(10-24-2019, 04:19 PM)GMDino Wrote: How do some people still support him?

Closed sessions are illegitimate but public hearings are show trials. We won’t participate in a partisan process, and it’s partisan as long as we won’t participate. You can’t remove Trump without evidence, and the evidence is just proof you want to remove Trump.

— Jon Lovett (respookted on BOOth sides) (@jonlovett) October 24, 2019

Quote:NSC official plans to testify in impeachment probe even if White House tries to block him


Tim Morrison has been identified as a witness to one of the most explosive pieces of evidence unearthed by House impeachment investigators.

A slew of high-profile witnesses have defied White House orders not to cooperate with the impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump. 

Tim Morrison, a National Security Council official who has been identified as a witness to one of the most explosive pieces of evidence unearthed by House impeachment investigators, plans to testify Thursday even if the White House attempts to block him.

“If subpoenaed, Mr. Morrison plans to appear for his deposition,” his attorney, Barbara Van Gelder, said.


A slew of high-profile witnesses have defied White House, State Department and Pentagon orders not to cooperate with the impeachment probe. In each case, lawmakers have issued a subpoena, which the officials have relied on to justify testifying over the administration’s objections.


Morrison, however, would be the first currently serving White House official to testify. He’s also the first official believed to be on a July 25 phone call between President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky during which Trump pressed his counterpart to investigate former vice president Joe Biden.

Morrison was also a crucial figure identified Tuesday by Trump’s ambassador to Ukraine, William Taylor, as a witness to Trump’s effort to withhold military aid from Ukraine in order to bend Zelensky to his will.

Taylor testified that on Sept. 1, Morrison told him about a conversation he witnessed between Trump's E.U. ambassador Gordon Sondland and a senior Ukrainian government official. In that conversation, Taylor said Morrison told him, Sondland informed the official that hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. military aid to Ukraine were dependent on the opening of political investigations.

Taylor also said Morrison spoke to him on Sept. 7 about another conversation with Sondland. In that conversation, per Taylor's recounting, Sondland revealed he had spoken directly with Trump about Ukraine and that Trump insisted that Zelensky should publicly declare the political investigations himself, rather than leaving it to subordinates. According to Taylor, Morrison said he then relayed details of the call to then-national security adviser John Bolton as well as NSC lawyers.

Van Gelder declined to comment on a CNN report that indicated Morrison would corroborate the key details of Taylor's testimony. "We will not be commenting on what he will say to the Committees," she said.

Sondland already testified to lawmakers last week but some Democrats have demanded he return for further questioning in light of Taylor's testimony.

Quote:Lawyers for former Trump advisor John Bolton reportedly in contact with impeachment probe panels


Lawyers for former national security advisor John Bolton reportedly have been in touch with officials working on House committees conducting an impeachment probe into President Donald Trump.

Bolton reportedly was so disturbed by efforts to get Ukraine to investigate Trump’s political opponents, among them former Vice President Joe Biden, that he called it a “drug deal.”

Bolton reportedly had called Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani a “hand grenade,” in reference to Giuliani’s efforts to pressure Ukraine.

Lawyers for former national security advisor John Bolton have been in touch with officials working on House committees about possibly testifying in the impeachment probe of President Donald Trump, a person close to Bolton told NBC News on Friday.

The news comes more than a week after the White House’s former top Europe expert, Fiona Hill, reportedly testified to Congress that Bolton was so disturbed by efforts to get Ukraine to investigate Trump’s political opponents that he called it a “drug deal.”

Hill said that Bolton told her he did not want to be part of that push, which involved White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, according to reports of her testimony.

Hill also reportedly testified that Bolton had called Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani a “hand grenade.”

Giuliani has been at the head of a charge to have Ukraine launch investigations that could benefit Trump politically ahead of his 2020 reelection effort.

The Washington Post reported Thursday that White House trade representative Robert Lighthizer in August withdrew a recommendation to restore some of Ukraine’s trade privileges after Bolton “warned him that President Trump probably would oppose any action that benefited the government in Kyiv.”

Bolton left the Trump administration on Sept. 10.

Trump said he fired Bolton, while Bolton said he had resigned.

(10-24-2019, 06:44 PM)hollodero Wrote: I solved that one. It's FOX news.

There's a whole lot of people that get served an alternative reality day in and day out. And the GOPlers representing them can't quite escape living the same alternative reality in order to get reelected. I mention that because I stumbled across a person named Geraldo Rivera (or something like that) today, a caricature of a person that on FOX claimed if FOX had existed back then, Nixon would not have needed to resign.

And I think that funny man is correct.

(10-28-2019, 11:09 AM)michaelsean Wrote: You don't know who Geraldo Rivera is?  Every good thing i ever thought about you has been erased in one post.

(10-28-2019, 11:58 AM)hollodero Wrote: I saw that guy before, but never caught his name. I assumed he was a lost Marx brother or something.

I'm bad at remembering right-wing pundits. I know that's awful. I actually started to think bad about myself for this as well. Your sentiments have my full endorsement.

(10-29-2019, 11:21 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Pelosi is planning to bring a floor vote on the next step of the inquiry this week: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/10/29/what-pelosi-is-up-with-thursdays-impeachment-vote/

Tl;dr: This isn't a necessary step (especially based on last week's court ruling), but it does signal that the House is going to move on from the closed depositions into the public hearing phase (as was always the intention). It will set the rules and procedures for the public part of the inquiry.

(10-29-2019, 11:29 AM)GMDino Wrote: Don't know if you listen to All the President's Lawyers (I'm catching up on the last few episodes) but they were discussing how long some of these court cases *might* take and how it might push the impeachment beyond Christmas.  It will be interesting to see how that part of it plays out.

(10-29-2019, 11:38 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I listen every week. But yeah, the court cases will be the interesting part. I can't remember if it was APL or LRC (the one from which APL spinned off), but they discussed how as of right now it is in Trump's best interest to get it over with quickly and Pelosi's to drag it out because of the public image. Now with this vote, they will be taking away the biggest argument the GOP has had with the whole thing thus far, so I would expect things to continue to trend poorly for Trump.

So with all of that, it makes you wonder how much the administration will continue to stonewall and fight in court as it will continue to draw things out and look bad for them.

(10-29-2019, 11:48 AM)GMDino Wrote: I listen to them both but am woefully behind.  When I'm not cutting the grass twice a week it cuts into my podcast time. 

(10-29-2019, 11:48 AM)GMDino Wrote: The GOP is already saying this vote is "too late" and the entire impeachment is a sham so they'll just move their "defense".

(10-29-2019, 11:48 AM)GMDino Wrote: If Trump holds true to what he thinks "works" for him it will be stonewalling all the way.

(10-29-2019, 11:55 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: This past LRC was an interesting one. Whoever they had for the left did not come across very well, tbh.


Yeah, I know they won't roll over, but it will become disingenuous if they get what they want and then still complain about the same things. Well, more disingenuous then it already was.


Likely because he won't listen to his advisers.