Kansas Crimson

ousdahl wrote: ↑Sun Dec 15, 2019 8:38 pm Is McConnell suuure he wants to have those guys talking?

Yessir.

Where’s the actual record of the call in all this?

Is that subject to subpoena, or yet another executive privilege?

Should it not be exhibit 1 in the trial evidence? Would hearing it not clear up an awful lot in a hurry?

I recall it was, at the direction of the president, stashed in some top secret archive, in a breach of normal protocol.

Does it even still exist?

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Sun Dec 15, 2019 8:07 pm That would be fun.

Schumer gets his witnesses, but only if McConnell gets his -- including, presumably, Clapper, Brennan, VPOTUS Biden, Whistle T. Blower, Christopher Steele, Bruce and Nellie Ohr....

And those people were involved in the extortion of Ukraine how?

Geezer wrote: ↑Sun Dec 15, 2019 10:27 pm

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Sun Dec 15, 2019 8:07 pm That would be fun.

Schumer gets his witnesses, but only if McConnell gets his -- including, presumably, Clapper, Brennan, VPOTUS Biden, Whistle T. Blower, Christopher Steele, Bruce and Nellie Ohr....

And those people were involved in the extortion of Ukraine how?

If you're going to accuse the president of undermining foreign policy for personal ends, it's necessary to determine whether or not those ends were, indeed, entirely personal.

Not that complicated. Doesn't make any difference why he did it. The fact that he did it was an abuse of power.

Geezer wrote: ↑Sun Dec 15, 2019 10:42 pm Not that complicated. Doesn't make any difference why he did it. The fact that he did it was an abuse of power.

You're wrong, of course.

But what else is new?

Wrong again

Nope.

ALL foreign policy is a series of quid pro quo exchanges. What differentiates the good from the bad is the intention and the aims.

We give you foreign aid, and in return, you share intelligence and serve as a check against our enemy is an example of a legitimate quid pro quo that happens every year, hundreds of times over.

We give you foreign aid, and in return, you investigate my political opponent is an example of an illegitimate quid pro quo -- UNLESS, it can be shown that investigating the political opponent also serves the national interest, which is what the Trump team should be trying to do (although that's not exactly an easy task).

Even if the request to investigate Biden was legit, what did Rudy and Barr have to do with it?

ousdahl wrote: ↑Sun Dec 15, 2019 11:18 pm Even if the request to investigate Biden was legit, what did Rudy and Barr have to do with it?

As I said, proving it was legit would be extremely difficult, not the least because POTUS and his crazy TV lawyer keep reminding us how fucking stupid and corrupt they are.

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Sun Dec 15, 2019 7:10 pm

zsn wrote: ↑Sun Dec 15, 2019 12:04 pm This time the evidence is in plain sight. Multiple people can and have corroborated malfeasance. People who can corroborate the corroboration have been prevented from corroborating. Willful blindness raw political calculation the operating principle. Integrity and National Interest...not so much

When your “evidence” begins with “I was told,” I was under the impression,” or “I believed,” you get the cluster hump you currently have.

I guess you CAN fool some of the people all of the time.

zsn wrote: ↑Mon Dec 16, 2019 2:53 am

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Sun Dec 15, 2019 7:10 pm

zsn wrote: ↑Sun Dec 15, 2019 12:04 pm This time the evidence is in plain sight. Multiple people can and have corroborated malfeasance. People who can corroborate the corroboration have been prevented from corroborating. Willful blindness raw political calculation the operating principle. Integrity and National Interest...not so much

When your “evidence” begins with “I was told,” I was under the impression,” or “I believed,” you get the cluster hump you currently have.

I guess you CAN fool some of the people all of the time.

Don’t feel too bad. You’re not alone in being fooled. Desperation can twist the mind in odd ways.

the house dems that hail from red districts, and who are putting their careers on the line by supporting impeachment, have given me a bit of faith in (at least some of) our elected officials

Dear Nancy Letter

TraditionKU wrote: ↑Tue Dec 17, 2019 11:47 am the house dems that hail from red districts, and who are putting their careers on the line by supporting impeachment, have given me a bit of faith in (at least some of) our elected officials

^^^

It's been a nice surprise to see the vast majority of them decide do the right thing even if it costs them their office.

i couldn’t even make it past page 3

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Sun Dec 15, 2019 11:34 pm

ousdahl wrote: ↑Sun Dec 15, 2019 11:18 pm Even if the request to investigate Biden was legit, what did Rudy and Barr have to do with it?

As I said, proving it was legit would be extremely difficult, not the least because POTUS and his crazy TV lawyer keep reminding us how fucking stupid and corrupt they are.

What's amazing is that Trump is a spoiled brat moron who has never had to fend for himself because he was born at home plate. His behavior is just the bullying that he's done his entire life and he doesn't really know any better, but Giuliani has been in politics for a very, very long time and his whole operating procedure on this is just weird. Not even corrupt or mobbed up or any of the other labels, just weird.

did anyone mention rudy’s phone call to the new york times monday night?