US Politics The trump impeachment thread

[somnilicious]

All i’ve heard is we hit some record numbers, this was all over the news more than once. Judging by my own portfolio and many friends and family, our numbers have swelled generously since Trump was inaugurated. That’s my experience. As far as the graph, that may be current conditions but at one point in his term the records were shattered.

The problem with that line of looking at things is that almost all the gains were made under Obama's presidency and even the record highs within the market were hit before Trump's economic policies took effect, which was the exact point on the graph when stocks almost stopped climbing altogether.

It's extremely myopic to breakdown stock gains by period and they are not actually a good barometer for a strong economy. The numbers don't lie. Stocks have stopped growing and the deficit is climbing through the stratosphere and this started with the TCJA going into affect Jan 18' .

I actually intend on breaking down Trump's claim to him being the reason for a strong economy in further detail very soon but this is the empeachment thread and that would be better suited for the presidency thread. Infact there are a lot of numbers that point towards poor trending performance. This is very relavent because it had previously been the only thing that caused people to overlook or ignore the vast mounting evidence for instances of obstruction, abuse of power and the multitude of crimes he has committed as acting president.

 

[Cream Gravy?]

Guys... I just realized that Mike Pence would be president if Trump was impeached. I am now STRONGLY against impeachment!

 

[OrbitalCombustion]

Guys... I just realized that Mike Pence would be president if Trump was impeached. I am now STRONGLY against impeachment!

Good thinking.

 

[somnilicious]

Guys... I just realized that Mike Pence would be president if Trump was impeached. I am now STRONGLY against impeachment!

It is a very disheartening prospect. Unfortunately the Constitution doesn't have a process for removal of an entirely corrupt cabinet. When Nixon was impeached his VP had already been convicted of crimes but that would be the worst reason not to support impeachment.

He should be impeached because he has committed impeachable offenses. That is the reason we impeach presidents.

I really can't see Pence being worse for America than Trump.

 

[Xorkoth]

All i’ve heard is we hit some record numbers, this was all over the news more than once. Judging by my own portfolio and many friends and family, our numbers have swelled generously since Trump was inaugurated. That’s my experience. As far as the graph, that may be current conditions but at one point in his term the records were shattered.

Crypto and the stock market are different. You can hardly credit Trump for crypto gains just because he hasn't done anything to stop it. No one else has ever done anything to stop it, either.

Congrats again on your crypto success.

Anyway there is a pervasive sense (generally supported by Trump because he makes sure to repeatedly tell everyone how great he's doing and how "the numbers are fantastic", etc etc), that the stock market is doing better than ever. Which it is in general. However Trump inherited the strongest stock market and economy we've had in a long while. Obama had the unemployment level plummeting already, the stock market was already going up. You can't credit Trump fir saving the economy when, while yes, numbers have continueed to rise, they were already on that upward trajectory. I know Trump loves to take credit for it, but these things takle years to play out. Any political scientist or economist would tell you that the effects of a president's policies take well into the next rpesident's term to come to fruition. Obama took the economy from the great recession into a robust period of growth and a market high point. Now it's still experiencing that, except, as mal's graph shows, when the tax reforms of 2018 hit, the market had a brief mini-crash and since has stabilized but stayed level instead of continmuing to rise. Around the world, investors are hesitant because of the trade war... now Trump is putting tariffs on parts of Europe too, on wine and cheese of all things. The effects of Trump's policies on the market are not fully felt yet.

Say what you want about Obama, he did some bad things I disagree with too, but he pulled the stock market from like $6k or whatever during the recession, to $18k before he left office, in 8 years, and unemployment went from almostt 10%, to 4.7%, and is only slightly better now, on account of already being in an upward trend. But people praise Trump for that, when it was Obama's work that recovered our economy.

 

[Cream Gravy?]

I really can't see Pence being worse for America than Trump.

Then I'm guessing you don't know much about Mike Pence.

 

[alasdairm]

All i’ve heard is we hit some record numbers, this was all over the news more than once. Judging by my own portfolio and many friends and family, our numbers have swelled generously since Trump was inaugurated.

post hoc ergo propter hoc?

alasdair

 

[somnilicious]

Then I'm guessing you don't know much about Mike Pence.

Probably not as much as I should but Trump continues to take disastrous step after disastrous step towards destroying America and any integrity we have left in the world.

I would truly be interested in any insights you have to offer.

I almost wonder if Pence would stand a better chance in the Presidential election. To me that would be concerning.

Honestly the only way I see Trump winning is through direct Russian interference, perhaps even ballot hacking. That is an unfortunate consequence of Trump's actions. Barr, Trump and McConnell have blocked any real steps towards stopping future election interference and that seriously compromises and brings a question mark to the legitimacy of our future Democratic elections and that is an absolute Russian win. Our future as a democracy depends on the trusts of the populace in the process. This fact will definitely be exploited in the next election. One of the many reasons he needs to be impeached.

 

[Cream Gravy?]

Pence intentionally tried to spread AIDs in his home state and is an Evangelical anti-women/anti-drug psychopath. I think that's enough for me to prefer Trump. At least I can expect Trump to act a fool. Pence would silently turn us all into slaves of a Christian dictatorship.

 

[somnilicious]

post hoc ergo propter hoc?

alasdair

Exactly..... Correlation does not equal causation.

 

[cduggles]

Tons of evidence contradicting Trump and his administration’s accounting of events is piling up.

There’s even evidence from someone who was on the infamous Zelensky phone call who tried to have the rough transcript corrected to reflect that, among other things,Trump directly referred to Biden, but couldn’t do so due to it being shoved into a highly classified system.

Vindman testimony fills gaps on Trump Ukraine call

www.nwherald.com

And I’m guessing Morrison, who testifies tomorrow, isn’t resigning because he has such glowing things to say about the administration. We’ll find out.

Top NSC Russia official to step down ahead of impeachment testimony

Tim Morrison’s name arose during damning testimony provided to lawmakers earlier this month by William Taylor.

www.politico.com

 

[TheLoveBandit]

No peach mints until the whistle blower? I support a whistle blower being able to speak freely and without persecution, but also support anyone knowing their accuser.

Anti-Trump 'Whistleblower' Worked With DNC Operatives, Joe Biden

...
“whistleblower” who prompted the current impeachment proceedings against President Trump is a registered Democrat who worked with a Democratic National Committee opposition researcher who dug up dirt on the Trump campaign during the 2016 election.

Federal documents reveal that the whistleblower, Eric Ciaramella, previously worked in the Obama administration with former Vice President Joe Biden and former CIA Director John Brennan. RealClear reports that Ciaramella remained there into the Trump administration, and headed the Ukraine desk at the National Security Council,
...
“He didn’t exactly hide his passion with respect to what he thought was the right thing to do with Ukraine and Russia, and his views were at odds with the president’s policies,” a former senior White House official said.
...
Ciaramella invited Chalupa [a Ukrainian-American woman who consulted for the Democratic National Committee, and “met with top officials in the Ukrainian Embassy in Washington in an effort to expose ties between Trump, top campaign aide Paul Manafort and Russia.”]to meetings and events at the White House, RealClear reported, documents confirming one occasion in November 2015. She also visited the White House with Ukrainian lobbyists seeking aid from Obama.
...
Before Ciaramella filed his “whistleblower complaint,” he sought “guidance” from House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff’s staff and other Obama-era NSC staff recently employed by Schiff’s office. Before this “guidance” was public knowledge, the Chairman was adamant on hearing the “whistleblower” testimony.

“We need to speak with the whistleblower,” Schiff and other Democrats proclaimed. As soon as Ciaramella’s partisanship and collaboration was discovered, Schiff and the Democrats flipped to preventing the testimony from happening and moving their hearings behind closed doors.

May I Introduce to You the Young Man Believed to be the 'Whistleblower'; Pssst: He Also Tried to Interfere in 2016 Election

* Ciaramella is a registered Democrat held over from the Obama White House, previously worked with former Vice President Joe Biden and former CIA Director John Brennan, a vocal critic of Trump who helped initiate the Russia “collusion” investigation of the Trump campaign during the 2016 election.

* Ciaramella left his National Security Council posting in the White House’s West Wing in mid-2017 amid concerns about negative leaks to the media. He has since returned to CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.

* “He was accused of working against Trump and leaking against Trump,” said a former NSC official.

* Earlier this year, Schiff recruited two of Ciaramella’s closest allies at the NSC — both whom were also Obama holdovers — to join his committee staff. He hired one, Sean Misko, in August — the same month the whistleblower complaint was filed.

* A CIA officer specializing in Russia and Ukraine, Ciaramella was detailed over to the National Security Council from the agency in the summer of 2015, working under Susan Rice, President Obama’s National Security adviser. He also worked closely with the former Vice President.

* Former White House officials said Ciaramella worked on Ukrainian policy issues for Biden in 2015 and 2016, when the vice president was President Obama’s “point man” for Ukraine. A Yale graduate, Ciaramella is said to speak Russian and Ukrainian, as well as Arabic. He had been assigned to the NSC by Brennan…He was held over into the Trump administration, and headed the Ukraine desk at the NSC, eventually transitioning into the West Wing, until June 2017.

* Federal records show that Biden’s office invited Ciaramella to an October 2016 state luncheon the vice president hosted for Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi. Other guests included Brennan, as well as then-FBI Director James Comey and then-National Intelligence Director James Clapper…Several U.S. officials told RCI that the invitation that was extended to Ciaramella, a relatively low-level GS-13 federal employee, was unusual and signaled he was politically connected inside the Obama White House.

* “He was moved over to the front office” to temporarily fill a vacancy, said a former White House official, where he “saw everything, read everything.”…The official added that it soon became clear among NSC staff that Ciaramella opposed the new Republican president’s foreign policies. “My recollection of Eric is that he was very smart and very passionate, particularly about Ukraine and Russia. That was his thing – Ukraine,” he said. “He didn’t exactly hide his passion with respect to what he thought was the right thing to do with Ukraine and Russia, and his views were at odds with the president’s policies.”

* Ciaramella worked with a Democratic National Committee operative who dug up dirt on the Trump campaign during the 2016 election, inviting her into the White House for meetings, former White House colleagues said. The operative, Alexandra Chalupa, a Ukrainian-American who supported Hillary Clinton, led an effort to link the Republican campaign to the Russian government. “He knows her. He had her in the White House,” said one former co-worker, who requested anonymity to discuss the sensitive matter.

If Eric Ciaramella really is the whistleblower, the whole impeachment narrative is decimated

The purpose of being a “whistleblower” is to expose wrongdoing perpetrated by people in power whose actions are being concealed from the public, oversight officials, and/or law enforcement. It is never to be used for political gain, whether personal or on behalf of others. It is also not supposed to be used as a ploy against one’s political opponents or the political opponents of those with whom the whistleblower is attached.

In other words, blowing the whistle is not supposed to be weaponized for political purposes, but if it turns out CIA operative Eric Ciaramella is the Ukraine whistleblower, his report can only be viewed as an attempted political assassination. We know this because he has been actively involved in multiple attempts to take down the President even before he was elected. He is the “Deep State” pawn many on the right have condemned, a pawn who has reported multiple instances of the President’s “wrongdoings” which invariably turned out to be false.

If anyone can be less credible than Adam Schiff, it’s Eric Ciaramella. When other news outlets pointed out the whistleblower was a Democrat, I shrugged. No big deal. A person’s allegiance to an opposing party does not eliminate credibility in and of itself. But when it was revealed that he worked for former Vice President Joe Biden, his credibility started slipping away, even in the eyes of skeptics like me. Now, we’re learning he has a long history of attempts to expose President Trump, including getting fired from the NSC for leaking information to the press. His attachments to John Brennan, Adam Schiff, Susan Rice, and others who have worked against the President is the cherry on top of the obliteration of his credibility.

The more we learn about him, the easier it is to understand why Democrats have pulled back on having him as part of the impeachment inquiry at all in spite of his whistleblower complaint being the catalyst for the whole debacle.

Ciaramello is not confirmed as the whistleblower, but all circumstantial evidence points squarely at him. We may never hear the official word on it because doing so would paint the Democrats’ impeachment narrative as one built like a house of cards.

The sheer fact the alleged whistleblower, Eric Ciaramella, had attempted on multiple occasions to frame the President is enough to destroy the entire impeachment narrative. This is the boy who cried wolf every chance he got.

How ‘Whistleblower’ May Be Outed: Ties to Biden, Brennan, Schiff’s Staff, Etc.

The official added that it soon became clear among NSC staff that Ciaramella opposed the new Republican president’s foreign policies. “My recollection of Eric is that he was very smart and very passionate, particularly about Ukraine and Russia. That was his thing – Ukraine,” he said. “He didn’t exactly hide his passion with respect to what he thought was the right thing to do with Ukraine and Russia, and his views were at odds with the president’s policies.”

“So I wouldn’t be surprised if he was the whistleblower,” the official said.

In May 2017, Ciaramella went “outside his chain of command,” according to a former NSC co-worker, to send an email alerting another agency that Trump happened to hold a meeting with Russian diplomats in the Oval Office the day after firing Comey, who led the Trump-Russia investigation. The email also noted that Russian President Vladimir Putin had phoned the president a week earlier.

Eric Ciaramella, Schiff’s ‘whistleblower

Eric Ciaramella was a CIA analyst and expert on Ukraine and Russia. He was detailed to the Obama White House NSC as Director of Baltic and Eastern European Affairs including Ukraine. Ciaramella was a known Susan Rice protege. He is said to have traveled to Ukraine with Vice President Joe Biden twice.

He was a close associate of State Department anti-Trump partisan Victoria Nuland. Ciaramella was involved in the 2016 correspondence about the $1 billion dollar loan guarantee Biden held up until prosecutor Victor Shokin was fired.

Ciaramella was said to be traveling with Biden on that trip.

He was certainly in the loop on all things Ukraine. Including disinformation on Paul Manafort and Trump passed to Victoria Nuland by Ukrainian sources. Clinton donor Victor Pinchuk sent Ukrainian Member of Parliament Olga Bielkova to meet with Ciaramella. One day before Bielkova also met with infamous John McCain aide David Kramer.

He isn't named as the whistle blower, but all signs point to him. If it's not him, this is moot. If it is him, I don't care that he's a Democrat, and based on his credentials he is the right person to be in the positions he was in, IMO. And, I get that anyone accused of anything will try to devalue the credibility of their accuser. That shouldn't matter - if something wrong was done, it was done and needs to be addressed regardless of who brings it forth.

However, this paints a picture of someone who has worked with DNC on getting dirt on Trump earlier, vocally opposed to Trump's foreign policy (allowable, but shows bias), and working with Schiff's staff. It reeks of another constructed situation by Dem leaders that if one looks just below the surface, falls apart as a fabrication in an attempt to create an impeachable offense. I don't know that this individual was tapped on the shoulder to create this, I don't go that deep into conspiracy theories. But I can see his passion and beliefs being a seed that Schiff could water and nurture into an impeachable offense, at least to sound like one. I have a real hard time with Schiff demanding we hear the whistle blower, then quickly preventing any questions from Repubs - that just doesn't sit right, and neither does Schiff's staff having communications with the individual prior to the statement coming out, but Schiff denied it.

I'm watching the whole thing from both sides - Dems saying 'we finally got him' (all the while ignoring their congressional duties while impeachment is the priority), and Repubs sitting back saying 'none of the earlier claims have amounted to anything and neither will this'. Maybe there finally are grounds for impeachment, but will it pass Congress? Would it go to 'removal'? I doubt it, but until we get more info it's a possibility. I'd be lying if I didn't admit it looks like another 'gotcha' by the Dems that will turn out to be unfounded. That's just my opinion.

 

[cduggles]

I support a whistle blower being able to speak freely and without persecution, but also support anyone knowing their accuser.

Do you have any concerns about the whistleblower’s safety? We do have a petty, thin-skinned guy with millions of fans/followers who think he’s been done wrong.

Also, there have been a number of witnesses providing corroborating testimony, so what purpose does exposing the whistleblower serve?

edit: https://www.npr.org/2019/10/01/7661...nfront-accusers-does-not-apply-to-impeachment

 

[cduggles]

It’s official now, the impeachment inquiry has been voted upon by the House. Next.

House takes huge impeachment step with vote on Trump probe

'Today, we are further down the path of our inquiry,' said Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

www.politico.com

 

[TheLoveBandit]

Do you have any concerns about the whistleblower’s safety? We do have a petty, thin-skinned guy with millions of fans/followers who think he’s been done wrong.

Also, there have been a number of witnesses providing corroborating testimony, so what purpose does exposing the whistleblower serve?

edit: https://www.npr.org/2019/10/01/7661...nfront-accusers-does-not-apply-to-impeachment

Whistle blower safety? I'd say if anything happens to a known person, all eyes are on Hillary Trump. If they aren't known, nobody will know if something happens to them.

Exposing the witness, and corroborators, invites the question of their motivation. If those without anti-Trump motivation present a case for impeachment, it stands. If they are biased, it leaves doubt as to what actually happened. It matters. Motivation matters. The truth can stand beyond motivations if facts can be presented honestly.

From your link

Democratic leaders lost just two of their members on the vote, which marks the first time the full House has voted on any aspect of the impeachment inquiry.

Indeed. And how much has been done behind closed doors with limited access? Speaking of which...

The resolution does spell out certain due process rights provided to Trump once the probe moves into the public domain, but Republicans note they are constrained by Democratic chairmen.

For instance, Republicans may request to call witnesses and issue subpoenas at Intelligence Committee hearings, but the requests can be vetoed by Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) — a similar arrangement to previous impeachment proceedings.

Trump and his legal team will also be able to mount a defense and cross-examine witnesses in the House Judiciary Committee, which will draft any articles of impeachment. But those actions will also need to be approved by Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.).

“The House Intelligence Committee has ceased to exist,” Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) said. “We now have a full-fledged impeachment committee in the basement of the Capitol.”

How fair are the rules of engagement for the minority, compared to how impeachments have been addressed in the past? I can see the need for a veto by whoever is leading the committee, lest we have an endless parade of rabbit holes and time wasting. I appreciate the hearings can now be in public, so we the people can see what is asked by both sides and what is allowed-not_allowed, but leading to this point I am wholly unimpressed with how the Dem leadership has handled this.

 

[totach]

It’s so funny to read what alasdairm writes . I’ve never seen a dumber blind hypocrite liberal .

 

[alasdairm]

^ nice ad hom. care to back that up?

alasdair

 

[CFC]

It’s so funny to read what alasdairm writes . I’ve never seen a dumber blind hypocrite liberal .

Come on mate - rather than insult, write some more detailed thoughts or rebuttals in response.

I know very little about Trump's impeachment, but I've been enjoying the back and forth in this thread and am open-minded to all.

 

[JessFR]

Gotta love the trump follower logic.

"It never happened, it's all lies! And if it did happen, it doesn't matter, because it's perfectly fine to do that! And if it's not perfectly fine to do that, it doesn't matter because democrats do it too!"

 

[cduggles]

Whistle blower safety? I'd say if anything happens to a known person, all eyes are on Hillary Trump. If they aren't known, nobody will know if something happens to them.

I don’t find this to be convincing, particularly considering Trump implied “kiddingly” that he wants to string the whistleblower up. Or that a bounty was offered by right-wing nut jobs for their identity.

Exposing the witness, and corroborators, invites the question of their motivation.

The story of the whistleblower has been corroborated (and more) by people with more direct knowledge. Isn’t that better, even better, than “good enough”? And why is motive more important than truth?

I personally don’t care why the whistleblower decided to tell the truth. It’s what gets done with that truth that’s more concerning, especially at this point, imo.

If those without anti-Trump motivation present a case for impeachment, it stands.

How many people do you want? And if they are telling the truth AND they dislike/hate Trump, why does it matter? Can’t we multitask?

How fair are the rules of engagement for the minority, compared to how impeachments have been addressed in the past?

There’s not much precedent regarding impeachment, and what there is supports an independent counsel mechanism (Bill Clinton/Ken Starr), which is something that won’t happen to Trump because of the blatant problems with the model (Mueller was special counsel, which is more limited in scope). So I think Trump is getting a very fair deal, particularly since he has a record of obstructing justice.

However, I think the process leading up to impeachment for Clinton was far too opaque, from what I know. But it is something to bear in mind, that Trump isn’t being impeached yet. Committee Republicans are able to attend and ask questions (including some of the ones who stormed the proceedings...), and it’s still currently a fact-finding process. From what I gather, it was a much more hyperpartisan process with Bill Clinton, although that’s hard to imagine.
I do hope Trump is forced to testify under oath in public. Must-see TV.
Frankly, I think the Democrats are being too responsive to incessant criticism from Trump and surrogates. They didn’t need to take a vote, which was political anyway, and the inquiry would still be completely constitutional. Democrats always worry too much about fairness.

I appreciate the hearings can now be in public, so we the people can see what is asked by both sides and what is allowed-not_allowed, but leading to this point I am wholly unimpressed with how the Dem leadership has handled this.

I don’t think the proceedings being public are going to do anything except allow for more slanderous accusations being leveled at people who testify, with the full weight of the presidency and his fans continuing to attack the witnesses. Hopefully it doesn’t prevent the truth from coming out. We’ll see. Public proceedings cater to the lowest common denominator, which does benefit Trump, but at least the Republicans have to come up with a new defense.
The fact that the president is already impugning the character of people who have no obvious motivation to lie is concerning and frightening in terms of silencing dissent.
What a mess.