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

Tatetopa
5 hours ago, Robotic Jew said:

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.

He may not testify but they floated an idea for him to read the call transcript on national TV.  I guess cooler heads prevailed.  

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Agent0range
18 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

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

You mean the people that came out to say he asked the Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden?  What's he gonna say?  "No I didn't."?  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agent0range
9 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.

Words matter, and so do context.  If you are a country that is being invaded by a superpower, completely reliant on the United States for aid and support against that superpower...are you going to throw it's leader under bus?  Everyone involved said their was quid pro quo, except for Trump.  Even his chief of staff.  If quid pro quo isn't pressure..what is?

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
third_eye

"Art of the deal" Article 2

I can do what I want, when I want, how I want, where I want, with who I want, or do not want.... 

Someone please give him a crown... nobody gets to keep a republic... 

~

Edited by third_eye
Addendum
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
35 minutes ago, Agent0range said:

You mean the people that came out to say he asked the Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden?  What's he gonna say?  "No I didn't."?  

I don't know what he is going to say, maybe we will find out if he testifies.

i really don't want to speculate, based upon my personal feelings. Who knows he may not even testify.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

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. 

I don't think he is going to testify either. But he is being given the opportunity to do so, I think we just have to wait and see what happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
10 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.

I think the reason the Democrates had the vote for impeachment inquiry was so they could put it front of the American people. To date none of these reports or inquiries have been televised, so this way the American people can form there own opinions. However, by doing this if the Democrates can't prove their case, it's going to destroy them. If they can't cast a doubt on What happened then President Trump will be vindicated. Either way this is going to have an effect on the election and to the winner go's the spoils.

Edited by Manwon Lender
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender

DEMS INTRODUCE RESOLUTION FORMALIZING IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY PROCEDURES

If the chair does not consent, the minority can appeal to the full committee. It is common in other proceedings for committee chairs to essentially have veto authority over subpoenas sought by ranking minority members.

The measure also sets the stage for proceedings to move into a public setting soon.

The resolution authorizes the Intelligence Committee to conduct an "open hearing or hearings" in which minority Republicans have equal time to question witnesses.

And, after that hearing is concluded, "to allow for a full evaluation of minority witness requests, the ranking minority member may submit to the chair, in writing, any requests for witness testimony relevant to the investigation described in the first section of this resolution within 72 hours after notice is given."

McGovern has argued, and maintained on Thursday, that the standards outlined in the resolution are the same as those under the impeachments of both Presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton.

The resolution further directs the Intelligence Committee, in consultation with the other committees, to prepare a report on its findings to the Judiciary Committee, which would write any articles of impeachment. In response to GOP complaints about Democrats' selective leaks of opening statements and depositions, the document also authorizes the public release of testimony transcripts, with only sensitive or classified information being redacted. The resolution also allows Republican members to submit written demands for testimony and other evidence, to cross-examine witnesses, and raise objections.

Here is the link where this the above information came from.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/house-votes-resolution-impeachment

 

There is some interesting information here be sure you open all the links.

 

Edited by Manwon Lender
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

Mistake

Edited by Manwon Lender

Share this post


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

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

Check out post #33 there is some interesting information in the three links in that post.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
19 hours 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 

Check out post #33 there is some interesting information in the three links provided.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
21 hours 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.

I added the rules for the inquiry to post #33, you may find it interesting.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Manwon Lender
5 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

He may not testify but they floated an idea for him to read the call transcript on national TV.  I guess cooler heads prevailed.  

What we need to hear is the actually call, the transcript doesn't mean much, below is located on the bottom of the transcript. In smaller print, I just made it a little bigger.

CAUTION: A Memorandum of a Telephone Conversation (TELCON) is not a verbatim transcript of a discussion. The text in this document records the notes and recollections of Situation Room Duty officers and NSC policy staff assigned to listen and memorialize the conversation in written form as the conversation takes place. A number of factors can affect the accuracy of the record, including poor telecommunications connections and variations in accent and/or interpretation, The word “inaudible” is used to indicate portions of a conversation that the notetaker was unable to hear.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa

If the President's conduct was not an impeachable offense and he is acquitted, that is just the way it goes in politics.  We can accept it.

If the arguments are that there was no quid pro quo because Trump said so and the man whose country is being held hostage for American defense aid says so, that is not a very convincing argument.  It is like me trying to tell you  that Hillary and James Comes said everything is OK so there is no need for an investigation.

If we were concerned about corruption in the Ukraine, and we were ,it would be reasonable for the President to be concerned.  The Pentagon was anxious to stop the corruption and diversion of military funds, hence the removal of the corrupt prosecutor, and the report by the Pentagon of improvements made.

It could well be said to be due diligence on the President's part to follow up on that concern as any good chief executive would.  On the phone call when the President brings up corruption, according to the transcript at least, he mentions nothing about corruption in the Ukrainian military or acquisition of material.  He doesn't ask if corrupt people in the government that were stealing the money we intended for their military were dealt with.   If he had, everybody would agree that that was the President doing his job.  

Instead he asks about the Biden family and the oil company Hunter Biden was involved in.  That is all, that is the favor, nothing else  That took it from national concern and due diligence to a personal interest concern about dirt on a political rival.

Share this post


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

If we were concerned about corruption in the Ukraine, and we were ,it would be reasonable for the President to be concerned.  The Pentagon was anxious to stop the corruption and diversion of military funds, hence the removal of the corrupt prosecutor, and the report by the Pentagon of improvements made.

That argument doesn't work for Trump, since he's been trying to gut the Ukraine aid specifically designated to fight corruption. 

Edited by ExpandMyMind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ExpandMyMind
23 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

What we need to hear is the actually call, the transcript doesn't mean much, below is located on the bottom of the transcript. In smaller print, I just made it a little bigger.

CAUTION: A Memorandum of a Telephone Conversation (TELCON) is not a verbatim transcript of a discussion. The text in this document records the notes and recollections of Situation Room Duty officers and NSC policy staff assigned to listen and memorialize the conversation in written form as the conversation takes place. A number of factors can affect the accuracy of the record, including poor telecommunications connections and variations in accent and/or interpretation, The word “inaudible” is used to indicate portions of a conversation that the notetaker was unable to hear.

The NSC Colonel already testified that the transcript had key parts missing. He tried to add them but they were deleted. And there also appears to be a chunk of time missing - maybe as much as 20 minutes - from the call timeline.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
1 hour ago, ExpandMyMind said:

The NSC Colonel already testified that the transcript had key parts missing. He tried to add them but they were deleted. And there also appears to be a chunk of time missing - maybe as much as 20 minutes - from the call timeline.

That's some great information, somehow I missed it, thank you for bring me to date.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ExpandMyMind
4 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

That's some great information, somehow I missed it, thank you for bring me to date.

I forgot to add that Trump's staff knew immediately just how bad that call was and moved it onto a 'highly classified server'. 

The cover up began mere minutes after the call.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
1 hour ago, ExpandMyMind said:

That argument doesn't work for Trump, since he's been trying to gut the Ukraine aid specifically designated to fight corruption. 

Thanks for the link.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
1 hour ago, ExpandMyMind said:

I forgot to add that Trump's staff knew immediately just how bad that call was and moved it onto a 'highly classified server'. 

The cover up began mere minutes after the call.

Hopefully, when all this go's before the American people and they see the up coming televised impeachment inquiry they will see through the smoke and mirrors. Also we can only hope that the Democrates have enough pieces of the puzzle to prove it. But even so the Senate is controlled by the Republicans and even though many already know the truth, it doesn't mean they won't stop the impeachment there. I just don't know anymore, but I do know that we live in a screwed up world.

  • Like 1

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.