Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Manwon Lender

Next phase of impeachment inquiry voted in

45 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Manwon Lender

The next phase of the House impeachment inquiries have been voted in. The House approved the resolution 232 to 196, the vote was completely along Party lines, except for two Democrates who voted against the inquiry. With this vote completed, the way has been cleared for Nationally Televised proceedings that will start in Mid-November. Ensuring President Trumps right to participate in the latter stage of the proceedings.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/house-to-vote-on-rules-governing-next-phase-of-trump-impeachment-inquiry/2019/10/31/bc2f5e7a-fbcc-11e9-ac8c-8eced29ca6ef_story.html

 

Edited by Manwon Lender
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender

Democratic leaders expected that two to four of their members would vote against the resolution. In the end, Reps. Collin C. Peterson (D-Minn.) and Jeff Van Drew (D-N.J.), who represent Republican-leaning districts, opposed it.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not A Rockstar

I do not support the impeachment drama as it just seems an extension of all the rest, non-stop for three years now. That being said, perhaps with it being public in the next phase, maybe we can get a few facts out to consider. I find it a complete farce that they should hold these secret squirrel meetings, and yet leak what they want to their Press freely. Pure farce.

Maybe now we can just hear what they claim and who is saying it for a change.

Far as quid pro quo goes, to me that is basic hard ball negotiating and happens throughout governments. "Support my bill and I will vote for your pork barrel bridge". No difference for all they want to act like they are so shocked. 

JMO.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
20 minutes ago, Not A Rockstar said:

I do not support the impeachment drama as it just seems an extension of all the rest, non-stop for three years now. That being said, perhaps with it being public in the next phase, maybe we can get a few facts out to consider. I find it a complete farce that they should hold these secret squirrel meetings, and yet leak what they want to their Press freely. Pure farce.

Maybe now we can just hear what they claim and who is saying it for a change.

Far as quid pro quo goes, to me that is basic hard ball negotiating and happens throughout governments. "Support my bill and I will vote for your pork barrel bridge". No difference for all they want to act like they are so shocked. 

JMO.

The R's still have to receive permission from Schiff to question witnesses and if he disapproves they can appeal to a committee.  AFAIK, this will not be a retroactive process.  Those already questioned will not be recalled.  I did not read this in depth so I stand to be corrected.  This is a little lipstick for the pig that the D's have been creating.  

To the bolded:  Absolutely accurate.  The irony here is that had Biden's son not been benefiting from his role with Ukrainian businesses, his dad's actions wouldn't have raised an eyebrow.  It ALL stinks but that's just the way business is done.  Trump was totally within the scope of his authority to do what he did, nothing illegal or even unusual except, Orange Man bad... This won't be the last attack by the D's.  They are in full assault mode and have nothing left to lose.  I predict that it only gets crazier and louder from this point forward.  Happy Holidays ;)   I hope the D's leadership get the full brunt of the public dissatisfaction over their holidays being dampened with this nonsense.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
12 minutes ago, Not A Rockstar said:

Far as quid pro quo goes, to me that is basic hard ball negotiating and happens throughout governments. "Support my bill and I will vote for your pork barrel bridge". No difference for all they want to act like they are so shocked. 

quid pro quo between governments is done a lot.  Quid pro quo within the government as you lay out is also done a lot.  Back scratching we would call it. Quid pro quo between an individual and a foreign government as is being claimed, not so much.  If true, "you get the defense money if you make a public announcement that you are investigating the Bidens "  is pretty uncool.  

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
33 minutes ago, and then said:

The R's still have to receive permission from Schiff to question witnesses and if he disapproves they can appeal to a committee.  AFAIK, this will not be a retroactive process.  Those already questioned will not be recalled.  I did not read this in depth so I stand to be corrected.  This is a little lipstick for the pig that the D's have been creating.  

To the bolded:  Absolutely accurate.  The irony here is that had Biden's son not been benefiting from his role with Ukrainian businesses, his dad's actions wouldn't have raised an eyebrow.  It ALL stinks but that's just the way business is done.  Trump was totally within the scope of his authority to do what he did, nothing illegal or even unusual except, Orange Man bad... This won't be the last attack by the D's.  They are in full assault mode and have nothing left to lose.  I predict that it only gets crazier and louder from this point forward.  Happy Holidays ;)   I hope the D's leadership get the full brunt of the public dissatisfaction over their holidays being dampened with this nonsense.

The thing I like best is that President Trump has the right to stand and face his accusers. I hope he doesn't pass on the chance to do so. I don't know what is the right thing to do in this situation, so my question is should he testify on his own behalf or should he decline the offer to do so?

i am sure someone here has some input on my question above.

Edited by Manwon Lender

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
8 minutes ago, and then said:

To the bolded:  Absolutely accurate.  The irony here is that had Biden's son not been benefiting from his role with Ukrainian businesses, his dad's actions wouldn't have raised an eyebrow.  It ALL stinks but that's just the way business is done. 

On this we will have to disagree.  It all stinks if we let it go bad, it is only the natural order of things if we let people get away with it.

The Dems haven't handled it very smartly, but the most  saddening thing is that nothing will change.  Corruption and favors and special deals and a dense swamp will all still be there, just the names on the checks will be different.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
1 hour ago, Not A Rockstar said:

I do not support the impeachment drama as it just seems an extension of all the rest, non-stop for three years now. That being said, perhaps with it being public in the next phase, maybe we can get a few facts out to consider. I find it a complete farce that they should hold these secret squirrel meetings, and yet leak what they want to their Press freely. Pure farce.

Maybe now we can just hear what they claim and who is saying it for a change.

Far as quid pro quo goes, to me that is basic hard ball negotiating and happens throughout governments. "Support my bill and I will vote for your pork barrel bridge". No difference for all they want to act like they are so shocked. 

JMO.

As far as Quie Pro Quo go's, I agree that it is basic hard ball for negotiating Withiin Governments. The problem is ( if it's true ) trying to force a foreign Government to investigate one of your political opponents by with holding aide if they don't comply is totally illegal. Now I haven't seen real proof that it really happened, but this is what the entire Impeachment Inquiry is about. The Democrates are going to have to prove to the American People that it happened, and they are going to need some very clear with out any doubt proof to do so.

This is a completely different issue than the statement you made above, at least for me.

Edited by Manwon Lender
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RAyMO
18 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

The thing I like best is that President Trump has the right to stand and face his accusers.

Oh I hope he does. From day one his own verbalisations have been his biggest problem

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
5 minutes ago, RAyMO said:

Oh I hope he does. From day one his own verbalisations have been his biggest problem

I also hope he defends himself, but I am not sure that it's going to happen. You see I am not sure of the Pros and Cons of him testifying before this board of inquiry. Unless he is aware of the questions they ask before hand, now that may sound strange but it happens. Because the last thing the President of the United States would want to do is take the 5th and not answer a question in front of the American public.

The point you made about his verbalisations, seem to be a plus more than a minus for him. His constituents love the way he says what is exactly on his mind at the moment. For me personally, I think he should not say many of the things he says. I think that a President should be more tactful in their comments when addressing the country, so I agree that the way he expresses himself is wrong at times.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ExpandMyMind
2 hours ago, Not A Rockstar said:

Far as quid pro quo goes, to me that is basic hard ball negotiating and happens throughout governments.

Sure. You pressure other governments to get in line with your foreign policy. You do this for the benefit of your government in what is usually a meticulously crafted agreement. A quid pro quo is a vital trade tool.

Trump's quid pro quo, however, was personal. He leveraged US foreign policy and hundreds of millions of dollars for personal gain - for help winning an election. It's the most fundamentally corrupt thing that any President I've heard of has ever done (certainly more than any President since WW2). Add to this his attempts to cover up the crimes and pressure witnesses into ignoring subpoenas, etc., and it becomes clear that not only is he corrupt, but he thinks he's untouchable and can get away with it (which he might do, thanks to Republicans).

It should also be highlighted that Trump's act of asking a foreign government to investigate a US citizen (a political enemy, no less), is itself highly illegal without any sort of quid pro quo. 

Edited by ExpandMyMind
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener

So Trump may have the opportunity to outline his defence in front of the committee ? 

Well, it will be a BIG LUVERLY defence. In fact, it will be the best defence EVER ! And Schiff will have to pay for it all ! :P 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RAyMO
2 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

Unless he is aware of the questions they ask before hand, now that may sound strange but it happens. Because the last thing the President of the United States would want to do is take the 5th and not answer a question in front of the American public.

This is a strange view - you are happy for him to respond publicly to show his innocence - but only to pre-arranged questions - which would obviously be agreed only if they don't allow any potential for guilt to surface. [misinterpreatation by me]

On the other hand I am sure his advisors will be delighted if he gets a chance even with pre-arranged questions - no fear of the disciplined Mr Trump going off message and saying something stupid.

"There was no quid pro quo - Its was a perfect call - but I didn't get any credit for it - Obama would have got credit, but the fake News never give me credit. Perfect Call, I didn't mention quid pro quo - read the transcript I didn't say 'quid pro quo' - maybe hinted at it a little but that's OK - that's what they tell me. Best call ever they tell me, no president has ever make a more perfect call. Anyway I didn't mention quid pro quo, Ruddy had already lined that up. Just ask him he's a good man, a very good man - good lawyer too and good with Ukrainians - he knows how to make them do things - you know good things for me for us."

 

Edited by RAyMO
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
22 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

So Trump may have the opportunity to outline his defence in front of the committee ? 

Well, it will be a BIG LUVERLY defence. In fact, it will be the best defence EVER ! And Schiff will have to pay for it all ! :P 

President Trump will have the opportunity to testify, but not only in front of the committee. Since the impeachment inquiry passed by vote today, the new phase of the investigation will be televised so the American people can see and hear all the information they need to decide what they think occurred. I am uncertain if the President will personally testify or not, I think we will just have to wait and see.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RAyMO
2 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

I am uncertain if the President will personally testify or not, I think we will just have to wait and see.

Joking aside imo Trump would be the worst person to call in his own defence and I am pretty sure those around him will know that.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
26 minutes ago, RAyMO said:

This is a strange view - you are happy for him to respond publicly to show his innocence - but only to pre-arranged questions - which would obviously be agreed only if they don't allow any potential for guilt to surface.

On the other hand I am sure his advisors will be delighted if he gets a chance with pre-arranged questions - no fear of the disciplined Mr Trump going off message and saying something stupid.

"There was no quid pro quo - Its was a perfect call - but I didn't get any credit for it - Obama would have got credit, but the fake News never give me credit. Perfect Call, I didn't mention quid pro quo - read the transcript I didn't say 'quid pro quo' - maybe hinted at it a little but that's OK - that's what they tell me. Best call ever they tell me, no president has ever make a more perfect call. Anyway I didn't mention quid pro quo, Ruddy had already lined that up. Just ask him he's a good man, a very good man - good lawyer too and good with Ukrainians - he knows how to make them do things - you know good things for me for us."

 

No I think you should read my comments again, I didn't say it would make me happy if he received prearranged questions. I was only trying to make a point that it does happen. During the Russia investigation he wouldn't testify unless he knew  what questions they would ask in advance, they wouldn't do that so he never testified. In truth, I don't think he is going to personally testify during this inquiry, but who knows maybe he will. 

Hope this clears up the disconnect on my comments above.

Edited by Manwon Lender
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RAyMO
3 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

No I think you should read my comments again, I didn't say it would make me happy if he received prearranged questions. I was only trying to make a point that it does happen. During the Russia investigation he wouldn't testify unless he New what questions they would ask in advance, they wouldn't do that so he never testified. In truth, I don't think he is going to personally testify during this inquiry, but who knows maybe he will. 

Hope this clears up the disconnect on my comments above.

My apologies - post edited.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
1 minute ago, RAyMO said:

My apologies - post edited.

No problem, I know sometimes I do not clearly state my thoughts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
9 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

as is being claimed, not so much.  If true, "you get the defense money if you make a public announcement that you are investigating the Bidens "  is pretty uncool.  

I agree.  The transcript of that call makes it crystal clear that this did NOT take place, though.  The words matter and he did not utter those words.  Further, Zelinsky had no knowledge that any aid was being delayed when the call took place and has said he felt no pressure.  I'm not sure why his clear statement on the subject is ignored by those who want to use it as evidence to Impeach a sitting president.  

We've been treated to a series of people, most of whom have no first-hand knowledge of the call, who are expressing an opinion of what the exchange between two leaders "meant".  If Nancy finds she has the votes to send Articles to the Senate then the Impeachment will happen and fail to remove him.  If she cannot get the votes she needs then the process will die, forgotten by all but conservative leaning news sites.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Captain Risky
6 hours ago, RAyMO said:

Joking aside imo Trump would be the worst person to call in his own defence and I am pretty sure those around him will know that.

Oh i don't know he seems to have gotten away with murder so far. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the13bats

Cool thread topic, trump isnt innocent and this isnt like cheating with porn stars or hiding his taxes,  he loves to blurt the first dumbassed thing that pops in his head, that lowbrow approach helped to gain worshippers, it will hurt more than help as we move forward.

While his "worshippers" see him as a flawless God some supporters like the rest of us do question things like why did you have affairs, why dont you show your taxes and so Mexico isnt paying for the wall our defense funds are.

If trump testifies he will bluster, derail, arm wave, blame hilly, Obama, the dems, yell "witch hunt", but that smoke and mirrors dumbard theathertrics wont wash with this, I question did he even know what he does at times is illegal, his no politician not by a long shot, no where near competent to be potus.

While it does appear he walks between rain drops, his worshippers seem to ignore some pretty blatant wrongs he has done and if questioned we get the cliche, Obama did this hilly did that, which is irrelevant smoke.

12 minutes ago, Captain Risky said:

Oh i don't know he seems to have gotten away with murder so far. 

Yes, he has, and a great deal of furor against him is hate fueled nonsense but it far from makes him guilt free, as i say this will be fun to watch unfold.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Captain Risky
1 minute ago, the13bats said:

Yes, he has, and a great deal of furor against him is hate fueled nonsense but it far from makes him guilt free, as i say this will be fun to watch unfold.

Isn't democracy all about the whims of the people ? There are laws and a certain way of doing things that needs to be respected in order so every one is accountable, especially the president. Otherwise he'd be a dictator. Republicans should be American first and foremost and should be leading the fight to stop Trump from holding American democracy hostage.  

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BrooklynGuy

I can hear the Republicans now "How do we know which one of these two traitors already testified, there must be an investigation into this, why were we not told he had an identical twin." ;)

 Vindman’s identical twin may be called to testify in impeachment probe

The identical twin brother of Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, the top Ukraine expert on the National Security Council who testified this week before House lawmakers in the Trump impeachment probe, may also be called to testify, according to a report. Yevgeny Vindman, also an Army lieutenant colonel, works in the White House in an office next to his brother as an NSC lawyer handling ethics issues. Alexander Vindman allegedly told investigators that his sibling had witnessed the decision to move the transcript of President Trump’s July 25 phone call with his Ukrainian counterpart, Volodymyr Zelensky, to a top secret server, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Read more: https://nypost.com/2019/11/01/vindmans-identical-twin-may-be-called-to-testify-in-impeachment-probe/

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
2 hours ago, and then said:

I agree.  The transcript of that call makes it crystal clear that this did NOT take place, though.  The words matter and he did not utter those words.  Further, Zelinsky had no knowledge that any aid was being delayed when the call took place and has said he felt no pressure.  I'm not sure why his clear statement on the subject is ignored by those who want to use it as evidence to Impeach a sitting president.  

We've been treated to a series of people, most of whom have no first-hand knowledge of the call, who are expressing an opinion of what the exchange between two leaders "meant".  If Nancy finds she has the votes to send Articles to the Senate then the Impeachment will happen and fail to remove him.  If she cannot get the votes she needs then the process will die, forgotten by all but conservative leaning news sites.

At this point, I would like to see public testimony from credible witnesses. Short of producing and playing the real  recording of the call, that is the best we will get.  I think there are two or three credible witnesses.

Depending on what sources you believe, there is some indication the Ukrainians did expect aid this summer and were surprised when it did not show up.

Now some speculation on my part:

If I were very needy of military aid to protect my country against the Russians, I would be in tune with the US.  I would cooperate to fight corruption and try to assure that the Pentagon gave me a clean bill of health.  Of course I would be doing the same with the EU . And by the way, apparently the EU has given the Ukraine about 16 billion dollars in grants and loans since 2014, so they are doing their share. 

When the Pentagon did report that the Ukraine had made good steps to clean up corruption and that it was OK to disperse the aid Congress had approved, I would expect that aid to show up.  When it did not, I would put a trace on the package so to speak.  As I got more desperate, I would surely try to find out why.  

You have witnessed the kind of trouble a British ambassador can get into for private comments, much less public ones.about the Administration.  There is really only one answer Zelensky can give even if two state department officials have his arms twisted and are beating him with a hose, "No pressure."   President Trump is sensitive of his ego and a very dangerous man to cross, especially when he leads the most powerful nation in the world.

I guess we will see. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Robotic Jew
9 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

President Trump will have the opportunity to testify, but not only in front of the committee. Since the impeachment inquiry passed by vote today, the new phase of the investigation will be televised so the American people can see and hear all the information they need to decide what they think occurred. I am uncertain if the President will personally testify or not, I think we will just have to wait and see.

I seriously doubt he will testify. If they wouldn't let him speak to mueller they certainly aren't going to let the idiot testify here. He would be impeached on multiple counts of perjury if this happened. And that's probably just after answering the first question. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.