Maybe if you had read the transcripts instead of talking out of your ass about strategy you would know what that strategy is (it’s in the transcripts). You didn’t so you don’t. And don’t try to pull this bullshit in this thread either. You’re losing engagement by the second.
Nunn Knows Best, that’s why he was so spot-on on what would happen with the Mueller Report after reading the whole thing. I didn’t read all that much of that either, and I was spot-on about what would happen despite by lack of knowledge about the contents of the report compared to you.
It’s the same here. It’s not about what’s IN the testimony, it’s about how it’s presented and about how much pressure is able to be put on Senate Republicans. They all already know what’s in there.
I think it’s an open question, which is better than what I thought with the eDems handling of the Mueller Report. But I know the ballpark of where public opinion needs to go to get a conviction, and we’re not particularly close yet.
I mean Linzie refuses to read any of the transcripts, and 4000 pages of transcripts have dropped in the last 7 days. No one in the Senate has read it. Hardly anyone in the House has read it (maybe 20 people have heard most of it), and I have read about 1100 pages of it. There’s no way anyone’s reading it who isn’t already. So acting like people know what’s in it, or can even get a glean of it is false. They are forcing news organizations to scramble to distill it in a matter of hours, and I’m sure they’re missing a lot of good stuff. All of the witnesses are A+ (people who talk to people for a living), and thinking they won’t do better when you hear their voices is just not thinking it through. Plus not a single one of those people has been built up in the media like Mueller. No one knew what Mueller sounded like going in, and they were disappointed. I was not.
But again, you’re way over your legal limit for posts I’m responding to because of your anger over whatever life events you have going on.
Nunn, most people are watching like 5 minutes a day of news. They’re not listening to the verbal equivalent of 4,000 pages of transcripts. They don’t know who Sondland is today, and they won’t the day after he testifies. They might for a fleeting moment understand who he is, but that’s it.
Your take is always some form of, “I’m more informed because I’ve read XYZ that nobody else has, thus I understand the facts better, thus I know what is going to happen because it must.”
Unfortunately being more informed doesn’t mean jack shit in the political world of 2019. If Dems can boil it down to 5 minutes for the lead in the local evening news repeatedly, they have a shot. If not, they will impeach him but he won’t get convicted. Meanwhile the GOP will be competing for those five minutes by sowing total chaos and confusion. I know they know how to do that, so I’m pessimistic. We have a shot, but we’re not favored.
And for what it’s worth, I still think the best political outcome may be a majority but not two-thirds of senators voting to convict.
1 Like
Rules of the hearing:
- Dem opening statement 5 minutes
- GOP opening statement 5 minutes
- Witness opening statements
- Schiff questioning 45 minutes (most will probably go to lawyers)
- Nunes questioning 45 minutes (most will probably go to lawyers)
Rounds can go back and forth as many times as Chairman deems necessary. At the end, each side gets 5 minute rounds with the members as usual. This isn’t what you’re used to.
Yeah, I knew it was going to be lawyers. It’s basically the Dem lawyers versus the GOP five minute rounds to sow chaos and confusion. If the Dems are smart they’ll pass on their own five minute rounds, but of course that’s not going to happen.
I’m not crazy about a separate impeachment thread, but I’ll try to go with it for now.
1 Like
That’s a good episode list.
3 Likes
Lol yea I was like “Goddamn!” seeing that list.
Non zero chance Trump has a heart attack in next 10 days.
3 Likes
As much as I want to have hope, I have very little. Christine Blasey Ford went before the world and told an obviously true story about being sexually assaulted by a guy who was promptly put on the Supreme Court without any consequence whatsoever. For these hearings to move the needle there is going to have to be some kind of bombshell revelation, complete with a compelling kill shot punchline.
3 Likes
Don’t think this is at all comparable to C. Ford’s experience or treatment.
Ford vs Kav is he said/she said.
The impeachment is Trump saying he did it and doubling down on doing it.
1 Like
I know people who work in the field of trial technology. There are amazing and sophisticated tools available to organize and present large amounts of complex data. I hope the Dems and their staffers are aware of these tools and don’t show up with posterboards from fucking Kinko’s.
2 Likes
Don’t worry, I’m sure they went to Staples.
I feel like getting Kav on the Supreme Court is was more important to Republicans than keeping Trump, although I still think it’s a longshot that the Senate votes to convict the Trumpster.
Counterpoint: None of this is complex and they ought to be able to explain it to the American people with a whiteboard from Kinko’s. Like, we’re all fucked if they need spreadsheets to make their case.
Here’s a good excerpt from Bill Taylor’s deposition about Volker on page 110. The GOP lawyer was trying to establish that Volker is Mr. Amazing Man of Integrity, and here’s how it went:
Castor: How long have you known Ambassador Volker for?
Taylor: So probably 20 years. A long time.
Castor: And is he a man of integrity?
Taylor: He is a man of integrity.
Castor: And he is somebody that’s always, to the best of your knowledge, acted in the best interests of the United States?
Taylor: He – when he got involved with Mr. Giuliani, I think that that pulled him away from or it diverted him from being focused on what I thought needed to be focused on, that is – yeah. So, in general, yes, but the Giuliani factor I think affected Ambassador Volker.
Castor: But as a man of integrity, if he genuinely believed it was in the best interests of the United States to engage with Giuliani, do agree that that’s – he was acting in the best interests of the United States when he did that?
Taylor: I think he thought he was.
Burn.
Fyp. There is no bombshell big enough that can penetrate the right-wing media bunker.
1 Like
That’s kind of more of a 
than a 
.
1 Like