Senate Impeachment Trial Thread.

[joaquinmiller]

Ken Starr. Now there was a Witch Hunter!

He solved the metaphysical question that bedeviled the 90's - how many Republicans can dance on the head of Bill Clinton's dick? All of them, as it turns out.

We should have known. A personal pecadillo was grist for his mill, when he set out to bag a President.

 

[joaquinmiller]

The Impeachment trial is so boring Trump tweeted about i
It's so boring that Trump broke his own Twitter record, defending himself thru tweets. Conveniently, tweets are immune to cross-examination.

Now you want to cross examine tweets? You aren't showing a lot of confidence in the case that was sent to the Senate!

Deliberately obtuse, of accidental? I didn't say I wanted to cross-examine tweets. I was pointing out Trump gets to say any bullshit he wants in his tweets, without fear of being questioned. Do you disagree?

Of course I disagree. Anyone on twitter can question him. You brought up cross examination in your post. Here, to refresh your memory:

Conveniently, tweets are immune to cross-examination.

I don't think that constitutes cross-examination, but feel free to display a definition, if you like.

Do you want to be able to cross examine Trump's tweets or not?

IT’S GOING TO TURN OUT THAT THIS WHOLE BOOK MANUSCRIPT THING WAS A SETUP BETWEEN TRUMP AND BOLTON, ISN’T IT?

I’ve never understood how wanting to do something that is entirely within the President’s power — ambassadors serve at his pleasure and can be fired for any reason or none — constitutes a high crime and misdemeanor, especially when it wasn’t done.

Uh-huh.

Trump signals he’d seek to block impeachment trial testimony from Bolton, others in exclusive interview

 

[Zorro!]

Now you want to cross examine tweets? You aren't showing a lot of confidence in the case that was sent to the Senate!

Deliberately obtuse, of accidental? I didn't say I wanted to cross-examine tweets. I was pointing out Trump gets to say any bullshit he wants in his tweets, without fear of being questioned. Do you disagree?

Of course I disagree. Anyone on twitter can question him. You brought up cross examination in your post. Here, to refresh your memory:

Conveniently, tweets are immune to cross-examination.

I don't think that constitutes cross-examination, but feel free to display a definition, if you like.

Do you want to be able to cross examine Trump's tweets or not?

IT’S GOING TO TURN OUT THAT THIS WHOLE BOOK MANUSCRIPT THING WAS A SETUP BETWEEN TRUMP AND BOLTON, ISN’T IT?

I’ve never understood how wanting to do something that is entirely within the President’s power — ambassadors serve at his pleasure and can be fired for any reason or none — constitutes a high crime and misdemeanor, especially when it wasn’t done.

Uh-huh.

Trump signals he’d seek to block impeachment trial testimony from Bolton, others in exclusive interview

Of course. He will not be the last President and he has to protect the Presidents ability to speak freely with advisers.

Democrats are sidelining the Federal Government that should be protecting us against the Coronavirus.

Quebec politician praises coronavirus for reducing carbon footprint in Wuhan.

Quebec politician and radio talk show host Luc Ferrandez has suggested that the coronavirus has had one “positive” outcome for the city of Wuhan, China—it’s reduced the carbon footprint.

On Saturday, he tweeted: “Wuhan. No automobile traffic. No air flights. The only city on the planet that will meet its GHG reduction targets. The way to this necessary degrowth will happen when all the debates have been in vain.”

Flashback to the Obama recession years, when Democrats like John Kerry and Claire McCaskill were uttering, as McCaskill did in 2011, that “the good news is, our [carbon] emissions are way down because of the recession. I mean, really, if you want to find a silver lining in the cloud, the number that we were looking for [with cap and trade legislation] … we are well, well [ahead of our goal]…because we have had such a real drop in manufacturing output.”

These people are out of their minds.

 

[easyt65]

Schiff claims Bolton's assertion he has 'evidence' mandates witnesses required.....
- This coming from the man who claimed for 2.5 years he had 'evidence' only to admit he lied
- This coming from the man who 'manufactured' the Whistle Blower scam & now says WBer is insignificant
- This coming form the man who attempted to present his own lies as evidence

The 'promise' of evidence has been heard over and over, only to find the Democrats have NONE.



"He Said - He Said":

"MULVANEY DENIES BOLTON ACCUSATIONS!…
BREAKING: Attorney for Acting WH Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney Releases Statement, Denies Bolton Claims"


"Bob Driscoll: “The latest story from the New York Time s, coordinated with a book launch, has more to do with publicity than the truth. John Bolton never informed Mick Mulvaney of any concerns surrounding Bolton’s purported August conversation with the President. Nor did Mr. Mulvaney ever have a conversation with the president or anyone else indicating that Ukrainian military aid was withheld in exchange for a Ukrainian investigation of Burisma, the Bidens, or the 2016 election. Furthermore, Mr. Mulvaney has no recollection of any conversation with Mr. Giuliani resembling that reportedly described in Mr. Bolton’s manuscript… It was Mr. Mulvaney’s practice to excuse himself from conservations between the President and his personal counsel to preserve any attorney-client privilege.”


Add in the fact, as already posted, that Dr. Hill and Ambassador Yavanovich bost testified already that 'EVERYONE' was concerned about Ukraine corruption, that 'Eliminating Ukraine Corruption was Trump Foreign Policy' from early on.

Hill's and Yavonovich's (Schiff's own 'witnesses') testimony already contradict what Bolton is claiming. Now you have Mulvaney, Hill, and Yavanovich countering Bolton's claims.

Bolton is looking more and more like a bitter, self-important, fired employee.


MULVANEY DENIES BOLTON ACCUSATIONS!... BREAKING: Attorney for Acting WH Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney Releases Statement, Denies Bolton Claims

 

[jc456]

Schiff claims Bolton's assertion he has 'evidence' mandates witnesses required.....
- This coming from the man who claimed for 2.5 years he had 'evidence' only to admit he lied
- This coming from the man who 'manufactured' the Whistle Blower scam & now says WBer is insignificant
- This coming form the man who attempted to present his own lies as evidence

The 'promise' of evidence has been heard over and over, only to find the Democrats have NONE.



"He Said - He Said":

"MULVANEY DENIES BOLTON ACCUSATIONS!…
BREAKING: Attorney for Acting WH Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney Releases Statement, Denies Bolton Claims"


"Bob Driscoll: “The latest story from the New York Time s, coordinated with a book launch, has more to do with publicity than the truth. John Bolton never informed Mick Mulvaney of any concerns surrounding Bolton’s purported August conversation with the President. Nor did Mr. Mulvaney ever have a conversation with the president or anyone else indicating that Ukrainian military aid was withheld in exchange for a Ukrainian investigation of Burisma, the Bidens, or the 2016 election. Furthermore, Mr. Mulvaney has no recollection of any conversation with Mr. Giuliani resembling that reportedly described in Mr. Bolton’s manuscript… It was Mr. Mulvaney’s practice to excuse himself from conservations between the President and his personal counsel to preserve any attorney-client privilege.”


Add in the fact, as already posted, that Dr. Hill and Ambassador Yavanovich bost testified already that 'EVERYONE' was concerned about Ukraine corruption, that 'Eliminating Ukraine Corruption was Trump Foreign Policy' from early on.

Hill's and Yavonovich's (Schiff's own 'witnesses') testimony already contradict what Bolton is claiming. Now you have Mulvaney, Hill, and Yavanovich countering Bolton's claims.

Bolton is looking more and more like a bitter, self-important, fired employee.


MULVANEY DENIES BOLTON ACCUSATIONS!... BREAKING: Attorney for Acting WH Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney Releases Statement, Denies Bolton Claims

NY Times admits they made it up.

 

[joaquinmiller]

Schiff kept talking about 17 witnesses. But there were 18.

Should we see transcripts of the 18th witness?

So That's Why Schiff Won't Release the Transcript of the 18th Witness

It's the one transcript that talks about Adam Schiff and the whistleblower. Now, everyone knows by now that Adam Schiff was not truthful about his contacts with the whistleblower. What they don't know and what's in that transcript is that the whistleblower wasn't truthful about his contacts with Adam Schiff.

The transcript is of the ICIG, and it's classified. The President can de-classify it. Until he does, Ratcliffe can say anything he wants about it - true or not.

That doesn't refute that there are 18 witnesses, and not 17 as Schiff kept repeating.

Might it refute your linked-story as to why the transcript hasn't been released?

Sure, but why to repeatedly lie there are 17 transcripts when there are 18?

I would guess it's because only 17 transcripts were included in the House Report. OE says it was a 'briefing'(intel), rather than witness testimony. I don't know that technically, but OE is reliable. At any rate, unless it's classified, Ratcliffe is free to show it to us. If it is classified, we won't know if Ratcliffe is lying about it or not.

 

[easyt65]

Uh-huh. Trump signals he’d seek to block impeachment trial testimony from Bolton, others in exclusive interview

So what? Again, Trump claiming the same 'Executive Privilege' Barry did during Fast and Furious is nothing new.

As I posted earlier, The process, as we have seen for years, is Congress asking for information / witnesses, the Executive Branch saying 'No', and then it be taken up in the courts. It's part of a checks and balances / Due Process system. Democrats, however, want to deny the President his Due Process by claiming his use of the courts is 'Obstruction of Justice', which is ludicrous.

Even the Judicial Branch has agreed that this is abuse of power by Congress in attempting to deny Trump his Due Process rights.

Try again.

 

[Zorro!]

Schiff claims Bolton's assertion he has 'evidence' mandates witnesses required.....
- This coming from the man who claimed for 2.5 years he had 'evidence' only to admit he lied
- This coming from the man who 'manufactured' the Whistle Blower scam & now says WBer is insignificant
- This coming form the man who attempted to present his own lies as evidence

The 'promise' of evidence has been heard over and over, only to find the Democrats have NONE.



"He Said - He Said":

"MULVANEY DENIES BOLTON ACCUSATIONS!…
BREAKING: Attorney for Acting WH Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney Releases Statement, Denies Bolton Claims"


"Bob Driscoll: “The latest story from the New York Time s, coordinated with a book launch, has more to do with publicity than the truth. John Bolton never informed Mick Mulvaney of any concerns surrounding Bolton’s purported August conversation with the President. Nor did Mr. Mulvaney ever have a conversation with the president or anyone else indicating that Ukrainian military aid was withheld in exchange for a Ukrainian investigation of Burisma, the Bidens, or the 2016 election. Furthermore, Mr. Mulvaney has no recollection of any conversation with Mr. Giuliani resembling that reportedly described in Mr. Bolton’s manuscript… It was Mr. Mulvaney’s practice to excuse himself from conservations between the President and his personal counsel to preserve any attorney-client privilege.”


Add in the fact, as already posted, that Dr. Hill and Ambassador Yavanovich bost testified already that 'EVERYONE' was concerned about Ukraine corruption, that 'Eliminating Ukraine Corruption was Trump Foreign Policy' from early on.

Hill's and Yavonovich's (Schiff's own 'witnesses') testimony already contradict what Bolton is claiming. Now you have Mulvaney, Hill, and Yavanovich countering Bolton's claims.

Bolton is looking more and more like a bitter, self-important, fired employee.


MULVANEY DENIES BOLTON ACCUSATIONS!... BREAKING: Attorney for Acting WH Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney Releases Statement, Denies Bolton Claims

Even if they are true, it's not a crime for Trump to think about holding up aid, that he didn't hold up. These people are beyond deranged.

But, as another probably rightly pointed out, this is about damaging Senators that can be damaged for not voting for witnesses. Think of who is NOT on that list:

• Romney (but he is so jealous of Trump he can't see straight and he could probably survive pissing off his base.)
• Murkowski - Alaska is a Red State.
• Susan Collins, they could probably hurt her, she might want to vote for witnesses.
• Lamar Alexander - TN is a red state.

So, they might get Mittens and Susan.

 

[joaquinmiller]

You gotta admire Starr's chutzpah - he rushed his Porn Report out 60 days before an election, and now, in somnolescent lament, he frets over politicized impeachment.

 

[Nostra]

SCHIFF (tape): We have not spoken directly with the whistleblower. We would like to.

PHILBIN: It turned out that that statement was not truthful. Around October 2nd or 3rd, it was exposed that the Manager Schiff’s staff at least had spoken with the whistleblower before the whistleblower filed the complaint and potentially had given some guidance, some sort to the whistleblower. After that point it became critical to shut down any inquiry into the whistleblower. During the House hearings, of course Manager Schiff was in charge. He was chairing the hearings. That creates a real problem from a due process perspective, from a search for truth perspective, because he was an interested fact witness at that point. He had a reason, since he had been caught out saying something that wasn’t truthful about that contact, he had a reason to not want that inquiry. It was he who ensured that there wasn’t any inquiry into that.

Now this is relevant here I think because as you’ve heard from my colleagues, a lot of what we’ve heard over the past 23 hours, over the past three days, has been from Chairman Schiff. He has been telling you things like what’s in President Trump’s head, what’s in President Zelensky’s head. It’s all his interpretation of the facts and the evidence trying to pull inferences out of things. There’s another statement that Chairman Schiff made that I think we have on video.

CHUCK TODD (tape): But you admit all you have right now is a circumstantial case.

SCHIFF: Actually, no Chuck. I can tell you that the case is more than that and I can’t go into the particulars, but there is more than circumstantial evidence now. Again, I think —

TODD: So you have seen evidence of collusion.

SCHIFF: I don’t want to go into specifics, but I will say that there is evidence that is not circumstantial and is very much worthy of investigation.

PHILBIN: That was in March of 2017 when Chairman Schiff was ranking member of HPSCI was telling the public, the American public, that he had more than circumstantial evidence through his position on H that President Trump’s campaign had colluded with Russia. Of course, the Mueller Report, as Mr. Sekulow pointed out, after $32 million and over 500 search warrants or roughly 500 search warrants, determined that there was no collusion. That wasn’t true. We wanted to point these things out simply for this reason. Chairman Schiff has made so much of the House’s case about the credibility of interpretations that the House Managers want to place on not hard evidence but on inferences. They want to tell you what President Trump thought. They want to tell you don’t believe what Zelensky said. We can tell you what Zelensky actually thought. Don’t believe what the other Ukrainians actually said about not being pressured. We can tell you what they actually thought. That it is very relevant to know whether the assessments of evidence he’s presented in the past are accurate. We would submit that they have not been and that that is relevant for your consideration.

There is a reason Pencil Neck didn't want to go into "specifics"......he had none.

 

[Zorro!]

SCHIFF (tape): We have not spoken directly with the whistleblower. We would like to.

PHILBIN: It turned out that that statement was not truthful. Around October 2nd or 3rd, it was exposed that the Manager Schiff’s staff at least had spoken with the whistleblower before the whistleblower filed the complaint and potentially had given some guidance, some sort to the whistleblower. After that point it became critical to shut down any inquiry into the whistleblower. During the House hearings, of course Manager Schiff was in charge. He was chairing the hearings. That creates a real problem from a due process perspective, from a search for truth perspective, because he was an interested fact witness at that point. He had a reason, since he had been caught out saying something that wasn’t truthful about that contact, he had a reason to not want that inquiry. It was he who ensured that there wasn’t any inquiry into that.

Now this is relevant here I think because as you’ve heard from my colleagues, a lot of what we’ve heard over the past 23 hours, over the past three days, has been from Chairman Schiff. He has been telling you things like what’s in President Trump’s head, what’s in President Zelensky’s head. It’s all his interpretation of the facts and the evidence trying to pull inferences out of things. There’s another statement that Chairman Schiff made that I think we have on video.

CHUCK TODD (tape): But you admit all you have right now is a circumstantial case.

SCHIFF: Actually, no Chuck. I can tell you that the case is more than that and I can’t go into the particulars, but there is more than circumstantial evidence now. Again, I think —

TODD: So you have seen evidence of collusion.

SCHIFF: I don’t want to go into specifics, but I will say that there is evidence that is not circumstantial and is very much worthy of investigation.

PHILBIN: That was in March of 2017 when Chairman Schiff was ranking member of HPSCI was telling the public, the American public, that he had more than circumstantial evidence through his position on H that President Trump’s campaign had colluded with Russia. Of course, the Mueller Report, as Mr. Sekulow pointed out, after $32 million and over 500 search warrants or roughly 500 search warrants, determined that there was no collusion. That wasn’t true. We wanted to point these things out simply for this reason. Chairman Schiff has made so much of the House’s case about the credibility of interpretations that the House Managers want to place on not hard evidence but on inferences. They want to tell you what President Trump thought. They want to tell you don’t believe what Zelensky said. We can tell you what Zelensky actually thought. Don’t believe what the other Ukrainians actually said about not being pressured. We can tell you what they actually thought. That it is very relevant to know whether the assessments of evidence he’s presented in the past are accurate. We would submit that they have not been and that that is relevant for your consideration.

There is a reason Pencil Neck didn't want to go into "specifics"......he had none.

Target Trump Forever.

“We will be down to the elemental after impeachment: if you can’t beat Trump legislatively, judicially, or electorally, and if you can’t impeach, convict him and remove him, perhaps you can simply physically destroy him.”​

As we’ve seen with Brexit, too, the political class is unable to accept electoral defeat, but must scheme and connive and bully to try to get its way despite the expressed wishes of the public. That alone makes it unfit to rule.

God Bless our Secret Service as they protect our Beloved President Trump.

 

[The Original Tree]

You gotta admire Starr's chutzpah - he rushed his Porn Report out 60 days before an election, and now, in somnolescent lament, he frets over politicized impeachment.

US Code violations were cited in every attempted impeachment since our founding but This Current One. It's an Invalid Impeachment, and in fact, The Democrats had to violate The Law, Due Process, and House Rules to even get it this far.

 

[joaquinmiller]

Uh-huh. Trump signals he’d seek to block impeachment trial testimony from Bolton, others in exclusive interview

So what? Again, Trump claiming the same 'Executive Privilege' Barry did during Fast and Furious is nothing new.

As I posted earlier, The process, as we have seen for years, is Congress asking for information / witnesses, the Executive Branch saying 'No', and then it be taken up in the courts. It's part of a checks and balances / Due Process system. Democrats, however, want to deny the President his Due Process by claiming his use of the courts is 'Obstruction of Justice', which is ludicrous.

Even the Judicial Branch has agreed that this is abuse of power by Congress in attempting to deny Trump his Due Process rights.

Try again.

As you'll note, I was responding to a crackpot conspiracy theory about the Bolton transcript being a "setup" between Trump and Bolton. Logically, he wouldn't block testimony of his own "setup".

Link to 'Even the Judicial Branch has agreed that this is abuse of power by Congress in attempting to deny Trump his Due Process rights'.

 

[Zorro!]

You gotta admire Starr's chutzpah - he rushed his Porn Report out 60 days before an election, and now, in somnolescent lament, he frets over politicized impeachment.

US Code violations were cited in every attempted impeachment since our founding but This Current One. It's an Invalid Impeachment, and in fact, The Democrats had to violate The Law, Due Process, and House Rules to even get it this far.

It's part of the Hoax that started as soon as Trump was declared the winner. This is their 2020 election strategy and it looks like a loser. These people are out of their minds.

Meanwhile they distract the Federal Government from protecting us from the Coronavirus:

UGH: 5 million residents left Wuhan before lockdown, mayor reveals, as 1,000 new confirmed cases expected in city.

 

[Nostra]

You gotta admire Starr's chutzpah - he rushed his Porn Report out 60 days before an election, and now, in somnolescent lament, he frets over politicized impeachment.

Starr had been investigating for 4 years, so how the hell to you get that he "rushed"? And 1998 was a mid term election, not a Presidential election year.

Oops......and Oops.............

 

[Zorro!]

Uh-huh. Trump signals he’d seek to block impeachment trial testimony from Bolton, others in exclusive interview

So what? Again, Trump claiming the same 'Executive Privilege' Barry did during Fast and Furious is nothing new.

As I posted earlier, The process, as we have seen for years, is Congress asking for information / witnesses, the Executive Branch saying 'No', and then it be taken up in the courts. It's part of a checks and balances / Due Process system. Democrats, however, want to deny the President his Due Process by claiming his use of the courts is 'Obstruction of Justice', which is ludicrous.

Even the Judicial Branch has agreed that this is abuse of power by Congress in attempting to deny Trump his Due Process rights.

Try again.

As you'll note, I was responding to a crackpot conspiracy theory about the Bolton transcript being a "setup" between Trump and Bolton. Logically, he wouldn't block testimony of his own "setup".

Link to 'Even the Judicial Branch has agreed that this is abuse of power by Congress in attempting to deny Trump his Due Process rights'.

Have you figure out whether you want to cross examine tweets or not? You are kinda all over the map.

Meanwhile as much as you want this farce to be the focus of the world, our Beloved President has more pressing matters than this silliness:

TRUMP HAS THIS DANGER ON HIS RADAR: Trump offers China ‘any help’ as virus toll grows, markets reel. But he needs to be thinking about measures in the United States, not just measures in China.

Confusion and lost time: how testing woes slowed China’s coronavirus response.

CDC considers expanded screening for coronavirus, spread risk still low. Well, I hope that’s true.

Chinese State Media Spread A False Image Of A Hospital For Coronavirus Patients In Wuhan: The photo actually shows an apartment building. The inability to trust information coming out of the Chinese government is a problem.

J&J scientific officer ‘pretty confident’ they can create coronavirus vaccine as outbreak widens. Well, get cracking, boys and girls. The big qualification: “But he said it could take up to a year to bring it to market.” If necessary, Trump will slice right through that red tape to protect The American People.

 

[joaquinmiller]

You gotta admire Starr's chutzpah - he rushed his Porn Report out 60 days before an election, and now, in somnolescent lament, he frets over politicized impeachment.

Starr had been investigating for 4 years, so how the hell to you get that he "rushed"? And 1998 was a mid term election, not a Presidential election year.

Oops......and Oops.............

Do you know why everyone worried, claimed, or predicted impeachment would backfire on the Democrats?

 

[Katniss]

I feel like I'm watching a washed up professor at college drone on and on about nothing of importance just so he can hear himself talk. I can't imagine this is going over very well with a faction of voters who can only absorb short soundbites.

 

[Nostra]

You gotta admire Starr's chutzpah - he rushed his Porn Report out 60 days before an election, and now, in somnolescent lament, he frets over politicized impeachment.

Starr had been investigating for 4 years, so how the hell to you get that he "rushed"? And 1998 was a mid term election, not a Presidential election year.

Oops......and Oops.............

Do you know why everyone worried, claimed, or predicted impeachment would backfire on the Democrats?

Absolutely. Dimwingers have no case.

Next?

 

[Shawnee_b]

thegatewaypundit.com/2020/01/gop-senator-john-barrasso-says-he-saw-blood-drain-from-schiffs-face-when-trumps-defense-team-played-video-of-fake-call-and-transcript/

Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) says he saw blood drain from Adam Schiff’s face when Trump’s lawyers confronted him about his fake call and transcript.

Deputy White House Counsel Mike Purpura opened the White House defense of President Donald Trump with video of Adam Schiff’s fake call and transcript he read during the House impeachment proceedings.

Mike Purpura played the video immediately after taking the podium on Saturday.

And there Schiff was lying his face off for the whole world to see.

Schiff completely fabricated transcript of Trump’s phone call to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky during his opening statement in the House hearings.

On Saturday, Trump’s lawyers confronted the serial liar in person, making the blood drain from his face.