Nancy Pelosi is about to do a big reveal. How much do you care and how much depends on who the hell the House managers are?
I find this a bit irritating, this political theater.
UPDATE: I watched the announcement, but all I remember is Nancy Pelosi going on about the Constitution and mentioning Abraham Lincoln, Paul Revere, and "These are the times that try men's souls." And somebody said that not only would Trump be on trial, but the Senate is on trial. And Nadler, looking disturbingly green, said Trump is on trial and also democracy is on trial. The frame of what's "on trial" is ever-expanding. What do you think is on trial? I'll just say it's trying my patience. And my patience pleads not guilty.
I'm adding some tags with this update, and I tried to add "Paul Revere," not that I wanted to create a new "Paul Revere" tag, but I'd add the tag if it already existed. Did it? Well... kind of...
AND: Is my use of the term "show trial" apt? It's not the normal show trial, where the predetermined outcome is that the accused will be found guilty and punished. From Wikipedia:
A show trial is a public trial in which the judicial authorities have already determined the guilt of the defendant. The actual trial has as its only goal the presentation of both the accusation and the verdict to the public so they will serve as both an impressive example and a warning to other would-be dissidents or transgressors. Show trials tend to be retributive rather than corrective and they are also conducted for propagandistic purposes. The term was first recorded in 1928.In the case of Trump's impeachment trial, the show is of hearing the accusations and the predetermined outcome is that the accused will be vindicated and nothing will happen to him. But there is a propagandistic purpose to it, and it's some kind of effort to warn other would-be transgressors. And yet, it's not very scary, is it? Indeed, in the future, the threat of impeachment may lose its power. It's just political nonsense.
Posts
286 comments:
1 – 200 of 286 Newer› Newest»Nobody cares who the house managers are.
The Democrats will regret having a trial in the senate.
I nominate the Ladies from "The View".
Will it include gender reveal, with preferred pronouns?
Gotta pump up those ratings and clickbait, no matter what it takes!
The sacrificial lambs. Make sure there is a black woman among the managers. And a gay or lesbian, preferably a minority or disabled.
It's illegal to look into Obama-era corruption concerning Obama's diversity hires.
It doesn't really matter. The left has NOTHING else. Trump in a landslide..2020!!!
Do the House managers each get a rose?
What hell are "impeachment managers" and what do they have to do with the Senate?
Will it include gender reveal, with preferred pronouns?
Will it be two old white guys, at least one with a weight problem. Where's the diversity?
I think my congressman will be one of them - Sean Patrick Maloney
It might matter. They will get to make opening statements. If they can put up an experienced trial attorney who has a reasonable, muted, methodical, just the facts style with a pleasant appearance and a non-screechy voice..........oh wait. We’re talking about the Dems here.
Never mind
- Krumhorn.
And the managers are,
Lavrentiy Beria
Roland Freisler
Andrei Vyshinsky
Do.Not.Care.
Just vote and get it over.
You want the most Trump-deranged house managers possible. It's got to be entertaining.
They will be the ones on the news saying "sham" a lot.
Spencer: "...
Lavrentiy Beria
Roland Freisler
Andrei Vyshinsky"
Thanks. I recognized Beria but not the other two. Comments like yours are why this blog is a favorite for me: always learning something.
While Democrats obsess over Trump, the entire Russian government resigns.
Sorry to inject a brief moment of reality.
It’s going to be a circus in the old style with bombastic partisan ringmasters, side shows with mustached fat ladies, sword swallowers, rubber-boned scissoring marginalized types, a whistle-blower blowing hard....the wildest freak show ever to take the stage.
- Krumhorn
I think that there are three Republicans willing to join in with the Democrats to keep Trump from getting his case heard, one of them, Romney, had his fingers in the pie in Ukraine.
“Not that there’s anything wrong with that!” - Uniparty
I click past CNN every morning and think, wow they're taking this so seriously! lol.
Seems like it would be a simple matter to gradually drop the coverage and move on to other stories.
The problem with hoping that the rank and file Democrats will come around to seeing that they are being used is that the first and most important step to being cured is to really want to be cured. They are getting way too much out of this.
While Democrats obsess over Trump, the entire Russian government resigns.
Vlad's obviously gonna try to do what his frenemy Xi did and declare himself "president for life". But Russia is (supposedly) not a totalitarian regime with an autocrat with absolute power at it's head... yet.
Live-TV tedious excitement over the naming of the House managers for the show trial in the Senate.
The ONLY people that have any excitement over this are the wackado Democrats and the MSM (but I repeat myself). Any self respecting Democrats left are as ashamed of this spectacle as everyone else.
IDGAS
Or as my friend likes to say “I’m all out of shits to give. I have none left”
Psychologically, I mean. It has to do with the way that pleasure and reward can get crossed up with pain and punishment in the human brain. We call it TDS, but they think it is normal because to deny it would be to cut off those little frissons of subconscious pleasure they get every time they are told Trump is scary. They are going to get mighty depressed after Trump is finally gone, and he will be one day. They will miss him and not know why.
disabled
"Walk Like an Egyptian Chicken"
‘Orange man bad!’ gives them a little jolt of dopamine.
After press conference, CNN immediately went to Jeffrey Toobin for initial reaction. First thing he mentioned was the diversity of the managers. I spit out my coffee laughing so hard.
What are these "managers" supposed to do anyway? Stand around and look somber? The House has already done their damage and now have to stand by while the adults clean up their mess.
Pelosi should've used the format of "The Dating Game." That would generate some interest.
There are NeverTrumpers like our Chuckles in the Senate who will be perfectly happy to join hands with the lefties and try to rough up the president. No matter how much good he has done for our country, they “loathe” him.
The hate dominates the lefties and the LLRs and the deep staters. What an ugly bunch.
- Krumhorn
What a disgrace this is.
Nervous nancy was falling apart and kept repeating that the Impeachment black mark on our President Trump is forever,implying she knows that it is a useless act and DOA in the Senate. So yes, it is only a bad political TV show.
There will be no Perry Mason moments in this trial. No one gets cross examined. The senators have to be silent and submit their questions in writing.
One important question to Adam Schiff, the lead House manager, "Did you or anyone on your staff meet with Eric Ciamarella to discuss his so-called whistleblower complaint? If so, was advice provided to Mr. Ciamarella on how to word his complaint?"
Schiff and Nadler - so they can't be called to testify. But my Wife said they indicated that they would be willing to testify. Under oath I would hope, then rip them apart, and get them for lying to Congress. Yeah, like that will happen.
The Democrats are just BEGGING to lose in November!!
Nancy Pelosi is about to do a big reveal.
She's going to let it slip, that she Hates Donald Trump?
Grab some popcorn and pull up a chair when Schiff is called as a fact witness.
wendybar said...
The Democrats are just BEGGING to lose in November!!
Seems like, the most Best they could have hoped for, would have been to Announce:
We WANT to follow the Constitution! Unfortunately Due to The COMPLETE lack of Bias seen in the Senate, WE will not be able to receive a fair trial of our findings
THEREFORE.
We have NO OPTION but to decline to participate in the Senate's SHAM of a trial
Their people would eat it up; and that's The Best they can hope for
LYNNDH said...
Schiff and Nadler - so they can't be called to testify.
In a real trial, that's true. This isn't a real trial, and the Senate sets the rules, so they could call Schiff if they want to. He could make objections on his own behalf and cross-examine himself. It would be a spectacle!
The Dems are taking the idea that politics is a reality TV show literally, but not seriously.
There are NeverTrumpers like our Chuckles in the Senate who will be perfectly happy to join hands with the lefties and try to rough up the president
I'm not so sure. Susan Collins has been under a lot of pressure and threats. Representing a state that half the population on Medicaid can't be easy. Still, she stood up well on Kavanaugh.
Schiff and Nadler - so they can't be called to testify.
Please add them to the witness list.
I look forward to the Dems prattling on about how "unfair" that would be to their case.
The whole world is a stage, Althouse. All of life is theatre. The fallacy of thinking outside the box is there is no box.
Granted, it's very lame theatre. That's why I put it on ignore. The peanut gallery is much more entertaining.
How bad is the case against Trump?
The best the Dems could find to prosecute it were Schiff and Nadler.
They choked up this dog's breakfast.
Now they can lie in it.
You said it, Althouse...
It's a "show trial."
This post needs your "bullshit" tag.
How much? Zero, zip, nada.
"This post needs your "bullshit" tag."
There's no "bullshit" tag and it wouldn't make sense to create one. It's so pervasive, it's meaningless. The tag itself would be bullshit.
You may be thinking of the tag that I do have, "civility bullshit." That's about a specific type of bullshit, bullshit on the subject of civility.
The House-folk were bullshitting, but not about civility.
1966 was a great time to be young and heterosexual. There was birth control and free love but not yet ruined by the coming plague of illegal drugs. Paul Revere and the Raiders were singing about raiding all the hot girls.
The DOW is at 29,099. Wall Street is unconcerned about impeachment.
"You said it, Althouse...It's a "show trial.""
But normally a show trial is what is done when the plan is to find the accused guilty and punish him. So it is a variation on the most normal form of the thing.
“Show trial” is an interesting choice of phrasing on your part, Althouse. Almost all standard definitions and descriptions of the term note that a “show trial” is one in which the judicial authorities have already determined the guilt of the defendant. And the pejorative connotation goes to those judicial authorities, for conducting what is a sham trial.
Who is your pejorative aimed at in this post? Democrats, who want more evidence to be admitted, and more discovery and more witnesses? A longer and more open and adversarial trial, closer to standard criminal procedure? That hardly seems consistent with any “show trial.”
Now you may argue, Althouse, that Democratic Senators have pre-judged Trump’s guilt. Of course it seems equally clear that most, but not all, Republicans in the Senate have predetermined that they will acquit Trump. This could be a “show trial” not because the defendant’s guilt is already determined but rather because his acquittal is practically guaranteed. Irrespective of any evidence. And in that case, the pejorative lands upon the side that has predetermined the outcome, right?
Beyond the mere outcome, I think that the most profoundly bothersome aspect of this “show trial” is the determination of Trump to make it as much of a show trial as possible. Just one side is withholding the production of documents. Just one side is fighting against the appearance of important witnesses. Making it more of a show trial and less of a real trial.
The only relevant question in the trial:
"Was there enough information publicly available at the time of Trump's phone call to reasonably suspect corruption in the matter of Hunter Biden's employment with Burisma and that it was related to Joe Biden's admitted use of US aid to the Ukraine to see Shokin dismissed?"
The answer is an obvious "Yes" to anyone who is not an outright liar and fraud.
End of the Impeachment Follies.
Haha. Althouse and I were writing about the same thing at the same time.
After you:
http://patterico.com/2020/01/13/stating-the-obvious-u-s-press-does-not-face-same-dangers-and-risk-as-their-iranian-counterparts/#comment-2294821
’Just one side is withholding the production of documents.’
Schiff hasn’t even released all the transcripts from the basement hearings.
I find this a bit irritating, this political theater.
Are you not entertained?
I'm afraid the lessons from the Kavanaugh hearings is that this stuff increases fundraising, particularly at a time when the economy is good and the government less relevant to our daily lives.
Is there a tetchy tone to our hostess's posts lately?
The girl in the Bandstand freeze frame has the Jennifer Anniston look 30 years early.
This girl dances like Elaine on Seinfeld.
"Sweet fancy Moses!"
Who is your pejorative aimed at in this post? Democrats, who want more evidence to be admitted, and more discovery and more witnesses? A longer and more open and adversarial trial, closer to standard criminal procedure? That hardly seems consistent with any “show trial.”
The Democrats did not release any real "evidence" during their sham hearings and continue to conceal depositions that do not support their actions.
The mendacity in your comments grows even more, if possible.
Pelosi's drive for impeachment has to be seen as a re-match for the dead Russian Collusion show. The Ukraine delay of Aid only proves Biden was a crook that stole US Foreign Aid money and Trump was investigating Biden's criminal operations.
Blogger Beasts of England said...
’Just one side is withholding the production of documents.’
Schiff hasn’t even released all the transcripts from the basement hearings.
You mean those interviews and depositions where Republican members of the Intel Committee were present. Schiff already said he plans to release all of them to the public and press when they no longer pose a risk of tainting witnesses involved in ongoing investigative work. Also, I suspect that they may want to protect one or more whistleblowers as the law requires.
If witnesses are called and documents are subpoenaed is there any doubt that the democrats will fight every single one in which their fellow travelers are targeted? You really are that fucking stupid Chuck.
Trump is FOREVER impeached. It will ALWAYS HAVE HAPPENED. It's on his PERMANENT RECORD.
Beasts of England (to Banned Commenter LLR-lefty (and FIGHTER!) Chuck): "Schiff hasn’t even released all the transcripts from the basement hearings."
Shhhh!
Just give LLR-lefty Chuck more rope.....
Per Speaker Pelosi, If Senate Rs refuse to call witnesses that House Ds didn't bother to call, it's a "coverup."
Indeed, in the future, the threat of impeachment may lose its power. It's just political nonsense.
Nonsense but not nonsensical. It's playing to women and women vote.
If you don't enjoy abstraction and analysis, you go with feelings, and that's women. Feeling play is at play.
Of course it's nonsense. It has to be.
It's all Reality Shows and Outrage now. I don't watch that stuff, be it Survivor or the Bachelorette or Housewives, and won't be watching this. Have to say though rather than finding it all irritating it is amusing in its breathless seriousness and urgency.
Party On Wayne!
Schiff lies constantly asswipe. Absolutely nothing he says can be believed.
Seriously though, there was fraud of the fisa warrant process and abuse at every step from steele to winer to laufman, parallel track with the 'whistleblower' complaint process.
I wish they had selected different clowns for this shit show. I hate reruns.
My understanding is that a soundtrack for the trial has already been selected.
"The celebrated Mr. K.
Performs his feat on Saturday at Bishops Gate
The Hendersons will dance and sing
As Mr. Kite flies through the ring, don't be late
Messrs. K and H. assure the public
Their production will be second to none
And of course Henry The Horse dances the waltz"
Mr. Forward said...
I nominate the Ladies from "The View".
donald: "Schiff lies constantly asswipe. Absolutely nothing he says can be believed."
GASP!!!!
Uh oh. You've done it now. LLR-lefty Chuck, the self-described Biggest FIGHTER-Y FIGHT FIGHTER to ever stride the planet is NOT going to appreciate you calling his co-author of Articles of Galactic Sham-Wow-Peachment such names!!
Chucky will be just itching to FIGHT you!!
’Schiff already said he plans to release all of them to the public and press when they no longer pose a risk of tainting witnesses involved in ongoing investigative work. Also, I suspect that they may want to protect one or more whistleblowers as the law requires.’
Plans to release them? So you admit that he hasn’t, just as I stated. Whether a Republican was in the meeting or not is irrelevant, as Trump’s defense team should have access to every document.
And there’s nothing to protect, re: the whistleblower. Even you’re not so stupid as to believe that bullshit.
Who for instance is this character, he worked for every intelligence from algeria to pakistan
https://mobile.twitter.com/santini1965/status/1216960434265362433
They say a DA can indict a ham sandwich.
But anyone can impeach a turkey sandwich. I just impeached one for lunch and it was delicious!
John Henry
The Democrats did not release any real "evidence" during their sham hearings and continue to conceal depositions that do not support their actions.
They held live, nationally-televised hearings with witnesses under oath.
"The Democrats did not release any real "evidence" during their sham hearings and continue to conceal depositions that do not support their actions."
To which Chuck responded: "They held live, nationally-televised hearings with witnesses under oath."
So you agree they did not release any real evidence, are concealing depositions that do not support their actions, and focused on simply the act of holding live, nationally televised hearings with witnesses under oath as the most potent thing they can do.
Just a reminder, Thunderdrome 2020 is now open for all non-Althouseian quarelling needs.
Stop by and find out all the things wrong with PDJT, mis-statements etc per a self-certified lifelong Republican who even voted for the man.
www.thunderdrome.blogspot.com
I even put a pussy picture at the top of the page for guys and gals who are into that sort of thing.
John Henry
It would be fun to call Schiff to testify as a witness and then watching as he simultaneously complains that the Senate is abusing their authority by looking into House ethics violations while also claiming he doesn't have to testify because of his position as a House manager. That would put a nice bow on the Articles of Impeachment before the Senate shutdowns the trial and moves for acquittal.
’They held live, nationally-televised hearings with witnesses under oath.’
It was a cornucopia of hearsay. Nothing more.
Lawfare LLR-lefty Chuck (THE FIGHTER!) is spinning even faster than usual, isn't he?
He knows perfectly well depositions not helpful to the dems were kept secret and the republican members of the committee are not allowed to speak publicly about what they saw and heard.
LLR-lefty Chuck (THE FIGHTER!) also knows perfectly well that those secret depositions that were not helpful to the dems resulted in those witnesses NOT being called to testify publicly in the nationally-televised hearings.
Again, I believe its extremely helpful and healthy that the REAL LLR-lefty Chuck has now fully emerged and has been clearly exposed as being as radical a leftist as all the other dems.
Ah yes, but not from their sham, secretie, secret hearings. In the basement. With the locked doors. And the prohibited questioning from Republicans.
When do we get those transcripts?
Again with the transgressors. I'm feeling triggered.
I have to say that the posts from that fellow, latest @10:36, are so blinkered and one sided and lacking in factual foundation that I assess that they must be trolling posts. No one would seriously believe that crap, right?
The live televised hearings were on whether the House has authority to impeach, which was never in doubt. The question avoided was whether they had a case worthy of impeachment, and apparently they do not as the live televised performances have only bolstered support for Trump and decreased support for removal from office. An extra month of reflection hasn't helped.
I would be very surprised if the Republicans aren't crafting the Senate trial as a vehicle to take out Biden and discredit (how hard could it be?) as many prominent Democrats as possible. Clearly, the Democrats are going into this thing in a defensive crouch. Hence all the thin hype and hoo-ha.
1/15/20, 10:10 AM
Blogger Chuck said...
“Show trial” is an interesting choice of phrasing on your part, Althouse.
You can discuss mis-statements about our beloved hostess the Thunderdrome too, Chuck.
Nothing is off topic. Feel free to go nuts!
www.thunderdrome2020.blogspot.com
John Henry
"They held live, nationally-televised hearings with witnesses under oath."
That much is true.
Anyone sprego:
https://mobile.twitter.com/3Raskol/status/1216669774320750592
Well, the Senate Democrats blew up the filibuster a few years back. Look how that worked out. It’s delusional to think these people are smart.
[Ricky Roma gets the House Managers from Pelosi with familiar "deadbeat" names]
Ricky Roma: Nadler? Schiff? Lofgren? Zoe Lofgren? How am I gonna make a case with these deadbeats? Where did you get this one from the morgue?
Pelosi: Look I'm...
Ricky Roma: Oh come on, what's the point? What's the ****ing point in any case I gotta argue with you, I gotta knock heads with the Republicans, I'm busting my balls sell your dirt with deadbeats.
[waves the list]
Ricky Roma: Money in the mattress.
Bob Smith: "Well, the Senate Democrats blew up the filibuster a few years back. Look how that worked out. It’s delusional to think these people are smart."
Indeed.
Case in point: Banned Commenter LLR-lefty Chuck (THE FIGHTER WHO WILL FIGHT YOU!). I can't believe Chuck's handlers are pleased with Chuck's clumsy and self-nullifying "lifelong republican conservative" performance on this blog.
Lefties like Chuck and Inga never seem able to think more than 1 step ahead.
Trump is FOREVER impeached. It will ALWAYS HAVE HAPPENED. It's on his PERMANENT RECORD.
Sort of like Hillary will FOREVER be the one that lost. It will ALWAYS HAVE HAPPENED. Except the current record is Trump is President and the PERMANENT RECORD is Hillary will not be President.
And Nadler, looking disturbingly green, said Trump is on trial and also democracy is on trial.
It's the fucking deplorables that are the real problem.
Their trial begins after the election.
Plans to release them? So you admit that he hasn’t, just as I stated. Whether a Republican was in the meeting or not is irrelevant, as Trump’s defense team should have access to every document
Name a document, or a category of documents, that Trump’s defense team needs for the impeachment trial, and for which they have been denied access.
’Name a document, or a category of documents, that Trump’s defense team needs for the impeachment trial, and for which they have been denied access.’
Seeing as you’ve already admitted that documents are being withheld, your request is moot.
You mean those interviews and depositions where Republican members of the Intel Committee were present.
Who were not allowed to report on what was said.
They held live, nationally-televised hearings with witnesses under oath.
All the "witnesses" were describing hearsay. NONE was a fact witness.
There were no "whistleblowers. The Democrats changed the rules to allow hearsay called "whistleblowing."
Why lie about all this ? You can hate Trump but why lie?
I assume they picked today to overshadow the China trade deal.
So 1.6 billion dollars of tax dollars goes missing from privat bank which is owned by the same person as owns burisma, who probably owns half the rada (ukrainian parliament)
For the record, I think "Trump's Impeachment: Democracy on Trial" is about as truthful as we can get.
In a functioning democracy, some of the media outlets would pick that up and run with it.
I suspect that as the democrats/HoaxLLR-lefties Sham-Wow-Peachment goes fully off the rails for the left/LLR-left in the Senate LLR-lefty Chuck, who at this time can barely contain the rage that has been building for months now particularly with the lack of US servicemembers deaths in the Iran strikes, is going to completely lose it (AGAIN!) and revert to his typical racist posting and attacks on women and children.
Can you imagine what LLR-lefty Chuck is going to say about the wives and children of Trump's legal team?
It ain't gonna be pretty.
Why lie about all this ? You can hate Trump but why lie?
Hating Trump requires one to eventually run into reality such that you stop hating him or begin lying.
The way to square the circle is to start labeling the truth as a lie and Trump as the supreme liar.
Like nuking the planet from orbit, it's the only way to keep the Trump hatred going for sure.
JohnAnnArbor: "I assume they picked today to overshadow the China trade deal."
Correct.
Recall that Banned Commenter LLR-lefty Chuck (THE FIGHTER WHO WILL FIGHT YOU!) asserted early on, like all leftists, that Trump would never be able to complete a single trade deal of any kind.
Let's just say that prediction held up as well as all of LLR-lefty Chuck's other predictions.....
Michael K said...Why lie about all this ? You can hate Trump but why lie?
--
Chuck said... I am afraid you are mistaking me for someone who has an interest in fair treatment of Donald Trump. I'm not your guy. I am interested in smearing him, hurting him and prejudicing people against him.
(But you can buy some reprieve with a donated big ass bottle of gin.)
Chuck: Democrats, who want more evidence to be admitted, and more discovery and more witnesses?
Why didn't they just question these other witnesses in the House, and include their testimony and other evidence in the Articles of Impeachment they voted to send to the Senate? The number of witnesses and the amount of evidence was entirely up to them.
I watched the announcement, but all I remember is Nancy Pelosi going on about the Constitution and mentioning Abraham Lincoln, Paul Revere, and "These are the times that try men's souls."
If they had a real case, that's what they'd be talking about.
The Constitutional fill-in is to paper over the dog that's not barking.
Democrats, who want more evidence to be admitted, and more discovery and more witnesses?
To quote a recent TV commercial: "That's not how this works. That's not how any of this works."
Like this snipehunt against rudy was initiated by the campaign legal center, thr people that gave us mccain feingold more to the point, the employers of donald ayer, who lavished us with this short subject dan brown opus dei conspiracy
As far as the Constition-loving Democrats are concerned, the only fair trial is one that ends in conviction.
Chew on that irony.
Losers
Sean,
iirc, executive privilege was invoked and they didn't want to seek the requisite court ruling that might reverse it.
Existential threat and all.
In david rohdes new yorker piece, skewered elegantly by sohab amari.
Campaign legal center was founded by fmr fec chair trevor potter, eho vouched for lois lerner
It's not Trump that gets a permanent stain
It's the House Dems.
The Democrats are on trial for hating America
Why didn't they just question these other witnesses in the House, and include their testimony and other evidence in the Articles of Impeachment they voted to send to the Senate? The number of witnesses and the amount of evidence was entirely up to them.
We all know why. There is no there there.
Steve Bannon wants a full trial with witnesses like the Bidens called. I am undecided. If Nancy is going to call a dismissal a "coverup" a full trial with witnesses including Ciamarella, Chuck's "whistleblower," might be necessary but I doubt the public will pay attention.
OT Message for Narciso
You recommended The Spy by Ted Bell a couple days ago in another comment thread. I've had good luck with your recommendations so went and had a look. It's #4 in a series so I started with #1 Hawke.
Just a couple chapters in but it looks like another great recommendation. Thanks again.
John Henry
traditionalguy said... [hush][hide comment]
Nervous nancy was falling apart and kept repeating that the Impeachment black mark on our President Trump is forever,implying she knows that it is a useless act and DOA in the Senate. So yes, it is only a bad political TV show.
1/15/20, 9:45 AM
So now after all is said and done, Next to President Trump's name (in all the history books) will be an asterisks that references a footnote of "Impeached". Next to that footnote will be another asterisks referencing an entire chapter that explains what a partisan, political, USSR style show trial that "impeachment" actually was along with all of the criminality and corruption that accompanied it and Trump will be applauded for showing the restraint of not having the lot of them dragged into the street and shot.
Blogger SeanF said...
Chuck: Democrats, who want more evidence to be admitted, and more discovery and more witnesses?
Why didn't they just question these other witnesses in the House, and include their testimony and other evidence in the Articles of Impeachment they voted to send to the Senate? The number of witnesses and the amount of evidence was entirely up to them.
No; the uncalled witnesses in the House impeachment inquiry refused to testify under the direction of the White House, which also directed the broad, almost universal refusal to produce any documents. A handful of witnesses cooperated, defying their instructions from the White House.
As for “hearsay,” I’d love for that to be hashed out, question-by-question in front of Chief Justice Roberts.
A theory going around says Pelosi put the shit sandwich in the freezer for a month so as to pull it out in time with keeping Biden's competitors stuck watching it defrost.
"Chuck said... I am afraid you are mistaking me for someone who has an interest in fair treatment of Donald Trump. I'm not your guy. I am interested in smearing him, hurting him and prejudicing people against him."
Just three more in the loss column in the recap of Chuck's life.
BTW I have never known an attorney who had so much free time during the day. But you almost never hear from him at night. It's almost like he isn't an attorney but the night manager at some Arby's.
’No; the uncalled witnesses in the House impeachment inquiry refused to testify under the direction of the White House, which also directed the broad, almost universal refusal to produce any documents.’
They had the right to argue the merits in court but chose not to. And they had plenty of time, as the one month delay in transmitting the articles has shown.
Yes the whole series is good i started witj assasin, if they want a fresh bond character, they should adapt that one, which goes from nantucket to london to miami to a mysterious gulf state to the far east
Banned Commenter LLR-lefty Chuck (THE FIGTHTER WHO WILL FIGHT YOU!): "No; the uncalled witnesses in the House impeachment inquiry refused to testify under the direction of the White House,...."
LOL
The "uncalled witnesses" include EVERY single witnesses the republicans wanted to call but were not allowed to call by the democrats.
I love Love LOVE how LLR-lefty Chuck thinks people are missing these basic facts!
Chucky really does believe he and his lefty/dem pals can pull one over on the American people!
Too funny.
A complete inability to adapt on the part of Chuck and his lefty pals. It's reminiscent of listening to Remainers (vs Brexiteers) talk about what was going to happen and why and you'd think to yourself "what universe are these morons living in?" and "why can't they see what is coming at them?".
The answer there as here is the same: Astonishing arrogance and bitterly clinging to policy and electoral analysis that is at least 3 decades out of whack.
"It's just political nonsense." may be the quote of the year. Remember onto whom blame should be heaped for this nonsense, and never let them live down an impeachment so weak they believe accepting in the Senate as-is has been called a "cover-up." That is, their impeachment was so rushed that only now, once it is done do the House mismanagers want witnesses called.
So don't forget this nonsense is brought to you by the Swamp, the permananet unelected bureaucracy and their representatives in both parties (though the current fiasco is almost purely D driven, their are Rs participating in the circus). The Swamp has tried to expel Trump and has utterly failed. Lying, cheating, false affidavits, a blind FISC, and phony whistleblowers couldn't complete their coup and this won't either.
Long live the Republic of the United States.
Question that will not be asked of the Dems: If the Senate votes not to remove, will you accept the verdict?
Or do they plan to keep counting the votes until they get the outcome they demand?
Again: (check the date)
Jack Posobiec
Verified account @JackPosobiec
Scooplet: Pelosi wants to hold the articles until mid-Jan
She wants the impeachment trial to coincide with the Women’s March on 1/18
Plan is to target Ernst, Collins, and Murkowski - @OANN
9:11 PM - 18 Dec 2019
So you have carter page, who was supposed to be a russian asset, but he turned two of them in, this is a twist like decaprio in the departed mifsud another mysterious character who has his hand in dozen pies, halper another helpful fellow on first name basis witn a deputy svr chief, downer who worked for british intelligence and the chinese at different time
Chief Justice Roberts does fuckall and makes no decisions whatsoever after swearing in the Senators.
Nothing.
Nada.
That is the Rehnquist standard.
Yet another lie from our resident racist fopdoodle.
"Chuck said...
Haha. Althouse and I were writing about the same thing at the same time."
If I were Althouse I would be afraid. Very afraid.
Trump produced the only document that matters: the transcript of his call with Zelenski.
We read it.
There was nothing wrong with it. The Bidens should have been investigated.
The impeachment itself is obstruction of justice, tampering and attempting to quash a legitimate investigation of Biden's corruption.
Everything the Democrats say is projection of their own crimes.
Just once in my life, I'd like to see that tactic fail. Just once. But so many people fall for it every single time.
Blogger Beasts of England said...
’Name a document, or a category of documents, that Trump’s defense team needs for the impeachment trial, and for which they have been denied access.’
Seeing as you’ve already admitted that documents are being withheld, your request is moot.
Are you really so ignorant? The transcripts you referred to are known to all of the Republicans who were present. And it is my understanding that Trump’s impeachment defense team has access to them, to whatever extent (none, probably) that they might have any bearing on a trial. They are only being withheld from release to the public and the press. You know, like Trump’s tax returns.
’The transcripts you referred to are known to all of the Republicans who were present.’
Speaking of ignorance!! And mendacity...
Blogger Kevin said...
Question that will not be asked of the Dems: If the Senate votes not to remove, will you accept the verdict?
Or do they plan to keep counting the votes until they get the outcome they demand?
I think that they will continue to do oversight, as the law directs Congress to do, and that they will continue to investigate when the information and evidence screams out for it.
Like Trump said about Ambassador Yovanovich, I think he is going to go through some things.
Atkinson's testimony directly refutes the hoax non-whistleblower "whistleblower" "testimony" according to republicans who were present and are not allowed to speak specifically about the proceedings.
That's why the dems are holding it back and not sending it over to the Senate.
All of which good little lefty Lawfare boys like Banned Commenter LLR-lefty Chuck (THE FIGHTER WHO WILL FIGHT YOU!) knows perfectly well.
Chuck: No; the uncalled witnesses in the House impeachment inquiry refused to testify under the direction of the White House, which also directed the broad, almost universal refusal to produce any documents.
Are you suggesting the Senate somehow has more power to compel their testimony than the House has?
I have a question for Constitutional law scholars. I see that the House is voting now on whether to communicate the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate. Lawrence Tribe says that Trump isn't impeached unless the House communicates the Articles of Impeachment. So what happens of the House voted to not communicate the Articles of Impeachment? Additionally, do the House rules call for a 2nd vote on Impeachment?
The "uncalled witnesses" include EVERY single witnesses the republicans wanted to call but were not allowed to call by the democrats.
Further, the impeachment hearing rules voted on by the full House included a provision that the republicans would have a full day to call their own witnesses.
Nadler refused.
I expect this little detail will become front and center in the Senate.
Yes its like patrick stewart saying the new federation will be more insular, wven more then when the borg were on the move.
What Democrats consider "fair" is what most people would call "rigged". When they say the "Senate is on trial," what they mean is that if the Senate doesn't convict Trump, that is a de facto conviction of the Senate. When they say "Democracy is on trial," they mean it's only democracy if they win.
These people are clowns and liars and scam artists who deserve far more ridicule and scorn than they're getting.
The impeachment itself needs to be prosecuted as obstruction of justice, specifipipes. as a cover up of Biden's crimes. And it's very obvious that that is because a LOT of Congress had their fingers in the same pies.
As Brit Hume pointed out, a "fair trial" is a protection afforded to the accused, it is not leverage for the prosecution against the defendant.
The House managers only get to manage themselves; not the trial.
They are, so to speak, only guests on the Senate floor.
Cocaine Mitch now, the Senate is his house.
Indeed. But since the rules have been changed, I demand a "fair trial" of Hillary Clinton for her use of a private server to conduct government business. I don't give a flying fuck what Democrat toadies like Comey claim any "reasonable prosecutor" would do about it. In fact, I want a "fair trial" of HIM for covering up her crimes on such a ridiculous pretext.
“The frame of what's "on trial" is ever-expanding. What do you think is on trial? I'll just say it's trying my patience. And my patience pleads not guilty.”
And I’m guilty of laughing out loud at this. Funny stuff! 😆
Frog-like Nadler looks green. Sounds about right...
The left are allowed to do whatever they need to do to take down an R - even full tilt PBS specials.
Investigate Biden?
Illegal!
" no one is above the law"
except any D.
I think it will be more interesting than the Democratic Debate, but it won't have the drama and suspense of the Royal Family rift. The Democrats should have found some way of including Stormy Daniels in the impeachment. That would have created some interest. Her testimony would have been a ratings grabber....Maybe there will be a Perry Mason moment where Trump collapses under Nadler's relentless questioning and admits that, yes, he's the man who killed Soleilmani.
Chuck,
I hate to pile on here, because I think you're basically a good earnest guy who wants serious people tackling serious issues.
But, honestly, you're taking this impeachment stuff WAY to seriously.
Althouse thinks it's a joke. Turley thinks it's a joke. Dershowitz thinks it's a joke. Not a Trump supporter in the bunch. You could put all three on the same talk show discussing the impeachment, and it would be an orgy of eyerolls.
Why? Because it's a joke, Chuck. A joke.
It would be hard to imagine more "credible" and "legitimate" House Managers than Schiff-ty Schiff, Nads Nadler and Hakeem Jeffries!!
LOLOLOLOL
What an "outstanding" lineup for what the dems are up to.
The only piece missing from this crew? LLR-lefty Chuck!
Actually, I suppose the House Dems would probably not want to shift their team that far to the left by including Chuck.
One of the last House impeachment managers was Rep. James Rogan, who subsequently lost his seat to Schiff in what was said to be the most expensive House race of its time. The district has been Schiff's ever since.
Rogan landed on his feet with an appointment in the Bush administration and later an appointment by Gov. Schwarzenegger to an Orange County judgeship. He has written three books, including one about collecting memorabilia regarding famous politicians, sports and entertainment figures. His chambers is covered with autographed pictures of U.S. presidents, etc. Rogan and I were colleagues 30 years ago in the Pasadena office of the LA District Attorney.
William: "I think it will be more interesting than the Democratic Debate, but it won't have the drama and suspense of the Royal Family rift. The Democrats should have found some way of including Stormy Daniels in the impeachment."
Couldn't do it without including LLR-lefty Chuck's beloved Michael Avenatti and that isn't really a good go-to tactic right about now......
Nadler's had a sickly complexion for some time now.
"I'm not joking!"
As seen elsewhere in the interwebz:
NANCY, YOU HAVEN’T DEVALUED TRUMP. YOU’VE DEVALUED IMPEACHMENT
Indeed.
Nadler: “The Senate is on trial as well as the President."
Nancy is addled and wandering. Paul Revere and the Raiders had a song "Kicks" about a girl who was addicted to drug use--and whenever she came down, she had to go up again. Now that song was popular nearly 50 years ago. But San Fran Nan could stand in for what the girl in that song would be like today.
Not that I'm saying that Nancy is a druggy---her drug of choice is political bull dust, and you inhale that often and long enough and you've got no more common sense than the average three year old.
Good grief,
https://mobile.twitter.com/julie_kelly2/status/1217473299770462209
When I get to the bottom I go back to the top of the slide
Where I stop and I turn and I go for a ride
Till I get to the bottom and I see you again
Look out
Helter skelter, helter skelter
Helter skelter
Look out, 'cause here she comes
MSNBC is defending the Constitution one day after defending Iranian mullahs.
Donald Trump can make his enemies say/do anything.
Chief Justice Roberts does fuckall and makes no decisions whatsoever after swearing in the Senators. Nothing. Nada.
That is the Rehnquist standard.
I recall a statement from Rehnquist to the effect that "I had nothing to do at the Clinton Impeachment trial and I performed my duties quite admirably"
Makes sense doesn't it? Impeachment is a political act, not a legal one.
Do others see this absurd impeachment as another version of the Mueller inquisition?
I understand why obsessed maniacs like Chuckles and Inga buy this nonsense, but how about ordinary, generally sane people?
Makes sense doesn't it? Impeachment is a political act, not a legal one.
Founded in Constitutional law, triggered by violations of the criminal code, and adjudicated via trial.
Nope, nothing "legal" about it.
I understand why obsessed maniacs like Chuckles and Inga buy this nonsense, but how about ordinary, generally sane people?
That's why I think nobody but the nuts will pay attention to a long trial with witnesses.
Pedantic criticism of my comment! What violations of the criminal code apply in this case? The "trial" is one in name only when you compare that proceeding (the details of which are decided by a political process) to an ordinary, everyday criminal trial. Thus the validity of Rehnquist's observation that he had nothing to do.
Francisco D,
I have asked my apolitical friends for their thoughts. None of them want to answer because they are apolitical. They think politics is terrible and that politicians are horrible humans. Most cannot understand the pursuit of office.
But underneath that they are further disgusted by the Democratics. They think Trump has done fine. Maybe better than most modern presidents but certainly no worse. They feel the optimism from the economy. They see the help wanted signs.
These are swing voters or more likely non-voters. And they are pissed. They have expressed support for a president after avoiding doing so throughout our respective relationships, but not uniformly so. Many continue to throw up their hands and curse the whole business.
My foreign friends and colleagues from Viet Nam, Laos, Eastern Europe, and South America are buying guns and ammo. To a man and woman they vow to be armed this time. They have nowhere else to retreat on this planet.
Browndog,
Perhaps that is true in theory. In practice, very little about this is legal. Prove me wrong by citing the statute Trump has allegedly violated.
BTW I have never known an attorney who had so much free time during the day. But you almost never hear from him at night. It's almost like he isn't an attorney but the night manager at some Arby's.
Yes and has anyone seen Ritmo and Chuck posting at the same time?
Looking at that American Bandstand clip, I'm struck by how many of the boys still had pretty short hair in 1966. They still look clean-cut. Was 1967, the Summer of Love and all that, the year when guys went hippie?
Browndog said...
Nadler: “The Senate is on trial as well as the President."
Isn't it the house that is on trial? Why refer an impeachment that you know will not succeed?
Blogger Birkel said...
Browndog,
Perhaps that is true in theory. In practice, very little about this is legal. Prove me wrong by citing the statute Trump has allegedly violated.
I agree.
This entire notion that impeachment is just another political endeavor like naming a post office is pushed by those that want impeachment to be whatever they want it to be, and swallowed whole by way too many people.
Looking at that American Bandstand clip, I'm struck by how many of the boys still had pretty short hair in 1966.
The demographic of the guys on American Bandstand was South Philly working class, not Hippie material.
@AZ Bob,
"Rogan and I were colleagues 30 years ago in the Pasadena office of the LA District Attorney."
Rogan was/is a good guy, and thank you for your service.
Off-topic, but in San Francisco, the idiots elected a bona fide communist, Chesa Boudin, child prodigy of the Weatherman, and he has fired all the professional prosecutors, and is hiring leftist defense attorneys in their stead.
25 years ago, they did the same thing, with Terrence Hallinan, who did the same thing, and was replaced by Kamala Harris.
This is how Democrats now roll.
Hungry for dat good strife, baby!
Pelosi is right about history, Trump will go down as the first president who was impeached and then re-elected. The cherry on top will be that Trump will be re-elected and this time will win with not only the electoral college vote but with the popular vote. And there is a better than even chance that the impeachment party will lose both houses of Congress and Pelosi will lose her Speakership.
As for this show trial, the Senate Republicans should require the trial be held using the federal rules of evidence. What say you Chuck?
I take your point, now, Browndog.
This impeachment is purely political. That is bad.
Impeachment as a constitutional safeguard is a legal matter. That is good.
So here's an interesting observation:
Remember waaaaay back when (2016/2017) when LLR-lefty Chuck pretended to be just the biggest SuperFan of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell?
Oh how LLR-lefty Chuck treated us to posting after posting telling us how dumb Trump was and how it should all be left to McConnell and crew and how those guys represented the "real republican" party that LLR-lefty Chuck was so very very proud to be a part of!
No praise was too great a praise for Mitch back then.
But then a funny thing happened on the way to impeachment: LLR-lefty Chuck let the cat out of the bag, giving away his true lefty nature and beliefs, and now that the democrats, including LLR-lefty Chuck heroine Nancy Pelosi, literally call Mitch McConnell a Russian asset and in the thrall of Putin, our LLR-lefty Chuck neglects to keep up appearances by coming to McConnell's defense!!!
LOL
Why, it's almost as if LLR-lefty Chuck forgot the game he was supposed to be playing here!
Trump. Delivers. So. Much. Winning.
I’d like to know how Klobuchar, Warren, and Sanders can vote to possibly remove their political rival from office. This is a clear conflict of interest, and I believe all three have already passed judgment of guilt before hearing any evidence or defense presented to the Senate.
And watch how the press flocks to them for commentary.
"Looking at that American Bandstand clip, I'm struck by how many of the boys still had pretty short hair in 1966."
Even rock stars didn't generally have super-long hair in '66, just kind of the shaggy Jim Morrison or Jagger look. Both grew their hair longer in the following years.
The boys wore their hair as long as their parents would allow. The were pushing it, and some were just a couple of missed haircuts away from the hippie look. Many of them probably went for it after they moved out on their own.
Indeed, in the future, the threat of impeachment may lose its power.
May? That ship has sailed, Professor.
Half of the Senate democrats have stated Trump should be impeached long ago, while tday they demand a "fair trial" and McConnell should recuse himself.
A point to consider is we need to streamline the treatment of impeachments going forward because this is now the way we do things.
If we are upset over an election outcome we can pout, hold our breaths and only vote for house members who guarantee they will impeach the incumbent president.
Once they gain the majority in the house they can vote on impeachment along party lines.It doesn't really matter what the charge is. It can be of substance or made up from whole cloth.
It then needs to be sat on for a month while "leverage over the Senate" is generated.
Then quickly dispatched by the Senate so we can get on with our lives and work on important things. I prefer Acquittal because that means the President is Acquitted FOREVER EleventyTHOUSAND
I call this Censure Plus.
The impeachment of Trump is going nowhere, but the Democrats have inflicted damage on Trump and the Republican Party by these proceedings and they are entitled to some payback.
The question now is to what extent and how McConnell and his allies are to be allowed to exact that punishment. If they turn the "trial" in the Senate into a trial of Joe Biden, their leading presidential candidate and former dear colleague (not to mention other Democrats who have been paid off through Burisma), that really is upping the ante, and there will be blood in the aisles.
So, how is this show going to be scripted and directed?
So many players, so many vital interests at stake!
The bargaining now going on in the back rooms must be something fierce!
Why lie about all this ? You can hate Trump but why lie?
Because if he doesn't lie, he'd have to come to grips with how wrong he is.
...
Althouse thinks it's a joke. Turley thinks it's a joke. Dershowitz thinks it's a joke. Not a Trump supporter in the bunch. You could put all three on the same talk show discussing the impeachment, and it would be an orgy of eyerolls.
Why? Because it's a joke, Chuck. A joke.
So some non-Republicans think that this impeachment is illegitimate. Non-Republican opponents of this impeachment who also possess preeminent legal credentials. True. I’d never deny it.
Now talk to the large handful of Trump Cult fuckheads here about the Republican PROPONENTS of impeachment, also possessed of preeminent legal credentials. The standard lie is that it is “The Left” that is out to get Trump because they never accepted the results of the 2016 election.
In the best of worlds, we’d get them together in the same television studio for two hours a night, and for a full week of those nighttime shows, to debate the merits of the case against Trump. Traditional (mostly) Democrats defending Trump, and traditional (until Trump) Republicans prosecuting Trump.
Taking the usual partisan sides and flipping them. Wouldn’t that be great? Two teams, each with a pairing of lawyers. Dershowitz and Turley on one side (opposing impeachment) and JW Verret, Paul Rosenzweig, Orin Kerr or George Conway as some possibles.
What makes Constitution legal?
discuss
good question,
https://www.theepochtimes.com/federal-judge-orders-justice-department-to-explain-why-awan-documents-are-being-kept-secret_3204055.html
@Browndog: Understand your point now re: "this impeachment" and agree. Democrats have made a mockery of a valid and serious Constitutional provision.
this is a power exercise, you could not speak ill of Obama or his associates like the mayor of sacramento, who was looting the AmeriCorps program, there was no ig at state for four years, they had a similar pretext with defense department,
Trump Cult fuckheads
THIS is why we shouldn't feed the trolls. This is how he sees everyone who posts on here that doesn't share his monomaniacal Trump hatred.
You are in a cult.
You are a fuck head.
Why?
Because you don't hate Trump with the same intensity as the banned commenter, because you refuse to see the logic in his pretzel-texts of cuckposting by the remnant or whatever faddish and transient webpublication by equally obtuse "thinkers" as Willy Kristol (hey sorry about old Gertrude by the way!) and That One Republican Who Might Agree in the feeble Senate or the overworked house, whichever.
You see, YOU are the fuck head for not understanding the deep wisdom of all that. YOU are cultists precisely because you are NOT obsessed with Trump. Okay? You see that right?
two minute hate is the flipside, like I say the questions of fisa abuse, of abuse of the 'whistleblower' process, of secret funds to provide assets like halper and mifsud, who have divided allegiances, the loss of billions of tax payer dollars in institutions like privat bank, all these are real issues left out of the equation,
Blogger Mike (MJB Wolf) said...
Trump Cult fuckheads
THIS is why we shouldn't feed the trolls. This is how he sees everyone who posts on here that doesn't share his monomaniacal Trump hatred.
...
Nonsense. I reserve the term “Trump Cult fuckheads” for the commenters on this blog’s comments pages who have obsessively denied that I am a Republican, or a lawyer. Who have claimed that I am paid by Soros. Who want to tell you that I am not a Republican Party voter right after I have said that I was.
These things go directly to the comment, by Bob, about non-Republicans opposing impeachment. With my point in substantive response being that there are also Republicans who favor impeachment. I’m one of them. But the discrete number (it’s no longer a small number, but I’d hate to tar all of the Althouse readership) of Trump Cult fuckheads here won’t let it go.
Post a Comment