• To celebrate the release of Halo: The Master Chief Collection on Steam, Xbox Games Studios has provided 5 Steam copies of the game and 5 Xbox One copies of the game! We will be giving these away in the Gaming Giveaways |OT|. Some Steam copies will also be given away to the PC Gaming Era community.
  • An old favorite feature returns: Q&ERA is back! This time we'll be collecting questions for Remedy Entertainment, makers of Max Payne, Alan Wake, Quantum Break, and Control. Members can submit questions for the next 3 days, 7 hours, 20 minutes. Submissions will close on Dec 12, 2019 at 12:00 AM.

Impeachment Hearings Day 5, Dr. Fiona Hill and David Holmes testify (live now). This is the last one!

dabig2

Member
Oct 29, 2017
2,742
Fucking PHEW. Listened to this all day at work. Sondland's testimony has a lot of already-addressed take-aways, but Cooper's was a fucking dagger, imo. When you give people a way to build a solid timeline, you give them lots of ammo in regard to building a case.

Also, Schiff is that motherfucker.
Posted this elsewhere, but yeah, timelines are huge to understanding more about the actions certain people were undertaking. That Sondland GOP soundbite has no substance when put up against a timeline, or any at all if you don't but still - Dems putting up a visual timeline, animated and definitely detailed, of everything going down and where certain people were, what they were doing, and then using their spoken testimonies to get what they were thinking at that time.

A months-long campaign by President Donald Trump and his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani to reportedly pressure the Ukraine government to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden, Trump’s potential rival in the 2020 election, has gripped the nation’s capital. The situation escalated following the Sept. 13 revelation of an intelligence community whistleblower complaint reportedly related to a “series of events” including a phone call between President Trump and Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

As these events unfold, the aim of the chronology below is to provide a useful reference for the context and timeline on Ukraine, the roles of Joe Biden and his son Hunter there, and Trump and Giuliani’s efforts to persuade Ukraine to pursue investigations against them. We attempt to present an accurate picture of events, favorable and unfavorable to the players involved. Our assessments and views of the available public information are reflected in two pieces: Viola Gienger’s “Trump and Giuliani’s Quest for Fake Ukraine ‘Dirt’ on Biden: An Explainer” and our forthcoming, “The Swiftboating of Joe Biden.”

This chronology will be updated as new information becomes available.
Start with that and go from there. Got 2 more days of testimonies to add to it too.

And the more you can make it like Jared Harris's court testimony in Chernobyl the better it could be! Or in other words, take it home Schiff because you've basically already been doing it. Put some timelines on the screen and run down every month of the past 2 years.
 

Leona Lewis

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,462
Crazy how attitudes about Schiff did a 180 lol
When was Schiff universally hailed as anything but a lone voice of reason and truth in this whole Trump Russia/Ukraine saga? He's been the MVP on this entire thing since his first big moment:


I was amazed when I saw this two years ago. At a time when the Democrats' spinelessness made me want to kill myself, he was literally the only one speaking the facts that everyone else but Maddow was skirting around.
 

JJAwiiu

Member
Oct 27, 2017
312
From Day 1 I've felt there's no way the Democrats won't impeach. Whatever is or isn't uncovered doesn't matter. They were waiting for their best play and now that they've decided on this, it WILL happen.

I've also felt Day 1 that there's no way the Republicans WILL impeach. Whatever is or isn't uncovered doesn't matter either. Worst case scenario, they'll just say "Well that's unbecoming of a president, but we don't find it to be an impeachable offense."

It's why I hate politics. It's become "Us VS Them" and "Them Vs Us." I wonder if the impeachment will rile up the Democrat voters or Republicans more.
 

Jersey_Tom

Member
Dec 2, 2017
3,084
When was Schiff universally hailed as anything but a lone voice of reason and truth in this whole Trump Russia/Ukraine saga? He's been the MVP on this entire thing since his first big moment:


I was amazed when I saw this two years ago. At a time when the Democrats' spinelessness made me want to kill myself, he was literally the only one speaking the facts that everyone else but Maddow was skirting around.
Schiff has a tendency to act like a doofus and go for a soundbite when he should be more concerned about laying out the facts. He got another harsh reminder of that when he pretty much caused an unforced error by giving a paraphrased rundown of the July 25th call which, while gives a better gist of what was happening, was used as a talking point for close to a month making it sound like the Dems were jumping to all sorts of wild conclusions.

Of course now after the testimonies so far all those conclusions have been shown to be right. And Schiff to his credit has been a lot more stoic lately when talking about impeachment.

Another reason people weren't backing him was that he, like Pelosi, weren't exactly bullish on the idea of impeachment from the get-go. During the Mueller investigation he was positive that an impeachment could happen but generally wasn't calling for it, and tended to throw cold water on his colleagues' calls for impeachment as recently as I've found as this past year.
 

Umbrella Carp

Member
Jan 16, 2019
2,866
From Day 1 I've felt there's no way the Democrats won't impeach. Whatever is or isn't uncovered doesn't matter. They were waiting for their best play and now that they've decided on this, it WILL happen.

I've also felt Day 1 that there's no way the Republicans WILL impeach. Whatever is or isn't uncovered doesn't matter either. Worst case scenario, they'll just say "Well that's unbecoming of a president, but we don't find it to be an impeachable offense."

It's why I hate politics. It's become "Us VS Them" and "Them Vs Us." I wonder if the impeachment will rile up the Democrat voters or Republicans more.
Such a partisan vote in the Senate despite the sheer amount of evidence and testimony would surely send the Democrat base into a frenzy
 

Jersey_Tom

Member
Dec 2, 2017
3,084
Such a partisan vote in the Senate despite the sheer amount of evidence and testimony would surely send the Democrat base into a frenzy
There's also a lot more Republican seats in the Senate up for reelection in 2020 than there are Dem ones. Depending on where polling is for impeachment at that point, it could be VERY risky to vote party lines for impeachment.

People like Susan Collins, Thom Tillis, Joni Ernst, Cory Gardner, Martha McSally, even Mitch McConnell could have irreparable damage done to their campaigns in 2020 if despite overwelming evidence and a poor performance by Trump in a Senate trial isn't enough to keep them from choosing party alliegance over the country. I mean that's a portion of this people still haven't really talked about if this does make it to the Senate. At some point Trump's going to have to talk, or have his representation make a case for him. THAT really could make or break this whole thing if millions of people see Trump melting down like Alex Jones towards the Chief Justice.
 

Umbrella Carp

Member
Jan 16, 2019
2,866
There's also a lot more Republican seats in the Senate up for reelection in 2020 than there are Dem ones. Depending on where polling is for impeachment at that point, it could be VERY risky to vote party lines for impeachment.

People like Susan Collins, Thom Tillis, Joni Ernst, Cory Gardner, Martha McSally, even Mitch McConnell could have irreparable damage done to their campaigns in 2020 if despite overwelming evidence and a poor performance by Trump in a Senate trial isn't enough to keep them from choosing party alliegance over the country. I mean that's a portion of this people still haven't really talked about if this does make it to the Senate. At some point Trump's going to have to talk, or have his representation make a case for him. THAT really could make or break this whole thing if millions of people see Trump melting down like Alex Jones towards the Chief Justice.
Do Trump or McConnell have any avenues to keep him out of that room? Because if they do, they will be exploring ALL of them.
 
Last edited:

dabig2

Member
Oct 29, 2017
2,742
Another reason people weren't backing him was that he, like Pelosi, weren't exactly bullish on the idea of impeachment from the get-go. During the Mueller investigation he was positive that an impeachment could happen but generally wasn't calling for it, and tended to throw cold water on his colleagues' calls for impeachment as recently as I've found as this past year
His shining moment of those times was after the Barr memo and Repubs were calling for his stepdown and possible resignation and such bullshit, he came out with his "you might think that's OK, I don't think that's OK" speech. A speech where he pretty much ran down every scummy thing we already knew Trump was guilty or complicit of.

But yeah, he was still often the cold water to impeachment on Trump's other crimes with Cummings playing in the middle to Auntie Maxine and Nadler's more outward push for stopping Trump. And then Trump committed crime #1000 and at least #3 in the extortion/solicit bribe category from a foreign country, and then we finally jumped into action.

But he's certainly shining right now when he needs to on the impeachment stage. He's been ontop of all of this shit since the start of Trump's presidency. Hell without him I'm not sure if we find out that Intelligence committees stopped receiving reports from the government just after Comey's firing.
 

GameChanger

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
671
Such a partisan vote in the Senate despite the sheer amount of evidence and testimony would surely send the Democrat base into a frenzy
Exactly. Trump's cult will never turn on him but the rest of the country is going to be very energized to remove him from office in 2020. A lot of Republican senators are in tough position right now. It's either Trump or their own reelections.
 

Umbrella Carp

Member
Jan 16, 2019
2,866
Exactly. Trump's cult will never turn on him but the rest of the country is going to be very energized to remove him from office in 2020. A lot of Republican senators are in tough position right now. It's either Trump or their own reelections.
For a lot of them, they can't get past this delusion that their re-election walks hand in hand with Trump
 

LordByron28

Member
Nov 5, 2017
1,421
For a lot of them, they can't get past this delusion that their re-election walks hand in hand with Trump
Depending on where the voting public opinion a vote either way for Republicans, especially in swing states, could be disastrous. If they vote to remove him from office, they piss off and deflate their core voting base. If they vote not to remove him they anger those who have wanted him gone.
 

digdug2k

Member
Mar 28, 2018
740
There's also a lot more Republican seats in the Senate up for reelection in 2020 than there are Dem ones. Depending on where polling is for impeachment at that point, it could be VERY risky to vote party lines for impeachment.
Polling really isn't moving on impeachment though. It moved a bit at the start but it's been pretty steady now. I'm not too hopeful this testimony will change anything.

People just have to get out and vote. Same as every fucking election. Voter turnout scares repubs more than this.
 
Last edited:

Brewm0nt

Member
Dec 22, 2017
223
His activity dropped almost instantly after Barr met with Murdoch/Fox News.
This just reminded me to check...the official @foxnews twitter account hasn’t posted anything since 11/8/18, over a year ago. I seem to remember there being speculation that this was because of an investigation but nothing ever came of it. I know they gave a bs excuse as to why, but when you consider how much money is lost through lost engagement it really makes you wonder why this was all approved. Especially considering they still have related accounts that are currently active.
 

dabig2

Member
Oct 29, 2017
2,742
This just reminded me to check...the official @foxnews twitter account hasn’t posted anything since 11/8/18, over a year ago. I seem to remember there being speculation that this was because of an investigation but nothing ever came of it. I know they gave a bs excuse as to why, but when you consider how much money is lost through lost engagement it really makes you wonder why this was all approved. Especially considering they still have related accounts that are currently active.
It's funny you bring that up, because another interesting meeting happened with Murdoch pretty much the same day Fox News went quiet.
1/ Two nights ago, Rupert Murdoch called on Mitch McConnell, after hours. Since then, two Fox News-related Twitter accounts have not tweeted.
 

Jersey_Tom

Member
Dec 2, 2017
3,084
Do Trump or McConnell have any avenues to keep him out of that room? Because if they do, they will be exploring ALL of them.
I haven’t done a whole lot of research into the Clinton impeachment to determine this or know enough to say that McConnell could make rules for the Senate trial, but what I have read suggests that the Senate does have a limited ability to make rules not outlined previously by some main rules for the Senate on impeachment. With that in mind it could be possible that Trump might kept from testifying in person and it would be to allow him to answer questions in writing or as I said, have someone answer questions for him. There might also be an opening where he might not even have to be in the room at all if his attorneys are going to answer questions for him.
 

Umbrella Carp

Member
Jan 16, 2019
2,866
I haven’t done a whole lot of research into the Clinton impeachment to determine this or know enough to say that McConnell could make rules for the Senate trial, but what I have read suggests that the Senate does have a limited ability to make rules not outlined previously by some main rules for the Senate on impeachment. With that in mind it could be possible that Trump might kept from testifying in person and it would be to allow him to answer questions in writing or as I said, have someone answer questions for him. There might also be an opening where he might not even have to be in the room at all if his attorneys are going to answer questions for him.
I guarantee you this, you will not see Trump's fat ass inside the Congress chamber for the entirety of this Impeachment.
 

Cheerilee

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,863
From Day 1 I've felt there's no way the Democrats won't impeach. Whatever is or isn't uncovered doesn't matter. They were waiting for their best play and now that they've decided on this, it WILL happen.

I've also felt Day 1 that there's no way the Republicans WILL impeach. Whatever is or isn't uncovered doesn't matter either. Worst case scenario, they'll just say "Well that's unbecoming of a president, but we don't find it to be an impeachable offense."

It's why I hate politics. It's become "Us VS Them" and "Them Vs Us." I wonder if the impeachment will rile up the Democrat voters or Republicans more.
The Democrats weren't waiting for their best play. They were waiting for the results of the Mueller Investigation. But then Mueller screwed everyone by going out of his way to not draw any conclusions, insisting that his report spoke for itself, which allowed Trump and the Republicans to spin the narrative, since they knew that most people couldn't be bothered to read the entire report. The Democrats say the report has evidence of crimes. The Republicans say it does not. Who should the general public believe, if they're not going to bother to read the full report themselves, and the guy who wrote the report won't give them the cliffnotes version?

Nancy Pelosi was actively fighting against impeachment, because she knew that the Senate would never remove Trump, and with no teeth, Trump could spin their attempted impeachment as a groundless smear campaign. Pelosi was afraid that, with weakened evidence, the impeachment everyone had been waiting for could backfire on the Democrats, and the safer option would be just to wait out Trump's doomed Presidency (since he barely got in, and his poll numbers with moderates have done nothing but drop with each scandal, even if his monthly scandals have become tiresome).

But then Trump forced the Democrats hands, by trying to interfere with the 2020 elections (by abusing the power of his office to attack the family of the Democrat who was leading in the polls), since Trump had so successfully gotten away with interfering with the 2016 elections. In trying to subvert democracy a second time, Trump left the Democrats absolutely no choice but to move forward with impeachment, regardless of political consequence.


I've been watching the story from Canada, outside of any attachment to the Republicans or the Democrats, and pretty much every commentator and analyst has been in constant agreement that the House is going to impeach Trump, not because the House is controlled by the Democrats, but because Trump is so obviously fucking guilty, and the Democrats are easily willing to see that. Trump will (probably) not be removed by the Senate, not because Trump is innocent, but because the Senate is controlled by Republicans, and the Republican Party is full on corrupt and borderline criminal at this point, in their willful negligence.

America was once the Leader of the Free World, but under Trump and the Republicans, it has become more like a gigantic Banana Republic. That's basically how the entire world sees America right now, aside from some massive pockets of emboldened Nazi resurgence (which have apparently taken root in all countries to a terrifying degree, including Canada), who are cheering these changes and wish to see them become permanent and implemented worldwide.

It's not a partisan issue. It's not "politics". It's criminals and Nazis, and the Republican Party's baffling choice to become the Party of Criminals and Nazis (apparently they'll agree to anything, as long as it brings them power).

Depending on where the voting public opinion a vote either way for Republicans, especially in swing states, could be disastrous. If they vote to remove him from office, they piss off and deflate their core voting base. If they vote not to remove him they anger those who have wanted him gone.
Add to that, Mitch McConnell has apparently been threatening Republican Senators, saying that anyone who votes to remove Trump will be ejected from the Republican Party, and will lose that support mechanism when it comes to running for re-election. And not only will they lose support, but they'll be forced to run as an Independant, against some rookie with an "R" next to their name on the ballot. Any Republican who votes to remove Trump can kiss their career goodbye, if Mitch and the Republican Party have the guts to follow through on their threat. Because the Republican Party is officially all-in in their support for America's Criminal President.
 
Dec 31, 2017
2,397
Moment of the day for me.

After Sondland opening statement and the Dems round of questioning. After what easily is the most damning and damaging hour to the republicans and Trump's administration of this whole inquiry.

"Time for the minority's 45 minutes."

*Cam on Nunes*

The sheer, genuine state of shock and distress he seemed to be in was a pure delight to witness. Then the shot with Castor moving arms in a 'wtf you want me to ask or do with this?!' way while Nunes turns to him with a fucking death stare for a moment.



Pure gold.



This was comedic in a way that shows/movies can only hope to strive for. Unreal.
 

fanboi

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
4,036
Sweden
Unless R-reps are in on it, would it even damage them if they went along and impeached and removed Trump now?

EDIT: Even though this hearing was much more important and major, the Cohen hearing will be my fav.
 

Beer Monkey

Member
Oct 30, 2017
4,569
Unless R-reps are in on it, would it even damage them if they went along and impeached and removed Trump now?
Trump would try to primary them all and they are cowards. They can't win elections with Trump's base. But they can't win primaries without them. So they know the general election looks real bad, but they don't know how to get to the general without being sycophants.
 

antonz

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,286
State polling is going to determine Mitch McConnell's moves. There are 4 very vulnerable Republican Seats at the moment which is enough to cause Republicans to lose the Senate. Mitch is without a doubt more concerned with keeping The Senate then he is with keeping trump.
 

Tbro777

Member
Nov 24, 2017
90
I was listening to some of the questioning as I was falling asleep earlier, I swear I heard one of the GOP reps trying to lay a foundation that Trump offered the QPC to Ukraine to test them to see if they would take him up on it to see if they are still corrupt. If that's where the GOP goes with their defense they are screwed. I probably just misheard things as I was half asleep though.
 

fanboi

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
4,036
Sweden
Yeah, it absolutely would destroy them politically. Which is why there's no movement.
would it though? They could just turn now and start drumming it up that they removed Trump and try to make the image that they saved the country in the end. Sure initially it would be bad for them, but in the long game I was more thinking.
 

Arkestry

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,337
London
Yeah, it absolutely would destroy them politically. Which is why there's no movement.
Except supporting Trump is killing them politically too. They just lost the governorship of Luisiana which was something insane like +20 for Trump in 2016. And that's only going to get worse and more pronounced as these hearings go on.
 

BowieZ

Member
Nov 7, 2017
2,740
State polling is going to determine Mitch McConnell's moves. There are 4 very vulnerable Republican Seats at the moment which is enough to cause Republicans to lose the Senate. ...
In fact, if Dems hold all of their seats (and this would invariably mean they sweep the Presidency too), they technically only need to pick up 3 Republican seats to bring the Senate to a 50-50 split in which case the Dem VP would break the ties.

I posted this about a year ago and it's worth looking through with fresh eyes:

... Nonetheless, in 2020, 34 Senate seats are up for the vote (which includes replacing the retiring Arizona Senator Jon Kyl, who himself replaced McCain) -- i.e., 12 Democrats and 22 Republicans, bringing the preliminary total, as at November 3, 2020, to:

D - 35
R - 31


So Dems need to gain at least 15, e.g. holding all of their 12, plus flipping 3 of the 22 Republican seats. (They'd need 16 if Trump wins re-election.)

-------------------------------------------------------------
Safe Republican: -- AK (Sullivan), AR (Cotton), LA (Cassidy), OK (Inhofe), SD (Rounds), WV (Capito), WY (Enzi).
Probable R: -- NE (Sasse), ID (Risch), KY (Turtle), MT (Daines), SC (Graham), TN (Alexander), TX (Cornyn).
Competitive R: -- AZ (ret. Kyl), CO (Gardner), GA (Perdue), IA (Ernst), KS (Roberts), ME (Collins), NC (Tillis).
Competitive D: -- AL (Jones), MI (Peters), MN (Smith).
Probable D: -- NH (Jeanne Shaheen), VA (Warner).
Safe Democratic: -- DE (Coons), NJ (Booker), IL (Durbin), MA (Markey), NM (T. Udall), OR (Merkley), RI (Reed).
-------------------------------------------------------------

The THREE best chances would probably be Dems picking up:

1. NC (In 2014, Thom Tillis beat Kay Hagan 48.8% to 47.3%);
2. CO (In 2014, Cory Gardner beat Mark Udall 48.2% to 46.3%);
3. AZ (given the strong Democratic showing this year, that bodes well for John McCain's former 'maverick' seat flipping blue, too).

Now, they may need one or two buffer wins, if Doug Jones's unexpected tenure is cut short in Alabama (Jeff Sessions is probably going to run), and likewise if Pence retains tiebreak power upon re-election (Jesus please save us). The best shots are:

4. IA (Joni Ernst beat Bruce Braley 52.1% to 43.8%; this was a Dem seat the preceding three decades!);
5. ME (Susan Collins controversially supported Kavanaugh, and may be primaried by Trump diehard Max Linn);
6. GA (David Perdue beat Michelle Nunn 52.9% to 45.2%);
7. KS (Pat Roberts, who'll be 84 if he runs, beat Independent Greg Orman 53.1% to 42.5% -- with an inspiring candidate this could be doable);
8. TX (I'm tossing Texas in here just in case O'Rourke decides to run again, especially given the impressive legwork from this year).

These 12 Dems and candidates for these 8 states need to get cracking.
I was right about Sessions running for Alabama again. Also, Kyl since resigned and in his stead Arizona's-other-seat loser in 2018 McSally is now the incumbent running for a two-year special term. Furthermore, KS's Roberts is indeed retiring (along with TN's Alexander and WY's Enzi) so there's a speckle of hope in his seat too.

The big news is there's now a 35th seat in play: GA, thanks to Isakson's early resignation. So, adding another one to the list of viable seats... the odds of Dems net gaining at least 3 seats are better than ever.
 

Messofanego

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,835
UK
Moment of the day for me.

After Sondland opening statement and the Dems round of questioning. After what easily is the most damning and damaging hour to the republicans and Trump's administration of this whole inquiry.

"Time for the minority's 45 minutes."

*Cam on Nunes*

The sheer, genuine state of shock and distress he seemed to be in was a pure delight to witness. Then the shot with Castor moving arms in a 'wtf you want me to ask or do with this?!' way while Nunes turns to him with a fucking death stare for a moment.



Pure gold.



Beautiful.
 

Cheerilee

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,863
would it though? They could just turn now and start drumming it up that they removed Trump and try to make the image that they saved the country in the end. Sure initially it would be bad for them, but in the long game I was more thinking.
The Republicans turned on Nixon before the end. Could you name even one of them? Nobody can. They get forgotten.

Except supporting Trump is killing them politically too. They just lost the governorship of Luisiana which was something insane like +20 for Trump in 2016. And that's only going to get worse and more pronounced as these hearings go on.
They're damned if they do, and damned if they don't right now.

IIRC, Jeff Flake (former Republican Senator who is willing to speak his mind, since he's not up for re-election) said that he's been talking to Senate Republicans, getting their real feelings, and Trump could be impeached tomorrow if the vote to eject him was private. Maybe half of the Republicans are riding Trump's dick, but the other half is furious about having to take ownership over all of Trump's scandals. They don't like being the Party of Criminals. The Party of Nazis. The Party of Russia. The Party of Trade Wars. The Party of Baby Cages. The Party of Cheating on Your Wife. The Party of Blatant Lies. Nevermind the fact that Trump is putting all of their careers at risk. Half of the Republican Senate wants to push Trump under a bus ASAP. 100% of the Democrats + 50% of the Republicans = 75% support for impeaching Trump, which is easily enough to clear the 67% hurdle.

The numbers slant slightly better in Trump's favor if Mike Pence gets impeached along with Trump, because the Republican Senators really don't want Acting President Nancy Pelosi for a few months, and would rather have Acting President Mike Pence, which is why Trump has been making noises about taking Pence down with him if he goes down, but that's not exactly a dealbreaker.

But #MoscowMitch is keeping them in line by directly threatening their careers. And they do not like that. They're teetering on the edge of revolt, but #MoscowMitch feels like their biggest, most immediate threat. Apparently their best case scenario is to try and play chicken, and wait for #MoscowMitch to accept Trump's defeat and rescind his threat. AKA, they're waiting for Mitch to turn against Trump.
 

Tekniqs

Member
Oct 26, 2017
780
watching the hearings from earlier as i missed most of it due to work. why do the GOP keep harping on these javalins? like, how's that any kind of defense regarding trump trying to bribe Ukraine into investigating Biden?
 

FF Seraphim

Member
Oct 26, 2017
4,771
Tokyo
watching the hearings from earlier as i missed most of it due to work. why do the GOP keep harping on these javalins? like, how's that any kind of defense regarding trump trying to bribe Ukraine into investigating Biden?
They are trying to say adding the javalins means the deal was changed so Trump had the right to withhold the military aid due to "concerns" and wanted to make sure it was a good "deal". Plus Obama didn't provide javalins only Trump did.