a bit bombastic to brag about it in the way but he was just the spokesman carrying out policy that was legal.  At that time, Ukraine was corrupt and was not in compliance with the conditions of the funding.  I explained above that for Trump, Ukraine was deemed in compliance and the "anti-corruption" stipulation was met (there was first hand testimony about this during the hearings). 

These are in no way the same thing and if this is the basis of the defense of Trump, it is a very weak defense.  He alone is not allowed to decide if Ukraine gets the funding.  Biden alone did not decide this, he just bragged about it.

Great response re: the difference between Biden's brag and Trump's unilateral actions.  I too don't know the truth with regard to "it happens all the time". I don't really know how any of us would really know that.  But in some support of Roy's comment, it wouldn't surprise me if presidents have held out support for gains -- not sure that I think many POTUS' have held out for countries investigating political rivals, but who knows?   

Ultimately the "it happens all the time" defense is the whutaboutism fallacy.   It is not a valid defense or relevant argument.   But Roy perhaps correctly previews that it will be used heavily by Trump's defenders.

NBA Officiating - Corrupt?  Incompetent?  Which is worse?  Does it matter?  It sucks.

Re: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)
« Reply #1652 on: December 02, 2019, 09:34:17 AM »

Offline heyvik

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1536
  • Tommy Points: 60
The long awaited Horowitz report will find.....nothing....

https://www.thedailybeast.com/doj-inspector-general-found-no-evidence-fbi-attempted-to-spy-on-trump-campaign-report

Quote
The Justice Department’s inspector general found no evidence that the FBI attempted to place undercover agents and informants inside President Trump’s 2016 campaign, The New York Times reports. Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s report—slated for release on Dec. 9—will reportedly disprove claims that the agency attempted to spy on the campaign. Horowitz notes that while the FBI used an informant and an undercover agent in meetings with ex-campaign advisers Carter Page and George Papadopoulos, the agency did not give any direction for the informant to infiltrate the campaign. The inspector general reportedly disproves assertions that Joseph Mifsud, a professor who promised political dirt to Papadopoulos, was an FBI informant. Horowitz also found that agency leaders did not take politically motivated actions while pursuing a wiretap on Page, which agents obtained after Page had officially left the campaign.
However, Horowitz is reportedly expected to criticize FBI leaders in the handling of the investigation—noting the “careless and unprofessional” way FBI officials got the Page wiretap and how one lawyer, Kevin Clinesmith, altered a document related to the wiretap application. A spokesperson for Horowitz has not spoken publicly about the matter.

I wonder where the far right will pivot to next? But this also leads me to think that shouldn't Barr be disbarred because of his lying under oath about the Trump campaign being 'spied' upon?

Re: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)
« Reply #1653 on: December 02, 2019, 10:13:06 AM »

Offline No Nickname

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 399
  • Tommy Points: 39
In reference to Biden, I think the big fundamental difference is that Biden did not do this unilaterally or in secret.  Congress and the whole of NATO were in on this. I feel he was a bit bombastic to brag about it in the way but he was just the spokesman carrying out policy that was legal.  At that time, Ukraine was corrupt and was not in compliance with the conditions of the funding.  I explained above that for Trump, Ukraine was deemed in compliance and the "anti-corruption" stipulation was met (there was first hand testimony about this during the hearings). 

These are in no way the same thing and if this is the basis of the defense of Trump, it is a very weak defense.  He alone is not allowed to decide if Ukraine gets the funding.  Biden alone did not decide this, he just bragged about it.

I have bolded the most important aspect of what you wrote about Trump's false claims that Biden was corrupt. 

Biden did not, on his own or in secret, make a decision to withhold aid unless Ukraine fired a prosecutor who was investigating his son.  It's just 100% false.  He was the mouthpiece of the US government's decision.  And Trump is too ignorant to understand the difference.  Or understands it and just wants to trick the public into believing this falsehood in order to exonerate his own actions.

The Vice-President of the United States doesn't even have the power to do what Trump is suggesting.  Would Trump have us believe that Mike Pence could withhold aid to a foreign country, for his own personal reasons, and it would actually be withheld?  Really???


Re: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)
« Reply #1654 on: December 02, 2019, 10:25:24 AM »

Offline heyvik

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1536
  • Tommy Points: 60

Impeachment inquiry: Trump and his lawyers refuse to attend 'unfair' hearing

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/dec/02/impeachment-inquiry-trump-and-his-lawyers-refuse-to-attend-unfair-hearing

Quote
President Donald Trump and his lawyers will not participate in a congressional impeachment hearing this week, the White House has said, citing a lack of “fundamental fairness”.
Trump’s aides responded defiantly on Sunday to the first of two crucial deadlines he faces in Congress this week as Democrats prepare to shift the focus of their impeachment inquiry from fact-finding to the consideration of possible charges of misconduct over his dealings with Ukraine.
The Democratic-led House of Representatives judiciary committee, tasked with considering charges known as articles of impeachment, had given Trump until 6pm on Sunday to say whether he would send a lawyer to take part in the judiciary panel’s proceedings on Wednesday.

To me this seems very simple and a WIN for the Trump campaign. Send lawyers and ask to call 1st hand witnesses, including yoursel, to testify to dispute claims. If what Trump claims happened is correct, the information that the 1st hand witnesses including yourself  will be verified. Show the independent voters and Republicans that you were falsely accused by Dems. Present evidence and make the Democrats look like they are overreaching! You would save the government so much more money that way! Run in 2020 on how you saved the taxpayer money by proving Democrat overreach and therefore not taking the impeachement to a Senate trial. You save you name by testifying and proving you were right all along!  Trump will win by a landslide.
However we all know this will never happen because innocent men want to prove their innocence at ANY cost and guilty men hide.

Re: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)
« Reply #1655 on: December 02, 2019, 10:40:53 AM »

Offline td450

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1107
  • Tommy Points: 145
In reference to Biden, I think the big fundamental difference is that Biden did not do this unilaterally or in secret.  Congress and the whole of NATO were in on this. I feel he was a bit bombastic to brag about it in the way but he was just the spokesman carrying out policy that was legal.  At that time, Ukraine was corrupt and was not in compliance with the conditions of the funding.  I explained above that for Trump, Ukraine was deemed in compliance and the "anti-corruption" stipulation was met (there was first hand testimony about this during the hearings). 

These are in no way the same thing and if this is the basis of the defense of Trump, it is a very weak defense.  He alone is not allowed to decide if Ukraine gets the funding.  Biden alone did not decide this, he just bragged about it.

I have bolded the most important aspect of what you wrote about Trump's false claims that Biden was corrupt. 

Biden did not, on his own or in secret, make a decision to withhold aid unless Ukraine fired a prosecutor who was investigating his son.  It's just 100% false.  He was the mouthpiece of the US government's decision.  And Trump is too ignorant to understand the difference.  Or understands it and just wants to trick the public into believing this falsehood in order to exonerate his own actions.

The Vice-President of the United States doesn't even have the power to do what Trump is suggesting.  Would Trump have us believe that Mike Pence could withhold aid to a foreign country, for his own personal reasons, and it would actually be withheld?  Really???

Trump is an expert at injecting confusion whenever he is accused of something. He understands exactly what he is doing.

This is why so much rides on the clarity of the media and Congress, an how they are not meeting the moment so far. Everyone is using phrases like "meddling" or "digging up dirt", or "attacking", and Trump can easily project confusing versions of these accusations back onto his opponents. The actual core of the wrongdoing, or lack thereof is lost in all of it.



Re: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)
« Reply #1656 on: December 02, 2019, 01:08:43 PM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 39593
  • Tommy Points: -27313
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .

Impeachment inquiry: Trump and his lawyers refuse to attend 'unfair' hearing

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/dec/02/impeachment-inquiry-trump-and-his-lawyers-refuse-to-attend-unfair-hearing

Quote
President Donald Trump and his lawyers will not participate in a congressional impeachment hearing this week, the White House has said, citing a lack of “fundamental fairness”.
Trump’s aides responded defiantly on Sunday to the first of two crucial deadlines he faces in Congress this week as Democrats prepare to shift the focus of their impeachment inquiry from fact-finding to the consideration of possible charges of misconduct over his dealings with Ukraine.
The Democratic-led House of Representatives judiciary committee, tasked with considering charges known as articles of impeachment, had given Trump until 6pm on Sunday to say whether he would send a lawyer to take part in the judiciary panel’s proceedings on Wednesday.

To me this seems very simple and a WIN for the Trump campaign. Send lawyers and ask to call 1st hand witnesses, including yoursel, to testify to dispute claims. If what Trump claims happened is correct, the information that the 1st hand witnesses including yourself  will be verified. Show the independent voters and Republicans that you were falsely accused by Dems. Present evidence and make the Democrats look like they are overreaching! You would save the government so much more money that way! Run in 2020 on how you saved the taxpayer money by proving Democrat overreach and therefore not taking the impeachement to a Senate trial. You save you name by testifying and proving you were right all along!  Trump will win by a landslide.
However we all know this will never happen because innocent men want to prove their innocence at ANY cost and guilty men hide.

Trump’s attorneys would be insane to have him testify pursuant to Schiff’s rules in front of a hostile tribunal. I think your point makes more sense if (and when) Trump refuses to cooperate in the Senate trial.
Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)
« Reply #1657 on: December 02, 2019, 01:22:12 PM »

Offline heyvik

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1536
  • Tommy Points: 60

Impeachment inquiry: Trump and his lawyers refuse to attend 'unfair' hearing

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/dec/02/impeachment-inquiry-trump-and-his-lawyers-refuse-to-attend-unfair-hearing

Quote
President Donald Trump and his lawyers will not participate in a congressional impeachment hearing this week, the White House has said, citing a lack of “fundamental fairness”.
Trump’s aides responded defiantly on Sunday to the first of two crucial deadlines he faces in Congress this week as Democrats prepare to shift the focus of their impeachment inquiry from fact-finding to the consideration of possible charges of misconduct over his dealings with Ukraine.
The Democratic-led House of Representatives judiciary committee, tasked with considering charges known as articles of impeachment, had given Trump until 6pm on Sunday to say whether he would send a lawyer to take part in the judiciary panel’s proceedings on Wednesday.

To me this seems very simple and a WIN for the Trump campaign. Send lawyers and ask to call 1st hand witnesses, including yoursel, to testify to dispute claims. If what Trump claims happened is correct, the information that the 1st hand witnesses including yourself  will be verified. Show the independent voters and Republicans that you were falsely accused by Dems. Present evidence and make the Democrats look like they are overreaching! You would save the government so much more money that way! Run in 2020 on how you saved the taxpayer money by proving Democrat overreach and therefore not taking the impeachement to a Senate trial. You save you name by testifying and proving you were right all along!  Trump will win by a landslide.
However we all know this will never happen because innocent men want to prove their innocence at ANY cost and guilty men hide.

Trump’s attorneys would be insane to have him testify pursuant to Schiff’s rules in front of a hostile tribunal. I think your point makes more sense if (and when) Trump refuses to cooperate in the Senate trial.
But isn't Trump innocent? Why wouldn't he want to prove to independents and Democrats that he's innocent sooner rather than later?

Re: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)
« Reply #1658 on: December 02, 2019, 01:38:45 PM »

Offline Sophomore

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2243
  • Tommy Points: 372

Impeachment inquiry: Trump and his lawyers refuse to attend 'unfair' hearing

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/dec/02/impeachment-inquiry-trump-and-his-lawyers-refuse-to-attend-unfair-hearing

Quote
President Donald Trump and his lawyers will not participate in a congressional impeachment hearing this week, the White House has said, citing a lack of “fundamental fairness”.
Trump’s aides responded defiantly on Sunday to the first of two crucial deadlines he faces in Congress this week as Democrats prepare to shift the focus of their impeachment inquiry from fact-finding to the consideration of possible charges of misconduct over his dealings with Ukraine.
The Democratic-led House of Representatives judiciary committee, tasked with considering charges known as articles of impeachment, had given Trump until 6pm on Sunday to say whether he would send a lawyer to take part in the judiciary panel’s proceedings on Wednesday.

To me this seems very simple and a WIN for the Trump campaign. Send lawyers and ask to call 1st hand witnesses, including yoursel, to testify to dispute claims. If what Trump claims happened is correct, the information that the 1st hand witnesses including yourself  will be verified. Show the independent voters and Republicans that you were falsely accused by Dems. Present evidence and make the Democrats look like they are overreaching! You would save the government so much more money that way! Run in 2020 on how you saved the taxpayer money by proving Democrat overreach and therefore not taking the impeachement to a Senate trial. You save you name by testifying and proving you were right all along!  Trump will win by a landslide.
However we all know this will never happen because innocent men want to prove their innocence at ANY cost and guilty men hide.

Trump’s attorneys would be insane to have him testify pursuant to Schiff’s rules in front of a hostile tribunal. I think your point makes more sense if (and when) Trump refuses to cooperate in the Senate trial.

I will concede the tribunal believes in his guilt, so that could be a reason an attorney would not want a client to testify.

I would add, however, that no sane lawyer would ever let this President testify under oath - even in the fairest, most impartial court proceeding. I think you know - and we all know - what that is.

Re: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)
« Reply #1659 on: December 02, 2019, 03:05:54 PM »

Online fairweatherfan

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20199
  • Tommy Points: 2285
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
So the White House recently released $105 million in foreign aid to Lebanon, intended to curtail influence from Iran, that was also getting held back for unexplained reasons since early September. The only statement anyone could get was the State Department vaguely alluding to "fighting corruption." Anyone have any faith whatsoever that it wasn't similar shenanigans going on? What kind of insane right wing conspiracy theories involve Lebanon these days?

https://apnews.com/ed82bdb9355544cabc43f2aa5a0de7e9

Re: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)
« Reply #1660 on: December 03, 2019, 02:48:21 PM »

Online nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 38928
  • Tommy Points: 6285
Turns out the Horowitz IG report doesn't sit well with AG Barr as it pretty much exonerated the FBI and it's leadership from foul play or allowing any political bias into their job performance, according to the Washington Post. Barr, who cozied up to Trump as an AG candidate by promoting his own bias against the Mueller report, isn't happy at all with the findings.

And, of course, now Fox, OANN and the White House will pivot to the Durham investigation as being the investigation that will take down the nasty Democrats that made up the entire Russia hoax and continue to push a new hoax, Ukraine.

Just you wait and see, Democrats! That Horowitz Durham investigation will prove Trump a saint and everything being said about him is because of the Deep State trying to take him down with lies!!!

Good grief, Republican Party. I gave you crap about your politics during the GWBush Administration, now, I just wish you would return to that Republican Party.

Re: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)
« Reply #1661 on: December 03, 2019, 04:04:13 PM »

Online nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 38928
  • Tommy Points: 6285
Devin Nunes is not looking very good at the moment. First the revelation he went to Ukraine to find evidence of Ukrainian election interference that didn't exist.

Now, the Impeachment Hearings report has published phone records of multiple phone calls between Nunes, Guiliani, Guiliani associate charged with election funding wrongdoing Lev Parnas, people at OMB and a call to a phone in the White House back in April just when the smear campaign to get rid of Yavanovitch began. Some of these calls were 8-9 minutes long so something was being discussed

Sure looks like Nunes should have possibly recused himself from those hearings.

Re: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)
« Reply #1662 on: December 03, 2019, 04:05:04 PM »

Offline slamtheking

  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21806
  • Tommy Points: 9204
Turns out the Horowitz IG report doesn't sit well with AG Barr as it pretty much exonerated the FBI and it's leadership from foul play or allowing any political bias into their job performance, according to the Washington Post. Barr, who cozied up to Trump as an AG candidate by promoting his own bias against the Mueller report, isn't happy at all with the findings.

And, of course, now Fox, OANN and the White House will pivot to the Durham investigation as being the investigation that will take down the nasty Democrats that made up the entire Russia hoax and continue to push a new hoax, Ukraine.

Just you wait and see, Democrats! That Horowitz Durham investigation will prove Trump a saint and everything being said about him is because of the Deep State trying to take him down with lies!!!

Good grief, Republican Party. I gave you crap about your politics during the GWBush Administration, now, I just wish you would return to that Republican Party.
I have to agree with that last line.  I thought Bush Jr was a complete moron and a tool for Cheney to do as he wanted but I never had reason to question the man's loyalty or devotion to the country.  I disagreed with all presidents on some of their policies but Trump is the only one I've seen where I seriously think every move he makes is for personal enrichment over the good of the country.  he's got to go as soon as possible

Re: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)
« Reply #1663 on: December 03, 2019, 04:20:21 PM »

Online fairweatherfan

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20199
  • Tommy Points: 2285
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
Devin Nunes is not looking very good at the moment. First the revelation he went to Ukraine to find evidence of Ukrainian election interference that didn't exist.

Now, the Impeachment Hearings report has published phone records of multiple phone calls between Nunes, Guiliani, Guiliani associate charged with election funding wrongdoing Lev Parnas, people at OMB and a call to a phone in the White House back in April just when the smear campaign to get rid of Yavanovitch began. Some of these calls were 8-9 minutes long so something was being discussed

Sure looks like Nunes should have possibly recused himself from those hearings.

Between this and Barr not recusing himself from discussing a criminal referral for Trump's phone call that explicitly named him as involved, it's just more confirmation that the fixation on Trump as the sole cause of this stuff is deeply misguided. It's the entire party, nearly, and the handful that aren't neck-deep in corruption are either getting driven into retirement/out of the party or are complicit through silence.

The deep irony is that, much like it was in the 20s and 30s, the more explicitly nationalist the various parties become the more internationally entangled they are with each other. It's a trans-national web of corruption and criminality masquerading as "Country First" in their respective countries.

Re: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)
« Reply #1664 on: December 04, 2019, 12:59:55 AM »

Offline Hoopvortex

  • Gordon Hayward
  • Posts: 470
  • Tommy Points: 79

Good grief, Republican Party. I gave you crap about your politics during the GWBush Administration, now, I just wish you would return to that Republican Party.

I feel the same. Ironic, isn’t it?

I’m afraid the ship has sailed.

I believe that a political party whose leadership is as cynical and opportunistic as today’s Republican Party has no long-term future. Their voters are increasingly older, less educated, and less diverse. Increasingly motivated by the idea that their problems are someone else’s fault.

Mr. Bush understood the demographic obstacles that they face - but today’s Grand Old Party (oh the irony) has doubled down on the demagoguery, and has abandoned its principles, one by one, for a mythology of resentment.

Deficits? Free trade? Personal responsibility? Standing up to tyranny? What happened to the party of Lincoln? The shining city on a hill? Ronald Reagan (let alone Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, and Dwight Eisenhower) is rolling over in his grave.

« Last Edit: December 04, 2019, 07:30:29 AM by Hoopvortex »
· Team executive on Brown’s future: “All-Star. Multiple times. Just like Jayson. Everyone loves Kawhi and PG as a wing duo. We think we have our own version growing right here in Boston. It’s gonna take a couple more years, but those guys are stars. And neither has an ego. They just want to play and win.”