Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Trump-Ukraine Imbroglio: Who Is That Whistleblower? Trump-Ukraine Imbroglio: Who Is That Whistleblower?

09-28-2019 , 01:56 PM
Person A: This chocolate ice cream tastes delicious.
Person B: This chocolate ice cream tastes terrible.
Luckbox: Neither of you should be confident that you are eating chocolate ice cream.
Trump-Ukraine Imbroglio: Who Is That Whistleblower? Quote
09-28-2019 , 01:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rococo
Person A: This chocolate ice cream tastes delicious.
Person B: This chocolate ice cream tastes terrible.
Luckbox: Neither of you should be confident that you are eating chocolate ice cream.
Well this has got to be a strawman. Are person A and person B billionaire media and government who are always lying?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rococo
Forget about whether the transcript is rough or perfectly accurate. Did the call occur at all? And if you believe it did, why are you so confident?
Why is this important Rococo? I've said 1) it isn't important and 2) I have no idea.
How much are you bothered by the fact that the you have zero clue how accurate the transcript is?

Last edited by Luckbox Inc; 09-28-2019 at 02:02 PM.
Trump-Ukraine Imbroglio: Who Is That Whistleblower? Quote
09-28-2019 , 01:58 PM
Trump-Ukraine Imbroglio: Who Is That Whistleblower? Quote
09-28-2019 , 02:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luckbox Inc
Well this has got to be a strawman.


Why is this important Rococo? I've said 1) it isn't important and 2) I have no idea.
I assume it informs your opinion about whether Trump should be impeached. Surely you don't want the president to be impeached on the basis of a conversation that very well may not have occurred. That would be a bad precedent.
Trump-Ukraine Imbroglio: Who Is That Whistleblower? Quote
09-28-2019 , 02:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rococo
I assume it informs your opinion about whether Trump should be impeached. Surely you don't want the president to be impeached on the basis of a conversation that very well may not have occurred. That would be a bad precedent.
Trump can be impeached for a wide variety of reasons as everyone knows.
If the conversation did occur he's a traitor and if it didn't occur he's a hoaxster. Either way it isn't good.
Trump-Ukraine Imbroglio: Who Is That Whistleblower? Quote
09-28-2019 , 02:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luckbox Inc
How much are you bothered by the fact that the you have zero clue how accurate the transcript is?
Given that it was released by the Trump administration, I think we can all be confident that an actual transcript could only have made Trump look worse.

Put another way, Trump didn't release a transcript that included a bunch of stuff that was much more damaging than what he actually said.
Trump-Ukraine Imbroglio: Who Is That Whistleblower? Quote
09-28-2019 , 02:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luckbox Inc
Trump can be impeached for a wide variety of reasons as everyone knows.
If the conversation did occur he's a traitor and if it didn't occur he's a hoaxster. Either way it isn't good.
Still not a good look to impeach a president on the wrong ground, right?
Trump-Ukraine Imbroglio: Who Is That Whistleblower? Quote
09-28-2019 , 02:15 PM
Does Trump lose executive privilege if impeached?
Trump-Ukraine Imbroglio: Who Is That Whistleblower? Quote
09-28-2019 , 02:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by maulaga58
Does Trump lose executive privilege if impeached?
no
Trump-Ukraine Imbroglio: Who Is That Whistleblower? Quote
09-28-2019 , 02:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rococo
no
Watching MSNBC it said the precedent in US versus Nixon he would.
Trump-Ukraine Imbroglio: Who Is That Whistleblower? Quote
09-28-2019 , 02:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rococo
Still not a good look to impeach a president on the wrong ground, right?
This sort of politics doesn't concern me. I would impeach them all and keep on going then rewrite the constitution if I had my say. "Looks" are silly.
Trump-Ukraine Imbroglio: Who Is That Whistleblower? Quote
09-28-2019 , 02:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rococo
Given that it was released by the Trump administration, I think we can all be confident that an actual transcript could only have made Trump look worse.

Put another way, Trump didn't release a transcript that included a bunch of stuff that was much more damaging than what he actually said.
Yeah probably stuff like "ok in a couple of months this story is going to break. All I need you to do is back my official position that that you weren't pressured and confirm our transcript. Have a nice day and we'll see about those F-35s".
Trump-Ukraine Imbroglio: Who Is That Whistleblower? Quote
09-28-2019 , 02:35 PM
If Trump is impeached and removed from office, can he still run for President in 2020?


PairTheBoard
Trump-Ukraine Imbroglio: Who Is That Whistleblower? Quote
09-28-2019 , 03:19 PM
Oh ok so money to burn is saying that the form switch doesn't change anything. Then why did the change come last month AFTER Trumps conversation with the Ukrainian president? That's very suspicious and pardon me if I don't believe one of the mouthfrothers on the left.
Trump-Ukraine Imbroglio: Who Is That Whistleblower? Quote
09-28-2019 , 03:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by beastalamode
Oh ok so money to burn is saying that the form switch doesn't change anything. Then why did the change come last month AFTER Trumps conversation with the Ukrainian president? That's very suspicious and pardon me if I don't believe one of the mouthfrothers on the left.
M2B nailed it. It's a red-herring.
It's Oswald in Mexico and Mohammed Atta's passport.
It's suspicious for sure but it's supposed to be suspicious because that is the point and what makes it a red-herring.

Last edited by Luckbox Inc; 09-28-2019 at 03:49 PM.
Trump-Ukraine Imbroglio: Who Is That Whistleblower? Quote
09-28-2019 , 03:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by beastalamode
Oh ok so money to burn is saying that the form switch doesn't change anything. Then why did the change come last month AFTER Trumps conversation with the Ukrainian president? That's very suspicious and pardon me if I don't believe one of the mouthfrothers on the left.
I quoted the actual law.
Trump-Ukraine Imbroglio: Who Is That Whistleblower? Quote
09-28-2019 , 03:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PairTheBoard
If Trump is impeached and removed from office, can he still run for President in 2020?


PairTheBoard
If the senate convicted they could hold a second, simple majority, vote to ban him from holding public office.
Trump-Ukraine Imbroglio: Who Is That Whistleblower? Quote
09-28-2019 , 03:55 PM
Lol 2nd hand knowledge hearsay nonsense. Clinton got impeached based on second hand knowledge.
Trump-Ukraine Imbroglio: Who Is That Whistleblower? Quote
09-28-2019 , 04:04 PM
an admission by a party(trump) is not hearsay.

also- this isnt a court case, so there is no such thing as hearsay.
Trump-Ukraine Imbroglio: Who Is That Whistleblower? Quote
09-28-2019 , 04:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slighted
an admission by a party(trump) is not hearsay.

also- this isnt a court case, so there is no such thing as hearsay.
Even if it was a court case, you can file a complaint based on hearsay, the discovery process is used to figure out what evidence is out there to substantiate your claims. The whole thing is absurd. The fact that the Federalist allowed that article to be published is beyond egregious.
Trump-Ukraine Imbroglio: Who Is That Whistleblower? Quote
09-28-2019 , 04:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by maulaga58
Watching MSNBC it said the precedent in US versus Nixon he would.
That might be true with respect to the grounds for the impeachment, like the crime-fraud exception.

I can't imagine that he loses the benefit of it entirely. I may have misunderstood your question.
Trump-Ukraine Imbroglio: Who Is That Whistleblower? Quote
09-28-2019 , 04:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by beastalamode
Oh ok so money to burn is saying that the form switch doesn't change anything. Then why did the change come last month AFTER Trumps conversation with the Ukrainian president? That's very suspicious and pardon me if I don't believe one of the mouthfrothers on the left.
There's no evidence that that part was changed after the conversation, only that it was changed at some point after May 2018. There's only evidence that there was some revision made in August this year but no indication that that revision was the change that removed the paragraph mentioned in the federalist article.

The whole form has apparently had a major layout change (including changing the name of the form) in the time since May 2018 so the insinuation that there was a secret change made specifically to remove that one section is quite a reach.
Trump-Ukraine Imbroglio: Who Is That Whistleblower? Quote
09-28-2019 , 05:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luckbox Inc
I didn't realize I had been asked a question.
But technically speaking the left is opposed to power and the right supports it. You can't really be so-called right but you can be so-called left. And I'll always stick up for Jsmith. Sure he's a "reactionary" but I sincerely believe he means well so perhaps so-called right is appropriate afterall in some cases.
His posting does not support your feeling that he means well. He trolls politics regularly. If he means well he could read more and post like an adult.
Trump-Ukraine Imbroglio: Who Is That Whistleblower? Quote
09-28-2019 , 05:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willd
There's no evidence that that part was changed after the conversation, only that it was changed at some point after May 2018. There's only evidence that there was some revision made in August this year but no indication that that revision was the change that removed the paragraph mentioned in the federalist article.

The whole form has apparently had a major layout change (including changing the name of the form) in the time since May 2018 so the insinuation that there was a secret change made specifically to remove that one section is quite a reach.
Man, it’s not a reach, it’s a flat out lie. Federal forms don’t get changed in secret. What does that even mean? The form is publicly available, how is it a secret? Plus, there are procedures that govern how how substantive changes can be made to federal rules. Agencies can’t just make substantive changes to federal procedure in secret, if they try to, you can usually invalidate the change. It’s nonsense and reprehensible for the Federalist to allow **** like that to be published.
Trump-Ukraine Imbroglio: Who Is That Whistleblower? Quote
09-28-2019 , 06:14 PM
Wait...I thought the only thing that the Federalist got wrong was arguing that it was prohibited* to submit a whistleblower claim without first hand knowledge?
What else was there?
*more or less..I don't think they used that word ever.
Trump-Ukraine Imbroglio: Who Is That Whistleblower? Quote

      
m