Impeachment hearings

[_EAllusion]

If Trump conditioned nothing specific on Ukrainian cooperation on the attempt to manufacture propaganda against Biden, that would still be extremely bad and worthy of impeachment. The US pushing for that already exerts inappropriate pressure by the very nature of the relationship with Ukraine. That Trump did condition things Ukraine desperately wanted and were part of formal US policy is even worse. It's criminal extra credit, but you can get lost focusing on the details of that and miss the bigger picture of what's wrong here.

Something that I've thought about lately is it's near universally recognized that Watergate was quite bad - to the point that the 'gate suffix connotes a bad political scandal. But that is only so because Nixon was forced out. What Trump did here is much worse than Watergate. Because Trump is hanging on with partisan backing, the sense of scandal around it hasn't sunk in the way it should. That produces a weird situation where Watergate is talked about in darker tones than this. Maybe that'll change, but I wonder if it will.

[_Brackite]

McConnel, in spite of being a lousy RINO, has been putting through enough Trump nominations that Republicans will have the power to play this game for quite some time regardless of the demographic shifts within the country.

McConnell is a lousy RINO??? McConnell is much more responsible than Trump in getting through conservative-leaning Judges on the courts. But Republican media will be giving Trump the credit.

[_EAllusion]

https://www.thedailybeast.com/lev-parna ... itter_page

Lol. God damn.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

This is not the first time that Trump has conspired with criminal foreign actors for electoral advantage.

Whatever happened to your Russian collusion thing?

Mueller stated in his reported that Trump wasn't exonerated, more than 20 Russian nationals and three Russian companies were indicted, multiple people went to jail for a myriad of reasons, so on and so forth. The only reason why impeachment wasn't pursued is because there was no way the Senate would vote to remove him from office. The difference between this and what's currently happening is Trump was on record requesting a quid pro quo, literally, and there are multiple credible witnesses attesting to that fact.

I'd like to think you knew that when you asked me that question, but you're so goddamn abysmally damned daft that I honestly believe you and a few other Conservatives probably ping somewhere between 65 - 85 on the IQ scale. I'm not kidding. Literally retarded. And you actually have the right to vote. It's amazing.

- Doc

[_Res Ipsa]

https://www.thedailybeast.com/lev-parnas-helped-rep-devin-nunes-investigations?via=twitter_page

Lol. God damn.

My God, you couldn’t invent a plot this weird if you tried.

I say this is worth taking a look a look at.

[_moksha]

Once Sondland proclaimed that they were all part of the criminal conspiracy, the only players left to hear from are Trump, Pompeo, Pence, and Bolton, before the Republican Senate can exonerate all of them from crimes committed.

[Guest]

Once Sondland proclaimed that they were all part of the criminal conspiracy, the only players left to hear from are Trump, Pompeo, Pence, and Bolton, before the Republican Senate can exonerate all of them from crimes committed.

Let’s be very clear here, lest our reality-deniars a la Russian collusion (LTC Vindman testified that the Ukrainian election interference conspiracy theory is a "Russian narrative that Putin has promoted.") decide to deny, well, reality. This morning Ambassador Sondland testified that a quid pro quo deal was ordered by President Trump. Let me repeat:

Sondland testified that there was a quid pro quo deal.

He was ordered by President Trump to work with Giuliani and his indicted associates (Lev Parnas & Igor Fruman) against his wishes.

Amb. Sondland stated that he was treated unfairly by the State Department and White House as they are refusing him access to his emails and phone records. That’s obstruction.

Sondland was against withholding aid to Ukraine. Sondland believes the only way aid would be released was if President Zelensky made a public statement of opening up investigations into Biden and the supposed Ukrainian 2016 election - I’m inserting this random comment here to show you that our local doorknobs don’t read what we post - interference.

This is in addition to:

President Trump's personal attorney, acting as an enforcer, a rogue element on Trump’s behalf, a workaround, literally a shakedown guy, conducted a smear campaign against an anti-corruption US official, former Ambassador Yovanavitch. Think about that Republicans. That’s the very essence of corruption, to corrupt the system from within for personal gain. Jesus Christ, it’s right in front of your faces.

Finally, former Captain and company commander in the US Army a Vietnam War vet who earned a Bronze Star and an Air Medal with a V device for valor, Amb. Taylor just straight up drew a devastating picture of President Trump pursuing his own personal interests by leveraging military aid for politically motivated investigations against his domestic rivals.

That’s it. That’s the truth. We can’t have a President who does this. Y’all still have Pence who is objectively more zealous than Trump on Conservative issues. Do the right thing and cut ties with a man who isn’t fit for the office he occupies.

- Doc

[_DarkHelmet]

Something that I've thought about lately is it's near universally recognized that Watergate was quite bad - to the point that the 'gate suffix connotes a bad political scandal. But that is only so because Nixon was forced out. What Trump did here is much worse than Watergate. Because Trump is hanging on with partisan backing, the sense of scandal around it hasn't sunk in the way it should. That produces a weird situation where Watergate is talked about in darker tones than this. Maybe that'll change, but I wonder if it will.

It will be interesting when Trump is cleared by the Senate, and possibly elected to second term , if the narrative on Nixon will change. It will look like he was forced out because the GOP was too weak to support him. After all, his "crimes" weren't that bad relative to Trump. He could have easily survived impeachment if the Republicans weren't such wimps.

[_Icarus]

The revelation everyone missed about Sondland is that he said Trump only wanted Ukraine to announce an investigation publicly. He never insisted an investigation actually take place. This proves rooting out corruption was just a ploy, when in reality he wanted a political favor.

[_Chap]

Impeachment hearings: Fiona Hill rejects Republicans' ‘fictional narrative’ Ukraine meddled in US election

Hill: "In the course of this investigation, I would ask that you please not promote politically driven falsehoods that so clearly advance the Russian interests...These fictions are harmful even if they're deployed for purely domestic political purposes."

Video link here:

https://Twitter.com/girlsreallyrule/sta ... 2387365888

It is a very powerful rebuke to some of Trump's Republican defenders.

Hill: 'He had an agreement with chief of staff Mulvaney that in return for investigations that this meeting would be scheduled'

Hill is now describing a key scene, 10 July meetings at the White House in which Sondland told Ukrainians he had a deal with acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney for a White House meeting for Zelenskiy if the Ukrainians announced investigations of Burisma/Bidens.

Yesterday Sondland said he did mention investigations in these meetings but he couldn’t recall naming Mulvaney or specifically saying “Burisma” or “Biden.”

In contrast, Hill has no doubt about what she heard.

“I listened very carefully to ambassador Sondland’s testimony,” she said.

“The meeting had initially been scheduled for about 45 minutes to an hour. It was definitely in the wrap-up stage at this point... Danylyuk was talking...we’d also wanted to [talk] energy sector reform... and then we knew that the Ukrainians would have on their agenda inevitably a question about a meeting...

“Amb Bolton was trying to parry this back.. it’s not Amb Bolton’s role to start pulling out the schedule...and he does not as a matter of course like to discuss the details... then Amb Sondland leaned in, basically to say ‘Well, we have an agreement that there will be a meeting if specific investigations are put under way.”

Then Hill saw Bolton stiffen, look at his wristwatch, “and basically said ‘Well, it’s really great to see you, I’m afraid I’ve got another meeting’.”

Sondland had not specifically said Burisma or Mulvaney yet, Hill said – “It was unclear who arranged the agreement” – but then the group went to a downstairs room for a debrief.

“Later [Sondland] said that he had an agreement with chief of staff Mulvaney that in return for investigations that this meeting would be scheduled.”

Investigations of what nature?, Goldman asks.

“He said investigations in Burisma.”

Then Bolton told Hill to go to NSC lawyer John Eisenberg, she says.

“Specific instruction was I had to go to the lawyers... [he said] ‘You tell Eisenberg that I am not part of whatever drug deal that Mulvaney and Sondland were cooking up’.”

Did you know what he meant by ‘drug deal’?

“I took it to mean investigations for a meeting.”

Did you go speak to the lawyers?

“I certainly did.”

Did you relay this?

“I relayed it precisely.”

Powerful moment.