I do not understand why the White House put so much emphasis on releasing the not-a-transcript when it is not exculpatory at all.
You see, he just put pressure on Ukraine to investigate a political opponent rather than explicitly saying they had to do it to get the aid they were promised and which Trump has given contradictory reasons for freezing.
Because the quid pro quo and not the "investigate my political opponent with the help of my personal lawyer" is the only bad part.
Dan is a CNN reporter who has become something of a living legend on Twitter for his continuous superhuman efforts to fact check Trump (and other politicians) in real time.
I do not understand why the White House put so much emphasis on releasing the not-a-transcript when it is not exculpatory at all.
Probably because they can release it and since it won’t contain the sentence “investigate Biden for me or you’ll never see this aid money” they will scream that it was all fine, despite it clearly not being fine when any sane person reads it.
I cleaned up the OP some and added a few useful links. Still a work in progress. Please bat signal me if there is something substantive that should be added to it. (Preferably that I can just copy pasta) However, strip that @ out in any quotes. I don't want a hundred notifications, please.
I do not understand why the White House put so much emphasis on releasing the not-a-transcript when it is not exculpatory at all.
You see, he just put pressure on Ukraine to investigate a political opponent rather than explicitly saying they had to do it to get the aid they were promised and which Trump has given contradictory reasons for freezing.
Because the quid pro quo and not the "investigate my political opponent with the help of my personal lawyer" is the only bad part.
Could it be that? I’ve been reading it mouth agape and I honestly wondered if Barr figured Trump was fucked so if the memo was released all the focus would be on Trump and Barr might slither out from under the ensuing investigation.
By the way this seems like a great time to remind everyone that the White House counsel is Barr’s son in law.
0
Options
I ZimbraWorst song, played on ugliest guitarRegistered Userregular
This is deeply into Homer Simpson "I thought the police officer was a prostitute" territory already.
Here's the thing that I'm wondering about.
I understand that most everyone else in Washington is capable of at least the facade of professionalism and so we are still dealing with an anonymous whistleblower.
Trump, however, is demonstrably not in this category. So I'm left wondering why we haven't seen him ranting on twitter with one of his clever nicknames. It must be a Herculean effort on the part of his minders to keep him on message with just referring to this person as "the whistleblower".
It strikes me as incredible that Trump allies are asking others to interpret a "favor" as not an implicit reference to quid pro quo given there is no way that Trump interprets it as anything but a transactional "I give you something and you give me something in return."
This is one of those times, where Trump is both sides of the conversation, right? Or like that time he pretended to be his publicist and called news outlets, right?
Cause it reads like Trump speaks and what Trump would say. Only it reads that way in Selenskyj's part of the conversation as well.
Here's the thing that I'm wondering about.
I understand that most everyone else in Washington is capable of at least the facade of professionalism and so we are still dealing with an anonymous whistleblower.
Trump, however, is demonstrably not in this category. So I'm left wondering why we haven't seen him ranting on twitter with one of his clever nicknames. It must be a Herculean effort on the part of his minders to keep him on message with just referring to this person as "the whistleblower".
He probably thinks "whistleblower" is already a dirty nickname.
So it dawns on me, couldn't this now open a path for the democrats to see Trump's tax information? You have to figure, that now that we're at this point, well emoluments should be included on the list of offenses and I suspect, that does mean you need to see his financial records, including tax stuff.
That path has been wide open for months now. There was a whole specific law and everything.
Spool, just hit on this. This admin has been successful in slowing shit down thus far and impeachment is a game changer.
So it dawns on me, couldn't this now open a path for the democrats to see Trump's tax information? You have to figure, that now that we're at this point, well emoluments should be included on the list of offenses and I suspect, that does mean you need to see his financial records, including tax stuff.
yes, under an impeachment inquiry the House has broader power to demand information more rapidly. Hopefully the end result of all this fuck-acting will be that if he'd just complied, it would have been easier for him!
Notice I don't suggest that it would have been easier if he'd just not done any crimes. "Don't do crimes" is pretty clearly off the table for this admin.
That's what I was thinking. I've seen a ton of stuff where they mention shit can now be fast tracked. Something tells me, Trump probably not just use to dealing with an entity that won't go away after an out of court settlement, in the event that his high powered lawyer fees don't intimidate them. He probably also isn't going to be used to the idea, that some entities can fast track shit and shut down his stonewalling, which is likely done to try and wear people out into settling. My hope is that if he gets the shit kicked out of him for emoluments as well, that might discourage some of the graft in state and local politics (fair bit of, rich assholes that see public office as a hobby with pay, that let's them score some perks for their primary business. I really dislike the idea of part time state legislatures because they kind of encourage setups that not only make it harder for the non-wealthy to hold office, but reinforce bad behavior).
Also saw someone bemoaning how all the judges Trump appointed, would help him. Not so sure that's going to be the case. For one, the fast tracking probably bypasses most of those judges, which means this will be either just SCOTUS or a very small number of courts high up on the chain. It's worth remember most of the judges that were appointed by Trump, were replacements for spots that opened up after judges appointed by past republicans left. From what I understand, Trump's appointments have done very little to change the makeup of the lower courts as of now. So if a lower court rules in his favor, they'd probably have done so if all the judges appointed by him, had been appointed by another republican. Also worth noting, that he probably has very lose ties to many of them and that we're dealing with the equivalent of the political Sith. A ton of those rat fuckers now have their, likely undeserved, seat on the court. They do not have to cover for him and debating on how things play, they might decide it's in their interest to not side with him. I suspect something that will hound Kavanaugh, in attention to him being a rapist, was that he backed the bullshit of the POTUS being above the law. I imagine if Trump goes down hard, namely his favorable ratings crater and this shit gets proven, it'll be really easy to make a case that any judge that tries to help Trump, probably should removed because they probably made a deal with Trump to cover his ass. That is an impeachable offense. With that in mind, many of those judges he appointed, could throw him under the bus because it makes that threat to their career go away, even if they had a backroom deal to cover his ass. Sharpie Gate, god do we need better names for scandals, probably gives them a way to discredit any claims he makes. On the other hand, these ideas might have documented the shit.
Anyways, I don't think Trump has majority backing on SCOTUS. There has been pushback from Roberts in the past, notably the "there are no Obama or Trump judges." Roberts is a shitty justice, but in addition to trying to maintain a thin veneer of credibility for the court under his tenure, he doesn't quite seem to align with some of Trump's bullshit. Anything the democrats can get under fast tracking now, that goes to court, is probably going to be in their hands whether Trump and the GOP like it or not. Gorsuch and Kavanaugh being on the court might be completely irrelevant. Only two I have any question about what they might do, are Thomas and Alito, but it hardly matters if Roberts is likely to help Trump with his bullshit on impeding Congresses powers.
The NYTimes has an impeachment flowchart that I think can be helpful for explaining the process.
+24
Options
TetraNitroCubaneThe DjinneratorAt the bottom of a bottleRegistered Userregular
Those... Those memos, which are not transcripts, are far more damning than I would have anticipated. It's clear and obvious that he was asking a foreign power to interfere. Why woul-
Oh god.
Are we really traipsing into the "It couldn't have been a crime! There wasn't a huge dollar sign on the bag!" defense again?
Those... Those memos, which are not transcripts, are far more damning than I would have anticipated. It's clear and obvious that he was asking a foreign power to interfere. Why woul-
Oh god.
Are we really traipsing into the "It couldn't have been a crime! There wasn't a huge dollar sign on the bag!" defense again?
Trump literally framed it as favor exchange! ARGH! They are literally going with him not explicitly mentioning the aid as 100% exoneration.
A lot of European countries are the same way, so I think it’s something you want to look at but the United States has been very very good to Ukraine. I wouldn’t say that it’s reciprocal necessarily because things are happening that are not good but the United States has been very, very good to Ukraine
Those... Those memos, which are not transcripts, are far more damning than I would have anticipated. It's clear and obvious that he was asking a foreign power to interfere. Why woul-
Oh god.
Are we really traipsing into the "It couldn't have been a crime! There wasn't a huge dollar sign on the bag!" defense again?
The Supreme Court has ruled that it isn't bribery unless there is as huge dollar sign on the bag.
Those... Those memos, which are not transcripts, are far more damning than I would have anticipated. It's clear and obvious that he was asking a foreign power to interfere. Why woul-
Oh god.
Are we really traipsing into the "It couldn't have been a crime! There wasn't a huge dollar sign on the bag!" defense again?
As ever, Merriam-Webster have been quick to jump into the fray.
This is one of those times, where Trump is both sides of the conversation, right? Or like that time he pretended to be his publicist and called news outlets, right?
Cause it reads like Trump speaks and what Trump would say. Only it reads that way in Selenskyj's part of the conversation as well.
It's not a transcript, so it's written by Trump's people. Likely in something akin to his voice, because that's how you write these things.
+3
Options
UnbrokenEvaHIGH ON THE WIREBUT I WON'T TRIP ITRegistered Userregular
This is one of those times, where Trump is both sides of the conversation, right? Or like that time he pretended to be his publicist and called news outlets, right?
Cause it reads like Trump speaks and what Trump would say. Only it reads that way in Selenskyj's part of the conversation as well.
It's not a transcript, so it's written by Trump's people. Likely in something akin to his voice, because that's how you write these things.
and/or Zelenskyy in trying to suck up to Trump deliberately tried to adopt his way of communicating
This is one of those times, where Trump is both sides of the conversation, right? Or like that time he pretended to be his publicist and called news outlets, right?
Cause it reads like Trump speaks and what Trump would say. Only it reads that way in Selenskyj's part of the conversation as well.
It's not a transcript, so it's written by Trump's people. Likely in something akin to his voice, because that's how you write these things.
I had wondered if Zelenskyy had been imitating Trump’s style of speaking as a way of ingratiating himself, and if that was why Trump thought the call was so “perfect”.
+11
Options
AbsalonLands of Always WinterRegistered Userregular
The 'tit' is impeachable. 'For tat' is like diamond-plating what is already cast-iron.
This is one of those times, where Trump is both sides of the conversation, right? Or like that time he pretended to be his publicist and called news outlets, right?
Cause it reads like Trump speaks and what Trump would say. Only it reads that way in Selenskyj's part of the conversation as well.
It's not a transcript, so it's written by Trump's people. Likely in something akin to his voice, because that's how you write these things.
I had wondered if Zelenskyy had been imitating Trump’s style of speaking as a way of ingratiating himself, and if that was why Trump thought the call was so “perfect”.
Yeah, that might even be it. But damnit, this reads like it was made up like 5 minutes before it was sent out.
This is one of those times, where Trump is both sides of the conversation, right? Or like that time he pretended to be his publicist and called news outlets, right?
Cause it reads like Trump speaks and what Trump would say. Only it reads that way in Selenskyj's part of the conversation as well.
It's not a transcript, so it's written by Trump's people. Likely in something akin to his voice, because that's how you write these things.
and/or Zelenskyy in trying to suck up to Trump deliberately tried to adopt his way of communicating
"speaking his language", as it were
It is one HUNDRED percent this.
FF XIV - Qih'to Furishu (on Siren), Battle.Net - Ilpala#1975
Switch - SW-7373-3669-3011
Fuck Joe Manchin
Also, while Zelensky is fluent in English it is common to have interpreters on the call. (You know, for spy reasons) and that could also be a factor. But mostly that this was a book report written by a Trump admin member.
I do not understand why the White House put so much emphasis on releasing the not-a-transcript when it is not exculpatory at all.
I think it is possible that there is more to this issue and worse things that will come to light. This may be the White House's way to try to get in front of the story and control the narrative.
Yeah, about what you'd expect. I know most of us don't actually think that Trump will be removed from office as a result, but it it annoying to be reminded that this is the caliber of person who will drive that.
From the incredulous political analyst from MSNBC, but the headline is from the New York Times.
The BBC are still going through the details so they only have the vaguest information so far but will update it as the day goes on. They’re saying the call is from July 25th. I thought most recent stuff had it placed as in August?
Literally right after the Ukrainian president finishes saying they would like to purchase more military equipment from the United States, Donald Trump says "I would like you to do us a favor, though"
It's so blatant, but unfortunately it is not as straight-forward a phrase as "How's the cover-up going, John?"
If we could get the actual tapes of it, I have no doubt it would be more damning, too. Actually hearing him say the words.
We need something more than this transcript. I guess if you have a low opinion of Trump and are reading through it you could say it’s bad, but for a lot of people they are just going to hand wave it as a nothingburger. There’s not really a smoking gun.
We need something more than this transcript. I guess if you have a low opinion of Trump and are reading through it you could say it’s bad, but for a lot of people they are just going to hand wave it as a nothingburger. There’s not really a smoking gun.
That's what the whistleblower report may turn out to be.
Posts
They are dumb
You see, he just put pressure on Ukraine to investigate a political opponent rather than explicitly saying they had to do it to get the aid they were promised and which Trump has given contradictory reasons for freezing.
Because the quid pro quo and not the "investigate my political opponent with the help of my personal lawyer" is the only bad part.
Dan is a CNN reporter who has become something of a living legend on Twitter for his continuous superhuman efforts to fact check Trump (and other politicians) in real time.
Probably because they can release it and since it won’t contain the sentence “investigate Biden for me or you’ll never see this aid money” they will scream that it was all fine, despite it clearly not being fine when any sane person reads it.
Trump is just claiming complete exoneration because he is a habitual liar.
Could it be that? I’ve been reading it mouth agape and I honestly wondered if Barr figured Trump was fucked so if the memo was released all the focus would be on Trump and Barr might slither out from under the ensuing investigation.
By the way this seems like a great time to remind everyone that the White House counsel is Barr’s son in law.
I understand that most everyone else in Washington is capable of at least the facade of professionalism and so we are still dealing with an anonymous whistleblower.
Trump, however, is demonstrably not in this category. So I'm left wondering why we haven't seen him ranting on twitter with one of his clever nicknames. It must be a Herculean effort on the part of his minders to keep him on message with just referring to this person as "the whistleblower".
Also on Steam and PSN: twobadcats
This is one of those times, where Trump is both sides of the conversation, right? Or like that time he pretended to be his publicist and called news outlets, right?
Cause it reads like Trump speaks and what Trump would say. Only it reads that way in Selenskyj's part of the conversation as well.
He just... tweeted it out.
He probably thinks "whistleblower" is already a dirty nickname.
Spool, just hit on this. This admin has been successful in slowing shit down thus far and impeachment is a game changer.
That's what I was thinking. I've seen a ton of stuff where they mention shit can now be fast tracked. Something tells me, Trump probably not just use to dealing with an entity that won't go away after an out of court settlement, in the event that his high powered lawyer fees don't intimidate them. He probably also isn't going to be used to the idea, that some entities can fast track shit and shut down his stonewalling, which is likely done to try and wear people out into settling. My hope is that if he gets the shit kicked out of him for emoluments as well, that might discourage some of the graft in state and local politics (fair bit of, rich assholes that see public office as a hobby with pay, that let's them score some perks for their primary business. I really dislike the idea of part time state legislatures because they kind of encourage setups that not only make it harder for the non-wealthy to hold office, but reinforce bad behavior).
Also saw someone bemoaning how all the judges Trump appointed, would help him. Not so sure that's going to be the case. For one, the fast tracking probably bypasses most of those judges, which means this will be either just SCOTUS or a very small number of courts high up on the chain. It's worth remember most of the judges that were appointed by Trump, were replacements for spots that opened up after judges appointed by past republicans left. From what I understand, Trump's appointments have done very little to change the makeup of the lower courts as of now. So if a lower court rules in his favor, they'd probably have done so if all the judges appointed by him, had been appointed by another republican. Also worth noting, that he probably has very lose ties to many of them and that we're dealing with the equivalent of the political Sith. A ton of those rat fuckers now have their, likely undeserved, seat on the court. They do not have to cover for him and debating on how things play, they might decide it's in their interest to not side with him. I suspect something that will hound Kavanaugh, in attention to him being a rapist, was that he backed the bullshit of the POTUS being above the law. I imagine if Trump goes down hard, namely his favorable ratings crater and this shit gets proven, it'll be really easy to make a case that any judge that tries to help Trump, probably should removed because they probably made a deal with Trump to cover his ass. That is an impeachable offense. With that in mind, many of those judges he appointed, could throw him under the bus because it makes that threat to their career go away, even if they had a backroom deal to cover his ass. Sharpie Gate, god do we need better names for scandals, probably gives them a way to discredit any claims he makes. On the other hand, these ideas might have documented the shit.
Anyways, I don't think Trump has majority backing on SCOTUS. There has been pushback from Roberts in the past, notably the "there are no Obama or Trump judges." Roberts is a shitty justice, but in addition to trying to maintain a thin veneer of credibility for the court under his tenure, he doesn't quite seem to align with some of Trump's bullshit. Anything the democrats can get under fast tracking now, that goes to court, is probably going to be in their hands whether Trump and the GOP like it or not. Gorsuch and Kavanaugh being on the court might be completely irrelevant. Only two I have any question about what they might do, are Thomas and Alito, but it hardly matters if Roberts is likely to help Trump with his bullshit on impeding Congresses powers.
Oh god.
Are we really traipsing into the "It couldn't have been a crime! There wasn't a huge dollar sign on the bag!" defense again?
That's 100% the defense.
No, and Schiff has said that he will find ways for Congress to interview him or her while keeping their identity a secret if he possibly can.
The Supreme Court has ruled that it isn't bribery unless there is as huge dollar sign on the bag.
As ever, Merriam-Webster have been quick to jump into the fray.
It's not a transcript, so it's written by Trump's people. Likely in something akin to his voice, because that's how you write these things.
and/or Zelenskyy in trying to suck up to Trump deliberately tried to adopt his way of communicating
"speaking his language", as it were
I had wondered if Zelenskyy had been imitating Trump’s style of speaking as a way of ingratiating himself, and if that was why Trump thought the call was so “perfect”.
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
Yeah, that might even be it. But damnit, this reads like it was made up like 5 minutes before it was sent out.
It is one HUNDRED percent this.
Switch - SW-7373-3669-3011
Fuck Joe Manchin
I think it is possible that there is more to this issue and worse things that will come to light. This may be the White House's way to try to get in front of the story and control the narrative.
Yeah, about what you'd expect. I know most of us don't actually think that Trump will be removed from office as a result, but it it annoying to be reminded that this is the caliber of person who will drive that.
That would be so epically delicious, to have Rudy testify and provide said receipts.
Which female former ambassador to the UN is he dissing here?
Holy shit, the spin doctored version that the executive released is them admitting to a crime?
Am I reading these correctly?
What in the hell is going on
This is just the condensed version Trump was willing to release. What the hell does the actual 30 minute transcript say?!?
It's so blatant, but unfortunately it is not as straight-forward a phrase as "How's the cover-up going, John?"
If we could get the actual tapes of it, I have no doubt it would be more damning, too. Actually hearing him say the words.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
That's what the whistleblower report may turn out to be.