Senate Begins Trump Impeachment Trial

U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Roberts swore in the members of the Senate today as the impeachment trial of Donald Trump begins.

With great pomp and circumstance, the articles of impeachment were brought in by a team of 7 Democrats, and prior to reading them Adam Schiff called out:

“Hear ye, hear ye, hear ye,” the sergeant-at-arms declared, using language from another era to admonish the senators not to speak while Representative Adam B. Schiff, the lead impeachment manager, prepared to read the articles aloud. “All persons are commanded to keep silent upon pain of imprisonment.”

Also today, a GAO report was released finding that Donald Trump broke the law in withholding aid to the Ukraine.

< Guiliani Time: A Roast, a Strikeout or Just Toast? | Thursday Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Pretty clear it's not just DJT on trial (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jan 16, 2020 at 01:41:38 PM EST
    It's the Senate.  Really our system of government.

    Well Schiff was absolutely brilliant. (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by desertswine on Tue Jan 21, 2020 at 01:10:44 PM EST
    Cippilone (sp) and Sekulow are absolute weasels.

    He really was (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 21, 2020 at 01:48:10 PM EST
    It's like watching a badly written movie.  The are like cartoon villains

    geez why isn't Schifff (none / 0) (#86)
    by desertswine on Tue Jan 21, 2020 at 01:59:01 PM EST
    running for prez?  He's got my vote.

    Sekulow was horrible. (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jan 21, 2020 at 06:28:24 PM EST
    What in the world do Eric Holder, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page have to do with the Ukraine shakedown scandal? They're no more relevant to the present discussion than William Casey, Oliver North and Fawn Hall.

    MSNBC is broadcasting Trump's temper tantrum. (none / 0) (#2)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 16, 2020 at 02:11:54 PM EST
    "This is a hoax. The Mueller report was a bomb. That phone call was perfect. we have the greatest economy in the history of our country. Blah, blah, blah. Yadda yadda yadda."

    The media ought to just cut him off. Enough is enough.

    Incredible to hear him say (none / 0) (#4)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jan 16, 2020 at 02:48:13 PM EST
    "Lieutenant Colonel". Like he was saying Nancy Boy.

    Good bit from Editorial Board (none / 0) (#3)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jan 16, 2020 at 02:44:26 PM EST

    The drip-drip-drip of incriminating Trump evidence is torture for Senate Republicans

    One thing floating around seems hopeful.  Several times today you hear a version of "remember, many Senators will be hearing this evidence for the first time".

    Putting aside if you believe that just saying it seems notable.  Things like that don't generally just get said on cable.  Reporters are hearing this from, probably Republican, senators watching this unfold with serious fear and loathing and looking for a exit.


    He said to no one in particular (none / 0) (#5)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jan 16, 2020 at 03:30:24 PM EST
    Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) warned Senate Republicans in an interview in The Hill that a vote to impeach President Trump would be a career-ending decision.

    Said Paul: "When it comes to whether or not you're going to impeach a president of your own party, particularly over a policy difference or whether or not he has lack of decorum or whatever, I think that's something that a lot of voters will not excuse."

    And not (none / 0) (#8)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jan 16, 2020 at 05:22:50 PM EST
    voting to impeach him is going to be a career ending decision for many. This could possibly take down David Perdue and Tom Tillis. It could take down senators in any state where Trump is not that popular.

    What a wonderful world it would be (none / 0) (#10)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 07:47:05 AM EST
    If some of them look at those two options and just decide to do the right thing.

    Yeah, I know

    The thing is what these republicans like Mitch etc are doing makes no sense unless there are very important things we don't know.

    They act for all the world like they believe we are at the beginning of a 1000 year Trumpreich with Don Jr and the princess taking the reins when Trump croaks and get encased in wax and displayed in the capitol rotunda.  That they never expect any consequence for what they are doing.

    One thing you hear is whatever they are hiding is so bad it's even worse than any penalty in the short term.  I'm open to this one.  Since it is beginning to look like the entire Trump Republican establishment is up to their azz in this.

    The rosy scenario version is they are planning to let the evidence roll and blame John Roberts for being "forced" to remove him.

    Or make up your own ending.

    I just think there are big surprises coming one way or another.

    Either way, this is history.  We are living history.  Which is ultimately written by the winner.


    Ken Starr (none / 0) (#11)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 08:51:03 AM EST
    And Dershowitz on the team.

    Strap in.


    Rudy (none / 0) (#12)
    by FlJoe on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 09:30:23 AM EST
    must be heartbroken.

    I would like to think even Rudy realizes ... (none / 0) (#24)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 01:26:39 PM EST
    ... that he's now likely incurred significant legal and professional liability for having facilitated this international fiasco and its resultant political sh*tshow.

    It appears such thinking (none / 0) (#25)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 01:30:01 PM EST
    LOL! If that's the case, then ... (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 01:39:43 PM EST
    CaptHowdy: "It appears such thinking is misguided[.]"

    ... it's probably time for Rudy's kids to take away Dad's car keys and henceforth confine him to an upstairs attic apartment.



    Another "perfect call". (none / 0) (#13)
    by KeysDan on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 09:31:09 AM EST
    Ken Starr fired as president of Baylor University amid sexual assault cover-up scandal, and " I kept my underwear on during massage at Epstein's mansion" .

    I actually think (none / 0) (#15)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 09:56:43 AM EST
    Both Starr and Dersh are good news for us.

    Check yer baggage at the door.  If you can.


    To be clear (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 09:59:48 AM EST
    I think we got two trials

    The one before the senate, who freaking knows, and the one before the public and I think they help us there.

    And you know what
    The public is going to be watching.

    Our country is about to be consumed by this.


    This is so completely (none / 0) (#19)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 01:06:29 PM EST
    on brand for Trump to hire those two.
    Ken Starr:
    BJ's are bad.
    Sex slavery is good.

    ... particularly in the Beltway press corps, have consistently proved themselves far too willing to serve as Ken Starr's bellhops. They regularly defer to his self-anointed moral standing as Bill Clinton's inquisitor, while otherwise rationalizing or ignoring the man's ethical prevarications as Baylor University's president and chancellor.

    One of the lawyers (none / 0) (#21)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 01:10:51 PM EST
    from lawfare said that hiring Ken Starr was nothing short of a disaster because there are gonna be tapes of him arguing the complete opposite of what he is saying now. For years they have been Ken Starr's bellhops but we'll see if they continue.

    Ken Starr (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by KeysDan on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 01:46:42 PM EST
    used his legal defense skills and, seemingly, his political connections in the state-federal case in 2008 to obtain that sweetheart plea deal from Acosta for his client Jeffrey. Epstein.  

    His holy roller facade melted in full view when, as president of Baylor University, he spearheaded the cover-up of the football player rape scandal during the entire period of his administration.  He got the boot.

    Ken Gormley's (then dean of law, now president of Duquesne University) book on the Clinton investigation describes the very questionable tactics of the Starr investigation, and, in my opinion, the unconscionable mis-treatment of Monica Lewinsky.  He should have been disbarred for his misplaced prosecutorial  fervor.


    Not only that (none / 0) (#22)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 01:18:38 PM EST
    Starr is just a singularly annoying person.

    I can't even stand hearing criticize Trump.  Which he has .  Sort of.

    No,  IMO we could not ask for a better face for this than Star and Dershowitz


    Plus (none / 0) (#23)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 01:22:53 PM EST
    THe two of them along with the rest of the high priced stable of lawyers means they don't plan to argue no big deal Ukraine got the aid nothing to see here.

    They understand Trump is in real legal peril and needs real lawyers.  Noticeably absent is the House screamers.

    And of course Rudy.


    Trump's legal team (none / 0) (#37)
    by KeysDan on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 03:21:31 PM EST
    Is reduced to the "so what" defense.  Sure he did it, so what.  Just felonies, not high crimes and misdemeanors.

    Apparently not (none / 0) (#50)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 19, 2020 at 07:35:52 AM EST
    According to their brief


    In a six-page filing formally responding to the impeachment charges, President Trump's lawyers rejected the case against him as illegitimate and described the effort to remove him as dangerous.

    WASHINGTON -- President Trump's legal defense team strenuously denied on Saturday that he had committed impeachable acts, denouncing the charges against him as a "brazen and unlawful" attempt to cost him re-election as House Democrats laid out in meticulous detail their case that he should be removed from office.

    The president's lawyers did not deny any of the core facts underlying Democrats' charges, conceding what considerable evidence and testimony in the House has shown: that he withheld $391 million in aid and a White House meeting from Ukraine and asked the country's president to investigate former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and his son, Hunter Biden.

    But they said Mr. Trump broke no laws and was acting entirely appropriately and within his powers when he did so, echoing his repeated protestations of his own innocence. They argued that he was not seeking political advantage, but working to root out corruption in Ukraine.

    "President Trump categorically and unequivocally denies each and every allegation in both articles of impeachment," wrote Pat A. Cipollone, the White House counsel, and Jay Sekulow, Mr. Trump's personal lawyer.

    Sounds kind of like the House defense after all


    ... doing the same damned thing, which don't appear to have irreparably harmed his standing in the Beltway media cocktail circuit.

    let's (none / 0) (#30)
    by FlJoe on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 01:54:31 PM EST
    not forget tRumps 'Florida fixer" Pam Bondi, receiver of illegal campaign funds

    Who also is a pal of Lev Picture of Pam Bondi and Lev Parnas emerges after she joins Trump impeachment defense


    29-30% of the country (none / 0) (#31)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 02:00:02 PM EST
    Is gonna love this.

    Others not so much I'm thinkin

    Just the stuff in this thread sounds like a damn crime family.

    Which of course it is but till now there have been minders and guardrails.  We are about to find out if there's still a "middle"



    "this is definitely an 'are you fucking kidding me?' kinda day."



    When (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by FlJoe on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 04:38:16 PM EST
    you think about it, this "dream team" has an astounding amount of baggage, much of it relatively fresh.

    There is no apparent legal strategy behind this, and politically it's insane.

    Starr in particular is going to have to litigate against the Starr of 20 years ago if the Democrats and the press force him to.


    And (none / 0) (#71)
    by FlJoe on Mon Jan 20, 2020 at 05:22:11 AM EST
    look who steps up to the plate arguing against himself
    "It certainly doesn't have to be a crime if you have somebody who completely corrupts the office of president and who abuses trust and who poses great danger to our liberty," Dershowitz told Larry King, Aug 1988.

    Here's (none / 0) (#78)
    by FlJoe on Mon Jan 20, 2020 at 04:18:37 PM EST
    a thought experiment for anyone who claims that impeachment needs a crime to be legitimate.

    What if an early 18th century President, say Andrew Jackson takes power an turns the WH into a bordello/casino/opium den, none of those being illegal at the time. Are you telling me that's not impeachable?


    Oops! I'm sorry, Jeralyn. (none / 0) (#40)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 04:12:20 PM EST
    I failed to self-screen Ms. Lewinsky's quote for profanity before posting. Please feel free to delete.

    And, to (none / 0) (#36)
    by KeysDan on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 03:15:51 PM EST
    round it out, we have Robert Ray added to the team.  Ray followed Starr as Independent Counsel, and in 2006 hit the news with his arrest for stalking his former girlfriend.

    Robert Ray? Oh, for fcks sake!!! (none / 0) (#38)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 03:41:27 PM EST
    They might just as well use the Friday night document dump to further announce the addition of Fox News psychonaut Jeanine Pirro.



    Too Bad That We Have to Wait (none / 0) (#6)
    by RickyJim on Thu Jan 16, 2020 at 03:39:18 PM EST
    at least to March for the financial records to become available.

    The GAO Report (none / 0) (#7)
    by KeysDan on Thu Jan 16, 2020 at 04:18:13 PM EST
    that found the Trump Administration in violation of the Impoundment Control Act of 1974 by withholding  aid to Ukraine, goes to the heart of Impeachment Article I (Abuse of Power) heightening   Trump's action as both corrupt and illegal.

    Moreover, the GAO Report was able to address the funding freeze from the Pentagon but not from those funds channeled through the State Department.

    The GAO Report was unable to complete its review since the State Department and OMB did not provide information requested related to the hold on funding to Ukraine.  As indicated in the Report, "reluctance to provide fulsome responses have Constitutional significance." The Report is, therefore, of supplemental support to Impeachment Article II (Obstruction of Congress).

    Tell me again (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by ragebot on Thu Jan 16, 2020 at 08:03:10 PM EST
    what use the GOA is.  What makes you think anyone will pay any more attention to this GOA finding than to these two GOA findings.

    Government Accounting Office Says Obama Circumvented The LAW With His Gutting Of The Welfare Work Requirement

    GAO Finds Payments To Insurers Under Affordable Care Act Are Illegal


    Don't worry, relax, (5.00 / 3) (#14)
    by KeysDan on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 09:38:56 AM EST
    chill.  Putin's got this.

    Geez Rage (5.00 / 3) (#17)
    by jondee on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 11:08:09 AM EST
    a site that exposes "The Party Of Genuine Evil And The Destruction Of America."

    You located some folks who can show those pansy-ass liberals at World Net Daily a thing or two about real conservatism.

    Lock and Load Christian soldiers.


    Yeah, who cares about the rule of law ... (5.00 / 3) (#18)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 12:41:17 PM EST
    ... and the now-documentable fact that the president is actively undermining both NATO and our own country's national security by doing the Kremlin's bidding in Ukraine, so long as the GOP gets to "own the libs."

    What a thoroughly pathetic and wretched bunch the Republicans have turned out to be. Because honestly, nothing so attests to the moral relativism of these repulsive reprobates than their own convenient and regular invocations of a self-perceived right to political expediency and ethical exception, while simultaneously denouncing everyone else's opinions and impugning their patriotism.



    You and Trump (5.00 / 6) (#32)
    by Towanda on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 02:00:32 PM EST
    type it as GOA -- and you did it twice.

    Being in the cult of Trump is not beneficial for you brain.


    This trial will be nothing but a farce (none / 0) (#27)
    by Chuck0 on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 01:35:11 PM EST
    and an exercise in futility. It is forgone conclusion that the GOP Senate will exonerate Cheeto jesus. Then he will spend the next 10 months crowing about his "perfect call" and how is "completely innocent." It will be stomach churning and nauseating. I will more than likely have to stop watching any news broadcasts once again.

    I agree 100% (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Sun Jan 19, 2020 at 01:17:34 PM EST
    Nancy's handiwork is something to behold.

    She's awesome (5.00 / 1) (#65)
    by Yman on Sun Jan 19, 2020 at 06:09:34 PM EST
    Triggers the snowflake wingers almost as much as HC.  Wonder why you guys are so threatened by smart, capable women?

    Not threatened at all (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Sun Jan 19, 2020 at 09:52:21 PM EST
    Her campaign for witnesses just highlights how weak the case is. If it were rock solid the witness testimony in the House should suffice.

    A parade of Swetnicks the world doesn't need.


    You guys are hilarious (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by Yman on Mon Jan 20, 2020 at 07:05:44 AM EST
    First, after Trump prevents the release of documents/testimony of witnesses, you whine about witnesses who don't have direct knowledge.  Then, when confronted with witnesses who DO have direct knowledge of his corruption, you claim there's no need to hear from them and try to slur them with the name of sexu@l abuse victims.

    Pathetic, yes, but completely typical.

    If you weren't afraid of the truth, you'd want to hear from them, but you already know how corrupt your orange, buffoon is, soooo ....


    If they had the TRUTH (none / 0) (#75)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Mon Jan 20, 2020 at 12:11:17 PM EST
    The House could have gone to court to require compliance. That the House chose not to do that speaks volumes.

    "Volumes" - heh (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by Yman on Tue Jan 21, 2020 at 04:38:20 PM EST
    You mean it shows they couldn't wait months/years for the courts to force your peach buffoon to do what he should have done to begin with?

    That's almost as funny as a Trumper using the word "TRUTH" - in all caps, no less.  As if they have the slightest clue what that means.


    Lord, two of you (5.00 / 1) (#106)
    by MKS on Thu Jan 23, 2020 at 09:40:34 PM EST
    saying the same thing.

    Two observations.  

    First, we now know what the GOP bubble is saying.

    Second, because two of you come out of the woodwork with drive-by scripts, the Right must feel really threatened.  The House Managers are scoring hits...  


    Polls are moving (none / 0) (#107)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jan 23, 2020 at 09:49:28 PM EST
    to majority supporting impeachment and removal. I think we're past Richard Nixon numbers at this point. The GOP can save what little dignity they have left and remove Trump or they can become collaborators. Either way they are going to be looking at a bloodbath in November.

    Their (1.00 / 2) (#95)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Jan 23, 2020 at 04:48:59 PM EST
    Subpoenas were invalid as well, which is why they pulled back the Kuperman subpoena as soon as he filed to fight it. They never followed proper procedure to vote for a impeachment. Basically, they are just letters. It was all for show, and now to try and get the Senate to do the investigation they were legally responsible for conducting

    Trial subpoenas (5.00 / 1) (#104)
    by MKS on Thu Jan 23, 2020 at 09:35:14 PM EST
    are issued in almost every case.

    And almost all trials have new evidence not previously uncovered during Discovery.  I once had to attend a deposition during the lunch hour during trial.

    You just regurgitate GOP talking points.  Coming to a Left Blog and spew out talking points without much support is not cool.  Just trolling.  


    No support (5.00 / 1) (#105)
    by MKS on Thu Jan 23, 2020 at 09:36:40 PM EST
    for your drive-by "points" is just trolling.

    Kupperman subpoena (1.00 / 2) (#110)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Jan 24, 2020 at 07:18:58 PM EST
    Once he actually challenged it in Court, the Dem's withdrew the subpoena. They knew the subpoena was not enforceable as they never opened a case for impeachment as prescribed.
    Pointing out facts is not trolling, impeachment cases are investigated in the House, and then the House Managers present their findings to the jury, the Senate.
    This House just really screwed up, they brought articles of impeachment to the Senate with no evidence.

    What planet are you living on? (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jan 24, 2020 at 07:30:51 PM EST
    TrevorBolder: "Once he actually challenged it in Court, the Dem's withdrew the subpoena. They knew the subpoena was not enforceable as they never opened a case for impeachment as prescribed. Pointing out facts is not trolling, impeachment cases are investigated in the House, and then the House Managers present their findings to the jury, the Senate. This House just really screwed up, they brought articles of impeachment to the Senate with no evidence."

    Opinions are not facts. And while you are certainly entitled to the former, you are not entitled to misrepresent them as the latter.



    You overwhelmed (none / 0) (#114)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Jan 24, 2020 at 07:59:22 PM EST
    Me with your barrage of facts.

    Sorry, but your opinion is not a fact


    Says the guy offering ... (5.00 / 1) (#118)
    by Yman on Sun Jan 26, 2020 at 08:58:50 AM EST
    ... the uneducated, wingnut opinion as fact.

    It (none / 0) (#76)
    by FlJoe on Mon Jan 20, 2020 at 02:56:57 PM EST
    speaks encyclopedias that tRump is afraid of letting the most knowledgeable witnesses testify.

    Do you really think if Bolton or Mulvaney could exonerate him they would have been allowed to testify already.

    What are you afraid of?


    Are you not (none / 0) (#77)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Jan 20, 2020 at 03:07:59 PM EST
    aware that the house has been going to court over everything w/r/t Trump withholding evidence? He's in violation of so many laws it's crazy. Once he's out of office he's going to be spending whatever money he has left on lawyers defending him for literally years. There's a reason why he moved his residence to Florida. He knows the feds are going to be able to seize every one of his assets when he is out of office. You guys and your Russian talking points are something else. Either you are unable to look up facts for yourself or you're just brainwashed by Russian intelligence services.

    Donald Trump has spent the last 3 years ... (none / 0) (#79)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jan 20, 2020 at 04:20:44 PM EST
    ... undermining our diplomatic corps, our military command structure, our intelligence agencies, our national security and our country's rule of law.  His ignorant base of white-wing supporters, of which you are clearly a charter member, love it.

    Trump is a malignant and ignorant narcissist, a spoiled trust fund baby who was born on third base and thinks he hit a triple. This has been true long since before he ever became a media celebrity. It's long been true before he ever became president. It has been true throughout his presidency. And it will still be true long after his presidency is over.

    You don't care if Trump has no plan for actual governance. You just want him to break things and hurt people, because you somehow equate his lack of moral character and ethical principles with "owning the libs." And the odds are better than even that you'll continue to cheer on that blow-dried blond clown, until the very day his fascist goons cast their Neanderthal eyes upon your own skull as their next likely and convenient target while fondling their baseball bats and ball-peen hammers.

    What a wretched and pathetic figure you cut, Abdul.


    We are going (none / 0) (#61)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Jan 19, 2020 at 01:57:14 PM EST
    to love the GOP going on the record with their full embrace of the Kremlin.

    I really think (none / 0) (#33)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 02:02:23 PM EST
    There are far worse outcomes than acquittal making Trump the face of the Republican Party 10 months from an election.

    I honestly think this may be the root of some republican intransigence.  They are f'ed either way so why not go out with a middle finger.


    While (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by FlJoe on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 02:10:21 PM EST
    I have my doubts about the intelligence and attention span of the America, I do think the fact that this whole thing is playing out like a mob movie is likely to help the masses to follow the plot, so to speak.

    Don't even try to get me (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 02:52:30 PM EST
    Out of my house next week.  I just stocked up.  Got firewood delivery.

    Two components to the (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by KeysDan on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 04:16:50 PM EST
    movie, the cult and the mob.  The cultists are the Trump supporters, the mob is Trump, as boss, and the rest of the players in his orbit, the mob.

    The mob even uses the language, straight out of a 1930s mob movie. For example, just today, Lindsey called Lev a "rat".  Trump's perfect call referencing Ambassador Yankovich: "she's going to go through some things."  Lev's notes on directions: "get rid of Lanny Davis (nicely)." Carol Perex, Director General of the Foreign Services, to Ambassador Yankovich at one in the morning: get on the next plane out. You are in danger. Bolton, I don't want any part of this "drug deal."  A "B" movie, too far fetched.



    Meanwhile, over in the Senate, ... (none / 0) (#43)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jan 17, 2020 at 07:01:06 PM EST
    ... we can't spell "crazy" without the AZ. After being widely criticized for callously slurring the professionalism of CNN's Manu Raju, who is actually one of the most well-respected members of the Washington press corps, Sen. Martha McSally (R-AZ) was given an opportunity by Fox News' Laura Ingraham to walk back her insult. But not only did she refuse to do so, she instead doubled down.

    It's probably not a good look for a GOP senator from an increasingly purple state who's already trailing her likely Democratic opponent next November by a fair margin in the polls. But then, anyone who thinks Republicans on Capitol Hill aren't feeling the stress of impeachment's moment, guess again.

    By now, most GOPers are likely aware that their codependent relationship with Donald Trump has evolved into a political high-wire act which, as new revelations of his administration's wrongdoing and chicanery continue to unfold in public, holds an ever-increasing potential for a spectacularly messy pratfall.

    Thank you, Nancy Pelosi.

    The interesting thing about that (none / 0) (#44)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jan 18, 2020 at 06:53:56 AM EST
    is that Ingrham really nailed her

    Probably because she thinks she is showing off for the cameras and plans to vote for witnesses

    She never answered the question.


    Marlow Stern is concerned (none / 0) (#45)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jan 18, 2020 at 04:34:49 PM EST
    Bill Maher Warns of `Civil War' If Democrats Don't Embrace Trump Supporters

    That's a bit of a misrepresentation of what he said but he did in fact say something like that.  His point was, I think, what he said.  We can hate Trump but we can't, meaning it's not really smart or productive, to hate his supporters.  And I agree.  I totally do.  I understand as well as anyone and better than most that many Trump supporters are not evil and cutting them off will just leave them to fester.
    I have really tried to be open and direct and willing to talk.

    Yesterday I had lunch with a group of them.  All except the guy who invited me were Trump supporters.  One even wore red a Trump 2020 hat.  I have know most of these guys for most of my life.  Politics was not once mentioned at lunch and the conversation was pleasant retelling of old tale tales.

    So it was like half fun and half twilight zone episode.
    These are old friends but they are like pod people.  I truly don't hate them but I don't know what to do with them.  Or to do for them.   It does strain small talk when the first thing you want to say is I hate everything you believe and you are enabling evil incarnate but hey, how about that local sports team.

    I honestly worry about these people.  Not really with fear, and not really not, but more like worry for them

    I honestly don't know what some of them will do.  The idea Trump could be removed is simply not part of their physical universe.  But you know what, he could.  If by some miracle that happens there is going to be some surprising and unexpected stuff happening I think.  Not in a good way.

    I see very few folks (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by ragebot on Sat Jan 18, 2020 at 10:32:05 PM EST
    who realistically think there will be twenty something Republican Senators who will vote to convict Trump.  Not to mention Jones and Manchin could well join the Republican Senators in voting to not convict.

    Even the talking heads at MSNBC seem to be claiming at best the Democrats can hope for will be winning a small number of Senate seats.  Even if Jones votes to not convict Trump it is hard to see how his seat does not switch from D to R.  But voting for conviction may help Senators like Collins win while being meaningless in the bigger picture.

    I am also seeing a lot of speculation that there will be no witnesses called.  There seems to be some agreement that for every witness the Democrats call the Republicans can call one.  Combined with no one really knowing what Bolton will say (I seem to remember something about a good lawyer never asking a question they don't know the answer to) and a likely a long running court challenge about not just can he testify, but what specific questions he will answer it may well wind up with the Senate not voting for additional witnesses.  

    Only thing I am really sure of is there are not twenty Republican Senators who will vote to convict Trump.  But I have to wonder how knowing conviction is a lost cause will alter what the Democrats will do during the trial.

    As an aside the economy seems to be not only setting records but unlikely to stop.  Especially since the Census will create a lot of jobs with fairly good pay.

    I am not expecting a miracle like my friend CaptHowdy.


    I do not think conviction is a lost cause (none / 0) (#47)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 19, 2020 at 07:00:25 AM EST
    A long shot not a lost one.  

    And my comment was not about people who are

    realistically think (ing) there will be twenty something Republican Senators who will vote to convict Trump.

    The people I'm talking about have not given it that much thought.  As I said, it's not part of their universe.  It's just a bunch of silly fake news and it will end the way every other Trump violation/outrage has ended which is being supplanted by another outrage.

    And there will be witnesses I think.


    About witness (none / 0) (#49)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 19, 2020 at 07:19:19 AM EST
    I would resist crowing about Mitch winning the first vote on preventing witnesses.  This will be Mitches fig leaf and face saving ploy sentient republicans allow him.

    They will vote to start without committing to witnesses and to "present the case"

    Then they will vote to hear witnesses.


    Mitch (none / 0) (#51)
    by FlJoe on Sun Jan 19, 2020 at 08:43:28 AM EST
    won nothing.  Pelosi never thought he would fold this early.

    Her delay allowed the witness question to fester and it has come to dominate the news coverage. We got
    to watch the Republican Senate caucus squirm or scurry away. Mitch and Lindsey have declared their intention to whitewash the whole thing.

    Also the flow of new information has been damming  and sometimes titillating, insuring the continued attention of the media and the public.

    The Republicans are in a even smaller box then before, blocking witnesses now is even more politically perilous now.


    She did not (none / 0) (#52)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 19, 2020 at 08:59:50 AM EST
    But prepare for the high fives and football spiking from certain quarters when the process begins without committing to witnesses.  If that happens and I think it's likely.

    It's stupid.  Enough senators have now said enough to know it's a fig leaf for Mitch and they will eventually vote to allow more evidence.    But the short term high fiving from the morons is the total point.


    FWIW (none / 0) (#53)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 19, 2020 at 09:05:06 AM EST
    Just now on FOX Karl grudgingly admitted there will likely be witnesses.  But you had to listen closely.

    That was all the Sunday talk I could take.  The gab fests seem split.  The first half hour of IMPEACHMENT and the second on the other most important question of the day.  The single issue related to the presidential primary that our nimble and crafty candidates have made sure breaks through the news fog to be discussed on every cable show.

    The real burning question of the day.  Who said what to who between Warren and Sanders.

    We should all be so proud.


    I (none / 0) (#70)
    by FlJoe on Mon Jan 20, 2020 at 05:06:42 AM EST
    think their end zone dance has already happened and got swallowed up by Parnas dumps.

    The witness/no witness drumbeat continues unabated. Even if Mitch succeeds, the "what are you trying to hide?" question will loom larger than ever.


    Robert Costa just made a good point (none / 0) (#73)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 20, 2020 at 08:29:28 AM EST
    At this point the question is not so much will there be witnesses as will they testify in open hearings or closed.

    Had not thought much about that but closed sounds like a Mitch thing.


    These (none / 0) (#80)
    by FlJoe on Tue Jan 21, 2020 at 05:44:27 AM EST
    numbers are worthy of some celebration
    About half of Americans say the Senate should vote to convict President Donald Trump and remove him from office in the upcoming impeachment trial (51%), according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS, while 45% say the Senate should vote against conviction and removal.

    Nearly seven in 10 (69%) say that upcoming trial should feature testimony from new witnesses

    Even a plurality of Republicans want witnesses, in your face Mitch!

    Oh and on the facts

     The new poll also finds majorities of Americans view each of the charges on which Trump will face trial as true: 58% say Trump abused the power of the presidency to obtain an improper personal political benefit and 57% say it is true that he obstructed the House of Representatives in its impeachment inquiry.
    Kudos to Schiff and eternal thanks to the brave witnesses.

    7 in 10 (none / 0) (#81)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 21, 2020 at 07:41:31 AM EST
    Can't agree the sky is blue

    Political Wire (none / 0) (#66)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 19, 2020 at 06:20:35 PM EST
    Murkowski Wants to Hear Case Before Witnesses

    January 19, 2020 at 8:20 am EST By Taegan Goddard 89 Comments

    Sen. Lisa Murkowski told the AP she's comfortable waiting to decide if more information is needed as part of the Senate's impeachment trial until after hearing arguments from House managers and attorneys for President Trump and questions from members.

    Murkowski said she wants to make sure there's a process that allows senators to "really hear the case" and ask questions "before we make that determination as to, what more do we need. I don't know what more we need until I've been given the base case."

    Murkowski as well (none / 0) (#96)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Jan 23, 2020 at 04:53:17 PM EST
    When asked if she had concerns about an executive privilege fight tying up the impeachment trial in the courts, Sen. Lisa Murkowski questioned why the House didn't go to court itself.

    "The House made a decision that they didn't want to slow things down by having to go through the courts. And yet now they're basically saying you guys gotta go through the courts. We didn't, but we need you to," Murkowski said.


    What you don't understand (none / 0) (#97)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jan 23, 2020 at 05:54:02 PM EST
    Although Lisa probably does, we don't really expect the senate to do that.

    What we really want is for country to watch them whine about not "hearing anything new" after voting eleven time to not hear anything new.

    This really could not be playing much better for us.  It will be even better when the presidents henchmen "present their case"

    I talk to people like you all the time.  So busy with your little end zone boogie in your bubble you don't even realize you are losing.


    Murkowski (none / 0) (#98)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Jan 23, 2020 at 06:00:22 PM EST
    And all Republican Senators are not pleased the House neglected its responsibilities and now want the Senate to do their job. Being called complicit won't help either.  
    Losing??  Just ask any Dem candidate on the campaign trail..how often do they get asked about impeachment....Never
    And it is not going to turn out like you hope

    Pfft (none / 0) (#99)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jan 23, 2020 at 06:06:37 PM EST
    "Dem candidates". The Serious Ones?

    FTR Bloomberg is running ads focused on impeachment in 26 states.  He's talking about it quite a lot.

    This is the sort of thing your sort should be worried about.

    Mike Bloomberg is assembling a team of fundraising experts to recruit wealthy donors - but not to take their money
    PUBLISHED FRI, JAN 17 20205:39 PM ESTUPDATED FRI, JAN 17 20206:52 PM EST


    Bloomberg (none / 0) (#101)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Jan 23, 2020 at 06:21:49 PM EST
    Will have his issues with the base of the Dem Party. (Stop & Frisk anyone)
    He will also have issues in those "26 states" as he not only wants to take away their guns, but their large sodas.
    The epitome of Big Government knows better, so sit back and we will take of you.

    Bloomberg has lots of money, I will give you that.


    You don't (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jan 23, 2020 at 09:11:06 PM EST
    have a clue. Do you realize that the GOP lost the house in 2018 mainly due to their embrace of the murderous gun culture? Our candidates ran on common sense gun laws against people screeching exactly what you're saying and your candidates lost. The gun people can only get away with lying for so long and after years of screeching somebody was going to take their guns and it never happening nobody believes them anymore. See Aesop about crying and a wolf.

    And the whole big gubmint neo-confederate yell? Yeah, our governor here in GA has put every woman of child bearing age under "big government". Making toddlers drink out of toilets, ripping families apart, apologizing for murderous dictators etc. that the GOP continues to do? Nobody believes your "big government" crap anymore either.

    But Putin troll you know we're onto you guys this time. You are not going to operate under the radar like you did in 2014 and 2016.

    And you are howling like a hit dog.


    Ps (none / 0) (#100)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jan 23, 2020 at 06:08:22 PM EST
    You don't have a f'ing clue what I "hope"

    In case anyone resists clicking the link above (none / 0) (#102)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jan 23, 2020 at 06:37:13 PM EST
    Out of fear of reading something positive about Bloomberg.

    Julie Wood, a spokeswoman for the campaign, confirmed in a statement that they've been asking Democratic power players to share Bloomberg's plans for his run for president with their networks, and to encourage their allies to donate to various Democratic causes.

    "As you've previously reported, the Bloomberg campaign is recruiting a broad group of supporters who are interested in defeating Donald Trump," Wood said. "We're asking these supporters to vote for Mike, donate to Democrats up and down the ballot and reach out to their networks to share Mike's record of accomplishment and plans for getting things done."

    This has (none / 0) (#55)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Jan 19, 2020 at 12:22:20 PM EST
    been my experience too. Pod people is the best description of them. They truly think that Trump is the most popular president ever, everything is the best ever. They have no idea that 60% of the country detests Trump and will walk over cut glass to get him out of office.

    Whether he's removed by the senate or loses the election there is going to be massive fallout among his supporters. I don't know what that is going to be though. I'm really tired of hearing how I have to coddle these jokers. They are adults not children but apparently people like Mahrer think we need to treat them like children or even worse terrorists that we can't cross because they might mass murder people.


    More the latter I think with Maher (none / 0) (#56)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 19, 2020 at 12:32:21 PM EST
    And I'm jus sayin

    He did warn of civil war (none / 0) (#57)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 19, 2020 at 12:34:21 PM EST
    And know what, he understands that segment of the population.  As do I.

    I'm worried.  Laugh all you want.


    I just convinced my (none / 0) (#58)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 19, 2020 at 12:37:02 PM EST
    New even more liberal bleeding heart than me neighbor to get a gun.  Something that took some convincing

    Again.  I live here.  I'm jus sayin.


    I'm not laughing (none / 0) (#59)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Jan 19, 2020 at 01:11:56 PM EST
    I see them on Facebook. People I went to high school with. Family members. Yes, they would have no problem mass murdering people. They are sick and messed up. Brainwashed by propaganda.

    A FTR (none / 0) (#48)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 19, 2020 at 07:09:58 AM EST
    That comment did not say I was expecting a miracle.  And by framing it that way I thought that was obvious.

    One thing I know, this election will not be decided by the stock market


    Lukovich (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by leap on Sun Jan 19, 2020 at 12:11:55 PM EST
    What he said (none / 0) (#62)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 19, 2020 at 04:32:15 PM EST

    Democratic Senator `Fine' if Hunter Biden Testifies

    January 19, 2020 at 3:03 pm EST By Taegan Goddard 50 Comments

    Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) told CNN it would be "fine" if Senate Republicans requested Hunter Biden as a witness in the impeachment trial against President Trump in exchange for House Democrats' requested witnesses.

    Said Brown: "I think you bring in -- We take the position that we want to hear from the witnesses. I don't know what Hunter Biden has to do with the phone call the President made."

    He added: "The point is we need witnesses, we need to know who they are with the right to call witnesses, additional witnesses later. But I don't understand how you come to the American public, make the case that this is a real trial, if there are no witnesses and there is no new evidence."

    I have been (none / 0) (#63)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Jan 19, 2020 at 05:15:16 PM EST
    saying the same thing. Joe Biden should say yeah, I'll testify. I don't know anything about the phone call but I don't mind showing up. The defense is they are a bunch of jagoffs. My reply is Hillary testified 11 hours in front of bunch of jagoff conspiracy theorists. What is wrong with Biden that he can't do 1/10 of what Hillary did?

    If that's what it take to get witnesses (none / 0) (#64)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 19, 2020 at 05:21:11 PM EST
    Subpoena them both.

    Yeah (none / 0) (#67)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Jan 19, 2020 at 07:36:02 PM EST
    and if the GOP starts really going off track we can start calling the victims from Baylor and the Epstein victims to testify regarding Ken Starr and Dershowitz. I mean if you're going to off the wall go all the way. I bet they would certainly be willing to cull Hunter and Joe off that list the possibility of those showing up.

    Irrelevant testimony (none / 0) (#69)
    by KeysDan on Sun Jan 19, 2020 at 09:54:48 PM EST
    in exchange for fact witness testimony may be a devil's bargain--- especially if the fact witness is allowed to claim some privilege for key, if not every other question.

    And, with a Republican controlled senate, the irrelevancy could readily be  made to outdistance the relevancy with the Biden's being subjects of impeachment rather than Trump.  

    In a fair fight,  it would be a reasonable bargain to achieve witnesses such as Bolton, Mulvaney, Pence, and Pompeo as well as Lev and others down the information chain.  But, these are Repunlicans we are afflicted with for whom their is no bottom.  

    I would not be surprised too, if the Biden's would seek to have any subpoenas quashed for irrelevancy to the impeachment charges.  

    No need to give credence to falsehood, better, in my view, to let the Republicans proceed with what will be seen as a Soviet-style sham, acquit and then run the trial.  And then Republicans can suffer the fate of the Soviet Union.

    More like calling a bluff (none / 0) (#83)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 21, 2020 at 09:00:28 AM EST
    I very much doubt they (51) have any interest in having a Biden under oath.

    They was never much much chance that would happen.  But why allow it to be used as an obstructionist threat.


    I don't think Mitch (none / 0) (#74)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 20, 2020 at 09:50:26 AM EST
    Will get away with 12 days.

    I strikes me (none / 0) (#82)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 21, 2020 at 08:53:55 AM EST
    The way Mitch has tried to handle this is the Barr model with Mueller.

    He has, pretty successfully, convinced much of the country this is a foregone conclusion.  I don't think it is.   But I was saying how Trump supporters don't think removal is even a remote possibility.

    So what happens if things start getting dicey?  Which it will when we get additional evidence.  We will get additional evidence.  What seems likely is Trump supporters are likely to lose their minds.  If they had been ever made to understand the seriousness of the situation they might have been eased harmlessly into it.

    I think that is not the plan.  I think they literally expect, and want, the insanity level to jump so high so fast some may literally be scared into falling in line.

    Yeah, it's a crazy risky thing.  But it's all they have.

    I think Mitch is thinking if he can't win he will make losing very costly.  

    That is an interesting take. (none / 0) (#88)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jan 21, 2020 at 06:08:59 PM EST
    Gas lighting is a hallmark of the GOP and it would be typical that Mitch would try something like that. However unless there is more they would still have to come up with 20 votes to remove him. Obviously they are never going to talk him into resigning.  

    The bottom would have to drop ... (none / 0) (#90)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jan 21, 2020 at 06:59:57 PM EST
    ... in public opinion polling for the GOP to be stampeded at this point. But hey, the public opinion meter on impeachment moved from 37% to 50% with the whistleblower revelations on Ukraine. So it's not out of the realm of possibility that a few more credible allegations could push the public past the breaking point.

    What many Republicans fail to realize is that thanks to Trump's betrayals and their own stupidity in demanding the identity of the CIA whistleblower (who in fact was outed by some GOPers), they've likely incurred the undying enmity of the professionals who staff both the USIC and the NSA. They now need to worry about a bombshell leak from some pi$$ed off intelligence analyst being dropped in the media on the heels of a Senate acquittal. That could make for a very ugly November.



    They have several worries I think (none / 0) (#91)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 21, 2020 at 07:33:45 PM EST
    Nancy has said subpoenaing Bolton is a possibility.  What if they acquit Trump and then Nancy gets him under oath.

    Or what if Rudy get indicted.  Or on and on.

    I don't think this is going well for republicans so far and it has large potential to go even worse.


    Geez, Pat Cippolone is just full of it. (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jan 21, 2020 at 07:45:03 PM EST
    "If the law is against you, argue the facts. If the law and the facts are against you, pound the table and yell like hell."
    - Carl Sandburg, author and poet (1878-1967)

    Rhetorically, he's pounding the table and yelling like hell.


    You know it is (none / 0) (#93)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jan 22, 2020 at 08:44:36 PM EST
    going to get worse. That is something I would put money on and I'm not a gambler. There is so much stuff being hidden that something could be leaked everyday until the election.

    Trump bragged at Davos (none / 0) (#94)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jan 23, 2020 at 09:45:34 AM EST
    That they can't impeach him because "they don't have the materials.  WE have the materials"

    Such as, let's say, ... (none / 0) (#108)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jan 24, 2020 at 01:20:16 PM EST
    ... an audio recording of President Trump ordering Rudy Giuliani's henchmen Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman to "get rid of" U.S. Ambassador Marie Yovanovich? ABC News is reporting its existence.

    Really (none / 0) (#109)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jan 24, 2020 at 04:30:41 PM EST
    The only thing worse might be an audio recording of him saying he likes to just grab women by the pu$$y.  And he can totally just do that anytime he wants  because he's just so awsum.

    You are really (none / 0) (#111)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Jan 24, 2020 at 07:22:43 PM EST
    Going to walk down this path....once again

    Stormy Daniels



    All had weeks and weeks of lavish media coverage and Democrat attaboys

    And...2 of the 3 are in jail, which is where Parnas and his pal will also be


    You best remember this, dude. (5.00 / 1) (#113)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jan 24, 2020 at 07:48:25 PM EST
    "Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish."
    - Euripides (484-406 B.C.), Greek tragedian and dramatist, ("The Bacchae," c. 407 B.C.)

    Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman weren't palling around with the libs when this recording was made. They were in the company of your hero, Donald Trump. given his repeated denials that he ever met and knew Rudy's two goons, the recording exposes him as a liar. Let me rephrase that - it exposes him as a liar once again, because he's been a liar and cheat for his entire life.

    Why in the world you would find that to be such an admirable quality in a political leader, the Good Lord only knows. But for sure, your stubborn residency within your very own fact-free parallel universe is a really unflattering and silly look. Not only does reality bite, it tends to chew up and spit out the ignorant.

    Ciao, pagliaccio.


    Parnas (1.00 / 1) (#115)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Jan 24, 2020 at 08:04:29 PM EST
    Why in the world you would find that to be such an admirable quality in a political leader

    Keep making stuff up that makes you smile, but just remember that you are in your own little fantasy world.

    Cohen wasn't palling around with libs either,

    Parnas and Fruman sound like Avenetti, and there is a good chance they will end up in a cell next to him. (Actually, Avenetti is now in the cell formerly assigned to Jefferey Epstein...fun fact,,)

    I just wouldn't get worked up over anything those 2 say


    Nobody (none / 0) (#116)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Jan 24, 2020 at 08:42:20 PM EST
    is getting "worked up" as you say about what they say. This is Donald that said it not them. And they are backing up the information that they are saying with text messages, recordings, emails and other evidence. Remember how many campaign staff from Trump's campaign are in jail right now?

    Uhhhhmmmm (none / 0) (#117)
    by Yman on Sat Jan 25, 2020 at 09:40:34 PM EST
    Avennati isn't in jail because of anything to do with Trump.  Stormy isn't in jail st all.  Cohen IS in jail BECAUSE he followed Trump's instructions to commit crimes (can you say "Individual One"?).  Not to mention all the others in Trump's inner circle are in jail or facing sentencing (Stone, Manafort, Flynn, etc.).  Can't wait until the orange buffoon can actually be charged with a crime.

    Tick, tock ...