Countdown Clock to Trumps impeachment " STARTS"
POSTED BY: THGRRI
UPDATED: Monday, April 14, 2025 23:28
VIEWED: 485499
PAGE 289 of 404
5 more years until Trump is out.
How exciting.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
CBS News poll: Majority of Americans, Democrats approve impeachment inquiry
More than half of Americans — and an overwhelming number of Democrats — say they approve of the fact that Congress has opened an impeachment inquiry into President Trump. But as the inquiry begins, there is no national consensus on how to assess the president's actions.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/cbs-news-poll-majority-of-amer
icans-democrats-approve-impeachment-inquiry/ar-AAI1Bml?ocid=spartandhp
tick tock
T 
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by THG:
CBS News poll: Majority of Americans, Democrats approve impeachment inquiry
More than half of Americans — and an overwhelming number of Democrats — say they approve of the fact that Congress has opened an impeachment inquiry into President Trump. But as the inquiry begins, there is no national consensus on how to assess the president's actions.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/cbs-news-poll-majority-of-amer
icans-democrats-approve-impeachment-inquiry/ar-AAI1Bml?ocid=spartandhp
tick tock
T
Well, to be fair, if anybody asked me I would tell them that I approve of the impeachment inquiry. I've been saying that they should impeach him as long as any of you guys have.
Glad to see that they're finally doing an investigation to decide whether or not they're going to impeach him at a later date or not.
You can never have too many of those.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
How many of his links did you read or watch, JO?
All uv them exept the repeats.
I usually debunk them point by point.
Today it included a revival uv the Uranium 1 Deal story. They never giv up on them kuz they know their readerz dont check anything.
----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early
http://www.7532020.com .
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by JO753:Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
How many of his links did you read or watch, JO?
All uv them exept the repeats.
I usually debunk them point by point.
Today it included a revival uv the Uranium 1 Deal story. They never giv up on them kuz they know their readerz dont check anything.
----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early
http://www.7532020.com .
That's funny, JO.
You haven't debunked anything here. You must be saving the good stuff for your real life friends I guess.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
tick tock
T
Trump says the whistleblower complaint isn’t accurate. The White House keeps showing how it is.
COMPLAINT: "Multiple White House officials with direct knowledge of the call informed me that, after an initial exchange of pleasantries, the President used the remainder of the call to advance his personal interests.”
TRANSCRIPT: Trump speaks in nine discrete segments.
He congratulates Zelensky on winning the presidency.
He says Ukraine is happy Zelensky won.
He mentions how much aid the United States provides to Ukraine.
He asks a favor: Investigate (baseless) rumors about Ukrainian involvement in an assessment of Russia’s hacking of the Democratic National Committee in 2016.
He encourages working with his attorney Rudolph W. Giuliani and pushes for an investigation of former vice president Joe Biden and his son.
He says he’ll have Giuliani and Attorney General William P. Barr call about the investigation.
He invites Zelensky to the White House.
He says he’ll see Zelensky at the White House or at an event in Poland (that he ended up not attending).
He again offers his congratulations.
Except for the invitation to the White House — though even that is questionable — the whistleblower’s allegation is accurate.
COMPLAINT: “According to the White House officials who had direct knowledge of the call, the President pressured Mr. Zelenskyy to … initiate or continue an investigation into the activities of former Vice President Joseph Biden and his son, Hunter Biden. …" (A different transliteration of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s surname is used throughout the document.)
TRANSCRIPT: Trump says, "[T]here’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it … It sounds horrible to me.”
COMPLAINT: “ … assist in purportedly uncovering that allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election originated in Ukraine, with a specific request that the Ukrainian leader locate and turn over servers used by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and examined by the U.S. cyber security firm Crowdstrike, which initially reported that Russian hackers had penetrated the DNC’s networks in 2016 …"
TRANSCRIPT: Trump says, “I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike … I guess you have one of your wealthy people … The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation.” (Ellipses in the original.)
COMPLAINT: “ … and meet or speak with two people the President named explicitly as his personal envoys on these matters, Mr. Giuliani and Attorney General Barr, to whom the President referred multiple times in tandem.”
TRANSCRIPT: Trump praises Giuliani at one point, saying that “[h]e was the mayor of New York City, a great mayor, and I would like him to call you. I will ask him to call you along with the Attorney General. Rudy very much knows what’s happening, and he is a very capable guy. If you could speak to him that would be great.”
At another point he says he “will have Mr. Giuliani give you a call and I am also going to [have] Attorney General Barr call and we will get to the bottom of it.” At another point he says he “will tell Rudy and Attorney General Barr to call.”
COMPLAINT: “The President also praised Ukraine’s Prosecutor General, Mr. Yuriy Lutsenko, and suggested that Mr. Zelenskyy might want to keep him in his position.”
TRANSCRIPT: Trump talks about a prosecutor, but it’s not clear whether he’s referring to Viktor Shokin — whom Biden fought to get fired — or Shokin’s replacement, Lutsenko. Lutsenko, it’s worth noting, had h
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
tick tock
T
Four debunked talking points used to discredit the whistleblower complaint
To defend President Trump against the whistleblower allegations, Republicans in Congress are having to dodge or misstate some key facts. Here are the most common talking points they are using to discredit the complaint and why those don’t hold up.
Talking point No. 1: There is no quid pro quo — in the call or the whistleblower complaint
This is technically true. According to a rough transcript of Trump’s July call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, Trump didn’t say: Do this for me, and I’ll do this for you. But he didn’t have to be that explicit. The context surrounding this call would lead any reasonable person to believe that Trump had things to offer the Ukrainian president if he helped Trump out. Consider:
Days before the call, Trump froze bipartisan military aid to Ukraine.
Trump mentioned he needed a “favor” from the president right after Zelensky indicated he would like to buy more Javelin missiles from the United States.
Trump resisted a White House meeting with Zelensky, something Zelensky desperately wanted, for some time. After Zelensky appeared to agree to help Trump out, Zelensky suddenly got what he had long wanted. Trump said: “Good. Well, thank you very much, and I appreciate that. I will tell Rudy and Attorney General Barr to call. Thank you. Whenever you would like to come to the White House feel free to call. Give us a date, and we’ll work that out. I look forward to seeing you.”
Plus, the idea of a quid pro quo may be a red herring. “You normally don’t have a quid pro quo stated expressly,” former federal prosecutor Randall Eliason told The Washington Post. “This is almost as close as you can get.”
Talking point No. 2: The whistleblower has political motivations, and so the complaint can’t be trusted
Page 5 of a report about the whistleblower by Michael Atkinson, the intelligence community inspector general, mentions that the whistleblower has “arguable political bias … in favor of a rival candidate.”
But in the very next sentence, Atkinson also said he had determined that that did not affect the credibility of the complaint. “Such evidence did not change my determination that the complaint relating to the urgent concern ‘appears credible,’ particularly given the other information the [intelligence community inspector general] obtained during its preliminary review."
In other words, Atkinson reviewed all angles of potential conflicts of interest by this whistleblower and still found his or her complaint to be credible, including by finding separate evidence.
Also, in questioning Thursday in the House Intelligence Committee, acting director of national intelligence Joseph Maguire backed up the whistleblower’s credibility. (Maguire said he does not know who the whistleblower is, but read this exchange between him and Chairman Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.):
SCHIFF: You don’t believe the whistleblower is a political hack?
MAGUIRE: I believe the whistleblower is operating in good faith and has followed the law.
A few minutes later:
SCHIFF: Do you have any reason to accuse him or her of disloyalty to the country or suggest he is beholden to anything else but the country?
MAGUIRE: Absolutely not. I believe the whistleblower followed the steps every way.
[What we learned from Joseph Maguire's testimony about the whistleblower complaint]
Finally, the inspector general who investigated the complaint found the whistleblower to have “subject matter expertise” about the material.
Talking point No. 3: The whistleblower had only secondhand knowledge
This is also true. But it’s not enough to discredit the entire complaint. If we think of the whistleblower as a reporter, the whistleblower talked to a lot of people who had firsthand knowledge.
In one key instance, we have original
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Mitch McConnell: Senate must hold trial on Trump if House impeaches
WASHINGTON – Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said the Senate would have "no choice" but to hold a trial on President Donald Trump if the House votes to put forward articles of impeachment.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/mitch-mcconnell-senate-must-ho
ld-trial-on-trump-if-house-impeaches/ar-AAI4n0F?ocid=spartanntp
tick tock
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME