The Trump Presidency...

@LJONESY
Were are you getting your poll numbers from?

From what I have read over the past 2 months the numbers haven't changed.

Half of people say they approve of the impeachment inquiry — 50% — compared to 43% who don't. That's about the same as in the poll a month ago (52% to 43%). But Americans are pretty much split down the middle — 45% to 44% — on whether they think Trump should be impeached and removed from office.

There is little question, however, what Americans think of Trump's conduct on that now-infamous July 25 call, in which Trump asked the president of Ukraine for a "favor" to conduct the investigations.

Seventy percent say it is not acceptable for a president to ask a foreign leader to investigate a political opponent. That includes 53% of Republicans who say it's either unacceptable (37%) or they're unsure (16%).

The longer this drags on the more unpopular it will become.
 
You say this is a partisan driven issue Jonesy but I am not sure that is true.

The actual impeachment process may have been kicked off by the Democrats but the people putting a noose around Trump’s neck are hardly a bunch of woke Democrat lefty snowflakes.

Bill Taylor? Lt. Col Vindman? Sondland? Hill? (Possibly, given that she worked for the Neegra - and Bush). Cooper? (Warned off by the White House).

These people have seen how Trump throws his people under a bus (I forget the current number of Trumpers being wary of going into the showers with Big Momma).

It might just be self-preservation but it could just be honour.

If the GOP wants to preserve itself they had better not piss off their Constituents.
 
Is anybody actually watching the full hearing, I'm over halfway through and there is not a lot that matches up with the personal opinions and feelings via twatter.
I decided on this one to watch the whole thing for myself, I think this feed is still live and it looks like I'm two hours behind.

It's tedious, but it's the only way to get round the media hype and narrative, from both sides.

The appears to be a lot of whatabouteries and not a lot of substance so far.

Part of me is thinking this is going to bring something nasty into the limelight that might not be what people think it's going to be.

2016 is back on the cards and political tactics are certainly being exposed, on both sides.
3D chess anyone.
 
Is anybody actually watching the full hearing, I'm over halfway through and there is not a lot that matches up with the personal opinions and feelings via twatter.
I decided on this one to watch the whole thing for myself, I think this feed is still live and it looks like I'm two hours behind.

It's tedious, but it's the only way to get round the media hype and narrative, from both sides.

The appears to be a lot of whatabouteries and not a lot of substance so far.

Part of me is thinking this is going to bring something nasty into the limelight that might not be what people think it's going to be.

2016 is back on the cards and political tactics are certainly being exposed, on both sides.
3D chess anyone.
Biden...

 
It takes a Brit to point out the false mantra from Nunes et al.

Full Link Law & Crime Article

Former National Security Council (NSC) official and Russia expert Dr. Fiona Hill, in her opening statement at Thursday’s public impeachment hearings, candidly debunked the “fictional narrative” that Ukraine, not Russia, interfered in the 2016 election. Republicans on the panel have repeatedly cited this conspiracy to justify President Donald Trump’s suspicions about Ukraine; Trump and Rudy Giuliani wanted Ukraine to publicly announce investigations of Burisma and the CrowdStrike conspiracy theory.

She also added: “Based on questions and statements I have heard, some of you on this committee appear to believe that Russia and its security services did not conduct a campaign against our country—and that perhaps, somehow, for some reason, Ukraine did,” Hill said. “This is a fictional narrative that has been perpetrated and propagated by the Russian security services themselves.”

In an excerpt seemingly tailored specifically for Ranking Member Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), Hill concisely explained it was “beyond dispute” that Russia, not Ukraine, was the foreign power that “systematically attacked” America’s democratic institutions in the lead up to the presidential election, noting this was also the conclusion of U.S. intelligence agencies and a congressional report.

Hill also warned members of Congress of the threat they pose to national security in promulgating baseless conspiracy theories.

“I refuse to be part of an effort to legitimize an alternate narrative that the Ukrainian government is a U.S. adversary, and that Ukraine—not Russia—attacked us in 2016,” Hill said.

“These fictions are harmful even if they are deployed for purely domestic political purposes. President Putin and the Russian security services operate like a Super PAC. They deploy millions of dollars to weaponize our own political opposition research and false narratives. When we are consumed by partisan rancor, we cannot combat these external forces as they seek to divide us against each another, degrade our institutions, and destroy the faith of the American people in our democracy.”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"They deploy millions of dollars to weaponize our own political opposition research and false narratives. When we are consumed by partisan rancor, we cannot combat these external forces as they seek to divide us against each another, degrade our institutions, and destroy the faith of the American people in our democracy.”

This is what I have been saying all along, to deny Russian intervention is stupidity at best, to continue promoting conspiracy theories simply because it spoils the narrative of Trump getting elected without help is ridiculous, as Hill said this morning: Russia is Bi-Partisan, they did not care whether Clinton got elected or Trump their goal is to seed discord between both parties, and to that effect they are winning hands down.
 
Very likely.

The problem with Sondland is that he gave a million bucks to Trumps campaign and was given the ambassadorship by Trump in return (QPQ in itself there methinks, although I recognise that is the nature of the beast and the way the spoils system works).

It is going to be hard for Trump to say “I didn’t even know him”. Or argue that he is a Democrat plant, part of the Deep State, went native in the State Department, is politically motivated or suffers from TDS.

My guess would be that Sondland knows exactly where the skeletons are, who said what to whom and that he has no desire to see a locked prison cell from the inside.

Things can only get better. Or funnier. Or weirder. Who GAF.
In US Politics donors many times get to be ambassadors

Joe Kennedy didnt get his by being a career diplomat

We have 2 routes to Ambassador

Career Diplomat (Not given the post very often)
Party Donor reward (Patronage)

lets take the US Ambassador to the UK as an example

Matthew Barzun (2013-17)- Worked for Obamas Campaign
Louis Susman (2009-2012)- Longtime Democratic party donor, buddy of John Kerry

as was Bush 43's, as was Bill Clintons (Less Adm Crowe)

Sondland is just another donor rewarded with an Ambasadorship
 
That was hard work last night, I lasted 7-ish hours and fell asleep when their "minor witness" was on camera.

Ingram sums it up, including what other outlets were pushing.
Notice how all the outlets use the same buzz words...Just like they did all the other times.


Amazing how (restricted) questioning by the Republicans brings out the reality, much to the behest of the DNC media outlets, who would otherwise have people believe fantastic presumptions

"2+2=4", "my asumption" and "2 asumptions + 2 assumptions = zero facts"...sums it all up IMO.

I suspect, yes.
Along with that Fusion GPS dossier and it's financial handlers.

I wonder if Biden ran for President so the Dems could then start this charade, It's obvious Trump intended to go for the architects of the dossier from day one, Then there is this...

Text - Treaty Document 106-16 - Treaty with Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters

When did Biden announce his running? It's possible running for Pres was his only angle for blocking an investigation into him and his son? ie what we are seeing play out now?

So no we go with Day 5 live catchup...Im bored
 
Ah yes, John Solomon, apparently known for being pro Trump and a purveyor of conspiracy theories.

Is it really a conspiracy theory that Hunter Biden was hired by Burisma for purely political reasons?

Hunter Biden- Dishonorably Discharged from the US Navy for drug use
Absolutely no experience in energy exploration, technology or management
Hired within 2 months of dishonorable discharge to the Burisma board of directors


Exactly what skills did he bring them OTHER than being the then current VP's son- so Access to the WH (''Hey pop Burisma needs this'')?
 
In US Politics donors many times get to be ambassadors

Joe Kennedy didnt get his by being a career diplomat

We have 2 routes to Ambassador

Career Diplomat (Not given the post very often)
Party Donor reward (Patronage)

lets take the US Ambassador to the UK as an example

Matthew Barzun (2013-17)- Worked for Obamas Campaign
Louis Susman (2009-2012)- Longtime Democratic party donor, buddy of John Kerry

as was Bush 43's, as was Bill Clintons (Less Adm Crowe)

Sondland is just another donor rewarded with an Ambasadorship

Let s not forget St Barry of Obama, A quick twatter-free reality check for the left

Barack Obama accused of 'renting out' top ambassador roles

US diplomats cry foul as Obama donors take over top embassy jobs

Barack Obama's ambassador legacy: plum postings for big donors – Center for Public Integrity


Ahhh, the internet, Where people are just a few clicks away from reality and one click away from twitter
They don't like ambassadors when they don't share their views, just like they don't like democracy hen it doesn't go their way.
The question they should be asking is WHY they act like that.
And where does that interference come from.
 
Is it really a conspiracy theory that Hunter Biden was hired by Burisma for purely political reasons?

Hunter Biden- Dishonorably Discharged from the US Navy for drug use
Absolutely no experience in energy exploration, technology or management
Hired within 2 months of dishonorable discharge to the Burisma board of directors


Exactly what skills did he bring them OTHER than being the then current VP's son- so Access to the WH (''Hey pop Burisma needs this'')?
Apparently he is fertile?


But unfortunately, also very forgetful.

'Hunter Biden, who initially denied having sexual relations with Roberts, eventually agreed to take a DNA test, according to documents filed by Roberts’ attorney, Clint Lancaster. '
 
 
BOOOM. There it is. The Steele Dossier

Dr Fiona Hill, British born, has just dropped she read the Steele dossier the day before Buzzfeed ran with it AND she personally knows Steele. She also knows Fusion GPS was procured and paid by the DNC to put the dossier together, Her own words of agreement. -2.05 in the live stream.


This could get rather sticky.

I like the bit where witness male claims he could here trump on the phone....CNN picked up on this and decided to prove to America that you can, in fact, hear other peoples conversations from a few seats away , even in a soundproofed acoustically perfect studio...seriously, this is part of his testimony


Desperate losers, This is why I watch fox. CNN is a shitpost of embarrassing own goals.

Laughing at the DNC part one...

 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top