November 8, 2019

"How much does anyone—on either side of this yawning national divide—care about the evidence if they know in advance how they plan to interpret it?"

Susan B. Glasser asks in The New Yorker in "Is Trump Already Winning on Impeachment?"
And, of course, the sense of constant crisis is overwhelming. How can Americans bother to keep track of who said what to whom about Ukraine when there will soon be another scandal, another cast of characters, another alarming development to monitor?...

Nonetheless, there is an actual investigation, with actual testimony. There are facts and even, in this post-truth age, truths....
The ellipsis I just put there represents my answer to the the 2 questions posed above. I'm not following the details of the impeachment inquiry.

ADDED: I'm not following the details, but it's not because I "know in advance how [I] plan to interpret" the evidence. I'm not following this because I believe the people who are shaping it and presenting and hyperventilating about it decided in advance the interpretation they wanted to manipulate people into having. I'm not going to sit around getting spoon fed this stuff on a daily basis, week after week.

129 comments:

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

The left want to impeach him over.... some words.

Where are the high crimes? The left keep hiding behind their BS non-knowledge of the US Constitution as proof they must fight Trump - but there isn't anything in there that relates to their BS theater.

Dave Begley said...

The Dems have beclowned themselves on this.

Nothing happened with Ukraine. They got their money. And someone needs to investigate the Bidens for violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and the Hobbs Act. Lock him up!

Koot Katmandu said...

I do not follow the details much either. I have concluded that even if what the Ds are saying is true - That PDT asked for a corruption investigation on Hunter B. or no aid - I do not care. Sounds like a reasonable request to me. I would like to know more about Hunter Bs actives.

wild chicken said...

Well, no shit. Especially since they have been trying gin up high crimes since 2015.

Why would any normal person pay attention at this point? You'd have to really hate Trump to grasp at straws like that and I just don't.

I thought the Clinton impeachment was stupid at the time too.

Bill Peschel said...

All of these "crises" are manufactured by the press. They're either fake (by that I mean the anonymously-sourced stories about "chaos" in the administration), or they're a lot less than they claim it is.

The press has no credibility anymore when it comes to anonymous sources. I remember a time when journalists wrung their hands over reporting from anonymous sources. Now, they'll deliberately misquote a speech to make Trump look bad.

Bay Area Guy said...

The Dems are the new Coup Clutz Clowns.

rehajm said...

...when there will soon be another scandal, another cast of characters, another alarming development to monitor...

Don't you mean development to manufacture?

There's been so many so called impeachable offenses, so many investigations, so many smoking guns. Crying wolf every time probably wasn't a good plan...

...but keep dropping the thousands of carpet bombing articles trying to soften up everyone's proclivities.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

It is genuinely impressive that Trump hasn't yet drowned in his own bullshit.

Trump (one month ago):
"Sondland,[is] a really good man and great American"

Trump (today):
"I hardly knew the gentleman."

bagoh20 said...

If the Congress has this kind of time to waste on pure political gamesmanship at the expense of all else, then you have to ask: do we really need a full time Congress at all? This one has already taken off 3 years to play this stupid soap opera. The only real result I see from it is exposure of some very corrupt people in very high places, doing deeply un-American things, and doing them as a normal course of business. That is being exposed every day, but the same partisanship lets the left ignore the corruption and treason laid bare.

No, I don't think I'm just being partisan myself. I look for that, but I don't see any facts that convince me that what I see is not treasonous corrupt behavior trying to undue an election. That what it is and has been since election night 2016 and even before that.

bagoh20 said...

The entire case for impeachment rests on the idea that the President cannot do his job if it will hurt someone who might run for President. Not that a president can't do that, but that this specific president can't. The case is weak, the crime non-existent, and the mysteries entirely made up. We already know exactly what the President said to the Ukrainian President, so what's there to investigate? I only see more bad actors showing up that are not associated with this President, but often acting illegally against him. I think the investigation is turning up lots of dirt, but not on Trump. Let it run, let it be seen.

mccullough said...

Biden’s Cokehead Son got $3 million from a Ukrainian oligarch while Biden was the federal government “point man” on Ukraine. Obama, the president at the time, had no problem with this. He was pushing through Net Neutrality for Netflix and promoting their shows in return for a $50 million payout he got just after his presidency was over.

Trump wanted to exploit the Biden corruption to help with his re-election.

These are the facts. Let the voters decide Biden and Trump’s fate.

bagoh20 said...

I think George Washington was a great man, and I also never met him. I judge him from what I've been told, but if I find out different, I can change my mind. Does that make me a bullshitter?

DanTheMan said...

Why don't people realize the Ukrainians have a constitutional right to our money? Making it conditional is clearly a crime.
The impeachable offense is attempted Grand Theft of their money from the Ukrainians.

Obama knew this. That's why when he negotiated with Cuba and Iran, he wasn't stupid enough to ask for anything.

Drago said...

ARM: "It is genuinely impressive that Trump hasn't yet drowned in his own bullshit."

Your sad and pathetic laments and lies as the dems 2020 chances continue to dissolve before our very eyes in real time are, to be truthful, quite entertaining.

Still, thoughts and prayers over your latest hoax loss.

elkh1 said...

"Truths", "facts" according to Schiff. If they were "truths" and "facts", why cover them up? Why such secrecy?

Francisco D said...

There are facts and even, in this post-truth age...

There are her truths as Cory Booker described the lies of Christina Blasey Ford.

I guess Adam and Nancy have their truths

These people sound more like Communist party intellectuals every day. Probably more Mao than Stalin.

bagoh20 said...

Can someone list all the false narratives laid out against Trump in the last 3 years? Is there enough bandwidth for that, and what about the next 5 years. How can it possibly continue at this rate? If only the entertainment business could be this creative with story telling.

PM said...

The Senate won't impeach and the Dems'll be left holding that bag, Warren, or Ms Unmentionable.

Kevin said...

Does that make me a bullshitter?

It makes you worthy of impeachment.

Unknown said...

Amazing how the democrat propaganda press, actually thinks they have no part in any of this. Truly, truly delusional. Probably not delusional at all, very purposeful.

J. Farmer said...

I have similarly paid next to no attention to the Ukraine story. Wake me when its' over. What strikes me about the whole impeachment imbroglio is how utterly unnecessary it is. The forces arrayed against Trump have largely neutralized him.

Leland said...

To answer Glasser, for the time being, we still presume innocence in the US until proven guilty. So yes, Trump is winning impeachment since we don't presume an inquiry means guilt. If an investigation, which is different than an inquiry, meant guilt, then Trump would be guilty for the last two years of Russian Collusion, despite no evidence being found that he did anything with Russia.

I realize this is the divide in the country, those who believe in the Bill of Rights (freedom to say things that hurt feelings, keep AR-15s, and presume innocence) and those who do not.

traditionalguy said...

The Dems and their Media minions had Victory Disease from 100% success rate at Fake News Narratives destroying all opposition for 20 years. Glen Simpson was a journalist that made millions making up and distributing slander stories.

But in Trump and his Military Intelligence Team the Dems and the RINOs have met their match. It's Midway redux using a simple formula : take code breakers and add the men with the courage to set traps and attack the enemy.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Congress looking to tax rape. If they cannot tax rape us, they don't have anything else to do but make Schitt up.

Iman said...

It appears the Democrats working on the impeachment effort have missed one of life's important lessons:

If you're going to be stupid, you have to be smart about it.

mccullough said...

Normal people aren’t “overwhelmed” by the Get Trump stuff. They tune it out. They can’t and don’t want to keep up with Emoluments, Collusion, Stormy Daniels, Ukraine, etc.

Give the 90s GOP some credit. Even though Get Bill failed, they knew the American Public: Blow Jobs, Spooge-Stained Dresses, and Pussy-Moistened Cigars. Good stuff. Entertaining






Bilwick said...

I fin a good rule of thumb is that "liberals" (i.e., State cultists) lie. To paraphrase an old Communist dictum, "There is no truth but statist truth." Sometimes they don't lie but merely believe and parrot the party line, which is another way of perpetuating the lie. So any evidence that comes from "liberal" sources is automatically suspect. It might be true . . . but what are the odds?

It's like if you caught a pickpocket trying to lift your purse, and later on you met the same guy running a flim-flam operation. If he told you, "The sky is falling," would you be inclined to believe him?

narciso said...

Oh the ukraine atory is very interesting, bur it has nothing to do with trump

h said...

Here's what Glasser really means: "Trump supporters do not care about the evidence because they know in advance how they plan to interpret it." Here is what Glasser would never ever be willing to say: "Trump opponents have already made up their minds to impeach and they don't care what evidence there is to support it."

Bagoh20 may be on to something: Congress has become an inconsequential debating society. THey don't legislate any more, and Presidents have stepped into the vacuum with executive actions, and the Judiciary has also stepped in to the policy void. It's not even a very good debating society. One of those British Universities Cambridge or Oxford sponsors actual debates in which debaters are required to engage with each other in a formal way; and people vote about which side has made a better case. But in the US Congress it's "My bumper sticker!" "No My bumper sticker" Proof by repetition.

Hagar said...

If Trump put a hold on the Ukrainian aid package it seems to me that a number of people would have noted that in their diaries, even if it was just a verbal command, but we have as of yet never heard any reference to such a directive; just these tentative recollections of having received an elusive impression that a hold was in place a month or two, or three, later.
So some such rumor circulated, but should not this be investigated and the source of it identified?

Real American said...

investigating corruption, even when committed by Democrats, is not an impeachable offense. Any suggestion otherwise is nonsense.

Nonapod said...

I think it's largely true that people have already made up their minds. This little show put on by Shiff won't move the needle in the slightest one way or the other. I just can't imagine that there's going to be some sort of new revelation or new piece of evidence that is likely to change things at this stage.

Basically, the Democrats have lost the current "Ukraine phone call" impeachment effort. They've failed to make a convincing case and I suspect pursuing it further will probably do more harm than good for them among swing voters in critical districts. So I say to Shiff and Pelosi "Go right ahead, make fools of yourselves".

R.J. Chatt said...

I haven't been following the details of the testimony closely either. Whenever I check in it appears to be a lot of gossip and opinions, not facts. I recognize that no matter how corrupt Biden was dealing with Burisma and his son's interests, the Ukrainians don't want to reveal that and risk retaliation by the Democrats (there's your quid pro quo) -- and I am a little surprised that Trump did not anticipate that.

Qwinn said...

When a Republican is accused, no amount of evidence is required.
When a Democrat is accused, no amount of evidence is sufficient.

TreeJoe said...

This sort of journalism/opinion-journalism is embarrassing. I mean truly, red-faced shameful to those who create it.

There is an investigation? An investigation is - usually - supposed to be conducted in a non-partisan way with both damning AND exculpatory evidence sought out and presented to an independent person or group of people to make a judgement on guilt.

Here we have:

- An investigation being conducted in secret led by partisans who are not charging a crime, they are charging a desired outcome (impeachment) and investigating to find the crime to support it. In private.

- Exculpatory evidence is deliberately NOT being sought, investigated, pursued, or presented. It is being surpressed. For example, did the Ukrainian's show knowledge or operate under such a quid pro quo?

- The leader of the investigator may have been involved in the story itself: https://twitter.com/RepAdamSchiff/status/1166867471862829056 Schiff may have been the one who disclosed (among others) to Ukraine their aid was up for review/on hold.

- The leader of the investigator, at partisan political odds with the defendant, is choosing which evidence to leak to maximize public influence in advance of a house of REPRESENTATIVES vote. In other words, a body made up of representatives of the people are being influenced by the investigative lead while the defendant is not able to make his own case public in the same investigation....and then those representatives will be asked to vote.

...

This isn't fancy or hidden. It's right out in the open what's happening. Why it's called and investigation or "truths" by anyone other than a political shill is beyond me.

Big Mike said...

I believe the people who are shaping it and presenting and hyperventilating about it decided in advance the interpretation they wanted to manipulate people into having.

Yes. I don’t get what is wrong with Trump offering up a quid pro quo. FDR never offered up a quid pro quo to Churchill or Stalin? Or Obama with Putin or Iran? There is nothing wrong with anything Trump has done or is doing.

sTony said...

Did President Trump start a trade war with China to boost his reelection prospects? Fighting the 'war' just enough that it slowed the advance of the DJIA but did not do lasting harm to the overall economy. Then, as the election draws closer, declare an agreement, rescind the tariffs slowly, thus restarting economic growth and sending the DJIA higher in time for the election in 2020.

Is he sandbagging the Democrats on Impeachment. The transcript of the call was ready to go in a couple days after the report of the whistleblower report. It had been moved to a secure server so that the people filing the WB (CS) report couldn't access it to confirm their rumors prior to the WB report. Perhaps President Trump has more documents to humiliate the Democrats and their impeachment attempt with?

When impeachment blows up in Democrats faces, (again), will Speaker Pelosi go all Casey Stengel on her caucus?

Qwinn said...

The Dems have no intent to impeach Trump at all. They know they have nothing.

The entire intent is that, when indictments against Democrats come down for the exact same crimes they accuse Republicans of, the Dems can scream "Retaliation!". They will even project accusations of projection.

It always, always, always works, at least as far as keeping Democrats out of jail. It limits the downside of their criminal activity to losing elections, and media complicity pretty much nullifies even that much.

Original Mike said...

Blogger J. Farmer said..."I have similarly paid next to no attention to the Ukraine story. Wake me when its' over."

Yeah, me too. Some things are obvious; Joe Biden is corrupt. As to the Star Chamber testimony, I get my news here. ARM delivers the latest "gotchas" and the commentariat slaps him down.

pacwest said...

@mccullough
I think you might have have the words facts and interpretation mixed up in both instances. But I do agree with your jury selection.

Biotrekker said...

The New Yorker Commentator description: "Susan B. Glasser is a staff writer at The New Yorker, where she writes a weekly column on life in Trump’s Washington." It's Trump's Washington. It's different than any previous Washington. It's Trump's. He's in their heads 24/7. They are obsessed with him. Like Ahab, they don't care if the ship sinks, or everybody dies.

Francisco D said...

Forget about it, Jake.

It's The New Yorker.

Francisco D said...

Forget about it, Jake.

It's The New Yorker.

Bill, Republic of Texas said...

"The Dems are the new Coup Clutz Clowns."

Ha! Perfect.

Sebastian said...

"I believe the people who are shaping it and presenting and hyperventilating about it decided in advance the interpretation they wanted to manipulate people into having."

You believe correctly.

What progs don't fully realize is that you and people like you believe that.

Rocketeer said...

Trust me? Really???

Okay, Boomer.

wild chicken said...

I'm on my 12th book re Trump, Clinton, Russia etc, fittingly ending up with Taibbi's book Hate Inc.

It is pretty much a gonzo screed, but once he gets his obligatory TDS out of the way it's rather good. He rips the media a new one over its deliberate attempt to jack with our emotions on a daily basis. Like sports journalism or WWE antics.

Btw he is a collusion skeptic and was taking on all comers on Twitter the other night, calling BS on every part of the hoax. It was glorious.

cubanbob said...

The Democrats are already in freak out mode that the Bidens might be called to testify in the Senate trial.

rcocean said...

The D's decided to impeach Trump the day he was inaugurated. But they had win the House first. That was step 1. The next step was the Mueller. But Mueller was a bust. So, they've gone to Plan B, the Ukraine nonsense. And when this is a bust, they'll do something else. And if Trump wins in 2020, AND they retain the House they will keep on going. Forever. The point isn't to win, the point is to damage Trump and take up all the Media oxygen.

The other front is the "Trump attacks Women". The "Pussy Tape" was supposed to be the "Kill Shot" but it failed. So , they've fallen back on having some women come forward every three months and claim Trump attacked them or harassed them or whatever. Stormy Danels, E. Carrol whatever, there was another in the news this week. Keep up the constant barrage. That's the plan.

rcocean said...

You had post way back in late 2016, early 2017 about Robert Reich laying out the "Battle Plan" to destroy Trump with non-stop legal action, attacks on his business, and stories about him harassing women. All this stuff - for the last 3 years - is planned out by the D's. Unlike the DC Republicans's - who are just unorganized dumbshits out for $$ - the D's own the media, the law, the entertainment INDUSTRY, and the DC bureaucracy and they are using ALL OF IT to overturn the election. That Trump has stood up to all this - single-handed - and MIGHT win reelection is astounding.

rcocean said...

You had post way back in late 2016, early 2017 about Robert Reich laying out the "Battle Plan" to destroy Trump with non-stop legal action, attacks on his business, and stories about him harassing women. All this stuff - for the last 3 years - is planned out by the D's. Unlike the DC Republicans's - who are just unorganized dumbshits out for $$ - the D's own the media, the law, the entertainment INDUSTRY, and the DC bureaucracy and they are using ALL OF IT to overturn the election. That Trump has stood up to all this - single-handed - and MIGHT win reelection is astounding.

rcocean said...

BTW, riffing off a previous comment, WHEN has the NYT/Wapo ever said: "Without evidence, XYZ accused Trump..."

LOL - NEVER!

daskol said...

Susan Glasser: she'll piss on your head and then tell you it's raining.

Leland said...

do we really need a full time Congress at all?

Texas considered that question long ago and came to the conclusion "no". The state legislature only meets for a few months every other year. It's only county DA's that take it upon themselves to file frivolous lawsuits against the state's executive for doing something like using a constitutional power of veto. It is frustrating and stupid, but at least real work can get done by the state government. It does suck for those homeless in that county.

Ken B said...

Names, dates, bill of particulars or it didn’t happen.

n.n said...

Iran in Iraq and a palette load of cash. A segue to a vacuum, ISIS progresses, then Middle East War 1.0. Oil in Libya and a Libya-Rebel/Jihadist/ISIS Affair. And natural gas in Ukraine, followed by 12 trimesters of witch hunts and warlock trials in a mass, international cover-up. Throughout, Obama, apparently, voted present. Good luck to Barr et al in their investigation to track this multi-tentacled creature of special and peculiar foreign, domestic, and embedded interests.

stevew said...

Speaking for myself, I have been trained over these past few years by Trump's critics and opponents not to believe anything they say about him. This is my starting point on Ukraine. In addition, I go by the Western tradition of placing the burden of proof on the accuser. This is not to say I dismiss the accusation, rather that I withhold judgement until the facts, all of them, are presented.

So far there is nothing to the accusations of impeachable actions by President Trump. We're going to get public hearings next week I'm told, maybe some proof will be offered then.

Jim at said...

Gee. If we only had a transcript we could all read for ourselves.

Oh, well.

Michael K said...

That PDT asked for a corruption investigation on Hunter B. or no aid - I do not care. Sounds like a reasonable request to me. I would like to know more about Hunter Bs actives.

There is a treaty, negotiated by Bill Clinton, that requires them to do this !

Michael K said...

Texas considered that question long ago and came to the conclusion "no". The state legislature only meets for a few months every other year.

I remember when California only had a "budget session," no legislation, on alternate years. Then Jesse Unruh got going and nothing has been the same since.

wildswan said...

It's all quite intricate. As I understand the issue Biden associated an aid package to the Ukraine with the demand that they drop their investigation of corruption which investigation if continued would have implicated his son since his son was on the payroll of the company being investigated. So Biden should have been impeached for this. But he was not. Now Biden and the Dems are saying that Trump did the same thing (I don't agree but that's not the point I'm making); and that Trump should be impeached because, since the investigation which Biden stopped and Trump restarted would prove Biden's corruption and prove that Biden should have been impeached, it follows that Trump is digging up dirt on Biden when he tells the Ukraine to clean up its act.

The trope seems to be that corruption is not an impeachable offense and pretending to oppose corruption in which you actually are a participant is not an impeachable offense but exposing corruption is impeachable. And this is particularly so when the US / Ukraine corruption about to be exposed is emblematic of the corruption of the US globalist class.

I don't need to spend hours and hours of work to find your ridiculous, anonymous, hearsay rubbish, somehow, shall I say, unconvincing. I did that on Russia, learned the pattern of anonymous leak, hinted bombshell etc., leading to nothing; followed swiftly and shamelessly by the same thing, anonymous leak, hinted bombshell etc., leading to nothing; followed swiftly and shamelessly by the same thing ...

So I follow the proceedings as I might follow a poorly-loaded truck which is shedding mattresses, glass bottles and flying gravel along the highway. I follow, disgusted, at a good safe distance. But, don't think I don't follow

Howard said...

Yawning is the best way to describe the abject boredom of the "divide" trope. That pablum need to be recycled into some new and improved meme-spin

Drago said...

I think its very helpful of Schiff-ty Schiff to literally prepare Republican members questions for them ahead of time and then dictating that the witnesses much answer those questions and then, after that, Schiff-ty may or may not allow additional questions.

And its all done in secret...except for what Schiff-ty leaks ahead of time and immediately after.

To our resident Althouse commie lefties/libs/LLR-lefties, this all sounds completely on the up and up.

Unexpectedly.

Original Mike said...

I did take the time to read the transcript of the call. Surprise, surprise...the democrat's case is a load of horseshit.

Mutaman said...

I am not following the details of the fact that yesterday the President stipulated in open court that he looted his own charity to promote his campaign and pay business debts.

The Cracker Emcee Refulgent said...

"Give the 90s GOP some credit. Even though Get Bill failed, they knew the American Public: Blow Jobs, Spooge-Stained Dresses, and Pussy-Moistened Cigars. Good stuff. Entertaining"

That's a great observation. If 51% of the American people can't even begin to tell you what "emolument" means, why would the canny politician ever bother mentioning it?

I get that impeachment is really just a fundraiser but, Jesus, when you were brainstorming this shit you didn't think you should make it about something interesting?

Pianoman said...

"I know bullsh*t when I see it." -- Ben Shapiro

PuertoRicoSpaceport.com said...

25%

Chic-Fil-A got on the wrong side of the gays, there were massive boycotts and the publicity propelled them to #2 fast food restaurant in the US even though they are not national and only open 6 days a week.

Memories Pizza got a big national hoorah going because they were accused of not wanting to serve pizza at a gay wedding. They walked away with over $800m in a go-fund-me account. Plus sold the business 3 years later.

PDJT has had an almost unbelievable amount of shit thrown at him. Now

HE IS GOING TO BE IMPEACHED!!!

HE IS SO SHAMED THAT HE IS CONSIDERING RESIGNING ANY DAY NOW!!!
(Unless he declares himself president for life instead. Some people seem able to hold both thoughts simultaneously)

And yet, in spite of all this he has managed to appoint and get confirmed 2 Supremes and 25% of all federal judges.

So in the case of CFA, Memories and PDJT, have they succeeded in spite of the kerfuffles or because of the kerfuffles?

In the CFA/Memories case it is so clear that they succeeded because of the kerfuffle, I have seen people say that it was an on purpose publicity stunt.

We've talked about PDJT's fantastic sense of misdirection that would put Penn and Teller to shame. "Hey, look over here! Covefe!, Ukraine Phone call! Impeachment!"

And while everyone is looking over there, they don't notice what he has managed to accomplish. More importantly, since they are paying little or no attention he is getting more done than any 3 regular presidents.

25%, that is a pretty amazing number. All fairly young, all will be there for a long time, all form the bench from which Supremes are traditionally picked.

Also for all the bellyaching about the wall, about 75 miles has been built to date.

Well played Mr President, well played indeed.

25%

John Henry

PuertoRicoSpaceport.com said...

I've mentioned a few times here that I was a lukewarm Obama supporter in 08 and a hardcore supporter in 12.

Not because I thought he would be a good president but because I thought he would be a horrible one. I was right.

That old fool Lenin famously said "Worse if better". Like the drunk that has to finally hit bottom before pulling themselves up, we had to have an Obama before we could get a Trump.

I've wondered, here and elsewhere, whether Obama was really a mole. Whether he was there to provoke a radical change in the form of a Trump (or Trumplike) presidency.

Intentional or not, I don't think it matters. I think that on a macro level, in the sense of stopping the car from running over the cliff, Obama was a great president. Great because he was so dreadful.

PDJT got me thinking of this the other night while watching his Mississippi(?) rally. He mentioned how many judges he had appointed and thanked Obama for leaving him so many vacancies.

PDJT didn't speculate but he left me wondering why? Why did he leave so many vacancies? Was it so a President Trump could appoint a lot of judges? Was it on purpose?

Again, intentional or stupidity, it doesn't matter. The vacancies exist and PDJT gets to fill them.

John Henry

PuertoRicoSpaceport.com said...

As for high crimes, PDJT actually committed one as he ran for president. He filed a false financial statement and signed it as correct under penalty of law.

It was not some lawyer or accountant that signed it, it was him personally.

He claimed to be worth $9 billion.

Why everyone knows he lied about this. Forbes says he is only worth $3b or so.

Why is he not impeached over this? Should be pretty simple to prove. Just look at all the assets in the 90 page filing and check their real value.

Easy Peasy. HE LIED!!!!! IMPEACHHHHHHH!!!

John Henry

William said...

Here's the deal on this one --

With Nixon and Clinton, they clearly did bad stuff. Nixon would have been found guilty had he not resigned … deservedly so.

I didn't and don't like Clinton, and clearly he was(is) no paragon of virtue. Should he have been impeached? Probably not, and the Senate did the right thing. But let there be no doubt, Clinton did bad stuff, nasty stuff, and lied about it. And he got off because ... Slick Willie.

But Trump? He didn't actually do anything that other presidents haven't done. Stylistically, he's has gauche as gauche can be, but he's done NOTHING to warrant impeachment, certainly not at the level of Nixon and (I dare say) I-did-not-have-sex-with-that-woman Clinton.

They want to impeach Trump for being Trump; that's inherently wrong.

narciso said...

trying to do so by a attrition, but also schumer filibustered all appointments,

Sigivald said...

I'm not following this because I believe the people who are shaping it and presenting and hyperventilating about it decided in advance the interpretation they wanted to manipulate people into having.

Dinner dinner, chicken winner!

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

The suspense was killing me so I took at look at Susan's twitter feed. It was just chock full of anti-GOP and Orange Man Bad tweets. I guess there's no mystery as to which side of the yawning divide her feet have landed on.

If I was asked how the media could regain some respect and heal this divide, I would say something like "before you express you're own biased opinion on politics, try putting yourself in the other guy's shoes." I'm sure Susan excelled at this when Joe was making his son rich or Hillary was committing multiple felonies exposing classified information or Barack was busy running guns in Mexico. I'm sure to her, all these were just misunderstandings. Easy to explain, minor inconveniences at most. Or more likely, unfortunate actions her heroes were forced to take in response to some evil GOP activity.

At this point, It's just all so boring and predictable. Just one more team-based opinion writer for The New Yorker distressed that not everyone is on her team.

Film at 11:00!

Michael K said...

The forces arrayed against Trump have largely neutralized him.

I guess that's why major investors expect another 15% rise in the S&P.

The Democrats are in crisis because Trump is going to get re-elected and their frantic bullshit is going nowhere. I know a couple NTs who are also going apeshit.

dbp said...

"PDJT didn't speculate but he left me wondering why? Why did he leave so many vacancies? Was it so a President Trump could appoint a lot of judges? Was it on purpose?"

No. It was because of Harry Reid's stupidity. Democrats took out the super-majority rule figuring they would keep the Senate and win the presidency forever. They got a Republican president and a Republican Senate too.

Amadeus 48 said...

This whole thing is ludicrous. There is an election next year. Why not focus on winning that?
Possible answers:
1. This is part of the campaign.
2. Their candidates are terrible, and they don't think they'll win 2020.
3. They have been driven crazy by the voters.
4. All of the above.
There is no reason to pay any attention to any of this.

Night Owl said...

Some bubble-dweller asks "Is Trump Already Winning on Impeachment?"

Could it be that the self-deluded media morons are finally catching a glimpse of a reality they've been hiding from since Trump won? Are they realizing that they no longer have the power to shape the narrative? You're damn right we've already decided how to interpret their bullshit. We think it stinks.

What they cannot even begin to imagine is how much some of us have come to loathe these liars. At my place of work the breakroom TV alternates between CNN and Fox news. People openly mock the media and turn them off when they start to rage. No matter the differences in our political leanings, we are united in our contempt of the hysteria-peddlers that call themselves journalists.

Politics today is not simply a battle between Trump vs the Trump-haters. It's in large part a battle between ordinary working Americans vs. the corruption that exists in our so-called "news" industry. Trump is a news media created phenomenon; how fitting that he is the one to destroy whatever credibility it has left.

Skylark said...

The allegations of abuse of power are striking and unprecedented: a President seeking to privatize American foreign policy for his personal political benefit. The hearings on Trump’s extortionate Ukraine scheme will be quickly followed by the drawing up of articles of impeachment,

Yes, there is no possible interpretation of the facts that suggests that Trump may have had good reason to question throwing billions of dollars into the corrupt rathole that worked to defeat him on behalf of the queen of corruption her very self.

Mutaman said...

"or Hillary was committing multiple felonies exposing classified information"

If true, how come you guys never prosecuted her? you controlled the WH, the congress, and the courts. I suspect you'd just rather whine about it all day.

Skylark said...

I tried to read it, but she has already decided that Trump is guilty and that his supporters just refuse to see the facts as they exist in Adam Schiff’s curation and interpretation!

Martin said...

No facts, yet, just innuendo, hearsay, controlled testimony and unreliable "transcripts" all spun through the Democratic Party Media Division.

Maybe there eventually will be facts, but not yet.

MountainMan said...

So Mark Zaid, one of the attorneys for "The Whistleblower? (Eric Ciaramella, for those who still don't know), said in January, 2017, just days after Trump's inauguration. "The coup has started." Yeah, that might sort of shape my interpretation of things.

Skylark said...

If true, how come you guys never prosecuted her? you controlled the WH, the congress, and the courts.

Here’s one:

“If there was a schedule that was created that was her Secretary of State daily schedule, and a copy of that was then put in the burn bag, that ... that certainly happened on ... on more than one occasion,” Abedin told lawyers

[snip]
“I’ve never seen anyone put their schedule in the burn bag – because every one of them had a state.gov email address and therefore their daily schedules became public records, as required by law,” Richard Grenell, former diplomat and US spokesman at the United Nations, told the Post.

Experts predict the circumstances surrounding the destroyed records will be intensely scrutinized.


Ehhh... Not so much.

Clinton was interviewed by FBI investigators on Saturday. On Monday, FBI director James B. Comey said that the former secretary of state and her staff had been "extremely careless” with emails,

But as we all know now, her fixer in the FBI Peter Strzok changed the language from a prosecutable “gross negligence” to “extremely careless.”

https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2016/0705/Did-Hillary-Clinton-violate-protocol-by-using-burn-bags

Remember that the people in these meetings gave Hillary millions and millions of dollars, these meetings that she covered up were at the same period as she destroyed all of these emails.

So if she wasn’t prosecuted by the Obama Administration, and his justice department, don’t blame Republicans.

BTW, it looks like our little FBI fixer was also working with a “Charlie” who looks like he is Cierramella, who also appears as a source of the Russiagate smears in the Mueller Report.

Skylark said...

Email, Ciaramella to Kelly et al.). The meeting had been planned on May 2, 2017, during a telephone call between the President and Russian President Vladimir Putin, and the meeting date was confirmed on May 5, 2017, the same day the President dictated ideas for the Comey termination letter to Stephen Miller. SCR08_001274 (5/10/17 Email, Ciaramella to Kelly et al.).

Ciarramella is the one who proved that Putin ordered Trump to fire Comey! Look, it happened on the same day Trump got word from Putin that this needed to happen! Wake up sheeple! How much more proof do you need!

narciso said...

he also arranges security clearances, for those with dodgy pasts, like porn convictions,

low quality troll, mostly passive aggressive,

Skylark said...

When you go back and read the Mueller Report, it’s full of the same partisan straw grasping and conclusion jumping, and the most “damning” stuff seems to have come from CIA operatives who are identified in the Mueller Report, incorrectly, as Russian spies and foreign governments.

Of course it was impartial! It was managed “day to day” per Mueller’s testimony to Congress, by the lawyer who defended the guy who wiped Hillary’s email server and destroyed devices under an order to preserve from Congress with hammers.

You couldn’t make this stuff up.

Unknown said...

I read the call transcript and in my view the dems lack reading comprehension and/or honesty. They decided on impeachment before the inauguration and were wailing about stuff that vanished like smoke multiple times already, so why should I believe their "facts" this time?

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

If true, how come you guys never prosecuted her? you controlled the WH, the congress, and the courts. I suspect you'd just rather whine about it all day.

If I recall, an unelected bureaucrat invented a legal standard whereby she wasn't guilty because she didn't "intend" to break the law. This despite the fact she hired a company to specifically setup, maintain and ultimately destroy her illegal server. His finding also assumed the (supposedly} smartest Presidential candidate in history, who served on influential committees involved with national security issues, apparently didn't understand even the most basic laws and processes regarding the handling of classified information.

Skylark said...

So the WB worked with the DNC contractor who was in Ukraine pressing the govt for dirt on Trump.

https://saraacarter.com/whistleblower-and-dnc-contractor-visited-obama-wh-it-must-be-investigated/

The WB had direct involvement with the 2016 shenanigans that Trump was asking be investigated in Ukraine.... It’s almost as if he was trying to protect himself from discovery and protect his job by claiming whistleblower status he didn’t really rate! Naah!

Skylark said...

"If I recall, an unelected bureaucrat invented a legal standard whereby she wasn't guilty because she didn't "intend" to break the law. “

It wasn’t so much that as that she didn’t “understand” that she was breaking the law, because a secretary of state of the United States of America, appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate can’t be expected to understand her job. After all, “she’s just a girl."

Unknown said...

What evidence?
*is hearsay considered evidence? Not being snarky, I just don't know if something that can't be used in a court of law as evidence meets some other definition.

*and I love the word 'hearsay,' which I kind of thought was obviously hear and say, but merriam-webster says it is defined as 'rumor.' Not like the kids game, 'speak and say' which has an objective end point

Mutaman said...

"So if she wasn’t prosecuted by the Obama Administration, and his justice department, don’t blame Republicans."

This is a spectacularly inane comment.

Drago said...

Mutaman: "If true, how come you guys never prosecuted her? you controlled the WH, the congress, and the courts. I suspect you'd just rather whine about it all day."

Wow. Are you really that stupid?

During obamas term, Comey, a Deep State coup boy riffing on the hoax dossier to spy on Trump (along with FBI Clintonites McCabe/Strzok/Baker/ et al with the pro-Clinton DOJ-ers Lynch/Yates etc) usurped the Attorney General's role and live on TV rewrote the statute and invented an entirely made up standard of "intent" to let Hillary off the hook.

Coney did this live. On TV. Before the entire world. During the obama admin.

You may return to your juice box and crackers.

Another lefty who cant remember a single thing that happened more than 15 minutes ago.





Ingachuck'stoothlessARM said...

Jim Jordan getting appointed to Intelligence Committee...

...aaaand Maggie Habberman on cue with the "sex abuse" claim.

like clockwork.

Ingachuck'stoothlessARM said...

"If you have anything that would help us uncover how deep this thing goes, please, we beg you: send it to our tipline so we can immediately bury it,

https://babylonbee.com/news/abc-asks-viewers-to-send-in-evidence-on-epstein-so-they-can-destroy-it-and-then-murder-you

Mutaman said...

"Wow. Are you really that stupid?"

Not stupid enough to believe that Comey's investigation forever precluded the government from prosecuting Clinton. Trump didn't think so.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/20/trump-wanted-to-prosecute-hillary-clinton-james-comey-report

Like I said, you guys would rather whine about it all day. Personally, I think you're too stupid to find the Courthouse.

h said...

sTony asks: Did President Trump start a trade war with China to boost his reelection prospects? I've a nagging question along these lines for some time. Here's what I've noticed: Trump seems to have found a pretty reliable lever on the stock market by leaking or announcing trade problems (stock market down) or leaking rumors of trade negotiation progress (stock market up). This line of inquiry (and other related question suggested by sTony) require us to believe that Trump is a real political genius. And while I'm willing to give Trump the benefit of the doubt on competence much more so than the anti-Trumpers, I do see in his real estate developer history a number of missteps that make me doubt his genius.

Jim at said...

If true, how come you guys never prosecuted her?

If it was up to us, she'd be in jail. But in case you haven't noticed, DC pols tend to protect each other.

Michael K said...

If true, how come you guys never prosecuted her? you controlled the WH, the congress, and the courts. I suspect you'd just rather whine about it all day.

Yeah,. There was a nice opportunity on Omaha Beach for a picnic, too.

Assholes galore.

Michael K said...

But in case you haven't noticed, DC pols tend to protect each other.

I'm concerned about DC juries. Did you notice Gregg Crag walked? DC juries are notorious. I hope Durham has cases lined up outside DC. Outside northern VA would be nice, too. The Covington kids' lawyer has the cases far from DC.

Drago said...

Mutaman: "Not stupid enough to believe that Comey's investigation forever precluded the government from prosecuting Clinton."

Until recently, the FBI and DOJ leadership were dancing to the democrats and GOPe tune.

To pretend that wasnt the case shows you to be at ARM levels of disingenuousness.

And in DC, the Courthouse is essentially located at the HQ of the DNC. It will take a Trump reelection and Barr and Durham actually coming thru to change it.

narciso said...

And they didny even bother to indict podesta and weber:


http://acecomments.mu.nu/?post=384223

Mutaman said...

"Yeah,. There was a nice opportunity on Omaha Beach for a picnic, too."

Bad analogy- Trump wasn't on Omaha Beach. Something about bone spurs.

narciso said...

https://amp.dailycaller.com/2019/11/08/fiona-hill-steele-dossier-disinformation?__twitter_impression=true

Skylark said...

"This is a spectacularly inane comment.”

So you have a rebuttal for the testimony of Abedin that Hillary destroyed federal records?

Michael K said...

Bad analogy- Trump wasn't on Omaha Beach. Something about bone spurs.

Neither were you, dippy. The point, lost on you lefties, is that this administration has been un∂er fire from before the inauguration.

Bone spurs were also disqualifying tin WWII. More so because more marching. Go to the back of the class, dummy,

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

The MSM(D) lay it all out as if a crime has been committed. They work backwards off of that.

of course it's illegal to look at Biden and Clinton epic financial pay to play shenanigans.

Iman said...

“I know a couple NTs who are also going apeshit.”

If one of them goes by the moniker “Patterico”, oh yes... yes, indeed.

Mutaman said...


How many excuses can the Trumpers come up with for not prosecuting Clinton ( or anyone else in the Obama administration)? How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

Mutaman said...

"Until recently, the FBI and DOJ leadership were dancing to the democrats and GOPe tune" (sic)

Well "recently" has come and gone. Does that mean we can expect some indictments Monday Morning? You morons haven't even indicted McCabe.

Mutaman said...

"So you have a rebuttal for the testimony of Abedin that Hillary destroyed federal records?"

Skylark : Clinton is a crook.

Me : So why haven't you prosecuted her ?

Skylark: Clinton is a crook.

Skylark said...

We explained why she hasn’t been prosecuted. The FBI was rife with Clinton fixers, including Comey. You can choose not to believe it. You just can’t choose to be credible when you refuse to engage counterarguments.

Anyway, I am tired of arguing with dishonest shills for the Clintons. Your dishonesty comes through loud and clear. There is no real need for me to press the point.

Skylark said...

https://genesiustimes.com/suicide-hotline-volunteer-shocked-when-hillary-clinton-tried-to-place-an-order1/

Ha!

Rabel said...

If the game's too tough for you, get off the field.

There's plenty of room in the stands.

Mutaman said...



You got a week left to file against McCabe, Sparky. Or have the "Clinton fixers precluded you from doing that?

https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/fbi/463870-judge-tells-justice-dept-to-charge-mccabe-or-drop-investigation

Michael K said...

Mutaman is a troll. Leave him be.

Michael K said...

If one of them goes by the moniker “Patterico”, oh yes... yes, indeed.

I feel kind of bad about Patrick. He and I attended Cathy Seipp's funeral together, He really has gone off his rocker, which worries me as he is an assistant DA. Inga loved that he banned me from his blog for arguing with him, but he has admitted that 85% of his readers have left and those that are left hate him.

Mutaman said...

Well you've got a week to file re McCabe, Sparky. Or did Comey preclude you from doing that too?

https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/fbi/463870-judge-tells-justice-dept-to-charge-mccabe-or-drop-investigation

Guildofcannonballs said...

All we know for sure is Trump never jumped in a pool.

If he did, and survived unscathed (can you even imagine?), that would make him superior to Krauthammer, Lowrey, and Hewitt. I heard for 2 or 3 minutes, for the second time this year, Hewitt pimp John Podhoretz. You see, in Hugh's world, twitter is just a little too nasty for the un-nasty cunt-of-cunts fatly-enraged miniscule troll compared to his papa so when he rightly gets reviled from all quarters Whoit just keeps pimp pimp pimping John Podhoretz, of all people, as a reasonable man who just has had enough. Of Trump. And Trump's tweets (of all things).

If jumping into a pool destroys physically Buckley's legacy then fuck it and take the money whatever way Hewitt cons you out of it.

You'll be relieved, after all his propaganda, if you just listen and buy his sellings.

I'm Full of Soup said...

Trump has been harassed endlessly since he won the election. The Russian collusion thing was trumped up BS and this impeachment BS is not legitimate either. So conservatives should refuse to debate the case and simply call it harassment and illegimate over and over.

Guildofcannonballs said...

I think I might name my book "Barnett regrets Romney: The doggies tale' tail."

I'm a gonna outsell all of you combined, but only with your help. Which you know.

Mary said...

Ann, your response that you won’t read about the impeachment hearings: “I'm not following this because I believe the people who are shaping it and presenting and hyperventilating about it decided in advance the interpretation they wanted to manipulate people into having.” reminds me of “The Boy That Cried Wolf” For two years the boy cried wolf and the town’s people became bored upon not seeing this wolf. Then one day the wolf appeared in the town square, and as always the boy cried “wolf!” The people laughed and went on their way. He again insisted “wolf!, look! He’s going to eat your babies!” But they said that’s just a dog. The boy was nearly hysterical, insisting, pointing to the wolf’s foamed mouth and licking his fangs. They would not believe. A man crossed through the town square with a young child by his side. The wolf lunged for the child and tore it to shreds. The boy screamed “see! see!” but the man was not shaken, he said that it wasn’t real and that he must be dreaming, because there is no wolf. Then the wolf attacked the man’s leg, he falls to the ground, the boy runs over and screams why won’t you believe me? He’s going to kill you! The man, panting and moaning from pain, says “that is, (gasps for air), that is my bad leg, this creature you call wolf must have known I have a bad leg, this isn’t a bad wolf, it’s taking care of me” He bleeds to death on the street. All the people in the town gather around him and proclaim “This wolf creature really knows how to solve problems!” The boy shakes his head looking both dumfounded and terrified. He rides his horse to Canada leaving only this story behind. The end.

narciso said...

Ah john podhoretz, its rather atriking how far he has drifted from his fathers teachings, as for buckley he worked briefly for the company in mexico largely training ravines the yenan way.

Guildofcannonballs said...

Wake the fuck up cunt: my gut is better than science.

WAKE UP!! My Gut!

Skylark said...

"Well you've got a week to file re McCabe,”

What does that have to do with anything I said. I don’t trust a government which is filled with people who have vowed to #RESIST Trump at every turn and wouldn’t be surprised if McCabe walks. They are all dirty.

What I don’t understand is your faith in Hillary.

Original Mike said...

Blogger Mutaman said..."If true, how come you guys never prosecuted [Clinton]?"

If true? The facts are public. Everyone knows it's true. I bet even you do.

cf said...

we're talking "Dems" here, but they could not be foisting this charade upon the nation if @NPR "news" reported true news honestly instead of their fomenting Kabuki. Pure script-writing, meant to inflame and divert their well-meaning herd of listeners who all want to be Good and decent folk.

Seriously, this is criminal, treasonous assault on our nation by Elite Supremacists who are above all law and imagine they are rightfully our Overseers.

history will not be kind to these power whores. (that means you, @arishapiro, "Luluuuu", "Mara" & the rest of the Grrlz)

interesting as hell that Matt Taibbi is being the rare canary. gives me hope.

Bilwick said...

Metaphorically speaking, Trump certainly seems to be on "Omaha Beach" in the war against The Hive.