Sentence First! Verdict Afterwards”: Senators Signal Their Votes Before Actual Impeachment

I often remark that my Senate trial defending Judge Thomas Porteous has a jury that I would normally strike for cause en masse. An impeachment jury composed of politicians can be akin to a maritime inquiry with a jury composed of the Pirates of Penzance. This week, Senators in both parties seemed to signal their votes before an actual impeachment has occurred, let alone a trial,. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.) declared “I’m not trying to pretend to be a fair juror here.” While the media focuses on Graham’s statement, Democratic senators have also made comments indicating that they have made up their minds. Indeed, yesterday, Sen. Chris Coons (D., Del.) declared that “if the Senate Republican majority refuses to discipline him through impeachment he will be unbounded.” It smacks of the Queen of Hearts in Alice in Wonderland: “Sentence first! Verdict afterwards.”

Both comments (and many others) undermine the integrity of the system and the legitimacy of any final decision. The Constitution often asks more from members than they are willing to give. In this case, they are expected to offer the House managers and the defense a fair hearing. To pre-judge the evidence before an actual impeachment signals to the public that this is simply a partisan muscle play and not a constitutional process.

Graham stated

“This thing will come to the Senate, and it will die quickly, and I will do everything I can to make it die quickly” and when confronted on the propriety of making such statements before a trial, Graham responded “Well, I must think so because I’m doing it . . . I am trying to give a pretty clear signal I have made up my mind. I’m not trying to pretend to be a fair juror here . . . What I see coming, happening today is just a partisan nonsense.”

For his part, Sen. Coons express how “gravely concerned” he is with even the prospect of acquittal:

“The only reason that Speaker Pelosi changed her position and supported moving ahead with an impeachment inquiry was because what Donald Trump is alleged to have done, and all evidence points to him having done it, which is to invite foreign interference in our next election.”

Obviously, both states only fuel the partisan concerns that each is voicing about the other side. Of course, the Clinton impeachment did not have a single Democrat breaking ranks. Thus, the “profiles of courage” shown by senators in the Andrew Johnson case remain the exception rather than the rule in impeachment. It is possible however for senators to transcend such impulses . . . just not recently.

164 thoughts on “Sentence First! Verdict Afterwards”: Senators Signal Their Votes Before Actual Impeachment”

  1. The # of Americans Disgusted with Democrats is growing. Just like the 2016 Election – the MSM is being ignored by Americans

    https://www.axios.com/focus-group-michigan-swing-voters-trump-impeachment-183e4fc7-5ecc-41bd-add1-537ed8a2fd8f.html

    These Obama/Trump voters are just Trump voters now

    SAGINAW, Mich. — Some swing voters here who voted for Barack Obama and then Donald Trump are firmly in Trump’s camp now — and they’re sick of impeachment.

    The big picture:

    These voters hate the fact that House Democrats are moving toward impeaching the president. They call it a distraction from the issues that would actually improve their lives, like preserving Social Security, cracking down on illegal immigration, and keeping jobs in the U.S.

    “I think she’s wasting a lot of [taxpayer] money on a ghost chase,” said Chad Y., a 43-year-old Obama/Trump voter, of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. “The money she’s spending on that could go to help the homeless or go towards health care.”

    Another participant, 73-year-0ld Michael G., said Democrats’ focus is in the wrong direction. “Instead of working on policies and things that will help the people, they are just working to basically preserve their own position … [T]hey don’t really care about you and [me], I don’t think.”

    Between the lines: These voters aren’t sick of Trump’s antics like other swing voters we’ve talked with, and they don’t feel a sense that things need to get back to “normal” — because Trump is their new normal.

    That’s reinforced by the fact that:

    They have virtually zero trust in the media’s coverage of him.

    1. So, I am a swing voter. And I know a number of other swing voters, out here West of the Rockies Mountain range, where our votes don’t really count anyway. Although, some don’t believe in election, but selection, but that’s a long-winded tangent for another day, a failure of the system in the minds of many. I can tell what little I do think of politics on the daily, I did think of politics much more while in the “zone of foreseeable danger” (my tort ref. for the day), we (collectively), the swing voters, while not “disgusted by” the Dems, do feel the push is insincere and lacking. Moreover, a complete and utter waste of time for the peoples.

  2. Vespasian began his reign in Egypt, securing the food supply for Rome.

    None of the laudatory writings of Pliny the Elder have survived.

    1. David Benson is the God Emperor of Making Stuff Up and owes me forty citations (one from the OED, one from the town ordinances and two from the Old Testament), an equation and the source of a quotation, after fifty-five weeks, and needs to cite all his work from now on. – Pliny the Elder has probably always best been known for Natural History.

        1. David Benson is the God Emperor of Making Stuff Up and owes me forty citations (one from the OED, one from the town ordinances and two from the Old Testament), an equation and the source of a quotation, after fifty-five weeks, and needs to cite all his work from now on. – that doesn’t mean the missing ones are of better quality.

    2. Early in his reign his eldest son Valarian completed the siege and sack of Jerusalem, including the deetruction of the Second Temple. The spoils, including the newly enslaved, considerably enriched Rome, adding to the emporor’s popularity.

  3. The evidence in the Bill Clinton impeachment was the eminently tangible sweater of Monica Lewinsky and DNA of “Slick Willy.”

    The evidence in the Trump case is the remarkably bizarre hearsay, innuendo and political opposition.

  4. FOX NEWS POLLS SHOWS 54% SUPPORT IMPEACHMENT

    UNCOMFORTABLY MORE THAN FOX EXPECTED

    Weeks of congressional hearings and debate have failed to move the electorate on impeachment, according to the latest Fox News Poll. At the same time, approval of President Trump’s job performance has climbed three points.

    Currently, 45 percent of voters approve of the job Trump’s doing, up from 42 percent in late October. Over half, 53 percent, disapprove. That lands the president almost exactly where he started the year, as 43 percent approved and 54 percent disapproved in January.

    The poll, conducted Sunday through Wednesday, also finds 50 percent want Trump impeached and removed from office, 4 percent say impeached but not removed, and 41 percent oppose impeaching him altogether.

    In late October, 49 percent favored impeachment and removal, 4 percent said impeach/don’t remove, and 41 percent opposed impeachment.

    Overall, 53 percent of voters believe Trump abused the power of his office, 48 percent think he obstructed Congress, and 45 percent say he committed bribery.

    In addition, 47 percent believe Trump held up military aid to pressure the Ukrainian president to investigate his political rivals.

    By a 60-24 percent margin, voters say it is generally wrong for Trump to ask leaders of foreign countries to investigate political rivals.

    And the “everybody-does-it” defense falls flat: only about one in five, 22 percent, think presidents typically ask leaders of foreign countries to investigate domestic political rivals. Among Republicans, 33 percent think that is common behavior.

    While over half of voters, 52 percent, say the Trump administration hasn’t cooperated enough with the impeachment inquiry, views are mixed over whether congressional Democrats are running the inquiry fairly (45 percent yes vs. 42 percent no).

    However, more consider the actions of congressional Republicans politically motivated than say the same of Democratic lawmakers.

    By a 16-point margin, voters are more likely to say Republican lawmakers just want to protect Trump politically than think Republicans truly believe what he did is not impeachable.

    By a 6-point spread, more believe congressional Democrats really think Trump committed an impeachable offense than that Democrats just want to hurt him politically.

    Voters narrowly say House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is better at Washington gamesmanship than Trump (41-37 percent). Women are more likely to say Pelosi is better by 10 points, while men pick Trump by 3 points.

    Conducted December 8-11, 2019, under the joint direction of Beacon Research (D) and Shaw & Company (R), this Fox News Poll includes interviews with 1,000 randomly chosen registered voters nationwide who spoke with live interviewers on both landlines and cellphones. The poll has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points for all registered voters.

    Edited from: “Fox News Poll: Trump Job Approval Ticks Up, Views On Impeachment Steady”

    Fox News, 12/15/19

    1. REGARDING ABOVE:

      These findings are noteworthy:

      “By a 60-24 percent margin, voters say it is generally wrong for Trump to ask leaders of foreign countries to investigate political rivals”.

      “And the “everybody-does-it” defense falls flat: only about one in five, 22 percent, think presidents typically ask leaders of foreign countries to investigate domestic political rivals. Among Republicans, 33 percent think that is common behavior”.

      “By a 16-point margin, voters are more likely to say Republican lawmakers just want to protect Trump politically than think Republicans truly believe what he did is not impeachable”.

      1. BRIAN KILMEADE REACTS TO POLL ON ‘FOX & FRIENDS”

        Fox News personality Brian Kilmeade made a remarkable admission early Monday morning.

        “The Fox poll came out — and I was stunned by this,” Kilmeade said on “Fox and Friends.” “This says 50 percent of the country want the president impeached. I was stunned to see that that’s the number, because I thought that things were trending away.”

        Actually, the Fox News poll released Sunday said that 54 percent of Americans want to see President Trump impeached. Fifty percent support impeaching him and removing him from office; an additional 4 percent support impeaching him but allowing him to remain on the job. Forty-one percent don’t think he should be impeached at all.

        (Interestingly, it’s that 4 percent who are most likely to see their desires fulfilled. Trump is likely to be impeached by the House this week but then acquitted by the Senate sometime next month.)

        There are, of course, broad differences in how members of each party view impeachment. Democrats overwhelmingly support impeaching and ousting Trump, while Republicans overwhelmingly disagree. Independents fall in the middle, with 50 percent supporting impeachment of the president (and slightly less supporting removal).

        What Kilmeade is comparing these results to, though, is the conservative media narrative that emerged in recent weeks. It’s one that was espoused by Trump himself last week, when the president declared that his poll numbers had gone “through the roof” — especially, he said, “with independent voters and especially in swing states.”

        As we noted Friday, that’s not true. The reality is that the polls actually haven’t changed that much. Since Fox News’s last poll in late October, for example, support for impeachment is essentially unchanged, once you consider the margin of sampling error. The same holds true for Trump’s job approval, which was at 42 percent in October and is at 45 percent now, a nonsignificant shift.

        Edited from: “Impeachment Reality Comes To Fox News Universe”

        Today’s Washington Post

        1. Trump Reacts To Fox News Poll..

          Between Plug For Hannity And Reminder He ‘Did Nothing Wrong’

          @realDonaldTrump
          Dec 15
          @seanhannity, who will be interviewed on @marklevinshow tonight at 8:00 P.M., @foxnews, stated about the Impeachment Hoax, “This is outrages lying, corruption and propaganda. Should never be allowed to happen.”

          @realDonaldTrump
          Dec 15
          The @foxnewPolls, always inaccurate, are heavily weighted toward Dems. So ridiculous – same thing happened in 2016. They got it all wrong. Get a new pollster!

          @realDonaldTrump
          Dec 15
          “The President did nothing wrong here. There is no crime.” @charliekirk11 Impeachment Hoax!

          Edited from: “The Real Donald Trump”, Twitter

      2. By a 60-24 percent margin, voters say it is generally wrong for Trump to ask leaders of foreign countries to investigate political rivals.

        Did President Trump ask a leader of a foreign country to investigate a political rival, or did he happen to ask for an investigation into corruption?

        1. Olly, Trump wanted Zelensky to parrot Putin lies regarding ‘Ukrainian interference”. Which signaled to NATO whose side Trump was really on.

                1. OLLY – Arizona has several expensive rehab facillties. I am sure they would treat habitual liars.

                  1. When it comes to rehabilitation, this author has a plan:

                    Three aspects of American political culture suggest we are in an era of decline. First, a serious “lack of will” of elected representatives. Second, decline in educational standards and assumption of the training of “journalists” into Departments of Communication,” and third, the growth of a political “New Class.”
                    https://theimaginativeconservative.org/2019/12/american-decline-what-to-do-richard-j-bishirjian.html?utm_source=The+Imaginative+Conservative+%28Daily%29&utm_campaign=693a329b4e-Today%27s+Essays&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_b25fb6fc69-693a329b4e-132528881&mc_cid=693a329b4e&mc_eid=c1f326aae5

            1. Olly, that was Trump’s demand to Zelenksy. He wanted him to confirm Russian lies that Ukraine had meddled in the 2016 Election. Zelensky, of course, had no interest in making ‘any’ statement that even came close to that. And the Ukrainian people certainly had no interest in having Zelensky say that. But Trump was so convinced Ukraine had Hillary’s server, that he was seriously pressing Zelensky to ‘come clean’.

                1. Olly, that was just ‘one’ of many articles addressing this. And I guess, from your reaction, that rightwing media has never covered this aspect of the Ukraine scandal. But this is the real scandal; Trump wanted Zelensky to parrot Putin lies.

                    1. Olly, I’m posting another one at the top. I can keep doing this all night if you want. There’s plenty where these come from. The Ukraine scandal is ‘not’ just limited the Bidens.

  5. I’m not sure I totally agree with the good (and very smart) professor here. Schiff and his team controlled the whole show–they were not stopped from bringing any witness they wanted. But Republicans on the committee were not only blocked from bringing (exculpatory) witnesses, but were also gagged from requests (points of order) and questions. Democrats proceeded to present their case in full. NO JUDGE would allow them to bring new witnesses without good cause, –and if Republicans already decided that what they heard and reviewed did not constitute impeachable conduct,I have no problem with a “summary judgrment/dismissal” analogy.

    1. Trump ordered executive branch to fail to respond to Congressional summons.

      That alone is a high crime.

      1. Benson, Dude you aren’t getting it.

        You probably never read this case and don’t understand the procedures.

        But basically you are totally missing Turley’s point that the POTUS can invoke privilege, just like any other party, and the Article III courts have a role in sorting that out.

        As they did here:
        https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/418/683/#tab-opinion-1950929

        And the House has totally short circuited that process.

        Why? because it’s fake, in a word!

        1. Mr Kurtz, there is not a word about executive privilege in the constitution. The impeachment clause is clear; it is entirely up to the House of Representatives.

          Quit making lame excuses.

          1. David Benson is the God Emperor of Making Stuff Up and owes me forty citations (one from the OED, one from the town ordinances and two from the Old Testament), an equation and the source of a quotation, after fifty-five weeks, and needs to cite all his work from now on. – there isn’t a word about abortion in the Constitution.

            1. Paul,
              Progressives don’t recognize the constitution as a limiting document. They view the absence of constitutional authority as an opening rather than a closing of their power. The 10th amendment is clear:

              The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

          2. Not a word! he says. LOL. separation of powers, surely you have heard of that. implicit in 3 different articles. hello! high school civics.

            ever heard of Montesquieu? sure you have

            https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/montesquieu/

            perhaps you would say that because he was not a Framer, his thinking on the topic does not matter?

            don’t be obtuse

            1. It appears Benson and the rest of his progressive ilk prefer the political philosophy of Hobbes.

              In this scheme, Hobbes explained, the sovereign serves as the soul of the body, animating it, moving it, as well as keeping it from motion in self-restraint. As the soul, the sovereign is not subject to any of the laws of the society, for he is, by his office, both above the law and one with the law.
              https://theimaginativeconservative.org/2019/12/hobbes-leviathan-collectivist-horror-bradley-birzer.html?utm_source=The+Imaginative+Conservative+%28Daily%29&utm_campaign=f38cd2a8fa-Today%27s+Essays&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_b25fb6fc69-f38cd2a8fa-132528881&mc_cid=f38cd2a8fa&mc_eid=c1f326aae5

      2. David Benson is the God Emperor of Making Stuff Up and owes me forty citations (one from the OED, one from the town ordinances and two from the Old Testament), an equation and the source of a quotation, after fifty-five weeks, and needs to cite all his work from now on. – Wrong!!!

          1. Anonymous – when one is right, one NEVER gets over it. It is NOT a waste of time or breath.

            1. A different anonymous, not the film buff, wrote those comments.
              Continue to take Benson to task for the citations he owes.

                1. There is only one “anonymous” film buff on this blog. And it’s me, hailing from Californian and insomniac 24/7. Paul, this Anonymous is an impersonator. Same icon and all. I will post as WW33 from today forward, just to prevent any confusion.

                  This Anon be fronting hard.

                  1. And if there is an error, e.g., I forgot to say my “name,” I will correct accordingly, as well as typos/”auto-correct” errors, contingent on if I care for the 2nd latter portion. ***California***

                    The former portion, my name, I will correct every time.

                    1. If they are nominated, then I should be getting copies in the mail delivered to me…or streaming versions with passwords. I don’t know if I will have time though before award season though…

                    2. WW33 – are part of Academy? or a subset? Richard Jewell should get nods for the top actor and Kathy Bates, maybe Best Pictures. Parasite will be nominated for Best Foreign Film.

                    3. And thank you for suggestion. I am more interested in “Parasite” than “Richard Jewell,” based off the trailers. I guess its a preferential type of thing. I will watch both though. I did “RJ” did not have a good opening at the box office, ouch! I assume it will show up in some award season dealio.

                      I like Clint’s directorial styling, its very consistent with lighting choices. Parasite it more intriguing to me. Not familiar with this S. Korean director, Boon. Looks good though.

      3. We have three co-equal Branches of Government. Whet you seem to be saying is the it is a High Crime for one Branch to seek resolution from another Branch. Bear in mind the specific function of that third Branch is to resolve disputes t which the Unites States is a party.
        At least Adam Schiff was honest when he told Chris Wallace that he didn’t want Trump to be able to “tie up the Congress in court”.
        Only the most feeble minded or biased would think it plausible that in order to uphold the Constitution, you need to violate it.
        If the Courts rule against Trump with finality and he refuses to abide by the rulings, you will have my support for obstruction and contempt charges. Not an instant before.

      4. The president responded to the subpoenas by exerting executive privilege. That is neither a high crime, low crime, or any crime. It certainly is not some ridiculous impeachable offense like obstruction of congress. Congress has a remedy that is within their powers and that is to take the issue up with the courts.

        Instead, Democrats have decided they are going to impeach the president on charges that they themselves are guilty of, all in an effort to influence the 2020 election.

        1. OLLY – can we still blame the British and Russians for interfering in the 2020 election?

        2. You don’t read so good.

          1. There is not a word in the constitution about executive privilege.

          2. The House of Representatives determines what is a high crime.

          3. There is no role for the courts in impeachment .

          1. David Benson is the God Emperor of Making Stuff Up and owes me forty citations (one from the OED, one from the town ordinances and two from the Old Testament), an equation and the source of a quotation, after fifty-five weeks, and needs to cite all his work from now on. – David, I agree with you on 1 and 2. However, the Executive and the Supreme Court disagrees with you on 3.

              1. David Benson is the God Emperor of Making Stuff Up and owes me forty citations (one from the OED, one from the town ordinances and two from the Old Testament), an equation and the source of a quotation, after fifty-five weeks, and needs to cite all his work from now on. – the Supremes trump all the little courts. Pun intended.

                  1. Anonymous – adult and to the point. And why are you wasting your time on this?

          2. Benson speaks with arrogant pretense which is typical of enthusiasts of “democracy” who want to urge on a tyranny from a coterie of elected officials. These in the DC Swamp, only honor their own elections!

            Separation of powers is a very real and integral understanding of our Constituion. The fool says the text does not support it. That’s false, but let’s proceed to the place where a conflict occurs. This is called a “CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS”

            The three branches can exist in conflict, but not for long. For them to have no role in mediating one another, is to invite anarchy.

            There is a role for all three branches in tempering each other; but in the natural scheme of government, one can do without a judiciary, or a representative body, but one can’t do without a CHIEF. He is the one who commands. The state is a fiction that is only made real in the facts of organization which can direct organized force in the form of “law.”

            Necessarily, there ALWAYS is a role for the chief executive. First and last, is the role for the chief executive. The CEO is alpha and omega of every state, necessarily, because the Chief is the one who utters the command.

            And from the command, commences all actions of force which are the legitimate operations of government.

            And so even the extreme French democracy of 1789 degenerated in a decade into the despotic rule of Napoleon. in 1799 he overthrew the Directorate.

            The Chief can act not only as executive, but also as Judge. And every judge has executory powers– see every judge who has a BAILIFF, that is, a cop who can arrest and imprison on the verbal order of the judge. Yes, even in America, one can be held in prison only on the word of a judge. I have seen it done. It is called,. CONTEMPT. it is a necessary and inherent power without which there is no true court.

            Congress can “MAKE LAWS” but can it enforce them?

            I am no genius here. See, Carl Schmitt, the “Crisis of Parliamentary Democracy.”

            You can posit a radical power in Congress to fabricate whatever laws you like ,but let them try and enforce them.

            I wonder, did you know how many times the courts in Chile had commanded that President Allende did thus and such, and he ignored them? Many times. Look it up, if it’s not been scrubbed yet.

            But it was only a CHIEF who could give power to the judges words. That Chief’s name was PINOCHET.

            So, remember, the seeds of every tyrant are planted in the preceding season of “democracy”
            Plato explained as much in The Republic.

            We are not there yet, but fools may rush it to conclusion.

          3. 1. There is not a word in the constitution about executive privilege.

            There is not a word in the constitution about a great many things the federal government is doing. I seriously doubt progressives want to make that argument, lest they accelerate the demise of the administrative state.

            2. The House of Representatives determines what is a high crime.

            Absolutely. And if they want to go all Christine Blasey-Ford on us and vote yes on these charges, there is nothing to prevent it. That’s just one of the reasons why they have 2 year terms and the Senate has 6. Go for it.

            3. There is no role for the courts in impeachment .

            There is when those charges are brought before the Senate.

            1. No, it is only that the Chief Justice presides over the Senate after impeachment is voted upon.

              Don’t confuse impeachment and conviction. .

              1. Don’t confuse impeachment and conviction.

                I don’t. One is to serve a political end and one is to serve justice.

                Christine Blasey-Ford approves your message.

      5. I am an attorney/litigator. That is NOT a “high crime.” I believe that if there is an appellate judicial decision rejecting the administration’s objections, Trump will comply. If he does not, you MAY have a valid point at that time…

        1. lin – Benson is an electrical engineer who got into computers before you needed a degree in Computer Science. He does not cite his sources. Oh, at he taught at WSU, if that means anything. 😉

    1. no he’s boring and he stinks .

      just more endless self soothing talk to soothe the readership which needs a daily dose of “hate trump”

      and i see another deep state apology from Bill Webster, puke, NYT schleps at his command. pathetic….. do they know the 25 year old man really wrote the editorial or not?

      article III judge and the only guy who was head of both CIA and FBI you dont get much DEEPER in the derin devlet of American than Bill….. born in 1924.. again….. one wonders who wrote the editorial for him…

        1. i know and have known and worked with 90 some year olds. I can tell you that most of them can’t type or write anymore.

          They can dictate. I have also worked with dictation, a lot. Dictation is something that lends itself to a lot of “help” from the one who transcribes.

          Probably he had a conversation they turned it into an editorial, ghost written ,and he approved it verbally, maybe signed a written copy in his own hand, at best.

          You know that’s so, isnt that right

          1. Could be. However, I know a retired professor in his 90s who continues to publish peer reviewed papers.

            1. David Benson is the God Emperor of Making Stuff Up and owes me forty citations (one from the OED, one from the town ordinances and two from the Old Testament), an equation and the source of a quotation, after fifty-five weeks, and needs to cite all his work from now on. – David, we both know that peer review is a joke. It is still publish or perish until you retire.

                1. David Benson is the God Emperor of Making Stuff Up and owes me forty citations (one from the OED, one from the town ordinances and two from the Old Testament), an equation and the source of a quotation, after fifty-five weeks, and needs to cite all his work from now on. – that is very sexist of you. And it may violate the Civility Rule.

            2. AT 92, the great Democratic Senator from West Virginia, made these wise and prescient remarks about the debacle that we know as Afghanistan

              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=daudw761Ms8

              I doubt Webster has the faculties of mind that Byrd did in 2009. Ten years ago, he was right!

              Byrd was no quisling of the Deep state, and its war factions, in spite of his record long tenure.

  6. Rudy is back and it looks lethal for Obama and Dems.

    https://twitter.com/RudyGiuliani/status/1206291142498750465

    Rudy Giuliani

    Verified account

    @RudyGiuliani
    21h21 hours ago
    More
    Budapest | Kiev | Vienna

    After hundreds of hours & months of research, I have garnered witnesses & documents which reveal the truth behind this impeachment, which includes NO wrongdoing by @realDonaldTrump.

    These threads only touch the surface. Read & watch all. More to come.
    5,574 replies 24,270 retweets 44,275 likes
    Reply 5.6K Retweet 24K Like 44K

    Rudy Giuliani

    Verified account

    @RudyGiuliani
    21h21 hours ago
    More
    Evidence revealed that corruption in 2016 was so extensive it was POTUS’s DUTY to ask for US-Ukraine investigation.

    Impeachment is part of Dem cover-up.

    Extortion, bribery & money laundering goes beyond Biden’s.

    Also, DNC collusion w/ Ukraine to destroy candidate Trump.
    1,267 replies 11,835 retweets 21,072 likes
    Reply 1.3K Retweet 12K Like 21K

    Rudy Giuliani

    Verified account

    @RudyGiuliani
    21h21 hours ago
    More
    You can question a witnesses credibility but you cannot question hard documentary evidence, which each firsthand witness part of this investigation provide.
    806 replies 10,317 retweets 19,710 likes
    Reply 806 Retweet 10K Like 20K

    Rudy Giuliani

    Verified account

    @RudyGiuliani
    21h21 hours ago
    More
    Witness Viktor Shokin:

    Holds doc’s proving money laundering by Burisma & Biden’s.

    Fired due to VP Biden’s threat not to release $1B in vital US aid.

    Shokin’s med records show he was poisoned, died twice, and was revived.

    Lots of heads will roll in Ukraine if this opens up.
    3,487 replies 10,698 retweets 17,279 likes
    Reply 3.5K Retweet 11K Like 17K

    Rudy Giuliani

    Verified account

    @RudyGiuliani
    Follow Follow @RudyGiuliani
    More
    Witness Yuri Lutsenko, inheritor of Shokin’s office:

    Records proving Amb Yovanovitch perjured herself at least twice.

    Doc’s showing she was denying visas to witnesses who could prove Biden & Dem corruption.

    Clear doc proof of money laundering by Burisma & Biden’s.

    />
    2:14
    445K views
    11:13 AM – 15 Dec 2019
    15,853 Retweets 28,402 Likes JRyan NooneKathie ThomasR#Moh63Judi RhodesegokillerfaithNationalist Bot 🧢DeplorableAlan
    2,308 replies 15,853 retweets 28,402 likes
    Reply 2.3K Retweet 16K Like 28K

    Rudy Giuliani

    Verified account

    @RudyGiuliani
    21h21 hours ago
    More
    Dem’s impeachment for innocent conduct is intended to obstruct the below investigations of Obama-era corruption:

    – Billions of laundered $
    – Billions, mostly US $, widely misused
    – Extortion
    – Bribery
    – DNC collusion w/ Ukraine to destroy candidate Trump

    Much more to come.
    3,933 replies 16,640 retweets 31,588 likes
    Reply 3.9K Retweet 17K Like 32K

    1. Rudy cleaned Gotham during a time few thought it would ever survive

      Dont count him down yet. He is a tough attorney and Dems rightly hate him

      1. Fleming – and Rudy didn’t need a Batsuit. Batmobile. or Batcave to clean up Gotham. 😉

    2. It wouldn’t surprise me in the least to discover the reason the corrupt political class has gone totally batsh!t crazy over the election of Trump is because he poses a serious threat to their feeding at the public trough. Not so much the domestic trough, but the foreign trough. They cannot be expanding their wealth just on salary and sound investments alone.

      Biden’s bragging in front of the CFR is a symptom of just how untouchable these folks believe they are and an indicator of how stupid Biden actually is. The alphabet soup of international organizations with influence over the money flowing around the world needs to be seriously dealt with. CFR, IMF, EU, UN, NATO and so on.

  7. You’re being awfully prissy about this. The charges are blatant hooey. The purpose of a trial will be to summon bad actors and put ’em under oath and on the record, starting with Hunter Biden and Eric Ciaramella.

    1. PH – speaking of biased media coverage, i saw Clint Eastwood’s Richard Jewell yesterday. Great movie and very disturbing. Both for what the FBI and the media did to Richard Jewell.

      1. Thanks for the review.
        Drudgereport is linking to bad reviews calling it Clint’s worst debut ever

        See….

        ‘JEWELL’ Disaster at Boxoffice…

        Eastwood movie killed by controversy…

        Director’s Worst Debut…

        1. Josie – it is not to everyone’s taste. However, the acting is superb and it is a beautifully directed film. It is a heavy topic and since you are there when Jewell finds the backpack, you know he is innocent. That makes it more maddening as the FBI and media trains go barreling down the tracks. I don’t remember seeing the actor who plays Jewell before, but he deserves an Academy nod for his performance. He is just spot on.

          Don’t worry about the controversy, it is overblown. See the movie and tell you friends. 🙂

        2. There’s a lot of box office flops that went on to big revenues.

          And there’s a lot of big winners that were stinkers in terms of meritorious art. Take a look at the entire porn industry for starters.

          Make no mistake, they want to punish Eastwood for defying the government in a way that’s not approved.

          Occasionally, there are works which are both meritorious art, and big box office winners, which still get stabbed by critics’ knives. The Passion of the Christ by Mel Gibson for example. An episode which revealed that sometimes accusations of bias reveal a mote in the eye of the accused, but a beam in the eyes of the Pharisees who make it.

  8. The whole thing is a sham and both sides know it. Pelosi and her fellow Democrats want to be able to say that Trump was impeached during the campaign. They’re doing it because they can. There may actually be some conscientious Democrats out there who see through it and will vote against the articles but I doubt it.

    1. semegowanjr – at this point, I think the expected Democrats to vote against impeachmemt is 3-5. which is not enough to stop it. I think they need 17 defections to stop impeachment. However, some Reps had a rough time when they went home and even Schiff got scuffed up over the weekend. Of course, Schiff won’t change his vote, but I would expect an Ethic Violation to drop on him (maybe more than one). Jerry Nadler might expect one or two as well.

      1. Paul:

        I still think a lot will happen between now and the House vote — if there is one. The latest number of defections I’ve seen is 5 which probably means 10.

  9. When the process begins with an “Impeachment inquiry” that wasn’t even voted on by the full House with the assertions of guilt preceding the charges. The whole matter is a joke anyway.
    If this had to do with the rule of Law there would have been an inquiry concerning the phone call or whatever acts caused concern.
    After that inquiry, if wrongdoing had been uncovered, a recommendation to hold an impeachment inquiry could have been sent to the floor and Articles drafted by the Judiciary Committee.
    Adam Schiff explained yesterday that they charged the President with “Obstruction of Congress”, whatever that is, because he did not want the President to be able to “tie up the Congress in Court”. In other words, he did not want the Rule of Law to operate, he wanted the House to reign supreme over the other two Branches.
    Even if you think Trump was planning to give the British the plans to West Point, I fail to see how anyone can defend the abuse of power exercised by the House.

    1. Ti317, the House held hearings with witnesses and invited the WH to sent theirs. Since the WH has pointedly refused to cooperate and spelled out their bad faith in several letters to the House, normal judicial push and shove on specific witnesses or documents would take forever. The House is under no obligation to take that course to force WH good faith and cooperation and correctly have charged the President with Obstruction.

      1. see Dershowitz’ comments regarding article 2. Gone, since SCOTUS agreed to hear Trump’s case. I think it was masterful how the DEMS made Trump look like he was obstructing when they gave him NO CHANCE to defend against accusations. Now that the shoe is on the other foot…cram it DEMs.

      2. Missed the point didn’t you?
        If I request you to come before a committee that has proclaimed your guilt and shown no inclination to allowing you to call the witnesses they find convenient, you would be well advised to give it no credibility by participating.
        Attempts to fundamentally remake it notwithstanding this is still America and no one ought be required to appear before any tribunal to establish his or her innocence. It is the sole responsibility of the accuser to prove the assertion.

        Trump may well be guilty but this process is tainted beyond belief. Put your hatred and partisanship aside for a minute and think of the implications for the country.

  10. and all evidence points to him having done it, which is to invite foreign interference in our next election.

    Not only has the evidence proven Democrats invited foreign interference in our last election, they are using this impeachment process to interfere domestically in our next.

  11. Please! Every Senator running for the President has said he’s guilty.
    And those statements were made months ago.
    Some elected people said Trump should be impeached shortly after he was elected.
    That’s bias to the extreme.

  12. “I often remark that my Senate trial defending Judge Thomas Porteous has a jury that I would normally strike for cause en masse. An impeachment jury composed of politicians can be akin to a maritime inquiry with a jury composed of the Pirates of Penzance.”
    *********************
    Well an absurd process deserves an absurd result, wouldn’t you say? Now if we can just prosecute those prosecutors.

  13. Another example of how leaving the administration of justice to politicians usually proves to be a very costly mistake

    1. And then there’s Mitch who has decided that to be very fair he will do the defendant’s throughout! Yep, that’s fair at least for MCCONNELL who is probably implicated through out.

  14. FarOutWest – the saying is “First we’ll hang ’em, then we’ll give him a fair trial.”

    Trump was not given a fair hearing in the House, turn about is fair play.

    1. ilhelm Klink : I believe that General Burkhalter knows that, as a man of honor, I would never inform on my fellows officers were I involved in a conspiracy; however, since I’m completely innocent and it was all the idea of Bussie and Bermeister…

      [Bussie vehemently berates Klink about it being all his idea while Bermeister denies involvement] 

      General der Infanterie Albert Burkhalter : Quiet! You’re all under arrest in quarters. I will see that you get a fair trial immediately, after which you will be shot.
      *************************************************
      Gen. Burkhalter( Leon Askin) was hilarious on Hogan’s Heroes.

  15. Isn’t there such a thing as “summary judgment” in courts, where it is clear the prosecution has no case and has violated the law, and the judge gives a quick “aquittal with prejudice “??
    Asking for Mulvane and Bolton to testify for the prosecution, again commits the same errors the house did, would ask them to violate executive privilege when no high crime or misdemeanor has been previously established??

  16. As in the Old West for the alleged horse thief “First he will get a fair trial…then we’ll hang him!”

    1. In the movie One-Eyed Jacks, Marlon Brando asks Marshall Karl Malden if he’ll get a fair trial. “Oh sure, kid, sure,” answers Malden, soothingly. “You’re gonna get a fair trial. And then I’m gonna hang you! Personally!”

        1. Mr. Schulte,
          Yes, it was filmed there. Brando directed it, and I don’t think any studio allowed him to direct again. It came in way over budget and took forever to complete.
          Malden defended the film and Brando, and thought he should have had the chance to direct again.
          “The Appaloosa”, with Brando and John Saxon, is a other good 1960s Brando Western.

Comments are closed.