General Impeachment inquiry launched

[KWingJitsu]

Read David Holmes' full opening statement in impeachment inquiry

David Holmes, an aide to the top U.S. diplomat in Ukraine, told the committees leading the impeachment probe that he overheard Mr. Trump asking EU Ambassador Gordon Sondland about the Ukrainian president's willingness to carry out investigations.

""So, he's gonna do the investigation?" referring to Ukrainian president Volodmyr Zelensky. "He's gonna do it," replied Sondland, adding he'd do "anything you ask him to."

Holmes said the phone call he heard occurred on July 26, the day after the conversation at the center at the impeachment probe, according to a copy of Holmes' opening statement obtained by CBS News. Holmes said he was sitting near Sondland at a restaurant in Kiev and could overhear the call.

Holmes also said in his opening statement that he asked Sondland about Mr. Trump's views on Ukraine. "I asked Ambassador Sondland if it was true that the President did not 'give a s—t about Ukraine.'" Holmes said that "Sondland agreed that the President did not 'give a s—t about Ukraine'" and that he only cares about "big stuff" like the "Biden investigation."​

So much for Trump caring about "corruption in Ukraine" eh?
LMAO.

 

[FINGERS]

Trump won’t be impeached.

I just hope this situation will allow a process in the future that stops the United States President Being a King.

The last thing America is is a fiefdom.

Its literally written in their law.

 

[member 3289]

Trump won’t be impeached.

Highly likely that he will be impeached.

Almost impossible that he will be removed from office.

 

[Disciplined Galt]

Reeeeeeeee.
Any day now.

 

[Leigh]

David Holmes, an aide to the top U.S. diplomat in Ukraine, told the committees leading the impeachment probe that he overheard Mr. Trump asking EU Ambassador Gordon Sondland about the Ukrainian president's willingness to carry out investigations.

""So, he's gonna do the investigation?" referring to Ukrainian president Volodmyr Zelensky. "He's gonna do it," replied Sondland, adding he'd do "anything you ask him to."

Holmes said the phone call he heard occurred on July 26, the day after the conversation at the center at the impeachment probe, according to a copy of Holmes' opening statement obtained by CBS News. Holmes said he was sitting near Sondland at a restaurant in Kiev and could overhear the call.

Holmes also said in his opening statement that he asked Sondland about Mr. Trump's views on Ukraine. "I asked Ambassador Sondland if it was true that the President did not 'give a s—t about Ukraine.'" Holmes said that "Sondland agreed that the President did not 'give a s—t about Ukraine'" and that he only cares about "big stuff" like the "Biden investigation."​

So much for Trump caring about "corruption in Ukraine" eh?
LMAO.

Is this held as a court hearing with an actual judge or is it a panel of non legally qualified officials? In the UK we have a term called 'hearsay' and that testimony would never fly.

 

[KWingJitsu]

Is this held as a court hearing with an actual judge or is it a panel of non legally qualified officials? In the UK we have a term called 'hearsay' and that testimony would never fly.

It's not court, it's an impeachment inquiry (which will likely lead to impeachment proceedings once the evidence and testimony is gathered and completed).
And this isn't considered hearsay because he actually heard the call, so its first hand (and sworn) testimony.

 

[Leigh]

It's not court, it's an impeachment inquiry (which will likely lead to impeachment proceedings once the evidence and testimony is gathered and completed).
And this isn't considered hearsay because he actually heard the call, so its first hand (and sworn) testimony.

Ok, cheers.

Regarding hearsay, David Holmes testified that Sondland had told him what Trump had said about Ukraine and Biden. That's third hand testimony and definitely hearsay.

Trump -> Sondland -> Holmes -> Testimony

 

[KWingJitsu]

Ok, cheers.

Regarding hearsay, David Holmes testified that Sondland had told him what Trump had said about Ukraine and Biden. That's third hand testimony and definitely hearsay.

Trump -> Sondland -> Holmes -> Testimony

If you read the first part, Sondland actually heard Trump's response on the phone, so that part's not hearsay:

he overheard Mr. Trump asking EU Ambassador Gordon Sondland about the Ukrainian president's willingness to carry out investigations.

""So, he's gonna do the investigation?" (referring to Ukrainian president Volodmyr Zelensky). "He's gonna do it," replied Sondland, adding he'd do "anything you ask him to."

The part about Biden was Sondland's response to the question i.e. 'what the president cares about is...' and not a direct Trump quote, so I doubt it could be considered hearsay; but maybe it could.

However, in these proceedings, hearsay isn't discounted. In fact, the initial Whistleblower report was definitely hearsay (he heard someone else describe the call before reporting it). And it turned out to all be true.
More on this: AP Explains: What’s wrong with hearsay evidence in Congress? Key part: "congressional committees invariably choose to allow hearsay."

 

[Deleted member 1]

Is this held as a court hearing with an actual judge or is it a panel of non legally qualified officials? In the UK we have a term called 'hearsay' and that testimony would never fly.

Impeachment inquiry. Private classified witness interviews occured. Then that moved to an open public proceeding that is going on now with rules and subjects based on the classified interviews. Comically the Republicans demanded a public inquiry to demean the private closed door ones ( that are needed because you don't know if classified details will be involved). Now they are public and the GOP states it's just for show.
This will likely lead to impeachment proceedings and impeachment in the house. Then it will move to the Senate "court" . This is not a legal court, but of importance impeachment and removal does not require typically legal standards.

U.S. Senate: Impeachment

Trump will probably be impeached but not removed.

 

[Filthy]

Impeachment inquiry. Private classified witness interviews occured. Then that moved to an open public proceeding that is going on now with rules and subjects based on the classified interviews. Comically the Republicans demanded a public inquiry to demean the private closed door ones ( that are needed because you don't know if classified details will be involved). Now they are public and the GOP states it's just for show.
This will likely lead to impeachment proceedings and impeachment in the house. Then it will move to the Senate "court" . This is not a legal court, but of importance impeachment and removal does not require typically legal standards.

U.S. Senate: Impeachment

Trump will probably be impeached but not removed.

They know that this trial will happen in the court of public opinion. Hence, the pardoning of the war criminals and such.

 

[BeardOfKnowledge]

There are no words for mind bafflingly stupid this impeachment inquiry is when there's so much better, lower hanging fruit if you're trying to win an election in 2020. I hope Democratic supporters remember this next year.

 

[member 3289]

There are no words for mind bafflingly stupid this impeachment inquiry is when there's so much better, lower hanging fruit if you're trying to win an election in 2020. I hope Democratic supporters remember this next year.

It is indeed an impeachable offense but I can't argue with those who say the move is political. I think what's important is that the bullshit was exposed before Zelensky was able to publicly announce an investigation into the Bidens.

If early elections are any indicator Trump is going to lose next year. Both gubernatorial candidates he's campaigned for (Kentucky and Louisiana) have been defeated by their Democrat counterparts.

But if anyone can fuck this up, it's the party that went out of its way to nominate Hillary Clinton when even a Jewish socialist with a heavy Brooklyn accent would've beaten Trump.

 

[BeardOfKnowledge]

It is indeed an impeachable offense but I can't argue with those who say the move is political. I think what's important is that the bullshit was exposed before Zelensky was able to publicly announce an investigation into the Bidens.

If early elections are any indicator Trump is going to lose next year. Both gubernatorial candidates he's campaigned for (Kentucky and Louisiana) have been defeated by their Democrat counterparts.

But if anyone can fuck this up, it's the party that went out of its way to nominate Hillary Clinton when even a Jewish socialist with a heavy Brooklyn accent would've beaten Trump.

The DNC is going to have a tough time running on an environment platform whlie they sit silent on public lands and water being sold off. Of course in this generation of hyper skepticism of "fake news" it's looking like a media mogul is going to run for their leadership so I'm not putting much past them at this point.

 

[jason73]

 

[KWingJitsu]

Impeachment inquiry. Private classified witness interviews occured. Then that moved to an open public proceeding that is going on now with rules and subjects based on the classified interviews. Comically the Republicans demanded a public inquiry to demean the private closed door ones ( that are needed because you don't know if classified details will be involved). Now they are public and the GOP states it's just for show.
This will likely lead to impeachment proceedings and impeachment in the house. Then it will move to the Senate "court" . This is not a legal court, but of importance impeachment and removal does not require typically legal standards.

U.S. Senate: Impeachment

Trump will probably be impeached but not removed.

You know you're giving @Wild constipation every time you post all this truth, right? Poor guy's probably sipping Pepto mixed with whiskey right about now.

 

[Deleted member 1]

You know you're giving @Wild constipation every time you post all this truth, right? Poor guy's probably sipping Pepto mixed with whiskey right about now.

Trump still stands a fair chance of winning next year solely because the Dems just really want to give him a fighting chance.

 

[Sex Chicken]

View: https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/1195705874372792321?s=20

 

[Wild]

You know you're giving @Wild constipation every time you post all this truth, right? Poor guy's probably sipping Pepto mixed with whiskey right about now.

Just tag me when he’s impeached, ok. Thx.

 

[Wild]

Trump still stands a fair chance of winning next year solely because the Dems just really want to give him a fighting chance.

He’ll win by a landslide. Far more than he beat Clinton by.

 

[Lukewarm Carl]

He’ll win by a landslide. Far more than he beat Clinton by.

So he'll actually win the popular vote this? Or just widen the gap in the electoral college?

I'm being genuine by the way. Just want to know which you think is going to happen.

 

[Deleted member 1]

So he'll actually win the popular vote this? Or just widen the gap in the electoral college?

I'm being genuine by the way. Just want to know which you think is going to happen.

Trump ain't winning the popular vote. But regional suburbs (not urban or rural) are strong swing areas this time around and many tilt his way. Enough and he'll take those states.
Florida will be key.

 

[Lukewarm Carl]

Trump ain't winning the popular vote. But regional suburbs (not urban or rural) are strong swing areas this time around and many tilt his way. Enough and he'll take those states.
Florida will be key.

I'd be lying if I didn't admit that there's a part of me that wants to see the pop vote gap widen against and the electoral college gap widen for as well.

 

[member 3289]

Trump ain't winning the popular vote. But regional suburbs (not urban or rural) are strong swing areas this time around and many tilt his way. Enough and he'll take those states.
Florida will be key.

Trump will win Florida. The Dems will have to win the election without it

 

[Deleted member 1]

Trump will win Florida. The Dems will have to win the election without it

If Trump takes Florida, he only needs one of the blue wall states to win.

 

[member 3289]

If Trump takes Florida, he only needs one of the blue wall states to win.

Florida is always a toss-up, but we have a largely popular Republican governor and a Republican-controlled state House and Senate. In 2018 there was only one Democrat to win a statewide race (Agriculture Commissioner Nikki Fried)