Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, December 10, 2019

Trump is the fourth US President in American history to face impeachment. If impeached, he'll be the third President to face a trial in the Senate.

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.

Steven's. Wheels are off the bus and the bus in in a deep ditch..

#1 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2019-12-10 09:20 AM | Reply

Ho hum. Whatever.

#2 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-12-10 09:22 AM | Reply

What the hell is that on Pelosi's nose?

#3 | Posted by boaz at 2019-12-10 09:24 AM | Reply

Now McConnell can hold a two month long trial, basically sequestering Sanders, Warren, Klobuchar, and Booker, clearing the field for Joe and Peter to campaign freely up until Super Tuesday. The Democratic leadership couldn't have coordinated this better if they tried. Hats off to them.

#4 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2019-12-10 09:25 AM | Reply

"What the hell is that on Pelosi's nose?"

Maybe it's the beginning of revitaligo, Ruckus.

#5 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2019-12-10 09:27 AM | Reply

And in the middle of all this, there's been an agreement on the North American Trade deal between the U.S., Canada and Mexico. Now THAT's news, not this revenge the Dems are doing on the nation for voting Republican.

#6 | Posted by boaz at 2019-12-10 09:34 AM | Reply

Well, that didn't take long. Actually, I guess it did. Democrats have been talking about impeachment before Trump was even inaugurated.

Has the public been swayed by the process thus far? I haven't seen any indication of that.

#7 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 09:40 AM | Reply

BOAZ, you DO realize, don't you, that even if Trump were removed from office (I know, ain't gonna happen), we would STILL have a Republican President? Unless Pence has decided to leave the party, like so many others. And he might not have been the guy you explicitly chose to be next in line (you didn't have a voice in VP selection), the guy who WON the nomination did pick him. So how is that "overturning an election"?

#8 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2019-12-10 09:40 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

#7 Jeff cares more about politics than about taking a stand against a demented criminal president.

Have YOU been swayed Jeff? Forget the general public for a second.

#9 | Posted by JOE at 2019-12-10 09:52 AM | Reply

Have YOU been swayed Jeff?

#9 | Posted by JOE at 2

Excellent question.

#10 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-10 09:58 AM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

Donald Trump needs to go, now. There's no reason for ANY PATRIOTIC AMERICAN to wait and see how he destroys the republic as he cheats on the next election.

#11 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-10 10:00 AM | Reply

You can't understand how weird it is, after decades of hearing Republicans harp on love of country, to see them give up the turf of patriotism entirely to the both the God-less and God-fearing Left.

#12 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-10 10:04 AM | Reply

"Well, that didn't take long. Actually, I guess it did. Democrats have been talking about impeachment before Trump was even inaugurated."

At least they waited until he got elected, eh?:

Republicans Are Already Talking About Impeaching Clinton

The G.O.P. is warning of a "constitutional crisis" if Clinton wins.

www.vanityfair.com

#13 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-10 10:06 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Donald Trump needs to go, now. There's no reason for ANY PATRIOTIC AMERICAN to wait and see how he destroys the republic as he cheats on the next election.

#11 | POSTED BY ZED

And imagine what he would/could do if he managed to WIN re-election! The man is a vindictive sociopath with control of the world's largest nuclear arsenal.

#14 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2019-12-10 10:07 AM | Reply

It would be amazing if the Senate removes Trump and then he got reelected next Fall. He'd be rested and ready to go after a bit of a vacation. Sadly it's DOA if and when it gets to the Senate.

#15 | Posted by Nuke_Gently at 2019-12-10 10:07 AM | Reply

Vanity Fair? Really Gal?

#16 | Posted by boaz at 2019-12-10 10:08 AM | Reply

Shoot! You just beat me to the punch! Darn typos!!

#17 | Posted by Nuke_Gently at 2019-12-10 10:08 AM | Reply

IF they removed him (fat chance!) they COULD bar him from ever again holding Federal office.

#18 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2019-12-10 10:09 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Has the public been swayed by the process thus far? I haven't seen any indication of that"

when jeffyj says "Has the public been swayed" what he really means is the national review has yet to tell him so

#19 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2019-12-10 10:12 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Vanity Fair? Really Gal?"

VF quoting Republicans, absolutely:

Still, that hasn't stopped a number of Republican lawmakers from jumping the gun. "There's been nothing like this where you can have potential criminal charges," New York Rep. Peter King said in a radio interview Tuesday. "You really could have a constitutional crisis here," he added, echoing a similar charge by Texas Rep. Louie Gohmert and Wisconsin Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner.

Other Republicans are already using the "I" word. "Assuming she wins, and the investigation goes forward, and it looks like an indictment is pending, at that point in time, under the Constitution, the House of Representatives would engage in an impeachment trial," Texas Rep. Michael McCaul said on Fox News. "They would go to the Senate and impeachment proceedings and removal would take place." Wisconsin senator Ron Johnson declared that Clinton could be impeached for "high crime or misdemeanor." And Donald Trump, who has turned "lock her up" into a rallying cry at his campaign stops, said Wednesday that Clinton would be impeached just as surely as Bill Clinton was. "You know it's going to happen. And in all fairness, we went through it with her husband. He was impeached," the Republican nominee said at a rally in Florida Wednesday, adding that Hillary is "most corrupt person ever to seek the presidency."

Not every Republican is ready to throw Clinton in jail. In a radio interview Tuesday, Texas senator John Cornyn said discussions of impeachment were "premature" as Clinton hasn't even been elected yet. "And unless there is some additional evidence that the F.B.I. director and the Justice Department would take to a grand jury, then she is not likely to be convicted of a crime." But that doesn't mean they aren't preparing to derail her potential presidency with a never-ending series of congressional hearings and investigations that could make the gridlock and partisanship of the Obama years look cordial by comparison. "Even before we get to Day One, we've got two years' worth of material already lined up, Utah Rep Jason Chaffetz, the chairman of the House Oversight Committee, said last week. "She has four years of history at the State Department, and it ain't good."

#20 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-10 10:15 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#20,

That being said Gal, you democrats went ahead and actually did what you are accusing Republicans of doing in the first place!

#21 | Posted by boaz at 2019-12-10 10:16 AM | Reply

Boy the DR clownbrigade goes right into butt hurt stupid mode. Weeweewee all the way too.

I'm buying popcorn.

#22 | Posted by RightisTrite at 2019-12-10 10:16 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

I read that when the Senate lays the groundwork for the trial rules, three Republicans could join the Democrats in insisting on an anonymous vote when it comes time for a verdict. That would allow Republicans to vote guilty without having to deal with their constituents' ire. Thought it was interesting.

#23 | Posted by The_Finn at 2019-12-10 10:18 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#21 | POSTED BY BOAZ

Gee, that couldnt be because Trump actually deserves it???

#24 | Posted by justagirl_idaho at 2019-12-10 10:28 AM | Reply

Dems are weaings for only introducing two articles. This leaves Trump completely unchecked for:
-Obstruction of the Mueller Investigation
-Witness tampering
-Emoluments Clause violations
-Canpaign Finance violations
-Abuse of Power by dangling pardons
-Other conduct grossly incompatible with the presidency (ignoring and disparaging all US intelligence agencies, ramping up family separation to use it as a deterrent, lying about literally everything, demanding loyalty, requiring NDAs, etc)

#25 | Posted by JOE at 2019-12-10 10:29 AM | Reply

Wow, interesting:

Go after your enemies': Trump's 21-year-old impeachment playbook

Trump shared his real-time thoughts about the Clinton impeachment two decades ago. Those same views are echoing through the president's fight today.

It's all part of Trump's strategy of abandoning one's compunctions and engaging in total warfare " a strategy he first drafted 21 years ago during President Bill Clinton's own impeachment hell. "Go after your enemies. I mean, they're after you. Go after your enemies," he recommended during an appearance on Hardball in September 1998.

"I think that Clinton probably is too nice a guy in a certain respect," he told host Chris Matthews. "I don't think he's going after people the way he should and I really believe his thing is to be liked and I don't think that's a very good position to be in right now."

In several television appearances in 1998 and 1999, while the scandal unfolded in real time, Trump remained consistent in his advice for Clinton: Don't get involved publicly, don't tell outright lies, make independent counsel Kenneth Starr look like he was on a witch hunt and denigrate his accusers.


www.politico.com

#26 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-10 10:29 AM | Reply

OMG!! I just realized that no matter what... relative to Trumplethinskin ... HRC left politics on a high note.

The ironies never end.

One would think maybe Gawd loves her more.

Soooooo much winning... clown style.

#27 | Posted by RightisTrite at 2019-12-10 10:29 AM | Reply

*weaklings

#28 | Posted by JOE at 2019-12-10 10:30 AM | Reply

Boaz, ICYMI: Trump actually ran on impeaching Hillary Clinton during his campaign:

And Donald Trump, who has turned "lock her up" into a rallying cry at his campaign stops, said Wednesday that Clinton would be impeached just as surely as Bill Clinton was. "You know it's going to happen. And in all fairness, we went through it with her husband. He was impeached," the Republican nominee said at a rally in Florida Wednesday, adding that Hillary is "most corrupt person ever to seek the presidency."

#29 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-10 10:33 AM | Reply

HRC left politics on a high note.

Losing an election to an overtly racist, conspiracy-spouting, nazi-sympathizing self-described sexual predator is not "leaving politics on a high note."

#30 | Posted by JOE at 2019-12-10 10:33 AM | Reply

#29 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

He wasn't wrong.

Contained within Monday's FISA report by the DOJ Inspector General is the revelation that Fusion GPS, the firm paid by the Clinton campaign to produce the Steele dossier, "was paying Steele to discuss his reporting with the media."

Talk about meddling in an election.

Everything people accuse Trump of doing, the Democrats, Obama, Hillary and Schiff are doing in spades.

Its psychological projection....

#31 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-10 10:36 AM | Reply

Thank you Nancy Pelosi for this.

You are the best Republican I've ever seen!

Trump 2020!

#32 | Posted by boaz at 2019-12-10 10:40 AM | Reply

Because of impeachment, Trump now leads Dems in battleground states..

hermancain.com

#33 | Posted by boaz at 2019-12-10 10:42 AM | Reply

That being said Gal, you democrats went ahead and actually did what you are accusing Republicans of doing in the first place!

#21 | POSTED BY BOAZ

Republicans impeached Clinton.

Democrats talked of impeaching "W".

Republicans talked of impeaching Obama.

Democrats are going to impeach Trump.

I was not following politics then, but I would wager that someone talked about impeaching H. W. Bush and Reagan. EVERY President has the other party "talk about impeachment". Which is not surprising. That is the main check on power of the executive. Whenever the president does something that pisses off someone in the legislative branch, they will inevitably "talk about impeachment".

But Democrats didn't impeach "W", despite all the talk. Republicans didn't impeach Obama despite all the talk. And Dems didn't impeach Trump over the Mueller investigation, despite all the talk. It was only after this Ukraine thing became public that impeachment actually made any progress.

Talk is cheap. It doesn't matter how much people "talk" about impeachment. Ignore all that. It is just noise that happens during EVERY PRESIDENCY. Theatrics to rile up the base.

Start paying attention once the actual process gets initiated and as it moves forward. THAT shows that it is not just talk, that there is something there. And this process is moving forward. A majority of Americans WANT it to move forward. They have been shown enough evidence that they want the process to move forward, so that more evidence will be gathered, Trump will be allowed to mount a defense, and the process of determining guilt will proceed. Whether or not they think that Trump should be removed is a different question. We are not anywhere near that point in the process. And that is why you have a trial - to figure out what happened and whether it deserves punishment.

#34 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2019-12-10 10:44 AM | Reply

"hermancain.com"

L
O
L

#35 | Posted by JOE at 2019-12-10 10:44 AM | Reply

"the Steele dossier"

Mackris must've missed the part where the IG pointed out Crossfire Hurricane had already started when they found out about the Steele Dossier.

And by "missed," I mean on purpose. Mackris knows he's lying...but that's his entire raison detre.

#36 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-10 10:44 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"hermancain.com"

Turns out, in every state, he's ahead by...nine. Three states...nine, nine, nine.

Of course, it turns out the editor is German.

#37 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-10 10:48 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

Let's cut to the chase:

Josh Marshall @joshtpm

Trump is so obviously guilty it's hard to even know what to say in these hearings. The evidence says he did it. His accomplices say he did it. HE SAYS HE DID IT. And fairly frequently he says he will do it again. What more is there to say?

#38 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-10 10:48 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

Because of impeachment, Trump now leads Dems in battleground states..
hermancain.com

#33 | POSTED BY BOAZ

Just a sec... weren't you just STS about Vanity Fair. And you then give us hermancain.com???

BTW... the polls you are using are from Firehouse Strategies, a political consulting firm founded by Republican strategists. So, I would guess that poll would be likely to be biased towards Republicans.

Just don't leave the echo chamber. You can be happy there.

#39 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2019-12-10 10:50 AM | Reply

Contained within Monday's FISA report by the DOJ Inspector General is the revelation that Fusion GPS, the firm paid by the Clinton campaign to produce the Steele dossier, "was paying Steele to discuss his reporting with the media."

Talk about meddling in an election.

#31 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS

Really? That is what you are going with?

That is called "freedom of speech" as defined by your conservative Supreme Court (money is speech). Fusion GPS is an American company, so according to the conservative ideology they have every RIGHT to pay people to engage in politics.

We have no problem with Trump "meddling" in the election. We have no problem with Hillary "meddling" in the election. That is actually what is supposed to happen. What we have a problem with is a FOREIGN COUNTRY (or foreign nationals) meddling in (spending money to influence) an election. Show me where a foreign government (or foreign nationals) paid for Steele and then MAYBE you would have a point.

Now, I would PREFER that corporations would not be allowed to "meddle" in elections. But, as it is currently and explicitly legal, it is hard to criticize them for doing so. And also, as you point out above, it was a POLITICAL CAMPAIGN which was ultimately paying for Steele to talk about his findings (and the political campaign also paid for those findings to start with).

I am going to have to remember that. Every time Trump holds a rally or makes an ad buy he is apparently "meddling" in the next election. Lol.

#40 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2019-12-10 11:01 AM | Reply

Just a sec... weren't you just STS about Vanity Fair. And you then give us hermancain.com???

Yea, you are right..

#41 | Posted by boaz at 2019-12-10 11:08 AM | Reply

I found some reporting on how impeachment is polling:

And yet the polling is about where it was at the start of October. As of this writing, in the FiveThirtyEight aggregation, 47.1 percent support removing the president, and 44 percent don't support removal. That's not good for the White House, but that's nowhere near where Democrats wanted it to be. There's nothing resembling the bipartisan consensus that Democrats had previously called a prerequisite for moving forward with the removal of a president. In fact, impeachment could well be hurting Democrats' chances in key swing states. A recent survey found removal is opposed by 50.8 percent of voters in Michigan, 52.2 percent of voters in Pennsylvania, and 57.9 percent of voters in Wisconsin. Whether or not you think the hearings were persuasive, the evidence suggests they didn't persuade many people who didn't already support impeachment.

www.nationalreview.com

I think Democrats are making a colossal mistake by pushing forward with this without strong public support.

#42 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 11:11 AM | Reply

Mccarthy is really kicking liberal ass in his press conference!

#43 | Posted by boaz at 2019-12-10 11:13 AM | Reply

#42 Your concern trolling aside, do YOU believe after all evidence and articles have been submitted that Trump deserves to be convicted?

#44 | Posted by JOE at 2019-12-10 11:18 AM | Reply

The usual suspects here have nothing to defend Trump. The media they pay attention to have nothing to defend Trump. Posts #2 and #3 are typical. If the public is tired of the Trump show, he's toast.

Also, it's telling that the journalistic integrity of hermancain.com is preferred over Vanity Fair. Like Christopher Wray just said, He conspicuously urged people to be savvier consumers of information.

#45 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2019-12-10 11:19 AM | Reply

Everybody knows that Trump has abused his position for personal and political gain. He has both legally and morally disgraced the position. Republicans just don't care, because he is one of their own. But if the Dems did it, these same GOPhers would be on a crusade to impeach.

#46 | Posted by moder8 at 2019-12-10 11:19 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Hey Boaz. This McCarthy???

www.washingtonpost.com

#47 | Posted by The_Finn at 2019-12-10 11:23 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#42

People haven't been paying close attention. Now that it's going forward, they will. I think most have Trump fatigue. Are you always premature? I guess we'd have to ask your wife.

#48 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2019-12-10 11:26 AM | Reply

#47,

So? He still kicked liberal ass in his press conference.

#49 | Posted by boaz at 2019-12-10 11:27 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

I think Democrats are making a colossal mistake by pushing forward with this without strong public support.

#42 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Do you honestly think that Trump WOULD NOT try to use the power of his office to manufacture more dirt on his political opponents if he doesn't have the threat of impeachment hanging over him?

He claims he did nothing wrong. Why would he not do more of it?

So, regardless of how little conservatives care about the Constitution or the integrity of our elections, you think it is a MISTAKE for House Democrats to uphold their responsibility to protect and defend our system of government?

I do find it ironic that you, who consistently supports the undemocratic outcomes of the Electoral College - claiming that it is necessary to go against the majority to PROTECT the minority, think that something like protecting our system of government should be based upon the whims of public opinion and a slim margin in political polls.

#50 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2019-12-10 11:28 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

People haven't been paying close attention. Now that it's going forward, they will.

I think your overestimate public engagement at this point. Most people had their minds made up about Trump a long time ago, which explains why the needle isn't really moving. We knew he was a criminal, unethical, crazy POS before the election. Trump has managed to kick up enough dust that the average person probably sees this as just another partisan he-said she-said.

#51 | Posted by JOE at 2019-12-10 11:29 AM | Reply

So? He still kicked liberal ass in his press conference.

#49 | POSTED BY BOAZ

Lol... and this is why Trump is so popular with conservatives. It doesn't matter what conservatives actually ACCOMPLISH, or even how corrupt, nepotistic, or even traitorous they are. All that matters is if they "kicked liberal ass" in public.

That is basically all that the conservative movement is now. They have no ideology that they care about. It is just about "pwning liberals".

#52 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2019-12-10 11:31 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#52, Actually, no it's not...

Liberals cant refute what he said. There is no crime here. Americans know that. Liberals are very passive aggressive. I'm just glad someone else is giving it back to them.

#53 | Posted by boaz at 2019-12-10 11:42 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

There is no crime here. -- Boaz

Obstructing congress is a crime. Ignoring subpoenas is a crime. Bribing foreign leaders to get involved in our elections is absolutely a crime...

#54 | Posted by justagirl_idaho at 2019-12-10 11:44 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

So? He still kicked liberal ass in his press conference.

Burning down the nation just to own the libs.

#55 | Posted by JOE at 2019-12-10 11:48 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Burning down the nation just to own the libs.

Maybe the libs need to learn to compromise and stop trying to destroy what we hold dear just to get their way.

#56 | Posted by boaz at 2019-12-10 11:50 AM | Reply | Funny: 3

Compromise, that is a funny joke.........

#57 | Posted by justagirl_idaho at 2019-12-10 11:52 AM | Reply

"Compromise"

What are Republicans willing to compromise on? You elected an alt-right sex offender president. That's not compromise.

#58 | Posted by JOE at 2019-12-10 11:53 AM | Reply

I often voted Republican before the party became the party of W, Sarah Palin, and (even worse) Trump. I honestly believe if I were a sitting US Senator even during my Republican "phase" I would have voted to remove a Republican president who obstructed Congress the way Trump has.

Nixon had more respect for the Constitution, the rule of law, and American political traditions than Trump has. Trump loyalists are not conservatives. They are conspiratorialists and cynics. Some are nihilists.

#59 | Posted by anton at 2019-12-10 11:54 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Everything people accuse Trump of doing, the Democrats, Obama, Hillary and Schiff are doing in spades.

Its psychological projection....

#31 | Posted by AndreaMackris

You mean like this very post is?

#60 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 11:57 AM | Reply

" Maybe the libs need to learn to compromise and stop trying to destroy what we hold dear just to get their way.
#56 | POSTED BY BOAZ AT 2019-12-10 11:50 AM"

1. What do the libs need to compromise on? Be specific.

2. What are libs trying to destroy that you hold dear? Again, be specific.

#61 | Posted by TrueBlue at 2019-12-10 11:57 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Democrats have been talking about impeachment before Trump was even inaugurated.

He has been in violation of the emoluments clause since day one.

#62 | Posted by Nixon at 2019-12-10 11:59 AM | Reply

Maybe the libs need to learn to compromise and stop trying to destroy what we hold dear just to get their way.

#56 | Posted by boaz at 2019-12-10 11:50 AM | Reply | Flag:

Compromise aka giving the GOP everything they want.

#63 | Posted by Nixon at 2019-12-10 11:59 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Trump has managed to kick up enough dust that the average person probably sees this as just another partisan he-said she-said.

#51 | Posted by JOE

Don't forget about his sycophantic cult following.

Trump and his base are the best sign yet of the moral rot that's killing this country.

#64 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 12:02 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

There is no crime here. -- Boaz

Obstructing congress is a crime. Ignoring subpoenas is a crime. Bribing foreign leaders to get involved in our elections is absolutely a crime...

#54 | Posted by justagirl_idaho

Not to mention impeachment doesn't require a statutory crime.

Abuse of power and violation of public trust are completely valid reasons to impeach a POTUS, which is why Trump deserves to be impeached.

#65 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 12:04 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 6

Maybe the libs need to learn to compromise and stop trying to destroy what we hold dear just to get their way.

#56 | Posted by boaz

LOL this from the guy who's glad the judiciary is being stacked with unqualified loons because it ensures his world view gets foisted on the rest of us.

#66 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 12:05 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 7

Vanity Fair? Really Gal?

#16 | POSTED BY BOAZ

Unless you are disputing the facts in the article, why would the source matter?

I would contend that over all, Vanity Fair is still more factual than Fox News.

#67 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2019-12-10 12:10 PM | Reply

1. What do the libs need to compromise on? Be specific.

Gun Control. Immigration.

2. What are libs trying to destroy that you hold dear?

Black American Culture.
The Black American nuclear family
Christianity
Any faith in religion by Americans
Traditional Values..
Personal Responsibility..

Need some more?

#68 | Posted by boaz at 2019-12-10 12:14 PM | Reply

I would contend that over all, Vanity Fair is still more factual than Fox News.

Vanity Fair only says what you want to hear. They have a liberal lean.

I would say Fox News is more impartial than Vanity Fair will ever be.

#69 | Posted by boaz at 2019-12-10 12:15 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Traditional Values..
Personal Responsibility..

Need some more?

#68 | Posted by boaz

LOL you support Trump but still spout this nonsense.

Physician, heal thyself!

#70 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 12:18 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Vanity Fair only says what you want to hear. They have a liberal lean.

I would say Fox News is more impartial than Vanity Fair will ever be.

#69 | Posted by boaz

LOL the unawareness. Is. Ridiculous.

#71 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 12:18 PM | Reply

Boaz explains why we lose wars

#72 | Posted by RightisTrite at 2019-12-10 12:30 PM | Reply

It would be amazing if the Senate removes Trump and then he got reelected next Fall. He'd be rested and ready to go after a bit of a vacation. Sadly it's DOA if and when it gets to the Senate.

#15 | POSTED BY NUKE_GENTLY

A person found guilty in an impeachment trial can't hold federal office again.

#73 | Posted by johnny_hotsauce at 2019-12-10 12:36 PM | Reply

Well, we all know this is going to werk out well... because RoC told us it will.

There is no doubt in any fair mind that the facts in sworn testimony from mostly Trump admin and career diplomats, including honored war heros with the medals to prove it, show with direct evidence, not hearsay, that Trump is guilty as charged.

And testimony from Constitutional experts showed that his actions are well within the outline of the impeachment clause; the only dissent on the panel was because not all the witnesses were heard... because Trump would not allow them to testify.

What we also know is that Trump has already collaborated with the GOP Sen to create a show trial that will be all about his enemies, not about him.... and we know that the idea that "good Republicans" would be swayed by the facts to convict him is absurd and always was.

#74 | Posted by Corky at 2019-12-10 12:38 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

The facts are overwhelming. All the not-liberals on this site who voted for, and are still supporting a crook never address the liar, con man, traitor, racist and mentally declining narcissist that you so fervently elected. All you have is whining about the process, trying desperately to find the technicality that is going to give you a semblance of hope that you are not just standing on a hill, preparing to give your life for an incompetent buffoon. You refuse to see it.

You are not victims. You have chosen to do this. #SAD #MAGA

#75 | Posted by chuffy at 2019-12-10 12:42 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 3

What more is there to say?
#38 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

"Not guilty."

And Jesus wept.

#76 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-12-10 12:43 PM | Reply

My Facebook feed is ridiculous, the amount of 'I stand with Trump' memes being shared by idiots I call friends and family is appalling. It is absolutely a cult and anyone that denies it is beyond saving.

#77 | Posted by justagirl_idaho at 2019-12-10 12:48 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

I think Democrats are making a colossal mistake by pushing forward with this without strong public support.
#42 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

That's the problem with you and many other Republicans, and Democrats for that matter: You perceive this to be of political or party importance. It's not, this is protecting established norms and mitigating future nefarious behavior.

If the Republicans want to protect Trump for the betterment of their party, so be it. At least the Democrats are on board with protecting country over party. Handing control of the government to the Republicans as a result of impeaching Trump over Ukraine scandal will be damn worth it, IMO.

#78 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-12-10 12:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

All you have is whining about the process, trying desperately to find the technicality that is going to give you a semblance of hope that you are not just standing on a hill, preparing to give your life for an incompetent buffoon.

#75 | Posted by chuffy at 2019-12-10 12:42 PM | Reply

When you don't have pride in yourselves a buffoon can seem heroic, one supposes.

#79 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-10 12:51 PM | Reply

"All the not-liberals on this site who voted for, and are still supporting ..." - #75 | Posted by chuffy at 2019-12-10 12:42 PM

Here's a sampling of posts from those on the right side of the aisle on this very thread:

"What the hell is that on Pelosi's nose?"
"...not this revenge the Dems are doing on the nation for voting Republican."
"Has the public been swayed by the process thus far?"
"Vanity Fair? Really ..."
"...you democrats went ahead and actually did what you are accusing Republicans of doing in the first place!"
"Its psychological projection...."
"Thank you Nancy Pelosi for this."
"I think Democrats are making a colossal mistake by pushing forward with this without strong public support."
"Mccarthy is really kicking liberal ass in his press conference!"
"He still kicked liberal ass in his press conference."
"Maybe the libs need to learn to compromise and stop trying to destroy what we hold dear just to get their way."
There's not a single defense of Donald J. Trump on the 2 articles of impeachment, the subject of this thread.

Not a single defense.

#80 | Posted by Hans at 2019-12-10 12:54 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 9

Not a single defense.
#80 | POSTED BY HANS

Telling.

#81 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-12-10 12:58 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I think Democrats are making a colossal mistake by pushing forward with this without strong public support.
#42 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

A majority of Americans support impeachment, so whatever fantasyland you live in that doesn't accept a majority supporting impeachment as "strong public support," you can just go back to.

#82 | Posted by chuffy at 2019-12-10 12:58 PM | Reply

projects.fivethirtyeight.com

#83 | Posted by Corky at 2019-12-10 01:05 PM | Reply

Support for impeaching Nixon took a very long time, but it eventually flipped from opposition to favorability.
Support for impeaching Clinton never overcame opposition to impeaching him, and Whitewater lasted over 6 years...
Support for impeaching The Elevator Molester has been steady and remains greater than opposition.

#84 | Posted by chuffy at 2019-12-10 01:13 PM | Reply

"At least they waited until he got elected, eh?:
Republicans Are Already Talking About Impeaching Clinton"

I remember opponents of both Trump and Clinton talking about eventually impeaching them before the election. And I knew that either one of them would have been dumb enough to go on to commit impeachable offenses during their term.

#85 | Posted by sentinel at 2019-12-10 01:15 PM | Reply

A majority of Americans support impeachment, so whatever fantasyland you live in that doesn't accept a majority supporting impeachment as "strong public support," you can just go back to.

#82 | POSTED BY CHUFFY

According to 538 aggregate about 47% support impeachment and removal.

#86 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 01:23 PM | Reply

1. What do the libs need to compromise on? Be specific.

Gun Control. Immigration.

Gun control is rich. Because it is conservatives taking the extremist view. Most liberals only want to close the loopholes (private party loophole) that allow people to get guns without a background check. And polls show that 60% of Americans believe that we should have stricter gun laws.

And immigration? Obama deported TONS of people. And liberals in Congress were perfectly willing to give more money to Border Patrol to secure the border. We just think a wall is a waste of money (and a terrible symbol). We also don't want to fund ICE because it STOPPED the moderate policy of prioritizing deportations for criminals and instead changed to the EXTREMIST position of deporting EVERYONE (even if they are not causing problems).

As pointed out by another poster, your definition of "compromise" is give me everything I want. Which, while wrong, is also ironic. Since Trump's view of "compromise" or "negotiation" seems to be "give them everything and get nothing in return" (see North Korea).

2. What are libs trying to destroy that you hold dear?
Black American Culture.
The Black American nuclear family
Christianity
Any faith in religion by Americans
Traditional Values..
Personal Responsibility..
Need some more?

#68 | POSTED BY BOAZ

Lol. You elected Trump. That has done more to destroy what "you hold dear" than anything else. Can't speak much to "Black" points, though I am curious how Trump has helped them. "Christianity" and "Any faith in religion by Americans" have been hurt more by Trump and conservatives than anything else. You think ANY religion supports turning away refugees, or intentionally being cruel to children in order to convince their parents not to bring them here? Support for those things (or the people who do those things) by "religious" people is rightfully seen as hypocritical and ignorant. The only way that liberals are destroying religion is by encouraging people to be educated and to think for themselves, which is apparently anathema to religions and "faith".

Traditional Values? How do you define that? I recall pondering the hypocrisy of it during the 2016 election when Trump's top two surrogates were Giuliani and Gingrich. Between the three of them they had NINE marriages and SIX divorces (now SEVEN since Giuliani got divorced from his most recent fling). And the amount of adulterous relationships they had was innumerable. Is that what you consider "traditional values"? Actually, it is probably a pretty accurate representation of "traditional values", especially be conservatives, but those "values" are disgusting which is why most moral people nowadays want nothing to do with them.

I am not even sure I want to touch "Personal Responsibility". Trump is the epitome of NEVER taking responsibility for ANYTHING. And the Republican base is primarily made up of people like coal miners or factory workers who made poor career choices when they were young, and now want the government to subsidize (or impose tariffs) to protect their jobs. Instead of taking "personal responsibility" for their choices and learning a trade that is actually useful in today's economy.

#87 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2019-12-10 01:23 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#86 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Honestly that doesnt matter at all when it comes to doing the right thing. Of course it would be nice if people were more informed and understood what happened. My dad does not watch the news, he doesnt follow politics, he only sees things on FB, and he is just sticking by his guy. Trump is the only POTUS he ever voted for in his life. There is no explaining to him what occurred because he believes it is made up. It is a cult personality and my dad has chosen Trump the way you would a wrestler on WWF or whatever it is called now. I have absolutely no doubts that he will vote for Trump given the chance in 2020. I know several more people like that, and no surprise they are all boomers...

#88 | Posted by justagirl_idaho at 2019-12-10 01:29 PM | Reply

According to 538 aggregate about 47% support impeachment and removal.

#86 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Why should we be asking about removal at this point? We haven't even heard an actual defense from Trump (which would be presented at the impeachment trial).

You are basically saying that anyone who is keeping an open mind until the actual trial is proof that Trump should not be impeached. I personally wish that we had pretty much 0% in favor of "impeachment and removal". Because that would indicate almost no hyper-partisanship. That fact that you feel the opposite (that people need to make up their mind about removal before it even goes to trial) I think is very telling. You complain about the divisiveness of politics in this country, yet here you are cheerleading for it.

#89 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2019-12-10 01:32 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

"According to 538 aggregate about 47% support impeachment and removal."

Unfortunately most folks polled don't understand the difference...so polling data is not a reliable source of information, IMO

#90 | Posted by eberly at 2019-12-10 01:40 PM | Reply

Removal requires a super majority; barring from future US office is a second vote requiring a simple majority. www.google.com

#91 | Posted by Nuke_Gently at 2019-12-10 01:42 PM | Reply

So that people don't lose their ----, I'll give my personal take first.

To me it's obvious what Trump was trying to do with his phone call to the new Ukrainian president. I view his actions as impeachable.

Here's my political take:

Throughout the entirety of this process, for whatever reason Democrats haven't moved public opinion one iota toward impeachment. If this were a sporting event they have been on offense throughout the entire process so far and have been playing on their home field within the MSM loudly cheering and amplifying this by turning the volume up to 11. With an impeachment vote, if they even get enough votes to impeach, they turn the ball over to the Senate which means the GOP will be on offense.

I see that going one of 2 ways. I can see McConnell immediately bringing it to a vote without holding any kind of hearings. I can also see McConnell scheduling all sorts of hearings regarding this and just like in the House the minority will have little say in how this is carried out - what's good for the goose and all that. McConnell will attempt to paint a picture on a political canvas as a back drop for the final phase of putting Trump on trial. With the IG report demonstrating serial abuses obtaining FISA warrants to surveil Carter Page coupled with Durham's statement yesterday that the investigation itself wasn't adequately predicated, McConnell will create a narrative of the so-called deep state engaging in all sorts of shenanigans to try and undo the 2016 election results by any means necessary. With that groundwork laid down, the Senate will subpoena Schiff, his aides and the whistleblower and McConnell will try to create a narrative that this whole thing was cooked up by a "deep state" operative colluding with the Democratic Party to try and remove Trump. Next up, McConnell will put Joe and Hunter Biden on trial and will attempt to convince the public that their arrangement with Burisma was corrupt thus legitimizing Trump's request for an investigation. Lastly, McConnell will hypocritically (the Senate hearings will be conducted in a 1-sided manner) attack the House hearings for their one-sidedness and he'll certainly attack (and I think this will resonate with the public) Schiff's publishing of phone records of Guilliani, Nunes, Solomon and others. Whether or not the GOP is more persuasive with the public than the Democrats have been remains to be seen.

Given where public opinion sits right now, voting to impeach and putting the ball in the GOP's court probably won't go well for the Democrats. 2 House Democrats have signaled they will vote against impeachment. If that happens and if any others defect it could prove disastrous from a political standpoint. Democrats will try to spin Justin Amash's vote (a guy who I like, BTW), but fact is he left the GOP and is now an independent. I don't think that spin will fly.

Like I said, having failed to move the needle of public opinion I think this is a huge mistake politically.

#92 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 01:46 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 5

Really disappointed in Boaz. I figured hed be honest about things eventually but looks like hes going to continue burying his head in a couple other chump' arses around here.

All in all, I say impeach and let his own party (whom at one time he called "stupid") deal with him publically.

You may say dems have a lot to lose without public support but the Republicans have a lot of margin of error too.

My opinion of Trump is hes a crook. A bankrupt, fraudulent university scammer, and washed up gameshow host. Hes whitetrash with some money who is shameless about any of the immoral schitt he says or does for the world to see... a complete embarrassment.
No, those aren't impeachable crimes but obstruction and bribery are. I say let the hair go with the hide.

And the others here can complain about politics at a municipal level.

#93 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2019-12-10 01:48 PM | Reply

1. What do the libs need to compromise on? Be specific.

Gun Control. Immigration.

#68 | POSTED BY BOAZ

I don't think BOAZ understands the meaning of the word 'compromise'.

2. What are libs trying to destroy that you hold dear?

Black American Culture.
The Black American nuclear family
Christianity
Any faith in religion by Americans
Traditional Values..
Personal Responsibility..
Need some more?

#68 | POSTED BY BOAZ

What a bunch of nonsense!

First, libs had nothing to do with undermining Black American Culture. Unless of course you mean by trying to eliminate slavery. The Black American nuclear family was undermined by poverty and greed.

Second, stop trying to turn America into a Christian theocracy! Nobody has taken any of your rights of religion away.

And personal responsibility? I haven't met a Republican with any of that in years!

#94 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2019-12-10 01:51 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

1. What do the libs need to compromise on? Be specific.

Gun Control. Immigration.

#68 | POSTED BY BOAZ

Boaz, you do realize that under Trumps watch red flag gun confiscation has OFFICIALLY begun???

Bump stocks must be forfeited

And Trump himself stepped right on out and personally said "we can confiscate guns and worry about due process later"

You're either trolling or willfully being dishonest.

#95 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2019-12-10 01:56 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#92

I actually agree with most of that. Well said, without your usual partisan spin.

#96 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2019-12-10 01:59 PM | Reply

#92

I second that.

#97 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2019-12-10 02:02 PM | Reply

#92

Gee, the WH is lying, the Repubican members on the committee are lying, the entirety of conservative media is lying and Drumpf supporters are only consuming a daily diet of Repubican lies...I wonder why that needle just keeps staying there...what could it be?

Again, everyone defending the president refuses to address the real issue. You complained about the process being partisan, when the House Democrats were merely following the rules established by Repubicans (who anticipated a HRC presidency, lol). You complained about a lack of transparency, ignoring the fact that Repubicans were invited to, and apparently frequently just didn't show up to, the closed-door depositions in the SCIF. You complained about not being able to call fact witnesses, despite Repubican fact witnesses being brought before the committee. You argued that Hunter and Joe Biden should be brought in as fact witnesses, despite neither of them being on the call in question. You complained that the hearings were unfair because Drumpf wasn't allowed to face his accusers, which doesn't happen at this point in the process, and then didn't blink an eye when POTUS refused to appear when invited to participate.

What you still have not done, however, is offer any definitive statements or evidence that challenges the facts. POTUS admitted to, provided documentation of and reiterated in a press conference solicitation of a foreign power (multiple foreign powers) to interfere in the 2020 election. He is a traitor. Anyone defending him is also a traitor.

#98 | Posted by chuffy at 2019-12-10 02:10 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Sounds like Trump is asking for Russia's help again in 2020:

WH Spox: Trump And Russia's FM Are Discussing Election Security At The WH Today

President Trump is meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and will reportedly talk election security.

mavenroundtable.io

#99 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-10 02:19 PM | Reply

"President Trump is meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and will reportedly talk election security."

The last time Trump met in the Oval Office with Lavrov, he bragged about firing Comey. I hope he's not bragging about how he is going to fire Wray, who he is not too pleased with at the moment.

#100 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-10 02:31 PM | Reply

"WH Spox: Trump And Russia's FM Are Discussing Election Security At The WH Today"

For a minute, let's pretend HRC had won a close election, and it came out that all of our intelligence agencies concluded Russia had meddled in the election, with the goal of getting HRC elected. And then today, President HRC meets with Russians at the White House. Assuming all that, here is the all-important question:

How many zip codes would be hit by the detritus of Sean Hannity's head exploding?

#101 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-10 02:31 PM | Reply

I'm not sure what the strategy is right now, but there are several possible tactics at play:

Voting on the limited scope articles is very specific - the public won't be able to follow too broad a scope, and the facts here are very clear. Investigations are ongoing, so whatever comes about in those will be added to the case.

The president and his staff have obstructed Congress and Justice. The DOJ is under an AG who is not faithfully executing his office, so they are sticking to the obstruction of Congress issue for now.

Many of us have been critical of Pelosi for delaying this for so long. We are now faced with a president who will appeal everything to the SCOTUS, delaying the process. The problem with waiting for the courts on everything is that POTUS is breaking the law right now, in real time.

Democrats don't have to forward articles of impeachment to the Senate. They can vote to impeach, and not refer it to the Senate. There are no rules around the timing of this, either. They could continue to add to the articles of impeachment. They could decide to censure the president instead.

Regardless, the GOP has gone all-in for Drumpf. Wagon's hitched, and as more and more of the truth comes out, it is not going to get any better for Repubicans. If you think any documents, recordings or fact witnesses under oath are going to exculpate him on this, you are a fool.

Nobody really knows how this is going to shake out. Sounds like there are a handful of Repubicans who are fine kicking him out of office, they just can't break ranks publicly. If you use the analogy of playoff sports, "That's why you play the game."

#102 | Posted by chuffy at 2019-12-10 02:32 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#96 - Thank you.

#103 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 02:36 PM | Reply

Trump-Barr/Prison 2020

#104 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2019-12-10 02:47 PM | Reply

"He is a traitor. Anyone defending him is also a traitor."

Today in DC, at the President's invitation, Lavrov spouts Russian propaganda:

Aaron Rupar @atrupar

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov: "We have highlighted once again that all speculation about our alleged interference in domestic processes in the US are baseless. There are no facts that would support that ...no one has given us this proof because it simply does not exist"

Pompeo kinda-sorta pushes back on Lavrov: "We think we've shared plenty of facts to show what happened in the 2016 election with our Russian counterparts. We don't think there's any mistake about what really transpired there."

twitter.com

Yeah, sure Donald, you go ahead and talk about election security with him, you ---- traitor:

WH Spox: Trump And Russia's FM Are Discussing Election Security At The WH Today

mavenroundtable.io

#105 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-10 03:26 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

I'm so old, I remember when Repubicans were against the Russkies. Guess they just needed a bigger payroll.

#106 | Posted by chuffy at 2019-12-10 04:08 PM | Reply

My Facebook feed is ridiculous, the amount of 'I stand with Trump' memes being shared by idiots I call friends and family is appalling. It is absolutely a cult and anyone that denies it is beyond saving.

POSTED BY JUSTAGIRL_IDAHO AT 2019-12-10 12:48 PM | REPLY |

I've got the same problem. It drives me batty.

#107 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2019-12-10 04:57 PM | Reply

The neutron bomb sitting in the middle of this is what Gal just highlighted, and Nancy Pelosi keeps subtly saying in repetition: Trump has betrayed the United States in favor of advancing Russia's interests in almost every aspect of his presidency and policies in which Russia's involved.

Hosting Lavarov in the Oval Office on the same day articles of impeachment are introduced - because he abused his power in denying a struggling nation dependant upon US support in their defense from Russia illegally invading, taking, and occupying their territory - congressionally passed funding passed only after Ukraine met stringent anti-corruption reforms and benchmarks confirmed by both the State and Defense Departments - is just the latest in-your-face example of his unending acquiescence to serve their interests over this nation's.

If the focus on Russia is amplified as it should be, either the GOP will find itself in a partnership with Putin himself, denying that Russia did anything wrong in 2016, or the Senators and public may finally see the now ever brightening lines connecting Trump's motivations directly to Russia's benefit.

#108 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-10 05:02 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

--he abused his power in denying a struggling nation dependant upon US support in their defense from Russia illegally invading, taking, and occupying their territory - congressionally passed funding passed only after Ukraine

In other words, impeach him for foreign policy decisions that go against the policy preferences of the neocon/neoliberal bureaucracy. That's what it's all about.

#109 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-12-10 05:10 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

NULLI

" That's what it's all about."

You know better than that.

#110 | Posted by Twinpac at 2019-12-10 05:17 PM | Reply

"In other words, impeach him for foreign policy decisions that go against the policy preferences of the neocon/neoliberal bureaucracy."

No, you blithering idiot. Impeach him for using the office of the Presidency and Congressionally-approved aid to shake down an ally fighting a war until they make up a lie about your chief political opponent.

You know...the kind of stuff the Framers specifically referenced in that document you pretend to revere, but more often wipe your ass with.

#111 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-10 05:23 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 4

My flags aren't working so I'm giving TONY'S #108 5 Newsworthys.

#112 | Posted by Twinpac at 2019-12-10 05:24 PM | Reply

= blithering idiot

Would be progress in his case.

But hey, if trolling libs is worth the price of one's reputation for intellectual honesty and integrity, well, he's paid it several times over now... in rubles.

#113 | Posted by Corky at 2019-12-10 05:30 PM | Reply

"I can also see McConnell scheduling all sorts of hearings regarding this and just like in the House the minority will have little say in how this is carried out - what's good for the goose and all that. McConnell will attempt to paint a picture on a political canvas as a back drop for the final phase of putting Trump on trial. With the IG report demonstrating serial abuses obtaining FISA warrants to surveil Carter Page coupled with Durham's statement yesterday that the investigation itself wasn't adequately predicated, McConnell will create a narrative of the so-called deep state engaging in all sorts of shenanigans to try and undo the 2016 election results by any means necessary. With that groundwork laid down, the Senate will subpoena Schiff, his aides and the whistleblower and McConnell will try to create a narrative that this whole thing was cooked up by a "deep state" operative colluding with the Democratic Party to try and remove Trump. Next up, McConnell will put Joe and Hunter Biden on trial and will attempt to convince the public that their arrangement with Burisma was corrupt thus legitimizing Trump's request for an investigation. Lastly, McConnell will hypocritically (the Senate hearings will be conducted in a 1-sided manner) attack the House hearings for their one-sidedness and he'll certainly attack (and I think this will resonate with the public) Schiff's publishing of phone records of Guilliani, Nunes, Solomon and others. Whether or not the GOP is more persuasive with the public than the Democrats have been remains to be seen. "

With Chief Justice Roberts presiding over the trial, how much of that do you think he'll be able to get away with? Especially stuff that isn't directly related to the charges Trump will likely be impeached on?

#114 | Posted by sentinel at 2019-12-10 05:40 PM | Reply

#114

CJ Roberts is presiding but McConnell can set the rules and parameters for the trial in the Senate, much as Schiff did in the House. CJ Roberts won't have a say in how this works until the trial starts, and will be bound by the rules laid out by the Majority.

According to reports, McConnell is trying to work things out with Schumer but my guess is that is going nowhere, so McConnell will establish the procedures as he wants and the Senate will do a straight party-line vote.

Senate Majority Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on Tuesday said that if he's unable to reach a deal with Democrats to set the rules for a Senate impeachment trial then he will try to to do so solely with GOP votes.

A Senate trial is expected to last as long as five or six weeks, depending on how much time the resolution allows House impeachment managers to make their case and the president's defense team to offer a rebuttal.

McConnell said he'll try to negotiate a deal with Senate Democratic Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) but that if it fails he'll try to muster 51 votes in the Senate Republican Conference to set the rules of the trial.

But McConnell acknowledged that he may not even have 51 votes in his own conference on the measure that determines how much time the impeachment managers and the defense will have to present their cases and what witnesses, if any, will be called to the Senate floor.

McConnell said that if he and Schumer fail to reach a deal and there aren't 51 Republican votes for a rules package then there would be a freewheeling series of votes on various motions, ranging from the management of floor time to summoning witnesses.

McConnell: Senate could pass partisan rules package for impeachment trial

Given public statements by GOP Senators to date, it looks like the Murder Turtle will have his caucus aligned when that vote happens, and the Bidens, Burisma, Schiff, the WB will all be on the table.

#115 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-10 06:04 PM | Reply

Like I said, having failed to move the needle of public opinion I think this is a huge mistake politically.
#92 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Considering the stakes, it's pathetic anyone would hold such a view as being legitimate within the context of protecting this democracy. Why your point matters is the underlying issue.

---- your party and ---- you opponents' party.

#116 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-12-10 06:23 PM | Reply

Bidens, Burisma, Schiff, the WB will all be on the table.
#115 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

One can only hope!!

#117 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-12-10 06:25 PM | Reply

"The House would be delinquent if it did not impeach president Trump."
-- Nancy Pelosi, December 10th, 2019

Exactly right.

#118 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-12-10 06:28 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

"In other words, impeach him for foreign policy decisions that go against the policy preferences of the neocon/neoliberal bureaucracy."

It's not him going against "my" policy preferences, it's Trump going against his own government's stated foreign policy set from his own office!

Though the President is free to change his mind, isn't it incumbent upon the President to do so be giving lawful orders to the government so everyone is on the same page and so the public is aware of such a 180 degree shift? That isn't what he did. He told one thing secretively to some, while others worked in the opposite direction as they had been previously ordered to do. This isn't the faithful execution of the law, it's undermining the internal chain of command for a purpose that doesn't serve America's stated interests more than it serves Trump's personal interests.

The issue isn't that Trump doesn't have the power or right to implement his policies through the established legal and regulatory channels for doing so, it's that he's using his power backhandedly, in service not of the nation but only for himself, and in this case to the benefit of Russia.

#119 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-10 06:30 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#115 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

see #74

#120 | Posted by Corky at 2019-12-10 06:32 PM | Reply

- Trump doesn't have the power or right to implement his policies through the established legal and regulatory channels for doing so,

Which is why an irate John Bolton called Trump's bypassing State diplomats to implement his bribery scheme through Rudy, "a drug deal".

He sent his employee Fiona Hall to the attnys as soon as he heard about the deal being discussed IN the WH in front of Ukraine reps.

Rwingers now love them some drug deals.

#121 | Posted by Corky at 2019-12-10 06:38 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#120

Already saw it...your point, other than to find other ways to quote yourself?

#122 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-10 06:41 PM | Reply

Point was obvious... you were wrong all along; Sen GOPhers wouldn't indict Trump even if he shot Stormy Daniels dead on 5th Ave. The idea that there is any integrity among Republicans Sens is.... quaint.

He's their cash cow, and as long as that's true he's bullet-proof. Sort of a sacred cow to the rwingers.

#123 | Posted by Corky at 2019-12-10 06:44 PM | Reply

Dorkus, my point has always been, if the Dems conducted an impeachment proceeding according to precedent, they would have a shot at convincing NeverTrump Senators to convict.

They (will have) failed in doing this correctly and will have this blow up in their faces at the Senate trial.

But keep on whining, it is what you excel at.

#124 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-10 06:48 PM | Reply

#115

That was 12/3, today is 12/10:

Growing divide between Trump and McConnell over impeachment trial

In conversations with the White House, the Kentucky Republican has made clear he hopes to end the trial as soon as he can, an effort to both get impeachment off his lap and protect his conference from potentially damaging votes should the process break out into partisan warfare. That will include a continuous whip count until McConnell feels he has the votes to acquit the President and end the show. He has even floated a 10-day minimum during these talks, one person said.

But the show is exactly what Trump wants. He's made clear to advisers privately that rather than end the trial as quickly as possible, he is hoping for a dramatic event, according to two people familiar with his thinking. He wants Hunter Biden, Rep. Adam Schiff and the whistleblower to testify. He wants the witnesses to be live, not clips of taped depositions. And he's hoping to turn it into a spectacle, which he thinks is his best chance to hurt Democrats in the election.

But Trump's position is the opposite of what some Republican senators, including some of Trump's closest allies on the Capitol Hill, are advising at this point. In closed-door meetings and phone calls over the course of the last month, several Republican senators have warned Pat Cipollone, the White House counsel, not to "turn the Senate into a circus," according to one Republican senator. A source familiar with the matter said there was no daylight between Trump and Cipollone on the trial.

Instead, there has been a concerted push to allow both sides -- the House Democratic managers and the White House defense team -- to present their case, then quickly move to a vote to end the proceedings. It would give enough time for moderate Republicans to see it as a fulsome and fair process, while shielding the conference from divisive votes on potential witnesses, one person involved with internal GOP discussions said.

Mitch doesn't want to turn the Senate into a Trump schitshow.

#125 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-10 06:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"In other words, impeach him for foreign policy decisions that go against the policy preferences of the neocon/neoliberal bureaucracy."

Impeach him for foreign policy decisions that go against the law.

#126 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-10 06:52 PM | Reply

"if the Dems conducted an impeachment proceeding according to precedent, they would have a shot at convincing"

The impeachment proceeding hasn't started yet, and when it does, it will start in the Senate, and it will be conducted by the Republicans.

#127 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-10 06:56 PM | Reply

#124

That's hilarious. You failed to understand that Trump would obstruct justice and prevent the witnesses needed to "conducted an impeachment proceeding according to precedent" from testifying... and now you blame Dems for that.

Dems never had a chance of convincing any GOP Sens to convict; Trump was always going to obstruct justice, and it was always going to take up to a year or more to litigate that... and in a rwing SC, making that a non-option.

But keep on being predictably stupid for your Party, it is that to which you excel.

#128 | Posted by Corky at 2019-12-10 06:57 PM | Reply

They (will have) failed in doing this correctly and will have this blow up in their faces at the Senate trial.

The only thing blowing up in the Senate will be the GOP as them Dems will pursue their case with all the probity and decorum such a serious undertaking demands and deserves. The GOP will try to unleash an InfoWars/Jerry Springer hybrid that may excite Trump's base but will anger and turn off most Americans that aren't in that category.

Time will tell, and we can revisit. There is no moral downside for the Democrats because the facts and principles are on their side. All Trump has is bombast, vitriol, and the status of pained victimhood when the fact remains the only thing he's being prosecuted for are his own actions which have nothing perverse to do with those trying to hold him responsible, as the Constitution allows and commands.

#129 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-10 06:57 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I haven't followed this enough to know what the expected vote count Will be in the Senate.

What's the threshold to remove Trump and where do we think it's gonna turn out?

#130 | Posted by eberly at 2019-12-10 07:05 PM | Reply

#130

It's a 67 vote threshold, so there was always going to be the need to get not only the very few moderates, but also many conservative Republicans to vote to convict, which means it was never going to happen without the Sec of State, the Energy Sec, the head of the NSC and all the other Trump aides who knew about this "drug deal" all along testifying, and that was never going to happen either.

www.washingtonpost.com

#131 | Posted by Corky at 2019-12-10 07:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Thanks corky.

From your link.....

"The political ideology of senators mattered far more than legal and constitutional arguments in predicting the outcome of the Clinton trial."

Some things never change.

#132 | Posted by eberly at 2019-12-10 07:27 PM | Reply

Some things never change.

Somehow this time "public opinion" seems to matter.

If Democrats can just sway public opinion those Republican senators will vote to convict.

I read that here a lot. When donald is aquitted it will be because Democrats failed to sway public opinion.

#133 | Posted by REDIAL at 2019-12-10 07:48 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"The political ideology of senators mattered far more than legal and constitutional arguments in predicting the outcome of the Clinton trial."

Very true, but what were the legal and constitutional arguments? Clinton had 2 articles of impeachment for which he received a trial in the Senate:


Article I charged that Clinton lied to the grand jury concerning:[27]

the nature and details of his relationship with Lewinsky
prior false statements he made in the Jones deposition
prior false statements he allowed his lawyer to make characterizing Lewinsky's affidavit
his attempts to tamper with witnesses

Article II charged Clinton with attempting to obstruct justice in the Jones case by:[28]

encouraging Lewinsky to file a false affidavit
encouraging Lewinsky to give false testimony if and when she was called to testify
concealing gifts he had given to Lewinsky that had been subpoenaed
attempting to secure a job for Lewinsky to influence her testimony
permitting his lawyer to make false statements characterizing Lewinsky's affidavit
attempting to tamper with the possible testimony of his secretary Betty Currie
making false and misleading statements to potential grand jury witnesses

Both articles concerned acts that were not connected to his abuse of presidential power regarding anything connected to the US Government. They were based on actions whose foundation were his own personal conduct.

The Republicans in 1998 claimed that these transgressions were of sufficient importance that the President should be removed from power, ie., a high crime or misdemeanor in constitutional parlance. Most of the Democrats disagreed. None of them said that what Clinton did was justified, only that nowhere in history or any sober reading of the Constitution did it seem lying about a personal extramarital affair was what the Founders had in mind when they codified the Constitution.

What they did have in mind, and said so repeatedly, was not allowing any President to solicit or accept the assistance of a foreign power in their effort to win an election. Trump used his power as President to undermine his own government's policy without ever publicly saying the reasons he unilaterally made such a decision until his surreptitious attempts were uncovered and brought into the light. If Trump had given his government orders through established channels to undertake his new foreign policy emphasis and had Congress' assent, then we wouldn't be here. Trump cannot unilaterally override Congressional funding orders unless he vetoes them and the veto is upheld. Other than that, he must "faithfully execute the laws of the United States" and in this case, did just the opposite.

The big problem here is that Nixon tried the same things in his attempt to cover up Watergate so Congress passed a law where there is a described process for the release of congressionally passed funding that does not allow the President to clog.

This time it's the Democrats who say that both legally and constitutionally Trump has violated his oath and Republicans try to claim that the Democrats and everyone else who disagrees with them are simply playing politics, ignoring the things I just noted above. So even though the statement at the beginning is correct, it doesn't truly represent the differences in these two cases in the depth that is deserved.

#134 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-10 07:51 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

If Democrats can just sway public opinion those Republican senators will vote to convict.

The general public isn't paying attention. The American attention span is hardly two weeks. If something isn't resolved within 14 day, the public has moved on.

As far as swaying Republicans. Have you seen conservative's reaction to climate change or gun violence. It's to double down on it.

If that's to lead me to believe anything, it's once Trump wins in 2020, he'll be twice as corrupt.

I've heard rumors of abolishing presidential term limits.

At this point. It wouldn't surprise me. Conservatives would cheer it on.

#135 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-12-10 07:58 PM | Reply

The general public isn't paying attention.

I didn't mean it was real. It's just the canned explanation for the Senate voting to acquit like everyone knows they will, and blaming democrats in the process.

#136 | Posted by REDIAL at 2019-12-10 08:04 PM | Reply

Tony I see what you're saying but you are watering down the fact that Bill Clinton was guilty as hell of the two charges levied against him in his impeachment proceeding.

45 senators voted to not remove Clinton even they all knew he was guilty of them both.

Politics mattered then. They still do.

Now, this is no excuse for not getting rid of Trump Who I agree deserves to be thrown out for what he's clearly guilty of.

#137 | Posted by eberly at 2019-12-10 08:11 PM | Reply

Tony I see what you're saying but you are watering down the fact that Bill Clinton was guilty as hell of the two charges levied against him in his impeachment proceeding.

45 senators voted to not remove Clinton even they all knew he was guilty of them both.

I think you've missed the point. Clinton WAS guilty, that isn't the issue. The issue was whether or not the US Constitution's most severe presidential sanction was intended to be used for a President guilty of lying about an extramarital affair(s) and trying to cover up its details. Clinton's "crime" was wholly independent upon his constitutional actions as President. His original act - the affair itself - was not a crime in and of itself.

And we can't forget the only reason Clinton was put into the position of committing perjury was the fact that an entirely unrelated investigation that had nothing to do with his personal conduct initially, caught wind of it and exposed it, creating the conditions for his crime.

It was always a constitutional question, not a legal one. In Trump's case, he's admitted to having violated the law by withholding congressionally-passed funding as a matter of abusing his presidential power, not for the sake of the country, but because it served his own interests.

Trump's self-released memorandum of his phone call is a tacit confession of his crime - that Trump still doesn't understand because he truly believes there are no constraints on his presidential powers. Constitutionally, Trump is saying, whatever I decide to do I can do; Congress is only mad because they disagree. The Democrats don't believe that's what the Constitution says, and since the DOJ works by the OLC memo stating that Trump cannot be legally held responsible by laws through the Courts for anything while he's President, the only other way to hold him accountable by the other co-equal branch of government is to use the Constitution's fire alarm, but with provable cause, not political malice.

#138 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-10 08:27 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Clinton's "crime" was wholly independent of his constitutional actions as President.

#139 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-10 08:28 PM | Reply

It really seems like Democrats are half-assing this.

#140 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 09:16 PM | Reply

"The issue was whether or not the US Constitution's most severe presidential sanction was intended to be used for a President guilty of lying about an extramarital affair(s) and trying to cover up its details. Clinton's "crime" was wholly independent upon his constitutional actions as President. His original act - the affair itself - was not a crime in and of itself."

I understand. I'm not trying to draw a parallel between Trump's and Clinton's transgressions.

#141 | Posted by eberly at 2019-12-10 09:23 PM | Reply

- Democrats are half-assing this.

Going full-ass would mean taking Trump's obstruction of justice through the courts for the next year or two, which, considering the rwing court, isn't much more promising than the rwing Senate.

#142 | Posted by Corky at 2019-12-10 09:47 PM | Reply

"Clinton WAS guilty, that isn't the issue. The issue was whether or not the US Constitution's most severe presidential sanction was intended to be used for a President guilty of lying about an extramarital affair(s) and trying to cover up its details."

He abused his office and committed a serious crime in trying to cover it up. There's no reason to think just because the underlying thing being covered up was an extramarital affair would exempt him from that.

"And we can't forget the only reason Clinton was put into the position of committing perjury was the fact that an entirely unrelated investigation that had nothing to do with his personal conduct initially, caught wind of it and exposed it, creating the conditions for his crime."

Yep. It shouldn't have mattered then, just like the circumstances leading up to the conditions for Trump's crime shouldn't matter now.

#143 | Posted by sentinel at 2019-12-10 10:11 PM | Reply

I understand. I'm not trying to draw a parallel between Trump's and Clinton's transgressions.

I'm only trying to make the distinction that with Clinton, the partisan split was based on constitutional concerns, not legal ones, on behalf of the Democrats. They did not believe that the President's personal conduct in private - leading him to lie and obstruct - was the high bar impeachment was written for. It was a judgment on his personal conduct having nothing to do with exercising his presidential powers.

As it regards Trump so far, the Republicans have issues with both the legal and constitutional aspects of the case even though (if we follow the actual law) the hold was a violation, hence "illegal" and fully through the illicit use of his presidential powers. And the Constitution specifically names soliciting help from a foreign government for domestic political considerations as being the very definition of an impeachable act. This is what the Founders wrote in ancillary writings and discourse as the Constitution itself was being written. So how is it not an unconstitutional act when those who wrote the Constitution says that it is?

So I think the fact that the GOP denies both is simply an untenable position based on the facts in evidence. Trump has broken both the law and the constitution at the same time in the eyes of many. So denying that, is a "political decision" that so far cannot be intellectually supported by defending his actions by any articulated legal or constitutional counters outside of invective and accusations toward those bringing them forth for adjudication.

Those are not valid defenses for allegations as serious as these.

#144 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-10 10:17 PM | Reply

He abused his office and committed a serious crime in trying to cover it up.

He didn't abuse his office. He used no unique presidential powers in asking witnesses to help him keep his private affairs from coming out. He didn't shred government documents or erase tapes. The seriousness of the crime was based on the seriousness of who he was and the responsibilities he had unrelated to the affair.

All crimes are not impeachable. The Dems felt what Clinton did was not the purpose impeachment was placed in the Constitution.

It's arguable, but that's the point. I don't think it's arguable that what Trump has done and is being charged with are indeed impeachable acts with or without an underlying, indictable crime.

#145 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-10 10:24 PM | Reply

I have a feeling that, absent a quick dismissal in the Senate, the process will be much more fair. Both sides would get to call all of their witnesses and be allowed to ask all of their questions within rules agreed to (or at very lease discussed and debated) by the majority and the minority.

#146 | Posted by Nuke_Gently at 2019-12-10 11:37 PM | Reply

" 'A majority of Americans support impeachment, so whatever fantasyland you live in that doesn't accept a majority supporting impeachment as "strong public support," you can just go back to.
#82 | POSTED BY CHUFFY'

According to 538 aggregate about 47% support impeachment and removal.
#86 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 01:23 PM"

The latest from 538 says:

"Overall, our tracker of impeachment polls shows that public opinion remains divided, with 48 percent of Americans in favor of impeaching Trump and 44 percent opposed."

fivethirtyeight.com

So, OK, 48% is a plurality and not a majority. It is a large enough plurality to be within the statistical variation of a majority. Beyond the actual numbers, it's probably more significant that there's been a definite, consistent shift towards favoring impeachment and away from opposing impeachment since mid-September.

BTW, the 538 poll is about impeachment and says nothing about removal.

#147 | Posted by TrueBlue at 2019-12-11 02:47 AM | Reply

The GOP Senate was a much different body when Clinton was on trial. It was comprised of real statesmen who valued the institution in which they served.

Today's GOP Senate is comprised of weaklings who are scared to death of Trump's shadow.

#148 | Posted by Twinpac at 2019-12-11 05:25 AM | Reply

To all of the people who say Democrats should wait to impeach until they sway Republican opinion, I ask you: If Trump's defrauding of students of his fake "university" to the tune of $25 million and donors to his fake "charity" to the tune of $2 million hasn't turned any of his disciples against him, do you honestly believe some more nuanced and developed explanation of Trump's violation of his oath of office in the Ukraine affair will?

Get serious. Trump is beneath the dignity of the office his holds. He deserves to be removed. You know it. Republican Senators know it. You should do the right thing and support removing this fraud if you are really the superpatriots you hold yourselves out to be.

#149 | Posted by anton at 2019-12-11 06:01 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

It is becoming increasingly obvious that the Republicans have sold out America. The impeachment won't change any of that but it will, to many of us, reinforce the belief that Republicans honestly aren't patriotic Americans any more. They know as well as the rest of us that Donald Trump is sold out to Putin but, I guess because of 2.5 trillion dollars of tax cuts for the 1% they don't care. That message needs to be communicated to the American people, the Republican Party leadership are traitors. When enough Americans understand that we will get our country back. Until that happens they will do as much damage to our nation as they possibly can.

#150 | Posted by danni at 2019-12-11 06:08 AM | Reply

DANNI

"Until that happens they will do as much damage to our nation as they possibly can."

They're a little behind schedule because of Trump's personal 3-yr distraction with his "Wall" but I think Putin has lit a fire under his ass and, you're right. Trump will have to slip into overdrive.

Putin can read poll numbers, too.

#151 | Posted by Twinpac at 2019-12-11 07:03 AM | Reply

I'm disappointed the Dems didn't charge Benedict Donald with more charges as he is guilty AF.
We will see if their approach is the right one.

#152 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2019-12-11 07:06 AM | Reply

I'm disappointed the Dems didn't charge Benedict Donald with more charges as he is guilty AF.

They did in subtle but definitely broader inclusive terms in both articles:

These actions were consistent with President Trump's previous invitations of foreign interference in United States elections.

These actions were consistent with President Trump's previous efforts to undermine United States Government investigations into foreign interference in United States elections.

This language keeps the door wide open to bringing in all the other things - at minimum - in these specific categories as corroborating evidence during the Senate trial.

As I read it, those sentences puts Mueller's findings into the mix should the Democrats decide to or plan on using them.

#153 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 07:29 AM | Reply

I referenced a Fox "news" poll that listed the impeach and remove favorability at 51%, but if we're going with 538 as the source of truth, so be it. My point stands that a) more people favor impeachment than don't and b) 47% is a huge number considering where we are, historical precedent and public support. The argument was that public support for impeachment is not there. It is.

#154 | Posted by chuffy at 2019-12-11 03:17 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Why argue about polls? Does a poll show how stupid you Lefties are? I believe you'll have one in November 2020. Just like 2016.

#155 | Posted by wisgod at 2019-12-11 05:03 PM | Reply

Sure looks like the swing States agree. Just like 2016.

#156 | Posted by wisgod at 2019-12-11 05:04 PM | Reply

#155

There are quite a few polls that show lefties, and people who don't get their "news" from conservitard media, as being more informed and more intelligent. So, to answer your second question, yes. It turns out, not stupid at all.

#157 | Posted by chuffy at 2019-12-11 05:11 PM | Reply

What happened in 2016 again, poll lock?
Stupid is a bad card to play

#158 | Posted by wisgod at 2019-12-11 05:18 PM | Reply

If we don't successfully impeach this corrupt con artist this Republic is in real danger. Never thought I would live to see the day when a charismatic figure took control off our government. The divide will be complete and the house will fall. Just as Lincoln predicted it would fall if we all allow ourselves to become so hatefully divided.

Better wake up quick America. The wolf is knocking at the door.

And If we let him then we deserve whatever happens.

And may the Gawds have mercy on our dream of a Perfect Union and our souls.

#159 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-12-12 07:07 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 2020 World Readable

Drudge Retort