December 10, 2019

Yeah, I know... impeachment unveiling this morning...

... can I avert my eyes? It's really awful. I'll try to look at video of the announcement later, but right now, I can't put up with these people.

ADDED: Here's the video. I'll force myself to watch:



UPDATE: I tried. I got 2 minutes and 45 seconds into the presentation, and I had to turn it off.

441 comments:

1 – 200 of 441   Newer›   Newest»
Annie C. said...

Nor can I.

AlbertAnonymous said...

Kabuki

rhhardin said...

Scott Adams says Nancy Pelosi is a fucking cunt.

I think he's misusing the connotations there, but just wanted something disrespectful to dem PC.

Dried up prune would be my feminine evaluation of sexuality.

BarrySanders20 said...

It's true that somebody is seeking to influence the next election.

Matt said...

Just look at those clowns behind the podium, and Nadler on his step-stool to reach the mic.

What a pathetic-looking lot. Nancy with her perfectly coiffed, non-grey hair despite the face just below it looking like the the Crypt-Keeper. Little Schiff with his pasty, smarmy, confused look. Maxine looking like a leather handbag, and the other nameless, shiftless bozos who think they can show-trial their way into the presidency.

Such utter trash.

Wince said...

"Unveiling" or anticlimax?

A trial in the Senate should reveal which party in which branch of government really has "abused power" and "obstructed congress".

Roughcoat said...

I hate those people. I hate the Democrat Party.

Casey said...

I have a question. If the executive, judicial and legislative branches are co-equal, how can obstruction or congress or abuse of power be impeachable offenses? Wouldn't this mean that every president, if he doesn't do congress's bidding, is impeachable? What happens when one party controls the legislature and one the presidency? Shouldn't the Supreme Court just throw these charges out as unconstitutional?

narciso said...

Meh:



https://mobile.twitter.com/KimStrassel/status/1204232499628408832

NYC JournoList said...

Think Pelosi & Co limited the scope because they know they get toasted on the details and don’t want a parade of witnesses in the Senate? Is it a coincidence that the IG report lays out the investigation into Trump based on a tip from a FOREIGN government in the same news cycle in which the Dems claim it is an impeachable offense to reach out to a FOREIGN government to investigate a rival candidate? Just questions for the cosmos.

Francisco D said...

Did they make a deal such that Republican Senators dismiss these bullshit charges for lack of evidence?

The Dems can tell their radicals that they impeached Trump, but not risk a trial that uncovers corruption from Biden, Schiff and others.

Tommy Duncan said...

If Trump vetoes a bill is it Obstruction of Congress and impeachable?

If it was a veto of a bill that the Democrats like isn't the veto an Abuse of Power?

TreeJoe said...

From my understanding, obstruction of congress is really contempt of congress for refusing congressional investigative requests.

And between the executive and legislative branches, the executive can refuse such requests and the courts do not get involved because it is not a legal issue but a "political issue"

Which would be addressed via the electoral process.

So one of the two articles of impeachment is something that is supposed to be solved via election?

Dave Begley said...

I think it is extremely interesting that an extraordinary intellect and politically neutral constitutional law scholar such as Professor Ann Althouse can't even bear to watch the historic impeachment hearings.

I suggest that the reason why is because it is a total partisan joke and really not serious.

JayDee77 said...

I will never in my life vote for a Democrat again. I HATE those MFers.

mccullough said...

Pelosi, Schiff, and Nadler have the three ugliest necks in Congress. They should cover them

Beasts of England said...

I didn’t know a co-equal branch could hold another in contempt.

Rory said...

The Left has no defenses against the far Left.

Leland said...

I think they'll make a deal too. The DC uniparty thinks branding Trump as impeached will help rid them of him, if not now, then in the election. Alas, once the trial moves to the Senate, a precedent will be set that a President can be impeached for obstructing Congress by claiming executive privilege.

WisRich said...

You made it two minutes longer than I would have Ann.

Big Mike said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Original Mike said...

Obstruction again? These people are one trick ponies.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

The power-left are all liars and cheats.
whole "news" rooms at major networks are singing the praises of total liars, and false-gods known as whistle-blowers.
The whistle-blower is a hero - according to the on-air talent at The Party Alphabet Networks.

it's really astonishing.

gspencer said...

Jerry Waddler is casting a big shadow today.

Leland said...

f Trump vetoes a bill is it Obstruction of Congress and impeachable?

See State of Texas vs Rick Perry. Democrats have tried this before, but at the state level.

WisRich said...

This is simply the Dem's keeping a campaign promise. How they justified it was secondary.

Original Mike said...

Blogger Roughcoat said..."I hate those people. I hate the Democrat Party."

I've reached that point as well, and I don't even feel bad about it. This precedent is horribly damaging to our country.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

It's illegal to obstruct their witch-hunt.
Trump is guilty of SORCERY!

gilbar said...

Wouldn't this mean that every president, if he doesn't do congress's bidding, is impeachable? What happens when one party controls the legislature and one the presidency?

I think that they've redefined Impeachment, to be a non binding vote of no confidence...
Sort of like a Censure, but not as damning. Impeachment NOW means that a majority of the House doesn't support you, and they feel (correctly, or not), that it won't hurt them politically to announce that non support.
So, from now on; Impeachment will happen CONTINUOUSLY, whenever the House controlled by the opposite party.

Removal, on the other hand; is something that will only happen if
A) the President has lost the support of HIS OWN party
B) his party thinks it could survive voting for removal

The GOOD NEWS about this, is:
IF a President (say, a President Warren) HAS the support of her own party; There will be ABSOLUTELY NO RESTRAINT on her ability to do WHATEVER her party desires.

Since Impeachment will mean Nothing, and Removal will be Out of the Question... A President Warren won't have to worry about following or obeying Laws, or Courts, or ANYTHING. She'll be able to do WHATEVER the Army allows her to do

Did i say The GOOD NEWS? Well, maybe not quite so good :)

Beasts of England said...

’Trump is guilty of SORCERY!’

He turned Nadler into a newt!!

Angle-Dyne, Samurai Buzzard said...

"I tried. I got 2 minutes and 45 seconds into the presentation, and I had to turn it off."

I admire your fortitude. And thank you for your reporting on this farce for us, to the extent that you do.

Ken B said...

You look away but how will you act? To me it looks like you put your claim to “cruel neutrality” on the line in the post where you came out as a Hillary voter. And the Democrats have proceeded. And it is even worse than anticipated. Will you disavow voting for any democrat who supports this sham, which is all of the ones running?

Hunter said...

In case anyone didn't notice, this makes an official admission that nothing in the Mueller report warrants impeachment.

If I'm reading correctly, it's also an admission that the Ukraine issue isn't about emoluments and that there is no emoluments issue with Trump generally.

The charge is just inappropriate foreign policy, plus the president being insufficiently cooperative with the effort to investigate crimes with which Congress doesn't see fit to charge him.

What a circus.

Meade said...

“A trial in the Senate should reveal which party in which branch of government really has "abused power" and "obstructed congress".”

Exactly.

Aunty Trump said...

This could cost Democrats seats in the Senate. That would be funny.

AllenS said...

Make that 2 exactlys.

Shouting Thomas said...

Thank you, professor.

Unknown said...

Is anyone watching this?

Hunter said...

Schiff: “It’s not a question of facts, because the facts are not seriously contested. It’s a question of duty.”

It's not the nature of the evidence, it's the seriousness of the charge.

Aunty Trump said...

FBI sent informant to ask whether Trump campaign was "preparing an October Surprise.” - OIG Report.

But that’s not spying! October surprises are illegal when launched against a Democrat! This is like when the Democrats used the IRS to demand tactical information from Tea Party groups.

The whole country stinks, and removing Trump would be at best a "French bath”. Can we go back to pretending we don’t see it anymore?

Aunty Trump said...

Meanwhile Romney’s campaign director went to work at Burisma. I am happy that piece of shit lost, even though I did send him a couple hundred bucks at the time.

Clyde said...

Washington is Hollywood for ugly people, and for that motley crew, ugly goes clear to the bone.

Aunty Trump said...

Deciding policy by democratic elections is just too risky for our new class of billionaires, which is why they buy media companies.

narciso said...

they are still up to their old tricksm


https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/12/09/ig-report-continued-specific-fisa-date-redactions/

Aunty Trump said...

All the while Trump’s economy is reducing income inequality by limiting illegal immigration.

https://twitter.com/JimPethokoukis/status/1204032120496279553

Spiros said...

Clinton was handing out pardons for cash. That was ballsy. Trump is kind of lightweight when it comes to malfeasance.

Nonapod said...

Look at that lot. Yikes. Like pallid cave dwelling organisms, our ruling class are best not seen in the light of day.

Michael K said...

Original Mike said...

Obstruction again? These people are one trick ponies.


This is all about focus groups and polls. "Quid Pro Quo" was dropped and "Bribery" was substituted when Democrat LIVs did not know what the Latin phrase meant. Bribery has apparently flunked the focus group test.

A Ricochet member has posted a description of Nancy Pelosi's rant to James Rosen.

A person who knows they have control of the situation does not meltdown like that. In her case, I believe she was on-board for an impeachment from the beginning but intended to play it for the full political benefit. And certainly, the present timing would be great for influencing the upcoming elections (seems to be a theme the Dems can’t escape from) if events were in their favor.

The heavy-handed committee meetings with such apparent lack of fairness (not mention evidence of any real kind) have been an across-the-board bust. The more they do, the easier it is to see they have no real case except a distaste for the president and anyone who voted for him. The parade of “witnesses” has been little more than a collection of career swamp dwellers unhappy with the rejection of their great policy insight who had no first-hand knowledge of anything and a selected set of snarky left-wing academics – all of whom appeared to talk down to everyone else without a D in front of their name or not holding a media card. One of the self-important, bow-tied professors even began by instructing us on his “conclusions” before even addressing any points of law and constitutionality.


He described it as a "Cornered rat response."

Big Mike said...

Has anyone besides me noticed that under this interpretation of an impeachable offense Barack Obama would have been impeached several times over?

Paddy O said...

I thought the one about Trump turning Pelosi into a newt was creative.

rehajm said...

Impeachment will happen CONTINUOUSLY, whenever the House controlled by the opposite party.

Impeachment will be illegal when Republicans do it. Hawaiian judge says so.

Aunty Trump said...

Remember when Obama got elected, and some guy from Goldman Sachs had already put out a complete and accurate list of who was going into what positions in the administration?

That’s how the game is played in America. You have your own people plugged into the “establishment” and vetted for loyalty so that you can hit the ground with your running dogs. Clinton had the network and lent it to Obama with the understanding that her turn at the trough was coming. Biden is their last hope, unless they can put some recent college grad like Buttigig into place whom they can quickly co-opt.

Rory said...

There's nobody to speak to restrain them. No ethical center anywhere in the party.

Aunty Trump said...

"I thought the one about Trump turning Pelosi into a newt was creative.”

I liked it, but I would have capitalized “Newt” just to hammer the point home.

Big Mike said...

@Althouse, you are still going to find a way to convince yourself to vote for the Democrat in eleven months, whomever the nominee is. You cannot help yourself.

rehajm said...

@Althouse, you are still going to find a way to convince yourself to vote for the Democrat in eleven months, whoever the nominee is.

All the running is to limber up for the contortions needed later...

Roughcoat said...

I am Forty-One.

"Your eyes are full of hate, forty-one. That's good. Hate keeps a man alive. It gives him strength."

Pillage Idiot said...

’Trump is guilty of SORCERY!’

He turned Nadler into a newt!!



Nadler didn't get better.

Bob Boyd said...

The rancid cream

Leland said...

Is the vote this afternoon? I'm ready to MoveOn.

Ken B said...

Without bribery this reduces to nothing but the Democrats running against the constitution. They want the president answerable to the bureaucracy in the first charge, and to congress in the second.

Bay Area Guy said...

"Abuse of Congress" is an article of impeachment?

The Dems are so used to lying they even lie about little things.

Congress = House & Senate

There is no allegation of any abuse towards the Senate, nor violation of Congress as a whole.

There is contempt for the House Judiciary and House Intelligence Committees run by a fat goofball Nadler and scrawny, lying weasel Schiff, respectively.

Bay Area Guy said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Aunty Trump said...

I don’t think Pelosi was “on board” from the beginning. This is a skirmish that she didn’t want that got out of control and has turned into a battle royale. It’s like a ship that is fated to run aground after a stupid move by somebody on the bridge, and no amount of yelling and no reconfiguration of the controls can avoid it’s sealed fate, even if it hasn’t become obvious to everybody yet that the ship will founder.

JPS said...

Big Mike,

"Has anyone besides me noticed that under this interpretation of an impeachable offense Barack Obama would have been impeached several times over?"

We on the right could save ourselves a lot of trouble by forgetting the notion that the left wants a single set of standards and principles to apply to all of us.

Who, whom. That's all you need.

The Crack Emcee said...

I'm not doing it.

J Melcher said...

"Obstruction" reminds me, and probably a lot of older voters, of the Martha Stewart sequence. Or the Flynn sequence.

Gov to Press: "Insider trading" "Collusion"

Accused to Press: "I am innocent"

Gov to Press: "Stock Manipulation" "Mishandling secrets"

Accused to Gov: "I am REALLY and TRULY innocent"

Gov to Court, Press, and Accused: "Lying to the investigators"

Accused: "Oh hell. Let's just make a deal for minimum hassle and let it all go away."

Trump disrupts the sequence.

William said...

You would think that the party of the media and of Hollywood could find more photogenic people to make their case. The eye does not willingly turn to those people. It's not just what they're saying. They're eyesores...I think the new president of Finland is really attractive. Could they subcontract her to run the impeachment proceedings? Running Finland doesn't take much time, and she's reliably liberal. If she announced the impeachment, I'm sure I would have looked and paid attention.

Roughcoat said...

They're out there operating without any decent restraint, totally beyond the pale of any acceptable human conduct. And they're still in DC serving as elected representatives of the people.

Roughcoat said...

If she announced the impeachment, I'm sure I would have looked and paid attention.

Only if she took her clothes off first.

Pillage Idiot said...

The last two years certainly show the differences between Democrats and Republicans.

The Democrats ran on the platform that they would IMPEACH TRUMP. They are certainly trying to live up to their campaign promises - regardless of any evidence whatsoever of an impeachable offense.

In the previous cycle, the Republicans ran on the platform that they would REPEAL OBAMACARE. However, as soon as they had the majority there was essentially no effort to pursue that campaign promise.

I am a right-wing voter. However, the Republicans that get elected pursue none of my policy preferences. I personally dislike Trump and find his pre-President personal life largely abhorrent to my values.

Yet, this is how you GET MORE TRUMP. I will hold my nose again in 2020, but much more thankfully vote for Trump this time around.

Casey said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Beasts of England said...

I enjoyed the part at the end when Nancy said we had to pass impeachment to find out what’s in it.

Aunty Trump said...

I read that Democrats are not whipping votes on this. In golf there is a concept of taking a “hero shot” or “taking your medicine.” Almost always taking the “hero shot” results in doubling your dose of “medicine.” Maybe the Democrats are ready to take their medicine on this one, and move on?

Naaah! Where’s the fun in that!

Aunty Trump said...

Ciaramella panicked when it looked like the jig was up with him and Joe Biden and their machinations with Ukraine. White House logs show him meeting with the people in Ukraine who were working to attack Trump and support Hillary.

He met with Shokin’s deputy prosecutors when they were told Shokin had to go or their would be no billion dollars.

Browndog said...

Blogger Casey said...

I have a question. If the executive, judicial and legislative branches are co-equal, how can obstruction or congress or abuse of power be impeachable offenses? Wouldn't this mean that every president, if he doesn't do congress's bidding, is impeachable?


There is no such things as precedents with democrats. When a democrat becomes President, the Executive will again become the most powerful branch of government, and Congress and the courts need to butt out-

Separation of powers.

Today, it's "Congressional oversight".

Skeptical Voter said...

Ms. Althouse you live in Wisconsin--one of the leading dairy states in the country. And surely you've seen people mucking out the milking barn, throwing out wheelbarrow loads or more of cow manure. If you can watch that, surely watching these clowns "solemnly" issue articles of impeachment can't be much worse.

rehajm said...

When a democrat becomes President, the Executive will again become the most powerful branch of government, and Congress and the courts need to butt out-

Not butt out, they will need to assist in the facilitation of cis bidding. Otherwise guilty of obstruction. We've been there already...

Aunty Trump said...

Mid term elections don’t go your way? “I’ve got a pen and a phone.” - Barrack Obama.

Fernandistein said...

If Trump lived around here...

An officer was called to Walmart about Trump sleeping in a restroom. Trump had an open bottle of vodka in his coat. Trump was arrested on an active warrant and was issued a summons for trespassing and disturbing the peace. He was left in custody of the House Judiciary Committee.

Browndog said...

Horowitz completed his report many months ago.

He dropped it the day impeachment hearings concluded, the day before Articles of Impeachment are announced.

MAJMike said...

"Casey said...
I have a question. If the executive, judicial and legislative branches are co-equal, how can obstruction or congress or abuse of power be impeachable offenses? Wouldn't this mean that every president, if he doesn't do congress's bidding, is impeachable? What happens when one party controls the legislature and one the presidency? Shouldn't the Supreme Court just throw these charges out as unconstitutional?
12/10/19, 9:17 AM"

Damn!! Read my mind!!! I said this to my Lovely Bride just minutes before opening this blog. Of, course I have only a Master's degree in History from a small regional Texas university, so my opinion is uneducated blather and in no way equal to the elevated Ivy League groupthink of the Ruling Class.

Leland said...

You have your own people plugged into the “establishment” and vetted for loyalty so that you can hit the ground with your running dogs.

The solution to block Trump was to have people refuse to tender their resignation, so Trump would have to fire them. Hence the notion that Trump is acting like a monarch when he recognizes his authority to fue them. This was planned long ago. They were just hoping Mueller could manufacture enough fake evidence for a better case for impeachment. I think the real surprise will be how many Republicans in the Senate will go along with this. If this makes it that far, it will be like turning on a light on a roach infestation.

MayBee said...

I wonder if either of these two House committees are going to have hearings about how the FBI made so many mistakes regarding FIDA warrants in 2016

President-Mom-Jeans said...

Do you want a Boogaloo? Because this is how you get a Boogaloo. I hope every single of these democrat cunts get the same brain cancer that thankfully took out that piece of shit McCain. A pox on all their houses.

Bay Area Guy said...

These Dems are mini-totalitarians. They are still butthurt that:

1. Trump beat them in 2016;
2. Mueller's 2 year Russian Collusion farce ended with a dud.

So, they are now lowering, ad hoc, the Constitutional standard for Impeachment so low, that no modern President could avoid impeachment for even trivial mistakes or misdeeds.

And, in their fevered rush, they are casual about nullifying 63 Million votes.

Every congressman who votes for this charade needs to be hammered.

hombre said...

Rory said...
“There's nobody to speak to restrain them. No ethical center anywhere in the party.”

Well said. This is the New Democrat Party, swamprats and grifters all!

AllenS said...

MayBee said...
I wonder if either of these two House committees are going to have hearings about how the FBI made so many mistakes regarding FIDA warrants in 2016

There is a good reason why the FBI does not video tape any recordings of them questioning people.

MayBee said...

Is there anyone currently running for POTUS who was in the executive branch when the 2016 election was so grievously meddled with?

Unknown said...

Heh, Scott Adams is hating their guts today. Right there with him.

AllenS said...

Yes. Biden.

hombre said...

The big question now is how RINO pussies like Mittens will screw up efforts by patriotic Republicans to expose Democrat sedition and will try to protect Dems from the opprobrium they deserve.

gilbar said...

Leland said...
I think the real surprise will be how many Republicans in the Senate will go along with this


respectfully, i'm doubting that ANY of them will vote to Remove.
Senators now stay in office until they either die, or get voted out; they Don't retire.
So, i don't see ANY republican senator deciding; "I don't, i'm not up for election for 4 years"

Already, ALL republican senators, except for 3, have pledged to acquit.
Lisa M, Mitt R, and Susan C might Hate Trump; but, not enough to lose their jobs over.

Susan C might not see a way to get reelected in maine if she votes to acquit; but i'm sure she sees that she won't make the primary if she votes to remove.

I doubt that the demo's will be able to keep all their side; once the lights go on, they'll be running for cover, not the repubs

Browndog said...

Staying true to form, the 2 Articles of Impeachment are exactly what they are doing to Trump.

Le Stain du Poop said...

What's that Ann? YOu don't enjoy throwing up in your mouth just a little?

Heatshield said...

If you’ve lost Althouse.....

narciso said...

projection like a drive in,


https://pjmedia.com/trending/rep-elise-stefanik-demands-adam-schiff-releases-his-personal-phone-records/

Aunty Trump said...

"The big question now is how RINO pussies like Mittens...”

Romney should recuse himself since he is mixed up in Burisma. Ha ha ha ha! I am sure that will happen! But you can bet that he will fight any efforts to uncover the dirt there tooth and nail.

Leland said...

Gilbar, with the same respect, I'm seeing what hombre just above noted. If this goes straight to vote, then I think you are right. However, I think there will be a trial. In that trial, Trump will get to defend himself. That's a wild card that I don't think either side of Congressional leadership is taking into account. Lindsay is already saying he won't discuss Ukrainian involvement in 2016. Why would Trump not want to talk about it? Is Graham going to gavel down the President trying to defend himself?

Earnest Prole said...

Nuttinberder.

Aunty Trump said...

I can’t see Sinema or Manchin voting to convict. But sure, Burisma Mitt will.

Brody Oaks said...

Well, we've moved away from the inkblots (Mueller, transcripts, IG report) to the Washington DC Community Theater's presentation of "Impeachment Because Reasons". At least we're making progress.

tcrosse said...

The Nixon Impeachment hearings had a much more presentable cast of characters. This bunch are too bizarre.

Beasts of England said...

I’m not sure that Jones (D-AL) will vote to convict. He may be screwed either way, but a vote for removal would seal his fate.

Browndog said...

After spending 2 years waiting on Horowitz to cleanse us from the bad actors, expose the democrat corruption, and finally hold people accountable, we move in. In less than 24 hours.

Now, we wait for the Senate trial to cleanse us from the bad actors, expose the democrat corruption, and finally hold people accountable.

Everything the President proffers as a defense will be twisted/spun to prove his guilt.

What cannot be spun/lied about will be ignored and memory-holed.

The Senate trial change a thing. Whether the witch sinks or swims it's still a witch.

Francisco D said...

Alas, once the trial moves to the Senate, a precedent will be set that a President can be impeached for obstructing Congress by claiming executive privilege.

AFAIK, the courts need to rule on that issue but the Democrats avoided filing a suit to compel testimony that would breach executive privilege. Maybe a constitutional lawyer can opine on that issue.

I maintain that there is a deal in which Pelosi satisfies the base with bullshit impeachment charges that the Senate dismisses either without trial or with a minimal trial. It will never come down to Romney, Burr or Murkowski voting to convict. The worst they can do is vote for an extremely limited trial that fails to expose Deep State corruption like the Burisma buddies.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

It's religious progressive revenge porn for the Hillary-lost scorned.

Francisco D said...

The Crack Emcee said... I'm not doing it.

LOL!

I can't resist.

AllenS said...

I do not think that it's possible to look ahead on this mess, and predict anything. Far too many bad actors.

Freeman Hunt said...

I would have preferred they'd worn t-shirts that said, "❤️ Pence!"

I would also like to see comedy sketches portraying Democrats as lovesick fans of rockstar Pence.

Drago said...

Andy McCarthy today: "The point is this: Democrats regard as impeachable “interference” any effort to investigate or draw attention to their known or suspected misconduct."

https://nypost.com/2019/12/09/democrats-latest-impeachment-line-investigating-corruption-is-election-interference/

Temujin said...

Obstruction of Congress? Hells Bells. People should get a Freedom Medal for obstructing Congress. I am very serious when I say THERE SHOULD NOT BE ANOTHER DEMOCRAT ELECTED FOR TWO GENERATIONS.

This Congress needs to be fully obstructed. Vote them out. Every stinkin Dem needs to be voted out.

Aunty Trump said...

How can Graham not talk about Ukraine 2016 when it was the specific subject of the call? This idea that effective lines of defense are closed to the president because the CIA says so is heinous.

If we are talking about Trump’s state of mind, there is plenty of evidence that Trump had cause to worry about corruption from that country. For two years we were told that there was no more serious wrongdoing than election interference... except when it helps Democrats!

Amadeus 48 said...

Not a good look for the House Dems. Couldn't they hire some actors?

Nadler played by Joe Pesci. Schiff played by Leo DiCaprio. Nancy played by Margot Robbie. Or Margot Kidder. or Margaret Trudeau. Or Justin Trudeau in drag.

Michael K said...

AFAIK, the courts need to rule on that issue but the Democrats avoided filing a suit to compel testimony that would breach executive privilege. Maybe a constitutional lawyer can opine on that issue.

My understanding is that they had to have a House impeachment vote, not just an "inquiry" to pierce Executive Privilege. That is what happened with Nixon and Clinton.

We have a local law professor to opine.

Unknown said...

Dried up prune would be my feminine evaluation of sexuality.

I read that as "famine" and it still made sense.

Yancey Ward said...

This morning's announcement convinces me that the Democrats are desperate to find a way out of the impeachment. They have completely abandoned the bribery/quid pro quo tactic, and I think they did so because of the danger to Biden. The charges they unveiled are not likely to get a majority in the House, and if they do, it is far more likely that the Senate will just dismissed them without a trial.

At this point, were I in the Republican leadership, I would insist on a trial with broad discretion give to Trump's lawyers to present a defense to both the charges leveled, and to the charges abandoned by the House. I think Democrats want the Senate to dismiss- it is hard to interpret today's actions in any other way- they want out of the corner they have painted themselves into, and the best way for that is to have the Senate rescue them. If I were McConnell, I would throw the drowning Pelosi a concrete block.

Bay Area Guy said...

Nadler is short and fat.

Drago said...

Yancey: "If I were McConnell, I would throw the drowning Pelosi a concrete block."

I would find a way to yank in Comey and gang and ask them what they did prior to the 2016 election regarding Ukrainian interference.

I would lay out every way that Ukraine interfered in our election (which they did because the obama/biden/dems/hillary/dnc were pushing them).

Go thru it with a fine tooth comb.

Drago said...

Bay Area Guy: "Nadler is short and fat."

Nadler burping is the sound you hear when one of your congressional staffers goes "missing".

chuck said...

>> Pelosi, Schiff, and Nadler have the three ugliest necks in Congress. <<

Instapundit recommends neck gaiters. As for this impeachment thingie, I made up my mind long ago. It is unlikely that something significant will turn up that might make a difference. I swore off voting for Democrats after 9/11 when their current behavior manifested itself. Call it my OK Boomer moment.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

The corrupt left will destroy Pence next.

They must find a way to install Hillary.

Achilles said...

hombre said...
The big question now is how RINO pussies like Mittens will screw up efforts by patriotic Republicans to expose Democrat sedition and will try to protect Dems from the opprobrium they deserve.

They didn't screw anything up.

They were in on it.

The 2012 primary drew those lines quite clearly.

BUMBLE BEE said...

Democrats proudly displaying their birthing via anal sphincter.

bleh said...

All the Democrats at the podium represent districts in California or New York, where impeachment fever runs high. I wonder what Democrats in competitive districts are thinking right now.

Achilles said...

The democrat party is an enemy of freedom.

Period.

They are a greater threat to our freedom than the Taliban or Al Quaeda were.

Note how little press coverage the terrorist attacks on our military bases are getting right now.

They are all on the same team.

Jail is too good for them.

Yancey Ward said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Yancey Ward said...

Here are the various endings for this that are possible:

(1) House vote on impeachment fails. Result- Trump claims victory.

(2) House never votes on impeachment, passes censure along party lines. Result- Trump claims victory.

(3) House vote on impeachment passes, Senate dismisses. Result- Trump claims victory.

(4) House vote on impeachment passes, Senate holds short trial in charges alone and acquits within a week. Result- Trump claims victory.

(5) House vote on impeachment passes, Senate holds longer trial that also brings in the bribery charges that were dropped, trial lasts 2-3 weeks dragging Biden through the mud, Senate acquits. Result- Trump claims victory.

There are no other outcomes possible at this point, and I think all in all, the best of the lot for the Democrats is #4, though a censure without an impeachment vote is just about the equivalent. I think the problem, though, is that Democrats will feel like they have to hold and win a vote in the House at this point- this was the problem all along- once Pelosi announced the inquiry, the way off the cliff was hard to find. Pride makes you do stupid things.

narciso said...

toby stephens, the dr. zola in captain America, for nadler I know he's a brit, Schiff is a poser, we know the left goes for grotesques to their agitprop, ed harris wasn't too far from McCain in julianne's bender, McDowell as Murdoch in game change, someone feral looking like the Obama staffer in zero dark thirty,

Bay Area Guy said...

A recent Harvard-Harris poll had Hillary leading the current Democrat pack of scoundrels at 21%.

Steve Bannon thinks Hillary's gonna jump into the race.

Perhaps, all this impeachment nonsense is designed to create a field of chaos, necessitating the entry of La Clinton to jump in and rescue America.

Francisco D said...

The charges they unveiled are not likely to get a majority in the House, and if they do, it is far more likely that the Senate will just dismissed them without a trial.

Pelosi knows she has the votes in the House. In that sense, she is willing to sacrifice some House seats in 2020 knowing that the Democrats have an excellent change of regaining the Senate.

This is up to Mitch McConnell and Lindsay Graham. If they simply dismiss, the Democrats Senate candidates will use that against them. If they have the courage to conduct a complete trial (which I tend to doubt) they can uncover Deep State corruption that hurts mostly Democrats, but the media will call it a "bipartisan scandal". If it was not a bipartisan scandal, the Media would bury it.

This is a test of Republican resolve. Do you have the courage and integrity, Mitch and Lindsay?

narciso said...

Stephen Dillane, I know there are Americans who could fit that, maybe live schrieber with some make up,

Yancey Ward said...

"Perhaps, all this impeachment nonsense is designed to create a field of chaos, necessitating the entry of La Clinton to jump in and rescue America."

Application of Hanlon's Razor suggests this is probably not the case, but Shelob could well use the chaos to get in.

Freder Frederson said...

Note how little press coverage the terrorist attacks on our military bases are getting right now.

Well, except for Pensacola (which even Trump refused to immediately condemn as a terrorist attack), and which got a lot of coverage, what are these attacks of which you speak?

Unknown said...

My concern is that this impeachment is an attempt by Congress, possibly unintentional, to reorganize the relationship between the Presidency and the Congress.
1. The Obstruction of Congress charge is founded on the claim that the President's refusal to voluntarily respond to the request by the committee is a violation. But the committee just asked for testimony and documents. Clearly the President has the right to refuse a request. If a request is compelling the nature of the relationship has changed dramatically. But this charge is asserting just that, that a request must be accepted. A supeona is not required.

2. The basis of the Abuse of Power charge seems to be that the President used his powers to request something that was to his political benefit at the cost of actions that were detrimental to the country. Note if the actions were beneficial to the country it would be hard to see an impeachable offense. But that basis requires accepting the premise that Congress has the power to decide in foreign affairs what is best for the country. The Constitution explicitly, except for enumerated cases, gives that exact power to the President. To assert that the opinion of Congress is superior to that of the President in foreign affairs goes directly against the text of the Constitution.

As can be seen from these two cases, these charges require that one accept that Congress has powers that it has never before asserted or been seen to have.

While probably not politically possible, I would assert that the Senate should throw out the impeachment on the grounds that the charges require the existence of powers of the Congress that do not exist and that even trying the facts on these charges is an implicit acceptance of this change in the structure of our government.

wholelottasplainin' said...


(5) House vote on impeachment passes, Senate holds longer trial that also brings in the bribery charges that were dropped, trial lasts 2-3 weeks dragging Biden through the mud, Senate acquits. Result- Trump claims victory.
****************

The Senate cannot introduce matters into a formal impeachment trial that are not in the Articles of Impeachment itself. Those "bribery charges" were never formally made by the House, so you can't say they were "dropped".

OTOH the Senate could open up a separate investigation of the Bidens regarding Hunter's seat on Barisma's board.





Aunty Trump said...

Shorter Freder: Squirrel!

rhhardin said...

Althouse doesn't feel that they mean well.

Not too upset about the rules though; rules are a guy thing.

Yancey Ward said...

I think better explanation for how the Democrats ended up here this morning is just sheer imbecility. Pelosi was listening to Schiff who had already had secret conversations with Ciaramella and probably Vindman, Kent, Yovanovich, Sondland, and Taylor too; and Schiff assured Pelosi they had an air-tight case agaisnst Trump. Schiff probably even told Pelosi they had documentation backing up the testimony, but that Trump would fight to prevent it being revealed (I think this is what Vindman's little story about how the transcript was locked down was supposed to fit in- evidence of obstruction/coverup). With this information from Schiff in hand, Pelosi jumped off the impeachment cliff just as Trump surprised everyone by releasing the transcript. What made Pelosi's mistake even worse, though, was that she knew Trump was about to release it. She could have waited a few days before acting to see how things settled out, but I bet Schiff was whispering in her ears the entire time.

Freder Frederson said...

Shorter Freder: Squirrel!

Umm, Achilles is listening to the monkeys flying out of his butt, and I am calling bullshit (actually it doesn't rise to the level of bullshit, it is an outright lie) on him.

narciso said...

like clockwork


https://twitter.com/julie_kelly2/status/1204427373736865792

Yancey Ward said...

You want to know how bad these last two days have been for the Democrats? Just look at this thread and the previous one on the Turley essay. Who has been in those thread defending the Democrats' position? No one, not even Howard who, at least, had the courage to show up. Even Chuck couldn't mount a defense to the Turley analysis, instead pointing to one guy Horowitz interviewed who might have been a pro-Trump FBI agent, but no defense to Turley's essay.

Tommy Duncan said...

If I were a Democrat Congressman from a non-loony district I would be very uncomfortable with these "charges" against Trump. The articles of impeachment will be discussed at length and their inappropriateness will become obvious to the public. It will be difficult for Pelosi to herd the chickens to 218 votes. The Democrat leadership may have signed a death pact in order to satisfy their loony base.

It will be interesting to observe how the Democrat/media spin evolves this week.

narciso said...

it's about the economic interests (Pasternak and co) that Schiff Pelosi Nadler, have in common, the parties that lobbied colonel vindman (naftogaz) and the atlantic council, that hosted the latters staff,

Phil said...

"This is a test of Republican resolve. Do you have the courage and integrity, Mitch and Lindsay?"

Mitch is going to hold the trial. But as I understand it, which witnesses get called is down to a simple majority vote in the Senate. Courage and integrity play a part, but it isn't entirely Mitch and Lindsay's reserves of same that are dispositive here.

Browndog said...

A motion to dismiss was introduced in the Senate trial of Clinton. Clearly this Senate is going to follow the same template used in the Clinton Trial (unlike the House), so I expect that to happen.

traditionalguy said...

No Fear: The Dems are promising that if the Senate acquits they will re-do permanent re-impeachment every three months. Fun, fun, fun.

narciso said...

in the evening thread, we saw another possible motive for why they went after general Flynn, his too frank assessment of our afghan policy, which by that time had been delegated to biden,
William taylor had been involved almost from the start,

Phil said...

Yancey, they aren't here because they haven't gotten their talking points yet. They'll show up once the spin machine gives them something they can manage to repeat without totally mangling it.

MountainMan said...

I had dentist appointment this morning and that was far more pleasant than watching this clown show.

When I get home I also see that Nancy is allowing USMCA to go forward, giving Trump a major trade victory. I’m sure she wanted to continue to sit on it so Trump couldn’t use it for his re-election but I expect she has some internal polls that look pretty bad. I saw somewhere on a web page on my phone while sitting in the waiting room that Trump now leads all the current Democrat field by 6 points or more in the key battleground states and that voters want the House focused on the country’s business and not the impeachment charade. I guess that messages must have gotten through but it is too late, I think the Ds are cooked, stick a fork in ‘em.

Like many others, I will never vote for any D again for as long as I live. I hope this sets them back for a long time.

narciso said...




Oh

https://thefederalist.com/2019/12/09/brennan-lied-about-not-including-steele-dossier-in-intelligence-community-assessment-on-2016-russian-election-interference/?fbclid=IwAR0TXgJFSlFT4ij9fyIk1se9tL07RBLzKU1oqF7BeOuPvXn0vrQQzAGibAk#.Xe_O1oaMOCs.facebook

Rick said...

It's like watching a spree killer suiciding by cop: there's a certain discomfort with the gore but the result is the best possible outcome at that point.

Freder Frederson said...

Who has been in those thread defending the Democrats' position?

I think the Democrats made a tactical mistake. They are rushing this. They should have issued the subpoenas to everyone and let them get dragged out in court. John Bolton especially would have made a fantastic witness (as much as I disagree with his policies, I doubt he would fall on his sword to save Trump's ass). There are no representatives running for Congress so having Pence, Bolton, Mulvaney, et al testify in the middle of the campaign season would be precious.

Michael K said...

With this information from Schiff in hand, Pelosi jumped off the impeachment cliff just as Trump surprised everyone by releasing the transcript.

I agree this is what probably happened.

What interests me is how Brennan and the CIA have , so far, managed to hang this all on the FBI.

I see another D member expressing doubts about the vote.

Freder is whining about something somebody said while his Titanic is going down. Better look for a lifeboat, Freder.

Donn said...

I didn't vote for Trump the first time, will be voting for him the second time!

Birches said...

Our media: We know that all of our theories of Russian collusion were wrong and fed to us by the same people peddling Ukrainegate. We also know from yesterday that our sources in government and our former intelligence analysts turned TV
commentators were flat wrong about the IG report But our first principle is Orange Man Bad so let's continue impeachment.

Michael K said...

Freder, I kind of agree with you on the witnesses but, to pierce Executive Privilege you would have to have a House vote to impeach. The vote to do an "Inquiry" by the Dims alone was not enough.

Achilles said...

Freder Frederson said...
Shorter Freder: Squirrel!

Umm, Achilles is listening to the monkeys flying out of his butt, and I am calling bullshit (actually it doesn't rise to the level of bullshit, it is an outright lie) on him.

There has been more than one terrorist attack on military bases.

Democrats like to call it "Workplace violence" though.

Because you are pieces of shit.

narciso said...

halper was paid by dia funds right, mifsud was probably a joint project between the company and the firm, and other continental counterparts like whatever Italian foreign intelligence is calling itself this week,

Howard said...

Blogger AllenS said...
I do not think that it's possible to look ahead on this mess, and predict anything. Far too many bad actors.


Careful. You're sounding reasonable.

Michael K said...

While probably not politically possible, I would assert that the Senate should throw out the impeachment on the grounds that the charges require the existence of powers of the Congress that do not exist and that even trying the facts on these charges is an implicit acceptance of this change in the structure of our government.

Good point. That might even be an argument to dismiss.

Bay Area Guy said...

Look at the California politicians in power:

1. Speaker Pelosi - 80 year old, shakes a lot, prays for Trump, but doesn't hate him.
2. Senator Harris -- dropped out of Dem primary, too many racists didn't support her.
3. Congressman Schiff - totally lied about Trump telephone call, caught when Trump released transcript. Worked with "whistleblower" to fabricate charges. Many false claims about Russian collusion.
4. Congressman Swalwell- dropped out of race, farts on camera.

These Californians are screwy.

Drago said...

Field Marshall and International Security Expert Freder: "I think the Democrats made a tactical mistake. They are rushing this."

No. Really? Ya think?

Freder actually thinks a "drag it out" strategy would be a solid winner for the dems!!

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Hey, maybe we could drag Mueller back up to the Hill to testify as well!!

No wonder Trump is winning despite the entire establishment world across all continents fighting against him along with our weaponized federal agencies attempting to frame him and undermine while 97% of the media goes 99% negative on him.

Achilles said...

Freder Frederson said...

John Bolton especially would have made a fantastic witness (as much as I disagree with his policies, I doubt he would fall on his sword to save Trump's ass).

Obama started more wars than Bolton did.

It is funny you pretend Obama and Bolton weren't on the same team even while acknowledging they are.

Phil said...

I can only remember one time that I ever voted for a Democrat. In Texas, we have judicial elections for all courts. One year, the Republican who was running for the Texas Supreme Court seat stated that she would be tough on crime. Unfortunately for her, the Texas Supreme Court does not hear criminal cases; those cases are heard by the Court of Criminal Appeals. So, I voted for the Democrat, on the theory that the Republican was either too stupid to know better, or thought I was.

No matter how stupid any Republican running for any office may be, I am voting for them from now on.

M Jordan said...

I have thought all along they would never actually pull the trigger on impeachment, that they would drive the junk heap Democrat bus up to the cliff then stop, blame intransigent Republicans, and say, “To hell with it, we the party of the people will let the people decide.” The purpose of all that, of course, would be twofold: to satisfy their extreme base and to have a nightly smear campaign against Trump.

I still think it. My bet is they do not go forward. I really, really think this. But we shall see.

Skippy Tisdale said...

"Or Justin Trudeau in drag."

He'd be playing the part of Maxine Waters.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

Shoot, I was hoping Alyssa Milano would get to testify.

Ken B said...

Yancey
Another informal indication. Jerry Coyne foams at the mouth about Trump and has been predicting impeachment since before the inauguration. But he isn’t blogging this. He realizes how weak it is is my bet.

Greg Hlatky said...

Democrats from Trump districts are the party's shtrafbat, backstopped the the far-Left SMERSH.

Freder Frederson said...

Democrats like to call it "Workplace violence" though.

Are you saying that any act of violence at a military base is a terrorist attack? That is just ridiculous.

narciso said...

zelinsky's aide zernak, expressed refuted the stupid diktat from chairman jabba,

Achilles said...

Phil said...

No matter how stupid any Republican running for any office may be, I am voting for them from now on.

Terrible idea.

Mitt Romney is a "republican." The Bushes are "republican." Amash was a "republican." McCain was a "republican."

There are a large number of corrupt shitheads who have been pretending to represent us under the name republican.

They are worse than the democratics.

Bay Area Guy said...

The bottom line is that House Democrats are not serious people. They have no pride or integrity or respect for the country, the Constitution or the laws of this land. They crave power. They are mad that Trump has denied them the power. It gnaws at them. It gives them uclers. So, they are striking back, not through fair elections, but through bogus, legal procedures, stage-managed by weasel lawyers like Weissman, Mueller, Goldman and other Lawfare trouble-makers.

Phil said...

Lighten up, Francis. They’re the only alternative to Democrats we’ve got.

phantommut said...

I maintain that there is a deal in which Pelosi satisfies the base with bullshit impeachment charges that the Senate dismisses either without trial or with a minimal trial.

I doubt it. A couple of people here have pointed out that all realistic scenarios end with Trump claiming (justifiably) vindication. If the Ultimate Ninja Turtle who leads the Senate Majority sees a way to turn that to his advantage he will do so. So he's going to slow-roast the Democrats as much as he can. Pelosi's best play is to see that Mitch doesn't get to play.

Achilles said...

Freder Frederson said...
Democrats like to call it "Workplace violence" though.

Are you saying that any act of violence at a military base is a terrorist attack? That is just ridiculous.

This is exactly what I am talking about.

You cannot be honest about a single thing.

You cannot take responsibility for your actions or your positions in any way. You dodge the truth when it is right there in front of you.

You cannot honestly say what the left wants in this country because the left wants to destroy the institutions of our founding and erase our borders.

Everything you post and say deflects from the truth or is an outright lie.

Democrats are terrible people.

narciso said...

and across the pond:


https://babalublog.com/2019/12/10/uks-socialist-labour-party-leader-jeremy-corbyn-ignores-a-cuban-dissidents-pleas-for-help/#comments

Achilles said...

Phil said...
Lighten up, Francis. They’re the only alternative to Democrats we’ve got.

Romney's staffers were "employed" at Burisma with Hunter. Romney has been providing all the support he can attacking Trump. McCain was right there with his democratic friends trying to oust Trump.

Biden is an enemy.

Romney is a traitor.

Traitors are worse and they are not an alternative.

Rosalyn C. said...

I only got through about half of the announcement, (what the heck was going on with Maxine Waters's mouth?) -- I had to turn off at Schiff spouting unpalatable lies about the mountains of evidence. We know that the Republicans were not allowed to refute, cross examine or present their witnesses and we were told there was no requirement to allow for that, this inquiry is like a grand jury. So how can he claim proof of anything? Genuinely sickening kangaroo court. Do Democrats really want a trial? I doubt it. Do they really want Trump out and Mike Pence to be President? No. Or do they think this is the best way to win in 2020? I'm appalled by the Democrats, and I was a life long Dem. Hard to handle.

In the alternate universe at the comment section at DailyKos people are complaining that there are only two articles, they want more! Pondering how many impeachments they can have? Some are expressing their love for Adam Schiff and their hope he will be the next Speaker, that goal was the reason for his actions. Anger that Pelosi is finally allowing a vote on USMCA... Oh brother.

Freder Frederson said...

This is exactly what I am talking about.

I was asking for clarification. You made an outrageous statement and when I called you on it, you claimed that some unnamed Democrats (in the military, the administration, the FBI?) are covering up terrorist attacks at military bases by calling it "workplace violence".

Provide a shred of proof for your ridiculous claims or STFU.

You are the terrible person. I have never claimed that "jail is too good" for Republicans. Apparently, you are hoping for some kind of internment or worse for Democrats.

narciso said...

they are not going wall to wall as they did with parkland and any number of incidents when they waved the bloody shirt,


http://www.talkleft.com/story/2019/12/3/131526/170/Trump_Admin/Federal-Court-Rules-Banks-Must-Turn-Over-Trump-s-Financial-Records

Gospace said...

Rush to impeachment? I think not. Since the Democrats announced their intent to impeach Trump before election day 2016 if the impossible happened and he were elected, they've been working on it for over 3 years at this point. If they delay too much longer the impeachment vote will be held after both parties pick a nominee. That won't bode well for them next November.

They've trapped themselves between that rock and that hard place. They have to hold a vote to impeach - and they don't even know if they have enough congresscritters on board to do so. They promised their more rabid supporters they would do so. If they hold the vote, and it fails, they lose. If they hold the vote and it passes, they lose.

There is no winning strategy for them at this point. And it's hard to tell what strategy is the least harmful for their purposes. At the top of the heap - Pelosi knew from the start that the Russian collusion bit they used to start the whole thing was complete and utter nonsense. As did Mueller, Comey, Brennan, and everyone else involved in it. Then the switch to Ukraine and quid pro pro then bribery, then ?????? It's not that they're trying and failing to hit a moving rapidly zig zagging target, it's that they're trying to hit the target before they erect it.

mockturtle said...

Are you saying that any act of violence at a military base is a terrorist attack?

If it's committed by a Muslim, hell yes!

Bay Area Guy said...

A few facts:

1. The Steele Dossier was filled with lies.
2. Steele was a political operative hired by the Dems.
3. It was illegal for the FBI to use the Steele dossier for the FISA Application
4. It was horrendous for the FBI to rely on Steele or his work to start an investigation of the Trump campaign.
5. Carter Page was never a Russian asset.
6. George Papadopoulos was never a Russian asset.
7. Michael Flynn was never a Russian asset
8. The Trump campaign did not work with Julian Assange to release the DNC e-mails.
9. The Trump campaign did not "collude" with Russia to interfere with the 2016 election.
10. The Russian "interference" with the 2016 election was minor. A few FB ads by trolls.
11. Ukraine was rife with corruption. Sons Biden and Kerry made tons of $$ off the Ukraine corruption.
12. Burisma hired Hunter Biden to use VP Biden as a source of political protection.
13. As VP, Biden threatened to withhold $1 Billion in Ukraine aid, unless the Ukraine prosecutor was fired.
14. VP Biden certainly demanded a "quid pro quo".
15. Nothing was wrong with Trump's phone call with Zelensky.
16. The President has executive authority under Article 2 to set foreign policy, and determine which country gets what aid. Bureaucrats at State and in the NSC work for the President.
17. Trump wanted the new Ukraine President Zelensky to start cleaning up the corruption before releasing the aid.
18. Burisma and Biden were part of that Ukraine corruption.
19. The aid was released.

gahrie said...

Steve Bannon thinks Hillary's gonna jump into the race.

I've been saying that since Nov 2016.

Biden wins the nomination, then dies a week later. Hillary steps forward to "save the party and the nation".

Francisco D said...

It will be interesting to observe how the Democrat/media spin evolves this week.


The Democrats have been let down by their propaganda wing. They expected the Media to take the ball and run to a touchdown. That is, they expected to inflame the public to the point that they demanded Trump's impeachment. The public is more and more attuned to Media propaganda. However, all is not lost no matter how the Impeachment Show concludes.

There is a strong element of jury tampering here. What do you think will happen if and when Obama officials are indicted and go to trial?

Michael K said...

There is a strong element of jury tampering here. What do you think will happen if and when Obama officials are indicted and go to trial?

I hope Durham is smart enough to avoid DC juries, like the oen that let Greg Craig off last month.

walter said...

Buck Sexton
‏Verified account @BuckSexton
4h4 hours ago

It’s really innovative how Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler plan to protect the sanctity of our elections by insisting the last election was rigged and the next one will be rigged too unless a Democrat wins of course
---
Dude gotta go!

Chuck said...

Who the hell is making you watch, Althouse?

If you're not interested, don't watch. Don't listen. Don't pay attention at all. Go for a walk. Take pictures. Do whatever you want.

But we both know why this is a conflict for you. It is because later on, you will want to blog a point of view about impeachment developments.

This is becoming a recurring thing with you. Declaring that impeachment developments are boring or dull or uninteresting or phony or illegitimate and mostly generally unwatchable because to you they are not entertaining. And so you tell the entire blogospehere that you won't watch. Your retiree time is too valuable.

But then of course the next day you turn around to try to seriously appraise the developments.

Michael K said...

Are you saying that any act of violence at a military base is a terrorist attack? That is just ridiculous.

Freder, you really are a fool. There have been a couple that were crazy people with guns, like that black guy in the Navy Yard a few years ago. The big terror attacks on bases have been called "Workplace violence" by your messiah. It's a joke because the left is always in a huge hurry to worry about "Islamophobia." It has already happened in Pensacola.

There are always excuses about Muslim terror attacks. Hiding facts is also popular by your team. The Boston Marathon bombers were part of a group but you never hear about it.

MN Irish said...

Trump is doing a rally In Hershey, Pennsylvania tonight. Do you think he will call out the dems (Matt Cartwright-D and
Conor Lamb-D)) in Trump Districts? Hahaha. It will be glorious. Michigan next week.

Yancey Ward said...

"This is becoming a recurring thing with you. Declaring that impeachment developments are boring or dull or uninteresting or phony or illegitimate and mostly generally unwatchable because to you they are not entertaining. And so you tell the entire blogospehere that you won't watch. Your retiree time is too valuable.

But then of course the next day you turn around to try to seriously appraise the developments."


Shorter Chuck- "Althouse, shut the fuck up."

Drago said...

I see LLR-lefty Chuck has reverted to his typically condescending commentary regarding Althouse and her blogging tactics and practices.

LLR-lefty Chuck reverts to this type of commentary when his beloved lefty dems have screwed up royally and are looking bad and falling behind.

He's got nothing else.

Consider this a preemptive and unconditional surrender by LLR-lefty Chuck on the biggest issue of the day.

I return you now to the continuing implosion of the entire Dem/LLR-lefty impeachment fever dream fantasy.

Michael K said...

In the alternate universe at the comment section at DailyKos people are complaining that there are only two articles, they want more! Pondering how many impeachments they can have? Some are expressing their love for Adam Schiff and their hope he will be the next Speaker, that goal was the reason for his actions. Anger that Pelosi is finally allowing a vote on USMCA... Oh brother.

I'm a little surprised about only two, also. I figured they would have 5 or 6 so the "moderate" Dims could vote no on one or two and say they voted against impeachment. The focus groups must have laughed the others out of contention.

Drago said...

Michael K: "I'm a little surprised about only two, also. I figured they would have 5 or 6 so the "moderate" Dims could vote no on one or two and say they voted against impeachment. The focus groups must have laughed the others out of contention."

To include Bribery or extortion would have immediately and completely destroyed Biden given his open bragging of forcing a quid pro quo in support of his son and cash flowing into the Biden family coffers.

That's the ONLY reason the lunatic dem/lefties/LLR-lefties discarded those potential articles.

Drago said...

BTW, do we want to start a pool on how long it will take for LLR-lefty Chuck to admit he was wrong about the Trump's ability to renegotiate NAFTA?

If someone starts a pool, I'll choose "never", because leftists never admit they are wrong. They just move on to the next dem/left/LLR-lefty lie.

Yancey Ward said...

I think they settled on the two in the hopes that abandoning the others would protect Biden. I can imagine that the Biden Campaign has been trying to get the House leadership to give up on the quid pro quo stuff precisely because the defense will have a legitimate reason to call the Bidens as witnesses- subpoenae that they will be forced to resist. The Democrats are hoping that these two narrow impeachment charges will narrow the avenues of counter-attack into legalistic ones.

Sebastian said...

"I can't put up with these people."

They are the liberals you have been voting for all your life. They are the people you tried to empower by voting for Hillary. They did exactly what you said they shouldn't do.

So now what? Have they lost you yet? Have you made "plans" and do you now "see what happens," so that you can resolve not to support these people any longer?

Or are you still "neutral"? Or is it still abortion ueber alles for you? If so, you only encourage them--and you do in fact "put up with them."

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 441   Newer› Newest»