LOL I wish I didn't have to LOL at that simple statement - but NBC is out there focusing on how titillating and entertaining the hearings are not - without really hitting substance at all - they are all falling for the GOP talking point of: "boring". This stuff should not be "entertaining" - but that's the majority of major MSM outlets coverage so far. It's pretty pathetic - corporate media is definitely on Trump's side (if that hasn't become obvious over the last 4 years)
The fact that Trump called Sondland on an unsecured mobile phone in Kiev means that Russia, and Ukraine likely have a recording of that call. Not to mention the NSA This is why various foreign countries almost certainly have leverage over the President.
If the thread is not clear before the closing argument/debate in the Senate, then it is too late. Individual One moves and 20+ tweets a day, Schiff moves at one soundbite. Individual One is playing with cats in an open field. Schiff is trying to heard those same cats.
Yes Reuters, that's what Democrats are aiming for here, a good Reality TV Show: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...t-hearings-begin-without-a-bang-idUSKBN1XO059 WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic lawmakers tried their hand at reality television with mixed results on Wednesday as they presented arguments to the American public for the impeachment of a former star of the genre, Donald Trump. Unlike the best reality TV shows - not to mention the Trump presidency itself - fireworks and explosive moments were scarce, however. Democrats need the hearings to resonate with the broader American public to gain support for a process that could lead to the impeachment and removal of the Republican commander-in-chief. Through hours of testimony and questioning that aired live on U.S. broadcast and cable networks, the proceedings were rather staid, with only the occasional raised voice or snippy retort. To the president’s son, Eric Trump, it was a big yawn. To go back to soccer analogies, that's the equivalent of having City playing Wolves, City pushing all the attacking, and Wolves hacking, fouling and wasting time to a halftime draw that should have been a 3-0 (referee missing two clear handballs), and the commentators complaining that City is not offering a good spectacle. GMAFB.
And that opening is where I have a problem with your statement. I interpreted it as you thinking it was a good argument for me, which it isn't. I'm talking about the public at large, who are going to struggle with how it is an impeachable offense if the Ukrainians weren't aware the military aide was being withheld. On the other hand, it should be relatively easy for the Dems to point out that even if the Ukrainians didn't know about the military funding, they did know that the visit with Trump was being withheld until the investigation into the Bidens and 2016 election were started. The problem here is that it will be hard to convince people that a meeting with the President has value. With regards to withholding the military funding, I think the Dems have done a bad job of showing that attempted bribery/extortion is almost as bad as actual bribery. People get arrested for planning criminal acts all the time. In this case, it could also be argued that even though the Ukrainians only knew about it in late August (per Taylor and Kent's testimony) and the funding was released in mid-September, that two to three weeks constitute the act of bribery/extortion.
A better soccer analogy: The impeachment inquiry proceedings on TV are like when the US National team is playing a very important match, and most Americans aren't even watching, because they don't care.
There may be a second witness (aside from all the other countries intelligence collecting agencies) NEW: Suriya Jayanti, a foreign service officer, also overheard a call between President Trump and Sondland discussing the need for Ukrainian officials to pursue "investigations" https://t.co/E1YGMrVfwdhttps://t.co/thz0swD7aS— rusticgorilla (@ImagineWorldas1) November 14, 2019
Dana Milbank in Washinhgton Post boils it down to 1 sentence-- "He abused presidential powers for personal advantage." Milbank also quotes former Deputy Solicitor General Neal Katyal for a 2-sentence explanation-- “A sitting president secretly tried to get a foreign government to announce an investigation into his chief political rival. In essence, Trump was using the awesome powers our Constitution gives presidents not to benefit the nation, but to benefit him personally.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/11/12/case-against-trump-seven-words/
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckr...-moment-in-the-trump-ukraine-scandal-timeline If you wonder why the Ukraine thing was so slapdash, this article makes the argument that Team Trump had a deal in place with the losing candidate from the 2019 election.
Pelosi is the Queen of Shade!! Speaker Nancy Pelosi appeared to question President Trump’s intelligence at a news conference: “If the president has something that is exculpatory — Mr. President, that means you have anything that shows your innocence — then he should make that known. So far we haven’t see that.”
I don't think there is any doubt Zelensky knew that Trump and Co wanted the investigations and that they were withholding a White House visit until he announced the investigations. For whatever reason, the focus seems to be on the military aid. Probably because the value of that is easier to sell than the value of a White House visit.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/...igations-trump-wanted-then-everything-changed Um, wow. So Zelensky was going to provide the deliverable September 13. It was all set up. But the whistleblower complaint got to Congress on the 9th, which f’ed it up. Guys, this is almost like a real life Star Trek episode where the galaxy and/or ship is save with 10 seconds to go on the doomsday device. We were 4 days away from Trump using foreign assistance to torpedo Biden.
This is a new wrinkle that I wasn't aware of.. It also seems to show why the Ukrainians were so interested in when the aid would be released:
Which also points to just why, after months and months of resisting, the Ukrainians finally broke down on having Zelensky make the announcement as soon as they found out the funding was contingent upon the investigations...
Sondland s'plaining part Two is coming along. This bozo called the POTUS on a cell phone, in a restaurant, in presence of staffers.......JFC! What an idiot. “A second U.S. Embassy staffer in Kyiv overheard a cellphone call between President Trump and his ambassador to the European Union discussing a need for Ukrainian officials to pursue ‘investigations,’” the AP reports. “The July 26 call between Trump and Gordon Sondland was first described during testimony Wednesday by William Taylor, the acting U.S. ambassador to Ukraine. Taylor said one of his staffers overhead the call while Sondland was in a Kyiv restaurant the day after Trump’s July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy that triggered the House impeachment inquiry.” “The second diplomatic staffer also at the table was Suriya Jayanti, a foreign service officer based in Kyiv.”
Long story short, the Dems seriously need to back the truck up a bit and go after the White House's records regarding Ukraine. It really seems like it could be a gold mine of information and, in theory, something that they should be able to get given the ruling around the Nixon tapes..
It makes it harder for people to vote for him. As you say, whether it's a political or a legal process is rather beside the point.
So you're saying that this will be dragged out further into the election cycle with a periodic trickle of leaks and document releases showing Trump and Co using the office of the President to put his political goals above the national security of the country? I'm not seeing the downside here.