2020 Presidential Election

[howardlander]

Why would dems freak out? If nothing happened, great. Glad the proper process was followed. The whistleblower complaint is supposed to get to the house under any other president. Right? Trumps team just blocked it.

I agree with this. The complaint is supposed to go to the congress. If the House holds an impeachment inquiry, and the result is that there is not enough evidence to proceed, I think most would find that a reasonable outcome. The Constitution confers on the Congress the responsibility to oversee the executive branch and that is what will now happen. Personally, I'd much prefer if there was really nothing there, but I don't prefer them not to look.

Howard

[CameronBornAndBred]

Turns out there is probably not a "transcript". There is not a stenographer on calls. But a summary of the call is made. Does anyone believe that will be acceptable? I wonder if the summary is made in Sharpie.

Now, is there a recording of the call? If so, will that be released?

There was a fellow interviewed last night that used to take part in these calls. (Not sure whose WH he was in, thinking Bush 1) He said there would be "on a good day" three people basically pounding at their keyboards taking notes, but no recording. He said he had asked about that, and was told they hadn't done audio recording "since the mid 70's". So if there is no recording, you can thank Nixon. I guess folks learned that having a tape might not be so great in the long run.

Another person familiar with these situations said the note takers would focus on the main conversation, but not record more banal familiar talk.

[dudog84]

Rudy Giuliani on Fox last night: "Joe Biden committed enormously serious crimes".

And the election is still 13+ months away. Sigh.

[Highlander]

Rudy Giuliani on Fox last night: "Joe Biden committed enormously serious crimes".

And the election is still 13+ months away. Sigh.

The Washington Post article mentioned up thread is pretty brutal in its take on Rudy. It seems Giuliani's belief of Ukranian malfeasance by Joe Biden is a primary reason Trump is embroiled in this mess. The Washington Post reports that Rudy (essentially) got the US Ambassador to Ukraine fired, and then inserted himself directly into discussions with Ukraine to try and extract dirt on the Bidens in exchange for aid. Payments were mysteriously delayed with no explanations.

I think its fair to ask why the President's personal lawyer is engaging with a foreign government as an official emissary of the United States in the first place, and who signed off on that. I also wonder if Trump will eventually throw Rudy under the bus to save himself.

[dudog84]

The Washington Post article mentioned up thread is pretty brutal in its take on Rudy. It seems Giuliani's belief of Ukranian malfeasance by Joe Biden is a primary reason Trump is embroiled in this mess. The Washington Post reports that Rudy (essentially) got the US Ambassador to Ukraine fired, and then inserted himself directly into discussions with Ukraine to try and extract dirt on the Bidens in exchange for aid. Payments were mysteriously delayed with no explanations.

I think its fair to ask why the President's personal lawyer is engaging with a foreign government as an official emissary of the United States in the first place, and who signed off on that. I also wonder if Trump will eventually throw Rudy under the bus to save himself.

You wonder? You're not the Highlander, you're Rip Van Winkle!

[LasVegas]

So the transcript is out and...wow. Democrats are going to be on the impeachment train. All aboard! Lindsey Graham has already come out against any sort of impeachment due to what he has seen on the transcript.

[Bostondevil]

I will suggest this and see if Jason backs me up that we need to put the kibosh on any mention of Kavanaugh in this thread. There is no way to bring him up without dipping into partisanship.

[howardlander]

You wonder? You're not the Highlander, you're Rip Van Winkle!

LOL. Thanks for the laugh, I needed it!

[golfinesquire]

I will suggest this and see if Jason backs me up that we need to put the kibosh on any mention of Kavanaugh in this thread. There is no way to bring him up without dipping into partisanship.

No worries. I am done. This is not the thread for it anyway.

[CameronBornAndBred]

So the transcript is out and...wow. Democrats are going to be on the impeachment train. All aboard! Lindsey Graham has already come out against any sort of impeachment due to what he has seen on the transcript.

How shocking.

I was totally expecting the transcript to be nothing, but that's pretty damning, and the Democrats are now locked into having to push ahead. There is the whistleblower's testimony of course, and from the DNI, but wow.

[CameronBornAndBred]

He repeatedly says Zelensky should work with Attorney General William P. Barr or his personal lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani. Giuliani had separately pressed Ukrainian officials for a Biden inquiry.

“I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it,” Trump says, according to the transcript.

Ouch...that's pretty damning, and while it of course it is up to the GOP Senate to convict, which of course I strongly doubt they do, other's will likely be shopping for jobs, if not fighting to stay out of prison, including Rudy and Barr.
And all of this for a guy that he may not even be running against.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...BoK?li=BBnb7Kz

[sagegrouse]

Turns out there is probably not a "transcript". There is not a stenographer on calls. But a summary of the call is made. Does anyone believe that will be acceptable? I wonder if the summary is made in Sharpie.

Now, is there a recording of the call? If so, will that be released?

One on-air reporter was in the Obama administration and said that "contemporaneous notes" of such calls are as good as it gets.

[OldPhiKap]

Wow, pretty damning. Not sure why the WH lawyers thought it was a good idea to release this. If you're gonna stonewall the whistleblower report on the basis of Executive Privilege, you might as well stonewall the whole thing.

Oddly, FoxNews.com has a headline admitting that Trump pressured Ukraine but denying that there was any mention of military aid. That is deceptive at best.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Wow, pretty damning. Not sure why the WH lawyers thought it was a good idea to release this. If you're gonna stonewall the whistleblower report on the basis of Executive Privilege, you might as well stonewall the whole thing.

Oddly, FoxNews.com has a headline admitting that Trump pressured Ukraine but denying that there was any mention of military aid. That is deceptive at best.

That's going to be the defense. No quid pro quo, and the one the GOP will use when not convicting. However, I would not be surprised now if one or two senators crossed the aisle. There won't ever be enough to convict, but I could see a couple at least.

[Bostondevil]

OK, question. It is my understanding that an impeachment inquiry is not limited to the phone call with the president of Ukraine. I am under the impression given that 6 Congressional Committees are going to be involved, that the impeachment inquiry will be looking at everything the deem relevant, like finances and emoluments, all of that. Am I wrong?

[JasonEvans]

I laughed out loud at one of Lindsay Graham's comments today, "You can't impeach a president over a phone call."

Does he think you cannot commit a crime over the phone? What if the call is you ordered someone to commit murder? What if the call was an offer of a bribe? It is so silly to imply that nothing that bad can happen in a phone call.

That said, though the transcript contains several very troubling portions, the Dems will need a lot more stuff if they plan to actually impeach.

[Highlander]

You wonder? You're not the Highlander, you're Rip Van Winkle!

Trying to stay as non-partisan as possible. That being said, I don't really know what value Rudy provides to Trump other than creating media distractions.

[CameronBlue]

That's going to be the defense. No quid pro quo, and the one the GOP will use when not convicting. However, I would not be surprised now if one or two senators crossed the aisle. There won't ever be enough to convict, but I could see a couple at least.

Assuming that McConnell even stages a Senate trial as a Constitutional mandate that forces the Senate to act upon AoI levied by the House seems unclear. As an aside, I think Trump has a fascination with big 5 dollar words and the word of the day apparently is "exculpatory." I think he needs a little more practice working it into everyday conversation cogently.

[golfinesquire]

OK, question. It is my understanding that an impeachment inquiry is not limited to the phone call with the president of Ukraine. I am under the impression given that 6 Congressional Committees are going to be involved, that the impeachment inquiry will be looking at everything the deem relevant, like finances and emoluments, all of that. Am I wrong?

You are correct.

[OldPhiKap]

That's going to be the defense. No quid pro quo, and the one the GOP will use when not convicting. However, I would not be surprised now if one or two senators crossed the aisle. There won't ever be enough to convict, but I could see a couple at least.

Agreed. But it seems awfully disingenuous to me to assert that there was no quid pro quo.

Trump first says that we have been really good to them, but that things have not been "reciprocal." This is literally what quid pro quo (this for that) entails -- reciprocity.

Then, when the Ukraine President says he is about ready to buy some new defensive weapons, Trump replies that he "needs a favor, though."

I think you really have to not want to see a quid pro quo to not see a quid pro quo. (And of course, the harm is in the asking for the favor -- the quid pro quo just makes it worse).

Dark times.