Politics: The Trump Impeachment Thread

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
41,573
7,863
278
51
East Point, Ga, USA
It was never going to be a smoking gun. The whistleblower mentioned multiple conversations, and this one is removed from all context. Congress needs to hear the entire complaint, and the context is what the administration is illegally hiding.
it's interesting to watch the spin/damage control evolve in the wake of this story. it's very similar to what happened with the mueller report (he was totally exonerated). we are now seeing the "he was exonerated" part being pushed far and wide. albeit with more concern than when it happened with the mueller report.
 

Go Bama

Hall of Fame
Dec 6, 2009
7,931
2,114
173
Thirteenessee
So the Senate voted unanimously in support of the House requiring the White House to furnish the full, un-redacted, whistleblower report to Congress. While that is encouraging; something smells fishy about this. Why would the Senate Republicans willingly cooperate in this matter? They must know that the report is not as damning as the media and most Democrats believe it to be. McConnell and his cronies are not stupid, they obviously know something the Democrats don't know and so does Trump.
Hadn't thought about the repubs playing along for this reason - what if the doc is nothing? What if this is all an elaborate setup to cut the dems off at the knees?

If the dems are right, this will effectively end his presidency. But if they're wrong, this will effectively give Trump 2020.
If what was a trap set by the GOP?

Getting Pelosi to begin impeachment proceedings?

Or getting Trump to be stupid?


Or what?

(I'm sorry, I'm just not understanding the context of your post).
If it exists, the “trap” is the elaborate setup. It implies that Trump and cronies are giving the Dems something to be suspicious about while Trump knows he has done nothing wrong. The end result is the Dems wind up with egg on their face and Trump proves to the American people it has indeed been a witch hunt all along.
 

CharminTide

Hall of Fame
Oct 23, 2005
7,091
1,085
178
If it exists, the “trap” is the elaborate setup. It implies that Trump and cronies are giving the Dems something to be suspicious about while Trump knows he has done nothing wrong. The end result is the Dems wind up with egg on their face and Trump proves to the American people it has indeed been a witch hunt all along.
That would be a good plan, although it presumes a level of strategery that I don't think exists. We'll find out eventually.
 

TrueCrimson7

All-American
Sep 21, 2014
2,489
158
73
USA
He explicitly asked a foreign power to investigate a political rival.
He explicitly asked a foreign power to look into the actions of an American who happens to be a political rival.

Again...does the President have to ignore potential foreign interference if the person bragging about it happens to be running for President? There's no quid pro quo. Are we tying a President's hands?
 

CharminTide

Hall of Fame
Oct 23, 2005
7,091
1,085
178
He explicitly asked a foreign power to look into the actions of an American who happens to be a political rival.

Again...does the President have to ignore potential foreign interference if the person bragging about it happens to be running for President? There's no quid pro quo. Are we tying a President's hands?
Pretty weak defense, IMO. Like I said, we need to hear the context of these comments. We already know that this conversation occurred very soon after Trump halted millions in aid from reaching Ukraine, and we really, really need to know more about that.

https://twitter.com/abc/status/1176874772736749569

 

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
41,573
7,863
278
51
East Point, Ga, USA
He explicitly asked a foreign power to look into the actions of an American who happens to be a political rival.

Again...does the President have to ignore potential foreign interference if the person bragging about it happens to be running for President? There's no quid pro quo. Are we tying a President's hands?
there was no potential foreign interference. that was established a few years back when this same conspiracy theory was being pushed and ultimately got debunked
 

TrueCrimson7

All-American
Sep 21, 2014
2,489
158
73
USA
Respectfully, this is all viewed in the prism of what you want the outcome to be. And there's not much anyone can do to convince the other. This seems like Kavanaugh all over again. Dems could not get 50 senators to oust his nomination. It is doubtful they will get the 2/3 majority to oust Trump so far.

I'm open to more info as it comes out.
 

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
41,573
7,863
278
51
East Point, Ga, USA
Respectfully, this is all viewed in the prism of what you want the outcome to be. And there's not much anyone can do to convince the other. This seems like Kavanaugh all over again. Dems could not get 50 senators to oust his nomination. It is doubtful they will get the 2/3 majority to oust Trump so far.

I'm open to more info as it comes out.
i am viewing it through the prism of the fact that this conspiracy theory that is the basis of "trump was legitimately looking into potential corruption" is known bs. i know the true believers will be repeating this along with "no quid pro quo" until the cows come home. but, so far, it doesn't seem to be gaining much traction.

and for the record, i am under no illusion that the senate will ever vote to remove him from office.
 
Last edited:

uafanataum

All-American
Oct 18, 2014
2,157
283
93
That would be a good plan, although it presumes a level of strategery that I don't think exists. We'll find out eventually.
The Democrats have promised free education, debt foregiveness, free health care and a whole lot more. Meanwhile the Republicans have promised to take all that away and still hold the Senate and the white house. I think the Republicans are good at stategy.
 

Chukker Veteran

Hall of Fame
Feb 6, 2001
8,589
815
128
i am viewing it through the prism of the fact that this conspiracy theory that is the basis of "trump was legitimately looking into potential corruption" is known bs. i know the true believers will be repeating this along with "no quid pro quo" until the cows come home. but, so far, it doesn't seem to be gaining much traction.

and for the record, i am under no illusion that the senate will ever vote to remove him from office.
If Trump had established any kind of credibility of being honest I might consider giving him the benefit of the doubt. He's done just the opposite.
 

crimsonaudio

Administrator
Staff member
Sep 9, 2002
46,368
6,808
353
crimsonaudio.net
That would be a good plan, although it presumes a level of strategery that I don't think exists. We'll find out eventually.
I think you're selling trump short; while I don't think he's very intelligent, this isn't some brilliant plan - a middle-school-aged kid could have come up with this.

And it's only clever if it works, time will tell if that's the case. Lots of things could come up in an investigation...

Once again, I just floated the idea as it crossed my mind (that this might be a ruse). Though the fact that it's not incredibly clever and that there likely isn't enough there to make the voters favor impeachment makes me wonder...
 

CharminTide

Hall of Fame
Oct 23, 2005
7,091
1,085
178
So, given that Trump has just publicly implicated AG Barr in this Ukraine mess, why hasn't Barr recused himself from this investigation? He shouldn't be allowed within 100 feet of that whistleblower memo or any related evidence.
 

TexasBama

Hall of Fame
Jan 15, 2000
11,582
3,385
273
62
Houston, Texas USA
I read the Mueller report and thought that grounds for impeachment were pretty well outlined. I doubt that report was simply archived after Mueller’s testimony.
 

Latest threads

TideFansStore.com - Wear UA Masks!

Purchases made through our TideFansStore.com link may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.