A very bad impeachment hearings day for Donald Trump

[macska]

Witnesses take a toll on Trump’s impeachment defenses

Analysis: Four witnesses delivered testimony that was deeply damaging to Trump's remaining defenses against allegations that he was personally involved in an arms-for-investigations deal.

www.nbcnews.com

Now, very bad or very good is a matter of opinion. The top aides called the phone call “unusual” and “inappropriate”. They were only partially correct. It was “inappropriate”, but NOT “unusual”.

 

[humbleseeker]

Somebody’s still trying to drum up some missing “pizazz”

 

[HarryStotle]

Nunes provides a litany of all the provably false claims that have been made in the media to date. But do go on taking this nonsense to be the unfailing truth.

You do realize that the “anonymous” whistleblower can’t be named by Schiff because this anonymous fellow is liable to prosecution for leaking information critical to national security if his identity were to be revealed, which is why it hasn’t and Schiff has tied to “disappear” his identity?

But do go on repeating what you are told.

 

[HarryStotle]

For anyone interested in researched facts rather than “pizzazz”…

https://johnsolomonreports.com/debu...-myths-about-biden-and-election-interference/

 

[ProVobis]

Nunes has an audience of one.

 

[HarryStotle]

Nunes has an audience of one.

You have just described the key problem for the truth these days – who controls the audience.

 

[Dr_Meinheimer]

Actually, it was a great day. Here is testimony from Volker and Morrison.

Morrison, Volker undercut claims of 'quid pro quo,' 'bribery' and 'cover-up' in pivotal day of testimony

Republicans sounded a celebratory note as House Democrats' impeachment inquiry wrapped up another day of public hearings Tuesday evening, saying the day's witnesses had served only to highlight fundamental problems in the case against President Trump.

www.foxnews.com

Republicans sounded a celebratory note as House Democrats’ impeachment inquiry wrapped up another day of public hearings Tuesday evening, saying the day’s witnesses had served only to highlight fundamental problems in the case against President Trump.

“Did anyone ever ask you to bribe or extort anyone at any time during your time in the White House?" House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Devin Nunes, R-Calif., asked at one point in Tuesday’s afternoon hearing.

Former National Security Council (NSC) aide Tim Morrison: “No.”

Former U.S. Special Representative for Ukraine Kurt Volker: “No."

Later, Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., hit the same notes in asking the witnesses about Trump’s fateful July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky: “Mr. Morrison, you were on that call, and there was no quid pro quo, correct? No bribery? No extortion?”

“Correct,” Morrison replied in response to each question.

“And, Ambassador Volker, I presume you got a readout of the call. … Was there any reference to withholding aid? Any reference to bribery? Any reference to quid pro quo? Any reference to extortion?”

“No, there was not,” Volker replied, again and again.

The answers underscored a problem facing House Democrats as their impeachment inquiry continued into its second week of public hearings: As more witnesses have testified, more soundbites have emerged that may help Republicans and the Trump campaign argue that the proceedings were politically motivated theater, long in the works and foreshadowed openly by Democrats for months, if not years.

Morrison, in another key moment, testified Tuesday afternoon that he understood the transcript of Trump’s call with Ukraine’s leader wound up on a highly secured and classified computer system due to an “administrative error” – not, as Democrats have alleged, because the president wanted to hide his conversation.

If you don’t like Fox News, just watch the testimony yourself. A great day!

 

[HarryStotle]

Now, very bad or very good is a matter of opinion.

A good analysis of how journalistic standards are being compromised by opinion, and even worse, varying standards.

Analysis: Media's Biden Standard of 'No Evidence' Is a Double Standard | RealClearInvestigations

For three years many of journalisms most prestigious news outlets won acclaim for making and repeating claims President Trump and his team had colluded with Russia to steal the 2016 election. No...

www.realclearinvestigations.com

 

[mrad25]

A very bad 3 years for Democrats. Game Plan to eliminate Trump

Plan A. Collude with Hillary, GPS and the Russians to win the election.
Plan B. Sway the Electoral College votes
Plan C. Overturn the Election results with recounts. (Recounts were abandoned when they resulted in more votes for Trump and exposing democrat voter fraud)
Plan D. Nullify the election by framing Trump with Russian collusion
Plan E. Have the Deep State take Trump out using the 25th Amendment
Plan F. Impeach Trump for firing Comey
Plan G=String (Stormey Daniels). Impeach Trump for Campaign Finance violations
Plan H. Push Back: “If you see anybody from that cabinet…get in their face”
Plan I. Impeach Trump for Obstruction of Justice
Plan J. Demonize Trump’s S.C. Justice nominee
Plan K. Impeach Trump for Money Laundering
Plan L. Impeach Trump for Treason
Plan M. Impeach Trump for revoking security clearances of people no longer in the government.
Plan N. Obstruct everything Trump attempts to do in congress
Plan O. Impeach Trump for violation of the Emoluments Clause
Plan P. Throw tantrum over Trump’s tax returns we will never see
Plan Q. Give sixteen year olds the vote
Plan R. Eliminate the Electoral College
Plan S. Let imprisoned convicts vote
plan T. Use pictures of illegal alien children caged by 0bama and blame Trump
Plan U. Mueller Report findings…
Plan V. Mueller’s 9 minute summary of Weismann’s 400 pg op-ed
Plan W. Impeach Trump for " racist" Tweet “if you don’t like it here, go home”
Plan X. Mueller’s testimony before Congress
Plan Y. Moscow Trump Tower
Plan Z. Tie Bill’s buddy Epstein to Trump
Plan AA. Exclude Trump from Kaliforia’s Primary Ballot
Plan AB. Convince voters we are headed into a recession
Plan AC. Recruit Establishment Never-Trumpers to run against him
Plan AD. Dox Trump supporters
Plan AE. Conspire with Silicon Valley to shut down any and all Conservatives
Plan AF. Change the whistle blower rules so literally anyone can fabricate a fake story based on hearsay
Plan AG. Change the House Rules on Impeachment as needed
Plan AH. Impeach Trump for pulling out of Syria after the Stated Mission of eradicating ISIS was successfully concluded
Plan AI. Impeach Trump for not informing leak prone democrats before taking out the ISIS leader and his successor
Plan AJ. Accuse Trump of a cover-up because the Trump/Zelenskiy transcript was stored on a secure system Wait, what?
Plan AK. Impeach Trump for Quid Pro Quo
no wait, make that Bribery,
Extortion
intimidating tweets
Plan AL. Since Dems know they can’t impeach, have a meaningless show trial to keep the word “impeachment” in the news. And coach the witnesses on their hearsay evidence.

 

[7_Sorrows]

I actually heard it was not a good day for the democrats.

 

[Rau]

I’m not an American and don’t live in the US. So reporting of US news tends to be pretty detached and “matter of fact”. With that said - the overall sense we get of Mr Trump suggests he is far more likely to be in the wrong than the right on this issue and others

 

[DIERM]

Plan AL. Since Dems know they can’t impeach, have a meaningless show trial to keep the word “impeachment” in the news. And coach the witnesses on their hearsay evidence.

Once we consider what the definition of “impeachment” is, this point falls apart.

Impeachment only requires a majority vote in the House of Representatives to move forward to trial in the Senate. That vote is impeachment.

So, in contrast to your statement, the Dems know quite well they CAN impeach.

Words matter.

Perhaps what you mean is that the Dems may not be able to convict at the Senate trial.

 

[ProVobis]

Are you saying it’s not first-hand information?

 

[Maximus1]

I think a quid pro quo is very bad in this case because it raises the ambit of bribery

 

[ProVobis]

A very bad 3 years for Democrats.

37 indictments with several Trump aides serving jail time isn’t a total loss. Throw in Manafort’s apartments and you have a little profit in there too.

 

[ProVobis]

Yes but their answer seems to be “So what?”

 

[Rau]

37 indictments with several Trump aides serving jail time isn’t a total loss. Throw in Manafort’s apartments and you have a little profit in there too.

I suppose in combative politics, these are chalked up to success for the Dems, but first and foremost, they are “fails” for the government party (Republicans).

 

[Maximus1]

So what says everything

 

[niceatheist]

I actually heard it was not a good day for the democrats.

Then you haven’t watched. Sondland’s testimony is definitely damaging.

 

[MikeInVA]

You do realize that the “anonymous” whistleblower can’t be named by Schiff because this anonymous fellow is liable to prosecution for leaking information critical to national security if his identity were to be revealed, which is why it hasn’t and Schiff has tied to “disappear” his identity?

No. whistleblowers do not need to be anonymous, they have legal protection against retaliation. People who leak sensitive information deserve to be prosecuted, and those who knowingly impede that process should also be prosecuted. And prosecuted in a legal court for committing actual crimes, not in some kangaroo court like we’re seeing in Congress right now.