Jump to content

Trump attacks impeachment witness on Twitter, Democrats see intimidation


rooster59

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Cryingdick said:

As far as I know she wasn't aware of the tweet until it was read to her today.

AFAIK, NOBODY was aware of the Tweet because it happened in real-time, slap bang in the middle of Marie Yovanovitch's measured and reasoned testimony.

 

Where's the 'Doh!' emoticon when you truly need it?

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Kelsall said:

Democrats see a lot of things that aren't there.

That might be seen as having an imagination while you base Trump supporters cannot see thing that clearly are there. That's blindness.

Edited by Becker
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The next step here will be the intelligence departments coming after all of Trumps cronies who were in clandestine discussions with Ukraine.

 

It has already been clearly demonstrated that Trumps unofficial team were working in a way that defied official policy. That is not up for debate. That is confirmed.

 

Guiliani was doing what he did without official vetting and government clearances. That is illegal. Whoever is found to have been orchestrating Guiliana, Sondland and possibly Barr, and the like will be needing to answer some tough questions on why this Ukraine situation took place through unofficial channels and in direct contradiction to offical Foreign Affairs policy. This is not going away no matter what the result of the Senate hearing.

 

Another interesting point on the Senate. It is clear there are a lot o Republicans up for election in marginal areas soon. They are unlikely to put their name to a vote against Trump's misdeeds. But what would happen if there was a blind ballot?

 

Senators who's moral judgement knows that what their party leader and head of the free world has been doing is not becoming of a person in such an office, would be allowed to vote without backlash from the President and their constituents.

 

I believe - and I may be wrong - it will only take three Republicans to block senate proceedings. They could demand that the ballot is to be blind before rules of the impeachment trial are ratified.

 

Then you have a very different ball game.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, TopDeadSenter said:

 Watching Yovanovitch on the stand was painful.

 

9 minutes ago, sfokevin said:

Everyone need to at least watch this C-Span clip

 

 

Now I know what TopDeadSenter meant when he said it was "painful" but I must admit I have not one iota of sympathy for either him nor Trump who must have been fuming while watching the hearings.

Judging by his pathetic tweets he didn't have a good day, not a good day at all!:clap2:

Edited by Becker
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, klauskunkel said:
6 hours ago, rooster59 said:

Nunes said. "This is the House Intelligence Committee that's now turned into the House impeachment committee."

Well Nunes, it's called evolution - an adaption to environment.

It's the same Nunes who in his opening comments on the 2nd day bizarrely suggested it become the Mexico and Canada trade agreement committee.

 

Between him and the hopelessly ineloquent and laughably inarticulate counsel "not as outlandish as it could be" Castor, I don't know which one is worse at stand-up.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The House Congress is dealing with the Impeachment.

 

The Senate has a large backlog of House Resolutions that McConnell is sitting on.

 

Let’s pretend that’s not a fact.

Please, I can not find this large backlog of House resolutions that McConnell is sitting on...I found 2 that he sent back for changes...????

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, tifino said:

Demos not happy that their planting of her over there in the first place... to help smooth the way for the Bidens to do their underworld Ukraine thing - got twarted

 

 

I think that you really believe that. How you ever done any research on the lady? Try doing a little research before you post. You may even learn something.

 

Granted this is from Wikipedia but

 

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

 

Marie Louise "Masha" Yovanovitch (born 1958) is an American diplomat and member of the senior ranks of the United States Foreign Service.[1][2] She served in a variety of State Department posts, including Senior Advisor to the Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs (2004–2005); U.S. Ambassador to Kyrgyzstan (2005–2008); U.S. Ambassador to Armenia (2008–2011); Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs (2012–2013); and Ambassador to Ukraine (2016–2019). Yovanovitch is a diplomat in residence at the Institute for the Study of Diplomacy at Georgetown University.

 

While ambassador to Ukraine, Yovanovitch was subjected to a conspiracy-driven smear campaign, amplified by President Donald Trump and his allies. In May 2019, Trump abruptly recalled Yovanovitch from her post following claims by Trump surrogates that she was undermining Trump's efforts to pressure Ukraine to investigate his political rival, former vice president and 2020 U.S. presidential election candidate Joe Biden. Yovanovitch's removal preceded a July 2019 phone call by Trump in which he attempted to pressure Ukraine president Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate Biden.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Anyone who thinks that the Senate could remove a duly elected President using a blind ballot is taking some serious drugs.  It would never, ever fly with the population.  And every politician knows it.

 

Just shows how desperate the Dems are to float such an insane scheme.  They're looking for anything, anyway possible.  They are desperate.  No one they've put up as a candidate could beat Trump.  They know it.

 

What population are you talking about - the American population as a whole? Or did you really men "part of the population" but just "misspoke"?

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Understanding that 45 fans think CNN is all "fake news" because they report objectively about 45, they are doing an interesting segment that I think warrants attention.

 

They have assembled a group of five "undecided" Midwestern voters (mix of genders and race) and watched them watch the impeachment inquiry hearings.

 

ALL started this with the position of NOT supporting impeachment.

 

After the first day, none of them changed their position.

 

After the next session with dumped Ambassador Yovanovitch THREE of them changed their positions to support impeachment! Yes, a very small sample of undecided voters, but such a massive change of opinion based on one day of testimony seems remarkable. CNN (responsible journalism organ that it is) was crystal clear that this pro impeachment group was talking about favoring impeachment in the house. None of that three is yet at the point of supporting conviction in the senate.

 

A key factor in this group changing their minds was the horrible tweet by the current president. (Does he want to be impeached?)

 

So this group will continue to be followed along this process. Of course some now pro impeachment are free to change their minds later.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PAWNEESE said:

With respect I think the point is she was about to most certainly hear of the intimidation at the scheduled long break. The pause was about to happen before the Republican lawyer questioned her.

 

Schiff knew she would be told by her support staff.  Also it was meant to intimidate future witnesses too.   Some of Trumps supporters are nasty.

 

(Trump was tweeting nasty spiteful childish stuff about her as she spoke .. for those not following the context .. and the chairman informed the witness and hearing what was going on. And hinted it was a possible further impeachable crime)

 

I did have my reservations as to why Schiff chose to 'live-stream' DJT's hot-off-the-press Tweet about his PERSONAL opinion of Yovanovitch beyond introducing the arguable notion of it being intimidation. However, it now appears very prescient based on the timing that you have highlighted where it's an incontrovertible fact that her staffers would have made her aware of it during the long break and ahead of possibly 'hostile' questioning.

 

The fact that the Republican response after the break was pretty much a repeat of their damp squib performance of the opening day, I would suggest that beyond the 'show me the whistleblower' tape-loop that seems to have been installed in Jim Jordan's head, the twittering of their dear leader pushed them onto the back foot (again).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • Create New...