MARGARET BRENNAN: The president has said he's heard you out on the merits of a short Senate trial, but he's going to do whatever he wants, he says. Should Republicans in the Senate really be taking their marching orders from the person being investigated?So, clearly, he's not taking "marching orders" from Trump, and I don't really think Trump thinks he's giving marching orders. I assume Trump knows the Senate won't do what he's saying and that's why he feels free to say that's what he wants. After the quick acquittal, Trump can go to his rallies and say: I wanted so much more — and it would have proven so much about how perfect I was and how corrupt and sick the Democrats and the deep state — I call it the deep state — are — but the Senate said no. They wanted quick. They kept saying quick. I wanted long, but they said quick, quick, we must be quick.
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: You know, I understand the president's frustration, but I think what's best for the country is to get—get this thing over with. I am clearly made up my mind. I'm not trying to hide the fact that I have disdain for the accusations in the process. So I don't need any witnesses. The president can make a request to call witnesses. They can make a request or call Mike Pence and Pompeo and Joe Biden and Hunter Biden. I am ready to vote on the underlying articles. I don't really need to hear a lot of witnesses.
MARGARET BRENNAN: But the president says he wants—he would love those individuals to testify. He says he wants evidence. He wants to make his case. Why are you opposed?
SEN. GRAHAM: Yeah, well, I'd tell the president, if somebody is ready to acquit you, I'd sort of get out of the way. If you start calling the witnesses the president wants and they're are going to start calling Mike Pence, you know, the secretary of State Pompeo, I don't think that's good for the country. I don't think it's good for the Senate. You need 51 votes to get a witness approved. I want to make my decision based on the trial record established in the House as a basis for impeachment. That's just me, one senator. But I think there's a general desire by a lot of senators to not turn this thing into a circus. I understand the president's frustration by being shut out of the house but I need to do what I think is best for the country....
SEN. GRAHAM: This is the first impeachment trial being driven by partisan politicians conducted behind closed doors. The testimony was selectively leaked. The president was denied the ability to participate meaningful in the House hearing. And I want to end it. I have nothing but disdain for this. I'm trying to make myself clear. What you're doing in the House is bad for the presidency. You're impeaching the president of the United States in a matter of weeks, not months.... I think this whole thing is a crock. You're shutting the president out. The process in the House, any partisan group could do this in the future. You're weaponizing impeachment. And I want to end it. I don't want to legitimize it. I hate what they're doing.He's contrasting this impeachment to the Clinton impeachment, when Graham supported a long procedure in the Senate. His answer is that the way the House played its role was so inappropriate — such a "crock" — that the Senate shouldn't dignify it with a full scale trial. The House has changed impeachment — "weaponized" it — and the Senate ought to respond in a way that disciplines the House and restores the traditional order.
I note that if the Senate does a full scale trial and accepts this notion that Senators must behave like jurors in court — who are rejected unless they begin with an unbiased mind and listen to the evidence and only decide based what they hear at trial — then the House could vote for impeachment after impeachment — why not a new impeachment every day? — and hobble the Senate with endless burdensome work. It doesn't make sense to interpret the Senate's role that way.
The Constitution gives the Senate "the sole Power to try all Impeachments." It doesn't say what "try" means and the Supreme Court made it clear in a 1993 case that "the word 'try' in the Impeachment Trial Clause does not provide an identifiable textual limit on the authority which is committed to the Senate."
Graham is claiming precisely that authority.
Posts
292 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 292 of 292>> The process has not helped the Democrats politically, so more of the same probably hurts them more and more. <<
I'm sure there will be more of the same whatever happens. And more of the same if Durham indicts anyone. Heh, impeachment, primaries, campaigns, Durham, and maybe RBG retirement. The next year is going to be fun.
Bob Boyd makes a very good point that probably should not be overlooked- a long, drawn out trial in the Senate might well sit just as well with independents as did the Democrat shit show impeachment inquiry did. Perhaps a dismissal of this nonsense is the way to reinforce that impression of the Democrats, and give them the rope to hang themselves with if they insist on further impeachment inquiries.
"G" word invoked!
https://twitter.com/RudyGiuliani/status/1206290349422981120
The Comey interview with Wallace was interesting- I think, for the first time, Comey is starting to blink. The IG report made him look incompetent, and even his political allies in the press understood that much. That Barr and Durham went out their way to point out that the predicate of Crossfire Hurricane is under investigation caught Comey attention, and today's interview was Comey retreating a fair distance- now blaming the people who reported to him. That won't sit well, but Comey doesn't want to be the guy holding the bag.
Pro Trump guys on Redditt who frighten the left and make them cry:
The Infamous Redditt The Donald site is backed up here
That Schiff is now retreating is also significant. Of course, Schiff is lying today just like he lied in his February 2018 memo. Barr and Durham have put the fear of God into the coup plotters.
https://twitter.com/julie_kelly2/status/1206206549351419906?s=20
well Schiff follows the Costanza rule, 'its not a lie, if you believe'
Question, Skylark: from the perspective we have today, knowing Deepthroat was disaffected Derp-stater Mark Felt, upset stomach being passed over for a top job, does Nixon’s impeachment also seem cargo-cultish? And while Clinton was a dirtbag, it was perjury about office blowjobs from an eager Monica and not whatever he did to Paula Jones or Kathleen Willey, behind the moral grandstanding behind the impeachment which Clinton survived and philanderer Henry Hyde did not. Andrew Johnson violates a law that was contemporaneously and broadly acknowledged as an unconstitutional infringement of his prerogative, and anyway didn’t apply to Stanton who’d been appointed by Lincoln. Congress, especially the democratically elected part, may be woefully susceptible to cargo-cult-like behaviors when their will is frustrated, not just this particular bunch of bozos, no? Impeachment is a safety valve, and not really a serious remedy but just a way for pissed off people to blow off steam.
"Comey retreating a fair distance- now blaming the people who reported to him."
Umm..chalking any concerns up to "sloppy" mistakes that he couldn't oversee from his elevated, detached perch.
Subpoena. Schitt's. Phone. Records.
Screw subpoenas. It’s time for Trump to go full WWE and just bodyslam Schiff on the House floor. This shit is getting boring and the ratings suck.
We’re like the only people paying attention in America
Lindsay Graham (in Jim Mora voice): What’s that? Ah - Impeachment? Don’t talk about - Impeachment? You kidding me? Impeachment? I just hope we can get this over with quickly!
the tenure of office was dubious, Stanton's removal was warranted, just a few years later, Ulysses grant had a checkered administration, yet because there wasn't a locus of opposition, there was no proceeding in that manner, but it took nearly 40 years for the real nature of felt's malfeasance to be shown, and woodward and Bernstein's collusion with same,
Sadly, Wallace didn't mention Clinesmith's "Viva la Resistance" reveal to Comey when discussing the FISA alteration of Carter Page's informant status.
"Sloppy" interview.
we might have addressed this point,
https://amgreatness.com/2019/12/13/trapped-by-the-ghosts-of-corrupt-administrations-past/
of course the press was manhandled re the underwear bomber, the stuixtnet link, the injury to james rosen
Yancey Ward @ 5:07pm...
Yep!!!
“F*ck Colorado's Jason Crow(D). He is a treasonous snot nosed leftist.“
Stone the Crow!!!!!!!!!
read the revisionist stuff on grant’s presidency. Perhaps he wasn’t such a bad president after all, and lots of stuff that strikes us as improper today was legal and common then. Revisionist perspective on Grant was that he was, at worst, naive about people and too loyal to friends when they really didn’t deserve it.
Blogger Kevin said...
Lindsay Graham (in Jim Mora voice): What’s that? Ah - Impeachment? Don’t talk about - Impeachment? You kidding me? Impeachment? I just hope we can get this over with quickly!
Nice work.
I give him the benefit of the doubt re members of the administration involved in credit mobilier, maybe a little less so with teapot dome, and harding's crew, it's rather striking what a hive of independent minds yields in each case,
Blogger daskol said...
We’re like the only people paying attention in America
Maybe.
Most assuredly, but when the vote comes to remove Trump from office, and the nation faces the prospect of being minutes away from a new President, it will get deadly serious.
take the field, and eat up the clock as long as possible.
the Dems are promising Endless Impeachment anyway, and have nothing but Endless Impeachment, so they will have no choice even after a 'swift acquittal' (which will never be accepted as legit in their eyes anyway)
Call as many dirty Dems in as they like.This may be a way to expose in specific their nefarious deeds that were never supposed to see the light of day, since Trump was never supposed to win.
The public is weary of the 'sham', not an earnest quest for truth/justice.
If we see how our 'betters' have been screwing us, and see them being (finally) punished, that may take some of the edge of the ennui.
And while Clinton was a dirtbag, it was perjury about office blowjobs from an eager Monica and not whatever he did to Paula Jones or Kathleen Willey, behind the moral grandstanding behind the impeachment which Clinton survived and philanderer Henry Hyde did not.
Daskol, allow me to correct you. The point from which the impeachment of Bill Clinton stemmed, was precisely the attempted rape of a subordinate, brought to his hotel suite at gunpoint for the purpose of being raped, who then sought redress in the courts, and was baulked by Clinton's concealment of the truth.
That truth was Monica. And a whole lot more, but nobody else had DNA.
All Clinton had to do was pay.
Incidentally, what I would like to see in the Senate, with a unified Republican caucus, would be the denial of all Democrat-requested witnesses and approval of all of President Trump's. Which was what the House did in reverse.
Jon Ericson said...
"G" word invoked!
https://twitter.com/RudyGiuliani/status/1206290349422981120
--
and a helluva lot more:
Rudy Giuliani
Verified account @RudyGiuliani
5h5 hours ago
Witness Yuri Lutsenko, inheritor of Shokin’s office:
Records proving Amb Yovanovitch perjured herself at least twice.
Doc’s showing she was denying visas to witnesses who could prove Biden & Dem corruption.
Clear doc proof of money laundering by Burisma & Biden’s.
I give almost everyone the benefit of the doubt, narciso .... for years and years - half a century's worth ---- let me explain my usually inexplicable reasoning just a little .....
I thought the the Lloyd Price classic 43 "PPERSONALITTY" (the first P is silent as in Psmith) had a joke in it where the guy sings to the woman he loves
here are some remembered lyrics .....
"they say I'm a fool for loving you"
"but you
WALK
with personality!
TALK
with personality!
CHARM
with personality!"
all of which is good but this is what I heard wrong from the year the 45 was first sold until like this afternoon (Gaudete Sunday, for those keeping track) was this, following the compliments to the young lady about she walked, talked, and charmed with personality ......
PLUS YOU GOT A GRAND NEW CAR
so I thought the song was a goof on guys who sweet talk rich girls
BUT WHAT THE SINGER WAS SINGING FOR THE LAST FIFTY YEARS WAS ACTUALLY
"plus you got a great big heart" not "plus you got a grand new car"
and all those years, on the transistor radios at Smith Point and Coney Island on those long gone sandy summer Sundays, on the car radio in the middle of the mid-continental night driving from one woebegone military installation to another in the depth of winter, on Cousin Brucie's Saturday night show in the background while playing mediocre poker with intensely interesting friends, and so on and so forth, I thought all those years, when I heard the song so many times - I thought the song was not a real love song but a song some guy sang because he admired this lady for having a grand new car
but it was straight up just a great love song
BECAUSE SHE WALKED WITH PERSONALITY TALKED WITH PERSONALITY CHARMED WITH PERSONALITY
plus she had a great big heart!!!!
Ingachuck'stoothlessARM said...
take the field, and eat up the clock as long as possible
the Dems are promising Endless Impeachment anyway, and have nothing but Endless Impeachment, so they will have no choice even after a 'swift acquittal' (which will never be accepted as legit in their eyes anyway)
______&&&&&-----
I ask (again) : why not Senate simply "Remand" back to House for do over?!
I leave it up to you to figure out what the previous comment of mine has to do with the biography of Lindsey Graham, the borderline evil gas lighting of the Trump-haters from solidly Democratic Congressional districts, and the ultimate fate of those who rashly judge others ....
like I said, it is Gaudete Sunday
well unlike many figures, that have trode the stage for the gop, trump has a personality, combative impulsive, but that's the only way to survive in the minefield they have planted,
Graham is almost right. Republicans have hearsay and documentary evidence to contradict Dem BS. For example, Biden’s extortion video, a written statement from the prosecutor that he was investigating Burisma and documentation that Hunter was on the Burisma payroll. Also, include the written explanation from the bureaucrats explaining the delay in passing the defense funds on to Ukraine, and evidence of Zelensky’s assertion that he was not pressured and was unaware of any delay in passing on the funds. Put that and other relevant stuff in a notebook for each Senator and have a vote for acquittal. Pack the chambers with friendly reporters who have had the materials for days to question Senators who vote against acquittal aggressively and with particularity.
Finally, refer the “whistleblower”, Vindman and their accomplices to DOJ for prosecution for disclosing classified information. Ambassador Yovanovitch’s meddling with Ukraine prosecutor’s on behalf of the Bidens and Soros’ operations ought to be referred also.
Hearsay begets hearsay. We don’t need another sideshow. The Democrat Senators don’t care about evidence that contradicts their seditious attempt to void the 2016 election and Republicans, even Mittens, know the impeachment is a hoax.
Not Stephen Cooper! Go away. The adults are having a serious conversation.
no! no 'do-overs' for them! It's our turn.
I am no fan of nepotism in the modern world - back in the day if I were in the right royal family - and I would have been, trust me - I would have been a fan of nepotism but look around you none of us here are exactly royals -
but if I were a liberal I'd be awful careful of getting Trump with that 'personality' of his too riled up else they are looking at 8 years of Donald Trump Jr starting in 2024, if they just let him have a normal presidency maybe the desire for revenge will not be strong enough to get DT JR to run
Sometimes I am right sometimes I am wrong in the 70s one thing I got right was the right car to drive if you want women to want to spend time with you, the right car was much better for that very important purpose than my unique understanding, as early as 1974, of Proust and Joyce and I KNEW IT and no it did not bother me, Proust and Joyce were some crazy dudes, not exactly Proverbs 8 types of guys
Narayanan said...
I ask (again) : why not Senate simply "Remand" back to House for do over?!
This makes me laugh because I had the same thought last week-
Like an Appeals Court, they could send it back to the lower court, the House, finding they applied the wrong rules of evidence, Applied the wrong law, etc.
After aquick acquittal Democrats can say Republicans violated their oath to give impartial justice and if they;d had a chance they could have proved it.
I don't think Trump will be denied a trial.Trump and the Republican caucus are going to work it out together in private negotiations.
The reason Lindsey Graham doesn't want a full trial is that Donald Trump stands to be, at a minimum, highly embarrassed if the truth of what he was asking Ukraine to investigate becomes clear, and at worst, he and Giuliani get exposed as dupes of Russian disinformation. Which he probably doesn’t realize yet, but some Senators probably do. He’s still got to know that the questions he wanted Zelensky to look into, as stated, are not in line with reality.
That is, to say clearly just what Trump was asking for with regards to ” what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine” in 2016, with Crowdstrike and the server and “a lot of things that went on”; and in regards to Joe Biden “stopping the prosecution” and bragging about it and treating a very fair prosecutor very badly .. would reveal that he was relying on information that was, to some degree, completely unfounded.
Republicans in Congress have mentioned some things that might be valid (Ukrainian spreading of information about Paul Manafort, Hunter Biden’s job) but not something that would explain what Trump was talking about in that July 25, 2019 call.
Democrats don’t want to push any position other than that Trump knew that all the investigations he wanted, or wanted announced, were unfounded, and they don’t even go into detail about that but just say he wanted them to help his 2020 political campaign.
Whether any investigating was justified or not, is, if you read the impeachment article completely irrelevant! Except that they don’t explicitly say that either.
Sammy Finkelman is clearly a Putin stooge
All Clinton had to do was pay.
If he did that. hed have lost his cover story for having a criminal defense fund.
Clinton actually ginned up this law suit, and it was legally defective (Paula Jone sued on the wrong tort)
The judge had ruled (later on fter this was all over she reversed herself) that consensual sexual relationships with subordinates was relevant to Paula Jones' case. Clinton lied about this under oath - for which, in that generation he'd probably have been expelled by the Senate if he was a Senator. What;s worse, Clinton had actually a bill into law making it relevant. Still, this was all small things.
/
12/15/19, 6:05 PM
Put the corruptocrats on trial.
We need to have a trial because people need to see that the Media are not so much the propaganda arm of the DNC s the DNC is the enforcement arm of the SJW Media.
Skyalark @12/15/19, 3:58 PM
The Ukrainian that Sondman claimed he said that to says he never met with Sondman except in passing after some kind of event and he was never asked to announce any investigation. Not that he never met wth him, not even that he didn't meet with him on September 1 at the Warsaw summit, bt that he ddi noot meet alone with him there in a way that he could not be verheard, and most important that Sondland did not tell him then (he doesn't say Sondland did not tell im later) that the aid and the investigations were linked.
What really happened on Sept 1 was that that was the day that Sond;and told Volker by telephone that he had made a mistake in telling the Ukrainians that a meeting was dependent on investigations but that he now thought that everything was dependent on investigations.
He had also told Senator Ron Johnson that aid was dependent on investigatons on August 30 or 31 who called up Trump and told Trump that. Trump asked who told him that and Senator Ron Johnson told him "Gordon Sondland" and Trump said he never had such an idea and there was no quid pro quo. But he only wants Zelensky to carry out his campaign promises or something. And Trump said to Sondland he was reviewing this (by this time Taylor had sent his cable at the suggestion of Bolton) and he thought Johnson wold be pleased with his decision.
Meanwhile Sondland and Volker and Taylor went on with their negotiations with Ukraine. and they reached an agreement that Zelensky would announce investigatons in an interview by Fareed Zakaria on CNN scheduled for Sept 13. But the aid was released on Sept. 11 and the interview was cancelled.
Sondland had a lawyer who did not take enough time (probably was paid by the hour) to reconstruct a correct chronology
Sammy Finkelman is clearly a Putin stooge
Agreed.
Sammys just a little more baroque than most.
The dems want to introduce mulvaney and bolton as witnesses because reasons.
Narayanan wrote:
"I ask (again) : why not Senate simply "Remand" back to House for do over?!"
That would be hilarious! It really would put the Democrats in a pickle.
"Blogger Inga said..."
Idiot.
For weeks now we’ve heard “Just you wait until it gets to the a Senate trial! They’ll call the Bidens and Schiff and then we’ll all hear the truth!”. What are Republicans afraid of? The truth?
Michael K, senile coot.
Inga STILL believes the hoax dossier is real and kavanaugh raped hundreds of women and Carter Page is a treasonous traitor russian agent.
To this very day she refuses to disavow these accusations she has made over and over again for years.
This is a rather twisted individual.
https://twitter.com/LeeSmithDC/status/1206312508404842502
Think about Carter Page for a minute.
Here you have an all-american red-blooded patriot who gets good enough grades to be admitted to the Naval Academy, he graduates from the Naval Academy and is commissioned a Naval Officer and becomes a Naval Intelligence Officer.
He performs his service honorably, departs the Navy appropriately, goes into business for himself and at some point the CIA approaches him to help them in their efforts to investigate actual russians the CIA believes are spies/agents operating in the US.
Carter Page is all too happy to help and does so, performing valuable services for the CIA as the FBI arrests the 2 russian agents and CONVICTS them. The CIA issues a positive performance evaluation for patriotic Carter Page.
Then, a few year later, a bunch of actual traitors in our government doctor evidence to frame Carter Page (because these corrupt agents want to spy on the Trump campaign) and millions of piece of crap democrats like Inga start calling Carter Page a treasonous traitor and these piece of crap democrats continue doing it for over 3+ years....
.....until the very moment the IG report comes out and we find out it was all lies the entire time.....
....and those very same piece of crap democrats, like Inga, CONTINUE to call Carter Page a treasonous traitor.
Just think about that.
The reason Lindsey Graham doesn't want a full trial is that Donald Trump stands to be, at a minimum, highly embarrassed if the truth of what he was asking Ukraine to investigate becomes clear, and at worst, he and Giuliani get exposed as dupes of Russian disinformation.
Sammy, you are sounding like Inga. Cut it out.
Somebody today linked to a Glenn Greenwald article Inga should take a look at.
I think the reverse is sammeh, the narrative has worked diligently to hide the extent of ukrainian corruption
Inga is a fool that it is not worth trying to inform her.
More important is what is going on behind the scenes in the Senate.
Representative John Ratcliffe is one of only three republican members of congress [the only one remaining (Gowdy, Goodlate gone)] who has seen all of the classified material evidence behind the FISA application and the intelligence abuses in 2016.
In this interview Ratcliffe outlines the scale and scope of the abuses as well as what they mean in the context of corrupt and illegal DOJ and FBI activity. WATCH:
The takeaway from this interview with Bartiromo is exactly why senators who participated with the intelligence operation to remove and eliminate President Trump blocked Ratcliffe’s nomination to the position of Director of National Intelligence.
The SSCI controls who is allowed to be CIA Director, NSA Director and Director of National Intelligence. The nominees must pass through this committee. Senator Burr and Senator Warner are the Chairman and Vice-Chair respectively. Both blocked Ratcliffe.
That video is worth watching, not to Inga of course.
Interesting how this structure was built up
https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2019/10/impeachment-built-trap-obama-created-romney-daniel-greenfield/?fbclid=IwAR31WMXngCBEs_K3753qrO910a3ELlMQL-Yssiosh3wv9-l3_vAYkB18Wc4#.XZuFfPsUXcw.facebook
But of course
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/12/newsweek-parrots-the-mullahs-line.php
What happened to Carter Page puts one in mind of the Central Park Five
Once in a while, CSPAN turns into WWE style entertainment, with shoes flying and punches thrown. We could do worse, I think, than to have a fistfight or maybe even for old time's sake a caning. It's great for Devin Nunes to write a snarky letter to Schiff--sick burn. How about going over and just pushing him on his ass, maybe pouring a milkshake on him? I don't think it would hurt Nunes' electability, and I doubt I'm the only one who'd have a higher opinion of the whole institution afterwards.
Why should 3rd world countries get to have all the parliamentary fun?
No edwin wilson, who did things at the companies direction, but then he was dissavowed and the travesty was not tevealed for 20 years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feeble-minded
>> Sammy, you are sounding like Inga. <<
More like someone who reads the NY Times. Lost souls wandering in the slough, I've met them in the wild.
Sammy, you’ve been hanging around Patterico and all of those Democrats who swear they are Republicans for far too long. You’ve been ‘tainted.
Hes been elliptical for awhile,
Well Sammy, Giuliani has certainly pushed a lot of chips on the table, but after all the bullshit I have been hearing from Mueller on,, I will wait to see the cards before I pass judgement as to who has been duped by whom.
For Lenin, who/whom was rather brutal. For Putin it’s just a game of which American can he get to say crazier shit, right? I get the Putin thing now.
All this lib blather about the oath taken for an impeachment trial...Tell me Chuck Schumer will not be lying by claiming to be impartial. Or Sherrod Brown. To say nothing of the Senators running or who had been running for, um, Trump's job. They represent their constituents and will do what their constituent polling tells them, so by nature, they are compromised.
The last resort of a scoundrel or demagogue is to claim moral superiority when common sense would suggest otherwise.
daskol - Putin is not who you think he is.
He remembers the thousands of times he listened, late at night, to his fellow Russians talking about DEATH
death from the pre-Merkelite Germans who raped and killed millions of Russian women.
death from the Panzers who ran into Russia knowing that the Americans were not going to invade Europe in time to keep the panzers from making martyr cities out of hundreds of Russian cities, with an average number of deaths in each city being a few hundred thousand.
Putin knows that Reagan was not there for the Russians when little Bush did his little dances in the White House as if he had been a victor. Sure Reagan suffered from dementia at the time, but still ....
Putin remembers the hundreds of thousands of Western men who travelled to Russia and the Ukraine with wallets full of money and who, as the Dutch and the Germans and the English and so on are famous for doing, ejaculated and then said 'you are nothing to me' to their victims.
Putin has been the victim of hundreds of death threats --- imagine that .....to put it in perspective, I have had lots of people on the inter webs fantasize about "punching me" because they did not like what I said in some comment thread (God help them if they ever really tried to inflict violence on me --- just saying, I am braver than King David and almost as strong as Samson, and as God is my witness there is no Delilah in my life who will ever turn me into the ways of LOSERS who LOSE the ways SAMSON the little man LOST when he thought he was falling in love with Delilah - but that is another story, and not a story you will likely ever understand - sorry but it is true....)...
Putin is not some little foreigner who you can innocently malign without knowing what he knows about the world.
Sure I am no fan of Putin, but I am no fan of the arrogant Bushes or the clueless Obamas or the vicious Jimmy Carter, who has never in his whole long life spent a single moment wondering why people think he is evil for his deep and reprehensible support of Planned Parenthood, an organization that does its best to keep down the birth rate of African-Americans, the people who he detested in his bigoted childhood.
Sadly, Putin is not as pro-life as he should be, but if he were an American, there is no way he would be as enthusiastic as poor Obama was for government support of as MANY PLANNED PARENTHOOD CLINICS IN AFRICAN-AMERICAN neighborhoods as possible.
You know I am right.
why do I bother nobody cares
Well i dont think putin is really that much of a victim, clearly he was planning his looting scheme all the way back to dresden his contact was the fmr stasi agent in charge of the nordstream pipeline.
However it can reasonably said that post siviet policies were conducted with an arrogance just short of malice
Sachs and summers were party to the looying of the state by the new class that would have made goldfinger envious. In the debris of that heist many russians died in fact it probably reminded him of the timd of troubles of late 16th century russia.
Before the romanovs firmly secured their power, what is a czar he is a boss or warlord who has secured the endorsement of the Church.
He knew something would be needed to bond the new state together, the population had fallen precipitously in the 90s. In the disease vor struggle for power etc.
Good God Almighty crush these evil people thank you AMEN
It is easy enough to end:
Trump's first witness called should be Obama. "What did you know and when did you know it."
Get the fucker on record under oath. He is not half the skillful liar that Slick Willie was.
Of course, that comes from being an affirmative action hire in essentially all the jobs he ever had and from never trying a case once.
Now these practices were carried out to lesser extent in places like poland thats what brought kwasnievski to power. For a tome
My uncle Bud died this weekend in lovely Wisconsin, La Crrose family from Thiensvielle.
Blogger Crazy World said...
‘Good God Almighty crush these evil people thank you AMEN”
SMITE THEM! Send plagues of locusts, give them boils and make their teeth fall out of their heads!
Nariso I do not like or dislike Putin, sure if we were in a foxhole together I WOULD KNOW what was in his heart.
When I was a little kid Kennedy was fucking teenage girls and laughing about it, when I was a little older Johnson was not much better, then there was Nixon, the best of the bunch, then there was the disgusting Carter and, as much as I like Reagan, he was a Hollywood dude and you know that he fucked a few women who would have been mothers to his children then he paid them to abort the poor child, and then there were the arrogant Bushes and poor fat flaccid Clinton and the idiot scholar Obama.
Don't tell me I don't know what people are like.
I pray for all of them but I pray for demons too tell me Narciso how many people do you know who have the balls to pray for demons?
Seriously .... seriously, I remember the way the world was the very second after the moment God created it, and I pray for every creature who is not as blessed as I am to remember that fantastically good-hearted moment.
Just saying. Feel free to think I am a phony.
I pray for every body I have had such a hard life you cannot imagine
tell me again I am a phony
you have no idea how kind I am not to tell you what I have seen
remember I pray for EVERYBODY
not saying my prayers are important but they are what they are
and there are lots of nuns, narciso, who know who I am and THEY ARE PRAYING FOR YOU
because they know you said a friendly word to me, once or twice.
I like it when people insult me on the internet because that is my signal to tell the hundreds of nuns and hundreds of holy men who know who I am to pray for people who insult me
not saying I deserve that happiness in this world or that I am a good person
JUST SAYING
JUST SAYING
God what did you do to me to make me remember the first moment of creation and to feel as if I should tell people what I remember, couldn't you have just made me a professional golfer or a poet or a punk rocker or something like that?????
WHAT WERE YOU THINKING>>>>>
I remember
Pleasanton 1974,
and I remember this, I remember the time I told someone that I had been praying for them for 50 years and I saw the look on their face, the look someone has when
FINALLY
they understand
GOD LOVES US ALL
so stop sinning, stop wondering if it is worth it to be tempted to sin ----IT IS NOT.
Or maybe I am just some student at some community college writing some long comment on some website just to show that I can,
Maybe I am not a thousand years old maybe I am young.
MAGNA EST VERITAS ET PRAEVALEBIT
I'm gonna stop there.
I'm so late on this the world will little note nor long remember what I say here, but I think Lindsay Graham is missing the point here. If the Senate doesn't call witnesses to show what a fraud this is the media and the Democrats will win the argument. They will be able to say the Republican Senate put on a phony rigged trial to cover up for their corrupt President. The Republicans need to bring forth the phony hearsay witnesses and cross examine them and make them admit their ties to Obama and Hillary and the Democrat party and the fact that only one of them was actually there in the room at the time of the big scary "call" to Zelensky. Let's hear from the whistleblower who never met Trump and wasn't even in on the call, they guy who set all this off. Let's hear from Schiff under oath tell us why he lied about not knowing the whistleblower. Ii could go on but nobody will ever read this anyway. GOod night.
Well im not to make the same mistake did, i just judge him by his actions and background. Now one chronicler the late anna politskaya basically blamed him foe every political murder of significance for about 20 years from klebnikov to maskadov.
Practically every terrorist attack in the chechen war, this was the mindswt of neue ohr at fusion
Blogger Sacto_Dave said..
If the Senate doesn't call witnesses to show what a fraud this is the media and the Democrats will win the argument. They will be able to say the Republican Senate put on a phony rigged trial to cover up for their corrupt President.
--
Emphasis on the media...which is a problem no matter what is done.
narciso tell me do you know what efim polenov has done for the world
Im aware what it did to litvinenko, but in putins mind its what adouble traitor (to the west and a convert to islam deserved
well i used to hang out with Putin's grandfather, we were students at the same time in old Madrid
and I used to say to him (to the granddad)
DO YOU KNOW THAT IT IS NO SMALL THING TO BE A FRIEND TO A CREATURE WHO NEVER HAD A FRIEND IN THIS WORLD
narciso God loves you and God loves all your ancestors and all your descendants
God loves your dogs and your cats and the fish in your aquarium and even the spiders who humbly hope to live a spider life in your amazing home
The fact that we're not hanging the entire collective treasonous Democrat Party by their balls is a huge win for them at this point, so let's congratulate them.
Putin is either the bogeyman, or the man you hire to kill the bogeyman. BABAYAGA.
Drago: 12/15/19, 7:54 PM
a bunch of actual traitors in our government doctor evidence to frame Carter Page (because these corrupt agents want to spy on the Trump campaign)
No, because they want to satisfy the Democrats, particularly Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid without spying on the Trump campaign. Without spying on the campaign because they don't consider themselves good at predicting which way things are going to turn out.
It turned out that Trump won, but they weren't guilty of spying on his campaign. Carter Page was not involved in the campaign at the time the FBI started spying on him - that's why they picked Carter Page to spy on. And George Papadoupolous, and all the other targets.
They did come a bit close to planting a spy in the campaign, althouth Joseph Mifsud may have acted on his own.
Sacto_Dave said...@ 12/15/19, 11:10 PM
I'm so late on this the world will little note nor long remember what I say here, but I think Lindsay Graham is missing the point here. If the Senate doesn't call witnesses to show what a fraud this is the media and the Democrats will win the argument.
I think that could happen.
But the problem is that a thorough exploration of everything that happened would probably show Donald Trump to be an incompetent fool who refuses to admit an error in judgment. Still, that's better than the alternative.
They will be able to say the Republican Senate put on a phony rigged trial to cover up for their corrupt President.
And more than half of the people will believe it was a phony rigged trial, and two thirds of them will believe they did to protect presidential misconduct.
Few will say that the Republicans were trying to protect Joe Biden, because if they are going to lose the 2020 election, they don't want to lose to Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders.
The Republicans need to bring forth the phony hearsay witnesses and cross examine them and make them admit their ties to Obama and Hillary
There's no phony witnesses except for David Holmes, (who doesn;t add much tot he story except some confusion) and the whistleblower. Sondland was careless about getting things right. The others told the truth - except that you have to figure out correctly what it means.
and the Democrat party and the fact that only one of them was actually there in the room at the time of the big scary "call" to Zelensky.
No, they actually had two more witnesses who were on the call besides Vindman. ( Tim Morrison and Jennifer Williams) But we pretty know what was said on the call. (a few words from Trump got lost but what Vondan and Williams said was said makes sense. (
Let's hear from the whistleblower who never met Trump and wasn't even in on the call, they guy who set all this off. Let's hear from Schiff under oath tell us why he lied about not knowing the whistleblower.
Good questions except it doesn't lead anywhere until you use the answers to ask other people questions.
There are a lot of things wrong in the whistleblower complaint, like that Trump wanted Zelensky to retain Prosecutor General Andriy Lutsenko, which the WB complaint makes out to be Giuliani's main, if not only, source.
The WB complaint implies that Zelesnky had already agreed to investigatons by the time of the July 25 call, (because he said he was told until mid July - he cuts it off at that point but that's not when his access to knowledgeable officials was cut off - that Zelensky "playing ball" was a condition not just of a meeting but a telephone call, and the telephone call happened ) and it is correct that he had agreed, which the House Intelligence Committee counsel finally stated.
And the WB complaint further implies (the way I read it) that it was Sondland and Volker who dissuaded the Ukrainians from following through, while in reality it seems to have been Taylor (on the grounds that Ukraine needed bipartisan support)
The House Judiciary committee seems not to have noticed that House Intelligence Committee says that Zelensky had already agreed to investigations by July 25, and that therefore the reason the Ukrainians did not follow through needs to be explained.
Ii could go on but nobody will ever read this anyway. GOod night.
Well, I did, at least.
I think I may have left out some assumptions I have:
Most important, Putin is in favor of corruption in Ukraine.
He arranged for corrupt ex-Soviet people in the USA to give money (not their money that's why they got indicted - the money had been traced to Ukraine but not further) for Republican causes to the point where they got introduced to Giuliani, and even hired him as a lawyer - and then later introduced him to people in Ukraine - including ex-prosecutors - who basically said the wrong people were corrupt. And told him stories favorable to Russia about 2016. And used a video of Joe Biden (where Joe Biden told a tall tale) to spin a false story that has Joe Biden stopping an investigation that was already stalled. (there's the claim that Shokin was demanding money to keep it stalled, but who knows? I even have had the idea that it could be Biden was protecting Burisma but Giuliani has it 180 degrees wrong. Joe Biden protected the corrupt prosecutor, did only ineffective things and only claimed later to have been the one who got rid of him)
The Democrats are not interested in having this - that Biden lied in the video, and there never was a cancelled announcement in Kiev - come out - but being a dupe could also embarrass Donald Trump. Giuliani's particular story is going to fall apart even though there are true facts mixed up in there. But the story he has, as a whole, is badly garbled.
It's quite true that Lindsey Graham doesn't want witnesses. The Democrats want some of their own choosing and Donald Trump wants others. If the Dems get witnesses Trump will have to be allowed to have his or it is not a fair proceeding..
Post a Comment