President Donald Trump - Formal Impeachment Inquiry Announced

notobtuse

Boggles wrote: »

So that's the lasting damage you're referring to? Figures!

Veritas Libertas

The goalposts have moved so many times, I can't keep up. What is the smoking gun right now for Trump's impeachment?

Or is there not any now, has it changed to an abundance of evidence?

Or would people just prefer to attack Trump - there's a thread in politics that does that; nice little echo chamber for people that are into that kind of thing.

notobtuse

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Why are you avoiding answering the question?

I gave the question it’s due. But hard to tell… Senator Angus King has claimed that some 20 minutes of the phone call between Trump and Zelensky are missing from the White House memo detailing the conversation. He should know… he was there, right?

Timberrrrrrrr

notobtuse wrote: »

I gave the question it’s due. But hard to tell… Senator Angus King has claimed that some 20 minutes of the phone call between Trump and Zelensky are missing from the White House memo detailing the conversation. He should know… he was there, right?

So you agree its a memo and not a transcript?

notobtuse

Veritas Libertas wrote: »

The goalposts have moved so many times, I can't keep up. What is the smoking gun right now for Trump's impeachment?

Or is there not any now, has it changed to an abundance of evidence?

Or would people just prefer to attack Trump - there's a thread in politics that does that; nice little echo chamber for people that are into that kind of thing.

The smoking gun is whatever Nancy Pelosi says it is.

notobtuse

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

So you agree its a memo and not a transcript?

Seems to be. Since Zelensky didn't speak in English, Ukrainian obviously wasn't included in the transcript.

weisses

notobtuse wrote: »

Trump is working on that. But he has been thwarted at every step as the swamp resists. Obviously not a easy as Trump thought it would be to rid Washington, DC of the corruption.

You mean Flynn, Cohen, Manafort etc etc etc ?

duploelabs

notobtuse wrote: »

Did your ouija board tell you that?

No, three sources here quoting court documents
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/michael-cohen-named-trump-individual-1-here-s-why-prosecutors-ncna947016

https://www.vox.com/2019/2/27/18243038/individual-1-cohen-trump-mueller

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/421175-dem-rep-calls-trump-unindicted-co-conspirator-in-cohen-case

mad muffin

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

That doesn't answer my question,was it a transcript of the whole call or a memorandum of part of the call?

I’ll spell it out.

W
O
R
D

F
O
R

W
O
R
D

Hope this helps.

Overheal

notobtuse wrote: »

You have no clue what the swamp is, do you?

Trump promised deep cuts in regulations and bureaucracy to spur economic growth... Check, and check. About 35,0000 government positions were eliminated within traditional paper-pushing, tax, and regulatory agencies… Education, Health & Human Services, EPA, IRS, Interior, and over a hundred others.

But much of the administrative state has mastered the art of survival in the era of Trump. Trump will be judged by his ability to take on permanent Washington bureaucracy – the swamp. So far it’s been a mixed record.

Economic growth is stalling and never reached targets promised by Trump nor the GOP.

Overheal

Veritas Libertas wrote: »

The goalposts have moved so many times, I can't keep up. What is the smoking gun right now for Trump's impeachment?

Or is there not any now, has it changed to an abundance of evidence?

Or would people just prefer to attack Trump - there's a thread in politics that does that; nice little echo chamber for people that are into that kind of thing.

Republicans are how afraid to say what that “smoking gun” might be after Kevin McCarthy shot them all in the foot on 60 minutes last week saying if the President said [what he actually said] it would have been impeachable, only for the 60 minutes interviewer to painfully point out that’s exactly what Trump said. McCarthy then accused 60 minutes of “adding a word” into their reporting of the phrasing Trump used - they had not. So nobody really knows what the goalpost is anymore as Republicans keep shifting it.

Overheal

mad muffin wrote: »

I’ll spell it out.

W
O
R
D

F
O
R

W
O
R
D

Hope this helps.

But if it’s word for word why is everyone mad at Pelosi for saying those are his words?

Keeping in mind the Telcon is not “word for word” it is a compilation based on notes taken in the situation room. It also doesn’t capture everything - the WH claimed several ellipses are included in the document where Trump is alleged to have ‘trailed off’ but this is normally where a stenographer would insert “[inaudible]” nor does it document any attempts at translation or interpretation by aides. The Telcon only accounts for 11 minutes of a 30 minute call.

Not a word for word account by any means. As if we need more evidence you don’t post in good faith.

Overheal

notobtuse wrote: »

Seems to be. Since Zelensky didn't speak in English, Ukrainian obviously wasn't included in the transcript.

It is (as the document itself helpfully notes in bold headings), a “Memorandum of Telephone Conversation” often known in DC as a memcon or Telcon

Penn

mad muffin wrote: »

I’ll spell it out.

W
O
R
D

F
O
R

W
O
R
D

Hope this helps.

It really doesn't, because it's wrong.

The memo itself specifically states:

CAUTION: A Memorandum of a Telephone Conversation (TELCON) is not a verbatim transcript of a discussion. The text in this document records the notes and recollections of Situation Room Duty Officers and NSC policy staff assigned to listen and memorialize the conversation in written form as the conversation takes place.

Now I'm sure they were absolutely as accurate as they could be, but it's wrong to state definitively that the transcript is "word for word". There is a significant disclaimer on the memo saying it should not be considered to be.

mad muffin

Overheal wrote: »

But if it’s word for word why is everyone mad at Pelosi for saying those are his words?

Keeping in mind the Telcon is not “word for word” it is a compilation based on notes taken in the situation room. It also doesn’t capture everything - the WH claimed several ellipses are included in the document where Trump is alleged to have ‘trailed off’ but this is normally where a stenographer would insert “[inaudible]” nor does it document any attempts at translation or interpretation by aides. The Telcon only accounts for 11 minutes of a 30 minute call.

Not a word for word account by any means. As if we need more evidence you don’t post in good faith.

Pelosi stated that Schiff’s opening statement of the transcript was what Trump said , which of course it was not. Schiff embellished it.

The whistleblower themselves say it was word for word.

https://theconservativeopinion.com/whistleblower-heard-wh-official-say-trumps-call-was-crazy-and-frightening/

Overheal

Penn wrote: »

It really doesn't, because it's wrong.

The memo itself specifically states:


Now I'm sure they were absolutely as accurate as they could be, but it's wrong to state definitively that the transcript is "word for word". There is a significant disclaimer on the memo saying it should not be considered to be.

There is no telling; whomever finalized the document could have admitted a whole section or two of the call and only a handful of people right next to Trump and Trump himself would ever be aware.

Veritas Libertas

Overheal wrote: »

Republicans are how afraid to say what that “smoking gun” might be after Kevin McCarthy shot them all in the foot on 60 minutes last week saying if the President said [what he actually said] it would have been impeachable, only for the 60 minutes interviewer to painfully point out that’s exactly what Trump said. McCarthy then accused 60 minutes of “adding a word” into their reporting of the phrasing Trump used - they had not. So nobody really knows what the goalpost is anymore as Republicans keep shifting it.

Come on this is disingenuous.. the goalposts have been constructed by the democrats (Impeachment)... surely there is a reason for this impeachment, what is the reason?

First it was what Schiff said(Scumbag)
Then the first whistleblower(apparently had political motive to hate Trump?)
Then it was second whistleblower(No evidence yet)
Then it was what he said on the lawn
Then it was his 60 minute interview.

You see how the goalposts keep moving?

Penn

Veritas Libertas wrote: »

Come on this is disingenuous.. the goalposts have been constructed by the democrats (Impeachment)... surely there is a reason for this impeachment, what is the reason?

First it was what Schiff said(Scumbag)
Then the first whistleblower(apparently had political motive to hate Trump?)
Then it was second whistleblower(No evidence yet)
Then it was what he said on the lawn
Then it was his 60 minute interview.

You see how the goalposts keep moving?

I think the goalposts are getting bigger rather than moving. They had enough to open an impeachment investigation based on the whistleblower and the Ukraine call. Everything that has happened after that is just more proof or items uncovered as part of the inquiry.

duploelabs

Veritas Libertas wrote: »

Come on this is disingenuous.. the goalposts have been constructed by the democrats (Impeachment)... surely there is a reason for this impeachment, what is the reason?

First it was what Schiff said(Scumbag)
Then the first whistleblower(apparently had political motive to hate Trump?)
Then it was second whistleblower(No evidence yet)
Then it was what he said on the lawn
Then it was his 60 minute interview.

You see how the goalposts keep moving?

There's no goalpost shifting, but you've just listed the evidence that shows Trump is at risk of impeachment, they're all indicating the same crime

Timberrrrrrrr

notobtuse wrote: »

Seems to be. Since Zelensky didn't speak in English, Ukrainian obviously wasn't included in the transcript.

But it's not a transcript its a memo, typed up from what was remembered, if Trump has nothing to hide then why not release a full verbatim copy of the conversation?

Overheal

Veritas Libertas wrote: »

Come on this is disingenuous.. the goalposts have been constructed by the democrats (Impeachment)... surely there is a reason for this impeachment, what is the reason?

First it was what Schiff said(Scumbag)
Then the first whistleblower(apparently had political motive to hate Trump?)
Then it was second whistleblower(No evidence yet)
Then it was what he said on the lawn
Then it was his 60 minute interview.

You see how the goalposts keep moving?

You’ve lost me: new damning information is shifting goalposts now? How is multiple people whistleblowing on Trump shifting goalposts? How is Trump shooting himself in the foot on the lawn evidence of democrats shifting goalposts? These aren’t shifting goalposts these are articles to add to then be considered by the House Judiciary Committee after the 3 inquiry committees complete their information gathering.

Timberrrrrrrr

mad muffin wrote: »

I’ll spell it out.

W
O
R
D

F
O
R

W
O
R
D

Hope this helps.

Trump claims it's word for word

WH claimed it was an "inexact memo".

Hmmmmm who to believe?

Zubeneschamali

mad muffin wrote: »

Pelosi stated that Schiff’s opening statement of the transcript was what Trump said , which of course it was not. Schiff embellished it.

The whistleblower themselves say it was word for word.

https://theconservativeopinion.com/whistleblower-heard-wh-official-say-trumps-call-was-crazy-and-frightening/

That is not what the article at your link says.


The whistleblower was not on the call, so cannot speak to it being word-for-word. What the article you link to actually says is : The whistleblower memo appeared to rebut criticism that the White House-released transcript was notes or a summary, writing that the “standard practice” was for the “White House situation room to produce a word-for-word transcript that memorializes the call.”


But this is not the whistleblowers actual complaint, it's a quick two page memo written after getting highlights of the call from someone who did hear it. We now know the word-for-word bit is wrong, and it isn't in the complaint.

Overheal

Statement from the White House Press Secretary:

The President has done nothing wrong, and the Democrats know it. For purely political reasons, the Democrats have decided their desire to overturn the outcome of the 2016 election allows them to conduct a so-called impeachment inquiry that ignores the fundamental rights guaranteed to every American. These partisan proceedings are an affront to the Constitution—as they are being held behind closed doors and deny the President the right to call witnesses, to cross-examine witnesses, to have access to evidence, and many other basic rights.

Today, on behalf of President Donald J. Trump, Pat Cipollone, Counsel to the President, sent a letter to Speaker Pelosi and Chairmen Engel, Schiff, and Cummings. The letter demonstrates that the Democrats’ inquiry lacks any legitimate constitutional foundation, any pretense of fairness, and even the most elementary due process protections. Democrats are pursuing purely partisan goals, including influencing the upcoming 2020 election. In the process, they are violating civil liberties and the separation of powers, threatening Executive Branch officials with punishment simply for exercising their constitutional rights and prerogatives. All of this violates the Constitution, the rule of law, and every past precedent. For these reasons, the Executive Branch cannot be expected to, and will not participate in, this exercise of partisan political theater.

President Trump and his entire Administration will, however, keep fighting for the American people, growing the economy, building prosperity, and protecting America’s interests at home and abroad.

Don’t think about it too much while doing a keg stand and maybe it will almost appear to make sense.

duploelabs

Overheal wrote: »

Statement from the White House Press Secretary:

The President has done nothing wrong, and the Democrats know it. For purely political reasons, the Democrats have decided their desire to overturn the outcome of the 2016 election allows them to conduct a so-called impeachment inquiry that ignores the fundamental rights guaranteed to every American. These partisan proceedings are an affront to the Constitution—as they are being held behind closed doors and deny the President the right to call witnesses, to cross-examine witnesses, to have access to evidence, and many other basic rights.

Today, on behalf of President Donald J. Trump, Pat Cipollone, Counsel to the President, sent a letter to Speaker Pelosi and Chairmen Engel, Schiff, and Cummings. The letter demonstrates that the Democrats’ inquiry lacks any legitimate constitutional foundation, any pretense of fairness, and even the most elementary due process protections. Democrats are pursuing purely partisan goals, including influencing the upcoming 2020 election. In the process, they are violating civil liberties and the separation of powers, threatening Executive Branch officials with punishment simply for exercising their constitutional rights and prerogatives. All of this violates the Constitution, the rule of law, and every past precedent. For these reasons, the Executive Branch cannot be expected to, and will not participate in, this exercise of partisan political theater.

President Trump and his entire Administration will, however, keep fighting for the American people, growing the economy, building prosperity, and protecting America’s interests at home and abroad.

Don’t think about it too much while doing a keg stand and maybe it will almost appear to make sense.

Yeah the problem here is that Trump can do all those things when the Impeachment trial begins, not before whilst the evidence is being gathered. Currently he'd blocking any investigation as he's asserting innocence, which are not the actions of an innocent man

Overheal

Republicans are mad because without the House vote they can’t make the same subpoenas as Dems - but they own the Senate and can call as many people as they wish to testify before them there.

The likely reason they’re mad that Democrats are sealing testimonies: keeping the lies straight. After a handful of testimonies from Trump people it would likely come out that either multiple people corroborated the same elements, to Trumps demise, or they are contradicting each other in which case someone is committing perjury.

The other funny bit about that is the White House is calling for an open and transparent investigation while it’s spent 3 years manufacturing as much obfuscation and delay as it can dream up. They want to talk about FISA but still want to keep the Schiff memo and Mueller reports largely redacted on that subject.

Overheal

Trump railing against the ICIG for causing all this...

If you couldn’t guess Trump appointed the ICIG

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/trump-criticizes-icig-he-appointed-for-finding-whistleblower-complaint-credible-and-urgent/

Why do all the best people he hires always betray him?

SJW Lover

duploelabs wrote: »

There's no goalpost shifting, but you've just listed the evidence that shows Trump is at risk of impeachment, they're all indicating the same crime

Wanna put some real money on it? I bet €1,000 with anyone who wants to put it up that Trump will not be removed from office on foot of the "Ukraine impeachment". No chance. Not a hope.

mad muffin

Thank you everyone for proving that the whistleblower is as useful, and as reliable as a chocolate tea pot.

SJW Lover

Igotadose wrote: »

lol. The President colluded with foreign adversaries.

This post made me all nostalgic for the pre-Mueller Report days.



Ps - the US has pumped billions into the Ukraine since the 1990s and orchestrated the coup in 2014. Ukraine are most definitely not a "foreign adversary".