What's new
By:

The official "let's impeach Trump" thread

Zombie said:
It kind of feels like Trump mistimed this as well. Releasing a transcript that is sure to be far from damning may have enabled him to buy more time and given Democrats on the fence on impeachment an out.

As it is now though, they've called for impeachment inquiries to begin, and that doesn't seem to me to be a battle you start if you aren't going to go full steam ahead.
Click to expand...

I’m worried that he’ll shoot out the transcript and although it looks bad it won’t be the “smocking gun” we’ve hoped for. He’ll then claim “total exoneration”, Dems will be deflated and those weak ones will fall apart, the media will claim that he’s been acquitted, and the public will move on.

Democrats, the media, and the public should push forward until the entire whistleblower complaint has been revealed. Not some weak *** transcript which is the equivalent to Barr’s redacted memo.
 
Zombie said:
It's not like we can trust president sharpie to release an accurate transcript of the call as well. Didn't he do this already with a Putin call?

Good news is the whistle-blower is ready to meet with the House intelligence committee this week.

Click to expand...


I hope he’s more forthcoming and has a better memory than Mueller.
 
The Thriller said:
I’m worried that he’ll shoot out the transcript and although it looks bad it won’t be the “smocking gun” we’ve hoped for. He’ll then claim “total exoneration”, Dems will be deflated and those weak ones will fall apart, the media will claim that he’s been acquitted, and the public will move on.
Click to expand...
I think there's far too much risk for Democrats to begin the fight for impeachment, and then wilt over something that they have no reason to believe will be accurate. That's worse than not committing to impeachment at all.

They do need to make the case that outright Quid Pro Quo is not the standard that needs to be met however.

Just saw that Pelosi is not making that mistake.

 
Archie Moses said:
A few things.

“Thunberg began suffering from depression as a child, by her own admission, in part because she learned about climate change at age eight,” noted the Washington Examiner piece from late August. “She was later diagnosed with autism and obsessive compulsive disorder and gradually became despondent as she obsessed over her fear of climate change. She developed mutism and an eating disorder so severe that she once went two months without food, and she stopped going to school. Her only sibling, a sister named Beata, also suffers from Asperger’s and OCD, as well as ADHD."

The more I read about Thunberg, the more I see how she's coached and taken advantage of. It's sad really.
Click to expand...

Yeah, because kids with autism spectrum disorders are so easily coached into showing emotions they don't actually feel.[/sarcasm]
 
Joe Bagadonuts said:
I figured it was implied by your comment that there has been no evidence of wrongdoing on the part of either Biden. If Trump or any of his associates are ever unwilling to answer one accusation or another people come out of the woodwork saying that their silence on the issue is evidence of their guilt. That doesn't work both ways?
Click to expand...

Sure. For example, one of the accusations of Trumps corruption was based on military personnel being put up at more expensive Trump properties than cheaper local properties. As it turns out, there were actual military personnel being put up at actual Trump properties than were more expensive that other, actual, local properties. Now, what's the actual scandal behind Hunter Biden's job? What wrongdoing was committed?
 
Zombie said:
I'm not aware of the Covington High School thing, and none of what you typed supports the idea she's being coached or coerced in some way.
Click to expand...

The high school kid who was standing in front of a Native American drummer while some other kids were chanting in the background.
 
Joe Bagadonuts said:
BTW, I was already familiar with this article. I'd be interested to see actual evidence of Shokin's corruption rather than heresay. But as I said before, no matter how corrupt Shokin is, the Biden's have certainly put themselves into a sticky position with regard to the Ukraine. I have yet to see anyone provide evidence that Hunter was providing his client anything other than his father's influence. He apparently has no previous experience in the gas industry, no previous experience in Ukraine, several previous drug related charges, and no willingness to talk to anyone about this situation.
Click to expand...

It is not particularly uncommon for companies to hire names that lend them prestige, particularly when those names are transactional lawyers that sit on the board and do occasional work. Back when I was a baby lawyer, at one of the top Silicon valley law firms, it was common for one of our firm's founders to serve on boards as a "service" to lend companies credibility - this was particularly true for companies that were dealing with stock option backdating scandals in the late 00's that wanted to give the appearance of taking corporate governance more seriously.

Biden was a transactional attorney at Rosemont Partners, which had a preexisting relationship with Burisma. The company initially brought on Devon Archer, Biden's business partner, as part of its effort to get better access to Western markets. Source (Russian language): https://www.capital.ua/ru/publicati...-napominaet-exxon-na-zare-svoego-stanovleniya It looks like Archer brought his business partner on board, likely because it carried lucractive fees for Rosemont to have two members. The Burisma board also included a former Polish president at the time. If you take a look at virtually any Silicon valley company's board composition there will be a lot of names that don't make a surface level sense. Board members aren't involved in day to day operation, they are an oversight body for the company's officers.

At some point the criticism becomes "Person X had a job and a famous father." At the presidential level, every business entanglement is a potential conflict of interest because the famous father can influence. There's gotta be a little more before you can impute something more sinister, and without any evidence that anyone believed Shokin was actively going after Burisma, there's just nothing there in this case.
 
Last edited:
Zombie said:
Ohh gotcha. I'm struggling to find a connection there.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that’s typically the case. But they heard it from Shapiro or saw it on Facebook so obviously it makes sense to them. If you disagree, you’re a hopelessly hateful and bigoted person. Convince me otherwise.

They’re both teens so obviously it’s the same thing...
 
Zombie said:
I think there's far too much risk for Democrats to begin the fight for impeachment, and then wilt over something that they have no reason to believe will be accurate. That's worse than not committing to impeachment at all.

They do need to make the case that outright Quid Pro Quo is not the standard that needs to be met however.

Just saw that Pelosi is not making that mistake.

Click to expand...


I hope you’re right. Maybe I’m just being overly pessimistic here. But we know that trumpworld is going to try and spin this as:

1. Look it’s not that bad on the transcript! Trump is just misunderstood and the Dems are out to get him because they lost in 2016 and Mueller failed.
2. Trumpworld hopes the media will catch on to this transcript narrative and clear trump and divide Democrats.
3. I can easily see Democrats screwing this up. Some even coming out and saying, “dammit, this is another mueller nothingburger! The transcript is damning but not impeachable.” While repubs circle the wagons and deflect, claiming that Biden now needs to be investigated.

And the media and public at large is too stupid to recognize that they were just played but Trumpworld.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top