The Trump Impeachment

[Brian Peacock]

Mr Trump can't remember ever having a phone call with the Ukraine president. So that clears that up.




But he can remember seeing 2000 people cheering when the twin towers came down.

[Scot Dutchy]

Selected amnesia?

[Sean Hayden]

Yes, I have been referring to the behavior of Republicans, but it is apparently the nature of the hearing which allows them to behave this way. I think we can at least approach the question of whether or not the method which allows this behavior is best. Even assuming there are many benefits to this particular approach, and I can see several, it may be possible that it is not best, or that it is not being best utilized.

I agree that this is far from an ideal way to deal with malfeasance by the executive. However, there has to be a way for those who would defend the accused to have their voice heard. If those defenders choose (or in this case, are forced*) to depend entirely on making noise, spouting baseless nonsense, and obstructing, so be it.

*Since there is no disputing the plain fact that Trump used the power of his office and his control over lawfully allocated taxpayer funding to bring pressure to bear on a foreign government for his own personal political benefit.

For example, you call it a political process and therefore by definition 'political', but it is specifically the aspect of politics which most resembles campaigning that is the problem.

In the sense that it's not a criminal justice process, and the Constitution requires that it be carried out by politicians in a political setting, yes.

A politician has more to do than win reelection, surely? Leave the campaigning outside gentleman: seems like a perfectly reasonable demand in my opinion.

Ensuring compliance with that perfectly reasonable demand is problematic. I think it would require amending the Constitution, which as you well know it an extremely daunting prospect. Given that we're talking about politicians here, I don't see them agreeing to creating rules for themselves that limit their ability to politicize such an important function.

Their failure to do so, and our inability to make them do so speaks to me of a larger problem in our system than even Trump. Perhaps they should all be sent home to think about it...

It's frustrating, but it's what we have to work with, and sending them home isn't going to produce any results. They're not risking losing office by behaving the way that they are. Partisan hacks like Jim Jordan get reelected regularly.

Can we put them in a corner then, or march them up and down the square, or wait, I know, let's require them to wear a uniform that signifies their silliness?

[Tero]

0B8712A3-8474-4F0A-924B-1F8462D01D82.jpeg (88.7 KiB) Viewed 2140 times

[Tero]

C5D65FE0-C6C2-444C-9873-35A937941936.jpeg (103.83 KiB) Viewed 2119 times

Our absolute President

[Tero]

WASHINGTON—Appearing before the House Intelligence Committee at Friday’s impeachment hearing, former ambassador Marie Yovanovitch testified that she was recalled from her post so a corrupt back channel could run U.S. policy in Ukraine but gets it if no one cares about anything anymore. “President Trump and his allies conducted a smear campaign against me knowing I would refuse to participate in advancing illegal activities on their behalf, though I totally understand if you don’t give a shit because that’s just the way things work now and nothing matters,” said Yovanovitch, who stated that while she found Trump’s actions “shocking” and “unprecedented,” lawmakers were free to cut her off at any time so that they could all go back to wallowing in the sense of meaninglessness that has come to permeate American life. “This has never really happened in the history of the modern presidency, but I can sympathize if you’re shrugging it off—I’m shrugging it off, too. Even if we do prove the president is guilty of high crimes, so what? It’s not like there are rules anymore. Frankly, I was surprised that I was called to testify at all.” At press time, Yovanovitch told the committee that if anyone wanted to join her, she was heading to a bar to drink until she couldn’t feel anything anymore.
https://politics.theonion.com/yovanovit ... 1839895020

[pErvinalia]

That's sounds legit.

[L'Emmerdeur]

Really, Trump was intent on investigating corruption in Ukraine. I don't care what anybody says.

When the call was over [US diplomatic aide], Holmes testifies, he asked Sondland if it’s true Trump didn’t “give a s–t about Ukraine.”

Sondland, per Holmes “agreed that the President did not ‘give a s–t about Ukraine.'” And then this happened:

I asked why not, and Ambassador Sondland stated that the President only cares about “big stuff.” I noted that there was “big stuff” going on in Ukraine, like a war with Russia, and Ambassador Sondland replied that he means “big stuff” that benefits the President, like the “Biden investigation” that Mr. Giuliani was pushing.

[source]

[L'Emmerdeur]

blerg

[Scot Dutchy]

Marie Yovanovitch receives standing ovation after Trump attacks her during impeachment testimony

Marie Yovanovitch received a standing ovation following her public testimony in Donald Trump’s impeachment inquiry, in which the ousted ambassador to Ukraine was attacked by the president in a series of controversial tweets.

The audience stood and cheered for the career diplomat as House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff ordered the meeting to a close, marking a rare moment in American politics. Citizens who sit in on congressional hearings are typically instructed to remain silent and respect decorum by abstaining from any audible outbursts.

Ms Yovanovitch testified for about five hours on Friday, telling investigators about her ouster in May at Mr Trump’s direction and how she felt as she found out that he had criticised her in a July phone call with Ukraine’s president.

As she spoke, Mr Trump tweeted: “Everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad.”

“It is a US President’s absolute right to appoint ambassadors”, he added.

Ms Yovanovitch was then asked in real time about the president’s tweets. She told Mr Schiff such attacks from the president were “intimidating” and that she did not understand why he would falsely smear her reputation.

Democrats are investigating Mr Trump’s dealings with Ukraine and a shadow foreign policy there led by his personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani. They said that Ms Yovanovitch’s removal set the stage for the president’s appeals to Ukraine’s leader to investigate Democrats.

[Tero]

The bragging that Trump claims proves Biden guilt. Play from 1 minute on. Hillary's 33 000 emails are in Ukraine!

[Tero]

In a sworn affidavit dated 4 September 2019 for a European court, Shokin testified that "On several occasions President Poroshenko asked me to have a look at the criminal case against Burisma and consider the possibility of winding down the investigative actions in respect of this company, but I refused to close this investigation."[30] Shokin wrote the affidavit in support of Ukrainian oligarch Dmytro Firtash.[31] John Herbst, the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine during the George W. Bush administration, said that Shokin's support of Firtash, who had been arrested for bribery in 2014, undercuts Shokin's claims to be motivated by transparency.[32][33] "Firtash is arguably the most odious, or one of the most odious oligarchs in Ukraine," according to Herbst.[32]

Shokin claimed in May 2019 that he had been investigating Burisma Holdings.[13][34][35] However, Vitaly Kasko, who had been Shokin's deputy overseeing international cooperation before resigning in February 2016 citing corruption in the office, provided documents to Bloomberg News indicating that under Shokin, the investigation into Burisma had been dormant.[36][37] Also, the investigation into Burisma only pertained to events happening before Hunter Biden joined the company.[38]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Shokin

[Tero]

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/11/16/poli ... index.html
6
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell spoke to Trump about the call and said, "That was the most innocent phone call that I've read." (McConnell said he doesn't recall speaking to Trump about the call. His public statement on the call was far less effusive than Trump's description.)

7. People are not talking about the call anymore. (People continue to talk about the call, a central focus of the impeachment inquiry.)

[Seabass]

WATCH: Amb. Yovanovitch’s full opening statement | Trump impeachment hearings

[Seabass]

And yet 40% of Americans still believe that the fat, orange one at the end is innocent...