Kent looks kind of like Judge Reinhold

11/13/2019 11:34:49 PM

Realistically though? Department of State, spent his whole career abroad in eastern Europe, speaks like 6 languages? kinda hints towards CIA.

11/14/2019 1:33:06 AM

Quote :

" tRuMp cReATeD tHiS wHoLe mESs oN pUrPoSe is peak galaxy brain"

But it’s incredibly on brand for Earl, though.

Earl and BanjoMan posting to each other in (quasi)defense of Trump is the inner circle of TWW hell.

11/14/2019 7:36:15 AM

Quote :

"it is, there was no release of foreign aid contingent upon Ukraine publicly announcing an investigation into Biden. That is a fact, that's the quid pro quo. It didn't happen. Let that sink in."

There was, and it was being withheld right up until the moment that Trump found out about the Whistleblower Complaint going public.

You get caught with your hand in the cookie jar after bedtime, mama's still gonna whoop you even if you didn't get the cookie.

11/14/2019 8:10:17 AM

I guess from this point on whenever the FBI is investigating someone planning a terrorist act they will have to wait until the act is completed and dozens are killed before making the arrest.

They simply won't have a legit case otherwise.

LOL!

11/14/2019 8:58:41 AM

Right, so if I shoot someone in the face and they happen to not die, I guess I get off scott free since no murder took place!

[Edited on November 14, 2019 at 9:32 AM. Reason : J]

11/14/2019 9:31:59 AM

i really hope dems expand the articles of impeachment to include other crimes as well such as emoluments violations perjury, subornation of perjury, etc

11/14/2019 9:53:18 AM

Quote :

"You get caught with your hand in the cookie jar after bedtime, mama's still gonna whoop you even if you didn't get the cookie."

Except that he didn't get his hand caught in the cookie jar. He is in trouble because other people were saying that he was planning to take something out of the jar.

And this is what makes it worse:

Mom: Did your brother tell you directly that he was gonna steal a cookie from the jar?
Taylor: No, our cousins told me that he was playing to steal from the jar.
Mom: Okay, I just need to make sure that he was actually gonna do it. Where's your cousin Sondland?
Taylor: He should be here next week.

Mom waits a week and then ask the cousin.

Mom: Did my son directly tell you that he was gonna steal from the jar?
Sondland: No, he just said that he wanted to look into to make sure that the cookies weren't being stolen by somebody else.
Mom: Oh, so you don't think that he was actually trying to steal?
Sondland: No, he was just making sure that other people weren't stealing from you.

And if they even get this dude on the stand and get him to actually say something other than "I can't get into that", this is exactly what he is gonna say. I am not defending Trump, I am just not kidding myself about the difficult of this impeachment and the risk the Dems run by holding these public hearings.

[Edited on November 14, 2019 at 1:32 PM. Reason : a]

11/14/2019 1:28:51 PM

for banjoman and other morons:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/11/14/one-defenses-trump-is-literally-tv-sitcom-joke/

simpsons did it first

11/14/2019 1:32:17 PM

^^ just better honest about why he won’t be removed then.

It’s not because he didn’t commit impeachable offenses and crimes (which SDNY confirmed). It’s because the Senate GOP is terrified of being primaried.

11/14/2019 2:17:55 PM

^^Don't be so naive. I am certainly not a moron by stating the difficulty in this case.

One problem is that this is a conspiracy trial with, as of today, no direct evidence linking Trump to the scandal.

The second problem is that the State department is doing everything they can to block testimony and evidence that could be vital to these hearings.

The third problem is Sondland. I would be shocked if he went up there and willingly indicated that the POTUS was trying to bribe the Ukranians into launching an investigation on the Bidens. Yes, it is clear that this was more than likely his intention, but getting Sondland to confirm that and say the words would be something else all together. The GOP have been handling this very well from a defensive position, and it wouldn't surprise me at all if nothing comes from the Sondland testimony.



[Edited on November 14, 2019 at 2:26 PM. Reason : a]

11/14/2019 2:25:25 PM

hmm

what's the word i'm looking for...

oh yeah

concern troll

11/14/2019 2:27:24 PM

Lol, banjoman didnt know sondland has already done that

11/14/2019 2:37:44 PM

https://www.wral.com/ap-norc-usa-facts-poll-americans-struggle-to-id-true-facts/18765931/

Quote :

"... ... ... But as a president with a history of making false statements and repeating debunked conspiracy theories faces public hearings this week in only the fourth impeachment inquiry in the nation’s history, the poll finds that differing political beliefs led Americans down different paths as they try to determine what's a unquestionable fact. Democrats are more likely to say they rely on scientists and academics, while Republicans are more likely to trust what they hear from President Donald Trump. “When I hear him on Fox News — that’s where I get all my information,” said Al Corra, a 48-year-old Republican from Midland, Texas. Trump, he said, is the easiest way to cut through an otherwise confusing information environment. Republicans are more likely than Democrats to put a great deal of trust in the president’s statements, 40% to 5%. Overall, a majority of Americans (61%) have little to no trust in information about the government when it comes from Trump, Corra said he distrusts academics as too “liberal" and he's not alone in that regard among Republicans. More Democrats than Republicans say they consider something to be factual if it’s been verified by scientists — 72% versus 40% — as well as academics — 57% versus 30%. ... ... ..."

11/14/2019 3:03:30 PM

5% of democrats trust trump?

11/14/2019 3:23:32 PM

I can't figure out how 5% of Republicans would even trust Trump.

Hell, I don't know if 5% of Trump's family trusts him.

11/14/2019 7:44:07 PM

The answer to that is: "the easiest way to cut through an otherwise confusing information environment."

11/14/2019 8:04:42 PM

Quote :

"Lol, banjoman didnt know sondland has already done that"

He hasn't testified yet.

11/14/2019 8:29:58 PM

Might want to add some qualifiers to that.

11/14/2019 8:36:09 PM

^^ lol, he has

Turn off Fox and watch real news

11/14/2019 8:53:54 PM

not at the hearing.

This guy is also a huge Trump supporter. I don't think it's that likely that he is gonna specifically single Trump out, regardless of what he may have already said. I would expect him to ride the GOP themes of portraying a president that was going after corruption, and not specifically the Bidens.

But, let's see.

11/14/2019 10:57:28 PM

In testimony to congress, yes

11/15/2019 6:50:44 AM

Anybody catch the NPR interview yesterday with some (R) Ohio congresscritter/senator? The reporter legit lost her cool at the bullshit he was spewing.

11/15/2019 7:48:01 AM

I didn’t see it but in a sane world it would happen more often.

Like, I don’t know how someone can sit there and have their intelligence insulted. If it’s a policy dispute or even some exaggeration or stretching of numbers it’s one thing but I don’t understand how a interviewer doesn’t get pissed off at Nikki Haley saying she has never heard Donald Trump lie.

11/15/2019 8:33:45 AM

Quote :

"The reporter legit lost her cool at the bullshit he was spewing."

They're feeding off Trump's his vibes. Dude's got them acting like it's Game 7 of the World series and JV is at the mound.

I wonder if any of y'all watched the Haley interview on CNN? It was pretty revealing and sinister the way that she just calmly explained her views on it.

"y'all are just trying to go at him again, but there was no hold up of aid for an investigation. I don't see an impeachable offense here."

[Edited on November 15, 2019 at 9:11 AM. Reason : g]

11/15/2019 9:00:46 AM

Trump released the first call memo to coincide with the ex-ambassadors testimony. Which, of course, is diversionary since even Vindman said that call was appropriate.

It’s akin to to Ted Bundy yelling “but look at all the women I didn’t kill!”

[Edited on November 15, 2019 at 9:15 AM. Reason : ^ We can just watch Fox it read the latest Haberman piece to get the GOP spin]

11/15/2019 9:14:43 AM

Devin Nunes knows there are nude pictures of Trump and god damn it, he wants to see them.

11/15/2019 9:22:59 AM

I can't pull myself away from this testimony.

11/15/2019 10:15:12 AM

The democrat lawyer looks like Scott Aukerman

11/15/2019 10:19:55 AM

Lol reading trump tweets in real time

11/15/2019 10:29:46 AM

This line that there was no hold up of aid so there is no crime is infuriating.

1) there was a hold up, if the whistleblower never said anything there would still be a holdup.

2) Its the mother fucking USA that is threatening to hold up aid, that threat is enough to be considered a bribe. Even if it doesn't come to pass that muscle is flexed and the guy on the other end of the line is now in the know that it is possible that at some point that aid may be back on the line and at risk if you don't get in line.

That's mob tactics, of course Trump had that in mind because hes seen it work before. Almost positively used it before.

Quote :

"This guy is also a huge Trump supporter. I don't think it's that likely that he is gonna specifically single Trump out, regardless of what he may have already said. I would expect him to ride the GOP themes of portraying a president that was going after corruption, and not specifically the Bidens."

Is this about Sondland? That guy is in way over his head. You're giving him way more credit than he deserves. We're seeing him try to keep his ass out of jail for perjuring himself.

[Edited on November 15, 2019 at 11:43 AM. Reason : ]

11/15/2019 11:32:17 AM

So it looks like we're going to have two people testifying that they heard Trump talking to Sondland about investigating Biden. Sondland, while loyal, has taken deliberate steps to correct his first testimony so that he isn't charged with perjury.

What is Sondland going to say about those calls in public testimony? Banjo, if he admits in that testimony that Trump specifically said he wanted a public declaration of an investigation from the Ukrainian president while aid was being held up, what is your new defense of Trump going to be?

11/15/2019 11:39:52 AM

Thats how negotiations work. This kind of thing has always happened. Its almost a duh. Like, why do you think we give aid to so many countries in the first place? You really think we are just philanthropic and not doing it for influence over their political economic and legal systems? You think aid has never been withheld in situations that didn't involve Biden?

Quote :

"U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration on Monday cut hundreds of millions of dollars in aid to El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras, after Trump blasted the three countries because thousands of their citizens had sought asylum at the U.S. border with Mexico."

Quote :

"President Trump has agreed to release $143 million in foreign aid to Central America, money the president froze earlier this year to put pressure on the governments of Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador during a migration surge at the U.S. southern border."

The bigger questions, is why does the president have this power if can't ethically be used?

[Edited on November 15, 2019 at 12:20 PM. Reason : its almost like you don't think he should have full executive power...almost like you think he lost]

11/15/2019 12:17:51 PM

When else has a president help up military aid solely for personal gain? I'll need sources

11/15/2019 12:19:09 PM

A. How do we define "personal gain" considering a gain for America is always a personal gain for the president?
B. What evidence do we have that there was a personal gain for Trump by having Biden investigated?
C. What evidence do we have that he did it solely for said personal gain?

You face a huge burden when making such claims around the nature of someone's intent. I'm not saying Trump doesn't do things for personal gain. IMO, he became president solely for personal gain. Hell, most of the people in DC are there solely for personal gain. I'm really just saying it will be nearly impossible to show and certainly nearly impossible to convince the nation of such specific intent involving routine negotiations.

11/15/2019 12:27:02 PM

^^bill taylor said it was a first



[Edited on November 15, 2019 at 12:28 PM. Reason : ^lol]

11/15/2019 12:27:35 PM

Earl is equivocating national interest and Trumps interest. He’s moving the goalposts whittle the ball is in the air.

Trump does not care what hunter Biden did in terms of corruption unless only because he wanted that spot for someone in his orbit. The only explanation is that he thought it could help him in the 2020 election. Any other explanation requires Simone Biles level gymnastics to make work. And trump is not capable.

11/15/2019 12:35:08 PM

Quote :

" B. What evidence do we have that there was a personal gain for Trump by having Biden investigated?"

Lol.

Won’t get Earl’d again.

11/15/2019 12:38:02 PM

Quote :

"A. How do we define "personal gain" considering a gain for America is always a personal gain for the president? B. What evidence do we have that there was a personal gain for Trump by having Biden investigated? C. What evidence do we have that he did it solely for said personal gain?"

A. I said "solely", so I'm going to assume you misread instead of ignored
B. You really need to see evidence that it helps Trump's reelection chances for someone he might be running against to be investigated for corruption?
C. Do you believe that Trump was pushing to have Zelensky announce the investigation on CNN, or is that fake news?

11/15/2019 12:45:42 PM

who has a better handle on if there was a problem with the call: all the people involved who thought it was wrong and the people who moved quickly to cover it up, or earl and banjoman

11/15/2019 12:49:40 PM

Quote :

" The only explanation is that he thought it could help him in the 2020 election"

And the only explanation for why he would think it could help him is that Biden actually did something wrong. Creating an investigation out of nothing would be bad for Trump.

Quote :

"A. I said "solely", so I'm going to assume you misread instead of ignored"

How can you say investigating corruption, if it actually turns out to have been real corruption (which is the only scenario that would help trump) is a sole benefit to Trump? How can you not see that everyone would benefit if we prosecute powerful people for their crimes? Even if Trump has also committed crimes and is a beneficiary of that particular bad guy going down.

Quote :

"B. You really need to see evidence that it helps Trump's reelection chances for someone he might be running against to be investigated for corruption?"

Announcing the investigation a year out would be way to early. If it was after the convention yes, but theres 20 other candidates available at the time. Like, how would Biden being investigated for corruption, hurt Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders? Submit your name into an election to become immune to criminal investigation. No wonder so many people keep entering the race!

Quote :

"C. Do you believe that Trump was pushing to have Zelensky announce the investigation on CNN, or is that fake news?"

Announcing something big like that on TV would be important because it would get erased otherwise. People that powerful are almost untouchable unless people on that level are after them. The public knowing first would keep it from getting erased.

Quote :

"who has a better handle on if there was a problem with the call: all the people involved who thought it was wrong and the people who moved quickly to cover it up, or earl and banjoman"

Probably the community of the people who are in powerful positions, and have their children in powerful positions because of connections and privileges produced in a fashion similar to the ones that were the subject of this hypothetical investigation. Definitely not the people who don't have a horse in the race at all.

[Edited on November 15, 2019 at 1:12 PM. Reason : k]

11/15/2019 1:10:25 PM

Quote :

"Creating an investigation out of nothing would be bad for Trump."

Ahha

hah

hahahha


hahahahahahahahahaahah

You're funny

11/15/2019 1:19:19 PM

it's true, it's why republicans had to resign after benghazi

11/15/2019 1:27:15 PM

It's also why there's no such thing as Qanon.

11/15/2019 1:34:03 PM

Quote :

"earl and banjoman"

First of all, I never said that there was not a problem with the call.

Second of all, just because I don't agree to everything that the Dems are saying doesn't automatically put me in Trump's corner.

If this case were a lay up then Trump would have resigned so that the VP could pardon him. There are clearly problems with this Impeachment hearing that the dems need to overcome. And acknowledging those problems doesn't automatically make me a Trump supporter.

On the other hand, the republicans are being incredibly deliberate and efficient with all of their questioning. Who would have thought that tanks and Obama would be mentioned so heavily during these proceedings? Who would have thought that they would be forcing every witness to answer the question of "do you know of any impeachable evidence against Trump?" when we all know damn well that it isn't the role of the witnesses to decide if he is guilty.

If you were a moron, you could almost admire their strategy.

[Edited on November 15, 2019 at 5:37 PM. Reason : k]

11/15/2019 5:27:53 PM

Quote :

" Early impact of impeachment inquiry: 68% of Americans watched, heard, or read about the impeachment hearings. Of those, 41% became more supportive of impeachment. Only 25% less supportive. Source: Reuters/Ipsos poll"

Can’t believe people thought impeachment would backlash

11/15/2019 7:55:26 PM

41% of 68% is only 28%

11/15/2019 8:00:53 PM

this counsel for the republicans has the weirdest haircut.

11/15/2019 8:19:39 PM

Quote :

"41% of 68% is only 28%"

So after two days of impeachment hearings 28% of Americans are more supportive vs 17% that are less supportive. What point are you making by use of the word "only"?

11/15/2019 8:29:11 PM

^I think the point is that he likes to go out of his way to kiss Trump's ass.

11/15/2019 10:43:16 PM