Page 20 of 45 FirstFirst ... 11121314151617181920212223242526272829 ... LastLast
Results 286 to 300 of 664

Thread: The Impeachment, Trial and Acquittal of Donald John Trump

  1. #286
    Global Moderator
    Comrade Commissar
    TopHatter's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Sep 03
    Posts
    17,081
    Rudy Giuliani Jokes That He Has 'Insurance' If Trump Throws Him Under The Bus

    Rudy Giuliani told a reporter that he has “very, very good insurance” if President Donald Trump ever decides to throw him under the bus.

    In a phone interview with The Guardian, journalist Stephanie Kirchgaessner asked the president’s personal attorney if he was nervous that Trump might do such a thing. Giuliani reportedly responded to the question with a slight laugh: “I’m not, but I do have very, very good insurance, so if he does, all my hospital bills will be paid.”

    His lawyer, Robert Costello, who was also on the call, then interjected: “He’s joking.”

    The question comes in the wake of speculation from analysts that such a move may be in the cards, after closed-door testimony from multiple witnesses during the impeachment probe described Giuliani as having a central role in the conversations and actions that led to the inquiry.

    A recent Axios report cited top House Republican sources as describing a potential GOP plan to distance Trump from Giuliani as part of an impeachment survival strategy. The report cited a well-connected Republican source as saying “Rudy will be cut loose because he was rogue.”

    Asked by The Guardian whether he believed Trump would remain loyal to him, Giuliani said he believed the president to be a “very loyal guy.”

    “I did what a good lawyer is supposed to do,” Giuliani reportedly said. “I dug up evidence that helped to show the case against him was false; that there was a great deal of collusion going on someplace else other than Russia. And then I stepped on the number one minefield, which is Joe Biden, who is heavily protected by the Washington press corps.”

    Giuliani was subpoenaed as part of the House’s investigation into Trump’s alleged efforts to pressure the Ukrainian government into investigating 2020 political rival Joe Biden in exchange for U.S. military aid and a White House invitation. He is also being investigated by federal prosecutors in New York over his ties to Soviet-born Florida businessmen Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, who were charged and indicted with campaign finance violations, and allegedly aided Giuliani’s efforts to advance Trump’s interests in Ukraine.
    ______________

    Jfc...This just gets juicier and juicier.

    So Rudy telegraphs loud and clear that he's got a mountain of shit he can drop on Trump (his lawyer probably shit a mountain himself when he heard that) but he also believes Trump to be a "very loyal guy"....the same Donald Trump that would probably knife his own spawn in the back if it would benefit him.

    Come back over to the rule of law Rudy...you used to put Mafia thugs in the clink left and right, you know what they're loyal to. You can do that again and redeem yourself, become America's Mayor again and people will remember you as a true patriot.

    Or you can go down in history as just another Trump chump.
    “You don’t even have to be convicted of a crime to lose your job in this constitutional republic if the Senate determines that your conduct as a public official is clearly out of bounds in your role… because impeachment is not about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.”
    ~ Lindsey Graham

    "The notion that you can withhold information and documents from Congress no matter whether you are the party in power or not in power is wrong. Respect for the rule of law must mean something, irrespective of the vicissitudes of political cycles."
    ~ Trey Gowdy

  2. #287
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    14,016
    every single one of the GOP arguments is so stupid, i feel dumber for having listened to them in the first place.

    "there was no quid pro quo" --> Mulvaney says there is

    "quid pro quo happens all the time" --> not against domestic political opponents they don't (and this seems to be where the GOP base is; IIRC some 65% of them think that this is perfectly legitimate and that every President does it.)

    "Trump was only looking to address Ukraine's general corruption problems" --> Trump says loudly that he only cares about Biden's stuff (plus the idea that the guy who paid off Stormy Daniels for her silence before an election cares about corruption...lol)

    "everything is all second hand" --> turns out there were people in the room that overheard it, plus Trump deliberately blocked his own people whom would have first hand knowledge from testifying claiming executive privilege

    "the whistleblowers are all deep state never-Trumpers" --> which has nothing to do with them testifying under oath regarding what they heard

    "the entire process is illegitimate and I refuse to comment further" --> the argument of Lindsey Graham, whom got tired of changing arguments on a daily basis

    "the hearing should be public, what are they trying to hide?" --> turns out Trump -didn't- want the hearings public

    now it's rapidly devolving into conspiracy theories about the likes of Vindman and Taylor (decorated vets) and Sondland as a never-Trumper (only he was a Trump campaign bundler...).

    so much contortion. they might as well just go down the Graham and McCarthy route of saying that no amount of evidence will lead them to impeach/convict Trump. it'd be more honest and less stupid for everyone involved.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  3. #288
    Defense ProfessionalSenior Contributor tbm3fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Nov 09
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Posts
    3,873
    Listening to half of them they pretty much say that since Trump didn't actually use the words "this is a quid pro quo" in the conversation it isn't one. That makes my head spin as Trump has been a scratch my back I'll scratch your back kind of guy his entire career.

    I'm sure he appreciates and understands this very well...

    "Someday, and that day may never come, I will call upon you to do a service for me. But until that day, accept this justice as a gift on my daughter's wedding day."



    Even Don Corleone didn't say "quid pro quo" as if he had to
    Last edited by tbm3fan; 15 Nov 19, at 18:12.

  4. #289
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    14,016
    so Roger Stone is going to prison, where he belongs.

    he joins Michael Flynn.

    Rick Gates.

    Paul Manafort.

    Michael Cohen.

    George Papadopoulos.

    I hope they're soon to be joined by Rudy Giuliani.

    and one day, maybe, Donald J. Trump.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  5. #290
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    14,016
    there's a great Washington Post article now about how one relatively junior CIA whistleblower started this whole process. no new news, just a detailed summary of everything that has gone on up until now:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...dce_story.html

    the list of people whom stood up for what was right against this unofficial channel which tried to screw over a US partner for Trump's political campaigning should be remembered by all Americans.

    the whistleblower's name, if and when he/she chooses to reveal their identity.

    William Taylor.

    George Kent.

    Alexander Vindland.

    Marie Yovanovitch.

    yet the bravery of the one whom spoke up outshines the last four.

    contrast these Americans with the incarcerated scum in the preceding post.
    Last edited by astralis; 16 Nov 19, at 22:25.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  6. #291
    Defense ProfessionalSenior Contributor tbm3fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Nov 09
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Posts
    3,873
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    there's a great Washington Post article now about how one relatively junior CIA whistleblower started this whole process. no new news, just a detailed summary of everything that has gone on up until now:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...dce_story.html

    the list of people whom stood up for what was right against this unofficial channel which tried to screw over a US partner for Trump's political campaigning should be remembered by all Americans.

    the whistleblower's name, if and when he/she chooses to reveal their identity.

    William Taylor.

    George Kent.

    Alexander Vindland.

    Marie Yovanovitch.

    yet the bravery of the one whom spoke up outshines the last four.

    contrast these Americans with the incarcerated scum in the preceding post.
    I'm looking forward to the public interview of Sondland in the coming days. The people listed all have seemingly put him in a spot now with his closed door testimony. They are professional State Department diplomats who do things by the book and keep records as one would expect. Sondland, being simply a GOP donor and certainly no ambassador, didn't perform that way. Hell, he had a conversation on a unsecured cell phone with the Russian FSB and Ukrainian Security Service no doubt listening in. Now how many "I don't recalls" will come out of his mouth. Do I protect Trump by risk of lying or do I keep my ass out of legal jeopardy?

  7. #292
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    14,016
    there's now a renewed slime campaign against Vindman led by Sen Ron Johnson (R-Wis) prior to his testimony.

    "“A significant number of bureaucrats and staff members within the executive branch have never accepted President Trump as legitimate and resent his unorthodox style and his intrusion onto their ‘turf’,” Johnson wrote. “They react by leaking to the press and participating in the ongoing effort to sabotage his policies and, if possible, remove him from office. It is entirely possible that Vindman fits this profile.”"

    what a POS.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  8. #293
    Global Moderator
    Military Professional
    Defense Professional
    Albany Rifles's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Apr 07
    Location
    Prince George, VA
    Posts
    8,943
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    there's now a renewed slime campaign against Vindman led by Sen Ron Johnson (R-Wis) prior to his testimony.

    "“A significant number of bureaucrats and staff members within the executive branch have never accepted President Trump as legitimate and resent his unorthodox style and his intrusion onto their ‘turf’,” Johnson wrote. “They react by leaking to the press and participating in the ongoing effort to sabotage his policies and, if possible, remove him from office. It is entirely possible that Vindman fits this profile.”"

    what a POS.
    He's a serving US Army officer who swore an oath to the Constitution five different times during his career.

    He was assigned to the NSC by DOD and is not a political appointee.

    What would Johnson, who never served a day in his life in uniform (just like someone else), know about the honor and integrity of an Army officer.
    “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
    Mark Twain

  9. #294
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    14,016
    Johnson wrote that in such a way that he could deny that he's attacking Vindman. "It is entirely possible..."

    worst time of slime: insulting and cowardly to boot.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  10. #295
    Global Moderator
    Comrade Commissar
    TopHatter's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Sep 03
    Posts
    17,081
    Here’s A Surprisingly Plausible Path To Removing Trump From Office
    It would take just three Republican senators to turn the impeachment vote into a secret ballot. It’s not hard to imagine what would happen then.

    By JULEANNA GLOVER November 12, 2019
    Juleanna Glover has worked as an adviser for several Republican politicians, including George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, John Ashcroft and Rudy Giuliani, and advised the presidential campaigns of John McCain and Jeb Bush.

    By most everyone’s judgment, the Senate will not vote to remove President Donald Trump from office if the House impeaches him. But what if senators could vote on impeachment by secret ballot? If they didn’t have to face backlash from constituents or the media or the president himself, who knows how many Republican senators would vote to remove?

    A secret impeachment ballot might sound crazy, but it’s actually quite possible. In fact, it would take only three senators to allow for that possibility.

    Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said he will immediately move to hold a trial to adjudicate the articles of impeachment if and when the Senate receives them from the House of Representatives. Article I, Section 3, of the Constitution does not set many parameters for the trial, except to say that “the Chief Justice shall preside,” and “no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.” That means the Senate has sole authority to draft its own rules for the impeachment trial, without judicial or executive branch oversight.

    During the last impeachment of a president, Bill Clinton, the rules were hammered out by Democrats and Republicans in a collaborative process, as then Senate leaders Trent Lott and Tom Daschle recently pointed out in a Washington Post op-ed. The rules passed unanimously. That’s unlikely this time, given the polarization that now defines our politics. McConnell and his fellow Republicans are much more likely to dictate the rules with little input from Democrats.

    But, according to current Senate procedure, McConnell will still need a simple majority—51 of the 53 Senate Republicans—to support any resolution outlining rules governing the trial. That means that if only three Republican senators were to break from the caucus, they could block any rule they didn’t like. (Vice President Mike Pence can’t break ties in impeachment matters.) Those three senators, in turn, could demand a secret ballot and condition their approval of the rest of the rules on getting one.

    Some might say transparency in congressional deliberations and votes is inviolable, and it’s true that none of the previous Senate impeachments have been conducted via secret ballot. But the Senate’s role in an impeachment is analogous to a U.S. jury, where secret ballots are often used. When Electoral College gridlock has resulted in the House picking the president—the House elected Thomas Jefferson in 1800 and John Quincy Adams in 1824—that vote has been secret. And, of course, when citizens vote for president, they do so in private.

    Trump and those around him seem confident that he won’t lose the 20 Republican senators needed to block a guilty verdict. But it’s not hard to imagine three senators supporting a secret ballot. Five sitting Republican senators have already announced their retirements; four of those are in their mid-70s or older and will never run for office again. They might well be willing to demand secrecy in order to give cover to their colleagues who would like to convict Trump but are afraid to do so because of politics in their home districts. There are also 10 Republican senators who aren’t up for reelection until 2024 and who might figure Trumpism will be irrelevant by then. Senators Mitt Romney and Lisa Murkowski have been the most vocal Republicans in expressing concerns about Trump’s behavior toward Ukraine. Other GOP senators have recently softened in their defense of him, as well—all before the House has held any public hearings.

    There’s already been some public speculation that, should the Senate choose to proceed with a secret ballot, Trump would be found guilty. GOP strategist Mike Murphy said recently that a sitting Republican senator had told him 30 of his colleagues would vote to convict Trump if the ballot were secret. Former Senator Jeff Flake topped that, saying he thought 35 Republican senators would vote that way.

    While it’s unlikely Trump would support a secret ballot, it’s possible he might actually benefit from one in the long run. If a secret ballot is agreed on and Trump knows the prospect of impeachment is near, he could then focus his energies on his post-presidency. Once he leaves office, Trump faces multiple possible criminal investigations, at the federal, state and local level. He almost certainly knows that a President Pence could pardon him only for federal crimes. To avoid the prospect of serving time, Trump could negotiate a collective settlement—just as the Sackler family has done in the OxyContin matter—with all the jurisdictions now running independent investigations into his activities. Trump’s impeachment, followed by a quick resignation, might appease Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance’s and New York Attorney General Letitia James’s thirst for justice, making them more likely to agree to a deal.

    Even McConnell might privately welcome the prospect of a secret ballot. He has always been intently focused on maintaining his Republican majority in the Senate. Trump’s approval numbers continue to languish, and support for impeachment has been rising. McConnell himself, facing reelection next year, has an approval rating of just 18 percent in Kentucky, not to mention that the Republican governor there just suffered a stunning upset in last week’s election. All of which suggests McConnell might warm to the possibility that he and his caucus could avoid a public up-or-down vote in defense of behavior by the president that’s looking increasingly indefensible.

    A secret ballot might get Trump out of office sooner than everyone expects: The sooner any three Republican senators make clear that they will support nothing short of a secret ballot, the sooner Trump realizes his best course could be to cut a deal, trading his office for a get-out-of-jail-free card—a clean slate from prosecutors—just as Vice President Spiro Agnew did. And if Trump were to leave office before the end of the year, there might even be enough time for Republicans to have a vibrant primary fight, resulting in a principled Republican as the nominee.

    UPDATE: Some constitutional scholars have pointed out that Article 1, Section 5, of the Constitution designates that 20 senators can oppose a secret ballot on “any questions,” but “questions” are defined as “Any matter on which the Senate is to vote, such as passage of a bill, adoption of an amendment, agreement to a motion, or an appeal.” No mention of impeachment proceedings is made. And, as others have pointed out, preceding this one-fifth requirement is crucial language: “Each House shall keep a Journal of its Proceedings, and from time to time publish the same, excepting such Parts as may in their Judgment require Secrecy.” Precedents are so thin here, but it is clear the Senate has the power to make its own rules over the trial proceedings. Those rules have historically required a simple majority of support.
    ______________

    tl;dr If the Senate proceeds with a secret ballot vote, Trump will be a pile of hammered dog shit about 6 feet tall. Ironically it might also spare him jail time from the state prosecutors that are out for blood.
    “You don’t even have to be convicted of a crime to lose your job in this constitutional republic if the Senate determines that your conduct as a public official is clearly out of bounds in your role… because impeachment is not about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.”
    ~ Lindsey Graham

    "The notion that you can withhold information and documents from Congress no matter whether you are the party in power or not in power is wrong. Respect for the rule of law must mean something, irrespective of the vicissitudes of political cycles."
    ~ Trey Gowdy

  11. #296
    Senior Contributor surfgun's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Nov 09
    Location
    MD
    Posts
    1,946
    Shades of Barbara Boxer today. Hilarious.

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=f0CprVYsG0k.

    Only about 10,000 Lt. Colonels in the US Army. Pretty self important of himself.
    Last edited by surfgun; 20 Nov 19, at 03:11.

  12. #297
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    14,016
    Shades of Barbara Boxer today. Hilarious.

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=f0CprVYsG0k.

    Only about 10,000 Lt. Colonels in the US Army. Pretty self important of himself.
    asking that you be called by your appropriate title is not self important at all in this context. after all, LTC Vindman called Devin Nunes "ranking member", instead of the rather more informal title of "Trump lapdog."

    it's part of a disgusting character attack, insinuating that he's pompous, trying to overawe civilians with his military credentials, or that he's a traitor because he wasn't born in the US.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...sense-decency/

    no amount of words can contain the utter contempt and scorn I have for these dicks.
    Last edited by astralis; 20 Nov 19, at 06:10.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  13. #298
    Defense ProfessionalSenior Contributor tbm3fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Nov 09
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Posts
    3,873
    Quote Originally Posted by surfgun View Post
    Shades of Barbara Boxer today. Hilarious.

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=f0CprVYsG0k.

    Only about 10,000 Lt. Colonels in the US Army. Pretty self important of himself.
    That is his proper title when in uniform so how hard can that be for you to understand. I guess he could have called Nunes by his first name of Devin and I bet Devin would have responded in kind. I also have my title and if you are not a friend and you talk to me over the phone or in person you use my title and do not presume you can use my first name. Common respect to a person who earned it is called. So what have you earned from years of education or service?

  14. #299
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Aug 08
    Location
    UK/Europe
    Posts
    5,474
    Quote Originally Posted by surfgun View Post
    Shades of Barbara Boxer today. Hilarious.

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=f0CprVYsG0k.

    Only about 10,000 Lt. Colonels in the US Army. Pretty self important of himself.
    Yet you call a guy who evaded service with an excuse about 'bone spurs' "President".

  15. #300
    Senior Contributor surfgun's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Nov 09
    Location
    MD
    Posts
    1,946
    Quote Originally Posted by tbm3fan View Post
    That is his proper title when in uniform so how hard can that be for you to understand. I guess he could have called Nunes by his first name of Devin and I bet Devin would have responded in kind. I also have my title and if you are not a friend and you talk to me over the phone or in person you use my title and do not presume you can use my first name. Common respect to a person who earned it is called. So what have you earned from years of education or service?
    It’s not Mr. Potato Peeler, it’s Specialist Potato Peeler to you, Sir!

    https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...mans-judgment/
    Last edited by surfgun; 20 Nov 19, at 12:37.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. The Cult of Donald Trump
    By TopHatter in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 100
    Last Post: 12 Feb 20,, 18:51
  2. Donald Trump rallies infiltrated by paid Hillary Clinton operatives
    By Parihaka in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 08 Nov 16,, 15:21
  3. Donald Trump Tells Friends He Will Run for President, Report Says
    By Julie in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 02 Mar 11,, 20:01
  4. Donald Trump Has Disappointed Me
    By THL in forum International Economy
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 09 Jan 07,, 21:11

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •