The Trump Whistleblower Extravaganza Thread

Post by **SDHornet** » Wed Nov 20, 2019 3:04 pm

Bad day for the donk impeachment narratives. Very bad day.

Post by **SDHornet** » Wed Nov 20, 2019 3:05 pm

Bobcat wrote:Can anyone explain a few things to me? I don't get into the politics like you guys do but when I watch this Sondland guy say things like, "Trump never told me aid was conditioned, that was my own personal guess" under oath in front of congress"

"I have said about 19 times, Trump did not ask me about the Bidens."

Coupled with the fact that during more than seven hours of questioning on Oct. 17, both Republicans and Democrats repeatedly asked Sondland whether aid was part of the White House quid pro quo. Numerous times, he said he could not recall.

How is this damning to Trump does it not exonerate him? The democrats were waiting for this guy to deliver and all he did was keep making it look like a waste of time for everyone involved right?

Am I missing something here?

You're missing the obvious:

ORANGE MAN BAD!!!

Post by **SeattleGriz** » Wed Nov 20, 2019 3:47 pm

Oh no. Ukraine asking for help rooting out corruption.

This HAS to be part of the quid quo pro!

https://en.interfax.com.ua/news/press-c ... 25831.html

KYIV. Nov 20 (Interfax-Ukraine) – Ukrainian members of parliament have demanded the presidents of Ukraine and the United States, Volodymyr Zelensky and Donald Trump, investigate suspicions of the legalization of $7.4 billion by the "family" of ex-President Viktor Yanukovych through the American investment fund Franklin Templeton Investments, which they said has ties to the U.S. Democratic Party

Post by **SeattleGriz** » Wed Nov 20, 2019 4:02 pm

SDHornet wrote:
More implosion.

That's not true. Ibanez says it's because Trump didn't tell him there was no quid quo pro! Unless...it's more 4D chess.

CID1990 · Post by **CID1990** » Wed Nov 20, 2019 4:10 pm

Skjellyfetti wrote:It's almost like we might need some testimony from some folks the White House doesn't want to testify. Interesting.

Mulvaney stood in front of a lectern and admitted aid was tied to investigations in his famous "GET OVER IT!!" speech.

This is where the left leaning media has you messed up and you’re in danger of falling into the conspiracy trap yet again, Reek.

If Trump predicated military aid on Ukraine opening an investigation on Burisma, and the son of his political rival *wasn’t* working for Burisma, then a quid pro quo was not only not inappropriate, but actually a common diplomatic tool. I live in a country where a 2014 coup was tied to a cessation in some military assistance, and the reestablishment of that aid is directly tied to a return to democratic governance.

So focusing solely on a quid pro quo only is a trap (which you appear to have already fallen into). Trying to show that there was no quid pro quo is also a trap, and the WH and House GOP members already fell into that one.

The focus needs to be on whether or not opening an investigation specifically into Burisma for the purpose of delivering dirt on Hunter/Joe Biden was a part of the attempt, because it then (and only then) becomes criminal extortion.

Hell, if House Dems focus on that, we might kill two birds with one stone... Trump is censured, and we can find out what I need to do to get a foreign gas company to pay me 50,000 per month.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

BDKJMU · Post by **BDKJMU** » Wed Nov 20, 2019 4:10 pm

Sondland confirmed POTUS told him: “No Quid Pro Quo” and no one told him aid was tied to an investigation, but you have the fake news MSM calling Sondland’s testimony a “bombshell“ saying Sondland confirmed a quid pro quo..

Post by **Ibanez** » Wed Nov 20, 2019 5:03 pm

The Giuliani part is where a trump would get tripped out. Some conservative lady on CNN today remarked that and stated, “Trump commands. He doesn’t get led around.” If Rudy is doing something and Trump is saying people need to talk to him, then I think the logical conclusion is that Rudy is acting under Trumps direction. Or he’s “gone rogue.”

Besides, does anyone expect to hear a witness testify that Trump would explicitly command many people to do something that he knows is wrong? Trump isn’t that stupid.

Btw - anyone else notice that the Republicans now don’t accept the word of the intelligence communities that Russia interfered? And isn’t it a tad odd that when Hunter Biden was with Burisma, the Republicans were in power in Congress? Where was the concern then? And for that matter, if the Republicans are so concerned about Biden, why hasn’t Sen. Graham called him in. He certainly has the power. The Senate could call every witness that they want tomorrow.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Post by **Ibanez** » Wed Nov 20, 2019 5:04 pm

BDKJMU wrote:Sondland confirmed POTUS told him: “No Quid Pro Quo” and no one told him aid was tied to an investigation, but you have the fake news MSM calling Sondland’s testimony a “bombshell“ saying Sondland confirmed a quid pro quo..

That doesn’t mean there wasn’t. All that means is that Trump didn’t tell Sondland.

You haven’t told me your real name or occupation. Does that mean you have neither?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Post by **Ibanez** » Wed Nov 20, 2019 5:08 pm

SeattleGriz wrote:
SDHornet wrote:
More implosion.
That's not true. Ibanez says it's because Trump didn't tell him there was no quid quo pro! Unless...it's more 4D chess.

1) I doubt Trump could handle 2-D chess
2) we learned that Trump didn’t tell Sondland the manic words. That’s all. I haven’t told you what my wedding vows were....does that mean I never said them?

Again - Mulvaney, Pompeo and Bolton could end this tomorrow. Just come and let the Democrats know they’re wrong.

And both sides need to stop spiking the ball. We’ve only confirmed that something shady happened, career people were concerned and that shouldn’t come as a surprise.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Post by **Ibanez** » Wed Nov 20, 2019 5:13 pm

CID1990 wrote:
Skjellyfetti wrote:It's almost like we might need some testimony from some folks the White House doesn't want to testify. Interesting.

Mulvaney stood in front of a lectern and admitted aid was tied to investigations in his famous "GET OVER IT!!" speech.
This is where the left leaning media has you messed up and you’re in danger of falling into the conspiracy trap yet again, Reek.

If Trump predicated military aid on Ukraine opening an investigation on Burisma, and the son of his political rival *wasn’t* working for Burisma, then a quid pro quo was not only not inappropriate, but actually a common diplomatic tool. I live in a country where a 2014 coup was tied to a cessation in some military assistance, and the reestablishment of that aid is directly tied to a return to democratic governance.

So focusing solely on a quid pro quo only is a trap (which you appear to have already fallen into). Trying to show that there was no quid pro quo is also a trap, and the WH and House GOP members already fell into that one.

The focus needs to be on whether or not opening an investigation specifically into Burisma for the purpose of delivering dirt on Hunter/Joe Biden was a part of the attempt, because it then (and only then) becomes criminal extortion.

Hell, if House Dems focus on that, we might kill two birds with one stone... Trump is censured, and we can find out what I need to do to get a foreign gas company to pay me 50,000 per month.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Honest Question - was the aide in that 2014 coup tied to a political favor? Was dirt on an American citizen part of the negotiations?

And I’ve been clear on using quid pro quo for foreign aide - it’s ok when we’re asking for something that serves the national interest.

And I happen to agree with you - if they stop focusing on the aid, and more on the investigations and Biden and PROVING that then the Dems would have something.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Post by **Ivytalk** » Wed Nov 20, 2019 5:15 pm

Donk convert/ WatergaterJohn Dean is calling Sondland a great American.

Post by **SeattleGriz** » Wed Nov 20, 2019 5:26 pm

Ibanez wrote:
SeattleGriz wrote:
That's not true. Ibanez says it's because Trump didn't tell him there was no quid quo pro! Unless...it's more 4D chess.
1) I doubt Trump could handle 2-D chess
2) we learned that Trump didn’t tell Sondland the manic words. That’s all. I haven’t told you what my wedding vows were....does that mean I never said them?

Again - Mulvaney, Pompeo and Bolton could end this tomorrow. Just come and let the Democrats know they’re wrong.

And both sides need to stop spiking the ball. We’ve only confirmed that something shady happened, career people were concerned and that shouldn’t come as a surprise.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What about Trump makes you think he couldn't handle 2D chess?

Post by **Ibanez** » Wed Nov 20, 2019 5:31 pm

Ivytalk wrote:Donk convert/ WatergaterJohn Dean is calling Sondland a great American.

He was on earlier saying Sondland needs to turn on his colleagues.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Post by **Ibanez** » Wed Nov 20, 2019 5:34 pm

SeattleGriz wrote:
Ibanez wrote: 1) I doubt Trump could handle 2-D chess
2) we learned that Trump didn’t tell Sondland the manic words. That’s all. I haven’t told you what my wedding vows were....does that mean I never said them?

Again - Mulvaney, Pompeo and Bolton could end this tomorrow. Just come and let the Democrats know they’re wrong.

And both sides need to stop spiking the ball. We’ve only confirmed that something shady happened, career people were concerned and that shouldn’t come as a surprise.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What about Trump makes you think he couldn't handle 2D chess?

It was a joke.

I find it amusing that every problem or scandal that arises is some long game that Trump has thought out. To what end, I’m not sure. Then again, I don’t “understand the genius of our President.”

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

BDKJMU · Post by **BDKJMU** » Wed Nov 20, 2019 5:36 pm

Ibanez wrote:
BDKJMU wrote:Sondland confirmed POTUS told him: “No Quid Pro Quo” and no one told him aid was tied to an investigation, but you have the fake news MSM calling Sondland’s testimony a “bombshell“ saying Sondland confirmed a quid pro quo..
That doesn’t mean there wasn’t. All that means is that Trump didn’t tell Sondland.

You haven’t told me your real name or occupation. Does that mean you have neither?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

NO-ONE told Sondland. Sondland stated such. So if no one told Sondland, it’s a lie for the fake news MSM to say Sondland confirmed a quid-pro quo..

Post by **SeattleGriz** » Wed Nov 20, 2019 5:40 pm

Ibanez wrote:
SeattleGriz wrote:
What about Trump makes you think he couldn't handle 2D chess?
It was a joke.

I find it amusing that every problem or scandal that arises is some long game that Trump has thought out. To what end, I’m not sure. Then again, I don’t “understand the genius of our President.”

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Got it. You dislike the chess analogy for the same reason I like to use it. It's absurd.

Post by **Ivytalk** » Wed Nov 20, 2019 6:05 pm

Sondland is a self-promoting, self-preserving whore and a clown. He gave Drumpf a million bucks after the election and bought a position for which he had no apparent qualifications. He should resign his ambassadorship immediately.

Post by **UNI88** » Wed Nov 20, 2019 6:13 pm

Ibanez wrote:
SeattleGriz wrote:
That's not true. Ibanez says it's because Trump didn't tell him there was no quid quo pro! Unless...it's more 4D chess.
1) I doubt Trump could handle 2-D chess
2) we learned that Trump didn’t tell Sondland the manic words. That’s all. I haven’t told you what my wedding vows were....does that mean I never said them?

Again - Mulvaney, Pompeo and Bolton could end this tomorrow. Just come and let the Democrats know they’re wrong.

And both sides need to stop spiking the ball. We’ve only confirmed that something shady happened, career people were concerned and that shouldn’t come as a surprise.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'll have you know that Trump is a world class Hungry Hungry Hippo player!

JohnStOnge · Post by **JohnStOnge** » Wed Nov 20, 2019 6:18 pm

BDKJMU wrote:
Ibanez wrote: That doesn’t mean there wasn’t. All that means is that Trump didn’t tell Sondland.

You haven’t told me your real name or occupation. Does that mean you have neither?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
NO-ONE told Sondland. Sondland stated such. So if no one told Sondland, it’s a lie for the fake news MSM to say Sondland confirmed a quid-pro quo..

I actually watched the hearings as today as I worked from home. Trump told Sondland to talk to Rudy. Then Rudy did the quid pro quo thing. I mean really man.

It's "talk to my lawyer." Then the lawyer says "quid pro quo."

Do you seriously, at this point, doubt that Trump was leveraging US aid in order to get the Ukrainians to announce that they were opening an investigation into Biden. I mean seriously. When you look at yourself in the mirror do YOU seriously doubt that?

Post by **SeattleGriz** » Wed Nov 20, 2019 6:20 pm

JohnStOnge wrote:
BDKJMU wrote: NO-ONE told Sondland. Sondland stated such. So if no one told Sondland, it’s a lie for the fake news MSM to say Sondland confirmed a quid-pro quo..
I actually watched the hearings as today as I worked from home. Trump told Sondland to talk to Rudy. Then Rudy did the quid pro quo thing. I mean really man.

It's "talk to my lawyer." Then the lawyer says "quid pro quo."

Do you seriously, at this point, doubt that Trump was leveraging US aid in order to get the Ukrainians to announce that they were opening an investigation into Biden. I mean seriously. When you look at yourself in the mirror do YOU seriously doubt that?

No need to fret. The Ukrainians have have asked for help investigating this nonsense.

Skjellyfetti · Post by **Skjellyfetti** » Wed Nov 20, 2019 6:21 pm

BDKJMU wrote: NO-ONE told Sondland. Sondland stated such. So if no one told Sondland, it’s a lie for the fake news MSM to say Sondland confirmed a quid-pro quo..

Sondland wrote:Mr. Giuliani's requests were a quid pro quo for arranging a White House visit for President Zelensky. Mr. Guiliani demanded that Ukraine make a public statement announcing investigations of the 2016 election/DNC server and Burisma. Mr. Guiliani was expressing the desires of the President of the United States, and we knew that these investigations were important to the President

Bottom line: White House needs to let Mulvaney, Guiliani, Bolton, and anyone else with direct knowledge testify.

For some reason, the people that could clear him... aren't allowed to testify.

houndawg · Post by **houndawg** » Wed Nov 20, 2019 6:25 pm

AZGrizFan wrote:
houndawg wrote:
Thats just normal officer shit.

Apparently that’s an Army thing then. That was most certainly NOT “normal officer shit” in the service I served in for 23 years.

JohnStOnge · Post by **JohnStOnge** » Wed Nov 20, 2019 6:34 pm

Now for the reason I came to this thread: After I watched today I wondered about what the coverage would be like in terms of influencing perception. So I decided to watch ABC World News Tonight. The reason I did that is that it's the highest rated network news nightly news show. The viewerships of network news nightly news shows dwarf any viewerships for comparable time periods on the cable news networks. ABC World News Tonight averages about 8 1/2 million viewers per 30 minute session. The highest rated cable news network show is Sean Hannity. That's sad, I know. But he averages around 3 1/2 million.

The major network news nightly news shows average about 21 million combined.

So I decided to watch ABC World News tonight today to see the impression created with respect to the Sondland testimony. And it was not good for Trump and the Republicans. They dutifully reported what the Republican talking points were. But they also dutifully destroyed them with context such as the fact that, when Trump told Sondland on the phone that there was no quid pro quo, he was already aware of the whistleblower report and the fact that the jig was up.

I have little doubt that the other two major broadcast networks provided similar coverage.

Post by **Ivytalk** » Wed Nov 20, 2019 6:39 pm

JohnStOnge wrote:Now for the reason I came to this thread: After I watched today I wondered about what the coverage would be like in terms of influencing perception. So I decided to watch ABC World News Tonight. The reason I did that is that it's the highest rated network news nightly news show. The viewerships of network news nightly news shows dwarf any viewerships for comparable time periods on the cable news networks. ABC World News Tonight averages about 8 1/2 million viewers per 30 minute session. The highest rated cable news network show is Sean Hannity. That's sad, I know. But he averages around 3 1/2 million.

The major network news nightly news shows average about 21 million combined.

So I decided to watch ABC World News tonight today to see the impression created with respect to the Sondland testimony. And it was not good for Trump and the Republicans. They dutifully reported what the Republican talking points were. But they also dutifully destroyed them with context such as the fact that, when Trump told Sondland on the phone that there was no quid pro quo, he was already aware of the whistleblower report and the fact that the jig was up.

I have little doubt that the other two major broadcast networks provided similar coverage.

“Dutifully,” huh?

ABC, David Muir, and Jonathan Karl have been dutifully sucking Schiff’s cock all week.

JohnStOnge · Post by **JohnStOnge** » Wed Nov 20, 2019 6:40 pm

BTW, I don't understand why the Republicans think what Trump said during that call to Sondland is exculpatory anyway. He says he doesn't want anything then shortly thereafter says he wants something.

Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums