The Impeachment Thread

#6,401
#6,401
Velo Vol said:
Are we all ready for the transition from "no quid-pro-quo" to "so what if he did"?

Click to expand...

You can expect a lot more gaslighting from Trump tomorrow. "As President of the United States, I have the right to withhold foreign aid for any reason that I want to!"
 
#6,404
#6,404
So, should I drop some cash on Cirque de Soleil or just watch the contortions Gym Jordan and Devoid Nunes go through tomorrow?
 
#6,412
#6,412
Whistleblower name is out there on Twitter now...should be interesting..now he can go up on the hill and testify in person
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#6,420
#6,420
RockyTop85 said:
For at least the third time:

Consider Trump’s threats from the eyes of someone that has knowledge of government corruption and is trying to decide whether or not to come forward, how to come forward, or whether to remain silent.

Those people now see what will happen to them if they come forward. It creates an *additional* disincentive from coming forward appropriately. Therefore, more people will do so recklessly and eschew proper procedure in order to make sure the message cannot be swept under the rug. Which is what Snowden did that you don’t agree with.

Because it is an *additional* incentive, these remedial disincentives that you keep chiming in with, which were already a part of the calculus. Are. Not. Relevant. To. This. Conversation. They are already included in the calculus that Trump is altering. Hence the analogy to pouring gasoline on an existing fire. The fire is already there. You can’t miss it.

However, I do sincerely apologize for assuming you were attempting to change the subject. It is abundantly clear from your last two posts, that you didn’t understand what the subject was.

I’m not asking for a change in the laws. I was prompting you to stop and think about the growing number of ways in which this man does not advance your principles.

Since I’m sure you won’t internalize any of that and will continue to demand to see where you did the following, here you go:




What exactly happened to Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden that would have a chilling effect in whistleblowers?
They were charged/prosecuted.
Under which administration were they prosecuted?
Obama.

It clearly a “but Obama.”





Almost verbatim, “What about the media?”
Click to expand...
Just who do you think you are to decide what is relevant to the conversation? That's just your way to try and dismiss anyone's opinion and to try and shut them up. Nice, but you can't carry that water here. Get a bigger bucket, or hose.

For at least the fourth time:

I asked you to find the words that I used that included "But Obama". There was no "But Obama" that you could find. You are reaching here and you know it, but I won't fault you for trying because you just have to make crap up no matter how tenuous the link might be. You might as well have said it was "But Bush" because he was the President before Obama, so they are linked. It's a moronic argument.

At least Manning took the punishment like a "man", unlike Snowden, now living in Russia to avoid prosecution. Charging and prosecuting weren't the only things that happened to those two, the media circus I referred to, threats, etc., also occurred. Whistle blowers saw that, and you know it. Quit being so deliberately obtuse.

I already considered Trump's responses and condemned them for not only the reasons you are remarking upon. We agree here. Not only do they have a negative effect on someone coming forward, it is poor, boorish behavior, whether there were other adverse effects, or not. Not to, even for a second, excuse or condone his behavior, but is any one surprised? You act like it is a surprise and is the end of the world for whistle blowers. He said it up front, in the open, in front of witnesses, for the record and can't do anything more than bluster about it.

Whistle blowers aren't as stupid as you make them out to be. They must carefully consider what the consequences may be before they come forward because it's their necks, or parts south of there. Even if Trump wasn't bloviating all over the place about it, you don't think that some other Presidents that we have had, wouldn't be upset and maybe even drawing up strategies to "deal" with the whistle blower that would impact the whistle blower in a very negative way? They would have enough self control and political acumen to keep quiet about it. Trump doesn't have that as part of his makeup. The President's reaction, no matter who that President is, "is already part of the calculus." Trump makes that reaction blatantly obvious. He's a d!ck. Wow, front page news. Ever consider that the whistle blower pretty much knew ahead of time how Trump would react? Really? Perhaps they were even smart enough to know that he just might lose control, go over the edge and say or do something more that would hurt himself in the process. You don't think that might be part of the "calculus?"

Your condescending remarks are barely worth addressing. You think that anyone that disagrees with you is simply just too dumb to understand what you consider as your brilliant tomes. You are not unlike Trump, in this regard, and also act like a liberal trying to win an argument. Call your opposition "dumb","stupid", "Irrelevant". What next, are you going to call me racist?
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#6,423
#6,423
evillawyer said:
Click to expand...

This is what you are using as proof of something counselor? Let me ask you this, when your clients (I highly doubt you are a real attorney) are involved in a case, criminal or civil, what’s one of the first things you tell them? You tell them not to talk about it because whether innocent or guilty they may say something damaging to the case inadvertently. Even if you are the prosecutor the same advice would be given to your client. Get real.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, 37L1 and tennvols77
#6,425
#6,425
Game. Set. Match. The Quid Pro Quo from Trump to Ukraine proof.

So now what? Trump's MO is deny, then once proven he will admit and say "so what?" His mindless drones will all nod their heads in agreement. Maybe this time Trump's wrong behavior has consequences. Maybe not. I'm going with yeah, it does, and we find out other crap along the way with the Inquiry, and he's ultimately convicted.

IF NOT... we are no longer a country with the Rule of Law. If not, his supporters (read: enablers) place Man before Office... Trump before the Constitution. The results of this could be catastrophic.

Which side of history are you going to be on?

-----

By the next day, the Ukrainians had agreed to announce their plans to carry out Trump’s investigations alongside the date for a meeting between the two heads of state, the messages indicate...

“Are we now saying that security assistance and WH meeting are conditioned on investigations?” U.S. Charges D’affaires in Ukraine William B. “Bill” Taylor texted to Sondland on Sept. 1, after Trump skipped a trip to Poland where he was meant to visit with Zelensky. Sondland swiftly moved the conversation from text messages to a phone call.

“As I said on the phone, I think it’s crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign,” Taylor later texted Sondland on Sept. 9, complaining that the Trump administration’s decision to withhold congressionally approved military aid to Ukraine had already created a “nightmare scenario.”
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top