Trump

Anything not relating to the X-Universe games (general tech talk, other games...) belongs here. Please read the rules before posting.

Moderator: Moderators for English X Forum

Vertigo 7
Posts: 819
Joined: Fri, 14. Jan 11, 18:30
x4

Re: Trump

Post by Vertigo 7 » Wed, 4. Dec 19, 15:50

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6Brau5 ... e=youtu.be

House Judiciary hearings beginning shortly.
"If we had confidence the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so. We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime." - Robert Muller, May 29, 2019

"Complete and total exoneration" - Donald Trump, March 24, 2019

Vertigo 7
Posts: 819
Joined: Fri, 14. Jan 11, 18:30
x4

Re: Trump

Post by Vertigo 7 » Wed, 4. Dec 19, 17:29

https://www.rawstory.com/2019/12/trump- ... oes-viral/

lol awwwww... Trumpypoo got his wittle feelings hurt.
"If we had confidence the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so. We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime." - Robert Muller, May 29, 2019

"Complete and total exoneration" - Donald Trump, March 24, 2019

RegisterMe
Posts: 1494
Joined: Sun, 14. Oct 07, 17:47
x4

Re: Trump

Post by RegisterMe » Wed, 4. Dec 19, 17:40

I'm watching the Judicial hearing at the moment. The start is painfully embarrassing :(.

EDIT: Here's a link - https://www.c-span.org/video/?466833-1/ ... EkQAvD_BwE
Gavrushka wrote:The problem with 'freedom of speech' is it makes wackos think they have something of value to say.

*WE WANT THE amtct BACK*
Rapier's search

Vertigo 7
Posts: 819
Joined: Fri, 14. Jan 11, 18:30
x4

Re: Trump

Post by Vertigo 7 » Wed, 4. Dec 19, 19:24

Taking bets that Gym Jordan is gonna parrot the Ukraine Russian narrative at 140MPH
"If we had confidence the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so. We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime." - Robert Muller, May 29, 2019

"Complete and total exoneration" - Donald Trump, March 24, 2019

RegisterMe
Posts: 1494
Joined: Sun, 14. Oct 07, 17:47
x4

Re: Trump

Post by RegisterMe » Wed, 4. Dec 19, 20:00

If Jordan is sensible he'll keep his mouth shut. The ranking Republican, counsel for the Republicans and Turley are putting up a much more impressive effort than any of the Republicans did in the Intelligence Committee hearings.
Gavrushka wrote:The problem with 'freedom of speech' is it makes wackos think they have something of value to say.

*WE WANT THE amtct BACK*
Rapier's search

Vertigo 7
Posts: 819
Joined: Fri, 14. Jan 11, 18:30
x4

Re: Trump

Post by Vertigo 7 » Wed, 4. Dec 19, 20:09

RegisterMe wrote:
Wed, 4. Dec 19, 20:00
If Jordan is sensible he'll keep his mouth shut. The ranking Republican, counsel for the Republicans and Turley are putting up a much more impressive effort than any of the Republicans did in the Intelligence Committee hearings.
Yeah, I agree. He has me pretty well convinced they need to slow down and make sure they get this right. Impeachment still must go forward, but I do want them to prove their case. Furthermore, I agree with Turley that the courts need to settle the issue of subpoenas.
"If we had confidence the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so. We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime." - Robert Muller, May 29, 2019

"Complete and total exoneration" - Donald Trump, March 24, 2019

Vertigo 7
Posts: 819
Joined: Fri, 14. Jan 11, 18:30
x4

Re: Trump

Post by Vertigo 7 » Thu, 5. Dec 19, 00:16

Ehh, okay I've changed my mind. Impeach for obstruction!
"If we had confidence the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so. We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime." - Robert Muller, May 29, 2019

"Complete and total exoneration" - Donald Trump, March 24, 2019

User avatar
felter
Posts: 490
Joined: Sat, 9. Nov 02, 19:13
xr

Re: Trump

Post by felter » Thu, 5. Dec 19, 01:24

What made you change your mind and why suddenly for obstruction, especially seeing as he has been doing that since moving into the Whitehouse.
I'm not saying he is a Russian asset, I'm saying he sat on his asset when he was supposed to be confronting Putin.
He will not be re-elected. Without a wall, he will only be remembered as a small cartoon figure who briefly inflamed and amused the rabble.

RegisterMe
Posts: 1494
Joined: Sun, 14. Oct 07, 17:47
x4

Re: Trump

Post by RegisterMe » Thu, 5. Dec 19, 01:28

I know the question was directed at me but, more broadly.... eh, I think Trump is bang to rights. At the same time I have some sympathy for one of the Republican positions that basically runs along the lines of "hey but we weren't allowed to call our witnesses".

I'd actually like to hear from them too.

But not if the White House prevents its staff (etc) from testifying either.

And I understand the Dem position, which is basically "why let them call people who are just going to throw already debunked mud in the air"?
Gavrushka wrote:The problem with 'freedom of speech' is it makes wackos think they have something of value to say.

*WE WANT THE amtct BACK*
Rapier's search

RegisterMe
Posts: 1494
Joined: Sun, 14. Oct 07, 17:47
x4

Re: Trump

Post by RegisterMe » Thu, 5. Dec 19, 01:36

Just stumbled on this - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bu3Fum2ozwI

Not really sure how to classify it but it's interesting nonetheless. Former Deputy Director of the NSA talking about her interaction with Trump.
Gavrushka wrote:The problem with 'freedom of speech' is it makes wackos think they have something of value to say.

*WE WANT THE amtct BACK*
Rapier's search

Vertigo 7
Posts: 819
Joined: Fri, 14. Jan 11, 18:30
x4

Re: Trump

Post by Vertigo 7 » Thu, 5. Dec 19, 02:55

felter wrote:
Thu, 5. Dec 19, 01:24
What made you change your mind and why suddenly for obstruction, especially seeing as he has been doing that since moving into the Whitehouse.
Well, I was initially swayed on slowing impeachment down because Turley made a good argument for allowing the courts to settle the issues of the subpoenas, knowing full well the courts will never say congress can't issue subpoenas to the executive branch. However, as the supreme court has ruled that congress is duly authorized to issue subpoenas to the executive branch in the past, I consider the issue settled. But also obstruction isn't the only article of impeachment that should be passed. However they want to word his abuse of office, be it bribery, extortion, or simply abuse of office, that too.

I mean, they have him dead to rights, no matter how you slice it. It's really an issue of convincing people. But in all fairness, that matters more for the trial than it does for the house vote, especially if the WH isn't going to participate in the house judiciary hearings. Everything the house is doing is an investigation, so Trump refusing the house is only adding more counts of obstruction. Let em hang himself.

I will point out that the democrats have shot themselves in the foot on a couple of issues. The few times they've spoken out for impeachment prior to the conclusion of the Muller Report isn't doing them any favors. It does give the appearance of prejudgement, but on the same coin, the republicans are just as guilty of that, not that it makes either one of them right. Also, they could allow Schiff to testify... throw the republicans a bone. It's not like Schiff can offer anything more than his arguments he's already made. If this report on what little interaction Schiff had with the whistle blower is accurate, then there's no issue in Schiff giving testimony that would hurt the democrats. If they have any opportunities to take the wind out of the sails of the Trumpanzies, they should capitalize on it, imo. Of course, if Schiff does testify, Trump is gonna accuse him of perjury. I dunno, seems like an easy win for democrats.
"If we had confidence the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so. We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime." - Robert Muller, May 29, 2019

"Complete and total exoneration" - Donald Trump, March 24, 2019

RegisterMe
Posts: 1494
Joined: Sun, 14. Oct 07, 17:47
x4

Re: Trump

Post by RegisterMe » Thu, 5. Dec 19, 03:35

Schiff "not testifying" could be a sublimely beautiful hook, couldn't it.

I'm absolutely not predicting this but posit a moment where Schiff / the Dems go.... "oh well, since you asked so nicely...", could be... entertaining.

Certainly, given what I've seen to date of the various hearings, he would know how to comport himself. I'd pay good money to see a Nunes and / or Jordan ring'a'ding v Schiff.
Gavrushka wrote:The problem with 'freedom of speech' is it makes wackos think they have something of value to say.

*WE WANT THE amtct BACK*
Rapier's search

RegisterMe
Posts: 1494
Joined: Sun, 14. Oct 07, 17:47
x4

Re: Trump

Post by RegisterMe » Thu, 5. Dec 19, 03:49

Jump to 7:30ish but there's some interesting commentary about the timing of the whole thing:-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3pxN091Ejc
Gavrushka wrote:The problem with 'freedom of speech' is it makes wackos think they have something of value to say.

*WE WANT THE amtct BACK*
Rapier's search

User avatar
Tycow
Posts: 867
Joined: Wed, 6. Nov 02, 21:31
x4

Re: Trump

Post by Tycow » Thu, 5. Dec 19, 17:08

Trump impeachment to go ahead - House Speaker Nancy Pelosi - BBC News

Can someone explain the significance of this?

Why would they come right out with it, essentially going around the Judicial hearings...? Do you think they've had new information, or some Republican senators have indicated they would support impeachment?

Curious.

Vertigo 7
Posts: 819
Joined: Fri, 14. Jan 11, 18:30
x4

Re: Trump

Post by Vertigo 7 » Thu, 5. Dec 19, 18:43

No, I think it's more that she's telling everyone that she's moving forward with the impeachment amid some speculation that the house would move to censure Trump instead of impeaching. There's still hearings to come and the house will remain in session over the holiday break to have the articles of impeachment written and possibly voted on before congress is back in session after the break.

I don't think the house republicans are going to change their tune at all, and the WH is going to continue to obstruct so I don't know what more the house is going to be able to accomplish. I have a feeling that the judicial hearing yesterday was to get a sense from constitutional law experts where things currently stand should they move forward with what they have, if they had grounds to do so, rather, which it seems they do.
"If we had confidence the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so. We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime." - Robert Muller, May 29, 2019

"Complete and total exoneration" - Donald Trump, March 24, 2019

Post Reply

Return to “Off Topic English”