Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #5551  
Old 11-23-2019, 08:14 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 12,636
The Republicans goal is to turn Joe Biden 2020 into the Hillary 2016 candidate, and why wouldn't they adopt that strategy? It worked, after all.

Assuming Biden wins, they will weaken him as he hobbles across the finish line into the convention. They'll assert that the Bidens are corrupt and rotten to their core, and that they'll do anything to win a nomination, which will probably cause some Bernistas to sour on him. The GOP is using whatever power they have left to cast doubt on democracy, and they're just getting started. This will go on for months.
  #5552  
Old 11-23-2019, 08:19 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,464
Quote:
Originally Posted by JKellyMap View Post
We’re both right. He had two models going on simultaneously: “polls only” and “polls plus.” As I recall, they never diverged much, mainly because the economy was doing well but not great, so it didn’t tend to push things much one way or the other (simply because of where we happened to be in the economic cycle, NOT because the economy is a poor predictor of elections in general. It isn’t perfect, of course.)

https://www.google.com/amp/s/fivethi...-forecast/amp/
Thanks, I had forgotten!
__________________
My new novel Spindown
  #5553  
Old 11-23-2019, 08:35 AM
Bone's Avatar
Bone is offline
Extrajudicial
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 11,026

Moderating


Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
It . does . not . matter.

Don't you understand?!

None of the facts that you think are important are going to bring down Donald Trump. We elected a post-facts president, and we've become even more anti-facts since.

The only facts that will matter are the economic facts.

p.s. Americans don't deserve democracy.
This is threadshitting. Don't do that. I'd rather not kick you out of this thread but I will if you do this again.

[/moderating]
  #5554  
Old 11-23-2019, 08:35 AM
Jim Peebles is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 658
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Since we're just talking number of Americans, here are the numbers from Wikipedia for the Congressional elections:

2018 -- Democrats win approximately 60.5 million votes, Republicans approximately 50.8 million

2014 -- Republicans win approximately 40.1 million votes; Democrats approximately 35.6 million votes

2010 -- Republicans win approximately 44.8 million votes; Democrats approximately 40 million votes

The Democrats increased their vote count in raw voter numbers, from 2014 to 2018, by over 25 million votes.

Once again, there's absolutely no evidence the Democratic party is weakening, and plenty of evidence for the opposite. Wherever you're getting your information on this from is fake news.
That wasn't the claim. They were claiming the Republicans did well in 2018 in terms of House and Senate seats compared to past Presidents' first midterm elections. I am too lazy to create a spreadsheet. I will do 2018 and 2010 (according to Wikipedia data):
Republican president:
2018 Senate: Republicans +2 seats, Democrats -2 seats
2018 House of Representatives: Republicans -42 seats, Democrats +41 seats
Democrat president:
2010 Senate: Republicans +6 seats, Democrats -6 seats
2010 House of Representatives: Republicans +63 seats, Democrats -63 seats
  #5555  
Old 11-23-2019, 08:35 AM
Bone's Avatar
Bone is offline
Extrajudicial
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 11,026

Moderating


Quote:
Originally Posted by dontbesojumpy View Post
Shut up.
Knock it off.

[/moderating]
  #5556  
Old 11-23-2019, 08:38 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,464
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Peebles View Post
That wasn't the claim. They were claiming the Republicans did well in 2018 in terms of House and Senate seats compared to past Presidents' first midterm elections. I am too lazy to create a spreadsheet. I will do 2018 and 2010 (according to Wikipedia data):

Republican president:

2018 Senate: Republicans +2 seats, Democrats -2 seats

2018 House of Representatives: Republicans -42 seats, Democrats +41 seats

Democrat president:

2010 Senate: Republicans +6 seats, Democrats -6 seats

2010 House of Representatives: Republicans +63 seats, Democrats -63 seats
The claim we were arguing was about the "walk away" movement. If it was successful in any way, then we'd be seeing fewer Americans vote Democratic. The numbers show the opposite, thus there is no significant "walk away" movement.
__________________
My new novel Spindown
  #5557  
Old 11-23-2019, 09:04 AM
Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 27,899
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Peebles View Post
That wasn't the claim. They were claiming the Republicans did well in 2018 in terms of House and Senate seats compared to past Presidents' first midterm elections. I am too lazy to create a spreadsheet. I will do 2018 and 2010 (according to Wikipedia data):
Republican president:
2018 Senate: Republicans +2 seats, Democrats -2 seats
2018 House of Representatives: Republicans -42 seats, Democrats +41 seats
Democrat president:
2010 Senate: Republicans +6 seats, Democrats -6 seats
2010 House of Representatives: Republicans +63 seats, Democrats -63 seats
2002 House: Rís plus 8
2002 Senate: Rís plus 2

1990 House: Dís plus 7
1990 Senate: Dís plus 1

1982 House: Dís plus 26
1982 Senate: No change

1970 House: Dís plus 12
1970 Senate: Rís plus 4

Youíre welcome for the context.
  #5558  
Old 11-23-2019, 09:28 AM
Jim Peebles is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 658
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenman View Post
2002 House: Rís plus 8
2002 Senate: Rís plus 2

1990 House: Dís plus 7
1990 Senate: Dís plus 1

1982 House: Dís plus 26
1982 Senate: No change

1970 House: Dís plus 12
1970 Senate: Rís plus 4

Youíre welcome for the context.
You left out 1994 (source = Wikipedia):
Democrat president:
Senate: Republican +8, Democrat -8
House: Republican +54, Democrat -54
  #5559  
Old 11-23-2019, 09:37 AM
Lance Turbo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 4,680
So 2018 was the third biggest swing of house seats of all time? Pretty undeniably big wave in that case.
  #5560  
Old 11-23-2019, 09:41 AM
Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 27,899
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Peebles View Post
You left out 1994 (source = Wikipedia):
Democrat president:
Senate: Republican +8, Democrat -8
House: Republican +54, Democrat -54
Iím cherry picking just like you did.
  #5561  
Old 11-23-2019, 09:47 AM
John_Stamos'_Left_Ear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,996
Trump obviously needs to listen to the Chicken Littles or he wouldn't be "miserable" and "intolerable" I don't think.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
  #5562  
Old 11-23-2019, 10:06 AM
Ann Hedonia's Avatar
Ann Hedonia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,939
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fear Itself View Post
I'm wondering what will happen when Republicans in the Senate start subpoenaing witnesses for the trial. Do they expect Hunter Biden to testify? If I were him, I would just claim "absolute immunity". If questioned about it, I would simply say it means whatever I want it to mean, per Trump v. Schiff.
That could easily backfire on them. They been painting him as some sort of worthless wastrel, without either an energy or corporate governance background, totally unfit to serve on the board of a corporation.

But its possible young Biden did bring substantial value to Burisma. From his background, it sounds like his experience was in raising capital and soliciting investment. You know, sales. And he might have been really good at it.

I think the Pubs best strategy is to paint him out to be a totally useless wastrel without letting him testify. Itís possible he is competent and well spoken and people will see that he brought value to Burisma. I donít know either way, Iíve never heard him speak. But this could backfire bigly.
  #5563  
Old 11-23-2019, 10:12 AM
jsc1953 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 11,037
The interesting thing about the Hunter Biden whataboutism: when you listen to the charges, here's what he's being accused of: being on the board, and being compensated, while being Joe Biden's son.

That's it. Nobody has actually suggested anything untoward has taken place; it's just "Hunter Biden! A bazillion dollars for being on the Burisma board!! Horrors!!!!"
  #5564  
Old 11-23-2019, 10:21 AM
kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 32,925
Quote:
Originally Posted by dontbesojumpy View Post
Walken, for the record, less than 3.
<3

You're doing god's work.
Fewer than 3.

What?

Last edited by kaylasdad99; 11-23-2019 at 10:22 AM.
  #5565  
Old 11-23-2019, 10:25 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 12,636
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsc1953 View Post
The interesting thing about the Hunter Biden whataboutism: when you listen to the charges, here's what he's being accused of: being on the board, and being compensated, while being Joe Biden's son.

That's it. Nobody has actually suggested anything untoward has taken place; it's just "Hunter Biden! A bazillion dollars for being on the Burisma board!! Horrors!!!!"
They don't have to have substance; it's enough to get an investigation going. It's the implication of corruption that would be enough to discourage participation in actually making the effort to follow the race and make the effort to drive to the polls, stand in line, and vote.
  #5566  
Old 11-23-2019, 10:35 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 19,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ann Hedonia View Post
That could easily backfire on them. They been painting him as some sort of worthless wastrel, without either an energy or corporate governance background, totally unfit to serve on the board of a corporation.
.
I've mentioned before, and I don't know why it doesn't seem to get any play, but Hunter served on the Amtrak board of governors previous to Burisma. Appointed by Bush.

He seems like a wastrel even still, lol.

Last edited by CarnalK; 11-23-2019 at 10:36 AM.
  #5567  
Old 11-23-2019, 10:46 AM
Lance Turbo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 4,680
"He had to announce the investigations. He didnít actually have to do them, as I understood it." - Gordon Sondland

That quote from Sondland's testimony should put an end to the idea that there was a legitimate anti-corruption reason for any of this.

It should, but it probably won't.
  #5568  
Old 11-23-2019, 11:10 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
It just gets worse and worse. (Americanoversight.org)

Looks like they're not willing to ignore the orders of a Federal judge, at least. Much more to come. This information was obtained via a FOIA. There are other FOIA active requests in the words of their Executive Director, "in the dozens."

Well done, American Oversight. Well done!!!
How did the documents get released? Presumably Trump and Pompeo didn't want them released. Did the FOIA request slip through the cracks? Did a lower-level State Dept. official pre-empt his superiors? Did Pompeo decide to obey the law for fear of a prison term? Is this the "deep state" fighting back?
  #5569  
Old 11-23-2019, 11:19 AM
steronz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 5,399
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
How did the documents get released? Presumably Trump and Pompeo didn't want them released. Did the FOIA request slip through the cracks? Did a lower-level State Dept. official pre-empt his superiors? Did Pompeo decide to obey the law for fear of a prison term? Is this the "deep state" fighting back?
I read through all 100 pages, there's hardly anything in them. The "bombshells" appear to be discussions about phone calls between Pompeo and Giuliani, and copies of 1 or 2 of Pompeo's schedules that showed 20 minute blocks of time carved out for Giuliani. It's interesting, those schedules were basically full 8 hour days of 20 minute phone calls dealing with people and subjects all over the map, with 15 minutes in between presumably for someone to brief him on the next call's topic. Being secretary of state sounds like my worst nightmare.

Anyway, if they were aware of the release they probably didn't care, I'm not sure if Pompeo has stipulated that he talked to Rudy at some point but it doesn't seem like anyone on Trump's defense team disputes it. In fact, they would just say it adds legitimacy to what Rudy was doing.

Last edited by steronz; 11-23-2019 at 11:20 AM.
  #5570  
Old 11-23-2019, 11:27 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 12,636
It corroborates Sondland's testimony - that's one thing. But we're probably just getting started. More to follow.
  #5571  
Old 11-23-2019, 11:28 AM
steronz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 5,399
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsc1953 View Post
The interesting thing about the Hunter Biden whataboutism: when you listen to the charges, here's what he's being accused of: being on the board, and being compensated, while being Joe Biden's son.

That's it. Nobody has actually suggested anything untoward has taken place; it's just "Hunter Biden! A bazillion dollars for being on the Burisma board!! Horrors!!!!"
The extension is that Joe shut down a Ukrainian investigation into Burisma in order to keep Hunter's gravy train flowing. Whether or not Hunter was qualified is irrelevant to that accusation, but also if Hunter were squeeky clean it would lessen the impact of Joe's alleged interference.

Not that any of this actually matters, but Hunter's lack of qualifications and the bad optics of him being on a foreign board are at least factual, and iirc prominent democrats were aware of and displeased with the bad optics when it was going on. In a sea of bullshit, criticizing Hunter's role with Burisma is one of the few things Republicans are doing that's got any connection to reality.
  #5572  
Old 11-23-2019, 11:53 AM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,779
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
How did the documents get released? Presumably Trump and Pompeo didn't want them released. Did the FOIA request slip through the cracks? Did a lower-level State Dept. official pre-empt his superiors? Did Pompeo decide to obey the law for fear of a prison term? Is this the "deep state" fighting back?
This is regular Americans fighting back. Any American could have made the FOIA request, but it so happened that American Oversight did. From their website, here is who they are:

Quote:
American Oversight is a non-partisan, nonprofit ethics watchdog and is the top Freedom of Information Act litigator investigating the Trump administration. Since our launch in March 2017, we have filed more than 100 public records lawsuits, uncovering and publishing tens of thousands of documents including senior officialsí calendars, emails, and expense records. Relying on FOIA and other public records laws, we file requests to uncover misconduct that otherwise would not see daylight, and then we harness the independent power of the courts to force the administration to obey the law.
There has never been a legal leg to stand on for the State Department or others to withhold these or any other requested documents. They literally ignored the letter of the law in failing to provide them to Congress in response to subpoenas. That was bad.

Anyway, American Oversight filed their FOIA request and a Federal judge ordered the State Department to comply with the request and release the documents by midnight last night. A lot of people (including me) were holding their breath, watching to see if the administration would ignore a judge's order. Up to now, they haven't. And they didn't. So they are still responding to the courts, if nothing else. If they had ignored the court's order, then we really would be just another authoritarian system.

It's why Moscow Mitch is working so feverishly to pack the courts with their lackeys. They want the veneer of a democratic republic without actually having one. They want people in judicial positions who will rubber stamp their authoritarian actions so they can point and say, "See? We're doing it by the book!" when in fact, they are already ignoring many Constitutional mandates as they choose.

What I love about documents is that their evidence is irrefutable. Trump Republicans can try to shade the meaning of testimony from witnesses, pretend the witnesses are partisan or liars, dirty up their reputations. But documents always speak for themselves.

You are right that Trump and Pompeo didn't want them released, even if, as steronz points out, this tranche doesn't reveal a ton. But AO indicated they have "dozens" of FOIA requests outstanding, so there is more to come. For me, the important thing is that AO forced the State Department to comply with the law.

I also think it's big news when a little over a month ago we've gone from the Trump "administration" defense of, "Whut? Secretly and illegally withhold military aid for political favors to subvert another election?" to documentary confirmation that the top State Department official was colluding with unofficial Giuliani and his now-indicted henchmen to undermine our official national security interests against the work and policies of his own people.
  #5573  
Old 11-23-2019, 12:03 PM
jasg is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Upper left hand corner
Posts: 6,318
Regarding Republican support for Trump, fear of tweets is one thing. However, the editor of the National Review, Rich Lowry had an interesting interview with Vox reporter Sean Illing. His comments explicitly explain the rest of Trump's support from modern Conservative Republican to me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Lowry - National Review
(Emphasis mine)

Sean Illing

I have to say, itís strange that you were so staunchly anti-Trump a few years ago, even publishing an entire collection of essays trashing his worldview, and now you write in this book that Republicans should ďthoughtfully integrate his nationalism into the partyís orthodoxy.Ē

What changed?

Rich Lowry

A couple of things. We ran our ďAgainst TrumpĒ issue in December 2015 prior to the Iowa caucuses. We desperately wanted to defeat him. We thought there were 16 better alternatives. But fast-forward to today, heís now the president, and weíve seen how heís governed and Iíve been surprised in two ways.

Iíve been surprised how on some really important matters of substance to conservatives of long-standing, heís been a rock, like on pro-life stuff, on conscience rights, on judges. That was one of the deep concerns we had about him but heís basically delivered.

My other surprise is I thought he would attempt to tone it down in terms of his personal conduct once he took office, but he absolutely hasnít. The office has made no impression on him whatsoever. The huge downside is that he doesnít respect the separation of powers in our government, he doesnít think constitutionally, and says and does things no president should do or say. And I and my colleagues call him out on that.

But at the end of the day, weíre asked to either favor Trump or root for Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders or Joe Biden or Mayor Pete, who oppose us on basically everything. So itís a pretty simple calculation.
In short, as with autocratic world leaders, Trump is a useful idiot. They might prefer more useful and less idiot, but they will work with what they got...
  #5574  
Old 11-23-2019, 12:14 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,779
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
The extension is that Joe shut down a Ukrainian investigation into Burisma in order to keep Hunter's gravy train flowing. Whether or not Hunter was qualified is irrelevant to that accusation, but also if Hunter were squeeky clean it would lessen the impact of Joe's alleged interference.

Not that any of this actually matters, but Hunter's lack of qualifications and the bad optics of him being on a foreign board are at least factual, and iirc prominent democrats were aware of and displeased with the bad optics when it was going on. In a sea of bullshit, criticizing Hunter's role with Burisma is one of the few things Republicans are doing that's got any connection to reality.
And this is simply untrue. Joe Biden was tasked with the official Obama administration's goal of pursuing more corruption in Ukraine, not less. Biden was dispatched to oversee the Ukraine's firing of Ukrainian Inspector General Shokin because he was corrupt. In fact, the investigation into Burisma under Shokin had gone dormant at the time Joe Biden aided in Shokin's firing.

There was no active investigation into Burisma at the time. The idea was to get a new Ukrainian IG who would investigation more corruption, not less.

This was not only the goal of the United States, but also the goal of other Western European governments.

A good CT debunker explanation can be found here. (New York Times) That link also takes on the stupid Crowdstrike crap and Hunter Biden China connections. It's a good read.

I don't disagree that Hunter Biden leaned on his father's reputation to get his Burisma board position. But if we're worried about nepotism, we could easily look at Jared Kushner, Ivanka Trump, Andrew Giuliani who now works as Trump's "sports liaison," and William Barr's son-in-law, Tyler McGaughey, who now works in the White House Counsel's office.
  #5575  
Old 11-23-2019, 01:07 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,774
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasg View Post
Regarding Republican support for Trump, fear of tweets is one thing. However, the editor of the National Review, Rich Lowry had an interesting interview with Vox reporter Sean Illing. His comments explicitly explain the rest of Trump's support from modern Conservative Republican to me.

In short, as with autocratic world leaders, Trump is a useful idiot. They might prefer more useful and less idiot, but they will work with what they got...
The argument completely ignores that if you impeach Trump, Elizabeth Warren does not become President and that Pence would be even more in line with what he's looking for.
  #5576  
Old 11-23-2019, 01:11 PM
margin is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,613
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
The way I look at it is that bribery and extortion are two sides of the same coin, with extortion the worse side because coercion is worse than inducement. Republicans will surely come to the point of arguing that since this is extortion, not bribery, it's not grounds for impeachment, but that won't pass the laugh test. If the Founders considered bribery sufficient to impeach over, they surely felt the same about extortion.
Well, seems like Trump was asking for a bribe, while simultaneously committing extortion.
__________________
"She's so angry!" When people say the same thing the same way about men, then you can complain.
  #5577  
Old 11-23-2019, 01:12 PM
Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 27,899
Super-genius Devin Nunes is threatening to sue the media for reporting on what Lev Parnas is saying about helping out on one of Nunesí junkets to gather conspiracy theories.

Note, Nunes isnít talking about suing his buddy Parnas for defamation. No, he wants to sue the media for reporting on what Parnas is saying.

Of course, thereís a reasonable chance that Parnas is lying. Heís really no more trustworthy that Nunes, after all.
  #5578  
Old 11-23-2019, 01:22 PM
Boycott is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 541
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
The Republicans goal is to turn Joe Biden 2020 into the Hillary 2016 candidate, and why wouldn't they adopt that strategy? It worked, after all.

Assuming Biden wins, they will weaken him as he hobbles across the finish line into the convention. They'll assert that the Bidens are corrupt and rotten to their core, and that they'll do anything to win a nomination, which will probably cause some Bernistas to sour on him. The GOP is using whatever power they have left to cast doubt on democracy, and they're just getting started. This will go on for months.
Generally agree but a lot of Americans just didn't like Hillary and Bill, period. There was 25 years of conspiracies about them.

Bill was in office one year when this wackjob was produced.

https://youtu.be/zCGW033-82c
  #5579  
Old 11-23-2019, 01:44 PM
Fear Itself is offline
Cecil's Inner Circle
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Flavortown
Posts: 36,219
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
The extension is that Joe shut down a Ukrainian investigation into Burisma in order to keep Hunter's gravy train flowing.
Except that didn't really happen either. There was no investigation of Burisma. The prosecutor Biden worked to have fired (Shokin) wasn't investigating Burisma. He wasn't investigating any of the corruption in Ukraine. He was taking bribes NOT to in investigate corruption. That's why the US wanted him fired. This story that Biden's son was being investigated is totally false.
  #5580  
Old 11-23-2019, 02:02 PM
dontbesojumpy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,351
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaylasdad99 View Post
Fewer than 3.

What?
Ask Kayla.
  #5581  
Old 11-23-2019, 02:06 PM
John_Stamos'_Left_Ear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,996
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
The extension is that Joe shut down a Ukrainian investigation into Burisma in order to keep Hunter's gravy train flowing.
This subject is not supposed to be in this thread. But this is bullshit. You can feel free to present the evidence in the thread where it is appropriate.
  #5582  
Old 11-23-2019, 02:12 PM
Ludovic is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: America's Wing
Posts: 31,029
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boycott View Post
Generally agree but a lot of Americans just didn't like Hillary and Bill, period. There was 25 years of conspiracies about them.
This. I think Buttigieg and Biden have the best chance of winning because they are most like Hillary but don't have her long history of (totally manufactured) baggage. If the last election and the last 3 years hadn't turned out the way they did, then the Democrats might need to swing for the fences, but they only need to flip a few tens of thousands of votes in a couple states to take the Presidency back, and that's a much more sure thing given that the Two B's aren't hated as much as Hillary and there will be a lot more people disenchanted with Trump than pleasantly surprised by him.

Whereas with Warren and Sanders, it is a more risky gamble on whether they can win more people with the details of their plans and their intensity, or lose more people to red-baiting.
  #5583  
Old 11-23-2019, 02:13 PM
John_Stamos'_Left_Ear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,996
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
I read through all 100 pages, there's hardly anything in them.
Politico disagrees:
Quote:
The 100 pages of documents show repeated contact in March between Pompeo and Giuliani, President Donald Trump's personal lawyer, with the help of White House officials.

The documents back up bombshell testimony from Ambassador to the EU Gordon Sondland this week alleging senior administration officials were in the loop on Trump and Giuliani's efforts to get Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden's family.

The released documents also include a letter signed by six former U.S. ambassadors praising Yovanovitch.

The documents also reveal Rep. Devin Nunes, an ardent Trump ally and the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, was on Pompeoís call list only a few days after Giuliani.
So these documents help corroborate the testimony of a witness who Republicans were trying to smear as unreliable (and the fact is he did change his testimony which naturally will cause skepticism). It also corroborated that Yovanovitch was highly praised and most importantly it also corroborates that Nunes is involved with this, which means that new evidence is not just from the mouth of someone facing jail time.

Yes, we knew this information previously, but now it's a hell of a lot harder for Republicans to spin because it's in black and white.
  #5584  
Old 11-23-2019, 02:19 PM
John_Stamos'_Left_Ear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,996
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenman View Post
Super-genius Devin Nunes is threatening to sue the media for reporting on what Lev Parnas is saying about helping out on one of Nunesí junkets to gather conspiracy theories.

Note, Nunes isnít talking about suing his buddy Parnas for defamation. No, he wants to sue the media for reporting on what Parnas is saying.

Of course, thereís a reasonable chance that Parnas is lying. Heís really no more trustworthy that Nunes, after all.
Hey, at least the members of the media are real, unlike his Twitter cow.
  #5585  
Old 11-23-2019, 03:05 PM
Walken After Midnight is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 5,398
Vicky Ward, CNN, who broke the Parnas/Nunes story:
Quote:
Lev Parnasís attorney has told me that his client would not be making these claims if he didnít have text messages and other such evidence to back them up.
  #5586  
Old 11-23-2019, 03:19 PM
dontbesojumpy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,351
‘Everything Is Connected’: Ukrainian Gas Company’s CEO Willing to Testify Against Rudy Giuliani

Quote:
“I will with a high likelihood be invited to testify in this case,” Naftogaz of Ukraine CEO Andriy Kobolyev said in an interview with Time. “If I am called, I would be willing to come and testify.”

...

Parnas and Fruman were arrested in October and charged for illegally funneling foreign political donations to Republican U.S. election candidates in violation of federal campaign finance laws. The two Soviet-born Florida businessmen were allegedly attempting to oust Kobolyev from his position at Naftogaz and have him replaced with someone more inclined to benefit them financially. This has previously been described as a “shakedown.”
Just to piggy-back on Walken's previous post.
  #5587  
Old 11-23-2019, 03:36 PM
Try2B Comprehensive's Avatar
Try2B Comprehensive is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 6,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
And this is simply untrue. Joe Biden was tasked with the official Obama administration's goal of pursuing more corruption in Ukraine, not less. Biden was dispatched to oversee the Ukraine's firing of Ukrainian Inspector General Shokin because he was corrupt. In fact, the investigation into Burisma under Shokin had gone dormant at the time Joe Biden aided in Shokin's firing.

There was no active investigation into Burisma at the time. The idea was to get a new Ukrainian IG who would investigation more corruption, not less.

This was not only the goal of the United States, but also the goal of other Western European governments.

A good CT debunker explanation can be found here. (New York Times) That link also takes on the stupid Crowdstrike crap and Hunter Biden China connections. It's a good read.

I don't disagree that Hunter Biden leaned on his father's reputation to get his Burisma board position. But if we're worried about nepotism, we could easily look at Jared Kushner, Ivanka Trump, Andrew Giuliani who now works as Trump's "sports liaison," and William Barr's son-in-law, Tyler McGaughey, who now works in the White House Counsel's office.
Why not just avoid engaging in whataboutism ourselves? We don't have to point to Trump family nepotism. Everyone has their minds made up about that anyway, they seem to have gotten away with it and what is the accusation anyway? It looks bad? It isn't worth it.

The Hunter Biden stuff relates to this thread the same way it relates to the impeachment inquiry: it is really a separate topic. If you have a criminal inictment you'd like to make, go ahead, but we're talking here about Trump's bribery, his high crimes, his obstruction of justice, his witness tampering. Hunter really doesn't figure in to any of that.

I am not Jr modding you, I am just saying Jared etc is (almost) as much of a rabbit hole as Hunter. Hunter's imagined "crimes" are the "tax cuts pay for themselves" of the impeachment hearings: say it enough and people will believe it and become fixated. So unless nepotism is going to be an article of impeachment, we should pursue it separately, if at all. Nepotism will make a great campaign point actually, if it comes to that.
  #5588  
Old 11-23-2019, 03:59 PM
BeepKillBeep is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,048
As the criminal behaviour becomes increasingly clear, the posts by Trump supporters are going to be increasingly comical. There are many reasons to hope the likes Guiliani and Trump go to prison, but I would just love to hear what Trump supporters like HurricaneDitka et al. will have to say at that time. I think it is about time for some throwing under the bus. I think next week it will morph into, yes, all of this criminal activity was committed but not by Trump. It was all of the underlings!

Last edited by BeepKillBeep; 11-23-2019 at 04:04 PM.
  #5589  
Old 11-23-2019, 04:18 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,779
Quote:
Originally Posted by Try2B Comprehensive View Post
Why not just avoid engaging in whataboutism ourselves? We don't have to point to Trump family nepotism. Everyone has their minds made up about that anyway, they seem to have gotten away with it and what is the accusation anyway? It looks bad? It isn't worth it.

The Hunter Biden stuff relates to this thread the same way it relates to the impeachment inquiry: it is really a separate topic. If you have a criminal inictment you'd like to make, go ahead, but we're talking here about Trump's bribery, his high crimes, his obstruction of justice, his witness tampering. Hunter really doesn't figure in to any of that.

I am not Jr modding you, I am just saying Jared etc is (almost) as much of a rabbit hole as Hunter. Hunter's imagined "crimes" are the "tax cuts pay for themselves" of the impeachment hearings: say it enough and people will believe it and become fixated. So unless nepotism is going to be an article of impeachment, we should pursue it separately, if at all. Nepotism will make a great campaign point actually, if it comes to that.
Your point is a fair one and I appreciate you making it. However, I'd ask that you look at the post that caused me to respond.

In it, steronz made a clear, false statement: "The extension is that Joe shut down a Ukrainian investigation into Burisma in order to keep Hunter's gravy train flowing."

Now, I don't know if s/he meant to make an incorrect statement or if it was just inartfully worded, but it is a false statement. Because this particular falsehood seems to have somewhat successfully made its way into the mainstream dialogue, the untruth of it is a real burr under my saddle. I feel the need to correct it when I see it.

Otherwise, again, I agree in every way with the criticism you offered.
  #5590  
Old 11-23-2019, 04:32 PM
Rick Kitchen's Avatar
Rick Kitchen is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Citrus Heights, CA, USA
Posts: 18,119
Quote:
Originally Posted by PatrickLondon View Post
I've got news for you. It's back.
Whom are we cold warring against? We love Russia.
  #5591  
Old 11-23-2019, 04:50 PM
Try2B Comprehensive's Avatar
Try2B Comprehensive is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 6,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
Your point is a fair one and I appreciate you making it. However, I'd ask that you look at the post that caused me to respond.

In it, steronz made a clear, false statement: "The extension is that Joe shut down a Ukrainian investigation into Burisma in order to keep Hunter's gravy train flowing."

Now, I don't know if s/he meant to make an incorrect statement or if it was just inartfully worded, but it is a false statement. Because this particular falsehood seems to have somewhat successfully made its way into the mainstream dialogue, the untruth of it is a real burr under my saddle. I feel the need to correct it when I see it.

Otherwise, again, I agree in every way with the criticism you offered.
Yeah, the "crimes" of Hunter and Joe motivated the "tax cuts pay for themselves" comparison. It is unfortunate that bs can have such a gavitational pull.

I don't know steronz's intentions but I took it as describing the GOP strategy, which seems to be to deflect attention away from impeachment and towards the crimes of the opposition, be they real or imagined. And chasing this unicorn is baked right into the bribery/extortion to begin with, so it is hard to just never ever mention it. But deflection seems to be all Team Trump has got, be it election strategy or impeachment defense. The propaganda-driven nature of the GOP generally has been my own burr for a long time.

I am saying this as someone working a lot of 12 hr days lately, mostly away from tv. This thread is doing more to keep me informed than any other source, so do please keep it up
  #5592  
Old 11-23-2019, 05:09 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 7,695
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
I read through all 100 pages ...

... I'm not sure if Pompeo has stipulated that he talked to Rudy at some point but it doesn't seem like anyone on Trump's defense team disputes it. In fact, they would just say it adds legitimacy to what Rudy was doing.
It severely undercuts the 'Rudy was a rogue agent and Trump had no idea what he was doing' defense of Trump. Specifically, it implies that Rudy can't be thrown under that bus alone---the theory would now have to be that Pompeo was part of Rudy's scheme (all supposedly unbeknownst to Trump, according to the 'rogue Rudy' defense).

And Pompeo is highly unlikely to cooperate with any such attempt to deflect responsibility for the Ukraine scandal from Trump.
  #5593  
Old 11-23-2019, 05:23 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 7,695
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walken After Midnight View Post
Fox News' senior judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano:
Quote:
ďThe Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee have unearthed enough evidence, in my opinion, to justify about three or four articles of impeachment against the president," Napolitano told Reason.com's Nick Gillespie.

"One is bribery... The second charge will be high crimes and misdemeanors, election law violation," the former New Jersey Superior Court judge said. "The third crime will be obstruction of justice. The fourth will be interference with a witness, and the fifth may be lying under oath."

ďThe evidence of his impeachable behavior at this point, in my view, is overwhelming," Napolitano concluded.
Perhaps another charge may be witness tampering:

Quote:
President Trump, partial to gold and marble elegance, never took a shine to rustic Camp David. So acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney pitched to him an unusual idea at the start of the House impeachment inquiry: Use the secluded mountainous presidential retreat to woo House Republicans.

Since then, Mulvaney and top White House officials have hosted weekend getaways for Republicans at the historic lodge, seeking to butter up Republicans before the big impeachment vote.

...ďIíve worked with a number of Republican presidents over various administrations . . . and Iíve never, ever been invited to Camp David,Ē said Rep. Ann Wagner (R-Mo.). ďIt was amazing to go for the short weekend. So historic.Ē

The excursions are funded by the U.S. government, administration officials say.

... In all, Trump has met with or reached out personally to 100 GOP members of the House since the impeachment inquiry was launched, and 50 of the 53 Senate Republicans have attended a White House lunch ...

[At Camp David] no phones are allowed on the premises ...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...d00_story.html

No phones are allowed, meaning there can be no records of what Trump may be saying to those who will vote on his fate.

"Jury tampering" might apply to both the House and the Senate, with the House members acting essentially as a grand jury, voting whether or not to indict, and the Senators acting as the jury in the trial that could remove Trump from office.
  #5594  
Old 11-23-2019, 05:54 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 7,695
Jury tampering, of course (not "witness tampering").
  #5595  
Old 11-23-2019, 06:02 PM
steronz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 5,399
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
And this is simply untrue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fear Itself View Post
Except that didn't really happen either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by John_Stamos'_Left_Ear View Post
This subject is not supposed to be in this thread. But this is bullshit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
In it, steronz made a clear, false statement: "The extension is that Joe shut down a Ukrainian investigation into Burisma in order to keep Hunter's gravy train flowing."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Try2B Comprehensive View Post
I don't know steronz's intentions but I took it as describing the GOP strategy
Yes, just to clear my besmirched name, I was merely describing the GOP strategy as Try2B Comprehensive understood. I don't believe that myself. Certainly Devin Nunes thinks there's some "there" there since he was over poking around in Ukraine, so I think it's fair to say the GOP strategy is to insinuate that this investigation existed and Joe Biden shut it down.

But I do appreciate that, as always, the quickest way to get the right answer on the internet is to post the wrong answer I know I'm not a household name around here so I'll try to make my intentions more clear in the future. And I also respectfully drop this topic now that I've been reminded that it's verboten in this thread.
  #5596  
Old 11-23-2019, 06:02 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 19,853
For god's sake. I'm sure he'll be up to no good but you can't expect the President to not have conversations with Senators and Congresspeople.
  #5597  
Old 11-23-2019, 06:06 PM
steronz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 5,399
Quote:
Originally Posted by John_Stamos'_Left_Ear View Post
Yes, we knew this information previously, but now it's a hell of a lot harder for Republicans to spin because it's in black and white.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherrerd View Post
It severely undercuts the 'Rudy was a rogue agent and Trump had no idea what he was doing' defense of Trump. Specifically, it implies that Rudy can't be thrown under that bus alone---the theory would now have to be that Pompeo was part of Rudy's scheme (all supposedly unbeknownst to Trump, according to the 'rogue Rudy' defense).

And Pompeo is highly unlikely to cooperate with any such attempt to deflect responsibility for the Ukraine scandal from Trump.
It's hard to know what strategy Trump's defense team is using at any given moment, but ISTM that the "throw Rudy under the bus" defense didn't really take off. Plus remember Rudy holding up his cell phone and saying that everyone at the state department knew what he was doing and he had the records to prove it? It hardly seems like they were trying to keep Rudy's contacts with Pompeo secret. And again, this only helps with the "there was no irregular channel" defense, since how can there be an irregular channel if Pompeo was in the loop?
  #5598  
Old 11-23-2019, 07:30 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,774
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
And again, this only helps with the "there was no irregular channel" defense, since how can there be an irregular channel if Pompeo was in the loop?
Trump: Pompeo, I want you to break this crime.
Pompeo: Yes, sir.
Pompeo: Sondland, protect Ukraine from Russia. Also, do what Giuliani tells you.
Giuliani: Sondland, break this crime with me.
Sondland: Pompeo, Giuliani is asking me to do this questionable act....
Pompeo: Thank you for the report. The President knows that you are doing your best and I am telling him great things about you.
Sondland: Volker, break this crime with me.

Pompeo is smart enough to simply maintain a form of blindness to the criminal act. He will almost certainly have worked to insulate himself from it in a variety of ways. He'll say that, as he understood it, Giuliani was working as the President's lawyer and that he had asked the people in Ukraine to help Giuliani get to know the area. If there were reports that Giuliani was asking them to do things that were outside the scope of his legal work, and delving into foreign policy, he was unaware of them or simply thought that the people were complaining that Giuliani was distracting them from their proper work. He's a busy guy, he talks to hundreds of people every day, they should have followed procedure Y to get his attention if there was a true issue but instead that only did procedure K and obviously that is insufficient.
  #5599  
Old 11-23-2019, 08:01 PM
simster is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 11,528
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
For god's sake. I'm sure he'll be up to no good but you can't expect the President to not have conversations with Senators and Congresspeople.
absolutely - so, before the impeachment proceedings began, how many of these 'retreats' has the President held? Has he invited Senators and Congresspeople from both parties, or only the ones he "needs"?

Last edited by simster; 11-23-2019 at 08:02 PM.
  #5600  
Old 11-23-2019, 08:37 PM
PhillyGuy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Pennsylvania U.S.A.
Posts: 1,572
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
For god's sake. I'm sure he'll be up to no good but you can't expect the President to not have conversations with Senators and Congresspeople.
Absolutely true.

It's jury tampering -- and perfectly legal.

The U.S. President, if sufficiently shameless, is mostly above the law. And DJT is sufficiently shameless.

A good example of this is the pardon power. A President who was committed to acting under law would always rubber-stamp the recommendations of the Justice Department Office of the Pardon Attorney. Someone like Bill Clinton usually did this, but not always. Above-the-law Trump just pardons who he wants to, period. He's legally above the law.

Last edited by PhillyGuy; 11-23-2019 at 08:38 PM.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:08 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017