We have seen repeated instances where President Donald Trump has stepped on the narrative of his defenders with a single misplaced tweet — often giving opponents precisely what they have been alleging. This weekend is another such example with a tweet saying ominously the House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff has not paid the price yet” for his role in Trump’s impeachment. The tweet sounded not only threatening but was immediately raised by Democrats as supporting what Schiff said in his closing argument about senators fearing retribution from Trump. One can easily view the tweet at a statement about political accountability, but the insistence on attacking Schiff personally is both improper and counter-productive. Trump was impeached by the House, not Schiff. He is fulfilling a duty under the Constitution. Some of us have criticized his representations, but alluding to personal costs for the House managers is wildly inappropriate in the middle of a Senate trial.
Just this week, Schiff may a serious mistake in suggesting that the Republican senators are afraid to stand up to Trump and find their “heads on a pike.” I wrote about this and other missteps by the House managers. Senators objected to the allegation as untrue and ridiculous. Yet some 48 hours later, Trump is tweeting about making Schiff pay.
Donald J. Trump✔@realDonaldTrump
Shifty Adam Schiff is a CORRUPT POLITICIAN, and probably a very sick man. He has not paid the price, yet, for what he has done to our Country!97.8K8:20 AM – Jan 26, 2020Twitter Ads info and privacy61.5K people are talking about this
Once again, I read this as a political not a physical threat. However, a president should not be threatening the house managers at all in the midst of a trial. It was not unreasonable for media to view this as a threat upon the lead House manager.
All of this makes it more difficult for his legal team and his allies. With key swing senators like Collins and Murkowski objecting to insults by Chairman Jerry Nadler and Schiff (and moving toward votes against witnesses), President Trump effectively gutted that position by seemingly threatening the lead manager. This only works to the advantage of the House managers and undermines the position of the President. Both Democrats and Republicans should object to this tweet as inimical to this constitutional process.
162 thoughts on “Trump: Schiff “Has Not Paid The Price Yet””
Give me a break.
Come on Professor. There is a clear distinction between discharging ones Constitutional duties and engaging in the inflammatory rhetoric and ad hominum attack that dominated Schiff’ almost bizarre presentation. Schiff’ has used distortions and lies to fan the flames of partisan rancor. I particularly enjoyed his unambiguous assertion that removing the president couldn’t be entrusted to the electoral process.
So I’m guessing Nancy Pelosi similarly “threatened” Senators when she said this:
““It’s about a fair trial,” Pelosi told ABC’s “This Week.” “We’ve done our job. We have defended the Constitution of the United States. We would hope the Senate would do that as well.”
She warned, “Now the ball is in their court to either do that or pay a price.”
Yes, those who vote to acquit Trump will certainly be reminded of that come re-election time…
David Benson is the God Emperor of Making Stuff Up and owes me forty-two 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 sixty-one weeks, and needs to cite all his work from now on. – yes, here in Arizona, McSally and Sinema are walking a tightrope.
…… by being re-eelected
Again JT suffers from selected outrage. Where was his outrage at the Pelosi comment you quoted? Highly recommend Hemingway’s piece at The Federalist:
This is really very simple. Anyone who has taken the time to actually read the Intelligence whistleblower law knows that Adam Schiff has no legal right to “protect the whistleblower.” He’s protecting himself and his staff. We now know that the alleged whistleblower and his buddy, who is now on Schiff’s staff, have been CONSPIRING to impeach Donald Trump since right after he took office. https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2020/01/22/whistleblower_was_overheard_in_17_discussing_with_ally_how_to_remove_trump_121701.html Do not think for one minute that Schiff and his staff are not already under investigation (as is Biden.) Federal investigations are not public but are conducted in secret. The president is merely telegraphing to Schiff that he’s in trouble. Conspiracy IS a Federal crime and Congressmen are not above the law.
Lost in the land of Making Stuff Up.
David Benson is the God Emperor of Making Stuff Up and owes me forty-two 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 sixty-one weeks, and needs to cite all his work from now on. – for someone who has owed me citations for 61 weeks, you are the one who is Making Stuff Up.
Conspiracy IS a Federal crime
Not by itself it isn’t. There has to be an underlying unlawful act.
Impeachment is not unlawful
Schiff is a seditionist
While on the subject of damage to the defense of the WH scumbag, over the weekend we now have video of Trump interacting with Parnas, who he recently pretended he didn’t know, followed by Bolton writing that the withheld aid to the Ukrainians was intended by Trump as a QPQ. As before, but even more now, senators who vote against hearing witnesses risk the near certainty that more will leak out over time, further proving what they all already know, and making them look like fools (the optimistic outcome) or complicit in the cover up.
It seemed odd that Bolton vowed to fight any subpeona from the House and now seems eager to testify in the Senate trial.
Maybe he didn’t want to give away the contents of his upcoming book too soon, but the timing is better now as it approches publication.
Bolton is an ossified fecal sample
Flush the Deep State saboteur with the rest of them
I remember before the attorneys put on in less than 3 hours more of a defense of Trump than the Democrats put on an offense in God, knows how long a time, hearing “now if Republicans can go the weekend without messing up.” I . never thought that the mess-up would come from the POTUS himself. I’d think he’d have a special detail assigned to him to prevent this kind of thing. However, Turley, who is usually quite right on, got this out of context. Taken right from Trump’s Twitter, “Shifty Adam Schiff is a CORRUPT POLITICIAN, and probably a very sick man. He has not paid the price, yet, for what he has done to our Country!”. Big difference in meaning when you add “FOR WHAT HE’S DONE TO OUT COUNTRY” Trump would in no way threaten physical violence, but he must figure a way to get out of this graciously., I’m sure Chuck Todd, Jake Tapper and George Stephanopoulos had a great time with this one this AM. I’ve seen Adam Shiff on (was it GMA?)
In case someone wants to scan before viewing the video. These things expose the crap. Anon wishes to peddle.
Ukrainian Official Who Attended Jan 2016 White House Meeting on Biden/Burisma Blows Up Schiff’s Narrative
Ukrainian Official Who Attended Jan 2016 White House Meeting on Biden/Burisma Blows Up Schiff’s Narrative
This week, Fox News’ Laura Ingraham obtained several emails from the State Department regarding a previously unknown White House meeting held in January 2016. After watching Ingraham’s presentation of the story, Ukrainian Embassy official Andrii Telizhenko, who had attended the meeting, issued an exclusive statement and provided several documents which she presented to her audience on Friday night.
On May 1, 2019, New York Times reporter Ken Vogel emailed the State Department to confirm that (State Dept. official) Elizabeth Zentos had attended the January 2016 White House meeting about “Burisma Holdings and concerns that Hunter Biden’s position with the company could complicate such efforts.” Vogel wrote that the attendees included “Ukrainian prosecutors and embassy officials as well as Eric Ciaramella from the NSC.” By now, everyone who has read my posts knows that Ciaramella is alleged to be the whistleblower who sparked the current impeachment trial of President Trump.
Telizhenko attended the secret January 19, 2016 meeting and his statement began: “I was told to work and cooperate with Mrs. Chalupa, a DNC operative, by Ambassador Chaliy…She asked for me to help her get dirt on Presidential candidate Donald Trump…I never coordinated any work with her or the DNC because…I did not support the unethical orders to work and assist one party.”
He also provided a copy of the White House invitation and a “schedule of the meeting listing two names, one associated with the whistleblower whose name we blocked out, and Elizabeth Zentos, both from Obama’s NSC (National Security Council).”
Ingraham continued, “Telizhenko said that while the meeting was touted as a quote prosecutor’s training program (Ingraham clears throat), much of the conversation revolved around the Bidens and Burisma and it wasn’t the Ukrainians who brought up the Bidens and Burisma.”
“Telizhenko wrote: The representatives of the DOJ, U.S. Embassy in Kiev and NSC staff raised the question of the Burisma investigation, most of NSC staff were people from Biden’s team.”
The whistleblower is not a whistleblower.
Ingraham asked investigative journalist Sarah Carter how Schiff can claim the Bidens have no relevance to this [the impeachment].
They can’t. This is the point and this is the reason why Adam Schiff does not want to call the whistleblower and this is the reason why he doesn’t want anymore information coming out because what we know now is those connections were so deep inside the State Department. And by the way, it’s not only Ukraine. You hear this coming from other countries with the Obama Administration…I’ll give you an example in Guatemala, pressure from the State Department to do things their way or they’ll withhold aid. This is nothing new. I think right now we’re on the cusp of something big. This is an explosive report Laura. This is huge and absolutely has to be investigated. But who is going to investigate it? The DOJ? The Senate Judiciary [Committee]?
The Washington Examiner’s Byron York weighed in:
This could be the nexus between the whistleblower and the Biden/Burisma story where you have concerns in the Obama White House about Hunter Biden’s connections in the Ukraine. His father is obviously the Vice President and now we have, we know, the person who is alleged to be the whistleblower was involved with that…Republicans do not want to call witnesses, but if they had to have a witness, it seems the whistleblower is the one. Because I do not believe it is possible to call for the removal of the President of the United States and say ‘some of the evidence has to stay secret.’
Laura stresses the point that “the whistleblower’s name is on every White House log from that meeting meaning he checked everyone in from the anti-corruption prosecutor in the Ukraine. Looks like they were discussing what to do about the Bidens and what to do about the corruption in Burisma. That was the focus and it was billed as something else so as not to raise eyebrows.”
Investigative journalist Lee Smith responded, “Another key point you have in the statement from Mr. Telizhenko is that they’re looking for information on candidate Donald Trump. At that point, it starts to cut right to the heart of the impeachment issue here if their complaint is that the President was looking for information on Biden and what we’re looking at (inaudible) and its source is they were collecting dirt on candidate Trump in 2016.”
Ingraham points out that in 2016, Sens. Charles Grassley (R-IA) and Ron Johnson (R-WI) formally requested documents from this meeting which are still outstanding. Turning to York, she says, “You know that every person at that meeting knows a lot about how this started and how the concern about the conflict arose.”
York says, “I’ll tell you interest in the Hunter Biden story among Republican senators has just gone through the roof in the last 24 hours because they believe Democrats, yesterday, just completely opened the door to it by being so defensive about it. They want to know more now.
Ingraham plays a clip of Schiff saying, “Now you’ll hear the further defense that Biden is corrupt, that Joe Biden is corrupt, that Hunter Biden is corrupt. If they couldn’t get Ukraine to smear the Bidens, they want to use this trial to do it instead.”
The panel is astounded. Sarah Carter says, “Why would you go there? Because this is where we’re going to go. And we’re gonna expose this corruption…And even more importantly, all of these documents Laura that you’ve been able to expose actually show that Joe Biden absolutely knew everything that was going on before he made those demands [to Ukraine President Poroshenko to fire Victor Shokin, the prosecutor general who was about to question his son].
Smith notes that, “The American public has now been exposed to four days of Schiffism as Adam Schiff has been holding forth and defending all sorts of things. Of course, that’s what he’s been doing for three years obscuring all sorts of abuses, fomenting conspiracy theories.”
“The Democrats have been pretty consistent about trying to tar any conversation about the Bidens as a conspiracy theory,” said Ingraham.
York said that was what White House Counsel Pat Cipollone’s point was. “Running for President conferred immunity on Biden and you couldn’t talk about this. And the bigger thing to remember about the impeachment right now is Republicsns want to get this over with.”
The Democrats have given the Trump defense team an open line of attack. In December 2015, The New York Times was sufficiently interested in Hunter Biden’s sweetheart deal with Burisma that they published a story about it. In January 2016, Obama Administration officials were concerned enough about it to summon nine Ukrainian government officials and prosecutors to a White House meeting. They even tried to hide the real purpose of the meeting by calling it a “Prosecutor’s Training Program.” Then two months later, Joe Biden himself, threatened to withhold $1 billion in aid unless the Ukrainian President fired the prosecutor.
So, the question becomes why did House Democrats impeach President Trump for asking questions about it? The answer is they can’t. It was just a pretext for impeaching the President.
And the next is, how can a man who was so obviously Joe Biden’s ally, who was so clearly doing Joe Biden’s bidding, who traveled to Ukraine with him and was invited to at least one very prestigious event by Biden, a highly partisan Democrat who left the White House in mid-2017 amid concerns about negative leaks to the media, allowed to lodge an anonymous complaint against President Trump?
Imagine the House Democrats’ case against President Trump as a rock. A mason positions a chisel in just the right place on that rock, then lifts his heavy mallet to strike a mighty blow. The rock cracks into several pieces which lie among the shards from the stone’s core. This week’s revelation that the Obama Administration had been apprehensive about the Biden/Burisma connection and had acted to address it has the same effect. And the news that Eric Ciaramella was so involved is equivalent to a second blow to the chisel. If Ciaramella is indeed the individual who filed the whistleblower complaint, and it is essential that we find that out, then this farce is over.
The video can be viewed here.
Writer at RedState
Former financial consultant, options trader
MBA, Mom of three grown children
Email Elizabeth at Eliza.firstname.lastname@example.org
Read more by Elizabeth Vaughn
Goody 2 Shoes Turley at his Best! So obvious Trump talking about the ballot box!
Actually…not so obvious. That’s the problem with this president – his behavior is more like a middles school boy than a 70’s years old man – regardless his position. I don’t find it unreasonable at all to believe that he meant he’d find a way to ‘get back’ at Schiff.
While a private business man, Trump was known – by his own admission – to indulge in ‘payback’.
A lot of people that did not vote for him but had not wanted Clinton were holding our breaths with his election hoping that his volatile, juvenile temperament would change and he’d be a good leader for all of us. Unfortunately, the man loves his Twitter and can’t seem to stay on track when speaking publicly. He needs to stop ‘winging-it’ he’s not good at it.
A few errant Twitters among a huge number and this latest Twitter fully read isn’t so terrible if it is terrible at all. Compare that Twitter to the continuous lies by Schiff or the enrichment Biden provided so many family members.
You have a right to prefer better prose rather than an ecomomy that the rest of the world would like to have. However, I think most of the population prefers a higher check at payday.
lawful revenge is still lawful
do you guys think politics in the biggest economy and military power in all history is not a serious competition?
naifs. or perhaps you just want Trump to play by the rules that your team does not!
It’s not a threat, political or otherwise. Trump is merely stating facts – karma, “everything that goes around comes around” – he believes it and so do I. And so does everyone else with an ounce of integrity. In the eyes of many, Schifty has payback in his future, without a doubt.
Where was Moses when the lights went out? Down in the cellar eating sour kraut.
Ironic how the Left now defend Bolton who is now selling a book….but of course.
Bolton Claim Set to Scramble Impeachment Proceedings
Draft of his book says Trump sought to keep aid to Ukraine frozen over Biden probe
Jan. 26, 2020 9:45 pm ET
President Trump’s lawyers will continue their defense in the impeachment trial this week. Photo: alex edelman/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images
WASHINGTON—A draft of a forthcoming book from former national security adviser John Bolton alleges that President Trump told him in August that he wanted to keep aid to Ukraine frozen until the country aided investigations into Democrats, including former Vice President Joe Biden and his son—a development that threatened to throw into turmoil the careful choreography of the Senate impeachment trial of Mr. Trump.
Mr. Bolton’s claim, which was reported by the New York Times and confirmed by a lawyer for Mr. Bolton, goes to the heart of Democrats’ impeachment inquiry and contradicts the White House’s argument that the decision to hold up nearly $400 million in aid to Ukraine was not related to the president’s push for investigations there. Democrats have said the president abused his power by leveraging aid approved by Congress in order to get a foreign leader to undertake actions that would benefit him politically.
Mr. Bolton’s lawyer, Charles Cooper, said he sent a copy of his manuscript to the National Security Council in December so it could be reviewed for classified information, adding that he did so on the assurance that the contents of the book wouldn’t be disclosed to anyone not involved in that process.
“It is clear, regrettably, from The New York Times article published today that the prepublication review process has been corrupted and that information has been disclosed by persons other than those properly involved in reviewing the manuscript,” Mr. Cooper said.
News of the manuscript’s claims comes on the eve of the defense team’s second session on the Senate floor, in which it was expected to present the bulk of its argument. The White House didn’t respond to requests for comment on Mr. Bolton’s description of his conversation with the president.
Democrats immediately intensified their calls for the Senate to vote in favor of calling more witnesses later this week, chief among them Mr. Bolton, who has said he would testify if he were subpoenaed by the Senate. Details of what Mr. Bolton might say could sway the four Republican senators who have said they are on the fence about the vote in favor of more testimony. If all Democrats vote in favor, they would need four Republicans to join them for the vote to pass.
“It is now up to four Senate Republicans to support bringing in Mr. Bolton… as well as the key documents we have requested to ensure all the evidence is presented at the onset of a Senate trial,” said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York. Democrats have also wanted to bring in acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney and two other witnesses.
The White House has sought to block testimony by Mr. Bolton and the other witnesses on the Democrats’ list.
Mr. Trump said in a news conference last week that testimony by Mr. Bolton would be a “national security problem” and added: “I don’t know if we left on the best of terms. I would say probably not.”
Mr. Bolton’s book also includes details of cabinet officials’ discussions about Ukraine and about Rudy Giuliani, the president’s personal attorney who led the campaign for investigations in Ukraine, according to the New York Times. Mr. Bolton wrote that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said privately that Mr. Giuliani’s claims that the ambassador to Ukraine was corrupt were not true, and that he shared his concerns about Mr. Giuliani with Attorney General William Barr after the president’s July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, in which Mr. Trump urged his Ukrainian counterpart to work with both Messrs. Giuliani and Barr on investigations, the Times said. Mr. Bolton wrote that he told the attorney general Mr. Trump had invoked him on the call.
A Justice Department official familiar with the matter said Mr. Bolton did call Mr. Barr to express concerns about Mr. Giuliani and his shadow foreign policy in Ukraine. It wasn’t clear what, if anything, the attorney general did with that information.
Department spokeswoman Kerri Kupec denied that Mr. Barr learned of the Ukraine call from Mr. Bolton. The department has repeatedly said he learned about it in mid-August.
Mr. Trump has denied any connection between his decision to hold up the aid to Ukraine and the investigations he sought. “I have never had a direct link between investigations and security assistance,” he said in November.
News of Mr. Bolton’s claims shook the White House, where several top advisers hadn’t read the manuscript. As of late Sunday evening, the press office hadn’t yet decided whether to issue a statement on the matter.
Last week in the Senate impeachment trial, Democratic lawmakers took the maximum 24 hours over three days to make their case for the president’s removal. Mr. Trump’s lawyers began their defense Saturday. They argued over two hours that Democrats had failed to make a compelling case and were relying on circumstantial evidence to conclude that the Republican president had conditioned aid to Ukraine on investigations.
The president’s team plans to present arguments Monday beginning at 1 p.m. EST and likely wrapping up by about 8 p.m., according to a person familiar with the discussions.
Constitutional law professor Alan Dershowitz and former independent counsel Kenneth Starr will likely speak Monday, the person said. Depending on how the session goes, the team may not use its session on Tuesday, the last day it has to make arguments before senators begin their questioning.
After a day of questions, the Senate will vote on whether to call more witnesses.
Democrats have accused the president of abusing his office in seeking the Ukraine investigations and of obstructing Congress during its impeachment probe.
The president’s team this week is expected to argue he was justified in pressing Ukraine on investigations.
Rep. Adam Schiff (D., Calif.), the lead House impeachment manager and chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said Sunday on NBC that Republicans who oppose calling witnesses would be denying the public information that is relevant to the case.
“I think they’re deathly afraid of what witnesses will have to say, and so their whole strategy has been deprive the public of a fair trial,” Mr. Schiff said of Republicans. “If they’re successful in depriving the country of a fair trial, there is no exoneration.”
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.), a top ally of the president on Capitol Hill, told Fox News he fervently opposes hearing more testimony.
“If we seek witnesses, then we are going to throw the country into chaos,” he said.
Sixty-six percent of Americans said the Senate should call witnesses to testify in Mr. Trump’s impeachment trial, including 45% of Republicans, 65% of independents and 87% of Democrats, according to an ABC News/Washington Post poll released on Friday.
Democrats would need four Republicans to vote with them for more witnesses, assuming all members of their caucus stick together. A handful of Republicans have signaled they are on the fence about the vote, among them Sens. Mitt Romney of Utah, Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska.
If the Senate votes against calling more witnesses, it would proceed soon afterward to a vote on whether to convict or acquit the president. Mr. Trump faces little prospect of conviction, which requires a two-thirds majority of senators to remove him from office.
“The Left”? The Left long since left the station.
A faint echo to be found in the pages of The Nation and a few other choice spots.
“President Trump effectively gutted that position by seemingly threatening the lead manager.”
The president is absolutely right, though I don’t know if it was good for him to make that type of statement at that time. However, he has been right so many times maybe he is right again and I am wrong. One has to think about who and what the President was appealing to
Disclosure: It would give me great pleasure to see Schiff locked up in either a prison cell or a mental institution. I don’t care which one as long as Schiff doesn’t have the key.
We have seen repeated instances where President Donald Trump has stepped on the narrative of his defenders with a single misplaced tweet…
Always the pearl clutcher….
and then there is this…
Just this week, Schiff may a….
But Lo! Turley misplaced the letter d.
Insert Latina Telenovela gasp…
The direction to take down Trump started before the election and at the highest levels. You can be certain that Loretta Lynch’s “career prosecutors” heard the message loud and clear:
Tim Kaine to Hilary Clinton: “President Obama called me last night and said, ‘Tim, this is no time to be a purist. You’ve got to keep a fascist out of the White House.’”
Hilary Clinton: “I echo that sentiment.”
Like the Oracle at Delphi, the meaning is up to the interpreter. The Oracle utterings are attributed to the ground gasses she inhaled. The Donald?
Contrary to Professor Turley’s biased interpretation, there was absolutely nothing threatening in President’s Trump’s Tweet that “[Schiff] has not paid the price, yet, for what he has done to our Country.” The President’s message merely alludes to the fact that Schiff has gotten away with his lies and has not, yet, had to face any consequences for those lies in creating, facilitating, and promoting the Democrat Party’s impeachment scam. “Paying the price” has always meant “facing the consequences” for one’s actions. It can be as a result of a noble action or a corrupt action, depending on the circumstances. For example, when a real whistleblower (not a phony one, like Eric Charmella) exposes corruption in an organization, such whistleblowers often must “pay the price” and that “price” can mean getting fired and blackballed, for example. In the case of Schiff and his cronies, their scam to divert attention from Joe Biden’s corrupt acts has been smooth sailing, at a great cost to the Country, but they have paid no price whatsoever for their own corruption.
those last, largely unknown 8 words make SUCH a difference. I think they ought to be known. Your statement, “In the case of Schiff and his cronies, their scam to divert attention from Joe Biden’s corrupt acts has been smooth sailing, at a great cost to the Country, but they have paid no price whatsoever for their own corruption.” indicates this; well said
What else is inimical to impeachment? All of it!
Jonathan – What we have learned since 2015 – in the end Trump is always correct when it comes to Politics and Tweets. Yes, his tweets cause the Media, Dem’s, Never Trumpers and the Washington elite a lot of heartburn and they quick to find fault but who are his tweets designed for, not the Media or Dems or the Elite it is for his supporters and followers and this tweet just tells like it is Adam Schiff needs to be held accountable for his actions, lies, untruths, and etc. Perhaps he will get caught up in the Durham investigations
Bills always come due at the polls. We vote for behavior, or against it. And then we get what we deserve.
You May vote for behavior but in the end few do. They vote for cold, hard facts and who can do the most for us and who will😋
Turley get a life will ya. Ya got bum burns straddling that fence. Playing both sides. You are a Democrat and part of the problem. I doubt Pres. Trump needs you at all.
He is a Democrat- however Jonathan Turley is so RIGHT on SO many things/issues-and I don’t mean politically right. I mean, correct, astute, with integrity and knowledge. He calls em like he sees em and that takes guts when he has an audience.
I have to do my own fact-checking because I think he has this one wrong- but I can be wrong, too
Let’s extend the same hyperbolic interpretation to the Democrats’ rhetoric. Absolutely nothing Nadler and Schiff said about President Trump and his family was true. We must rebut all of the lies that they told many that were threatening to the entire Senate and to the voter. It’s time to call out the Democrat liars and admit that they haven’t yet paid a price for the numerous lies or their conspiracy to negate the US Constitution and the voters.
I echo your thoughts completely. They have shredded the Constitution and some of the actions-many- will take years to undo
On the contrary. They have carefully followed the Constitution to assess that Donald Trump was correctly impeached and ought to be convicted on both charges.
The presidency is other than for agrandizing the president. Donald Trump fails to understand that and has failed to fulfill his oath of office. In my opinion he belongs in St Elizabeth’s.
David Benson is the God Emperor of Making Stuff Up and owes me forty-two 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 sixty-one weeks, and needs to cite all his work from now on. – you are an electrical engineer. Your opinion on the President’s mental health means jack.
David, if you play nice maybe the nurses at the psych ward will give you back your crayons and coloring book.
Stop the pearl clutching, JT! Anyone with a room temperature IQ understands that Trump meant Schiff will have to face the voters in nine months.
Stop the pearl clutching, JT! Anyone with a room temperature IQ understands that Trump meant Schiff will have to face the voters in nine months.
If that what he means he could have just said that.
Why the veiled threat if that is not what he meant?
😀 Why should he? This way he owns the news cycle.
Why should he? This way he owns the news cycle.
Bingo. That is exactly correct.
It is the exact same reason Trump made the Zelensky phone call sound like a mob boss running a protection racket.
Trump gives the MSM what they want and the MSM gives Trump what he wants. Its a a big club and you aint in it.
Its a a big club and you aint in it.
Correct. I’m not in your I feel triggered club.
It’s not like Trump has tried to overturn an election, abusing the intelligence agency against political foes, impeaching opponents based on debunked false allegations, or inciting riots.
It’s not like he told people that wherever Schiff goes, he should make a crowd. Make sure he knows he’s not welcome anywhere, anymore.
People can infer whatever they want from Trump’s blunt language. Actions matter more. Democrat actions have been crystal.
It’s not like Trump has tried to overturn an election,
Overturning the election would mean Hillary would become president – who thinks that will ever
Of course t happen?
abusing the intelligence agency against political foe
The intelligence agencies have helped Trump at every turn.
impeaching opponents based on debunked false allegations
Without the impeachment trump would probably not get reelected.
Guess what overturns elections, Trumpsters???…
The next election. It’s 2020 people. The year of the next presidential election.
Stop brushing the hair of your tired talking points. History got up and moved on you quicker than Trump’s ass when Stormy spanked it with a rolled up magazine.
See what I mean about a room temperature IQ, people?
That’s the trouble with democrats. Even the wonderful Jonathan Turley gets it just so wrong so often.
Comments are closed.