Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, November 12, 2019

Joyce White Vance: Trump has, per usual, thrown out a barrage of defenses, hoping something will stick. So far nothing has. Here are the key defenses he's tried and those he'll likely move on to next, and why they all fail.

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Trump's defenses are doomed to fail because he is guilty. Not saying he won't get off. Just that he's guilty as hell.

#1 | Posted by Zed at 2019-11-12 11:26 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Obviously the GOP Senate has a tough decision ahead of them.

Should they be cowards or patriots?

I don't think they're worried about Trump as much as they're worried about what's going to happen to them come re-election time.

There's an infinite number of Americans who sick and tired of being sick and tired of Trump. These are the people we used to call the silent majority.

There's no guaranteed way to predict the reaction of the public, no matter which way they go.

#2 | Posted by Twinpac at 2019-11-12 11:51 AM | Reply

#2 And there are more people who are sick and tired of the left spending all their time trying to unseat an elected President because they know they can't come up with (another) candidate that the American public wants.

#3 | Posted by fishpaw at 2019-11-12 12:04 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

FISHPAW

Could I borrow your crystal ball? . . . Mine's in the shop.

#4 | Posted by Twinpac at 2019-11-12 12:15 PM | Reply

GAL

It seems that Trump's latest defense is going to be determining his "state of mind" during that phone call.

It's a Hail Mary but it's all he's got left.

#5 | Posted by Twinpac at 2019-11-12 12:21 PM | Reply

The defenses fail, but that doesn't mean the malapportioned Republican Senate won't disingenuously rely upon said failed defenses to acquit the criminal occupant of the White House.

#6 | Posted by JOE at 2019-11-12 12:31 PM | Reply

FISHPAW
Could I borrow your crystal ball? . . . Mine's in the shop.

#4 | POSTED BY TWINPAC AT 2019-11-12 12:15 PM | FLAG:

Based on all your failed predictions I can see why it is in the shop.

#7 | Posted by fishpaw at 2019-11-12 12:34 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

The latest i heard was 'yes, there was quid pro quo, but his intent was to serve the nation, not serve himself.'

#8 | Posted by schifferbrains at 2019-11-12 12:35 PM | Reply

#3 | POSTED BY FISHPAW

Lol... that was actually a very good post to demonstrate the point of this thread.

You don't even TRY to counter the points made in the article by defending the actions of the conservatives in the White House (Trump and his sycophants). Probably because, as I have pointed out before, EVERYONE agrees that conservative politicians are corrupt scum, even you.

So, you resort to impugning the motives of the liberals who are investigating his actions and trying to reveal the truth to the general public. That is called an "ad hominem" attack. And it is a favorite logical fallacy of people who know they are losing arguments, but don't want to admit it.

If Trump had actually followed the law and the constitution, we would not be in this situation. But, if he were the type of person to follow the law and the constitution, then conservatives would not have wanted him as their representative anyways (for conservatives it is a feature, not a bug).

#9 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2019-11-12 12:43 PM | Reply

Trump is toast. The Republicans are trying to figure how to keep their phony-baloney jobs for as long as they can. Once the base gets fatigue from trying to defend the un-defensible, they'll turn against Trump. That's what spineless politicians do. They're sick of Trump.

#10 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2019-11-12 12:50 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

Just watch the hearings, ignore all media as they will use clips. The hearings will be what we need to know.

#11 | Posted by Petrous at 2019-11-12 01:13 PM | Reply

#3 | POSTED BY FISHPAW AT 2019-11-12 12:04 PM | FLAG:

Too bad your argument is full of holes. Such as there are PLENTY on the right who support this impeachment inquiry, and if it's found Trump abused his office for personal gain, there will be plenty on the right supporting his removal.

He's a ---- stain on U.S. history and that's not just an opinion of the left.

#12 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-11-12 01:17 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1


Just watch the hearings, ignore all media as they will use clips.

#11 | Posted by Petrous at 2019

You do understand that what you're watching instead of clips is also the media, right?

#13 | Posted by Zed at 2019-11-12 01:48 PM | Reply

I dont see the House Impeachment broadcast as 'the media' but you do?

#14 | Posted by Petrous at 2019-11-12 01:52 PM | Reply

I dont see the House Impeachment broadcast as 'the media' but you do?

#14 | Posted by Petrous at 2019

What I'm most interested in is whether you'll accept what you see over a House Impeachment broadcast as being valid.

#15 | Posted by Zed at 2019-11-12 01:55 PM | Reply

Hard question?

#16 | Posted by Zed at 2019-11-12 01:57 PM | Reply

A hard question, obviously.

#17 | Posted by Zed at 2019-11-12 02:00 PM | Reply

The FBI does not (with the single exception of Hillary's email) announce investigations.

The announcement of an investigation could taint the jury pool.

It can also unfairly destroy the reputation of an innocent person should nothing come of the investigation.

The fact that Trump wanted it publicly announced is also indicative of a corrupt intent, because doing so would hurt the possibility of securing a conviction in a court of law.

This is simply not the way one proceeds if they think there are legitimate corrupt acts that should be investigated and prosecuted.

Everything points to a sham investigation whose outcome is irrelevant because the announcement of the investigation to hurt his political opponent is the end goal.

#18 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-11-12 02:07 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Why would listening to testimony in the House be a problem.

I've been on juries. This is the whole point of the hearings, right? Now we hear the evidence to support impeachment articles.

#19 | Posted by Petrous at 2019-11-12 02:17 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

What I'm most interested in is whether you'll accept what you see over a House Impeachment broadcast as being valid.

#15 | POSTED BY ZED AT 2019-11-12 01:55 PM | FLAG:

LOL, this is exactly what you said about the Mueller report before it came out and then when it didn't come out the way you wanted Mueller was a bum and he needed to testify. Then that would be the end all but that bombed, and then it was Cohen.....and John Dean.....and..........................

#20 | Posted by fishpaw at 2019-11-12 02:34 PM | Reply

So, you resort to impugning the motives of the liberals who are investigating his actions and trying to reveal the truth to the general public. That is called an "ad hominem" attack. And it is a favorite logical fallacy of people who know they are losing arguments, but don't want to admit it.
If Trump had actually followed the law and the constitution, we would not be in this situation. But, if he were the type of person to follow the law and the constitution, then conservatives would not have wanted him as their representative anyways (for conservatives it is a feature, not a bug).

#9 | POSTED BY GTBRITISHSKULL AT 2019-11-12 12:43 PM | FLAG:

Reveal the truth? So why did the Dems vote to have an open investigation as long as they can veto Republican witnesses and questions. That is not following the law, that is not following the constitution as you are barking for. So save us your everyday faux outrage about conservatives and how Dems are the model politicians. When the Durham report comes out we will see how wrong you are again.

#21 | Posted by fishpaw at 2019-11-12 02:43 PM | Reply

When the Durham report comes out we will see how wrong you are again.

#21 | Posted by fishpaw at 2019-11-12 02:43 PM | Reply | Flag

Somehow I don't think anyone has to be shaking in their boots.

#22 | Posted by Zed at 2019-11-12 02:53 PM | Reply

#20 | Posted by fishpaw

PETROUS said he'd listen to the evidence and I respect him for that.

What are you going to do?

#23 | Posted by Zed at 2019-11-12 02:54 PM | Reply

how Dems are the model politicians.

#21 | Posted by fishpaw at 2019-11-12 02:43 PM |

We have plenty of faults; many more than I'd like.

But I don't think any of are going to bend a knee to Neegan this year. It's bad enough you do it.

#24 | Posted by Zed at 2019-11-12 02:57 PM | Reply

how Dems are the model politicians.

#21 | Posted by fishpaw at 2019-11-12 02:43 PM |

We have plenty of faults; many more than I'd like.

But I don't think any of us are going to bend a knee to Neegan this year. It's bad enough you do it.

#25 | Posted by Zed at 2019-11-12 02:58 PM | Reply

So why did the Dems vote to have an open investigation as long as they can veto Republican witnesses and questions.

#21 | POSTED BY FISHPAW

Because Republicans would do stupid crap like try to subpoena Hunter Biden, or the whistleblower.

Also, as a conservative you no idea what is in the law or the constitution, but there is no law saying how impeachment inquiries are supposed to run. And the constitution ALSO says almost NOTHING about how they are supposed to be run. It is left up to the discretion of Congress (specifically the House).
But, these are being run very similarly to how CONSERVATIVES ran the Clinton impeachment, as well as the Benghazi hearings. If you think the precedent that conservatives set was improper and should be overturned, then say that. But if you are going to claim that they don't follow the law, or the constitution (or that they are being "unfair"), you need to present SOME SORT of evidence or argument that supports that assertion. Instead of just regurgitating right-wing talking points that you previously guzzled down.

When the Durham report comes out we will see how wrong you are again.

Hahhahahahaha. The supposed "impropriety" that Durham is supposed to be investigating is that the Obama unfairly "targeted" the Trump campaign for investigations. It is a BS "nothingburger" (as you would call it) because the Obama administration followed proper procedure (and it was kept under wraps so it didn't affect the election), but even if something does come of it at least Obama did it with warrants and judges and through the American judicial system. What American judge (however improperly) signed off on the Trump Administration initiating an investigation into Hunter Biden in Ukraine???? That is the way things are supposed to happen. If the US government (executive branch) is going to go after someone, they have to go through the checks of the Judicial system (checks and balances built into the constitution). You think that the Obama administration "lied" to a judge. The Trump administration just circumvented the judge and warrant part entirely.

So, if you think that Durham COULD POSSIBLY find something on Obama, then you have to admit that what Trump did was way out of bounds. Well... you don't "have to" admit it. You would only "have to" if you had any intellectual honesty. But, you are a conservative so that is not expected of you.

#26 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2019-11-12 03:08 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

The Senate can subpoena too so who cares if it is denied in the House. If it really matters the R's can subpoena who they want when it reaches the Senate.

Can we at least start listening to the hearings?

#27 | Posted by Petrous at 2019-11-12 03:28 PM | Reply

#27 | POSTED BY PETROUS

I think you have to wait until tomorrow at 10am.

#28 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2019-11-12 04:02 PM | Reply

But, these are being run very similarly to how CONSERVATIVES ran the Clinton impeachment, as well as the Benghazi hearings.#26 | POSTED BY GTBRITISHSKULL AT 2019-11-12 03:08 PM | FLAG:

That is completely wrong, Clinton was allowed to have his attorney at all of the hearings, Trump was not. Clinton's attorneys could question witnesses, Trumps could not. Those closed door hearings were supposed to be closed door but Schiff leaked out his interpretation of every testimony. But if someone told you they were the same you can go ahead and believe it. Would not be the first time or the last time that you were clueless.

#29 | Posted by fishpaw at 2019-11-12 04:23 PM | Reply

Repubs can ask all the questions they want (within the time limit). They can even bring in counsel to ask questions.

And Trump is still blocking witnesses from testifying before Congress. If he wants to question Dem witnesses, then maybe he should allow the Dems to question the witnesses they requested.

And his attorney will get their opportunity before the Judiciary Committee if they want to question witnesses.

#30 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2019-11-12 04:43 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#30

Only with the formalization vote of the Impeachment Inquiry were the Minority allowed to have their counsel ask questions or for Trump to have his own counsel present, but only after introduction of Articles of Impeachment at the Judiciary Committee level.

Still different from the Clinton Impeachment proceedings, but getting closer.

#31 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-11-12 04:55 PM | Reply

That is completely wrong, Clinton was allowed to have his attorney at all of the hearings, Trump was not. Clinton's attorneys could question witnesses, Trumps could not. Those closed door hearings were supposed to be closed door but Schiff leaked out his interpretation of every testimony. But if someone told you they were the same you can go ahead and believe it. Would not be the first time or the last time that you were clueless.

#29 | Posted by fishpaw

The hearings haven't started yet. How was trump not allowed to have an attorney at hearings that haven't occurred yet?

#32 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-11-12 05:24 PM | Reply

#32 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

They are still complaining about the closed door sessions that were more similar to the Ken Star portion of the Clinton investigation. Anything to complain about the process...

#33 | Posted by justagirl_idaho at 2019-11-12 05:50 PM | Reply

If this crap makes it to the senate it will be crushed. Unless public sentiment is about 67% "remove" will fail. Wrap it up Nazi Pelosi.

#34 | Posted by Nuke_Gently at 2019-11-12 07:52 PM | Reply

SPEAK @ 32

I think FISH has hearings confused with depositions.

Since Trump has never sat for a deposition, Fish's point about not having an attorney present is moot.

#35 | Posted by Twinpac at 2019-11-12 08:54 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

If this crap makes it to the senate it will be crushed. Unless public sentiment is about 67% "remove" will fail. Wrap it up Nazi Pelosi.

#34 | Posted by Nuke_Gently

"THIS CRAP" is a slam dunk case of abuse of power, high crimes and misdemeanors, criminal coverup, and obstruction of congress.

It will make it to the senate, and then the whole country and whole world will see that your party is nothing more than a cult for a crook, as you let him off the hook, sending the message that your party has zero ethics, patriotism, or intelligence, and that if someone is in your party, there is nothing they can do that you think they should be held accountable for. Then voters can decide what to do with a party like that in 2020.

#36 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-11-12 08:57 PM | Reply

Hold the Senate vote in secret like juries do.

Trump will have to pack his bags for Florida. Reports are, there are 30-35 Republicans who'd vote to remove him, based on the facts as they're currently known, if not for fearing Trump and his base.

#37 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-11-12 11:23 PM | Reply

this crap makes it to the senate it will be crushed. Unless public sentiment is about 67% "remove" will fail. Wrap it up Nazi Pelosi.

#34 | POSTED BY comrade NUKE_GENTLY

What's the hurry pubert?

Don't you want to hear and see the evidence of charges, or is your mind already made up without seeing or hearing the evidence, like the Southern Belle?

#38 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2019-11-13 12:42 AM | Reply

Sometimes I wonder why I even waste my time explaining these simple things to you morons but I will be the one to take one for the team and explain how reality works to you.

There is no way that the senate will vote to convict based on the charges as presented. ZERO PERCENT. The reason for this is two-fold:

1.) The GOP knows that voting to impeach Trump will END THE PARTY. Trump is immeasurably more popular that any GOP senator or rep " that is just a simple fact. Further, many of the GOP voters in 2016 were the same Dem that voted Obama and they switched solely because of Trump. I am sure the RNC has internal polls on Trump " those that actually matched the last election, and they know he is the one drawing voters to the party.

2.) The charges against Trump as just the latest rehash of Dem calls for impeachment and no one takes them seriously. The main reason for this is that to accept Trump is guilty of anything, you must believe that Hunter Biden and Joe Biden are totally free from corruption. This is an impossible feat to do for anyone that is GOP or independent. The Dems will believe anything that Maddow says, but sentient Americans know what Hunter and Joe did was very, very shady at a minimum and probably rises to the level of quid pro quo more than anything Trump is accused of doing.

So, because the Dems cannot defend Hunter and Joe paired with the fact that the Senate has a goal of self-preservation, there is no way he will be convicted by the Senate " again, this is just reality and doesn't even require you to even look into the underlying charges.
Dems are doing themselves a great disservice with this distraction " but, it is driven by their lack of a viable candidate. However, if a trial does occur (I am not convinced it will), it will ultimately boost Trump just like it did for Clinton.

#39 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-11-13 03:33 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

The Democrat's plan to sabotage the president's re-election campaign looks like it will backfire. Without actual impeachable offenses, the people will see through this tactic for what it is. Unfortunately, it is also the people that have the most to lose.

Pelosi needs to just cut her losses and get back to work!

#40 | Posted by Gr8Music at 2019-11-13 07:59 AM | Reply

The charges against Trump as just the latest rehash of Dem calls for impeachment and no one takes them seriously. The main reason for this is that to accept Trump is guilty of anything, you must believe that Hunter Biden and Joe Biden are totally free from corruption.

#39 | Posted by iragoldberg at

How these things possibly hang together is beyond sane thought.

#41 | Posted by Zed at 2019-11-13 08:11 AM | Reply

you must believe that Hunter Biden and Joe Biden are totally free from corruption.

#39 | Posted by iragoldberg at

Do you believe that Trump is totally free from corruption?

If you say no in regards to the man who stole money from charities, students, and veterans then you prove yourself the aching bastard we know yu to be.

If you say yes then by your own "logic" impeaching Trump is necessary.

#42 | Posted by Zed at 2019-11-13 08:14 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Every politician is guilty of corruption; some are just better at hiding it. Anyone that thinks otherwise is an idiot.

We've accepted this fact for decades - they just need to get back to work!

#43 | Posted by Gr8Music at 2019-11-13 08:33 AM | Reply

We've accepted this fact for decades (politicians are corrupt)

#43 | Posted by Gr8Music at 2019-1

You need to speak for yourself, or for your tribe.

Normal people are like any of you.

#44 | Posted by Zed at 2019-11-13 08:59 AM | Reply

We've accepted this fact for decades (politicians are corrupt)

#43 | Posted by Gr8Music at 2019-1

You need to speak for yourself, or for your tribe.

Normal people are NOT like any of you.

No one cares if you want to impose your sloppy, lazy, dishonest, venal, criminal values on American culture just because you have a ------ for Donald Trump.

You can be as stupid and as self-defeating as you want to be, but keep it to yourself.

#45 | Posted by Zed at 2019-11-13 09:02 AM | Reply

Every politician is guilty of corruption; some are just better at hiding it. Anyone that thinks otherwise is an idiot.
We've accepted this fact for decades - they just need to get back to work!

#43 | POSTED BY GR8MUSIC

Ahhh... you must be a conservative.

See, of course conservatives think that all politicians are corrupt. Because all CONSERVATIVE politicians are corrupt. EVERYONE agrees on that point. And, conservatives ideologically disagree with liberal politicians, so they are of course predisposed to assume the worst about them. A liberal politician just wearing a tan suit, to conservatives, is proof that the politician hates America. If Mother Theresa had run as a liberal in the US, conservatives would have thought she was one of the most corrupt people to ever live.

But, unlike conservatives, liberals do not think their politicians are corrupt. That is because we actual hold our politicians to a standard that rises far above the Republican standard of "doesn't commit (or, more accurately, get caught committing) serious felonies while in office". And, even then, conservatives are pretty flexible on whether that is even a standard. While corruption occurs (as it does anywhere power is wielded) it is punished when discovered.

So, while lack of morality and outright corruption and abuse of office may represent the conservative ideology, it does not represent me (or other liberals). And we will hold your crappy politicians accountable, even while you refuse to.

#46 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2019-11-13 09:22 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

1.) The GOP knows that voting to impeach Trump will END THE PARTY.

NICE OF YOU TO ADMIT THAT ALL REPUBS CARE ABOUT IS THE PARTY, NOT THE LAW OR THE COUNTRY.

2.) The charges against Trump as just the latest rehash of Dem calls for impeachment and no one takes them seriously.

YOU MEAN NO ONE IN YOUR CULT TAKES THEM SERIOUSLY. THIS ISN'T A RE-HASH. THESE ARE ENTIRELY NEW CRIMES, ADDITIONAL CRIMES, ALTHOUGH HE COMMITS SO MANY THAT I CAN SEE HOW YOU'D BE CONFUSED

#39 | Posted by iragoldberg

#47 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-11-13 01:10 PM | Reply

Just the facts of his having had secret meetings with Pootie -- this alone is grounds for impeachment and removal.

#48 | Posted by grumpy_too at 2019-11-13 08:19 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort