Smoke, mirrors and circus much?

[Beebs52]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vox.co ... epublicans

[Bob78164]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vox.co ... epublicans

I've got no problem with the whistleblower answering questions if he or she is willing to do so, but it's ridiculous to claim that either motivation or sources are relevant at this point. Those would matter only if we had no other way to assess the accuracy of what the whistleblower said. But we do. We've got firsthand testimony now, not to mention the altered transcript that all by itself proved most of what was in the report.

So now that we know that the whistleblower was right, why he or she came forward really doesn't make a particle of difference to whether the conduct described actually occurred. It's like saying that Donny should get away with murder because the witness who told us where to find the videotape had it in for Donny. If the video exists, it doesn't matter why Donny was turned in. --Bob

[silverscreenselect]

So now that we know that the whistleblower was right, why he or she came forward really doesn't make a particle of difference to whether the conduct described actually occurred.

Whistleblowers, like informants in general, often have a grudge against the person they inform against. The Republicans at first claimed that what the whistleblower was saying was hearsay and his identity was vital to assess credibility. We've now had the credibility verified by multiple witnesses and we've had people who were sitting in on the phone call to testify about it.

The Republicans keep waving their arms about the whistleblower because they've got no other defense other than to try to obscure the facts with enough of the public. And the public increasingly isn't buying it.

[Ritterskoop]

I'm just saying, we spent all night at work trying to find a word to replace Whistleblower that would fit in one-column headlines.

I think they settled on Informant, but even that loses some of its meaning.

If it had been me, I would have gone a whole other route:

Hearings
to return
to source

or some such.

[flockofseagulls104]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vox.co ... epublicans

I've got no problem with the whistleblower answering questions if he or she is willing to do so, but it's ridiculous to claim that either motivation or sources are relevant at this point. Those would matter only if we had no other way to assess the accuracy of what the whistleblower said. But we do. We've got firsthand testimony now, not to mention the altered transcript that all by itself proved most of what was in the report.

So now that we know that the whistleblower was right, why he or she came forward really doesn't make a particle of difference to whether the conduct described actually occurred. It's like saying that Donny should get away with murder because the witness who told us where to find the videotape had it in for Donny. If the video exists, it doesn't matter why Donny was turned in. --Bob

Bobby, this whole thing is a partisan attempt to get trump out of the election or to discredit him to gain a little advantage in the election. We have the transcript of what was said, and anything that was left out did not change the tone of the conversation. It certainly did not add "find dirt or make it up" to the conversation. It didn't add it 8 times.
You are entitled to your opinion, but not one non democrat voted to continue the impeachment. That is the definition of partisan. And all the dems have is the OPINIONS of several people about the phone call, completely ignoring the statements of the two people involved in the phone call. No investigation of biden was conducted ( although it should be) and the military aid was given.
All we have been given from the "investigation" is any dirt they could find against trump, and going forward, Schiff controls who can be questioned and who can question them.
And meanwhile, the House is doing nothing else. So much for walking and chewing gum.
I think it's just another overreach by the resistance mob.

[silverscreenselect]

You are entitled to your opinion, but not one non democrat voted to continue the impeachment.

And, as inevitably happens, you are wrong. Justin Amash, who is no liberal, voted in favor of the proceedings and has repeatedly castigated Republicans for their blind allegiance to Trump. A majority of the American public is now in favor of at least the hearings if not actual impeachment.

What was left out of the so-called transcript were specific references to the Bidens according to the witness who was on the call.

You really should review facts, not right-wing whitewashing and spin.

going forward, Schiff controls who can be questioned and who can question them.

While this is technically true, the rules the Democrats adopted allow the Republicans to subpoena witnesses and documents and the questioning will be 45 minutes a side by the attorneys, followed by five minutes by each member. That should give the Republicans plenty of time to bring out whatever they can.

And as far as the House doing nothing, here's a list of bills that were considered last week alone.

https://docs.house.gov/floor/

[BackInTex]

I'm just saying, we spent all night at work trying to find a word to replace Whistleblower that would fit in one-column headlines.

I think they settled on Informant, but even that loses some of its meaning.

If it had been me, I would have gone a whole other route:

Hearings
to return
to source

or some such.

Leaker fits.

[silvercamaro]

I'm just saying, we spent all night at work trying to find a word to replace Whistleblower that would fit in one-column headlines.

I think they settled on Informant, but even that loses some of its meaning.

If it had been me, I would have gone a whole other route:

Hearings
to return
to source

or some such.

Leaker fits.

I think the simple "whistler" should do the trick. Everybody knows how to whistle in Washington, just pucker up and blow smoke.

[flockofseagulls104]

You are entitled to your opinion, but not one non democrat voted to continue the impeachment.

And, as inevitably happens, you are wrong. Justin Amash, who is no liberal, voted in favor of the proceedings and has repeatedly castigated Republicans for their blind allegiance to Trump. A majority of the American public is now in favor of at least the hearings if not actual impeachment.

Justin Amash, the newest Jon Ossoff, is an independent, as you have pointed out yourself.

What was left out of the so-called transcript were specific references to the Bidens according to the witness who was on the call.

You really should review facts, not right-wing whitewashing and spin.

From what was described, nothing that changed anything about the call was omitted. Please omit the trolling. I follow this as much as you do, probably more, because I try and get information from all sides. You don't.

going forward, Schiff controls who can be questioned and who can question them.

While this is technically true, the rules the Democrats adopted allow the Republicans to subpoena witnesses and documents and the questioning will be 45 minutes a side by the attorneys, followed by five minutes by each member. That should give the Republicans plenty of time to bring out whatever they can.

Due process has already been thrown under the bus. No way to get it back. And once again, please name the specific crime that was allegedly committed.

See especially section F
https://rules.house.gov/sites/democrats ... iciary.pdf

Make up of the Judiciary Committee.

Majority 24
Jerry Nadler, New York, Chairman
Zoe Lofgren, California
Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas
Steve Cohen, Tennessee
Hank Johnson, Georgia
Ted Deutch, Florida
Karen Bass, California
Cedric Richmond, Louisiana
Hakeem Jeffries, New York
David Cicilline, Rhode Island
Eric Swalwell, California
Ted Lieu, California
Jamie Raskin, Maryland
Pramila Jayapal, Washington
Val Demings, Florida
Lou Correa, California
Mary Gay Scanlon, Pennsylvania, Vice Chair
Sylvia Garcia, Texas
Joe Neguse, Colorado
Lucy McBath, Georgia
Greg Stanton, Arizona
Madeleine Dean, Pennsylvania
Debbie Mucarsel-Powell, Florida
Veronica Escobar, Texas

Minority 17
Doug Collins, Georgia, Ranking Member
Jim Sensenbrenner, Wisconsin
Steve Chabot, Ohio
Louie Gohmert, Texas
Jim Jordan, Ohio
Ken Buck, Colorado
John Ratcliffe, Texas
Martha Roby, Alabama
Matt Gaetz, Florida
Mike Johnson, Louisiana
Andy Biggs, Arizona
Tom McClintock, California
Debbie Lesko, Arizona
Guy Reschenthaler, Pennsylvania
Ben Cline, Virginia
Kelly Armstrong, North Dakota
Greg Steube, Florida

Intelligence Committee

Majority 13
Adam Schiff, California, Chair
Jim Himes, Connecticut
Terri Sewell, Alabama
André Carson, Indiana
Jackie Speier, California
Mike Quigley, Illinois
Eric Swalwell, California
Joaquin Castro, Texas
Denny Heck, Washington
Sean Patrick Maloney, New York
Val Demings, Florida
Raja Krishnamoorthi, Illinois
Peter Welch, Vermont

Minority 9
Devin Nunes, California, Ranking Member
Mike Conaway, Texas
Mike Turner, Ohio
Brad Wenstrup, Ohio
Chris Stewart, Utah
Rick Crawford, Arkansas
Elise Stefanik, New York
Will Hurd, Texas
John Ratcliffe, Texas

And as far as the House doing nothing, here's a list of bills that were considered last week alone.

https://docs.house.gov/floor/

All earthshaking stuff. Where's the Mexico-Canada Trade bill?

[silverscreenselect]

Due process has already been thrown under the bus. No way to get it back. And once again, please name the specific crime that was allegedly committed.

Since the House of Representatives determines what process is due and is using the rules that were established by the Republicans themselves in 2015, that argument doesn't hold water.

Withholding aid that had already been approved by demanding that a foreign government take action against a private individual for personal gain qualifies as either bribery or a high crime and misdemeanor. Take your pick.

And I guess you discounted Vindman's testimony that Trump removed specific references to Biden and Burisma from the so-called transcript.

As far as due process, while all you've done is throw the term around like a magic mantra, Trump is being afforded similar rights and protections to those extended to Clinton and Nixon during the impeachment phase of their proceedings.

https://www.npr.org/2019/11/03/77515242 ... nd-clinton

You may actually stare at the words from various news sources but you rely on right wingers to form your opinions for you, even when they make little to no sense as here.

[BackInTex]

Withholding aid that had already been approved by demanding that a foreign government take action against a private individual for personal gain qualifies as either bribery or a high crime and misdemeanor. Take your pick.

I know you'll agree, my sources may be flawed, but I can not find anywhere where the president withheld or threatened to withhold aid. Please show me where that was done or threatened. And before you go there "By the way, I would like you to do us a favor" is not in anyway such a threat.

And as far as personal gain goes, it is not Trump's fault the crimes were committed by a potential political opponent. Biden doesn't get a pass on being investigated for crimes because he happens to be running for president. Just as Trump was not granted such immunity.

[Bob78164]

Withholding aid that had already been approved by demanding that a foreign government take action against a private individual for personal gain qualifies as either bribery or a high crime and misdemeanor. Take your pick.

I know you'll agree, my sources may be flawed, but I can not find anywhere where the president withheld or threatened to withhold aid. Please show me where that was done or threatened. And before you go there "By the way, I would like you to do us a favor" is not in anyway such a threat.

And as far as personal gain goes, it is not Trump's fault the crimes were committed by a potential political opponent. Biden doesn't get a pass on being investigated for crimes because he happens to be running for president. Just as Trump was not granted such immunity.

This is the latest Republican game plan. Focus completely on the phone call and ignore all of the additional evidence that Donny required Ukraine to invent dirt on a political opponent as a quid pro quo for receiving foreign aid that Congress had already approved. "I would like you to do us a favor" is the code. All of the other conversations that you want us to ignore are the code book.

He did it. There's no question about it. The only remaining question is whether you're okay with it because he's on your side. It sounds like you are. And if enough Americans agree with you, that has terrifying implications for the future of our democracy. --Bob

[flockofseagulls104]

Withholding aid that had already been approved by demanding that a foreign government take action against a private individual for personal gain qualifies as either bribery or a high crime and misdemeanor. Take your pick.

I know you'll agree, my sources may be flawed, but I can not find anywhere where the president withheld or threatened to withhold aid. Please show me where that was done or threatened. And before you go there "By the way, I would like you to do us a favor" is not in anyway such a threat.

And as far as personal gain goes, it is not Trump's fault the crimes were committed by a potential political opponent. Biden doesn't get a pass on being investigated for crimes because he happens to be running for president. Just as Trump was not granted such immunity.

This is the latest Republican game plan. Focus completely on the phone call and ignore all of the additional evidence that Donny required Ukraine to invent dirt on a political opponent as a quid pro quo for receiving foreign aid that Congress had already approved. "I would like you to do us a favor" is the code. All of the other conversations that you want us to ignore are the code book.

He did it. There's no question about it. The only remaining question is whether you're okay with it because he's on your side. It sounds like you are. And if enough Americans agree with you, that has terrifying implications for the future of our democracy. --Bob

Oh. We got a dog whistle here. No question about it. We get to impeach presidents based on dog whistles now. Good thing they had the English to Ukrainian dog whistle dictionary handy for that call! Good thinking!

[flockofseagulls104]

Due process has already been thrown under the bus. No way to get it back. And once again, please name the specific crime that was allegedly committed.

Since the House of Representatives determines what process is due and is using the rules that were established by the Republicans themselves in 2015, that argument doesn't hold water.

Withholding aid that had already been approved by demanding that a foreign government take action against a private individual for personal gain qualifies as either bribery or a high crime and misdemeanor. Take your pick.

And I guess you discounted Vindman's testimony that Trump removed specific references to Biden and Burisma from the so-called transcript.

As far as due process, while all you've done is throw the term around like a magic mantra, Trump is being afforded similar rights and protections to those extended to Clinton and Nixon during the impeachment phase of their proceedings.

https://www.npr.org/2019/11/03/77515242 ... nd-clinton

You may actually stare at the words from various news sources but you rely on right wingers to form your opinions for you, even when they make little to no sense as here.

You were doing so well, too. You had one non trolling response in a row going.

[silverscreenselect]

You were doing so well, too. You had one non trolling response in a row going.

Which beats your current and continuing record of zero accurate, intelligent responses in a row.

[Ritterskoop]

I love Leaker and Whistler, and will pass them along, and give y'all credit.

[Beebs52]

I love Leaker and Whistler, and will pass them along, and give y'all credit.

I accept responsibility for the direction of this thread. I just ...whatever.

[BackInTex]

Withholding aid that had already been approved by demanding that a foreign government take action against a private individual for personal gain qualifies as either bribery or a high crime and misdemeanor. Take your pick.

I know you'll agree, my sources may be flawed, but I can not find anywhere where the president withheld or threatened to withhold aid. Please show me where that was done or threatened. And before you go there "By the way, I would like you to do us a favor" is not in anyway such a threat.

And as far as personal gain goes, it is not Trump's fault the crimes were committed by a potential political opponent. Biden doesn't get a pass on being investigated for crimes because he happens to be running for president. Just as Trump was not granted such immunity.

This is the latest Republican game plan. Focus completely on the phone call and ignore all of the additional evidence that Donny required Ukraine to invent dirt on a political opponent as a quid pro quo for receiving foreign aid that Congress had already approved. "I would like you to do us a favor" is the code. All of the other conversations that you want us to ignore are the code book.

He did it. There's no question about it. The only remaining question is whether you're okay with it because he's on your side. It sounds like you are. And if enough Americans agree with you, that has terrifying implications for the future of our democracy. --Bob

This is the latest Democrat game plan. Ignore the facts, the actual phone call, and make up "dog whistles" and other things usually perpetrated by Democrats.

"no question about it". Funny. How much did you put down on Beto?

[Billy Bored Thornton]

I love Leaker and Whistler, and will pass them along, and give y'all credit.

My ex and I used to call each other by these very names. I'll let you guess who was who.


Pumpkin.

[flockofseagulls104]

Oh my God! The Future Of Our Democracy Is At Stake!!!!!!!!!!
We should all do what bob tells us. He and SSS know what will save OUR DEMOCRACY!

PLEASE tell us, bob. What should we do next to salvage The Future Of Our Democracy?

[Bob78164]

I know you'll agree, my sources may be flawed, but I can not find anywhere where the president withheld or threatened to withhold aid. Please show me where that was done or threatened. And before you go there "By the way, I would like you to do us a favor" is not in anyway such a threat.

And as far as personal gain goes, it is not Trump's fault the crimes were committed by a potential political opponent. Biden doesn't get a pass on being investigated for crimes because he happens to be running for president. Just as Trump was not granted such immunity.

This is the latest Republican game plan. Focus completely on the phone call and ignore all of the additional evidence that Donny required Ukraine to invent dirt on a political opponent as a quid pro quo for receiving foreign aid that Congress had already approved. "I would like you to do us a favor" is the code. All of the other conversations that you want us to ignore are the code book.

He did it. There's no question about it. The only remaining question is whether you're okay with it because he's on your side. It sounds like you are. And if enough Americans agree with you, that has terrifying implications for the future of our democracy. --Bob

This is the latest Democrat game plan. Ignore the facts, the actual phone call, and make up "dog whistles" and other things usually perpetrated by Democrats.

"no question about it". Funny. How much did you put down on Beto?

Ask and ye shall receive.

"Gordon Sondland, a key figure in the impeachment inquiry, told a top Ukrainian official that hundreds of millions of dollars in military aid to the beleaguered U.S. ally would 'likely' be held up unless the country’s government announced investigations of President Donald Trump’s political rivals — a major reversal from his previous closed-door testimony."

He did it. The only remaining question is whether you're okay with that because he's on your team. So far all available evidence is that most of the Republican Party is okay with that, which is damning evidence that the modern Republican Party needs to suffer the same fate nationwide that it has already suffered in California. Because as long as Republican voters have that attitude, Republican politicians who care more about Republican primaries than about doing what's right (which appears to be just about all of them) will continue to defend the indefensible without regard for right, wrong, or what's good for our country. --Bob

[silverscreenselect]

He did it. There's no question about it. The only remaining question is whether you're okay with it because he's on your side.

I have a feeling Flock's going to be doing some extra-heavy-duty research of Breitbart and Redstate to figure how to explain away today's developments.

[flockofseagulls104]

This is the latest Republican game plan. Focus completely on the phone call and ignore all of the additional evidence that Donny required Ukraine to invent dirt on a political opponent as a quid pro quo for receiving foreign aid that Congress had already approved. "I would like you to do us a favor" is the code. All of the other conversations that you want us to ignore are the code book.

He did it. There's no question about it. The only remaining question is whether you're okay with it because he's on your side. It sounds like you are. And if enough Americans agree with you, that has terrifying implications for the future of our democracy. --Bob

This is the latest Democrat game plan. Ignore the facts, the actual phone call, and make up "dog whistles" and other things usually perpetrated by Democrats.

"no question about it". Funny. How much did you put down on Beto?

Ask and ye shall receive.

"Gordon Sondland, a key figure in the impeachment inquiry, told a top Ukrainian official that hundreds of millions of dollars in military aid to the beleaguered U.S. ally would 'likely' be held up unless the country’s government announced investigations of President Donald Trump’s political rivals — a major reversal from his previous closed-door testimony."

He did it. The only remaining question is whether you're okay with that because he's on your team. So far all available evidence is that most of the Republican Party is okay with that, which is damning evidence that the modern Republican Party needs to suffer the same fate nationwide that it has already suffered in California. Because as long as Republican voters have that attitude, Republican politicians who care more about Republican primaries than about doing what's right (which appears to be just about all of them) will continue to defend the indefensible without regard for right, wrong, or what's good for our country. --Bob

I'm ok with that because he's on my team. But I will do my part to save The Future Of Our Democracy by voting for a socialist. It's the least I can do.
In the meantime I will continue to wonder what the hell happened to russian collusion and why Burisma paid millions of dollars to hunter biden. And who it was exactly that cleared the bidens of any wrong doing. And wondering when and what's in the IGs and durham reports. And when the bodies are going to start piling up from trump killing more people than mao, hitler and stalin combined.
Things like that that are of no concern to the fine people of california.

[BackInTex]

Ask and ye shall receive.

so you do believe him, if he is saying something you want to believe. Seems about right.

[Bob78164]

Ask and ye shall receive.

so you do believe him, if he is saying something you want to believe. Seems about right.

You think that this guy, who donated to Donny's campaign and was rewarded with a plum diplomatic post, is making it up?

There are none so blind as those who will not see. --Bob