U.S. House to launch Trump impeachment inquiry over Ukraine controversy

[mtls2005]

10 hours ago, Kelsall said:

Your team is going to have to persuade millions of Trump supporters to come over to your side to get a conviction in the Senate.

 

Looks like someone has reached the fifth stage...acceptance (that the president will be impeached). Although maybe a bit of Anger left over?

 

Denial

Anger

Bargaining

Depression

Acceptance

 

 

47 minutes ago, Kelsall said:

And then there's this...

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-dares-congress-brandishing-deep-red-2016-election-map-try-to-impeach-this

 

See also 1973-1974, when the map was much redder and Nixon still enjoyed +50% apporval.

 

So there's that.

 

History can be a fickle friend.

 

You should read The Final Days.

 

 

 

[Tippaporn]

9 hours ago, gamb00ler said:

The depth of your misunderstanding is amazing.  The House has initiated an impeachment INVESTIGATION only.  If sufficient wrongdoing is found, they will then submit articles of impeachment to a House vote.  Sheesh!

The depth of your misunderstanding is amazing.  LOL, because I left out "inquiry"?  Pelosi's intent is to impeach Trump and remove him from office.  You're attempting to make me look stupid on a technicality when the context of my statement is all too well understood.

 

Seriously, sometimes I question myself as to why I even respond to feeble attempts at distortion such as yours.

[Tippaporn]

13 hours ago, heybruce said:

No explanation because there was no change.  https://www.yahoo.com/gma/legal-experts-debunk-trumps-claim-whistleblower-rules-were-221903684.html

 

So what if the whistle blower information is second hand?  Has any of it been proven inaccurate?  The key points have been verified by the release of the official phone call transcript,

One thing that puzzles me is that 2nd hand information is inadmissible in court.  Allowing 2nd hand knowledge in a complaint seems to me to a break in logic.  Not sure if any has asked the question yet but would the whistle blower's testimony even be allowed in a court of law, or a Senate trial?

 

I may as well add not hearing another question regarding the sources of the 2nd hand information.  Would those sources be forced to identify themselves and testify in person?  I would think so.  

[Tippaporn]

13 hours ago, heybruce said:

I don't find Hannity's program entertaining, but it is certainly not news. 

 

Hannity is a pundit, he doesn't report news, he edits and interprets it in a manner to confirm the biases of his audience.

No different than the right wing media outlets.  Agreed?

[Tippaporn]

12 hours ago, Jingthing said:

So what? All he'll ever have is his base. He never grows it.
 

Would love to see your data, Jingthing.  If you have it.  If you don't then all you're doing is making an out and out false claim in an attempt to pass it off as fact.  That would be so dishonest.

[mtls2005]

9 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Seriously, sometimes I question myself as to why I even respond to feeble attempts at distortion such as yours.

 

Oh, come on. You? Question yourself? Do you talk to yourself a lot too?

 

5 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

One thing that puzzles me is that 2nd hand information is inadmissible in court.

Well, this isn't a court proceeding, it's unique that way. YEs, it's a sort of trial in the Senate, where various pieces of evidence can be presented. I'd go for the transcript myself

 

I call 911 to report a crime, the police investigate (based on 2nd hand information) and arrest the alleged perpetrator. Other proof, including first-hand witnesses, are used in a  trial. Are you suggesting that, as the 911 call was "second-hand" the entire case should be dismissed? Curious.

 

 

CAD

 

Confuse

Attack

Deflect

 

 

BTW, there's new talking points out so maybe get up to speed.

 

 

 

[mtls2005]

20 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Would love to see your data, Jingthing.  If you have it.  If you don't then all you're doing is making an out and out false claim in an attempt to pass it off as fact.  That would be so dishonest.

 

A functioning adult would present data supporting the fact that the president has grown his base. A petulant child would storm off to his bedroom with a similar rant to yours. It's embarassing to you quite frankly.

 

The 2018 election points to a distinct lack of growing the base.

The president's recent polling data doesn't show him increasing his base, except for non-college educated elderly white males.

The swing in support +10 for impeachment doesn't show an increase in the base

 

 

But all this deflection is hardly germane to the topic. "Fire up the Impeachment machine, Sherman".

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Sujo]

22 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

One thing that puzzles me is that 2nd hand information is inadmissible in court.  Allowing 2nd hand knowledge in a complaint seems to me to a break in logic.  Not sure if any has asked the question yet but would the whistle blower's testimony even be allowed in a court of law, or a Senate trial?

 

I may as well add not hearing another question regarding the sources of the 2nd hand information.  Would those sources be forced to identify themselves and testify in person?  I would think so.  

The wb had first hand knowlege of some of the complaints.

 

For heresay his evidence would be to answer who told him things. They then get that witness in to testify directly.

 

Secondhand information is routinely used in investigations.

[thaibeachlovers]

1 hour ago, mtls2005 said:

 

Looks like someone has reached the fifth stage...acceptance (that the president will be impeached). Although maybe a bit of Anger left over?

 

Denial

Anger

Bargaining

Depression

Acceptance

 

 

 

See also 1973-1974, when the map was much redder and Nixon still enjoyed +50% apporval.

 

So there's that.

 

History can be a fickle friend.

 

You should read The Final Days.

 

 

 

Nixon resigned because the tapes were going to be released, as I recall. Trump, apparently, does not have such tapes or recordings to discover.

[Tippaporn]

Hearsay in United States law

 

I, myself, wouldn't retain anyone on this thread for representation.  There are 30 exceptions for allowing hearsay in a federal court of law.  Then again, I wouldn't begin to know what difference might exist between trial in a Federal court versus trial in the Senate.

[mtls2005]

12 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Nixon resigned because the tapes were going to be released, as I recall. Trump, apparently, does not have such tapes or recordings to discover.

Facepalm

 

 

The tapes were released.

 

Please see United States v. Nixon

 

 

Nixon resigned because Republican Senators appealed to his patriotism. That, and his fear of the consequences were he to continue the fight.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[mtls2005]

2 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

I, myself, wouldn't retain anyone on this thread for representation.

 

Why would you? Have you done something illegal?

 

Making your stand on the WB Complaint seems risky....

 

"The form was changed...."

"It's second-hand..."

"The WB is a traitor..."

 

Defend the charge, not the weapon.

 

 

 

 

The transcript is the bloody knife, with the president's fingerprints on it, and Lady Liberty laying dead in a pool of blood.

 

The glove fits.

 

 

Suggest you get the new talking points.

 

 

 

 

 

[magaumove]

On 9/25/2019 at 3:20 AM, spidermike007 said:

I have mixed feelings about this. It will never pass the senate, so it is really just a ceremonial proceeding. However, this is something he has earned and with his continued disregard for the law, he deserves this kind of disrespect. I think it will hurt him. I think he is going to lose the election hugely. The American people are just tired of his games, his extreme lack of talent, his complete inability to negotiate anything, his arrogance, hubris, and combative style. And the world feels this way even more so. His approval rating in the US is down to 39%. I would imagine worldwide it has to be less than 10%. The planet will celebrate when he is ousted, and hopefully the SDNY will pursue him, and make sure he gets locked up. He has worked his whole life for that fate. After swindling thousands of people out of billions of dollars, prison is where he belongs. 

I believe American's are far more sick & tired of the phoney democrats and how they are trying to screw a duly elected POTUS! Hmmm,,,imagine the progress that could be if the lying idiots like schiff put this much effort into doing their jobs for the american public. Wow, trump is trump but what the corrupt dems are doing is utter lunacy! And, the horowitz day of reckoning may be on the horizon....bout time too!

[ballpoint]

Just now, mtls2005 said:

Facepalm

 

 

The tapes were released.

 

Please see United Staes v. Nixon

 

 

Nixon resigned because Republican Senators appealed to his patriotism. That, and his fear of the consequences were he to continue the fight.

 

 

 

 

And, what else has the White House been secreting away on the National Security Council network?

 

"Apart from Trump’s staggering abuse of presidential power, one of the more troubling and pivotal disclosures from the whistle-blower’s complaint is that the White House systematically used the NSC network to hide his misdeeds. Doing so immediately turned that system into a Pandora’s Box of current and future woes for Trump and his White House. It also made those who managed the system, or who passed judgment on or had knowledge of the material that went into it — including witnesses and possible co-conspirators — into more than fair game for the Democrats running impeachment proceedings".

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-09-30/whistleblower-complaint-now-trump-talks-of-civil-war-and-treason

 

[bendejo]

6 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

Nixon resigned because Republican Senators appealed to his patriotism. That, and his fear of the consequences were he to continue the fight.

The actual communique was a letter from GHW Bush, who was then RNC chair, telling him the party could no longer stand behind him.

These days the RNC chair is pretty much a stooge (remember Reince Priebus?) so I wouldn't expect such a thing to happen with the present drama.

 

 

[bendejo]

10 hours ago, gamb00ler said:

Does anyone know how to invoke the Google function to translate TrumpSpeak to English?

It is not possible to use artificial intelligence to decipher something that is already artificially intelligent.

 

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

One thing that puzzles me is that 2nd hand information is inadmissible in court.  Allowing 2nd hand knowledge in a complaint seems to me to a break in logic.  Not sure if any has asked the question yet but would the whistle blower's testimony even be allowed in a court of law, or a Senate trial?

 

I may as well add not hearing another question regarding the sources of the 2nd hand information.  Would those sources be forced to identify themselves and testify in person?  I would think so.  

Tips to a police hotline are second hand information.  Any person who heard another discussing a criminal act and reports it to the police is providing second hand information.  If that information is verified through other sources, as the information provided by the whistle blower has been. then it can be used in court.

 

Trumps rambling rationale to President Zelinsky about the "favor" of a Biden investigation was based on second hand information, but the information was disproven or invented allegations.  Yet Trump tried to extort the President of Ukraine to act on it.

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

No different than the right wing media outlets.  Agreed?

I assume you meant to post "left wing media outlets", but I agree.  All of the 24 hour "news" networks pursue ratings by having more opinion programs than news.  That is why I get my news from reading.

 

Edit:  I should have posted "All of the 24 hour general "news" networks in the US...".  I don't know if the sports, business, entertainment, and other specialty news channels waste so much time on opinion programs.  With the exception of the BBC, I also don't know how 24 hour news works in other countries.

[heybruce]

41 minutes ago, magaumove said:

I believe American's are far more sick & tired of the phoney democrats and how they are trying to screw a duly elected POTUS! Hmmm,,,imagine the progress that could be if the lying idiots like schiff put this much effort into doing their jobs for the american public. Wow, trump is trump but what the corrupt dems are doing is utter lunacy! And, the horowitz day of reckoning may be on the horizon....bout time too!

Once again, it is the job of Congress to provide oversight of the executive branch.  That is what the House is doing.  It is also passing lots of legislation, which the Senate, under Moscow Mitch, refuses to take up.

 

So the House, in doing its job, caught the President abusing power to extort a foreign leader into providing support for Trump's re-election.  No patriotic American would object to investigating and, if facts warrant, impeaching Trump.

[canuckamuck]

If they take second hand information now, what can be said? I guess there is nothing to be done about it. However I think the fact that the stipulation that the whistle blower information originally needed to be first hand information right up until this whistle blower complaint was made. And now, apparently to accommodate this report, they take second hand info. Leads one to suspect that first hand stipulation was removed for a political purpose.

I don't expect any one will agree with me.

This doesn't change things for Trump, but certainly the smell of dirty deeds hangs over the process.

[canuckamuck]

7 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

 

This talking point has been jettisoned/de-bunked. Do try to keep up - I know it's hard. Repeating it only reflects poorly on you.

 

Inspector General of the Intelligence Community Releases Statement on Whistleblower Complaint

...

 

All right. I'll accept that.

[Sujo]

1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

Hearsay in United States law

 

I, myself, wouldn't retain anyone on this thread for representation.  There are 30 exceptions for allowing hearsay in a federal court of law.  Then again, I wouldn't begin to know what difference might exist between trial in a Federal court versus trial in the Senate.

Please learn to read.

 

Impeachment is not a court hearing. They alone make the rules.

 

Hearsay is routinely used in investigating something. This is an investigation on whether to impeach. The trial will be in the senate and they set the rules for the hearing.

[thaibeachlovers]

1 hour ago, mtls2005 said:

Facepalm

 

 

The tapes were released.

 

Please see United States v. Nixon

 

 

Nixon resigned because Republican Senators appealed to his patriotism. That, and his fear of the consequences were he to continue the fight.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Apologies, my memory was erroneous.

[Tippaporn]

1 hour ago, mtls2005 said:

 

A functioning adult would present data supporting the fact that the president has grown his base. A petulant child would storm off to his bedroom with a similar rant to yours. It's embarassing to you quite frankly.

 

The 2018 election points to a distinct lack of growing the base.

The president's recent polling data doesn't show him increasing his base, except for non-college educated elderly white males.

The swing in support +10 for impeachment doesn't show an increase in the base

 

 

But all this deflection is hardly germane to the topic. "Fire up the Impeachment machine, Sherman".

 

A functioning adult would present data supporting the fact that the president has grown his base. A petulant child would storm off to his bedroom with a similar rant to yours. It's embarassing to you quite frankly.

 

Pure baiting with this statement, mtls2005.  That's strictly against forum rules.

 

The 2018 election points to a distinct lack of growing the base.

 

An invalid metric.  The 2018 election results might be indicative of the republican base but as Trump was not on any ballot it cannot be assumed that those results were reflective of Trump's base.

 

The president's recent polling data doesn't show him increasing his base, . . . .

 

Is polling data accurate?  Any evidence out there that it has been purposely skewed in the past?    Election forecasters, relying on opinion polls, put Clinton’s chance of winning at anywhere from 70% to as high as 99% in 2016.  Why would a rational person now accept opinion poll results prima facie?  Your choice, not mine.

 

. . . . except for non-college educated elderly white males.

 

Adding that to your comment so thoroughly discredits your point.  You have an opportunity to prove me wrong by backing that statement up with fact.  I highly doubt that you will because I've searched and it doesn't appear to exist.  Complete fabrication, again passed off as truth.  And again, so dishonest.

 

The swing in support +10 for impeachment doesn't show an increase in the base.

 

Not a valid point either.  You would have to know the exact make up of that swing in order to see what proportion of that swing was due to defections within Trump's base and what percentage was due to Dems previously disfavoring impeachment now jumping on the bandwagon.

 

But all this deflection . . . .

 

A false claim against me.

 

[Becker]

3 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

One thing that puzzles me is that 2nd hand information is inadmissible in court.  Allowing 2nd hand knowledge in a complaint seems to me to a break in logic.  Not sure if any has asked the question yet but would the whistle blower's testimony even be allowed in a court of law, or a Senate trial?

 

I may as well add not hearing another question regarding the sources of the 2nd hand information.  Would those sources be forced to identify themselves and testify in person?  I would think so.  

I'll repost this:

 

Link: Judge Andrew Napolitano says issue of whether whistleblower complaint is based on hearsay is now moot

 

"President Trump acknowledges the veracity of the declassified transcript of his phone call with Ukraine's leader, says Fox News senior judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano."

[Tippaporn]

2 hours ago, mtls2005 said:

 

Oh, come on. You? Question yourself? Do you talk to yourself a lot too?

 

Well, this isn't a court proceeding, it's unique that way. YEs, it's a sort of trial in the Senate, where various pieces of evidence can be presented. I'd go for the transcript myself

 

I call 911 to report a crime, the police investigate (based on 2nd hand information) and arrest the alleged perpetrator. Other proof, including first-hand witnesses, are used in a  trial. Are you suggesting that, as the 911 call was "second-hand" the entire case should be dismissed? Curious.

 

 

CAD

 

Confuse

Attack

Deflect

 

 

BTW, there's new talking points out so maybe get up to speed.

 

 

 

Oh, come on. You? Question yourself? Do you talk to yourself a lot too?

 

Baiting which I'll choose to ignore.  Again, comments like that are strictly against forum rules.

[Tippaporn]

11 minutes ago, Becker said:

I'll repost this:

 

Link: Judge Andrew Napolitano says issue of whether whistleblower complaint is based on hearsay is now moot

 

"President Trump acknowledges the veracity of the declassified transcript of his phone call with Ukraine's leader, says Fox News senior judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano."

Excellent and fair opinions given by Napolitano.  And I reacted to your post favorably, Becker.

[spidermike007]

2 hours ago, magaumove said:

I believe American's are far more sick & tired of the phoney democrats and how they are trying to screw a duly elected POTUS! Hmmm,,,imagine the progress that could be if the lying idiots like schiff put this much effort into doing their jobs for the american public. Wow, trump is trump but what the corrupt dems are doing is utter lunacy! And, the horowitz day of reckoning may be on the horizon....bout time too!

You are correct. The day of reckoning is coming. Trump is going down. Schiff is doing the will of the American people. The majority want this impeachment to move forward. Sorry your guy is guilty. That is entirely on you and your choices in life.

[Becker]

Link: Republican Rep. Adam Kinzinger on President Donald Trump's 'Civil War' threat: 'Beyond repugnant'

 

"Republican congressman and Air Force veteran Adam Kinzinger slammed President Donald Trump for suggesting that his impeachment could lead to a "Civil War.""

 

 

[Rdrokit]

Just sitting back and laughing. The Democrats just want to keep the media stirred up with negative Trump news. Just like the Russian inquiry this one will fissile out. I think some on the Left are getting tired of their "leaders" spinning their wheels trying to get dirt on Trump and not getting anything else done in Congress for the past 3 years. If Trump wins in 2020 I'm expecting a lot of democratic congressional heads to explode.