Donald Trump Presidency discussion Thread VI

everlast75

If the mods may permit a moment of levity...


"In 2016, Stormy Daniels got $130,000 after getting screwed by Trump.

In 2017, Gordon Sondland paid $1,000,000 to get screwed by Trump.

What a difference a year makes!"

duploelabs

everlast75 wrote: »

If the mods may permit a moment of levity...


"In 2016, Stormy Daniels got $130,000 after getting screwed by Trump.

In 2017, Gordon Sondland paid $1,000,000 to get screwed by Trump.

What a difference a year makes!"

Trumpflation

everlast75

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1197128816470171649?s=19

I suspect Sondlond leaked this to cover his proverbial...

Outlaw Pete

Quin_Dub wrote: »

No - The Transcripts have not been released , all we've seen so far are "summaries", the verbatim transcripts have absolutely not been released.

You are correct in that Vindman etc. say that the summary of the July calls are an accurate representation of the substance of the call they are absolutely not transcripts.

Why haven't they released the full text of the calls yet?

In the line you emboldened there, I was clearly referring to the transcripts of Jennifer Williams and Tim Morrison's testimony, hence the "republicans had been requesting them for weeks" after it in brackets.

With regards to the call memcon / transcript, what makes you think there is anything else? You have I'm sure read or heard the witnesses debate if single words had been used. For example Morrison doesn't believe Burisma was ever explicitly mentioned, but Williams and Vindman do, and so surely if there was other dialogue it would have been referenced by one of them. Vindman (in particular) would be saying as much, but he doesn't. On the contrary, here's what he had to say:

From his Opening Statement:

From his original testimony:

aloyisious

I'm looking at Chris Cuomo talking to a GOP Rep outside the Hill & the GOP-er is saying "there must be a Mens Rea, whats the..." and I walked away. FFS, the gain is to have Ukraine start a corruption investigation into both the Bidens with a public bells and whistle intro into the lead-up months to the next US presidential election and its the GOP refusing to admit the large print in front of them all that's so frustrating and making people angry. The ignorance being practiced by the GOP is getting to be habitual now and is insulting to the intelligence of the US electorate.

Quin_Dub

pixelburp wrote: »

Do you really think so? We've seen in the past with votes like the failed Medicare repeal, or the SC picks, that senators such as Susanne Collins will talk a big game of concern and thoughtfulness, only to ultimately side with the party. Perhaps impeachment is a different ball game but as has been said - including by yourself - until the polling needle swings away from full, partisan support, senators are unlikely to vote against their interests.

More likely in the House than the Senate , but I do think that there's a reasonable chance that Romney might vote for Impeachment.

The big elements will be the state/district level view of the opinion polls.

A few of the GOP representatives up for re-election might have to think very hard if there is strong support for Impeachment in their electoral area.

Thepoet85

Sorry if asked already, but what time does the hearings start today?

Overheal

Thepoet85 wrote: »

Sorry if asked already, but what time does the hearings start today?

Pfft I’m still trying to catch up on Volker and Morrison.

Overheal

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

In the line you emboldened there, I was clearly referring to the transcripts of Jennifer Williams and Tim Morrison's testimony, hence the "republicans had been requesting them for weeks" after it in brackets.

With regards to the call memcon / transcript, what makes you think there is anything else? You have I'm sure read or heard the witnesses debate if single words had been used. For example Morrison doesn't believe Burisma was ever explicitly mentioned, but Williams and Vindman do, and so surely if there was other dialogue it would have been referenced by one of them. Vindman (in particular) would be saying as much, but he doesn't. On the contrary, here's what he had to say:

From his Opening Statement:



From his original testimony:

Morrison does not speak the language does he. Vindman testified both that he heard this and understood that when part of Ukrainian dialog he felt it was overlooked and instead the translation was ‘the company you mentioned’

Overheal

Didn’t John Solomon tie Yovonavitch, Burisma, Crowdstrike and the Bidens together?

Outlaw Pete

Overheal wrote: »

Morrison does not speak the language does he. Vindman testified both that he heard this and understood that when part of Ukrainian dialog he felt it was overlooked and instead the translation was ‘the company you mentioned’

I didn't say I agreed with him. I was merely making the point that if they debated a single word, the chance that there was other dialogue yet to be seen is remote.

aloyisious

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

In the line you emboldened there, I was clearly referring to the transcripts of Jennifer Williams and Tim Morrison's testimony, hence the "republicans had been requesting them for weeks" after it in brackets.

With regards to the call memcon / transcript, what makes you think there is anything else? You have I'm sure read or heard the witnesses debate if single words had been used. For example Morrison doesn't believe Burisma was ever explicitly mentioned, but Williams and Vindman do, and so surely if there was other dialogue it would have been referenced by one of them. Vindman (in particular) would be saying as much, but he doesn't. On the contrary, here's what he had to say:

From his Opening Statement:





From his original testimony:

So the crux of the matter on what was said by the two presidents during the calls is what may have been caught on audio recording [if such were taken & kept] of their conversations for historical record and for full transcription later. The conversations were a two-way affair so I wouldn't be surprised if it was taped by the Ukraine side, given the importance of it for the fate of that nation and the complicated way the Trump administration was handling the "negotiations". I suppose that the language used was English as Zelensky, according to some-ones testimony yesterday about the calls, is fluent in English. Barring some anti-recording desire on both sides, there would be a verbatim recording of every word spoken by both sides during the calls and both [well, at least one] would be idiots not to reckon on that being a fact of political life.

Stallingrad

Hey Pete, people who dislike Trump can cite countless examples of why.

As a supporter of his can you explain what it is you like about him and why he was your continued support. This is genuine request, not a dig. There are not many here who feel the way you do and you are good at arguing your case.

Outlaw Pete

aloyisious wrote: »

I'll mostly agree with you on almost everything in your post, except for the QPQ, whereby Don wanted Zelensky to make a public announcement that the Bidens and their connection to the Ukraine Co would be investigated in respect of corruption within Ukraine and the removal of Don's withholding of the funding from the senate was dependant on Zelkensky making that public announcement.

Don's ambassadors [plural] have testified to Dons stipulation on that being part of the deal: US Senate cash $ in exchange for a Ukraine corruption investigation into the Biden and the Ukraine Co Biden Jnr was a board member of. The QPQ quote may not be there in the wording of Don's deal offer but Don's block on the funding [I've got you over a barrel and there's F-all you can do about it] is there for everyone to see. Give me what I want or else.

Edit: please read though my post carefully as I've made some word additions to mu original wording in respect of the Bidens.

The problem I see with that is we are assuming that these people were parsing Trump's wishes accurately and not misrepresenting his position. I noted for example yesterday Volker said he did not believe there was any QPQ as he felt the aid would be released anyway and that it was more dependent on getting other EU countries to agree to do more re security aid.

Not suggesting Trump didn't discuss Zelensky making a public statement re investigations into Burisma/Bidens but just that he may have been doing so within the scope of negotiations. Sondland has claimed Trump nearly bit his head off when he asked what he wanted from Zelensky, saying he didn't want anything, no QPQs, and so it does seem as if he was frustrating by that chap himself.

Hill certainly seems as if she had no time for Sondland and will be interesting to hear what she thinks.


Statement from Kellogg to coincide with Jennifer Williams testimony:

duploelabs

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

The problem I see with that is we are assuming that these people were parsing Trump's wishes accurately and not misrepresenting his position. I noted for example yesterday Volker said he did not believe there was any QPQ as he felt the aid would be released anyway and that it was more dependent on getting other EU countries to agree to do more re security aid.

Not suggesting Trump didn't discuss Zelensky making a public statement re investigations into Burisma/Bidens but just that he may have been doing so within the scope of negotiations. Sondland has claimed Trump nearly bit his head off when he asked what he wanted from Zelensky, saying he didn't want anything, no QPQs, and so it does seem as if he was frustrating by that chap himself.

Hill certainly seems as if she had no time for Sondland and will be interesting to hear what she thinks.


Statement from Kellogg to coincide with Jennifer Williams testimony:

If he said she said is the argument, then why not release the full transcript (not the summary as has been before) and it'll all be done and dusted

everlast75

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

The problem I see with that is we are assuming that these people were parsing Trump's wishes accurately and not misrepresenting his position.

I think the main problem here is the fact Trump withheld payment of Congress approved taxpayers money (fact) to an ally (fact) in order to secure action which would personally benefit him (fact).

What makes matters worse was that withholding of funds was to the detriment of US foreign policy. (fact)

mcmoustache

Some of Sondland's opening statement has been published by the daily beast. It looks like Trump and Giuliani are the ones going under the bus here. It's understandable since I don't think Sondland expected to be signing up to what looks like a criminal conspiracy.

Also, there are rumours of a Pompeo resignation going around but nothing is confirmed yet.

But in his opening statement, which The Daily Beast obtained, he said he did not want to work with Giuliani, Trump’s personal lawyer, and that he only did so because it was the only way to improve U.S.-Ukraine relations.

“Secretary Perry, Ambassador Volker and I worked with Mr. Rudy Giuliani on Ukraine matters at the express direction of the President of the United States,” Sondland said. “We did not want to work with Mr. Giuliani. Simply put, we played the hand we were dealt. We all understood that if we refused to work with Mr. Giuliani, we would lose an important opportunity to cement relations between the United States and Ukraine. So we followed the President’s orders.”

Later in his testimony, he reiterated that point.

“Let me say again: We weren’t happy with the President’s directive to talk with Rudy,” he said. “We did not want to involve Mr. Giuliani.”

Quin_Dub

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

The problem I see with that is we are assuming that these people were parsing Trump's wishes accurately and not misrepresenting his position. I noted for example yesterday Volker said he did not believe there was any QPQ as he felt the aid would be released anyway and that it was more dependent on getting other EU countries to agree to do more re security aid.

Not suggesting Trump didn't discuss Zelensky making a public statement re investigations into Burisma/Bidens but just that he may have been doing so within the scope of negotiations. Sondland has claimed Trump nearly bit his head off when he asked what he wanted from Zelensky, saying he didn't want anything, no QPQs, and so it does seem as if he was frustrating by that chap himself.

Hill certainly seems as if she had no time for Sondland and will be interesting to hear what she thinks.


Statement from Kellogg to coincide with Jennifer Williams testimony:

This is the big angle here..

How many times has the "They misinterpreted him" defence been rolled out now for things that Trump has said and done??

You're misunderstanding him here , he's not being racist/sexist/dense etc. etc. etc.

At some point that argument has to stop being valid..

And as for the "more dependent on getting other EU countries to agree to do more re security aid." thing - This again is a complete invention in Trumps mind.

The EU has always been a huge supporter in the Ukraine.

There are specific reasons why the EU doesn't explicitly send armaments etc. but they have given multiples of the amounts spent by the US for years , almost 2X this year and last so this Trump argument about holding the money up until everyone else "paid their share" is absolute verifiable guff.

everlast75

mcmoustache wrote: »

Some of Sondland's opening statement has been published by the daily beast. It looks like Trump and Giuliani are the ones going under the bus here. It's understandable since I don't think Sondland expected to be signing up to what looks like a criminal conspiracy.

Also, there are rumours of a Pompeo resignation going around but nothing is confirmed yet.

"“Mr. Giuliani’s requests were a quid pro quo for arranging a White House visit for President Zelensky,” Sondland’s statement says. “Mr. Giuliani demanded that Ukraine make a public statement announcing investigations of the 2016 election/DNC server and Burisma. Mr. Giuliani was expressing the desires of the President of the United States, and we knew that these investigations were important to the President.”"

So Sondlond says that Rudy, acting at the direction of Trump, wanted a QPQ.

That seems problematic to Trump's position.

Water John

If Pompeo were to resign, the flood gates would open.

Sondland ties QPQ to Giuliani and Trump in his opening statement. Sonland says he had told Zelinsky on what was required, before the 25th July telephone call.

Quin_Dub

Water John wrote: »

If Pompeo were to resign, the flood gates would open.

Sondland ties QPQ to Giuliani and Trump in his opening statement.

It appears he's looking for a way out

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has told three prominent Republicans in recent weeks that he plans to resign from the Trump Administration to run for the U.S. Senate from Kansas in next year’s elections. The problem: how to get out in one piece.

Pompeo’s plan had been to remain at the State Department until early spring next year, the three Republicans tell TIME, but recent developments, including the House impeachment inquiry, are hurting him politically and straining his relationship with Trump.

everlast75

Quin_Dub wrote: »

It appears he's looking for a way out

If Pompeo and Mulvaney fall on their swords over this, its slightly better for Trump. He still is in very deep

BonnieSituation

Have we gotten to the bottom of the hospital visit yet? Is he back?

kowloon

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Hqve we gotten to the bottom of the hospital visit yet? Is he back?

He was in a video yesterday and it seemed like business as usual, so it could be nothing. Maybe he's just a bit shy at the moment.

Quin_Dub

everlast75 wrote: »

If Pompeo and Mulvaney fall on their swords over this, its slightly better for Trump. He still is in very deep

Don't know about Mulvaney , but I can't see Pompeo "taking one for the team"

He's looking for a clean getaway to get back to the senate where he can keep his head down for a few years.

It's whether he can get out clean or indeed even win a Kansas primary at this stage.

TomOnBoard

Here we go! Stand by for a major John Dean moment... Or else a damp squib!

Either way, America's mayor is fcuked!

PropJoe10

Seems that Sondland is going to implicate Trump here in his opening statement. Could be good viewing today!

jooksavage

PropJoe10 wrote: »

Seems that Sondland is going to implicate Trump here in his opening statement. Could be good viewing today!

Yep, that opening statement looks horrific, if the one being put about it legit

everlast75

PropJoe10 wrote: »

Seems that Sondland is going to implicate Trump here in his opening statement. Could be good viewing today!

https://twitter.com/nwadhams/status/1197157401046257665?s=19

Hope that smug grin of Pompeo has been wiped off now...

PropJoe10

Nunes: "Welcome to the fifth day of this circus".

These people are an absolute disgrace and history will remember it. Hopefully the end of their careers ASAP.