Official President Trump Impeachment Inquiry Thread

[TimmySmith 2,782]

Worse than the fact it's hearsay is the fact that ALLthe testimony yesterday was from the texts and the transcript which have been public knowledge for weeks and the left called them damning bombshells. Sadly proves the average lefty really isn't paying attention to any facts. The right is simply more informed.

[Baker Boy 1,704]

On Day 1 of the public impeachment inquiry hearings into President Trump, Democrats succeeded in more directly connecting Trump to alleged misconduct related to Ukraine while Republicans continued to cry foul.

https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2019-11-14/impeachment-trump-william-taylor-george-kent-newsletter

[TimmySmith 2,782]

3 minutes ago, Baker Boy said:

On Day 1 of the public impeachment inquiry hearings into President Trump, Democrats succeeded in more directly connecting Trump to alleged misconduct related to Ukraine while Republicans continued to cry foul.

https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2019-11-14/impeachment-trump-william-taylor-george-kent-newsletter

Nameless faceless aides overhearing historic phone conversations.  The foundation of neo fascist inquisitions.   

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

2 minutes ago, TimmySmith said:

Nameless faceless aides overhearing historic phone conversations.  The foundation of neo fascist inquisitions.   

Reminds me of this..........

 

[nzoner 937]

18 hours ago, KSB2424 said:

Jim Jordan: You didn’t listen in on President Trump & Zelensky’s call?

Taylor: I did not.

Jordan: You’ve never talked with Chief of Staff Mulvaney?

Taylor: I never did.

Jordan: You’ve never met the President?

Taylor: That’s correct.

Jordan: And you’re their star witness.

Didn't see the video posted,it's well worth a watch if anyone hasn't seen it

 

[Mr. Hand 482]

10 minutes ago, Filthy Fernadez said:

Reminds me of this..........

 

Exactly what is going on.

[IGotWorms 4,059]

4 hours ago, 5-Points said:

hearsay

[ˈhirˌsā]

NOUN

information received from other people that one cannot adequately substantiate; rumor.

"according to hearsay, Bob had managed to break his arm"

synonyms:

rumor · gossip · tittle-tattle · tattle · idle chatter · 

[more]

law

the report of another person's words by a witness, which is usually disallowed as evidence in a court of law.

 

See that last part there? Granted, this isn't a court of law but this whole case hinges on what somebody says they heard somebody else say. Rock solid evidence right there.

 

If Taylor’s staffer testifies as to what he heard Trump say, that ain’t hearsay. For a number of reasons. First it’d be a statement of a party-opponent which is not hearsay. Second it probably wouldn’t be offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted—the point of relevancy is that Trump said it, not whether what Trump said is ultimately true. Third even if it was hearsay there are probably exceptions like statements against interest and maybe present sense impression.

Legally, it ain’t hearsay. I’m not really sure any of it is since most of this stuff isn’t for the truth of the matter asserted. It’s all about who knew and intended what, when. Yes I know this is all complicated to a non-fake lawyer and you won’t understand most of it and will act like I’m crazy. Whatever.

[IGotWorms 4,059]

3 hours ago, TimmySmith said:

Worse than the fact it's hearsay is the fact that ALLthe testimony yesterday was from the texts and the transcript which have been public knowledge for weeks and the left called them damning bombshells. Sadly proves the average lefty really isn't paying attention to any facts. The right is simply more informed.

Not true. The trump/Sondland phone call was new and potentially critical. But also that’s the way this process occurs. You use depositions to learn the facts then testimony to present them. The very idea is that by the time you present your case you aren’t surprised by much. The difference here is usually the deposition transcripts aren’t publicly released ahead of time and known by the “jury” (us, in this instance).

[IGotWorms 4,059]

You know, I kinda like Jim Jordan and enjoy his schtick, and I have to admit he is effective. But, let’s not forget this is the guy that looked the other way on child sexual abuse at Ohio State. Basically the exact same grave misdeed for which Joe Paterno was burned at the stake. Team doctor was sexually abusing wrestlers and Jim Jordan said “that’s just Strauss.” Yeah it was a long time ago but it’s concerning

[drobeski 3,061]

4 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

You know, I kinda like Jim Jordan and enjoy his schtick, and I have to admit he is effective. But, let’s not forget this is the guy that looked the other way on child sexual abuse at Ohio State. Basically the exact same grave misdeed for which Joe Paterno was burned at the stake. Team doctor was sexually abusing wrestlers and Jim Jordan said “that’s just Strauss.” Yeah it was a long time ago but it’s concerning

Sure he did. 

Typical leftist dirtbag. 

[IGotWorms 4,059]

Just now, drobeski said:

Sure he did. 

Typical leftist dirtbag. 

Several people have said so under oath in a federal lawsuit.

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

3 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Several people have said so under oath in a federal lawsuit.

Several folks claimed stuff about Kavanaugh under oath. That sh!t was debunked too. 

 

[TimmySmith 2,782]

17 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Not true. The trump/Sondland phone call was new and potentially critical. But also that’s the way this process occurs. You use depositions to learn the facts then testimony to present them. The very idea is that by the time you present your case you aren’t surprised by much. The difference here is usually the deposition transcripts aren’t publicly released ahead of time and known by the “jury” (us, in this instance).

The "alleged" phone call with Sondland and another party, you mean.  Unless you think Sondland had a speaker phone call with the President with an aide present. Then we have Sondland speaking off the cuff to the aide about the President. Unlikely. 

[Fireballer 2,644]

31 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

IfTaylor’s staffer testifies as to what he heard Trump say, that ain’t hearsay. 

Correct.  But, that didnt happen yesterday.  Up to this point, all there is is hearsay.

[lickin_starfish 1,942]

Yeah, but hearsay is better than direct evidence, haha!

[Strike 5,614]

So impeachment is one of the most serious things the House can do, and yet Nancy Pelosi couldn't be bothered with it:
 

Quote

 

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi addressed today's first public hearing in the impeachment inquiry into President Trump.

"What has come forth has further, of course, given us the truth of what happened at the time," she said.

Pelosi went on to say she was consumed with other legislative matters — prescription drugs, Dreamers, appropriations and the US-Mexico-Canada trade agreement today — and caught a "few minutes" of the beginning of the hearing.

 

[Mr. Hand 482]

5 minutes ago, Strike said:

So impeachment is one of the most serious things the House can do, and yet Nancy Pelosi couldn't be bothered with it:
 

She is so full of crap

[vuduchile 1,945]

5 minutes ago, Strike said:

So impeachment is one of the most serious things the House can do, and yet Nancy Pelosi couldn't be bothered with it:
 

This is why US politics are so ridiculous.  She knows it's a sham, but still verbally supports it for the sake of her party.  Meanwhile, as you said, she has more important things to do than attend the hearings.  

[RLLD 4,256]

Maybe she is shifting this over to Schiff....letting him take the fall, who knows,,,,,

[TimmySmith 2,782]

26 minutes ago, Strike said:

So impeachment is one of the most serious things the House can do, and yet Nancy Pelosi couldn't be bothered with it:
 

She is right.  It has given us the truth. The witnesses so far seem to corroborate the transcript.  

[Casual Observer 597]

1 hour ago, IGotWorms said:

If Taylor’s staffer testifies as to what he heard Trump say, that ain’t hearsay. For a number of reasons. First it’d be a statement of a party-opponent which is not hearsay. Second it probably wouldn’t be offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted—the point of relevancy is that Trump said it, not whether what Trump said is ultimately true. Third even if it was hearsay there are probably exceptions like statements against interest and maybe present sense impression.

Legally, it ain’t hearsay. I’m not really sure any of it is since most of this stuff isn’t for the truth of the matter asserted. It’s all about who knew and intended what, when. Yes I know this is all complicated to a non-fake lawyer and you won’t understand most of it and will act like I’m crazy. Whatever.

That's what you're banking on when you opine on legal matters here.

[vuduchile 1,945]

2 minutes ago, RLLD said:

Maybe she is shifting this over to Schiff....letting him take the fall, who knows,,,,,

I'd like to think she and the others are putting themselves at political risk here, but I'm not so sure.  I still don't see many people on the fence with Trump, so who would be swayed if this all blows up in their faces?   

If they try and fail, I doubt any of their supporters jump ship.  

[Strike 5,614]

Just now, vuduchile said:

I'd like to think she and the others are putting themselves at political risk here, but I'm not so sure.  I still don't see many people on the fence with Trump, so who would be swayed if this all blows up in their faces?   

If they try and fail, I doubt any of their supporters jump ship.  

There are a lot of independents in this country.  In fact, more and more people are choosing not to register with a  party.  Those independents gave Trump the victory in 2016.  I think a lot are disgusted with him and would rather not vote for him.  If the Dems put up a reasonable candidate they would be willing to vote for that person.  But the Dems haven't which makes it likely Trump could win.  But if this blows up in the Dems faces a lot of those independents will vote for Trump just because of how disgusted they are with the Dems.  It could turn a close win/loss in to a landslide win for Trump.

[Casual Observer 597]

1 hour ago, IGotWorms said:

Not true. The trump/Sondland phone call was new and potentially critical. But also that’s the way this process occurs. You use depositions to learn the facts then testimony to present them. The very idea is that by the time you present your case you aren’t surprised by much. The difference here is usually the deposition transcripts aren’t publicly released ahead of time and known by the “jury” (us, in this instance).

Telling that you used the word "us" for the jury, because all of these sham proceedings are meant to influence voters, but the jury in this case is the Senate.

[Intense Observer 344]

While the Dems star witness Taylor relied on heresay and opinion to claim Trump withheld aid the Ukraine Foreign Minister disagrees.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-impeachment-ukraine/u-s-envoy-sondland-did-not-link-biden-probe-to-aid-ukraine-minister-idUSKBN1XO1HK

“Ambassador Sondland did not tell us, and certainly did not tell me, about a connection between the assistance and the investigations.

[Casual Observer 597]

Just now, Intense Observer said:

While the Dems star witness Taylor relied on heresay and opinion to claim Trump withheld aid the Ukraine Foreign Minister disagrees.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-impeachment-ukraine/u-s-envoy-sondland-did-not-link-biden-probe-to-aid-ukraine-minister-idUSKBN1XO1HK

“Ambassador Sondland did not tell us, and certainly did not tell me, about a connection between the assistance and the investigations.

Can we get that guy to testify via videoconference link or something?

[Intense Observer 344]

I suspect the Dems move on from this as fast as possible after getting feedback on yesterday's disaster.

Time for some school shootings and Supreme Court Justices and former presidents to die (illness not Newbie)

[IGotWorms 4,059]

1 hour ago, Filthy Fernadez said:

Several folks claimed stuff about Kavanaugh under oath. That sh!t was debunked too. 

 

Sure but this wasn’t political. It’s a regular ol’ lawsuit. And the people who’ve testified against Jordan had no reason to lie that I’m aware of. I mean I guess it’s possible it’s not true and it was a long time ago, but paterno was destroyed over the same thing and now that it’s a new righty hero you guys have suddenly seen the light

[IGotWorms 4,059]

5 minutes ago, Casual Observer said:

Telling that you used the word "us" for the jury, because all of these sham proceedings are meant to influence voters, but the jury in this case is the Senate.

Yes but who do members of Congress represent? The people. I.e., “us”

[Baker Boy 1,704]

and the Worms ate into his brain...

[IGotWorms 4,059]

Just now, Baker Boy said:

and the Worms ate into his brain...

Roger Waters is awesome — one thing we can agree on, unless you’re one of those ridiculous David Gilmour people 

[IGotWorms 4,059]

But I mean, you know what WORMs was supposed to stand for, right?

[drobeski 3,061]

1 hour ago, IGotWorms said:

Several people have said so under oath in a federal lawsuit.

Shifty has lied to you over and over. Blatant in your face lies. 

Do you consider him credible?

[drobeski 3,061]

6 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Sure but this wasn’t political. It’s a regular ol’ lawsuit. And the people who’ve testified against Jordan had no reason to lie that I’m aware of. I mean I guess it’s possible it’s not true and it was a long time ago, but paterno was destroyed over the same thing and now that it’s a new righty hero you guys have suddenly seen the light

It wasn't political? When exactly did these revelations come about ?

[Casual Observer 597]

4 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Yes but who do members of Congress represent? The people. I.e., “us”

Who members of Congress represent and who is the jury in an impeachment are two separate things.  Please try to remember your own stupid statements.

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

8 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

 and now that it’s a new righty hero

 

1 minute ago, drobeski said:

It wasn't political? When exactly did these revelations come about ?

Exactly.

Now that Jordan poses a threat to their narrative, they solicit anyone who could possibly be connected to launch a bunch of accusations against him.

Just like Kavanaugh..............just like Trump................just like (insert next perceived threat to the left)

[Baker Boy 1,704]

7 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Yes but who do members of Congress represent? The people. I.e., “us”

Many members of Congress have been barred from participating in the hearings, they are all Republicans. I am not being represented during this farce.

 

[Intense Observer 344]

10 minutes ago, Filthy Fernadez said:

 

Exactly.

Now that Jordan poses a threat to their narrative, they solicit anyone who could possibly be connected to launch a bunch of accusations against him.

Just like Kavanaugh..............just like Trump................just like (insert next perceived threat to the left)

Didn't Paterno involve people who admitted to fücking preteen boys in the āss?

And aren't the Ohio State allegations about a coach jerking off his own dïck in the group shower with other 18+ year olds?

 

[IGotWorms 4,059]

43 minutes ago, Filthy Fernadez said:

 

Exactly.

Now that Jordan poses a threat to their narrative, they solicit anyone who could possibly be connected to launch a bunch of accusations against him.

Just like Kavanaugh..............just like Trump................just like (insert next perceived threat to the left)

Pretty sure you’re wrong on that. If I understand correctly I believe this suit began a while ago and doesn’t directly involve Jordan but rather centers around Ohio state’s wrestling team, for which he was an assistant coach at the time. Look I like Jordan and I don’t know that it’s necessarily fair to blame him for what happened at Ohio state a long time ago but the idea that this is a partisan smear job, while understandable, is wrong so far as I understand.

[IGotWorms 4,059]

45 minutes ago, Baker Boy said:

Many members of Congress have been barred from participating in the hearings, they are all Republicans. I am not being represented during this farce.

 

You need to get current on your disinformation Phurfur, that particularly lie was abandoned a while ago