Originally posted by Mountain Man
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Whistleblower identified
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostI thought the whole reason that the hearings are secret was so that witnesses couldn't hear the testimony of others. FWIU Sondland decided to alter his testimony so that it aligned with what the MSM (who also hasn't heard anyone testify) is reporting. Being so easily swayed is a sure sign that he's not a very credible witness. I mean, what's the next thing he'll change so that it now matches up with what he is currently hearing?
Sondland changed his testimony after the initial transcripts were released. We have eight of them now. It's been in all the papers.
Background reading:
offers a potentially critical piece of evidence to investigators trying to determine whether Mr. Trump abused his power.
Late-night show hosts mocked Mr. Sondland
Hmm. So that's where that line came from.
All I know about late night variety shows is what I read in the papers. There's a lot more interesting reading lately.
This is Sunday, 11/10.
On Monday, 11/4, the transcripts from McKinley and Yovanovich were released.
On Tuesday, 11/5, the transcripts from Volker and Sondland were released, and Sondland revised his testimony.
On Wednesday, 11/6, the transcript from Taylor was released.
On Thursday, 11/7, the transcript from Kent was released.
On Friday, 11/8, the transcripts from Hill and Vindman were released.
In other news, House republicans are asking the whistleblower to testify, because FWIU, the argument that he had nothing more than second-hand hearsay to offer doesn't matter anymore.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimLamebrain View PostOf course he really can't say where the presumption came from, that would be telling the truth. Besides, he can presume all he wants, but you don't convey that message, the quid pro quo, on a presumption. Everybody knows that, even you.
But then when you read his testimony, he says that he told his Ukrainian counterpart that the aid was "likely" (his exact word) tied to an anti-corruption statement, meaning he didn't express any certainty. In fact, the only time he expressed any certainty about quid pro quo was in his text message to Bill Taylor where he said that the President was "crystal clear" that there wasn't to be one.Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
The Republicans want to question Eric Ciaramella about his contacting Schiff and just how much "help" was he.
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View Post[ATTACH=CONFIG]40778[/ATTACH]
If I tell you about a conversation I heard that is hearsay
So if the question is: did Sondland say the call was tied to the investigations, it is eyewitness testimony. If the question is "was the aid tied to the investigation", then it is hearsay.
Sondland telling the Ukrainians that is the situation carries with it the fact the ukrainians knew or believed the aid was tied to the investigations. ERGO, we have eyewitness testimony from both hill and sondland, that the Ukrainians knew, were told, that the aid was tied to the investigations.
Thus we know the ukrainians were led to believe that they had to commit to the investigations to get the aid.
Since we have the Transcript of Trump also asking for the 'favor' in sequence with the mention of the aid in the call, we know Trump was also participating in the overall connecting of aid and investigations.
We have the hill July 10 meeting where Sondland tells the ukrainians the call itself requires a commitment to the investigations. We have the president on the call asking for the favor of the investigations wrt the aid. And we have sondland again telling the ukrainians the aid is held and contingent on the announcement of the investigations.
And that is just 3 events out of thousands of pages of testimony about this crazed story of President Trump, Giuliani and the gang as they tried to get dirt on Biden through the Ukrainians by using this aid as leverage.Last edited by oxmixmudd; 11-10-2019, 11:50 AM.My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1
If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26
This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19
Comment
-
Originally posted by oxmixmudd View PostSondland telling the Ukrainians that is the situation carries with it the fact the ukrainians knew or believed the aid was tied to the investigations. ERGO, we have eyewitness testimony from both hill and sondland, that the Ukrainians knew, were told, that the aid was tied to the investigations.
Secondly, according to his testimony, he only suggested that it was a possibility based on a presumption, indicating that he did not have any direct knowledge of a quid pro quo:
"I now recall speaking individually with Mr. Yermak, where I said that resumption of U.S. aid would likely not occur until Ukraine provided the public anti-corruption statement that we had been discussing for many weeks. I presumed that the aid suspension had become linked to the proposed anticorruption statement."
And really, who knows what Sondland actually said since he seems to have trouble remembering what he said or did during that period. Maybe he'll come up with another "correction" to his testimony to make things ever more muddled.
The only thing we know for certain is that he told Bill Taylor at the time that the President was "crystal clear" that there was to be no quid pro quo, so whatever his presumption is based on, it certainly didn't come from Trump. If Sondland made a bad call based on a false presumption then surely that's on him.
Then there's Vindman who disagreed with Trump as a matter of policy but said, "I did not know whether there was a crime or anything of the nature," and when pressed to support his claim that Trump demanded that the Ukraine government investigate Biden could not find anything in the transcript to latch onto even after spending several minutes looking over it in the hearing. And, like Sondland, his testimony is full of opinion being passed off as fact with phrases like "I did not think it was proper", "I just wrote it the way I kind of felt it", "I guess in my mind", and "That's just the way it seemed to me" (required reading). Not to mention his pretense of showing up to testify in full uniform when it had been his habit for years to wear a suit and tie to work.
Then we have Fiona Hill with her "I heard from a guy who heard from a guy" hearsay.
Bottom line: there is zero direct evidence that the Trump administration did anything illegal or even improper. And that's based only on what Schiff has condescended to release. Who knows what exculpatory evidence he's sitting on.Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostI thought the whole reason that the hearings are secret was so that witnesses couldn't hear the testimony of others.
FWIU Sondland decided to alter his testimony so that it aligned with what the MSM (who also hasn't heard anyone testify) is reporting. Being so easily swayed is a sure sign that he's not a very credible witness. I mean, what's the next thing he'll change so that it now matches up with what he is currently hearing?
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostThe Republicans want to question Eric Ciaramella about his contacting Schiff and just how much "help" was he.
What does Adam Schiff have to hide. hmm?Last edited by RumTumTugger; 11-10-2019, 02:19 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostThe Republicans want to question Eric Ciaramella about his contacting Schiff and just how much "help" was he.
Well, it's a nice change of pace from the Hillary hit squads, but while we're usually great with crazy, it's getting all full in here.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Juvenal View PostLemme get this latest conspiracy theory straight. So Schiff, using his own super-secret spies who were in on the call, or knew about the call, or used a honey trap or something or other to find out about the call, is supposed to have primed the whistleblower with the contents of his complaint, so he could launch an investigation into what he already knew?
Well, it's a nice change of pace from the Hillary hit squads, but while we're usually great with crazy, it's getting all full in here.Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostIf you're going to burn straw men, at least have the decency to open the window to clear the air afterwards.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Tassman View PostWell it canGeislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.
Beige Federalist.
Nationalist Christian.
"Everybody is somebody's heretic."
Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.
Proud member of the this space left blank community.
Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.
Justice for Ashli Babbitt!
Justice for Matthew Perna!
Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostGroup think, tribalism, not ever wanting to admit that their side, thus themselves, could be guilty of anything. A sort of blind patriotism to the team."He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot
"Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman
My Personal Blog
My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)
Quill Sword
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by rogue06, Today, 09:50 PM
|
0 responses
4 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Today, 09:50 PM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, Today, 04:03 AM
|
23 responses
111 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Diogenes
Today, 12:19 PM
|
||
Started by carpedm9587, Yesterday, 12:51 PM
|
97 responses
519 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Diogenes
Today, 09:31 PM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 06:47 AM
|
5 responses
45 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by mossrose
Yesterday, 12:18 PM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 06:36 AM
|
5 responses
26 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Yesterday, 07:37 AM
|
Comment