Will Trump be a Good President? - Page 1027

marton · #**20521** 18.11.2019, 19:56

@Blueangel I am firing up the popcorn machine

	Quote:
	The House of Representatives is now investigating whether President Donald Trump lied to special counsel Robert Mueller in written answers he provided in the Russia investigation, the House's general counsel said in federal court Monday. "Did the President lie? Was the President not truthful in his responses to the Mueller investigation?" House general counsel Douglas Letter told the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit about why the House now needs access to grand jury material Mueller collected in his investigation.

LOL!

#**20522** 18.11.2019, 21:11

Quote:

marton

Evermore rumors circulating about Trump's unexpected visit to Walter Reed hospital on Saturday; also strange that he went by road when usually he took a helicopter!
I hope he remains mentally competent.

Meanwhile, Trump in a tweet yesterday urged Kim Jong Un to “act quickly, get the deal done” and hinted at another summit between them, saying “See you soon!”

N. Korea's reply;

Quote:

“We are no longer interested in such talks that bring nothing to us.
As we have got nothing in return, we will no longer gift the U.S. president with something he can boast of, but get compensation for the successes that President Trump is proud of as his administrative achievements.”

LOL!

North Korea!, North Korea won't meet with him, the pariah state won't meet the US president, lordy lordy.

A cynic could say they were just playing him while they advanced their missile program.

marton · #**20523** 18.11.2019, 23:38

Busy day as ever in Trump's land!

	Quote:
	Senate aides met with tax return whistleblower: report. Aides to the leaders of the Senate Finance Committee met earlier this month with a federal employee who alleges possible inappropriate efforts to influence an IRS audit of President Trump or Vice President Pence, the Washington Post reported Monday, citing two people with knowledge of the matter. When Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard Neal (D-Mass.) was asked last week if anyone with his committee has met with the whistleblower, he said, "I know that the follow-up has taken place."

Source

Fires on every front

Urs Max · #**20524** 19.11.2019, 19:47

	Quote:	marton
	Now we know from the new transcript that the official White House Press Release about his April 21 call which said the call was about corruption in Ukraine was a lie! Corruption was not mentioned.

That, or the transcript is incomplete.

cannut · #**20525** 19.11.2019, 20:01

	Quote:	marton
	The Dems seem to be backing off trying to force reluctant witnesses to attend the House impeachment process but it is not clear why? I wonder if they hope to call them to the Senate impeachment trial as witnesses which seems to have a stronger process for forcing attendance?

I don't see it going to the Senate .Just 11 more month till election and lots of manure to spread

marton · #**20526** 19.11.2019, 20:15

	Quote:	Urs Max
	That, or the transcript is incomplete.

This leads us to the conspiracy theory that Trump again in this call threatened Ukraine President Zelensky if he did not investigate the Bidens.

The elephant in this room is that so far the impeachment witnesses have said the April 21 call was OK compared to the July call.

If the transcript is incomplete then it just reinforces the theory that the Trump White House administration is incompetent?

marton · #**20527** 20.11.2019, 00:58

Today it was the Republicans turn to call their first two witnesses, Kurt Volker and Tim Morrison. Unfortunately, they both seemed to have had some sort of minor Epiphany and are changing their testimonies since their closed deposition session.
Their testimony was not entirely flattering to President Trump. So far, they have described their unease at Rudy Giuliani’s efforts in Ukraine and their skeptical view of efforts to launch an investigation into Burisma, the Ukrainian energy company.

For example, Kurt Volker;

	Quote:
	Amended his previous testimony and said did not understand until recently that “Burisma” was linked to Hunter Biden, despite discussing with Giuliani on July 19 the possibility that Joe Biden might have been influenced by his son's role in the Ukrainian gas company as vice president — which Volker now described as a “conspiracy theory.”

& Tim Morrison

	Quote:
	Morrison noted that he did not intend for his testimony to be taken as an attack on the “character or integrity” of his colleagues on the NSC. That sentiment came hours after Republican lawmakers pointed to his criticisms of Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman during the first session of Tuesday’s impeachment hearing and after the White House used his words to attack Vindman on its official Twitter account. Morrison also noted that Trump’s reference to Crowdstrike and a Democratic computer server — both based in debunked conspiracy theories — were not part of his official preparatory talking points for the July phone call with Ukraine’s president.

Overall, I doubt GOP will be opening the champagne tonight.

gaburko · #**20528** 20.11.2019, 01:04

All true. However what really really matters is if this will break the tight allegiance of the GOP to Trump (doesn't seem likely yet), whether this will have any impact on public opinion (doesn't seem to have any yet). Trump has been able to bend facts and reality and I give more hope to his medical condition (yes, I'm a bad guy, i don't wish him well) than to any of this.

	Quote:	marton
	Today it was the Republicans turn to call their first two witnesses, Kurt Volker and Tim Morrison. Unfortunately, they both seemed to have had some sort of minor Epiphany and are changing their testimonies since their closed deposition session. Their testimony was not entirely flattering to President Trump. So far, they have described their unease at Rudy Giuliani’s efforts in Ukraine and their skeptical view of efforts to launch an investigation into Burisma, the Ukrainian energy company. For example, Kurt Volker; & Tim Morrison Overall, I doubt GOP will be opening the champagne tonight.

marton · #**20529** 20.11.2019, 01:13

	Quote:	gaburko
	All true. However what really really matters is if this will break the tight allegiance of the GOP to Trump (doesn't seem likely yet), whether this will have any impact on public opinion (doesn't seem to have any yet). Trump has been able to bend facts and reality and I give more hope to his medical condition (yes, I'm a bad guy, i don't wish him well) than to any of this.

The GOP will not break with Trump because they are frightened he will tell his base not to vote for them next time around.

GOP must be wishing they had never called Volker as a witness; in the last few minutes.....

	Quote:
	Volker says he found the reference to Biden on Trump's July 25 call unacceptable.

gaburko · #**20530** 20.11.2019, 01:25

It all depends on which part of the statement you want to focus on

naturally fox news focuses on another part:

"My colleagues asked about, 'Well, doesn't aid get held up for all kinds of reasons?' Ambassador Volker, have you ever seen military aid held up because the President wanted his rival investigated?" House Intelligence Chair Adam Schiff asked.

"No, I have not seen that," Volker said.

When Schiff asked Morrison, he responded, "No, chairman."

	Quote:	marton
	GOP must be wishing they had never called Volker as a witness; in the last few minutes.....

#**20531** 20.11.2019, 09:21

The Reps deal several major blows to the impeachment investigation, in summary the Reps and Faux news have shown that

George Kent has a big water bottle and drinks water from it
Lt Col Vindmans testimony can be dismissed by calling him 'Mr Vindman'
Lt Col Vindman didn't have to wear his uniform to the proceedings

well theres no arguing with the coherence of their arguments.

gaburko · #**20532** 20.11.2019, 09:32

	Quote:
	The Reps deal several major blows to the impeachment investigation, in summary the Reps and Faux news have shown that George Kent has a big water bottle and drinks water from it Lt Col Vindmans testimony can be dismissed by calling him 'Mr Vindman' Lt Col Vindman didn't have to wear his uniform to the proceedings well theres no arguing with the coherence of their arguments.

BTW, its precisely this type of intellectual superiority and dismissal of realities on the ground that brought Trump to power. You see the world in a certain way, his voters see it in a different way. So far, he's winning.

marton · #**20533** 20.11.2019, 09:57

	Quote:	gaburko
	It all depends on which part of the statement you want to focus on naturally fox news focuses on another part: "My colleagues asked about, 'Well, doesn't aid get held up for all kinds of reasons?' Ambassador Volker, have you ever seen military aid held up because the President wanted his rival investigated?" House Intelligence Chair Adam Schiff asked. "No, I have not seen that," Volker said. When Schiff asked Morrison, he responded, "No, chairman."

That is just a diversion.

The case is that it is illegal for a US President to ask a foreign leader to interfere in the next election by investigating a political rival.
It is clear from the rough transcript that he did that; “Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it. It sounds horrible to me.”

Of course, bribing the foreign leader to do that makes it worse. Not bribing the foreign leader does not make it better!

gaburko · #**20534** 20.11.2019, 10:11

	Quote:	marton
	That is just a diversion. The case is that it is illegal for a US President to ask a foreign leader to interfere in the next election by investigating a political rival.

Impeachment is a POLITICAL process, not judiciary

It's not a matter of what's legal or not, it's a matter of whether the House and the Senate BOTH agree to impeach and as of today pretty much everyone is clear that the Senate will not.
The only plausible scenario the Dems are playing out now is to somehow divide the Republican well into 2020 so to harm the re-election chances of Trump. This is not about what's legal, this is a political fight and the distinction is important.

#**20535** 20.11.2019, 10:16

	Quote:	gaburko
	Impeachment is a POLITICAL process, not judiciary It's not a matter of what's legal or not, it's a matter of whether the House and the Senate BOTH agree to impeach and as of today pretty much everyone is clear that the Senate will not. The only plausible scenario the Dems are playing out now is to somehow divide the Republican well into 2020 so to harm the re-election chances of Trump. This is not about what's legal, this is a political fight and the distinction is important.

I don't think you know what impeachment is. Please go look it up and then come back to us once you know how it works.

gaburko · #**20536** 20.11.2019, 11:13

	Quote:
	I don't think you know what impeachment is. Please go look it up and then come back to us once you know how it works.

OMG, I did and I was right. As usual.

Wiki:

Although the subject of the charge is criminal action, it does not constitute a criminal trial; the only question under consideration is the removal of the individual from office, and the possibilities of a subsequent vote preventing the removed official from ever again holding political office in the jurisdiction where he or she was removed.

And this is, of course, logical if you knew anything about the separation of powers, as this is a process by the legislative body, not by the judiciary.

#**20537** 20.11.2019, 11:42

	Quote:	gaburko
	OMG, I did and I was right. As usual. Wiki: Although the subject of the charge is criminal action, it does not constitute a criminal trial; the only question under consideration is the removal of the individual from office, and the possibilities of a subsequent vote preventing the removed official from ever again holding political office in the jurisdiction where he or she was removed. And this is, of course, logical if you knew anything about the separation of powers, as this is a process by the legislative body, not by the judiciary.

Try quoting the relevant paragraph from Wikipedia. Hint, it's the one before the one you used and it explains exactly what IMPEACHMENT is and who does the impeaching and not some ethereal conviction concept. Off you scuttle, try again.

marton · #**20538** 20.11.2019, 11:44

	Quote:	gaburko
	OMG, I did and I was right. As usual. Wiki: Although the subject of the charge is criminal action, it does not constitute a criminal trial; the only question under consideration is the removal of the individual from office, and the possibilities of a subsequent vote preventing the removed official from ever again holding political office in the jurisdiction where he or she was removed. And this is, of course, logical if you knew anything about the separation of powers, as this is a process by the legislative body, not by the judiciary.

Did you notice the bit about "the subject of the charge is criminal action" which is why I wrote "The case is it is illegal for a US President...... "

gaburko · #**20539** 20.11.2019, 12:35

	Quote:	marton
	Did you notice the bit about "the subject of the charge is criminal action" which is why I wrote "The case is it is illegal for a US President......* "*

Let me further dumb it down for you guys:

the only question under consideration is the removal of the individual from office

#**20540** 20.11.2019, 12:46

	Quote:	gaburko
	Let me further dumb it down for you guys: the only question under consideration is the removal of the individual from office

It isn't though, is it? The only thing in question was your lack of knowledge of what impeachment is, hence my replies to this from you...

	Quote:	gaburko
	Impeachment is a POLITICAL process, not judiciary It's not a matter of what's legal or not, it's a matter of whether the House and the Senate BOTH agree to impeach and as of today pretty much everyone is clear that the Senate will not. The only plausible scenario the Dems are playing out now is to somehow divide the Republican well into 2020 so to harm the re-election chances of Trump. This is not about what's legal, this is a political fight and the distinction is important.

I hope you've caught up with the rest of the wiki article and now know who does the impeaching - I've even bolded it to help you out.