The Impeachment Inquiry

[wayfriend]

That is why they should be fielding a viable candidate and work to vote him out as opposed to impeachment.

Hashi, please use your Mensa and Intertel capabilities. How do you vote out a president who does not abide by laws? Who can create the appearance that his opponent has committed crimes? Who can arrest anyone who stands in his way? Who can divert the resources of the US to his campaign? Who can rig the vote any way he likes? Who can pardon anyone who commits a crime on his behalf? Who need not even respect the results of the election? (Go count the times Trump has claimed the election is rigged, that he need not observe any term limits) --- I think you only pretend to be so naive.

No, spare me the "it would never happen" crap. Conservatives have been saying that about Trump since he was elected. Wrongly every time.

The man effing pardoned soldiers guilty of war crimes according to his own military, for his own political advantage. Show me where he has drawn the line.

[Zarathustra]

I find the propensity for insulting people and malevolent misinformation not funny at all....

Does this mean we're no longer going to hear "comedy gold?" I approve.

There are a variety of opinions on this board, arising from a variety of sources with emphasis on different facts/perspectives. You are the only one calling these differences "lies" and (comedy gold!) "malevolent misinformation." There is no malevolence in having different opinions/sources/information. But when simple rebuttals just won't do, the other side must be described as evil, I guess.

What was that you were saying about insults??

[Obi-Wan Nihilo]

Wayfriend only cares about the Constitution when it suits him. Recall that he defended the illegal suspension of the 4th Amendment following the Boston Marathon bombing.

He is utterly without principle.

[TheFallen]

I find the propensity for insulting people and malevolent misinformation not funny at all, and terrifying in a way that is far beyond mild....

Here's a very simple solution... stop doing it then.

[Hashi Lebwohl]

That is why they should be fielding a viable candidate and work to vote him out as opposed to impeachment.

Hashi, please use your Mensa and Intertel capabilities.

It is precisely because I have those credentials that I know that everything you suggested is at an Alex Jones level of co conspiracy theory. Obama joked about a third term, too, but no one took him seriously. Trump says that crap specifically to throw certain people off-balance. You are better than that--don't fall for his bullshit.

[wayfriend]

So no takers, then. Just insults.

You guys forget ... when you demonstrate the kind of forum this is by how you treat posters, I feel like I've accomplished something.

[Obi-Wan Nihilo]

So no takers, then. Just insults

Coming from one of the most insulting posters to have ever posted in this forum, that's comedy gold.

[Zarathustra]

So no takers, then. Just insults.

You guys forget ... when you demonstrate the kind of forum this is by how you treat posters, I feel like I've accomplished something.

Oh we haven't forgotten that members of the Left believe they have accomplished something when they play the victim card. This is perhaps their greatest accomplishment (sadly). The problem is that no one insulted or victimized you. Calling you on your contradictions/inconsistencies isn't insulting you. Maybe Obi Wan could have rephrased his criticism as "WF's outrage over alleged violations of the Constitution seems inconsistent," rather than saying you have no principles, but it's not like he said you should feel ashamed for having your opinions, as you do to us. At some point you should think about giving up this crusade you have to prove we are bad. You might think of it as some morally superior demonstration, but it comes off as whiny schtick.

[Hashi Lebwohl]

Wow--Sondland's explosive opening statement this morning. Everyone knew what was happening, everyone knew it was quid pro quo, everyone was in on it--this had such a moving effect upon Adam Schiff that the chairman had to excuse himself, go outside, and hold a brief press conference boasting that now they had the evidence with which to conclusively and correctly impeach the POTUS.

That is definitely breaking news of an explosive nature....except....hrm....oh my.

It appears that Sondland's subsequent testimony after that negated his entire opening statement, rendering it null and void despite the fact that CNN still had it posted and published while Sondland was negating his own testimony.

Ultimately, when asked directly he stated that when he confronted Trump about what to do re Ukraine and what the POTUS wanted, Trump replied, "nothing. I want nothing from Ukraine. No quid pro quo--I just want Zelensky to do the right thing."

The foundation of the impeachment inquiry--quid pro quo and withholding aid from Ukraine as part of some sort of bribery scheme--just collapsed. Sondland's final testimony was that he had supposed that was what Trump wanted but that he really didn't know. His entire testimony and "bad feelings" about it all was nothing more than a wild guess.

Just like the Mueller Investigation we may stick a fork in the impeachment inquiry because it is done. Oh, they will still impeach for some lame reason, because Democrats just know that Trump must be guilty of something, if only they could find out what it is.

[TheFallen]

You guys forget ... when you demonstrate the kind of forum this is by how you treat posters, I feel like I've accomplished something.

"Accomplished something"? Well possibly wf, if your objective was to be a small irritant of very little consequence. Not a particularly ambitious goal, but clearly one fitting your particular talent sets and abilities. Well done on your achievement.

Your double standards are evident in almost every post you make. Now I personally am unsure whether this is due to a crippling lack of self-awareness on your part or whether you're just an obsessional fanboi - but it's hardly a big deal either way

Let's face it, someone who eternally claims persecution, refuses to address reasoned rebuttal and who repeatedly goes straight to ad hominem insult while simultaneously claiming that they're the one being insulted is never going to be worth paying much attention to.

[Hashi Lebwohl]

Oh, I forgot to add: the FBI wanted to interview the whistleblower--you know, Eric Ciaramella--last month as a potential witness but that meeting has not yet taken place. It isn't like Mr. Ciaramella has any credible testimony about anything important, since all h is information was second- and third-hand.

[Skyweir]

Wow so Sondlands testimony today was damning .. highlighting all those aware of the attempt at bribery for Trumps personal gain.

Spotlighting Pompeo, Pence, Mulvaney, Bolton, Giuliani et al

Everyone was in the loop," according to Sondland

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/sondland ... 53f20cd30a

I did not see Sondland outing Trump and confirming that he was following orders directly from the POTUS.

And Sondland butt covered re the quote Hashi cited. Sondland is not going to take any bullet for Trump. Sensible boy. But he is setting Giuliani up for the fall.

[Hashi Lebwohl]

Then you also missed all of Sondland's other testimony where he negated everything you just said. He quoted Trump, who said--and I paraphrase here--"I want nothing from Ukraine. No quid pro quo. I just want Zelensky to do the right thing."

The only things which got damned by Sonldand's testimony were Schiff with his excited run to the microphone to announce, with glee, "we got him" and CNN publishing, also with glee "they got him". You were both wrong because you got nothing, especially when Sondland admitted that he presumed all these things. A presumption, as you well know, is nothing more than a wild guess.

[Skyweir]

So no takers, then. Just insults

Coming from one of the most insulting posters to have ever posted in this forum, that's comedy gold.

You have a surprisingly short memory. I recall insults being welcomed in this forum some months ago, and at the very best being readily ignored.

How about we then cease hostilities. Its a simple action to take.

Many have been offended by ill considered comments and that ill considered comments ... wouldnt a better way forward be to bury hard feelings and institute a cease fire ... and establish a transition period to allow Tankers to transition to a less personally insulting way forward.

This would involve not throwing up old offences and past butt hurts. Like what one learns after falling out with partners, digging up old butt hurts dont help, right?

A clean slate to move the Tank forward. If there is a genuine desire and interest for a more collaborative tone ... it is entirely doable. However, it wont be successful without unanimous accord.

[Gaius Octavius]

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4710 ... ts-in-last

Independents support of impeachment down 2 points; opposition up 10 points.

[Hashi Lebwohl]

I recall insults being welcomed in this forum some months ago, and at the very best being readily ignored.

I don't welcome insults but I don't do anything about them, either--an insult damages only the person making the insult. If someone's words online make you--not you, personally, the generic "you"--feel bad then the problem is you for taking those words to heart. Wayfriend has subtly insulted my intelligence at least half a dozen times in recent weeks but I let it go because his words have no effect on me. I mention it now only as an example for others to follow--don't respond to an insult and don't take it personally. Far too many people take things too personally these days.

In other words, grow up and get over it. Of course, the insulter needs to grow up, too--choose your words in a manner befitting a mature adult, not a spoiled child on the elementary school playground.

Oh...and for pity's sake stop dragging around baggage from something someone might have said years ago. (again, not directed at anyone in particular)

[Skyweir]

Weve all been insulted we have all been insulting. Not one of us can claim a high ground. We can each and all however, change the tone of the conversation.

Right?
ie focus on the issues as opposed to using a posters comments and views as an opportunity to slagging off at them personally and insulting them personally.

Sure show each other how we think we are wrong in our views ... but without the need to take drive by pot shots at their character or intelligence etc.

Or not ... as I said without any accord the Tank will remain a cesspool of exploitative and gratuitous hostility.

[Skyweir]

Gotta say Hale and Cooper did a solid job today. Thats what apolitical looks like. Good job guys.

[TheFallen]

I have no idea what to make of Sondland's testimony yesterday. It was just plain weird. It was like there were two different Sondlands.

First there was the Sondland who started off testifying fairly categorically (much to Schiff's seriously inappropriate delight and literally uncontainable glee - geez, isn't this guy in his role as heading up the enquiry at least meant to make an effort to fake the semblance of dispassionate propriety?)...

And then there was the Sondland who spent the entire second half of his testimony rowing back on what he'd said during the first half?

As I said, very odd.

To support the existence of inconsistencies in Sondland's testimony, I STRONGLY recommend that people should check out the Enquiry video linked to below, where Mike Turner (Rep) hones in on Sondland's contradictory statements, blocks him off from any wiggle room and so draws a simple admission from Sondland that his entire earlier testimony was based on nothing more than "my own presumption". This is precisely what Hashi is referring to above and it is absolutely cogent to any evaluation of the value of Sondland's testimony as a whole.

Sondland is forced to clarify.

It's only 5 minutes long and is literally compulsory viewing for those who have not seen it but who still want to comment on Sondland's testimony

Frankly it is simply not worth anyone passing comment on any potential significance within the first half of Sondland's testimony until that has been seen and evaluated in the light of the material within this video of his cross-examination and responses from later in the day.

[Skyweir]

No one should rest a case on Sondland ... and hes not necessary anyway. Theres Holmes up again soon.

But Sondland has implicated Trump and his cronies but more interestingly he is setting up Giuliani as fall guy. Giuliani has already weighed in and theres more there.

Yes Schiff could have dealt better with the whole Sondland thing as his entire testimony was definitely playing either side ... Trump Sondland and not wanting to expose himself more than he already has.