Donald Trump - All things impeachment.... | Acquitted in the Senate

Status
Not open for further replies.
The interesting thing about this for me is they so willingly released the transcript. I mean it is quite clearly an impeachable act, isn't it?

It shows how far they/we've come on this journey. They can convince their base that anything is okay now, so just revealing an impeachable offence is the easier way forward.
 
Last edited:
shabadu84 said:
Stepping up the crazy is honestly part of the plan. Divide attentions and conquer. The flurry of news that came out today - wouldn't surprise me if some of those came from Trump's allies. Especially since some of it seemingly connects the Ukraine issue with the Russia one. A public with a short attention span can be easily confused.
Click to expand...

I genuinely believe that there really is no plan, he's gone off the deep end this time with no understanding of how serious this could be for him. He will randomly tweet and cause a huge fuss, but I don't think its going to work this time, beginning of the end? I don't know I would much prefer to see him comprehensively voted out of office next year rather than impeached. Of course happy to see go to jail after the 2020 election for all the shit he's pulled, but think it would be much better for American politics in the long run if he's voted out.
 
The Boy said:
I genuinely believe that there really is no plan, he's gone off the deep end this time with no understanding of how serious this could be for him. He will randomly tweet and cause a huge fuss, but I don't think its going to work this time, beginning of the end? I don't know I would much prefer to see him comprehensively voted out of office next year rather than impeached. Of course happy to see go to jail after the 2020 election for all the shit he's pulled, but think it would be much better for American politics in the long run if he's voted out.
Click to expand...
Not his plan, the people around him who have some brains but who, of course, are also culpable and think they can scheme their way out this. They're the ones who will speak to reporters behind the scenes or coordinate leaks etc. There are A LOT of people heavily invested in Trump+his policies+his crimes and I can't see them just going down without a fight even if he spirals out of control.
 
Florida Man said:
Not really. Evangelicals live among the whole economic and racial spectrum. Think of Ned Flanders being the typical type.
Click to expand...
I don't really know what it means, sorry if it comes across racist or that I have anything against christian people, I thought they were more like the Saudis of Christians.
 
syrian_scholes said:
I don't really know what it means, sorry if it comes across racist or that I have anything against christian people, I thought they were more like the Saudis of Christians.
Click to expand...
My personal experience with Saudis shows me that even they have more open mindedness compared to the extreme religious here.

Rednecks are basically poorer white country folks. Some are super religious. Some are big sinners. Most are conservative Trump supporters. And you can recognize them by their accents, their clothing, and their big trucks. A good portion of rednecks are evangelicals but evangelicals can also be white collared clean cut white folks who live in suburban neighborhoods.
 
Florida Man said:
My personal experience with Saudis shows me that even they have more open mindedness compared to the extreme religious here.

Rednecks are basically poorer white country folks. Some are super religious. Some are big sinners. Most are conservative Trump supporters. And you can recognize them by their accents, their clothing, and their big trucks. A good portion of rednecks are evangelicals but evangelicals can also be white collared clean cut white folks who live in suburban neighborhoods.
Click to expand...
Aye I've been in contact with rednecks here in Texas at Pasadena, as soon as my parents and I started talking Arabic we were getting a lot of uncomfortable looks, but you know how there's pc words for everything nowadays.
 
Florida Man said:
Rednecks are basically poorer white country folks. Some are super religious. Some are big sinners. Most are conservative Trump supporters. And you can recognize them by their accents, their clothing, and their big trucks. A good portion of rednecks are evangelicals but evangelicals can also be white collared clean cut white folks who live in suburban neighborhoods.
Click to expand...
:lol: So true
 
syrian_scholes said:
Aye I've been in contact with rednecks here in Texas at Pasadena, as soon as my parents and I started talking Arabic we were getting a lot of uncomfortable looks, but you know how there's pc words for everything nowadays.
Click to expand...
I doubt they’ll kick up a fuss for being called rednecks but I probably wouldn’t be liberal with that term if I was a middle eastern person in Texas.
 


Completely off topic but this video had me absolutely creased up this morning
 
shabadu84 said:
Not his plan, the people around him who have some brains but who, of course, are also culpable and think they can scheme their way out this. They're the ones who will speak to reporters behind the scenes or coordinate leaks etc. There are A LOT of people heavily invested in Trump+his policies+his crimes and I can't see them just going down without a fight even if he spirals out of control.
Click to expand...

I'm as willing to believe that he thought he'd negotiated a deal with Pelosi and in his arrogance, ordered the transcript to be released. If that's the case, he was probably just itching to brag about it.
 
TheGame said:
:lol::wenger:

Click to expand...


It’s Brietbart. 2.16% of that 2.17% will consist of people who either looked left and right before answering or were sitting down and could answer confidently straight away.
 
My early prediction for how this is going to all play out and what I think the GOP/McConnell plan is going to be:

Democrats have taken what seems to be quite a smart hard line approach to their subpoenas - “failure or refusal to comply with the subpoena, including at the direction or behest of the President or the White House, shall constitute evidence of obstruction of the House’s impeachment inquiry and may be used as an adverse inference against you and the president.”.

On first thought, this seems like a really good move. Basically every single time someone refuses to comply with a subpoena it's going to be recorded as evidence against Trump and will be used as yet more grounds to impeach him. Perfect...

...until he is eventually impeached and a good portion of the reason that he was impeached is because 10/15/50/n.. subpoenas were defied. So it reaches the Senate and the first thing the Republican senate decide to do is have a vote on whether executive privilege is a valid reason for defying a congressional subpoena. They vote in Trump's favour and all of a sudden the majority of the evidence used to impeach Trump is ruled inadmissible and cannot be used against him in the senate trial.

You can imagine how that trial will end up playing out. Democrats question on the limited actual evidence they do have, Republicans obfuscate the President's intentions and argue for the President's prerogative to discuss whatever he wishes. Too many grey areas to convict him and the right wing press ramp up the narrative of presidential harassment and he gets a big bump in the polls.
 
The fecking President of the United States said:
“We’re trying to find out [who the whistle-blower is]...when you have a whistle-blower that reports things that were incorrect, as you know, and you’ve probably now have figured it out, the statement I made to the president of the Ukraine—a good man, a nice man, new—was perfect, it was perfect, but the whistle-blower reported a totally different statement, like a statement that was not even made.... The call was perfect. When the whistle-blower reported it, he made it sound terrible. And then you have Adam Schiff, who, even worse, made up my words...which, I’ve never even seen a thing like that...he actually took words and made it up. The reason is that when he saw my call to the president of Ukraine it was so good that he couldn’t quote from it because there was nothing done wrong...so Adam Schiff decided, I can’t let this happen, so let me make up...[he] made up a phony call and read it to Congress...and it’s a disgrace. This whole thing is a disgrace. There’s been tremendous corruption, and we’re seeking it. It’s called drain the swamp. There’s been corruption on the other side, there’s been corruption like you’ve never seen. Now the new president of Ukraine ran on the basis of no corruption...and I believe that he really means it. But there was a lot of corruption having to do with the 2016 election against us, and we want to get to the bottom of it, and it’s very important that we do.”
Click to expand...

There's so much going on here.
 
Stating the obvious perhaps but he seems more bothered by the fact that his phone conversations aren't receiving praise than by the prospect of impeachment.
 
Rado_N said:
There's so much going on here.
Click to expand...

He's annoyed at the fake words that are literally in black and white in the actual transcript the White House released.
 
Can they only impeach him from this phone call or can they use other issues on top, such as the obstruction charges from the MR which are also impeachable offences and anything else they find out during these inquiries.

If other whistleblowers come through with any wrong-doing then surely these can be added to the list of impeachable offences too. We’ve still got the tax issues hovering in the background which may contain more impeachable offences. There could end up being a large stack of them.
 
Dwazza Gunnar Solskjær said:
Didn't he already say he wasn't Trump's attorney?

Anyway, TV lawyers don't get special privileges.
Click to expand...
they dont and in a normal court of law it would be a laughable motion that a judge would easily dissmiss. but alas this isnt a court room, there is no judge and Rudy can tell them to go do one because clearly no one puts any weight on a congressional subpeona as there willl be no enforcement of it. The plan for dems is to write up Rudy as obstructing as part of the impeachment proceedings :lol:
 
Rudi isn't an active member of the D.C Bar, so where does he stand with attorney client privilege?
 
ChaddyP said:
they dont and in a normal court of law it would be a laughable motion that a judge would easily dissmiss. but alas this isnt a court room, there is no judge and Rudy can tell them to go do one because clearly no one puts any weight on a congressional subpeona as there willl be no enforcement of it. The plan for dems is to write up Rudy as obstructing as part of the impeachment proceedings :lol:
Click to expand...

I'll buy that for a dollar! :lol:
 
Rado_N said:
Rudi isn't an active member of the D.C Bar, so where does he stand with attorney client privilege?
Click to expand...
To be fair attourney client privilege is useless in congress. They dont recognise the right . Or dont have to.


"Congress maintains that it is not obligated to recognize common law privileges established by courts, such as the attorney-client privilege, work product doctrine, or other non-constitutional privileges.[10] Congress bases this assertion on (1) the separation of powers, dictating that Congress is not bound by courts’ common law practices and (2) Congress’s inherent legislative right to investigate. Congress has nearly limitless powers to investigate anything within the “legitimate legislative sphere.”[11] "

https://businesslawtoday.org/2019/0...tions-key-considerations-recent-developments/
 
He will be impeached, not removed, will go through this unscathed just before elections, dems will choose Biden, Trump will attacked him as corrupt and his son as well for this Ukranian mess (turning it against de Dems) and he will get reelected. IT-HAD-BEEN-AL-WAYS-LIKE-THIS during his presidential tenure, GOP don't care and have his back and people stop caring on what is not normal anymore
 
Red Defence said:
Has he got any official clients?
Click to expand...

Only Trump as far as I know, and I don't know what the formal status is there. I just recall reading about him not being an active member of the Bar and so could not represent Trump in court if it came to that.

Not sure how that relates to Congress, especially in light of the below post:

ChaddyP said:
To be fair attourney client privilege is useless in congress. They dont recognise the right . Or dont have to.


"Congress maintains that it is not obligated to recognize common law privileges established by courts, such as the attorney-client privilege, work product doctrine, or other non-constitutional privileges.[10] Congress bases this assertion on (1) the separation of powers, dictating that Congress is not bound by courts’ common law practices and (2) Congress’s inherent legislative right to investigate. Congress has nearly limitless powers to investigate anything within the “legitimate legislative sphere.”[11] "

https://businesslawtoday.org/2019/0...tions-key-considerations-recent-developments/
Click to expand...

Interesting, thanks for this.
 
The Boy said:
I genuinely believe that there really is no plan, he's gone off the deep end this time with no understanding of how serious this could be for him. He will randomly tweet and cause a huge fuss, but I don't think its going to work this time, beginning of the end? I don't know I would much prefer to see him comprehensively voted out of office next year rather than impeached. Of course happy to see go to jail after the 2020 election for all the shit he's pulled, but think it would be much better for American politics in the long run if he's voted out.
Click to expand...

He's not going to jail. Let's face it. A slap in the wrist and asked to resign.

History wont be nice to him but no way he'll end up in jail
 
Someone thinks that USA will recognize that they have a criminal as their president? representing the country? for 4 years? would be an embarrassment and everybody would question all the deals and blame the US for all the conundrums that he organized like Iran deals, trade war with china and North Korea

Will be recognizing internationally a big feck up
 
4bars said:
Someone thinks that USA will recognize that they have a criminal as their president? representing the country? for 4 years? would be an embarrassment and everybody would question all the deals and blame the US for all the conundrums that he organized like Iran deals, trade war with china and North Korea

Will be recognizing internationally a big feck up
Click to expand...
To be fair, we had Bush + Cheney for 8 years and they are practically war criminals.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.