October 8, 2019

Attkisson notes the incoherence of the Democrats' position.

106 comments:

traditionalguy said...

Atkinson points out that this is the thread that unravels years of massive Dem and RINO corruption. Which is why many now think Nancy is probably doing this under orders from Trump to get better plea bargain terms and keep part of her hoard of corruption money from confiscation by the Sec'y of Treasury.

JCA1 said...

It's all ridiculous. For the better part of 3 years, everyone was screaming that we must investigate Trump because we have to know whether someone who is running for President is in cahoots with a foreign power. In fact, it appears as though the DNC, the Hillary campaign, the CIA, the FBI, and God knows who else were doing just that. Now, the very idea that we should investigate whether someone who running for President is in cahoots with a foreign power is entirely off limits and grounds for removal from office? Does that apply retroactively to everyone who investigated Trump?

Infinite Monkeys said...

"notes the incoherence of the Democrats' position"

Like shooting fish in a barrel.

Skylark said...

That’s why the hearings have to be double secret. Because the accusation is that Trump may have done exactly what Obama did against him.

Michael K said...

The Ukrainians are admitting they colluded with Hillary in 2016.

Amazing that it is not mentioned here.

Chalupa was working directly with the Ukrainian embassy in the United States to raise concerns about Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and, according to Politico, she indicated that the Embassy was working “directly with reporters researching Trump, Manafort and Russia to point them in the right directions.”

The Ukrainian embassy political officer who worked at the embassy at the time, Andrii Telizhenko, stated that the Ukrainians “were coordinating an investigation with the Hillary team on Paul Manafort with Alexandra Chalupa” and that “the embassy worked very closely with” Chalupa.


Whodathunk ?

Mike Sylwester said...

CNN does not see any incoherence in this position.

Watching CNN is similar to the experience that Soviets and East Europeans suffered while watching their mass media during the Communist years -- mind-boggling propaganda.

Rae said...

"Not Biden" is way ahead in the polls.

Nonapod said...

Not so much incoherence as glaring hypocrisy. But yeah. It's difficult to take anyone that seriously who has suppressed, igonored, and downplayed all the blatant wrong-doing by team blue over the past few years who is now screeching about similar types of supposed wrong-doing by Trump.

I keep hearing the refrain that Biden family's Ukrainian and Chinese adventures have been "debunked" or that they're just a "right wing conspiracy theory" or whatever despite all the evidence that's staring us in the face. Or that James Comey totally vindicated Hillary because she totally didn't intend to do what she did (as if that's any kind of criminal standard). Or that we should completely dismiss all the obvious malfeasance of the Obama administration's investigation into the Trump campaign, the entrapment of Papadopoulos unmasking of individuals. And Benghazi. And Fast and Furious. And probably at least 6 other things I can't even remember.

Clearly these are all just the crazed conspiracy theories of right wing nut jobs. But what Trump said on a phone call was just so bad that it's impeachable, even though the transcript indicates no obvious quid pro quo or threat at all. Give me a break.

Gk1 said...

Watch a leftie lose it and shriek "Tu quoque!!!" the minute you point this out like I did on facebook last week (as if they can paper over this obvious problem with impeachment). Well yes, the democrats and the previous administration did this exact thing, contacting 5 eyes intelligence, reaching out to the Ukraine to get dirt on Trump and no one seemed to have any issues with that at all. Of course people are going to bring it up.

Skylark said...

Say it ain’t so!

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/ukraine-sabotage-trump-backfire-233446

This is why the polls don’t matter. There is so much that is being prevented from reaching the larger public consciousness that will change the whole narrative for people who haven’t already closed their minds.

The whole “Impeachment inquiry” is an example of trying to bootstrap impeachment based on secret hearings. It should be a case study of “motivated reasoning.” If it’s all so bad, what could be more devastating than sunshine on Trump!

Skylark said...

"You won’t tear down the master’s house with the master’s tools”

Logic and reason and fairness? The master’s tools.

n.n said...

Reality is just an illusion. What matters is perception and presentation.

IgnatzEsq said...

This reminds me of when the Republicans were impeaching Clinton and the Republicans like Henry Hyde were also philanderers. I remember thinking at the time, though I was quite young then, how strange and stupid it was that they were making the impeachment case based on an extramarital affair when everyone was having them (I admittedly didn't realize at the time how forcing sex on an intern isn't just an affair and is actually rape).

Incoherence is a good description of the Democratic argument, but I worry that the media is so bad that many people (my own mother included). It's only incoherent or hypocritical if you know what about things like the Biden family's shady dealings with Ukraine or the Democratic Senator's letter to Ukraine asking them to help with their investigations into Trump.

Bay Area Guy said...

Attkisson is great. I put her up there in the similar lofty perch as Althouse. They both report the news first, before adding any opinions.

Modern day journolists don't do that anymore. They first ask, does it help or hurt our liberal narrative? Then they shade it in the "appropriate" direction. If it hurts too much, they simply ignore it.

Skylark said...

Kolya: Did they, those Russians, help Trump? Your people?

Sytnyk: I think they did. Yeah. I helped him, too. Not him, but Hillary. I helped her.

Kolya: Yeah. Right. Then her position tottered, right?

Sytnyk: Well, this is how they write about it, right.

Ivan: Hillary’s humanitarian aid … [indiscernible.]

Kolya: Well, I’m about … the commentaries. At the time, we were not [indiscernible.]

Sytnyk: Trump … his purely inner problem … issue … they dominate over the external matters. While Hillary, she is – how shall I put it? She belongs to the cohort of politicians who comprise the hegemony in the U.S. Both in the U.S. and the entire world, right? For us, it’s … sort of … better. For Americans … what Trump is doing is better for them.

Kolya: Well, we have lots of those American experts here now … [indiscernible.]

Sytnyk: Well, there, you see why Hillary lost the elections? I was in charge of the investigation of their “black accounting” records. We made the Manafort’s data available to general public.

Kolya: So what?

Sytnyk: He was imprisoned.

Skylark said...

Sorry, that was from The Blaze

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Nobody in the media talks about camp Hillary hiring Christopher Steele (A non-America! British spy) to dig up dirt on Trump before the 2016 election.

Skylark said...

This reminds me of the Charge of the Light Brigade

Forward, the Democrat Brigade!”
Was there a man dismayed?
Not though the politician knew
Someone had blundered.
Theirs not to brook reply,
Theirs not to explain why,
Theirs but to cheat and lie.
Into the valley of defeat
Rode the Democrats.

Skylark said...

Drudge says they got him now! Trump won’t cooperate with their secret hearings where Republicans are powerless, so #IMPEACH!

That will fly, I am sure!

Narr said...

SA is a treasure, but then noting incoherence among the Dims doesn't take a master logician.

Narr
And she's cute!

rehajm said...

Comments like that are how you get othered by Twitter.

Skylark said...

Holy shit! Nobody cut Trump’s hair, because the son of bitch is using “the jawbone of an ass<<--Himself” to tear his enemies asunder!

https://nypost.com/2019/03/25/ex-cia-head-brennan-on-trump-attacks-i-may-have-relied-on-bad-information/

Chris Hayes says I am dispirited. No Chris, that’s you you see in the mirror, not us!

Yancey Ward said...

I think Steele and FusionGPS literally fabricated the dossier on Trump out of nothing (no sources but their imaginations), but the fact remains that they still claim Steele got the info from high Russian government officials. There is abundant public information demonstrating that Clinton and the Obama Administration did get information from the Ukraine on Manafort. US Democrat Senators wrote letters to the Ukrainian government encouraging their cooperation with the sham Russian Collusion investigation. And Quid Pro Joe is on video bragging about extorting the Ukrainian government to fire a public prosecutor while his son was earning $50K+ per month from a Ukrainian Oligarch.

All of the above will be front and center of any Senate trial.

gahrie said...

Someone needs to tell Sharyl that it's different when Democrats do it. Democrats are the good guys and are doing it to protect our republic. Republicans are evil and do it to prevent the Democrats from winning.

Jupiter said...

"Incoherence" is one way to put it. But it seems a bit tepid. What we have is a raging mob, hunting their victim in the streets with blazing torches and pitchforks at the ready, for the crime of consorting with foreigners. which foreigners they would be quite happy to declare honorary American citizens if the opportunity arose.

Yancey Ward said...

I will say this, though- the odds of the Senate convicting Trump are significantly higher this morning since Trump is striking directly at the endless Mideast wars the US is involved in. The Republican politicians in D.C. are in bed with the military-industrial complex even more deeply than the Democrats still (though that has changed a bit in the last 3 years). I think the move is not only right from an ethical point of view, but will have broad support in the public, so Trump is still very likely to survive a trial, but the odds did change against him measurably yesterday.

Bill Harshaw said...

There's no difference between the President withholding aid from a friendly government in an effort to get damaging information on political rivals and private citizens asking for such aid?

That's like saying there's no difference between a professor demanding sex from a student in return for good grades and a classmate proposing a hookup to a fellow classmate?

Tommy Duncan said...

How is it that Pelosi and Schiff are able to convene an "impeachment investigation" without the consent of the House as a legislative body?

How is it that Pelosi and Schiff are issuing subpoenas without an authorization from the House as a legislative body?

How is it that Pelosi and Schiff are conducting their "impeachment investigation" sessions in secret?

How do you conduct an impeachment investigation without stating a crime to be investigated? Isn't that investigating a man rather than investigating a crime? (Lavrentiy Beria comes to mind.) Is there a specific law that has been violated that represents a "high crime"?

Is the average American comfortable with the idea that House Democrats acting in a secret and purely partisan manner toward the goal of removing the President of the US from office without providing the House Republicans a voice of any kind?

Freder Frederson said...

Okay, let's get this straight. If the DOJ opened an investigation into Biden's dealings with Ukraine (assuming that it was not opened at the behest of the president), that would be perfectly appropriate. So would seeking the assistance of the Ukrainian government in the investigation. Trump's problem is that Biden is a potential rival in a Federal election. At the very least it is inappropriate, and is quite likely a felony, to seek foreign help in investigating a rival.

Susan said...

Only Trump may never receive any help of any kind either foreign or domestic.

Nor is he allowed to defend himself in any way from any charge.

Because Orange Man Bad!

Gospace said...

But the MSM news consumer isn't aware that Democrats were proven to do that in 2016. And before, but we won't discuss that.

Asking people where they get their news from is a pretty good indicator of how they'll vote.

MSN consumers believe global warming is both real and a serious problem when it's neither.

Achilles said...

The democrats aren't incoherent. Their position is easily understood.

They are corrupt fascists. Power is the only thing that matters to them.

All laws and events are conceived, selectively enforced, and carried out to give them more power over other people.

That is it.

Left Bank of the Charles said...

Democrats have to prove what Schiff alleged in his opening statement, that Trump was pressuring Ukraine to make up stuff about the Bidens and that Trump was using U.S. military aid as his cudgel. On the other side, Trump has to prove the Bidens really were doing dirty deeds. Otherwise, neither side wins and it's a standoff.

MBunge said...

I'm sure the team at Jonah Goldberg's new "newsletter" will get right on this.

Is there a better illustration of how corrupt and deceitful the conservative intellectual establishment was than the fact that, three years in, there's going to be not one but TWO anti-Trump conservative outposts?

Mike

Peter said...

Doesn't this tweet capture in two sentences what this is all about? My sleaze can beat up your sleaze any day?

Sebastian said...

"*they* are turning to foreigners to investigate a rival for political purposes. And some Ds already were proven to have done that in 2016."

Well, duh.

But being prog means never having to be coherent.

Actually, they are: they coherently and consistently claim that what's good for them isn't good for Rs.

stevew said...

I've noticed that too, as have lots of other folks.

Tells me that Impeachment is the game being played but not the objective. I'm leaning toward the argument that Speaker Pelosi is:

1. Giving the most anti-Trump members of her caucus what they have been demanding,
2. Getting this issue out in public and resolved now rather than when primary season is on,
3. Protecting her members that are in areas that support Trump.

Part of her calculus is that this will at best help with the Democrats 2020 electoral prospects, or at least not hurt.

cf said...

She should know all about the #serenePoliceState of the Democrats.

"February 13, 2012:
At approximately 10:30pm, remote intruders secretly download new spy software proprietary to a federal agency onto Attkisson’s CBS work computer. (The software was secretly attached to a legitimate Hotmail email and downloaded in the background after a pop-up ad appeared).

https://sharylattkisson.com/2017/12/obama-era-surveillance-timeline/

Skylark said...

Another weird thing is that the renewed investigation into Burisma started months before the phone call. It also seems to be about the time when the ground floor started being put into place for this whole house of cards that is this whistleblower inquiry.

Scott said...

Coherence, transparency, clarity, or logic are useless in maintaining the Democrat tribal juju. Don't think so? Ask a Trump hater to name one specific thing that Trump did which rises to the level of high crime or misdemeanor. And just be careful you don't get punched.

Tim said...

Democrats have been intolerant since their founding.

Carol said...

Wait, she's one of them, isn't she?

Uh-oh!

Skeptical Voter said...

If you want coherence, you surely don't want a Democrat. But then there are aren't many coherent folks in the GOP either. A pox on all their houses.

Nichevo said...

Why should incoherent or just plain old and consistency, hypocrisy or dissonance bother you? Because it doesn't. Because you'll still vote for them. Because they're so pretty. The only way to get them to stop is to vote against them.

James K said...

Trump's problem is that Biden is a potential rival in a Federal election. At the very least it is inappropriate, and is quite likely a felony, to seek foreign help in investigating a rival.

What law does it violate? And what you're saying is that running for office gives one immunity? And if your crime involved a foreign government that government is precluded from cooperating with the investigation? Not a single word in your statement makes sense, including "and and "the."

wholelottasplainin' said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Danno said...

Sheryl Attkisson was one of the last investigative reporters who was not a political crony of the Democratic party.

When people like her return (in mass) to the lamestream media, the LSM will revert to being mainstream and I may watch some of their news. Not until.

wholelottasplainin' said...

Blogger Freder Frederson said...
Okay, let's get this straight. If the DOJ opened an investigation into Biden's dealings with Ukraine (assuming that it was not opened at the behest of the president), that would be perfectly appropriate. So would seeking the assistance of the Ukrainian government in the investigation. Trump's problem is that Biden is a potential rival in a Federal election. At the very least it is inappropriate, and is quite likely a felony, to seek foreign help in investigating a rival.
***********************

If Trump had known that Comey, Brennan et al were secretly in cahoots with Hillary to seek help from a foreign nation to investigate *him*, would he be able to argue what you've said here, Freder?

Did you ever use that argument when the Mueller investigation was being discussed?

Iman said...

These are not your grandpappy's Democrats for sure... no, that's not true. They've been pulling this sort of excrement for decades.

Michael K said...

Trump's problem is that Biden is a potential rival in a Federal election. At the very least it is inappropriate, and is quite likely a felony, to seek foreign help in investigating a rival.

I see we now have Attorney General Freder on duty. Spell out that felony big guy. Now we want case law, not the bullshit you usually provide in your military lectures.

Here's a suggestion.

And here, too.

9-131.010 - Introduction
This chapter focuses on the Hobbs Act (18 U.S.C. § 1951) which prohibits actual or attempted robbery or extortion affecting interstate or foreign commerce. Section 1951 also proscribes conspiracy to commit robbery or extortion without reference to the conspiracy statute at 18 U.S.C. § 371. Although the Hobbs Act was enacted as a statute to combat racketeering in labor-management disputes, the statute is frequently used in connection with cases involving public corruption, commercial disputes, violent criminals and street gangs, and corruption directed at members of labor unions.


Now go for it big guy !

Blogger may also have been bribed by Biden since it has refused to post this 4 times.

Ingachuck'stoothlessARM said...

The anti-Trump whistleblower has a significant tie to one of the Democrat presidential candidates currently vying to challenge President Trump in next year's election
--per @RealSaavedra
---------

ffs-- "SS,DD" -- it's been years of this-- call it what you want-- projection, or "best defense is a good offense" ('good' not in terms of quality/truthfulness, but quantity)

Derp State be like "Drop the Chalupa!!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwtHbRBYbIE

Achilles said...

Freder Frederson said...

Trump's problem is that Biden is a potential rival in a Federal election. At the very least it is inappropriate, and is quite likely a felony, to seek foreign help in investigating a rival.

If you commit crimes then all you need to do is run for president as a democrat.

If you do that democrat voters will support you and declare that investigating your crimes is illegal.

The entire party from top to bottom is corrupt and evil. The average democrat voter at this point is evil and is plainly opposed to the founding principle that men are created equal and face equal justice under the law.

Note how democrats are siding with China against Hong Kong.

Freder is the norm as a democrat voter.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

It's OK when democrats do it - because reasons.

Look at Chuck Todd beclown himself.
Our media = democratic partisan hacks who ignore all corruption on their team.

FullMoon said...

On the other side, Trump has to prove the Bidens really were doing dirty deeds. Otherwise, neither side wins and it's a standoff.

Nope. The most un-informed, low information, average working stiff voter knows that a guy with no experience gets a fifty thousand dollar a month job because his daddy is vice president just ain't right.

And, as a lot of politics leading up to elections is a matter of creating fear, hate and resentment of the other side, that 50,000 gonna hurt.

Of course, a minor problem will be that Democrats are not the only ones whose friends and families benefit from corruption. Republicans do it too.

narciso said...

indeed:

https://dailycaller.com/2019/10/08/rudy-giuliani-testify-remove-adam-schiff-intel-chair/

Qwinn said...

It's not "incoherence". It's not "hypocrisy".

It's projection.

And it always, always, always works.

Disagree? Name a single crime which the Democrats have managed to project onto Republicans prior to their own related crimes coming to light, that the Democrats have ever suffered a single solitary negative consequence for.

madAsHell said...

She can connect the dots!!.....and she calls herself a journalist??

Browndog said...

Attkisson is the most astute reporters there is today. That is to say, one of the last true reprters there is. She's the one that coined the phrase "The IG is where government investigations go to die."

First hand knowledge...

Francisco D said...

Freder is the norm as a democrat voter.

Yes. He well represents the intellectual depth of modern day Democrats.

They do not try to convince with facts. They simply repeat the same bullshit over and over again until it lodges in your mind. Several Dems that I know earnestly believe that Trump made a deal with Putin to rig the election. They also believe that Kavanaugh is a serial sexual assaulter. These are not bad people. They don't pay much to attention to evidence or lack thereof.

They believe what the Dems say because they want to be with the "good guys" on different issues.

Skylark said...

"On the other side, Trump has to prove the Biden's really were doing dirty deeds”

We know his son was hired on by a company, along with other connected Americans, like Romney relations, to protect themselves from prosecution. He collected 3 million dollars for this service. I am sure that that will fly with the American people.... wait It doesn’t. I am sure when Biden fired the prosecutor looking into his son’s business, there was no conflict of interest, like Joe Biden says, until I look up conflict of interest in the dictionary.

Joe’s son has been making money his whole career off of his access to his dad, from the time Joe was a Senator and he was a lobbyist to Biden’s committee to when he was Veep, Hunter swanning into countries on Air Force 2, and getting all kinds of payoffs for services for which his only qualification was as kind of a hostage, keeping off the wrath of the United States.

I really liked the part, as. reported in the New York Times, where the ‘consultancy’ he worked for, and a fellow board member, Archer, quit Burisma after being prosecuted for defrauding pension funds and Indian tribes. Did I mention that Hunter was a lobbyist for gaming interests to his dad’s committee? Also in the New York Times!

Nancy’s son is deep into this slimy kind of business too!

Skylark said...

What is really funny is that this whole political impeachment is about investigating a political rival to the Democrats. Just like Russia was. It’s impossible to be too cynical about the Democrats.

StephenFearby said...

Whistleblower had 'professional' tie to 2020 Democratic candidate
by Byron York
October 08, 2019 03:04 PM


'In an Aug. 26 letter, the Intelligence Community's inspector general, Michael Atkinson, wrote that the anonymous whistleblower who set off the Trump-Ukraine impeachment fight showed "some indicia of an arguable political bias ... in favor of a rival political candidate."

A few weeks later, news reports said the whistleblower's possible bias was that he is a registered Democrat. That was all. Incredulous commentary suggested that Republicans who were pushing the bias talking point were so blinded by their own partisanship that they saw simple registration with the Democratic Party as evidence of wrongdoing.

"Give me a break!" tweeted whistleblower lawyer Mark Zaid. "Bias? Seriously?"

Now, however, there is word of more evidence of possible bias on the whistleblower's part. Under questioning from Republicans during last Friday's impeachment inquiry interview with Atkinson, the inspector general revealed that the whistleblower's possible bias was not that he was simply a registered Democrat. It was that he had a significant tie to one of the Democratic presidential candidates currently vying to challenge President Trump in next year's election.

"The IG said [the whistleblower] worked or had some type of professional relationship with one of the Democratic candidates," said one person with knowledge of what was said.

"The IG said the whistleblower had a professional relationship with one of the 2020 candidates," said another person with knowledge of what was said.

"What [Atkinson] said was that the whistleblower self-disclosed that he was a registered Democrat and that he had a prior working relationship with a current 2020 Democratic presidential candidate," said a third person with knowledge of what was said...'

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/whistleblower-had-professional-tie-to-2020-democratic-candidate

Why the hell should a wanna-be whistle-blower with hearsay information who is a currently employed (not retired) CIA officer (identified by some as an analyst, not a case officer) with a prior unspecified working relationship with an unknown 2020 presidential candidate not be regarded with all the suspicion he or she deserves by Atkinson?

CTH offers a plausible explanation:

Activity and Background of Sketchy IC IG Michael Atkinson Now Under Investigative Spotlight…

"...Michael K Atkinson was previously the Senior Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General of the National Security Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ-NSD) in 2016. That makes Atkinson senior legal counsel to John Carlin and Mary McCord who were the former heads of the DOJ-NSD in 2016 when the stop Trump operation was underway.

Michael Atkinson was the lawyer for the same DOJ-NSD players who: (1) lied to the FISA court (Judge Rosemary Collyer) about the 80% non compliant NSA database abuse using FBI contractors; (2) filed the FISA application against Carter Page; and (3) used FARA violations as tools for political surveillance and political targeting.

Yes, that means Michael Atkinson was Senior Counsel for the DOJ-NSD, at the very epicenter of the political weaponization and FISA abuse..."

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/10/07/activity-and-background-of-sketchy-ic-ig-michael-atkinson-now-under-investigative-spotlight/

Skylark said...

Oh look, the whistleblower works for one of the candidates. That would have been good to know a week ago!

What was this about politically motivated investigations?

Wince said...

Freder Frederson said...
Okay, let's get this straight. If the DOJ opened an investigation into Biden's dealings with Ukraine (assuming that it was not opened at the behest of the president), that would be perfectly appropriate.

I think the legal and ethical standard is whether there is probable cause to investigate, not who dropped a dime or why.

So would seeking the assistance of the Ukrainian government in the investigation.

In the call, Trump urged Ukraine to work with the US DOJ.

Trump's problem is that Biden is a potential rival in a Federal election. At the very least it is inappropriate, and is quite likely a felony, to seek foreign help in investigating a rival.

Trump urged Ukraine to conduct it's own official investigation, unlike Hillary's campaign and the DNC who sought "foreign help" in their investigating a political rival.

More, when Rudy was there it was in the pendency of the Mueller case. As Trump's lawyer, he and Trump had every right to full discovery in the defense of Trump.

Qwinn said...

"At the very least it is inappropriate, and is quite likely a felony, to seek foreign help in investigating a rival."

Christopher Steele could not be reached for comment.

Yancey Ward said...

Don't be hard on Freder, the past is wiped clean each night and a new day restarts history.

Skylark said...

Trump's problem is that Biden is a potential rival in a Federal election. At the very least it is inappropriate,

But this impeachment charade is “appropriate.” What is “appropriate” is determined exactly how?

Skylark said...

"I know, for my part, my main concern was with the Russians and the threat posed by the Russians to our very political fabric and uhhhh, the message I'm getting from all of this is apparently what we were supposed to have done was to ignore the Russian interference, ignore the Russian meddling and the threat that it poses to us, and oh, by the way, blown off what the then commander-in-chief, President Obama, told us to do, which was to assemble all of the reporting we could, that we had available to us."

"It’s kind of disconcerting now to be investigated for, you know, having done our duty and done what we were told to do by the president," Clapper added.


My my my. President Obama ordered an investigation into a political rival!

Skylark said...

I am betting that the candidate the whistleblower worked for is none other than Clueless Joe BIden.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

Yeah, but Hillary and Biden were “cleared”

Paul said...

"It seems to me, factually, that while some Ds accuse Trump of turning to foreigners to investigate a rival for political purposes, *they* are turning to foreigners to investigate a rival for political purposes. And some Ds already were proven to have done that in 2016."

Don't confuse people with facts. Dems can break the laws at will, Republicans most obey the laws to the letter (and even farther depending on how Democrats interpret the laws.)

And as for Crooked Hillary and Buffoon Biden being 'cleared', police reopen cases all the time when new facts emerge.

Drago said...

Skylark: "My my my. President Obama ordered an investigation into a political rival!"

And all the while the lefties/dems/deep staters were conducting Tens Of Thousands of illegal and improper FISA database searches.

Hmmmmm, its almost as if the obama White House was rife with corruption and the media covered it up then and continue to cover it up now.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Cleared by .... the media!

Ingachuck'stoothlessARM said...

you mean this CIA?

The CIA Just Declassified the Document That Justified the Iraq Invasion; The Bush White House Looks Very Very Very Bad

https://truepundit.com/the-cia-just-declassified-the-document-that-justified-the-iraq-invasion-the-bush-white-house-looks-very-very-very-bad/

wholelottasplainin' said...

Left Bank of the Charles said...

Democrats have to prove what Schiff alleged in his opening statement, that Trump was pressuring Ukraine to make up stuff about the Bidens and that Trump was using U.S. military aid as his cudgel.

>>> all points manifestly falsified by the timeline of events and the phone call transcript itself. If you have contrary evidence, produce it.

On the other side, Trump has to prove the Bidens really were doing dirty deeds. Otherwise, neither side wins and it's a standoff.

>>> Trump doesn't have to prove anything----Biden's recorded speech to the CFR REVEALS that he pressured the Ukraine to fire a prosecutor who was investigating the company employing his talentless, feckless son for $50K / month, or be denied a cool billion in US aid, and ....sonovabitch!, they complied.

That would be an "admission against interest" in any court proceeding.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

I am looking forward to Trump's 11 straight hours of House testimony to match Hillary's.

There's gonna be some interesting stuff in the later hours as he becomes frankly delusional.

Iman said...


"On the other side, Trump has to prove the Biden's really were doing dirty deeds”

Oh, the dirty deeds were done, but they most certainly weren’t dirt cheap.

Ingachuck'stoothlessARM said...

Schiff4Brains claims 'whistleblower' is getting death threats...
... but no one knows who the whistleblower is.

...aaaaand another interesting thread by Dr.Quigley:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1180911831482802177.html

Ingachuck'stoothlessARM said...

"Biden....James Biden"

Joe Biden Implicated In Massive Fraud Case Against His Brother and Hedge Fund Partner

https://truepundit.com/joe-biden-implicated-in-massive-fraud-case-against-his-brother-and-hedge-fund-partner/

#BidenFamilyValues

Drago said...

ATM: "I am looking forward to Trump's 11 straight hours of House testimony to match Hillary's.
There's gonna be some interesting stuff in the later hours as he becomes frankly delusional."

I was wondering what the coup supporting collusioner numbskulls would say next.

As always, ARM is Johnny On The Spot.

h said...

So much of what I read is either: (1) Obama administration did things wrong, and I want that investigated, but stop talking about Trump; or (2) Trump administration (and TRUMP) did things wrong and I want that investigated, but stop talking about Obama (administration).

I believe that it is wrong for an incumbent person to use the power of their office to influence an election. But, do I really believe this as a black/white thing? Do I believe that it is wrong for an administration to promote economic growth because they hope that a strong economy will help the administration be re-elected? No, I don't. Or do I believe that it is wrong for an administration to take positions about foreign relations that would make the US safer because those positions will help the administration be re-elected? No I don't.

What if promoting US economic growth entails negotiating foreign trade agreements? Then is it wrong, because it requires "cooperation" of foreign governments? (No I don't think so.) Or what if making the US safer entails negotiating with foreign governments regarding certain certain political or military arrangements? Then is wrong, because it requires "cooperation" of foreign governments? (No I don't think so.)

So would it be wrong for a President to say, "Back off on the current negotiation, because after the election I'll have more ability to make concessions that you want?" Or would it be wrong for a President to say, "I'm running against candidate A -- find me evidence that will harm candidate A and I'll make a governmental concession that will make you happy?"

So, I hate we have arrived here, but I think at this point, the best thing might be to have a comprehensive set of public testimonials in which these questions are explored. But the public testimonials cannot be: "I hate Trump so Trump is a crook" or "I love Trump so Trump is not a crook." They must be: "here is a set of principles that I endorse and based on those principles Trump should be impeached -- but conceiveably also Obama (or Sec State Clinton) should have been impeached." or else: "here is a set of principles that I endorse and base on those principles Trump should not be impeached -- but based on those principles Sec Clinton and Pres Obama (and other Obama admin officials) should be absolved of their actions.

roesch/voltaire said...

Oh no a Republican White House aid was so upset with the crazy call to Ukraine that he leaked the information to this partisan whistle blower. The more we known the ticker the web.

daskol said...

Everybody’s just reading from the stage directions now. How embarrassing. It’s one thing to focus on a misleading narrative, to the exclusion of inconvenient facts and characters. It’s another to tell a journalist that’s your strategy, and that you’re trying to get your whole caucus to use only 6 words when talking about the subject. They think we’re really stupid, and some of them are not so bright themselves.

"Democrats have to stay very disciplined in adhering to that clear, cogent narrative that was written for us,” Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) said...
“If you look at the polling, we’ve so far kept the momentum going,” Yarmuth said...
In a conference call last week, Democratic Caucus Chairman Hakeem Jeffries encouraged lawmakers to use “repetition,” relying on six key words — “betrayal, abuse of power, national security” — to hammer their point to the public.


There’s more here: this inside baseball stuff is just sad.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

In hour 11 of Trump's testimony I fully expect him to admit that he sold his youngest child's soul to the dEviL down at the cRoSSroADs in order to get to the bottom of cRoWDstRiKe's sequestration of the server in the uKRaInE.

Michael K said...

Oh no a Republican White House aid was so upset with the crazy call to Ukraine that he leaked the information to this partisan whistle blower.

More nonsense from the lefties. Try to pay attention,. Giving up the bong might help.

Michael K said...

There's gonna be some interesting stuff in the later hours as he becomes frankly delusional.

You should know as they are your friends. Why don't you write to Pelosi and suggest she hold a real House vote so the "subpoenas" are valid ? So far, it is a TV show.

Narr said...

r/v gets all excited. "The more we known the ticker the web."

Narr
Take a few deep breaths; there's a good lad.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

Can you imagine 11 hours of Trump testimony? What would be the over-under on him perjuring himself a 1000 times? I could overcome my doubts about impeachment just to take that bet.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Obstruction of justice. What justice? Not cooperating with the leftwing Hillary lost butt hurt party witch hunt.

Drago said...

Our Althouse lefties are an excellent barometer of just how delusional the aggregate left have become. Its fun to watch.

Drago said...

Clapper now officially shoving obama under the bus is also quite entertaining.

Drago said...

Breaking News!! We now find out Ukraine had ALREADY reopened their investigation into Biden months BEFORE the Trump call!!

Sorry ARM. Perhaps Adam Schiff can conjure up new make believe hoax testimony for you to embrace!!

The dem hacks are the biggest bunch of moron cant-shoot-straight idiots I have ever seen.

And its gloriously fun to watch.

Gahrie said...

The American Left:

"Ahh, but the collusion that's... that's where I had them. They laughed at me and made jokes but I proved beyond the shadow of a doubt and with... geometric logic... that a witness to the collusion DID exist, and I'd have produced that witness if Mueller hadn't of covered for Trump."

Rory said...

"They must be: "here is a set of principles that I endorse and based on those principles Trump should be impeached -- but conceiveably also Obama (or Sec State Clinton) should have been impeached.""

So, one party says, "thinking what we do now, we would have punished our guy, but since that ship sailed we'll punish your guy for the same thing?"

Sam L. said...

What???? Dems LIED to us????? Is this news to any of us?

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

After 11 hours of Trump testimony so many people will have been thrown under the bus that will have a prison overcrowding problem. We'll need to start looking into shipping convicts overseas - maybe to Greenland. I hear it's available.

Drago said...

Gee whiz, who could have guessed that the democrat political operative turned Brennan CIA operative turned Obama White House digger of dirt in Ukraine against Trump operative turned Brennan-assigned to Trump White House CIA anti-Trump spy turned hoax "whistle-blower" would have "forgotten" to include the evidence that the Ukrainians had already reopened their ivestigation into Burisma and Hunter Biden?

Besides everyone alive that is....

John Clifford said...

"There's no difference between the President withholding aid from a friendly government in an effort to get damaging information on political rivals and private citizens asking for such aid?"

Er, that's not what happened, although that is what the Democrats are alleging happened. Thankfully we have the transcript and don't have to rely on second- and third-hand information (hearsay) from a biased leaker who has been caught lying on the whistleblower form.

BTW we know who the whistleblower is now... Emily Latella.

Nichevo said...

h said...

It doesn't mattet what you said because you seem to equate the actions of both sides.

President Trump has done nothing wrong. There is nothing to investigate but calumny; vapor; moonshine and forefathers.

There does seem to be misconduct of unknown levels by persons associated with the Democrats. Some of it seems pretty bad.

So I'm not prepared to let your guys off just so the President will not be bothered. There is no baby to split.

Skylark said...

"Breaking News!! We now find out Ukraine had ALREADY reopened their investigation into Biden months BEFORE the Trump call!!”

Breaking news from 2017, as reported in Politico

I think it is pretty clear to anybody without unshakable hatred of Trump that the Ukraine getting Manafort fired had a larger impact on the election than Facebook ads of Hillary wrestling with Satan, or whatever they were.

Of course the Russians wanted to tweak Hillary, because they thought she was the INEVITABLE winner, as evidenced by the fact that they gave her hundreds of millions of dollars in contributions to her political machine featherbed hotel, er I mean the Clinton Foundation.

rehajm said...

China is looking to avoid Trump’s latest round of tariffs and willing to deal a bit this morning. They still want to keep stealing ip but its a start. Shows the strategy isn’t as crazy as the crazies believe...

Skylark said...

"So much of what I read is either: (1) Obama administration did things wrong, and I want that investigated, but stop talking about Trump; or (2) Trump administration (and TRUMP) did things wrong and I want that investigated, but stop talking about Obama (administration). “

You know what I think? I think that alls fair when it comes to getting the truth before the electorate. The Russian hoax was not truth, the wikileaks DNC stuff was. The Manafort stuff was truth. So what I want is the Democrats to stop using their power of impeachment to attempt to remove a president based on fake outrage that Trump would do something like look into election interference, and noticing the Biden dirt, might mention it.

If the Democrats had any such dirt on Trump’s family, I assume we would have seen it. Instead we get accusations that whenever he mentions the name of one of his resorts, or a diplomat stays at his DC hotel, that’s impeachable! They are a family of Innkeepers, they were before he was president. They are qualified to provide a diplomat with a warm bed, clean sheets, and a nice breakfast. Unlike Hunter BIden, who is known to have bought crack at a homeless encampment, and has sold access to his father his whole life, it seems.

Tank said...

Projection. It is always projection.

Drago said...

Skylark: "Breaking news from 2017, as reported in Politico"

Yep. That was the point. I was sort of riffing off that ludicrous performance by far left hack Chuck Todd when Ron Johnson mentioed it.



El Supremo said...

There should be a news organization with a dozen reporters like Sharyl Attkisson. You know what I mean, a news organization with actual journalists.

El Supremo said...

Anybody want to buy some Biden access? There are a lot of people out there trying to unload it.