Pelosi: Impeachment Is Moving Forward

[Jimmy Higgins]

Since this thread is about Pelosi Impeachment. I do realise that to ALL leftists Geller is ignored, but this post............... https://gellerreport.com/2019/11/impeachment-hoax-exposed.html/.................truly says it all.

Not just leftist, but moderates, centre-rightists, libertarians - basically anyone who is not bigoted dismiss Pamela Geller for the batshit bonkers birther whore she is.

I understand that the truth can in many cases hurt the sensibilities of snowflakes.

Is this why the Trump Admin refuses to let anyone in the Admin testify... and those that have, have done so against the Administration's wishes?

 

[Elixir]

extortion is more likely to be uttered ambiguously than bribery.
Asking for aid from a foreign power to help in one's Presidential election campaign is illegal, I thought, as in accepting or soliciting that aid. Impeachable on that alne, regardless of the extortion.

Just withholding the aid is in and of itself is crime.

So are the election finance violations for which Cohen is rotting away in jail, while his co-conspirator INDIVIDUAL-1 is rotting away our intelligence apparatus, our foreign policy, our national security, our judicial system and everything else he touches.
Obviously crime has nothing to do with whether Republicans will continue to fellate Trump.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Jebus fucking Christ Trump!

Everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad. She started off in Somalia, how did that go? Then fast forward to Ukraine, where the new Ukrainian President spoke unfavorably about her in my second phone call with him. It is a U.S. President’s absolute right to appoint ambassadors.

....They call it “serving at the pleasure of the President.” The U.S. now has a very strong and powerful foreign policy, much different than proceeding administrations. It is called, quite simply, America First! With all of that, however, I have done FAR more for Ukraine than O.

For those interested, she did serve in Mogadishu. Some might remember things not going well there... then fast forward and ignore 20 or so years... Ukraine!

She did technically serve as an ambassador to three nations in that gap, for Bush and Obama.

 

[southernhybrid]

Trump attempt to intimidate witness may be another impeachable offense!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/impeachment-hearings-live-updates/2019/11/15/c4b9f0f4-0726-11ea-8292-c46ee8cb3dce_story.html#link-DQLCZQJBEU4OLH6WIK6VPWWZ34

Democrats characterized Trump’s disparaging tweets about Yovanovitch as witness intimidation with some suggesting the episode could be added as another article of impeachment.
Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.), who sits on the Intelligence Committee, tweeted: “.@POTUS tampering with and intimidating a witness in real time while testifying is shocking and beneath any office, let alone the Office of the President.”
“The president just demonstrated witness intimidation & obstruction of justice in real time. Yuvanovitch is a dedicated, truth-telling, career foreign service official who knows how to put country first, over partisanship. Trumps actions are truly dangerous,” wrote Rep. Pramila Jayapal (Wash.) (Yovanovitch’s name was misspelled.)
And Rep. Ted Lieu (Calif.) tweeted: “Why is @realDonaldTrump engaging in witness intimidation of Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch while she testifies during the #ImpeachmentHearings? Because her testimony is devastating to @POTUS.”

How can anyone not see the corruption and incompetency of Trump!

 

[Elixir]

Devon Nunes, whose performance during the Mueller investigation was so embarrassing that any normal human would be afraid to show his face ever again, sings his duet with Jimmy Jordan lamenting the absence of first hand witnesses. What a joke. I for one, would absolutely love to hear from Bolton, Mulva, Rudi, Rudi's thugbuddies Igor and Lev, and of course the First Hand Witness and Obstructor in Chief himself.
But I'd be satisfied to see Trump convicted of obstruction.

When the Senate acquits, shouldn't Pelosi loudly solicit dirt on Trump from every one of our allies who have dealt with him?

 

[southernhybrid]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2019/11/14/career-white-house-budget-official-expected-break-ranks-testify-impeachment-inquiry/

A longtime career employee at the White House Office of Management and Budget is expected to break ranks and testify Saturday in the House Democrats’ impeachment inquiry, potentially filling in important details on the holdup of military aid to Ukraine.
Mark Sandy would be the first OMB employee to testify in the inquiry, after OMB acting director Russell T. Vought and two other political appointees at the agency defied congressional subpoenas to appear. The White House has called the impeachment inquiry unconstitutional and ordered administration officials not to participate.
Unlike these other OMB officials, Sandy is a career employee, not one appointed by the president. He has worked at the agency off and on for over a decade, under presidents of both parties, climbing the ranks to his current role as deputy associate director for national security programs.

Sandy could provide insight into the process by which some $400 million in military and security aid to Ukraine was held up over the summer. He was among the career staffers who raised questions about the holdup on the aid, people familiar with the matter said, and his role gave him responsibility for signing the documents required to hold it up. The people spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.

This will be a close hearing tomorrow. I'm not sure why unless Sandy is worried about witness intimidation. But things are moving along.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

This will be a close hearing tomorrow. I'm not sure why unless Sandy is worried about witness intimidation. But things are moving along.

I think Schiff wants closed hearings first, then public. It could potentially make it easier for information to be forthcoming.

 

[Angry Floof]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2019/11/14/career-white-house-budget-official-expected-break-ranks-testify-impeachment-inquiry/

A longtime career employee at the White House Office of Management and Budget is expected to break ranks and testify Saturday in the House Democrats’ impeachment inquiry, potentially filling in important details on the holdup of military aid to Ukraine.
Mark Sandy would be the first OMB employee to testify in the inquiry, after OMB acting director Russell T. Vought and two other political appointees at the agency defied congressional subpoenas to appear. The White House has called the impeachment inquiry unconstitutional and ordered administration officials not to participate.
Unlike these other OMB officials, Sandy is a career employee, not one appointed by the president. He has worked at the agency off and on for over a decade, under presidents of both parties, climbing the ranks to his current role as deputy associate director for national security programs.

Sandy could provide insight into the process by which some $400 million in military and security aid to Ukraine was held up over the summer. He was among the career staffers who raised questions about the holdup on the aid, people familiar with the matter said, and his role gave him responsibility for signing the documents required to hold it up. The people spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.

This will be a close hearing tomorrow. I'm not sure why unless Sandy is worried about witness intimidation. But things are moving along.

The main reason is that the DOJ refuses to help with the investigation part. Accusations of crimes prompt investigations to see if there's any evidence to base any potential charges on, or in this case, to base impeachment on. There are numerous good reasons for investigators to keep their investigations out of the public eye until they get the information and evidence that they need, and since the DOJ wouldn't help, Congress has had to do the investigation themselves. That's the reason for closed door hearings first. They don't know if the witness is going to give them information that should be protected or if the witness even has any useful information at all, or information that would lead to other witnesses being called.

Republicans damn well know this. They are mostly lawyers themselves. They pretend to not know the nature of investigation as opposed to hearings and trials that come *after* the investigation phase. I'm still not sure what is the payoff for them, what they have traded their conscience and careers and reputations for, or if it's worth it, but they've traded their integrity for something. I can't imagine what would be worth all that for them.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Also, with private testimony, witnesses can't hear what the other people said and get their stories straight. Note with Sondland how he straight up lied to Congress and then had to "amend" his statements later after he found out that other people were actually telling the truth.

 

[Elixir]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2019/11/14/career-white-house-budget-official-expected-break-ranks-testify-impeachment-inquiry/







This will be a close hearing tomorrow. I'm not sure why unless Sandy is worried about witness intimidation. But things are moving along.

The main reason is that the DOJ refuses to help with the investigation part. Accusations of crimes prompt investigations to see if there's any evidence to base any potential charges on, or in this case, to base impeachment on. There are numerous good reasons for investigators to keep their investigations out of the public eye until they get the information and evidence that they need, and since the DOJ wouldn't help, Congress has had to do the investigation themselves. That's the reason for closed door hearings first. They don't know if the witness is going to give them information that should be protected or if the witness even has any useful information at all, or information that would lead to other witnesses being called.

Republicans damn well know this. They are mostly lawyers themselves. They pretend to not know the nature of investigation as opposed to hearings and trials that come *after* the investigation phase. I'm still not sure what is the payoff for them, what they have traded their conscience and careers and reputations for, or if it's worth it, but they've traded their integrity for something. I can't imagine what would be worth all that for them.

It is gratifying to see how much more difficult it is in these circumstances, vs. during the Mueller investigation, for Republicans to turn it into their usual clown show of conspiracy theorism and character assassination. IMHO, they are falling relatively flat... which probably means that public sentiment toward conviction will likely inch up some fraction of a percent over coming weeks. That part is depressing. But I am also grateful for the sheer volume of facts that are being read into the public record in this case. Even if the current Senate fails to fulfill its duty, history will record their cowardice in no uncertain terms.

 

[lpetrich]

Donald J. Trump on Twitter: "Everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad. She started off in Somalia, how did that go? Then fast forward to Ukraine, where the new Ukrainian President spoke unfavorably about her in my second phone call with him. It is a U.S. President’s absolute right to appoint ambassadors." / Twitter

Donald J. Trump on Twitter: "....They call it “serving at the pleasure of the President.” The U.S. now has a very strong and powerful foreign policy, much different than proceeding administrations. It is called, quite simply, America First! With all of that, however, I have done FAR more for Ukraine than O." / Twitter

then
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "Trump himself is clearly not satisfied with only one article of impeachment.
His choice to publicly broadcast his own, personally authored witness intimidation means he’s wants to sign up for another article on obstruction of justice, too." / Twitter

 

[Angry Floof]

Also, with private testimony, witnesses can't hear what the other people said and get their stories straight. Note with Sondland how he straight up lied to Congress and then had to "amend" his statements later after he found out that other people were actually telling the truth.

Yes, this is probably the most important reason for closed door depositions.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2019/11/14/career-white-house-budget-official-expected-break-ranks-testify-impeachment-inquiry/

This will be a close hearing tomorrow. I'm not sure why unless Sandy is worried about witness intimidation. But things are moving along.

The main reason is that the DOJ refuses to help with the investigation part. Accusations of crimes prompt investigations to see if there's any evidence to base any potential charges on, or in this case, to base impeachment on. There are numerous good reasons for investigators to keep their investigations out of the public eye until they get the information and evidence that they need, and since the DOJ wouldn't help, Congress has had to do the investigation themselves. That's the reason for closed door hearings first. They don't know if the witness is going to give them information that should be protected or if the witness even has any useful information at all, or information that would lead to other witnesses being called.

Republicans damn well know this. They are mostly lawyers themselves. They pretend to not know the nature of investigation as opposed to hearings and trials that come *after* the investigation phase. I'm still not sure what is the payoff for them, what they have traded their conscience and careers and reputations for, or if it's worth it, but they've traded their integrity for something. I can't imagine what would be worth all that for them.

It is gratifying to see how much more difficult it is in these circumstances, vs. during the Mueller investigation, for Republicans to turn it into their usual clown show of conspiracy theorism and character assassination. IMHO, they are falling relatively flat... which probably means that public sentiment toward conviction will likely inch up some fraction of a percent over coming weeks. That part is depressing. But I am also grateful for the sheer volume of facts that are being read into the public record in this case. Even if the current Senate fails to fulfill its duty, history will record their cowardice in no uncertain terms.

Even I am surprised at the weak ass defense arguments from Republicans, and I was expecting weak argumentation. I think we all were. That counsel ... dude, I was beginning to think he was working for Dems. (Side note: Under House rules, can Repubs replace that counsel? I'm curious because if I were a Republican, I would sure as hell want to. And I'm not suggesting he's a bad counsel, just that he seems too decent and honest to do what Republicans would want him to do, to obfuscate and badger, in other words.)

As for facts on display, I've always believed that this was the most important reason for the hearings - laying out the facts, hearing the testimony in a setting that even Republicans can't stop or distort, much less Fox talking heads. They can whine and lie after the fact, but they can't stop anyone from hearing the testimony as it happens.

 

[Elixir]

Yes, this is probably the most important reason for closed door depositions.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2019/11/14/career-white-house-budget-official-expected-break-ranks-testify-impeachment-inquiry/

This will be a close hearing tomorrow. I'm not sure why unless Sandy is worried about witness intimidation. But things are moving along.

The main reason is that the DOJ refuses to help with the investigation part. Accusations of crimes prompt investigations to see if there's any evidence to base any potential charges on, or in this case, to base impeachment on. There are numerous good reasons for investigators to keep their investigations out of the public eye until they get the information and evidence that they need, and since the DOJ wouldn't help, Congress has had to do the investigation themselves. That's the reason for closed door hearings first. They don't know if the witness is going to give them information that should be protected or if the witness even has any useful information at all, or information that would lead to other witnesses being called.

Republicans damn well know this. They are mostly lawyers themselves. They pretend to not know the nature of investigation as opposed to hearings and trials that come *after* the investigation phase. I'm still not sure what is the payoff for them, what they have traded their conscience and careers and reputations for, or if it's worth it, but they've traded their integrity for something. I can't imagine what would be worth all that for them.

It is gratifying to see how much more difficult it is in these circumstances, vs. during the Mueller investigation, for Republicans to turn it into their usual clown show of conspiracy theorism and character assassination. IMHO, they are falling relatively flat... which probably means that public sentiment toward conviction will likely inch up some fraction of a percent over coming weeks. That part is depressing. But I am also grateful for the sheer volume of facts that are being read into the public record in this case. Even if the current Senate fails to fulfill its duty, history will record their cowardice in no uncertain terms.

Even I am surprised at the weak ass defense arguments from Republicans, and I was expecting weak argumentation. I think we all were. That counsel ... dude, I was beginning to think he was working for Dems. (Side note: Under House rules, can Repubs replace that counsel? I'm curious because if I were a Republican, I would sure as hell want to. And I'm not suggesting he's a bad counsel, just that he seems too decent and honest to do what Republicans would want him to do, to obfuscate and badger, in other words.)

As for facts on display, I've always believed that this was the most important reason for the hearings - laying out the facts, hearing the testimony in a setting that even Republicans can't stop or distort, much less Fox talking heads. They can whine and lie after the fact, but they can't stop anyone from hearing the testimony as it happens.

EXACTLY
The facts recorded in these hearings will remain facts into perpetuity, and Trump's idiotic conspiracy theories will remain idiotic conspiracy theories for future generations. Also written, will be numerous volumes that try to explain the mass insanity of the right, in which FOX News will figure prominently. Schoolchildren will wonder, as I once did about Germans under Hitler, how so many people could possibly have been so incredibly stupid.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Donald J. Trump on Twitter: "Everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad. She started off in Somalia, how did that go? Then fast forward to Ukraine, where the new Ukrainian President spoke unfavorably about her in my second phone call with him. It is a U.S. President’s absolute right to appoint ambassadors." / Twitter

Donald J. Trump on Twitter: "....They call it “serving at the pleasure of the President.” The U.S. now has a very strong and powerful foreign policy, much different than proceeding administrations. It is called, quite simply, America First! With all of that, however, I have done FAR more for Ukraine than O." / Twitter

then
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "Trump himself is clearly not satisfied with only one article of impeachment.
His choice to publicly broadcast his own, personally authored witness intimidation means he’s wants to sign up for another article on obstruction of justice, too." / Twitter

When the ambassadors finally got the clan heads to get together and come up with a united front against the out of control militias that were robbing relief food for starving Somalians, the US military attacked that meeting with cruise missiles killing many of them. That lost us any trust and leverage with the clans. It wasn't this ambassador that caused the disaster that was Somalia. Just a little reminder of the facts

 

[southernhybrid]

Has anyone mentioned that closed door testimony late yesterday?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/15/us/politics/trump-ambassador-sondland-ukraine-call.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

An official from the United States Embassy in Kiev confirmed to House impeachment investigators on Friday that he had overheard a call between President Trump and a top American diplomat in July in which the president asked whether Ukraine was going to move forward with an investigation he wanted.

The official, David Holmes, testified privately that he was at a restaurant in Kiev, Ukraine’s capital, when he overheard Mr. Trump on a cellphone call loudly asking Gordon D. Sondland, the American ambassador to the European Union, if Ukraine’s president had agreed to conduct an investigation into one of his leading political rivals. Mr. Sondland, who had just come from a meeting with top Ukrainian officials and the country’s president, replied in the affirmative.

“Beginning in March 2019, the situation in the embassy and in Ukraine changed dramatically,” Mr. Holmes said, according to his statement. “Specifically, our diplomatic policy that had been focused on supporting Ukrainian democratic reform and resistance to Russian aggression became overshadowed by a political agenda being promoted by Rudy Giuliani and a cadre of officials operating with a direct channel to the White House.”

The conversation between Mr. Trump and Mr. Sondland took place on July 26, one day after Mr. Trump personally pressed Mr. Zelensky in a now-famous phone call to investigate Mr. Biden and his son Hunter Biden, as well as unproven allegations that Ukraine conspired with Democrats to interfere in the 2016 election. Mr. Trump specifically wanted an investigation into unsubstantiated corruption allegations related to Hunter Biden’s work for a Ukrainian energy firm, Burisma Holdings.

Mr. Sondland did not mention the episode to investigators last month when he answered their questions in private. He will almost certainly be asked about it next week when he appears for public testimony before the House Intelligence Committee.

Looks like Sonland has some 'splaining to do.

 

[Elixir]

Has anyone mentioned that closed door testimony late yesterday?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/15/us/politics/trump-ambassador-sondland-ukraine-call.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

An official from the United States Embassy in Kiev confirmed to House impeachment investigators on Friday that he had overheard a call between President Trump and a top American diplomat in July in which the president asked whether Ukraine was going to move forward with an investigation he wanted.

The official, David Holmes, testified privately that he was at a restaurant in Kiev, Ukraine’s capital, when he overheard Mr. Trump on a cellphone call loudly asking Gordon D. Sondland, the American ambassador to the European Union, if Ukraine’s president had agreed to conduct an investigation into one of his leading political rivals. Mr. Sondland, who had just come from a meeting with top Ukrainian officials and the country’s president, replied in the affirmative.

“Beginning in March 2019, the situation in the embassy and in Ukraine changed dramatically,” Mr. Holmes said, according to his statement. “Specifically, our diplomatic policy that had been focused on supporting Ukrainian democratic reform and resistance to Russian aggression became overshadowed by a political agenda being promoted by Rudy Giuliani and a cadre of officials operating with a direct channel to the White House.”

The conversation between Mr. Trump and Mr. Sondland took place on July 26, one day after Mr. Trump personally pressed Mr. Zelensky in a now-famous phone call to investigate Mr. Biden and his son Hunter Biden, as well as unproven allegations that Ukraine conspired with Democrats to interfere in the 2016 election. Mr. Trump specifically wanted an investigation into unsubstantiated corruption allegations related to Hunter Biden’s work for a Ukrainian energy firm, Burisma Holdings.

Mr. Sondland did not mention the episode to investigators last month when he answered their questions in private. He will almost certainly be asked about it next week when he appears for public testimony before the House Intelligence Committee.

Looks like Sonland has some 'splaining to do.

Ya betcha. Apparently there were at least two other people at the table and at least one other besides Holmes has agreed to testify. Sondland is going to have to choose between spilling ALL the beans and sucking up to Trump in hopes of a pardon.

 

[Angry Floof]

Has anyone mentioned that closed door testimony late yesterday?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/15/us/politics/trump-ambassador-sondland-ukraine-call.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

An official from the United States Embassy in Kiev confirmed to House impeachment investigators on Friday that he had overheard a call between President Trump and a top American diplomat in July in which the president asked whether Ukraine was going to move forward with an investigation he wanted.

The official, David Holmes, testified privately that he was at a restaurant in Kiev, Ukraine’s capital, when he overheard Mr. Trump on a cellphone call loudly asking Gordon D. Sondland, the American ambassador to the European Union, if Ukraine’s president had agreed to conduct an investigation into one of his leading political rivals. Mr. Sondland, who had just come from a meeting with top Ukrainian officials and the country’s president, replied in the affirmative.

“Beginning in March 2019, the situation in the embassy and in Ukraine changed dramatically,” Mr. Holmes said, according to his statement. “Specifically, our diplomatic policy that had been focused on supporting Ukrainian democratic reform and resistance to Russian aggression became overshadowed by a political agenda being promoted by Rudy Giuliani and a cadre of officials operating with a direct channel to the White House.”

The conversation between Mr. Trump and Mr. Sondland took place on July 26, one day after Mr. Trump personally pressed Mr. Zelensky in a now-famous phone call to investigate Mr. Biden and his son Hunter Biden, as well as unproven allegations that Ukraine conspired with Democrats to interfere in the 2016 election. Mr. Trump specifically wanted an investigation into unsubstantiated corruption allegations related to Hunter Biden’s work for a Ukrainian energy firm, Burisma Holdings.

Mr. Sondland did not mention the episode to investigators last month when he answered their questions in private. He will almost certainly be asked about it next week when he appears for public testimony before the House Intelligence Committee.

Looks like Sonland has some 'splaining to do.

He sure does. Time for him to unveil testimony 3.0.

 

[ZiprHead]

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

View attachment 24867

Hilarious!

 

[angelo]

Our Fuhrer Trump isn't going to be removed from office because he still controls the Senate. The only defense remaining - which isn't a defense at all but rather a propaganda campaign - is to keep repeating the same lies over and over. Nazism managed to convince germans to commit genocide in the name of patriotism. Trumps antics are small potatoes in comparison but only because he's being prevented from going that far. Even if he is reelected we have to keep fighting his hate.

Is that so! This baseless witch hunt is doing the Trump a favour if anything!

https://gellerreport.com/2019/11/trump-trump-impeachment-ratings-rise.html/