Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Sunday, January 19, 2020

Frank Bruni: How in God's name -- and it was in God's name -- can the Republicans who have already decided to acquit President Trump take a solemn oath to administer "impartial justice"? They're partial to the core, unabashedly so, as their united march toward a foregone conclusion shows.

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.

They're partial to the core, unabashedly so, as their united march toward a foregone conclusion shows.

Posted by rcade at 05:51 PM | 0 COMMENTS | permalink | Comment on This Entry |

They want to get rid of this as soon as they can. I'm not sure the attitude really helps Trump's re-election or continuing GOP control of the Senate.

Until Trump manages to change American culture entirely, the nation values the entire story told as truthfully as possible.

#1 | Posted by Zed at 2020-01-19 06:57 PM | Reply

By the way, sociopaths are incapable of shame.

#2 | Posted by Zed at 2020-01-19 07:09 PM | Reply

They're partial to the core, unabashedly so, as their united march toward a foregone conclusion shows.

Why shouldn't they be?

There isn't an impeachable offense.

If there was all this gorilla dust and name calling wouldn't be needed.

Whats the crime? violation?

Anything? Why isn't in the Article of Impeachment? Its supposed to be like the grand jury ...

Well where is the indictment?

#3 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2020-01-19 07:36 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Whats the crime? violation?

#3 | Posted by AndreaMackri

Treasonous behavior in the form of Trump manipulating foreign governments to assist his own re-election.

#4 | Posted by Zed at 2020-01-19 07:42 PM | Reply

Well where is the indictment?

POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS AT 2020-01-19 07:36 PM | REPLY

Impeachment is the process by which a legislative body levels charges against a government official. Impeachment does not in itself remove the official definitively from office; it is similar to an indictment in criminal law, and thus it is essentially the statement of charges against the official.

#5 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2020-01-19 07:43 PM | Reply

Personal and Party gain before the US IS an Impeachable offense.
Being the perfect ------- also does not help.

#6 | Posted by bat4255 at 2020-01-19 07:43 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Whats the crime? violation?

#3 | Posted by AndreaMackr

When you treat Trump like he's pure as driven snow, that's an act.

#7 | Posted by Zed at 2020-01-19 07:44 PM | Reply

#5

It's pretty rare when I can say this these days but Laura is absolutely correct. Impeachment is a political remedy. It has certain parallels to a legal process but that's not what it is. I've seen both sides get this seriously wrong as both sides have bitched about the process depending on whether it's the House or the Senate.

#8 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-01-19 08:33 PM | Reply

"Where's the indictment?"

Andrea, have you really forgotten that Trump's DOJ, including Special Counsel Robert Mueller, says he can't be indicted?

#9 | Posted by nimbleswitch at 2020-01-19 08:42 PM | Reply

"Where's the indictment?"

He's impeached. That IS the indictment. It's the same thing.

Now the Senate will acquit him. If the glove don't fit, you must acquit.

#10 | Posted by REDIAL at 2020-01-19 09:10 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

Donald John Trump, the 45th president of the United States, will not come out of the impeachment as the big loser. He will be acquitted by fellow Republicans in the Senate, and he will assure his base that the House impeachment has been undone - - like it never happened at all. That will be a lie, of course, but Andrea and his base will sucker it up.

The real losers of this impeachment trial will be the former Republican Party, which will nevermore be recognized as "the party of Lincoln." (Would Lincoln be a Republican were he alive today?) Rather, the former Republican Party will evermore be recognized as the Trump Party. And well it should. After all, Republican leadership (i.e., Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham, Mike Pence, Bill Barr) has sold out the Republican Party to the concept of dictatorial presidents. But, especially if Trump is re-elected this year, the Republican Party will never elect another. The Republican Party will have assassinated itself.

#11 | Posted by nimbleswitch at 2020-01-19 09:14 PM | Reply

The votes in the House were partisan

The votes in the Senate were partisan

Clinton/Trump

Nobody expected a different result.

The votes were known beforehand.

#12 | Posted by Petrous at 2020-01-19 09:54 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

en.wikipedia.org

5 and 10 republicans crossed the aisle to vote not guilty

#13 | Posted by truthhurts at 2020-01-19 10:47 PM | Reply

Q Mr. President, what exactly did you hope Zelensky would do about the Bidens after your phone call? Exactly.

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I would think that, if they were honest about it, they'd start a major investigation into the Bidens. It's a very simple answer.

Oct. 3, 2019, 10:17 a.m., White House South Lawn. As transcribed officially by the White House:

www.whitehouse.gov

#14 | Posted by nimbleswitch at 2020-01-20 12:33 AM | Reply

It sounds like Makris is unaware that at the time the Constitution was adopted there were no criminal statutes because they hadn't been written yet. Federal statues did not exist until the Congress under the Constitution created them. So, obviously, a statute is not required to impeach and remove.
Several Federal judges have been impeached and removed for "neglect of duty and drunkenness on the bench", neither of which is a "criminal statute"

The impeachment power is not different for President than it is for other "Federal Officers" including Federal Judges.

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase was impeached in 1804:

"The House adopted the select committee's eight articles on March 26, 1804,[17] one of which involved Chase's handling of the trial of John Fries. Two more focused on his conduct in the political libel trial of James Callender. Four articles focused on procedural errors made during Chase's adjudication of various matters, and an eighth was directed to his "intemperate and inflammatory ... peculiarly indecent and unbecoming ... highly unwarrantable ... highly indecent" remarks while "charging" or authorizing a Baltimore grand jury."

Several others were impeached and removed for "Abuse of power".

Nope, not seeing a violation of a Federal statute there...

#15 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2020-01-20 01:54 AM | Reply

# 10
NOT the same.

Indictment: a formal charge or accusation of a serious CRIME.

Impeachment: a charge of misconduct made against the holder of a public office.

NO CRIME mentioned by definition.

#16 | Posted by Greatamerican at 2020-01-20 02:08 AM | Reply

Whats the crime? violation?

Anything? Why isn't in the Article of Impeachment? Its supposed to be like the grand jury ...

Well where is the indictment?

#3 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS

Disingenuous questions from a disingenuous pile of schit.

#17 | Posted by jpw at 2020-01-20 09:07 AM | Reply

No crime is required for Impeachment. That's a ridiculous creation/fabrication made by those that excuse Trump's unethical, immoral, lawless actions.

It's amusing watching trumpers so busy lapping up the slop Trump and the Republicans are spewing that they can't figure that out, or don't stop to think how stupid that argument is.

The most obvious proof of this is that Congress can't impose criminal penalties on those that are impeached.

If you need the term "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" explained, this is a good write-up:
www.crf-usa.org
(keep in mind that when the US Constitution was written we didn't have a book of law and defined crimes like we do today - because Congress wasn't around.

Even Jonathan Turley, cited by those on the Trumpside conceded "There is much that is worthy of investigation in the Ukraine scandal, and it is true that impeachment doesn't require a crime."

If one insists that the "crime" be indicated, though it is not necessary, then the Democrats can charge "bribery" in the next set of Impeachment charges. That one is specifically listed in the U.S. Constitution and there's ample proof Trump did just that.

But then y'all will cry about something else. It's all you do.

#18 | Posted by YAV at 2020-01-20 09:23 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

I love the double standard at play here. Democrats can be as hyper-partisan and partial as they wish but Republicans have to be sober and fair.

This is a great summation of how ridiculous Democrats are being (and this piece is very hard on Trump, and to a lesser degree Senate Republicans)

What Nadler and other Democrats are insisting on is that the Senate take up its investigative baton. In other words, the body controlled by the party that was desperate to impeach Trump wants to outsource its work to the body controlled by the party that rejects Trump's impeachment.

This is a cockamamie demand that is of a piece with the House's attitude to the Senate's proceedings: We are going to rush the impeachment, but don't dare rush the trial. We are going to impeach without key witnesses and documents, but if you hold a trial without key witnesses and documents, you are engaged in malfeasance. We didn't want to deal with knotty questions of privilege and potential litigation arising from them; you are obliged to.


www.nationalreview.com

#19 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-01-20 10:33 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Turley - "There is much that is worthy of investigation in the Ukraine scandal, and it is true that impeachment doesn't require a crime."

Of course it doesn't "require" a crime .... but it would certainly help your cause if you want people to join in your fiasco of removal.

Just because you don't like his policies toward Ukraine is hardly worthy of removal.

Again where is the crime ?

#20 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2020-01-20 10:45 AM | Reply

I would also ask Turley, has anyone ever been impeached without a crime?

Not just Presidents, but judges too? Has the Senate ever impeached anyone without a crime being committed?

#21 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2020-01-20 10:47 AM | Reply

but it would certainly help your cause if you want people to join in your fiasco of removal.

Just because you don't like his policies toward Ukraine is hardly worthy of removal.

Again where is the crime ?

#20 | Posted by AndreaMackris

Eat schit, -------.

Or at the very least stop posting disingenuous questions.

#22 | Posted by jpw at 2020-01-20 10:53 AM | Reply

Or at the very least stop posting disingenuous questions.

What is disingenuous about asking for a crime?

If you have no crime ....

What are you having a trial for?

What are you asking Senators to be shameful about?

#23 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2020-01-20 10:56 AM | Reply

What is impeachment trying to prove?

Its hilarious when you think about JeffJ's post, in the framework of NO crime.

#24 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2020-01-20 10:57 AM | Reply

Are you a scientist JPickled?

If you are what are you trying to prove exactly?

#25 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2020-01-20 10:58 AM | Reply

Are you a scientist JPickled?

If you are what are you trying to prove exactly?

#26 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2020-01-20 10:58 AM | Reply

What is disingenuous about asking for a crime?

Because it's not a requirement for impeachment.

You know this.

But ask because you know the answer is "he's not charged with a crime" so you can go "then why are we impeaching him?".

It's disingenuous garbage.

#27 | Posted by jpw at 2020-01-20 10:58 AM | Reply

Mackris,

Impeachment is a political remedy. Although the Constitution cites "High crimes and misdemeanors" it doesn't define what that means. Congress can remove an honest president for gross incompetence/negligence if it put our national security in grave jeopardy.

#28 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-01-20 10:58 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

What is impeachment trying to prove?

That Trump has abused his office for personal gain and is unfit to continue to serve.

Something that is obvious to anybody who's not a POS.

#29 | Posted by jpw at 2020-01-20 11:00 AM | Reply

I would also ask Turley, has anyone ever been impeached without a crime?

The answer is yes, and if you'd read what I posted, you'd know that by reviewing the 13 Judges Congress has impeached. A disingenuous question because you didn't know the answer, assumed there was no such case, were wrong, but posed the question as if there wasn't such a case.

Turley - ..." it is true that impeachment doesn't require a crime."

followed by you, after admitting the above is true, with:

Again where is the crime ?

Disingenuous through and through.

#30 | Posted by YAV at 2020-01-20 11:16 AM | Reply

A disingenuous question because you didn't know the answer, assumed there was no such case, were wrong, but posed the question as if there wasn't such a case.

Goal post move to POTUS impeached without crime in 3...2...1...

#31 | Posted by jpw at 2020-01-20 11:25 AM | Reply

Makris, this is the same thing I posted to you on another thread:

It sounds like you are unaware that at the time the Constitution was adopted there were no criminal statutes because they hadn't been written yet. Federal statues did not exist until the Congress under the Constitution created them. So, obviously, a statute is not required to impeach and remove.

Several Federal judges have been impeached and removed for "neglect of duty and drunkenness on the bench", neither of which is a "criminal statute". The impeachment power is not different for President than it is for other "Federal Officers" including Federal Judges.

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase was impeached in 1804:

"The House adopted the select committee's eight articles on March 26, 1804,[17] one of which involved Chase's handling of the trial of John Fries. Two more focused on his conduct in the political libel trial of James Callender. Four articles focused on procedural errors made during Chase's adjudication of various matters, and an eighth was directed to his "intemperate and inflammatory ... peculiarly indecent and unbecoming ... highly unwarrantable ... highly indecent" remarks while "charging" or authorizing a Baltimore grand jury."

Several others were impeached and removed for "Abuse of power".

Nope, not seeing a violation of a Federal statute there...

#32 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2020-01-20 11:38 AM | Reply

I guess it's telling when DR Libs start running out of sources to spread their hate so they just look to the NY Times and WaPo for all of their articles.

"That Trump has abused his office for personal gain and is unfit to continue to serve.

Something that is obvious to anybody who's not a POS."

And yet, the person he outed for doing the EXACT. SAME. THING. is still running for President and is allowed to by the party who is mad that Trump did it. That's not deflection, that's wondering, if it's so bad that it warrants impeaching the President of the United States, then you would think it's bad enough to stop someone from running who did it too. But, that's just taking the partisan hate out of the picture and wanting what's best for the country so I apologize if I have offended you in doing so.

#33 | Posted by humtake at 2020-01-20 12:46 PM | Reply

Here's what's impeachable:
-wearing a tan suit in public
-having an uppity, educated wife
-joshing with Hebrews like this Seinfeld fella, for some TV show about coffee
-playing golf
-making a GOP president from a family of American Royalty look bad by getting one of those Noble prizes
-letting poor and dark-skinned folks get access to medical care
-saying there are 57 US states

Do we need to say more?
--GOP toadies

#34 | Posted by catdog at 2020-01-20 01:20 PM | Reply

Why shouldn't they be?
There isn't an impeachable offense.
If there was all this gorilla dust and name calling wouldn't be needed.
Whats the crime? violation?
Anything? Why isn't in the Article of Impeachment? Its supposed to be like the grand jury ...
Well where is the indictment?

#3 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS

When did you join Trump's legal team?

What law school did you go to?

Do you have any legal authority showing Impeachment requires violation of a Federal or State criminal law?

#35 | Posted by Sycophant at 2020-01-20 01:44 PM | Reply

#33 | POSTED BY HUMTAKE

Conservatives have presented ZERO evidence that Joe Biden did ANYTHING to abuse his power. In fact, multiple Republican Senators SUPPORTED Biden in getting the Ukrainian guy fired. Did Biden also bribe THEM to get them to support him getting this guy fired for (in your opinion) the sole purpose of helping Hunter?

Please... give me links to your evidence. If you have evidence of actual wrongdoing (as there is in the case of Trump), I would be COMPLETELY BEHIND forcing Joe Biden to drop out.

But, we all know you are a conservative Trumper, so of course all you have are your lies. The GOP controls the Senate. If there IS any evidence of wrongdoing by Joe Biden, why are they not investigating it??? I will tell you why. Because all the GOP Senators ALSO see your lies for what they are, and don't want to actually open an investigation and embarrass themselves. You can spread all the FUD you want, but the Republican ACTIONS speak way louder than your words. And their ACTIONS say that you are full of crap, and that Joe did nothing wrong.

On the other hand, the actions of Democrats are crystal clear that they DO believe that what Trump did was wrong. And are willing to stand behind it with ACTIONS (unlike the ------- who you conservatives elected to hold office).

#36 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2020-01-20 02:45 PM | Reply

And yet, the person he outed for doing the EXACT. SAME. THING. is still running for President and is allowed to by the party who is mad that Trump did it. That's not deflection, that's wondering, if it's so bad that it warrants impeaching the President of the United States, then you would think it's bad enough to stop someone from running who did it too. But, that's just taking the partisan hate out of the picture and wanting what's best for the country so I apologize if I have offended you in doing so.

#33 | Posted by humtake

LOL points to the conspiracy theory that started the whole impeachment debacle to justify not impeaching Trump for leveraging a foreign government to support his conspiracy theory.

You can't make this garbage up.

#37 | Posted by jpw at 2020-01-20 06:21 PM | Reply

Not just Presidents, but judges too? Has the Senate ever impeached anyone without a crime being committed?

Yes, an article against Judge John Pickering (1804, U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire):

a man of loose morals and intemperate habits ... [who] ... in the year 1802, being then judge of the district court in and for the district of New Hampshire, did appear on the bench of the said court for the administration of justice in a state of total intoxication, produced by the free and intemperate use of intoxicating liquors; and did then and there frequently, in a most profane and indecent manner, invoke the name of the Supreme Being, to the evil example of all the good citizens of the United States; and was then and there guilty of other high misdemeanors, disgraceful to his own character as a judge and degrading to the honor of the United States.
An article against President Andrew Johnson:
Andrew Johnson as the Chief Magistrate of the United States, did, on the 18th day of August, in the year of our Lord 1866, and on divers other days and times, as well before as afterward, make and deliver with a loud voice certain intemperate, inflammatory, and scandalous harangues, and did therein utter loud threats and bitter menaces as well against Congress amid the cries, jeers, and laughter of the multitudes then assembled and within hearing ... .
The Sordid Story of Impeachment

#38 | Posted by et_al at 2020-01-20 07:09 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Well where is the indictment?

#3 | Posted by AndreaMackris

The president can't be indicted stupid. That's why he's not in jail with michael cohen for the crime he committed with michael cohen.

#39 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2020-01-21 12:33 AM | Reply

Here is a list of 8 crimes Trump committed that would put anyone else in jail for the rest of their life.

So Trump is facing death in prison unless his corruption wins over US law.

#40 | Posted by bored at 2020-01-21 01:54 AM | Reply

www.justsecurity.org

#41 | Posted by bored at 2020-01-21 01:55 AM | 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