North Korea and US politics

[mack341]

Threatening to murder a witness makes him deserve atleast that.
Why do you think he should get away with it is a better question i think.
And "he/she/it did that" is not a defense for what Roger Stone has done.

As far as I can tell if the witness you mention was mr credico, he was in court making wisecracks and trying to do comedic impressions, rather than applying for the witness protection scheme/having a face transplant to hide from stone's intention to have him murdered.

Have you got any quotes or sources for this btw, has this been added to his charge sheet? Or was it a turn of phrase rather than a real threat that would be carried out?

I didn't say he should get away with it either, I said a sentence around 1 year would be reasonable/fitting. The man's an eccentric, political trickster, waste of time and money keeping him banged up for years, it's disproportionate and ott.

 

[sufferinsilence]

I know what you mean, I edited that out of my post, about getting a fair trial in a strongly partisan environment if there is a political element to the charge being faced; however I don't think it equates the same here, to the situation now, with many afflicted strongly by trump derangement syndrome, which takes bias and the difficulty of making a fair judgement to the next level.

The thing with mueller and the various indictments, is the context and background to it all. I haven't read all the details regarding manafort etc...but my sense is it's not groundbreaking stuff, but the best mueller and his team could find to inflict as much collateral damage as possible on trump.

The trump hating public ought to be a bit careful for what they wish for, an all powerful deep state could turn against their candidate when the policies don't quite fit with the deep state's preferred agenda. look at tulsi gabbard, not quite enough of a warhawk for the msm so must be attacked whenever possible.

The fact alot of these people have agreed into plea deals means they knew they did wrong and this way have most likely gotten a much better sentence than when they would've let the case go to court. It might not have been groundbreaking but apparently it was more than enough to warrant serious sentences.

I don't believe in a "deep state" the way it is pictured by Trump and his following. If anything the deep state are career politicians, diplomats, lobbyists and advisors who'll always be around in DC whether there is a democrat or republican in office. Roger Stone is deep state being involved in the Nixon, Reagan and Trump campaigns and that's just the tip of the iceberg.

And talking about MSM: Fox News is the biggest MSM outlet there is on cable news. Just look at the ratings which are touted by Trump himself every so often. Aren't they trying to influence their public? It's not because the primetime hosts are all very pro-Trump that they're a "fringe" news outlet. They're as mainstream as they come.

 

[mack341]

I agree re the deep state. Yes, but Fox are the only mainstream channel putting forward some conservative viewpoints, I don't agree with them on everything, they have their convenient blind spots as well. We have a bit of a problem if the public is roughly 50/50 liberal/conservative but the media is 90% liberal, pushing the woke/pc agenda, then there's a disconnect. There was a better balance in the past, when also media ownership wasn't concentrated and so you had a broader range of opinion from writers and broadcasters.

I'm no trump fan boy either despite what some here may believe but in the cold light of day, he just represents the views of most 70yr olds, and because he doesn't worship at the temple of woke orthodoxy he must be constantly pilloried.

 

[goatwack]

I actually liked Deep State, though series 2 was a lot better overall I felt

 

[Kroffe]

As far as I can tell if the witness you mention was mr credico, he was in court making wisecracks and trying to do comedic impressions, rather than applying for the witness protection scheme/having a face transplant to hide from stone's intention to have him murdered.

Have you got any quotes or sources for this btw, has this been added to his charge sheet? Or was it a turn of phrase rather than a real threat that would be carried out?

I didn't say he should get away with it either, I said a sentence around 1 year would be reasonable/fitting. The man's an eccentric, political trickster, waste of time and money keeping him banged up for years, it's disproportionate and ott.

Turn of phrase? I think it was what was written in his text.
"Prepare to die"
And thats a death-threat in my book, even if it comes from a "eccentric political trickster".

Giving the man 1 year would just prove exactly what the narcissistic clown has been counting on all these years.
That he is above the law.
He should serve a sentence according to what the law says about the crimes he have committed. No more, no less.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[mack341]

Turn of phrase? I think it was what was written in his text.
"Prepare to die"
And thats a death-threat in my book, even if it comes from a "eccentric political trickster".

Giving the man 1 year would just prove exactly what the narcissistic clown has been counting on all these years.
That he is above the law.
He should serve a sentence according to what the law says about the crimes he have committed. No more, no less.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

I doubt mr credico was shaking in his boots, stone is a fantasist, it's melodramatic bluff...'you're a rat...prepare to die' if he'd wanted to make a real threat he'd likely dress it up in euphemistic terms, to create more fear or not at all in case the police found it later on, he wouldn't want lasting evidence of it to be available for them to discover.

 

[goatwack]

"You're a rat....prepare to die!" is definitely a generic, low-tier mobster film extra thing to say

 

[mack341]

Turn of phrase? I think it was what was written in his text.
"Prepare to die"
And thats a death-threat in my book, even if it comes from a "eccentric political trickster".

Giving the man 1 year would just prove exactly what the narcissistic clown has been counting on all these years.
That he is above the law.
He should serve a sentence according to what the law says about the crimes he have committed. No more, no less.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

I don't see what stone gained from telling congress he had a backchannel to wikileaks and assange, can you decipher this for me?

He now gets to spend 20 years in poky, what was the flipside if congress believed him?

 

[Kroffe]

I doubt mr credico was shaking in his boots, stone is a fantasist, it's melodramatic bluff...'you're a rat...prepare to die' if he'd wanted to make a real threat he'd likely dress it up in euphemistic terms, to create more fear or not at all in case the police found it later on, he wouldn't want lasting evidence of it to be available for them to discover.

Even disregarding the threat, he is still guilty of witness tampering, and should be judged accordingly.

Edit: i believe thats the charge anyways, i dont think he has a charge for the death-threats.

 

[mack341]

Even disregarding the threat, he is still guilty of witness tampering, and should be judged accordingly.

The witness, mr credico led stone on to believe this in the early days, that he had direct access to assange, then stone wanted him to say the same to congress. It was like two bs merchants getting each other in trouble

 

[Kroffe]

I don't see what stone gained from telling congress he had a backchannel to wikileaks and assange, can you decipher this for me?

He now gets to spend 20 years in poky, what was the flipside if congress believed him?

"When the House had asked Stone in September 2017 if he had discussed WikiLeaks, its founder Julian Assange or the Democratic hack with the Trump campaign, Stone had denied it under oath , saying his legal team "found nothing" of those types of communications.

Prosecutors argued that witness testimony, along with Stone's texts, emails and phone records, showed Stone's interest in reaching WikiLeaks about the hacked documents it had and speaking to the Trump campaign and even Trump himself about it. Prosecutors said Stone had lied to Congress out of a desire to protect Trump. "

 

[goatwack]

Jeez they even look like mobsters

 

[Kroffe]

The witness, mr credico led stone on to believe this in the early days, that he had direct access to assange, then stone wanted him to say the same to congress. It was like two bs merchants getting each other in trouble

View attachment 117920

But when the committee and Special Counsel Robert Mueller later sought to corroborate Stone’s claim by asking Credico to testify, Credico realized Stone had lied about him being a back channel and fudged the timeline to make it sound like Credico had provided information in July, when in fact Credico did not actually interview Assange until a month later.

“I don’t know why you had to lie and say you had a backchannel,” Credico later told Stone in texts sent in early December 2017. “You could have just told them the truth … You want me to cover you for perjury now.”

“I guarantee you, you are the one who gets indicted for perjury if you are stupid enough to testify,” Stone replied.

 

[mack341]

But when the committee and Special Counsel Robert Mueller later sought to corroborate Stone’s claim by asking Credico to testify, Credico realized Stone had lied about him being a back channel and fudged the timeline to make it sound like Credico had provided information in July, when in fact Credico did not actually interview Assange until a month later.

“I don’t know why you had to lie and say you had a backchannel,” Credico later told Stone in texts sent in early December 2017. “You could have just told them the truth … You want me to cover you for perjury now.”

“I guarantee you, you are the one who gets indicted for perjury if you are stupid enough to testify,” Stone replied.

That's what I mean even credico doesn't know why stone did it, if we could work that out the case might make more sense. The thing is faced by mueller's team of prosecutors grilling you, you might say something wrong in an attempt to protect yourself.

They may have been trying to say/prove stone had a direct link to russians, that was where he was getting his info from on the leaks etc.. and he then thought 'shit! I know I'll tell them about credico and wikileaks to get them off my case' a white lie can mushroom. He wasn't charged with russian collusion or interfering illegally in the 2016 election, so has got himself landed in jail on side issues to mueller's original investigation

 

[Kroffe]

That's what I mean even credico doesn't know why stone did it, if we could work that out the case might make more sense. The thing is faced by mueller's team of prosecutors grilling you, you might say something wrong in an attempt to protect yourself.

They may have been trying to say/prove stone had a direct link to russians, that was where he was getting his info from on the leaks etc.. and he then thought 'shit! I know I'll tell them about credico and wikileaks to get them off my case'

"Prosecutors said Stone had lied to Congress out of a desire to protect Trump."

Why can it not just be as easy as that?
He lied to protect his buddy Trump.

 

[mack341]

"Prosecutors said Stone had lied to Congress out of a desire to protect Trump."

Why can it not just be as easy as that?
He lied to protect his buddy Trump.

Out of a desire to protect trump from what? Trump never colluded with putin otherwise he wouldn't be still sat where he is now. Surely the whole mueller case didn't hinge on roger stone?

If you believed wikileaks were in bed with the russians, collaborating and coordinating, and roger was tasked with getting the info for trump, maybe that's the story.

To me Hillary was a toxic, divisive character carrying a lot of negative baggage, that was all the help trump ever needed to win.

 

[Kroffe]

Out of a desire to protect trump from what? Trump never colluded with putin otherwise he wouldn't be still sat where he is now. Surely the whole mueller case didn't hinge on roger stone?

If you believed wikileaks were in bed with the russians, collaborating and coordinating, and roger was tasked with getting the info for trump, maybe that's the story.

To me Hillary was a toxic, divisive character carrying a lot of negative baggage, that was all the help trump ever needed to win.

"Stone testified he had a back channel to WikiLeaks website founder Julian Assange, who alerted him in the summer of 2016 that more damning emails about Clinton would be released. "

Even if Trump would have won without Stones lies, they were still in his favor.

 

[mack341]

"Stone testified he had a back channel to WikiLeaks website founder Julian Assange, who alerted him in the summer of 2016 that more damning emails about Clinton would be released. "

Even if Trump would have won without Stones lies, they were still in his favor.

It was in his favor that 'more damning emails about clinton would be released'?..so they were never released, but the harm was done by saying they would be?

I wished you'd put a bit more meat on the bones regarding these roger stone lies that helped trump, practically the whole msm is anti trump and yet the 2016 narrative concocted so far is vague and misty, if there'd been something distinctive, standout, trump would've had to resign a year ago surely?

 

[Kroffe]

It was in his favor that 'more damning emails about clinton would be released'?..so they were never released, but the harm was done by saying they would be?

I wished you'd put a bit more meat on the bones regarding these roger stone lies that helped trump, practically the whole msm is anti trump and yet the 2016 narrative concocted so far is vague and misty, if there'd been something distinctive, standout, trump would've had to resign a year ago surely?

Of course that works in Trumps favor.
"oooh, just you wait, theres more damning emails coming" does not exactly sound good does it?
Had he been outed as a liar&criminal then and there, it probably would have had the reverse effect and instead worked in Hillarys favor.

I dont know what more meat you need to see that the man is a criminal and a liar. If you dont believe him to be guilty of the things he has been found guilty of, then theres no way i can convince you otherwise.
Eccentric political trickster or not, he seems to have overstepped, and is now paying for it.

 

[mack341]

Of course that works in Trumps favor.
"oooh, just you wait, theres more damning emails coming" does not exactly sound good does it?
Had he been outed as a liar&criminal then and there, it probably would have had the reverse effect and instead worked in Hillarys favor.

I dont know what more meat you need to see that the man is a criminal and a liar. If you dont believe him to be guilty of the things he has been found guilty of, then theres no way i can convince you otherwise.
Eccentric political trickster or not, he seems to have overstepped, and is now paying for it.

I was just asking, it wasn't clear for me what you meant with your post, I haven't followed the ins and outs of the hillary email leaks and timeline. It all get's confused in my head with that server business of her's which was also being looked at around that time.

You said stone's lies (plural) helped trump, I was just wondering whether you could expand on what they were, but it doesn't matter.

I doubt the neutral public, the swing voter as opposed to swinging voter, would've put much credence to stone's utterances, a man with a tattoo of richard nixon on his back.

The feeling of 'anything goes' if it damages trump is all I'm left thinking, the sense of perspective and proportion thrown out the window.

 

[Kroffe]

I was just asking, it wasn't clear for me what you meant with your post, I haven't followed the ins and outs of the hillary email leaks and timeline. It all get's confused in my head with that server business of her's which was also being looked at around that time.

You said stone's lies (plural) helped trump, I was just wondering whether you could expand on what they were, but it doesn't matter.

I doubt the neutral public, the swing voter as opposed to swinging voter, would've put much credence to stone's utterances, a man with a tattoo of richard nixon on his back.

The feeling of 'anything goes' if it damages trump is all I'm left thinking, the sense of perspective and proportion thrown out the window.

Well yeah, they are after Trump, and i dont think anybody is denying that.
But i dont see how its "anything goes". They are not making up things to charge Trumps buddies with.
They have been tried, and found guilty of actual crimes, some more serious than others.

I think they will get Trump aswell in the end.
That his lies & criminal acts will come back to bite him, as it has for the criminals he surrounds himself with.
But that may be just wishful thinking on my part. He is good at weaseling out of trouble.

 

[sufferinsilence]

Well yeah, they are after Trump, and i dont think anybody is denying that.
But i dont see how its "anything goes". They are not making up things to charge Trumps buddies with.
They have been tried, and found guilty of actual crimes, some more serious than others.

I think they will get Trump aswell in the end.
That his lies & criminal acts will come back to bite him, as it has for the criminals he surrounds himself with.
But that may be just wishful thinking on my part. He is good at weaseling out of trouble.

There is a reason Trump has been fighting so hard to not have this tax returns made public... He is exhausting all legal options to keep them under lock. If he had nothing to hide, why would he? He should be proud to show everyone: "look, I'm clean and this is a witch hunt" but just tweeting once a day "witch hunt" is much easier I guess.

 

[Kroffe]

There is a reason Trump has been fighting so hard to not have this tax returns made public... He is exhausting all legal options to keep them under lock. If he had nothing to hide, why would he? He should be proud to show everyone: "look, I'm clean and this is a witch hunt" but just tweeting once a day "witch hunt" is much easier I guess.

Yeah, that and marketing his sons book seems to take up alot of twitter-space these days for him.
"Trump has accused former vice president Joe Biden of major ethical lapses and railed against Biden's son for allegedly profiting off his father's office. "

Its like he has zero self awareness.

 

[Harry_BKK]

In other news:

"Anticipating a very busy 2020, the President is taking advantage of a free weekend here in Washington, D.C., to begin portions of his routine annual physical exam at Walter Reed," White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham said in a statement.

Sure, he will do it three months advance. Who are they kidding? The guy is obese and 74 years old. The average live expectancy for men in the US is 76 years!

Didn't know it took so long to write another fake result sheet, e.g. "he could live up to 200 years, his genes are just so perfect."

To me, when a 74-year old goes to a hospital well in advance than required then something is not right, isn't it?

And busy with what? More TV binge watching and tweeting?

 

[Kroffe]

In other news:

"Anticipating a very busy 2020, the President is taking advantage of a free weekend here in Washington, D.C., to begin portions of his routine annual physical exam at Walter Reed," White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham said in a statement.

Sure, he will do it three months advance. Who are they kidding? The guy is obese and 74 years old. The average live expectancy for men in the US is 76 years!

Didn't know it took so long to write another fake result sheet, e.g. "he could live up to 200 years, his genes are just so perfect."

To me, when a 74-year old goes to a hospital well in advance than required then something is not right, isn't it?

And busy with what? More TV binge watching and tweeting?

Now thats where i have to disagree.
The man is clearly a physical wonder-man.
Every year that passes, he adds two years to his life expectancy.
He is in the kind of physical shape we mere mortals can only dream of ever attaining.

 

[dionysus]

yes, the man has the body of a god
oops, auto-correct
body of a gourd

 

[Kroffe]

yes, the man has the body of a god
oops, auto-correct
body of a gourd

Wait, like a fat bastard?
Actually tried using this gif above, but they have restricted gifs at 2mb i think.
Used to be 4mb or something. Its like im being censored.
But since im so smartysmart, i figured out i can just link the gifs instead of uploading them to the forum.

Old Attachment (Invalid)

 

[dionysus]

gods that's scary lol

 

[Kroffe]

gods that's scary lol

I know right!!
Its like, now im so limited in what kind of gifs i can use.
Its like they are trying to silence me.

Wait... you were probably talking about fat-trump gif.

 

[Harry_BKK]

Yet more "winning" for Mr T, I am sure he's having lots of fun.

This at his last rally a few days ago. Mr T making it personal again, you could call it a recipe for disaster. IT is good though that people finally seem to see that all he does is spout lie after lie.

It looks like Louisiana is indeed sending a message to Washington and that by electing a Democrat!

 

[ternur]

kroffe when it comes to politics, you're not the same cuddly bear you normally are, you get your claws out straightaway

The bears are not what they seem.

 

[mack341]

The bears are not what they seem.

wow I never realised they were that mobile in attack mode, no wonder meeting one is fatal.

Do you have wild brown bears in Finland and next door in sweden?

I can just imagine the feeling of dread at seeing one in the woods and he sees or smells you...dinner time

 

[ternur]

wow I never realised they were that mobile in attack mode, no wonder meeting one is fatal.

Do you have wild brown bears in Finland and next door in sweden?

I can just imagine the feeling of dread at seeing one in the woods and he sees or smells you...dinner time

I think @Kroffe farms them somewhere in Swedenland.

There are around 2100 wild bears here. For some reason they don't respect borders, they just wander from Sweden and Russia and do as they please. How rude are they.

 

[Kroffe]

I think @Kroffe farms them somewhere in Swedenland.

There are around 2100 wild bears here. For some reason they don't respect borders, they just wander from Sweden and Russia and do as they please. How rude are they.

2018 they estimated 2900 bears were chilling in our forests.
Its pretty rare seeing one.
If you are out walking in the woods, just make sure you dont sneak around like a ninja.
You dont want to sneak up on a Mama Moose or Mama Bear chilling with their offspring (animal children, not the band)

 

[mack341]

2018 they estimated 2900 bears were chilling in our forests.
Its pretty rare seeing one.
If you are out walking in the woods, just make sure you dont sneak around like a ninja.
You dont want to sneak up on a Mama Moose or Mama Bear chilling with their offspring (animal children, not the band)

might be better odds stumbling on a bear than getting a doa2 wildline

you must have roaming wolf packs in the woods as well in sweden? I had always thought it would be nice to hike/ramble in the scandi countries, having a few 2nd thoughts now, I quite like the way my limbs are currently attached to my body... any dangerous snakes or spiders to add to the list?

 

[Kroffe]

might be better odds stumbling on a bear than getting a doa2 wildline

you must have roaming wolf packs in the woods as well in sweden? I had always thought it would be nice to hike/ramble in the scandi countries, having a few 2nd thoughts now, I quite like the way my limbs are currently attached to my body... any dangerous snakes or spiders to add to the list?

Nah, its pretty chill as far as venomous animals go.
I think Vipers may be the worst we got, and they are mostly a danger for pets.
Its a bit like with bees. Harmless for most humans but if you are sensitive to that kind of venom, you might be in trouble.

And since we have a thing called Allemansrätten here, its a pretty great place to hike around in.
Basically means you can stay wherever you want, if not staying longer than a day or two.
Just leave the place as you found it and its all good.
This is for the forests ofc.. You cant go camping on someones lawn.

 

[mack341]

Kroffe, after viewing the VS thread on privacy I was having a gander on google about sweden and spying on the public, but got distracted by an article about the assassination of the Swedish prime minister Olof Palme in 1986 [which I don't believe I'd ever heard about before, maybe in passing the name rings a bell ] which has never been solved ?

Sounds like one for the conspiracy files/CM conspiracy group...or the NK thread

 

[Kroffe]

Kroffe, after viewing the VS thread on privacy I was having a gander on google about sweden and spying on the public, but got distracted by an article about the assassination of the Swedish prime minister Olof Palme in 1986 [which I don't believe I'd ever heard about before, maybe in passing the name rings a bell ] which has never been solved ?

Sounds like one for the conspiracy files/CM conspiracy group...or the NK thread

I was born 1986, and with that, this discussion is over.
We dont talk about the incident.

 

[Kroffe]

But for real tho. Palmes murder has a bunch of conspiracy theories out there.
So much not making any sense, and false confessions etc.
Its pretty crazy it has not been solved.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[mack341]

I was born 1986, and with that, this discussion is over.
We dont talk about the incident.

Fair enough, does seem it was and still is a seismic event in swedish history.

I respect your wish, my lips are sealed.

 

[Kroffe]

Fair enough, does seem it was and still is a seismic event in swedish history.

I respect your wish, my lips are sealed.

Yeah, i cant really discuss it since i dont remember the details.
I just remember hearing a voice just after i was born. The voice asked me if we should go ahead with the Palme-plan, and if i had given my go-ahead for the Nuclear experiment in Chernobyl.
I think i said yes, but im not 100% sure.
Thats why i dont speak much about the incident.

 

[sufferinsilence]

Trump's having a bout of dementia it seems:

Tell Jennifer Williams, whoever that is, to read BOTH transcripts of the presidential calls, & see the just released ststement from Ukraine. Then she should meet with the other Never Trumpers, who I don’t know & mostly never even heard of, & work out a better presidential attack!

She was a special advisor to Pence on Russia, ofcourse he knows who she is...

 

[mack341]

Yeah, i cant really discuss it since i dont remember the details.
I just remember hearing a voice just after i was born. The voice asked me if we should go ahead with the Palme-plan, and if i had given my go-ahead for the Nuclear experiment in Chernobyl.
I think i said yes, but im not 100% sure.
Thats why i dont speak much about the incident.

haha it was you, a baby assassin using stilts and a long mac!
No it's a fascinating subject, although upsetting for many in sweden. I was interested to read that apparently stieg larsson was looking into the case not long before he died of a heart attack aged only 50...hmm I don't know if that is true but some coincidence.

It would be amazing if one day all the big mystery's and unsolved questions could be answered, motive is key in cases like this and the ability/means to evade detection.

But will leave it there and return to good old donald

The impeachment trial is another farce I'm sorry to say, it's a fishing trip, let's make a charge against the president [the biden quid pro quo claim] and then we can question all these govt officials under oath and hopefully one or two will drop a bombsell revelation we can then use as the original charge was going nowhere, it's a means to an end.

 

[Harry_BKK]

haha it was you, a baby assassin using stilts and a long mac!
No it's a fascinating subject, although upsetting for many in sweden. I was interested to read that apparently stieg larsson was looking into the case not long before he died of a heart attack aged only 50...hmm I don't know if that is true but some coincidence.

It would be amazing if one day all the big mystery's and unsolved questions could be answered, motive is key in cases like this and the ability/means to evade detection.

But will leave it there and return to good old donald

The impeachment trial is another farce I'm sorry to say, it's a fishing trip, let's make a charge against the president [the biden quid pro quo claim] and then we can question all these govt officials under oath and hopefully one or two will drop a bombsell revelation we can then use as the original charge was going nowhere, it's a means to an end.

I don't think it is a farce because it is not just one call. It is the corrupt lead-up to the call and what was supposed to follow after the call. It was a pre-meditated campaign to make sure his political opponent is tarnished. That is against the US constitution no matter how much you would love your idol to be innocent.

I read an article on a site which linked to this story, would think it lays out the development in a good chronological order and also gives a little insight into how Mr T thinks he can get away with anything he does:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

While I can see that there are plenty of people who would like to see Mr T gone, he has brought this onto himself through his own doing. According to his own people, he has been warned multiple times that the conspiracy theories have been debunked many times over, yet he thought he is the smarter one (as usual ) and knows it all better. Now he will suffer the consequences for his deeds.

 

[Harry_BKK]

Trump's having a bout of dementia it seems:



She was a special advisor to Pence on Russia, ofcourse he knows who she is...

I am pretty sure we have not seen anything yet that is too shocking. But I am very sure it will get much worse as the inquiry is proceeding. Especially the language he will be using will show the real Mr T, an un-educated real-estate braggart from NY.

 

[mack341]

I don't think it is a farce because it is not just one call. It is the corrupt lead-up to the call and what was supposed to follow after the call. It was a pre-meditated campaign to make sure his political opponent is tarnished. That is against the US constitution no matter how much you would love your idol to be innocent.

I read an article on a site which linked to this story, would think it lays out the development in a good chronological order and also give a little insight into how Mr T thinks he can get away with anything he does:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

I just think the fact the focus is so much on the ukraine, neutrals in the middle will feel apathy, who cares about the ukraine honestly. And If biden and his son had done nothing wrong then trump was requesting the ukrainians to investigate hot air.

As the journalist kimberley strassel was saying on the lou dobbs show the other day [lou was away] and trump posted the clip on his twitter, where is the quo in this quid pro quo, the ukrainians gave trump nothing he gave them the aid. It is a good interview and covers the differences between this impeachment process and the ones before.

The republicans in the senate aren't going to uphold the impeachment verdict because of this hazy biden quid pro quo, so it's really about influencing the public, will they even bother watching if it carries on in the same 'he says, she says fashion' - all hearsay.

I'm not sure adam schiff is the most credible person either to be leading this, I don't know if he comes from a legal background but I think somebody with a legal mind/training would be required. If you try to block too many people from asking questions it begins to look evasive and dodgy, let the questions and answers fall on their own merit.

The whole charge, sequence of events needs to be boiled down so the public can understand it, I don't really see how bill taylor and his predecessor have moved the story on much, in which case that segment was a waste of time and you can't afford to waste the public's time with these things.

I can't disagree that trump is a real estate braggart from NY, but he is a bit more than that too.

 

[Harry_BKK]

I just think the fact the focus is so much on the ukraine, neutrals in the middle will feel apathy, who cares about the ukraine honestly. And If biden and his son had done nothing wrong then trump was requesting the ukrainians to investigate hot air.

As the journalist kimberley strassel was saying on the lou dobbs show the other day [lou was away] and trump posted the clip on his twitter, where is the quo in this quid pro quo, the ukrainians gave trump nothing he gave them the aid. It is a good interview and covers the differences between this impeachment process and the ones before.

The republicans in the senate aren't going to uphold the impeachment verdict because of this hazy biden quid pro quo, so it's really about influencing the public, will they even bother watching if it carries on in the same 'he says, she says fashion' - all hearsay.

I'm not sure adam schiff is the most credible person either to be leading this, I don't know if he comes from a legal background but I think somebody with a legal mind/training would be required. If you try to block too many people from asking questions it begins to look evasive and dodgy, let the questions and answers fall on their own merit.

The whole charge, sequence of events needs to be boiled down so the public can understand it, I don't really see how bill taylor and his predecessor have moved the story on much, in which case that segment was a waste of time and you can't afford to waste the public's time with these things.

I can't disagree that trump is a real estate braggart from NY, but he is a bit more than that too.

You do not need a "quo". The mere asking of a foreign country for help with your political campaign is totally sufficient.

And given another few days, the Ukrainians would have announced the investigations. They had already agreed (as Sondland said in his phone call). An interview with Zelensky on CNN was scheduled to happen and was then cancelled when the whistleblower report became public. So just a few more days, and you would have had the clear "quo".

Again, this is not about Biden, it is the corrupt build-up that undermines US national security in exchange for political aid in Mr T's campaign.

Schiff is an ex-US attorney from California, so I would say he is the right person for the job. Until now, he has been blocking only questions which have nothing to do with the case, e.g. Nunes and others trying to advance yet again the same conspiracy theories. Please make the effort to watch the proceedings live and don't simply believe what Lou and Fox are telling you or want you to see.

As for hearsay, well, Mr T is blocking all direct witnesses from testifying. Just like in a mob case where such tactics are common, you build a case with the resources you have. BTW, David Holmes and Jennifer Williams are direct witnesses and they corroborated the story. It will be an interesting Wednesday when Sondland testifies again as he nearly perjured himself already once.

Investigating Biden would be totally OK, however, this was not about the investigation itself. Mr T wanted simply to have the Ukrainians announce the investigations because that would have been enough to sink Biden's bid for the presidency. He doesn't care one single bit about the investigation itself and even less about corruption.

BTW, Mr T was not the one who released the aid as he claims. It was the State Deparment legal office who said that there is no legal standing in withholding it.

 

[mack341]

You do not need a "quo". The mere asking of a foreign country for help with your political campaign is totally sufficient.

And given another few days, the Ukrainians would have announced the investigations. They had already agreed (as Sondland said in his phone call). An interview with Zelensky on CNN was scheduled to happen and was then cancelled when the whistleblower report became public. So just a few more days, and you would have had the clear "quo".

Again, this is not about Biden, it is the corrupt build-up that undermines US national security in exchange for political aid in Mr T's campaign.

Schiff is an ex-US attorney from California, so I would say he is the right person for the job. Until now, he has been blocking only questions which have nothing to do with the case, e.g. Nunes and others trying to advance yet again the same conspiracy theories. Please make the effort to watch the proceedings live and don't simply believe what Lou and Fox are telling you or want you to see.

As for hearsay, well, Mr T is blocking all direct witnesses from testifying. Just like in a mob case where such tactics are common, you build a case with the resources you have. BTW, David Holmes and Jennifer Williams are direct witnesses and they corroborated the story. It will be an interesting Wednesday when Sondland testifies again as he nearly perjured himself already once.

Investigating Biden would be totally OK, however, this was not about the investigation itself. Mr T wanted simply to have the Ukrainians announce the investigations because that would have been enough to sink Biden's bid for the presidency. He doesn't care one single bit about the investigation itself and even less about corruption.

BTW, Mr T was not the one who released the aid as he claims. It was the State Deparment legal office who said that there is no legal standing in withholding it.

Right I gotcha, trump wanted the ukraine to announce an investigation had begun, that's not an angle I'd heard till now, maybe the ukrainian officials involved in the conversations etc.. will also need to testify under oath

I'm sorry but I don't think I could watch the whole hearings, I watched a bit earlier today of marie's testimony, but it all felt a little bit unexciting. I don't think she would've found trump's tweet intimidating, he slags off loads of people, she'd probably thinks he must be rattled and I'm getting even.

In a procedure or process if your chairman, as I guess schiff is, has already completely made up their mind, which he has clearly from before day 1...he will try to orchestrate the proceedings to get the outcome he wants, I don't think that is exactly compatible with having a fair or balanced hearing.

Surely even if you despise trump you must be able to see the shortcomings of the way this process has been handled so far, would anyone want to be investigated this way, it looks like a kangaroo, political court.

 

[Harry_BKK]

Right I gotcha, trump wanted the ukraine to announce an investigation had begun, that's not an angle I'd heard till now, maybe the ukrainian officials involved in the conversations etc.. will also need to testify under oath

I'm sorry but I don't think I could watch the whole hearings, I watched a bit earlier today of marie's testimony, but it all felt a little bit unexciting. I don't think she would've found trump's tweet intimidating, he slags off loads of people, she'd probably thinks he must be rattled and I'm getting even.

In a procedure or process if your chairman, as I guess schiff is, has already completely made up their mind, which he has clearly from before day 1...he will try to orchestrate the proceedings to get the outcome he wants, I don't think that is exactly compatible with having a fair or balanced hearing.

Surely even if you despise trump you must be able to see the shortcomings of the way this process has been handled so far, would anyone want to be investigated this way, it looks like a kangaroo, political court.

I'll quote Moscow Mitch: "I will do everything I can so Obama will be a 1-term president." ......Geez mack, take your blinders off!

And no, the Ukrainians do not have to testify. It is plainly to establish whether Mr T tried to engage a foreign power to help with his political campaign. Whether the Ukrainians did or not, does not matter. Trying to rob a bank is a crime even if it fails.

FYI, impeachment in the House is a political process, not a criminal trial.

The trial will come in the Senate.

The Republicans had no issues which such a process when they impeached Clinton or investigated Hillary for that matter. You can watch some of the hearings from Clinton's impeachment and you will realize that it was in no way different.

The majority in the House is driving the process in the direction they want. It is how the framers of the constitution thought it would be, that is why you have a trial in the Senate where you will need a 2/3 majority.

If this is a kangaroo court, what was Hillary's countless Benghazi investigations or Clinton's impeachment in your view? BTW, just for FYI. The Republican majority cut the funding for embassies years before Benghazi happened and then tried to blame Hillary and Obama for not doing enough.

 

[sufferinsilence]

Right I gotcha, trump wanted the ukraine to announce an investigation had begun, that's not an angle I'd heard till now, maybe the ukrainian officials involved in the conversations etc.. will also need to testify under oath

I'm sorry but I don't think I could watch the whole hearings, I watched a bit earlier today of marie's testimony, but it all felt a little bit unexciting. I don't think she would've found trump's tweet intimidating, he slags off loads of people, she'd probably thinks he must be rattled and I'm getting even.

In a procedure or process if your chairman, as I guess schiff is, has already completely made up their mind, which he has clearly from before day 1...he will try to orchestrate the proceedings to get the outcome he wants, I don't think that is exactly compatible with having a fair or balanced hearing.

Surely even if you despise trump you must be able to see the shortcomings of the way this process has been handled so far, would anyone want to be investigated this way, it looks like a kangaroo, political court.

And yet they're using the rules the republican majority have approved in 2015.

Is it fair and balanced? Probably not, because it's ALL politically motivated. But so was the impeachment of Bill Clinton by the republicans. Would it be fair and balanced if a judge appointed by one of the former presidents or by president Trump was chairman? Probably not. That's the problem of the American system, especially in these very partisan times where politicians from both sides of the aisle are just trying to push their agenda instead of trying to do what's best for the people they serve.

And when it goes to the Senate the Chief Justice of the United States will be presiding, who was nominated by George W. Bush.