१२ डिसेंबर, २०१९
"The trial records should be the documents that they use for impeachment in the House: no more, no less. I'm not interested in any witnesses. This thing is a sham. I want to get it over with."
Said Lindsey Graham, quoted in "Graham says he won't call any impeachment witnesses in Senate committee: 'It's a crock'" (Fox News).
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
११४ टिप्पण्या:
If Graham does that, fuck Graham permanently. Lindsey 2.0 was obviously then just an act, and he's as corrupt as the rest of them.
There is a ton of fear on both sides of the aisle of what will get exposed if they let Trump start overturning all the rocks.
It's Trump's trial, not Lindsay's.
Trump's entitled to put on his defense as he sees fit, not some girly-man senator/
...and there it is. Dark government wins again.
I mean, he's not wrong, it IS a sham - but if you fail to prove the case that the Bidens earned the investigations, you are doing nothing but enabling that sham and ensuring that the shams will continue forever.
But that would be surrendering the chance to persuade Democrat Senators who are keeping their mind open. Never mind, I see his point.
It is a sham but not everyone knows that, and not everyone who knows and doesn’t care has had their face rubbed in it yet. Witnesses, cross examination, and pound it into rubble in two weeks.
Could the stupid democrats have teed the ball up any higher?
Trump and the senate are gonna smash this piece of shit out of sight.
Lindsay was once totally controlled by He Whom we do Not Name. So he cannot afford to let the story of Hillary's Dossier and the bi-partisan money laundering through the Ukraine appear on a national Broadcast.
But DJT has accepted Lindsay's repentance. Only after November 2020, will Paul Harvey's rest of the story makes its appearance.
If they don't make Democrats pay a price for this sham, Democrats will keep inventing, more shams to impeach Trump with.
"This thing is a sham. I want to get it over with." -- Said Lindsey Graham
A sham. A farce. A charade. A travesty. A mockery. A Kangaroo Court. A Potemkin Village. A Kabuki Theater. A scam. A hoodwink. A flimflam. A conjob. A blow job (referencing Kamala Harris' prospective vote.) A swindle. A hoax.
"Trump's entitled to put on his defense as he sees fit"
That's what I thought too, but I've read the Senate rules for impeachment and I no longer think that is the case. I thought Trump could call any witnesses he wanted in his defense, but apparently not. I think they have to get 51 votes to call a witness, and if a couple of squishes defect, you gotta get a Dem to cross the line. They'll require something in return, maybe a witness we don't want to get called. So the problem isn't Graham or McConnell, it's Romney and his ilk.
1998 Lindsey Graham would vote yes on Article I of the Trump impeachment and no on Article II.
"This thing is a sham. I want to get it over with." -- Said Lindsey Graham
It's a liberal Temper Tantrum.
If he follows through with this threat, Graham is going to lose the Senate to the Democrats in 2020.
Squishy Republicans like Martha McSally and Cory Gardner will definitely lose their seats.
Uncover the facts, Lindsey.
Left Bank of the Charles: "1998 Lindsey Graham would vote yes on Article I of the Trump impeachment and no on Article II."
Left Bank, after having been proved wrong on just about every issue for the last 3 years, decides now would be a terrific time to not only employ forward looking mind-reading skills but also backward looking mind-reading skills.
Discuss.
Hanging with hunter:
https://mobile.twitter.com/seanmdav/status/1205185687517040646
Is Senator Graham the sole decider? He is merely a committee chairman.
The entire Senate will vote. The entire Senate might want to hear more than Senator Graham wants to hear.
What does Senator Mitchell say?
'F that. Now I want an Impeachment Trial. I want all the Dems and the Deep Staters testifying under oath. I want to see them run through. Otherwise, this has been a cost-free impeachment for the Dems and they'll do it again because they were not made to suffer the consequences of abusing the political process.
Across the pond
https://mobile.twitter.com/aaronjmate/status/1205162364175302656
During the Senate trial, President Trump can conduct a mass rally in a battlefield state every evening. Speaking to full stadiums, he can show on huge screens excerpts from that day's Senate trial. He can mock the trial hilariously.
Many more people will be watching and enjoying Trump's televised rallies every evening than will be watching the Senate's televised trial every day.
I think they have to get 51 votes to call a witness, and if a couple of squishes defect, you gotta get a Dem to cross the line.
That's my understanding, too. That's why Schiff and Nadler have shut down the GOP.
"you gotta get a Dem to cross the line."
At least Manchin seems agreeable.
The only way the Dems are going to pay any price is if they lose the House. No matter what else happens, if they keep the House they'll try to impeach again.
If the Rs fuck up, and they lose the Senate - then we lose this unbelievable string of judicial appointments, which like it or not is our best protection against the left's protracted assault on our liberty.
I don't claim to know how impeachment will play out in the three states with vulnerable R senators. What I do know is that McSally ran a shitty campaign last time and I wouldn't bet on her winning. I wouldn't bet on Gardner winning. And that is without taking any missteps into account. I don't have a clue what Collins needs to do to win, but don't forget she stood fast on Kavanaugh like a boss. And I don't see any vulnerable dems except Doug Jones. So we could easily end up with 50. One death or retirement in a state with a Dem governor and blammo say hello to Senate Majority Leader Schumer.
Fuck that.
"At least Manchin seems agreeable."
You don't think he has a price? Spoiler alert: he has a price. Until you know what it is, don't make any bets.
Boy, these guys don't know how to negotiate. You let it be known that the Senate will call both Bidens, Adam Schiff, Nancy Pelosi, and half the population of the Ukraine. Impeachment will fail in the House.
And if it doesn't. Have at it.
Missed Thom Tillis, he's at risk as well. So we could absolutely lose the Senate with just a little bad luck.
Again, I don't pretend to know which impeachment strategy will play best in those states, but if you aren't paying close attention to that you're just emoting.
Serious Question:
If Mitt Romney was to commit suicide; would we still need 51 votes? would that lower it to 50?
Thinking like a Clinton
Then Lindsay and Mitch need to tell their friend Nancy to make sure enough Dems vote down the articles of impeachment.
Or else Trump is going to bring The Show.
Right now Romney and his 5 Stepford Sons are trying to cover their tracks.
Blogger Mike Sylwester said...
During the Senate trial, President Trump can conduct a mass rally in a battlefield state every evening. Speaking to full stadiums, he can show on huge screens excerpts from that day's Senate trial. He can mock the trial hilariously.
Many more people will be watching and enjoying Trump's televised rallies every evening than will be watching the Senate's televised trial every day.
Let the Senate do the blocking and tackling, and play to your strengths with your All World QB. I like it.
"What I do know is that McSally ran a shitty campaign last time and I wouldn't bet on her winning."
And we just got another McSally type in the Senate from GA. Given to us by another turncoat GOPe-er who had to struggle to beat that moron Abrams in GA!!
The GOPe won't be happy until the dems are running the show in DC again. Then the GOPe can go back to playing the Washington Generals, not complaining, getting pats on the head from dems (like Burr gets from Warner) and getting invited to all the best DC parties where they serve the biggest jumbo shrimp and the best canape's!!
Oh, those jumbo shrimp!! The best. That's all it took for the lefties to purchase the services of Jonah Goldberg, Max Boot, David French, Steve Hayes et al.
The less time they wait on this, the better. Vote and be done!
Guess Graham is dirty af too.
It seems like only yesterday when LLR-lefty Chuck was insinuating Trump was a rabid anti-semite.
"Nine in ten Orthodox Jews say that they support President Donald Trump, according to a poll released Wednesday by Ami Magazine. Moreover, that support appears to have risen dramatically since Election Day in 2016."
Ouch!!
And now that Israel is naming towns, streets and train stations for Trump after Trump moved the embassy to Jerusalem (another thing LLR-lefty Chuck said would never happen) AND Trump has recognized, properly, Israel's sovereignty over the Golan and supports Israel building in the West Bank, I think we can safely say the following:
Every single claim made by LLR-lefty Chuck over the last 3 years has been proven utterly false.
But only false. And only utterly.
Unexpectedly.
If they were dealing with a public that supported impeachment, they'd need to have a strong defense to change minds. There's no support for impeachment and moving through the trial fast gets on to business, showing who wants to be about the real business of Congress and leading. Belaboring the issues to score more points when people are already convinced it's a sham can only hurt in the long run.
Also, if there is to be an investigation into the FBI and others, make the arguments about that be their own focus.
Well, it's interesting. I think Original Mike is correct that if the senate preemptively announces a witness-free flushing of this thing, it makes it a lot easier for the House to vote the articles of impeachment. But they were probably going to do so anyway.
I'm having a hard time figuring out which path--hearings with witnesses, or a quick vote--is better for Republicans, or for that matter better for the republic.
I would love to make Schiff, the Bidens, etc. pay a stiff price for the bullshit they have wrought, but I'm not sure serious hearings would have that result. I suspect people are tired of the whole spectacle, and 99 percent of us are pretty locked in and impervious to persuasion.
"Belaboring the issues to score more points when people are already convinced it's a sham can only hurt in the long run. "
Or, it could also prove decisively that the Bidens are corrupt and the entire sham had a purpose - to cover up Democrat corruption. And, really, given how much info is already in the public sphere, how much time could it take? 2 days?
I noticed Jonah Goldberg claiming there was "no evidence" that Ukraine interfered in the election. How about, during the trial, bringing up the Ukranian Court that decided there very much was, since Jonah couldn't be bothered to mention it?
The Dems have a 100% stranglehold on the media. A trial like this would have a good chance of breaking through that and actually get some real info to the LIVs. Do we really have any other reliable ways to get to people who rely only on the MSM?
In Drago world, anti Likud Party is anti-Semitism.
Interesting you people are not happy with Lindsey's trial balloon.
Abuse of Power = DEMOCRATS.
We want full exposure of all corruption on the left. Nothing less.
Drago said...
The GOPe won't be happy until the dems are running the show in DC again. Then the GOPe can go back to playing the Washington Generals, not complaining, getting pats on the head from dems (like Burr gets from Warner) and getting invited to all the best DC parties where they serve the biggest jumbo shrimp and the best canape's!!
You make them out to be stooges.
They are not stooges. They are just as evil corrupt as the Democrats. They are getting paid too.
They just ask for a little less money. And have less respect for their constituents.
I think Graham and his friend McCain made a lot of money for themselves and their friends in Ukraine and elsewhere. Graham has all the same friends and was the neocon fav for years.
Graham converted when he saw the chance and the tide turned. But he is clearly dirty.
Graham is shitting his pants right now.
If the Senate Republicans expect to call witnesses, they should call the witnesses the House Republicans would have called had the Democrats permitted it.
I think calling Biden and / or Schiff just turns a Senate trial into a Republican version of the House clown show. The point should not be to embarrass Biden. The point should be to embarrass the House Democrats. And it shouldn't take much to do that.
Calling Dershowitz and Turley might be good strategy.
If we did not have a corrupt, lying sack of sh-t national media which serves as a Dem SuperPac, this could not move forward. Whether it was prudent to impeach Horndog Clintoon, there were underlying felonies, and 31 Dems in the House voted for impeachment. Does the Slimes remind its sheep about that?
Is Inga on suicide watch?
Howard: "In Drago world, anti Likud Party is anti-Semitism."
Yes, it makes sense you would revert to that untenable position as it is better than all your other untenable positions.
Good luck with that.
But quick question: wouldn't a real anti-semite actually hate ALL Israeli parties and their members?
Don't worry. No one expects you to answer that. Just sit there and wait for your next cookie from those who do your thinking for you.
Howard said...
Interesting you people are not happy with Lindsey's trial balloon.
Howard, we would be happier with Comey, Brennan, Clapper et all suspended from lampposts.
Your team could give up the suicide march.
So, both parties are in on the foreign bribery rackets.
It is a crock, but exposing the corrupt dems is paramount. The Constitution demands it!
Our Democracy is at stake!
What I do know is that McSally ran a shitty campaign last time and I wouldn't bet on her winning.
Yup. she was a good Congress person for AZ-2, which has a lot of Democrats around the U of A.
Lousy campaign. I wish I had the thousand bucks I gave her back. Still she was close enough that I think fraud flipped it to Sinema.
Sinema seems to realize it and might be a swing vote if they ever get around to trying to legislate.
The only way to stop partisan impeachments from becoming the new normal is by bringing the wrath of God down upon its proponents. Graham should be looking to make the rubble bounce.
“Is Inga on suicide watch?”
Hardly. Inga is enjoying the flop sweat by Republicans today. They’re sounding hysterical. Can’t wait for the Senate trial.
"Graham should be looking to make the rubble bounce."
He's part of the rubble I'd guess.
Collins has been yelling and fast talking all day and now he just stormed out, looking defeated.
Inga: "Hardly. Inga is enjoying the flop sweat by Republicans today"
LOL
Inga is back in Hoax Dossier Mode!
Hey Inga, did you hear? Looks like the China Deal is ready to go.
Thoughts and prayers.
Boy, these guys don't know how to negotiate. You let it be known that the Senate will call both Bidens, Adam Schiff, Nancy Pelosi, and half the population of the Ukraine. Impeachment will fail in the House.
My overly hopeful side wonders if Lindsey and Cocaine Mitch will push for a full trial when the time comes, but they won't say so now because impeachment will fail in the House.
When have DC Republicans ever been that clever?
and MCUSA deal.
If they were dealing with a public that supported impeachment, they'd need to have a strong defense to change minds. There's no support for impeachment and moving through the trial fast gets on to business, showing who wants to be about the real business of Congress and leading. Belaboring the issues to score more points when people are already convinced it's a sham can only hurt in the long run.
It hurts the Republic because not even 1 cockroach was squished as a lesson.
How's that tattooed forehead, Inga? Is it tender?
The point should not be to embarrass Biden. The point should be to embarrass the House Democrats. And it shouldn't take much to do that.
Embarrassment is not the objective. Finding out who is getting paid off (besides Joe and Hunter) is the objective.
If some Republicans are in on the graft, they should bear the consequences.
Question for the group: do the senators running for president need to recuse themselves from the voting? After all, this represents a politically beneficial thing for them, voting to remove a potential political rival (assuming one of them wins the D primary) from office. This seems to be a conflict of interest on their part.
'across the pond,
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/12/12/general-election-polls-tracker-latest-uk-odds-2019-opinion-poll/
"Flop sweat"? If we were worried about Trump, the argument we'd be having wouldn't be "do we destroy the Democrats with a trial or just move on"? I am on the "destroy them utterly, we'll never get a better setup" side, for the record.
I wonder if Inga will have the decency to apologize after calling Carter Page a treasonous traitor now that we know that not only is Carter Page NOT a treasonous traitor, he was actually working with our own CIA to expose russians!!
In fact, Carter Page played an important role in the indictment and conviction of 2 russians here in the states.
It's astonishing that the democrat/LLR/deep state hacks literally lied to the FISA Court and manufactured fake evidence against Carter Page and continued to frame him in the court of public opinion for 3 years!!
I wonder how many other Inga/LLR-lefty Chuck type hacks still work at the FBI?
So, Inga, now that we know what we know, are you going to retract your thoroughly debunked lies about Carter Page, US Naval Academy Graduate and Naval Intelligence officer and red-blooded patriotic American?
I'm betting you won't, because for all your talk about respecting the military you don't give 2 hoots about any of it.
Look at Comey. Look at Schiff.
Does anyone really think being under oath would prevent them from lying?
That there is a point now, after everything that has transpired, where they acknowledge that their dishonesty has to stop?
Not going to happen.
They have the moral rectitude of a thousand Hawaiian judges.
They will get away with it.
And, at their funerals, they will be remembered as controversial yet courageous.
There is nothing left for Samson to do except push over the pillars.
I am Laslo.
If the trial take place CNN and MSNBC will have to air 70's sitcoms for weeks. Their ratings can't go lower anyway.
Can’t wait for the Senate trial.
Me too. See you after.
yes, they follow the Costanza paradigm 'its not a lie if you believe it'
"They will get away with it."
Comey may not.
Michael Tracey@mtracey
Jerrold Nadler once again warns that the United States will descend into dictatorship if Trump is not impeached over temporarily withholding future military aid to Ukraine. In psychological terms, this is what's known as "catastrophizing" -- an unhealthy, self-defeating delusion
Honest lefty speaks.
LMAO:
"In a strange turn of events, a 28-year-old stripper from Arkansas was able to get Hunter Biden to answer questions under oath about Burisma — something even the most powerful US Senators have not done."
Maybe we won't need the trial after all! Still, let's have it. Better safe than sorry.
This reminds me of the scene in Casino where Momo is complaining about Rothstein going after the gaming commissioners. ‘Doesn’t he know those are our guys?!’
It is a crock.
But a trial would be fun.
well harry reid, mr. cleanface, aka commissioner Harrison, was one, played by the older smuckers brother,
Brody,
That depends entirely on which party they are from.
Francisco D said, "Embarrassment is not the objective. Finding out who is getting paid off (besides Joe and Hunter) is the objective.
If some Republicans are in on the graft, they should bear the consequences."
You're angling for justice. In this instance, justice means, ideally, stopping the impeachment (and certainly the removal). If you want to take down everyone with their hands in the till, you're biting off way more than you can ever chew.
Alan Dershowitz has opined this impeachment is unconstitutional:
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15269/senate-unconstitutional-impeachment
Does the Senate Judiciary committee hold hearings before the trial? I don't remember that from Clinton's.
"This Is What a Bombshell Looks Like: Lindsey Graham Got IG to Confirm There Was ILLEGAL Spying on Trump Campaign"
https://pjmedia.com/trending/this-is-what-a-bombshell-looks-like-lindsey-graham-got-ig-to-confirm-there-was-illegal-spying-on-trump-campaign/
It's amazing. When Trump says something that people claim to be a lie, you just have to wait, because the more adamantly they claim he is wrong, the more you can be certain that somehow he right. I know he can't possibly just know the truth all the time, but he has incredible instincts for where it is and where it is not. He's a stable genius or an idiot savant. I would never bet the man he is wrong on anything, even if he said the sun rises in the west.
From the Dershowitz article:
"Were Congress to vote to impeach President Trump on the two proposed grounds, its action would be unconstitutional. According to Hamilton in Federalist 78, any act of Congress that does not comport with the Constitution is "void." This view was confirmed by the Supreme Court in Marbury v. Madison and is now the law of the land." ~ A.D.
Ahhh, the old M v M. I always loved that tune.
Does anyone trust Justice Roberts to uphold the Constitution as written if the Republicans asked him to throw the damned clown show out? Maybe if it was Obama being impeached, but Trump?
Fuck Lindsey.
The Senate will conduct a trial.
Move to dismiss, should that fail, a trial ensues.
Prosecution, defense, a judge, witnesses, jury, the whole ten yards.
I think it's in the Constitution.
@TJM (3:28), you just had to go and ask that, didn’t you?
The "obstruction of Congress" charge can easily be dismissed on a demurrer for failure to state a real offense.
’well harry reid, mr. cleanface...’
I’m only here to be your set-up guy, narciso. :)
And those getting their thongs all in a twist over the idea of summary dismissal rather than a protracted trial should realize that you don't have to do one or the other.
You can dismiss the case and still call the same witnesses afterward as a matter of government oversight and investigation into a corrupt impeachment process. You don't need to leave a defendant hanging just to prove corruption of the process.
well he struck me as a slithy tove, but only the likes of fedora, have really described what kind of slorr he really is, mixing metaphors, he may have been the inspiration for power's boothe bay city chieftain,
You don't need to leave a defendant hanging just to prove corruption of the process.
That "defendant" is the President of the United States.
This isn't Jose on trial for a B&E at the local liquor store, looking at 30 days in the county lock-up.
This is removing an elected President of the United States, which has never, ever happened in the history of our country.
Over a phone call????????????
This is removing an elected President of the United States
That's right.
Don't give this sham any legitimacy, which a full trial would do. Dismiss the damn thing summarily.
Then call your witnesses in a separate oversight proceeding.
You can dismiss the case and still call the same witnesses afterward as a matter of government oversight and investigation into a corrupt impeachment process.
Which will be ignored or lied about by the usual suspects, as with Horowitz.
If the impeachment vote goes as things look right now, with a bill of impeachment being voted out by the House on pretty much a party line vote, then kicked out by the Senate on, essentially, a party line vote, then it winds up looking like some sort of inter-party spat, no biggie. But it really is a big thing, and IMHO it needs to be treated that way by the Senate.
That’s my opinion, I welcome other perspectives.
BTW, there have been online rumors for a while that Graham has been sucking on the Ukrainian teat. I can see the value of a short up or down vote for him, but it does a disservice to his party, not to mention the President from his party.
What's best for America? Long term I have to think that exposing the truth about the "Deep State" is even more important than keeping Trump.
Mike Tanis said...
What's best for America? Long term I have to think that exposing the truth about the "Deep State" is even more important than keeping Trump.
Thank-you.
The charges against the President have to be adjudicated.
Period.
"But it really is a big thing, and IMHO it needs to be treated that way by the Senate."
Many people have been stalwarts in this, and justice requires that they get the whole truth.
Watching this Impeachment hearing, I'm sorry to say-
These democrats in this House of Representatives, are just plain stupid. Stupid people.
My God.
Now, the communists are wrapping up, making the case that Donald Trump can't be re-elected because "he'd do it all over again".
Do what?
Don't ask.
Fight if you must, but a win without fighting is the best kind. It doesn’t take an ancient Chinese general to figure out that. Dismiss the charges, or vote not guilty, however it works in the Senate, and sic Barr on anyone he can get on any charges. That’s the next front in the battle that needs to be fought.
Sadly agree with the sentiments of not dragging out and have Cocaine Mitch summarily throw it out without even looking at it and instead having Barr & Durham and the Senate grind away at the core swamp creatures. The american public won't be swayed beyond where it is now and it's already bored to tears. The norm will be an impeachment every 4 years everytime the house changes hands. Thanks PRICKS!
Big Mike,
I love seeing a Crazy Inga going bonkers. She is so deliciously dumb and venal
@TJM, demons can be summoned ...
I remember Kenneth Starr, an Independent counsel, into Bill Clinton's crimes.
No such thing was used for Trump... and thus it's a kangaroo court and will not stand.
Trump doesn't want to get t over with. He wants to beat the Democrats badly in the Senate and have their case destroyed.
What does he mean by "trial records?"
I love seeing a Crazy Inga going bonkers. She is so deliciously dumb and venal
In other words, she is the base of the Democratic Party.
How else do you get some of the Democrat representatives with IQ scores well below room temperature.
Does Trump need to participate at all?
Senators are complicit with Biden on kickbacks.
Complicit in Mueller investigation.
They also control witness selection!?
OMERTA
If we're not calling new witnesses, just vote.
Since the Page warrants were obtained illegally through lying to the courts, does the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine make any evidence obtained inadmissible?
The evidence has already been submitted to the Senate. The only thing left now is for the Senate to listen to arguments by each side's attorney. After that, the Senate will vote to find the the President, not "not guilty", but innocent of all charges. There is a great difference between a finding of "not guilty" and a finding of "innocent". A finding of innocent will forever scar democrats as a party of arrogant fools.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा