The Trump Impeachment Inquiry

[John_Stamos_Left_Ear]

@Jim_Peebles

I had to crank up the REO Speedwagon to stay awake while listening to the “evidence”:
Heard it from a friend who
Heard it from a friend who
Heard it from another Trump’s been messin’ around

Please… Adults are talking.

[John_Stamos_Left_Ear]

@HurricaneDitka

Virtually everyone’s feelings would change if it were Obama instead of President Trump.

Al Franken says “nah.”

[John_Stamos_Left_Ear]

@HurricaneDitka

I’m comfortable with the response I gave, thanks anyways.

Your argument that if everyone does it it’s fine would cause a lot of people to jump off a bridge just because someone else did. (Source: My Mom)

Also: Not everyone does it (Source: Al Franken)

[John_Stamos_Left_Ear]

@Sage_Rat

The only reasons to be having these hearings, that I can think of, are:

1. Because the Senate won’t allow the prosecution to make a case.
2. To raise money for the DNC for 2020.
3. To ensure that all of the accusations are stale and have a lot of time to accrue misleading defences against them that leave the public uncertain about the what matters any more, before it goes to the Senate.

Or… it’s codified in the Constitution that “The House of Representatives…shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.”

[elucidator]

Devin Nooner reads the great transcript of the great first phone call from our great Leader to President Zelensky congratulating him on his great election. It was a great call.

[Gyrate]

Make Calls Great Again!

[QuickSilver]

@HurricaneDitka

Nope. Let’s go back to the not-quite-a-transcript:

Zelensky: I also plan to surround myself with great people and in addition to that investigation, I guarantee as the President of Ukraine that all the investigations will be done openly and candidly… That I can assure you.

President Trump: Good …

Do you speak Ukrainian, HD? Are you familiar with the slavic sense of humor, specifically biting sarcasm and mockery?

Let me help you out here. If quoted correctly, what you heard Zelensky do there is TROLL Trump.

I know it serves a desired end to pretend Zelensky was earnest in his response.

He wasn’t. Not for a hot Kiyev second.

[JohnT]

@elucidator

Devin Nooner reads the great transcript of the great first phone call from our great Leader to President Zelensky congratulating him on his great election. It was a great call.

Except:

1. It doesn’t mention corruption, despite an earlier White House reading of the call which stated Trump weighed in on corruption
2. For purposes of impeachment, the call established that a meeting with the President was on the table, thereby removing any “there was no original promise” arguments the Defense may have.

[Ravenman]

@HurricaneDitka

If true, does it not also “torpedo” the dem argument that the aid money was critical to Ukranian’s ability to fend off the Russians and that they were like a-guy-with-his-balls hooked-up-to-a-car-battery-level of desperate to obtain it?

You are rewriting history. Both Dems and R’s strongly opposed Obama’s policy on lethal weapons. Keep in mind that you are viewing this through your lens, in which Republican voters and leaders readily fall in line with Trump, so you expect Dems did the same to Obama. The fact is that Dems routinely criticized Obama on matters they disagreed with him about - Ukraine, deporter in Chief, etc.

@HurricaneDitka

Oh goody, we’re back to “manufacture dirt” again. That never happened. There’s been no evidence presented that President Trump asked the Ukrainians to “manufacture dirt”.

You think Rudy and his criminal friends were chasing down the truth? LOL!

[Sage_Rat]

@HurricaneDitka

Oh goody, we’re back to “manufacture dirt” again. That never happened. There’s been no evidence presented that President Trump asked the Ukrainians to “manufacture dirt”.

Let’s say that I hook up a car battery to a man’s testicles and torture him for a few days. I then tell him that it would make me happy if he would investigate my political rival. I make it clear to him that I can pick him up at any time, bring him back, and continue frying his genetic legacy.

Does this seem necessary if you believe that a crime was actually committed?

Why not, for example, do something simple like report the crime to the police?

Would “car battery” be your first step, if you were aware of criminal activities?

[elucidator]

…I know it serves a desired end to pretend Zelensky was earnest in his response. …

Or, he may be aware that the very lives of his fellow citizens rest upon shameless and limitless flattery. Thousands of lives might rest upon whether or not he kisses whatever, whenever, wherever. If it were me, I’d have no choice but to grab my shit-eating spoon, grin the grin and mmmm-good!

If its just your ass, you have every right to stand proud! If it’s theirs, you grovel, kiss and suck.

[RTFirefly]

Josh Marshall has a good take on the “Trump/Giuliani/etc. were only fighting corruption” argument:

The consistent GOP line has been that post-Soviet Ukraine has always had a problem with corruption (true). And Pres Trump was only trying to get them to crack down on corruption, albeit in a uniquely targeted way. People have tended to credit the logic if not the facts …

2/ of this argument. But it’s actually the complete opposite. Trump was demanding Ukraine be more corrupt if it wanted its military aide. When people talk abt endemic corruption in Ukraine, it’s not just people taking bribes or getting sweetheart deals.

3/ More specifically it is that business is driven by control of the state. Those in power allow their allies to loot the state at will while using the power of the state - particularly prosecution - as a weapon against those out of power. This drives a trend in …

4/ which those in power max out their money making and then usually go into exile or prison when their allies lose power. What President Trump was demanding - political investigations aimed political rivals - is exactly what “corruption” means in Ukraine.

5/ Indeed, he was demanding that Ukraine take the practices that have hobbled and bedeviled Ukraine and export them to the United States. It’s really clear cut. Trump wasn’t asking Ukraine to crack down on corruption but expand it and indeed to export it to the USA.

[ThelmaLou]

I listened to Ambassador Yovanovich’s opening statement this morning. Holy crap, that woman is articulate. Her remarks were clearly organized, admirably thorough, and directly addressed issues involving her departure from Ukraine. They were a good length, and struck the right tone, with an emotional ending. One time she said “fabrications” when I wish she had said “lies,” but hey, she’s a career diplomat. I arrived at my destination and had to get out of the car when the questioning started. Anyone catch what came after?

[Lance_Turbo]

@ThelmaLou

I listened to Ambassador Yovanovich’s opening statement this morning. Holy crap, that woman is articulate. Her remarks were clearly organized, admirably thorough, and directly addressed issues involving her departure from Ukraine. They were a good length, and struck the right tone, with an emotional ending. One time she said “fabrications” when I wish she had said “lies,” but hey, she’s a career diplomat. I arrived at my destination and had to get out of the car when the questioning started. Anyone catch what came after?

What about pizazz? Did she have pizazz? I heard that that’s important for some reason.

[JohnT]

President attempts to intimidate witness by tweeting about her.

Schiff reads tweet to get it in the Record, and asks her to respond to the President’s tweet.

Hope this adds the pizzazz and excitement the GOP was waiting for!

“In an extraordinary moment during the impeachment hearings, the ousted former Ukraine ambassador was asked to respond in real time to a Twitter broadside from President Donald Trump.”

POLITICO

[sps49sd]

@iiandyiiii

What would be the relevance of such a thing, even if it’s accurate? It has nothing to do with the facts of the allegations against Trump.

It has to do with whether these allegations are facts, and if Schiff is lying about his contacts then how much trust he deserves.

[JohnT]

Even Fox News caught this:

“Fox’s @BretBaier: Trump’s Twitter outburst “enabled Schiff to then characterize that tweet as intimidating the witness or tampering with the witness, which is a crime – essentially adding an article of impeachment, real time.””

Brian Stelter

Direct quote:

Bret Baier

“That was a turning point in this hearing so far. She was already a sympathetic witness & the President’s tweet ripping her allowed Schiff to point it out real time characterizing it as witness tampering or intimidation -adding an article of impeachment real-time.”

[Airbeck]

Schiff is not testifying, why is trust in him relevant? He is not one of the ones making claims of presidential misconduct in testimony. This is a red herring.

[iiandyiiii]

Did Trump just try and intimidate a witness in real time?

[iiandyiiii]

@sps49sd

It has to do with whether these allegations are facts

No it doesn’t – all the facts reported in the WB report have been corroborated by many other sources, including the White House’s transcript and even the White House Chief of Staff.

and if Schiff is lying about his contacts then how much trust he deserves.

Who cares if he’s worthy of “trust”? I’m interested in the facts being discussed and witness testimony, not whether some Congressperson is worthy of “trust”.