Leon Troutsky

Pure Football
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Leon Troutsky

  1. Do you even read the bulls*** twitter propaganda that you post? From the article... Democratic candidate Pete Buttigieg compared Bernie Sanders’ supporters with fans of President Trump — claiming that both camps include disaffected citizens who seek to change the status quo. The 37-year-old mayor of South Bend, Indiana, was speaking at a campaign stop in New Hampshire on Friday when he drew a parallel between followers of the diametrically opposed politicians, according to the Washington Examiner. “I think the sense of anger and disaffection that comes from seeing that the numbers are fine, like unemployment’s low, like all that, like you said GDP is growing and yet a lot of neighborhoods and families are living like this recovery never even happened. They’re stuck,” Buttigieg told high school students in in Nashua, N.H. “It just kind of turns you against the system in general and then you’re more likely to want to vote to blow up the system, which could lead you to somebody like Bernie and it could lead you to somebody like Trump. That’s how we got where we are.” ^^^ZOMG HE SAID BERNIE IS JUST LIKE TRUMP!!!!
  2. Can I just add that Godfather of Harlem gets better with each episode?
  3. CNN reporting that Pence aide who was concerned about the Ukraine call will appear to testify tomorrow if subpoenaed. And she’ll definitely be subpoenaed.
  4. This is the type of clownishness that’s the biggest threats to the impeachment effort... Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) went searching for answers regarding Ambassador Gordon Sondland’s faulty memory when he was questioning Taylor. Lieu noted the big gaps in Sondland’s memory when he appeared before the impeachment inquiry, and in a series of questions to Taylor tried to figure out what was behind it. “There was no indication that he was under the influence of alcohol?” Lieu asked Taylor. “There was no indication that he was under any medications that caused short-term memory loss?” Taylor responded dryly: “Not that I know of.”
  5. Not the hard core Republicans and Trump supporters. They’re not going to change. This is a fight for the middle.
  6. Bro, the entire game here is convincing the general public. Everything about impeachment is going to hinge on how the public reacts to the competing arguments.
  7. More importantly, the people that DO matter -- independents and leaning partisans -- aren't going to be persuaded by bias arguments given all the actual facts and evidence that's emerged. Complaining about the whistleblower is intended to keep the GOP base distracted. It's not going to shift the impeachment numbers.
  8. All of that might be true if the whistleblower were the source of the information. But at this point, unimpeachable witnesses (Vindman, Taylor, etc.) have testified and corroborated the complaint. So the whistleblower doesn't actually matter anymore. It would be like someone in a bank heard specific information about the manager stealing money out of the vault. This person hates the manager with a passion and wants to get him fired. So he puts together all of the information he heard and passes it along to supervisors. The supervisors interview other employees at the bank who don't even know the manager. They all say "yes, he was stealing from the bank, here are videos of him doing it, and here are other people who also saw it." Then the manager says, "okay, I took money from the vault and took it home, but that's not stealing!" After all of that, who cares if the person who originally passed the information along to supervisers hates the manager or not?
  9. He can hear Taylor tell it himself at the hearings next week.
  10. Exactly. The fact that Trump didn’t run it through the State Department, but instead had his personal lawyer working behind the scenes is another strong indication he knew it was corrupt. Also, everybody involved who has testified have all said they viewed it as inappropriate or corrupt.
  11. Excerpts from Taylor’s testimony, BTW... https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/20191106taylor_transcipt_excerpts38964.pdf ^^^Only 13 pages.
  12. Also this from Bill Taylor. Next week’s public hearing is going to be interesting... Q: And when you say that, this was the first time I heard that the security assistance—not just the White House meeting—was conditioned on the investigation, when you talk about conditioned, did you mean that if they didn’t do this, the investigations, they weren’t going to get that, the meeting and the military assistance? A: That was my clear understanding, security assistance money would not come until the President [of Ukraine] committed to pursue the investigation. Q: So if they don’t do this, they are not going to get that was your understanding? A: Yes, sir. Q: Are you aware that quid pro quo literally means this for that? A: I am.
  13. Welp, this is pretty clear. From Bill Taylor’s testimony. Q: Now, my colleague in the minority asked you about ‘quid pro quo.’ And are you a lawyer? A: I am not. I am not, Mr. Chairman. Q: Because he asked you about the legal definition of ‘quid pro quo.’ So you’re not in a position to talk about legal definitions? A: I am definitely not in the position. Q: Okay. A: I don’t speak Latin. Q: And, of course, whether it meets a legal definition of ‘quid pro quo’ or it doesn’t is really irrelevant to what we’re focused on here. But it is your testimony that, hey, you don’t make these public statements about these two political investigations we want, you’re not getting this meeting – you make these statements, you’ll get the meeting; you don’t make these statements, you won’t. Was that your understanding of the state of affairs in July of 2019? A: Yes.
  14. Thanks, jury tampering was the term I was struggling to come up with. I hope that MF’er goes to jail or gets sued into homelessness whichever the case.
  15. So who was the person who came up with it???
  16. How is that not obstruction of justice or some form of witness tampering (yeah, it’s a juror, not a witness)? How is that not patently criminal?
  17. Rand Paul tweeted a link to an article naming him, also.
  18. I just remembered Fiona Hill testifying last month. That means we have at least four transcripts coming out This week — Taylor, Morrison, Vindman, Hill.
  19. Sondland keeps digging that hole... Lee Wolosky, a lawyer for Fiona Hill, a key former National Security Council staffer, took issue with testimony released Tuesday from Sondland in which he described a meeting with Hill over coffee in which she was upset about “everything having to do with the Trump administration.” “Sondland has fabricated communications with Dr. Hill, none of which were over coffee,” Wolosky said in a tweet. “Dr. Hill told Sondland what she told lawmakers — the lack of coordination on Ukraine was distastorous, and the circumstances of the dismissal of Amb Yovanovitch shameful.”
  20. I thought this was some interesting insight about what Republicans are saying in private... SO AFTER TUESDAY’S BOMBSHELL transcript release -- GORDON SONDLAND and KURT VOLKER -- we buzzed our top House Republican sources and challenged them to tell us what they were actually thinking about TRUMP’Sstanding at the moment. -- THEY UNDERSTAND TRUMP IS IN DEEP TROUBLE. “Without a doubt,” one House Republican told us, this is the biggest political pickle TRUMP has been in. That’s why Republicans are taking the highly unusual step of putting Rep. JIM JORDAN (R-Ohio) on the Intelligence Committee to defend the president: He needs reinforcements, and fast. (We hear it will just be Jordan that gets a slot on that panel.) -- THEIR STRATEGY IS TO OBFUSCATE. Republicans understand that they “have a tough set of facts,” as one told us, and they are going to try to muddy the waters and distract from the obviously troubling testimony delivered by every witness Democrats have called. Watch for small-ball answers trying to pick apart the credibility of certain witnesses when it comes to whether they extrapolated or had firsthand information on what they were testifying about. -- THEY’RE READY TO THROW SONDLAND UNDER THE BUS. This was, perhaps, the most surprising to us. Conventional wisdom held that SONDLAND was going to be the strongest ally for TRUMP -- a donor whose $1 million to the Trump inaugural fund should have made him a loyal figure. But Republicans are starting to turn on him. Lawmakers we spoke with called him a lackey, a chest-thumper and a rube. Of course, perhaps that’s because he turned on the president. But there is no love lost for Sondland at all. -- THEY STILL, TO THIS DAY, QUESTION THE QUID PRO QUO. The cornerstone of Republicans’ defense of TRUMP is that, despite testimony indicating otherwise, there is no actual evidence of a quid pro quo. There is talk that the president wanted to hold up aid in exchange for a statement laying out an investigation into theBIDEN family. But, as several lawmakers told us, the aid was restored without the statement. By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. WE ASKED OUR SOURCES this simple question: If TRUMP is so concerned about corruption, can you point to other places in the world where he’s withheld aid in exchange for cleaning up government, or was the Biden example unique? No one can, but people point out that he frequently has threatened to cut off aid. https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook/2019/11/06/trumps-gop-walloped-487602
  21. I don’t mind people posting twitter with factual information and I don’t mind people dunking on the media when it’s warranted. What HM and I most often complain about is the utter bulls*** some of y’all continue to post that is not factually accurate and in many cases outright false. HM is right — there was nothing wrong with the headline or the article. The twitter “dunk” was complete BS.
  22. Or maybe I’m cautious and don’t jump the gun with imperfect data...like I was telling people regarding Trump in 2016? It was too early to call that election when that tweet was posted.
  23. Dems have the VA senate. On track to win majority in House and just need 6 more seats (they are leading in 10). https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/11/05/us/elections/results-virginia-general-elections.html
  24. I understand how it works. There’s not enough certainty in those benchmarks because of intra-county variations in turnout and vote choice to justify calling it that early.