Yesterday’s question and answer period was a largely choreographed exercise with legal teams spontaneously responding to questions with preset video clips and visual displays. However, there was one major but largely overlooked moment that raises some serious issues over the authority of the presiding officer vis-a-vis the Senate. In the midst of the questions, Robert spiked a question from Sen. Rand Paul (R, Ky). It concerned the whistleblower and the underlying legal premise for barring the question could prove controversial today. UPDATE: Roberts again refused to read the question of Sen. Paul. After the Chief Justice refused to ask his question, Rand walked out of the Senate.
Sen. Paul appears to have delivered a question to Roberts that would have named the alleged whistleblower. Roberts had indicated that he was going to disallow questions on the whistleblowers but he was reportedly deterred from that course by the threat of being overruled by the Senate. He allowed general questions about the whistleblower by preventing Paul from asking his question. Paul reportedly pledged to revisit the issue today and was overheard by reporter Niels Lesniewski in saying “I don’t want to have to stand up to try and fight for recognition . . . “If I have to fight for recognition, I will.”
This creates a fascinating conflict. Federal law does not guarantee anonymity of such whistleblowers in Congress — only protection from retaliation. Conversely, the presiding officer rarely stands in the path of senators seeking clarification or information from the legal teams. Paul could name the whistleblower on the floor without violation federal law. Moreover, the Justice Department offered a compelling analysis that the whistleblower complaint was not in fact covered by the intelligence law (the reason for the delay in reporting the matter to Congress). The Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel found that the complaint did not meet the legal definition of “urgent” because it treated the call between Trump and a head of state was if the president were an employee of the intelligence community. The OLC found that the call “does not relate to ‘the funding administration, or operation of an intelligence activity’ under the authority of the Director of National Intelligence . . . As a result, the statute does not require the Director to transmit the complaint to the congressional intelligence committees.” The Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency Council strongly disagree with that reading.
Regardless of the merits of this dispute, Roberts felt that his position allows him to curtail such questions and answers as a matter of general decorum and conduct. It is certainly true that all judges are given some leeway in maintaining basic rules concerning the conduct and comments of participants in such “courts.”
This could lead to a confrontation over the right of senators to seek answers to lawful questions and the authority of the presiding office to maintain basic rules of fairness and decorum. It is not clear what the basis of the Chief Justice’s ruling would be in barring references to the name of the whistleblower if his status as a whistleblower is contested and federal law does not protect his name. Yet, there are many things that are not prohibited by law but still proscribed by courts. This issue however goes to the fact-finding interests of a senator who must cast a vote on impeachment. Unless Majority Leader Mitch McConnell can defuse the situation, this afternoon could force Roberts into a formal decision with considerable importance for this and future trials.
Update: Paul said that his question did not mention the name of the whistleblower and instead focused on “whether or not individuals who were holdovers from the Obama National Security Council and Democrat partisans conspired with Schiff staffers to plot impeaching the president before there were formal House impeachment proceedings.” If that is the full question, I fail to see the justification for Roberts refusing to read it. There have been various questions on both sides raising political influences and conspiracies. Once the presiding officer begins to bar questions as disrespectful or objectionable, it is incumbent on the officer to explain the criteria or basis for such regulation.
If Roberts accepts the premise that a single anonymous person can level a charge that potentially removes a sitting president with the expectation that he/she will never have to answer for it, then the sole power of impeachment no longer rests with the House but with any single political partisan in a position of trust who can conveniently “misinterpret” or twist real happenings to suit partisan ends.
That’s a good point.
Apparently it doesn’t matter that the transcripts show there was no quid pro quo with Ukraine. It doesn’t matter that Ukraine says there was no quid pro quo or strong arming. It doesn’t matter that the ambassadors confirmed Ukraine knew nothing about it. It doesn’t matter that Sondland said he presumed, i.e. made it up.
No, what matters is if someone, somewhere, can say that Trump wanted leverage. It doesn’t apparently, matter that he didn’t actually do it.
Isn’t there supposed to be one justice system for all? Then let’s make the criminal justice system all run the same. People will be tried for murder, regardless of whether the victim is alive or not. All it will take is one person to say he did it, and he won’t even have to present any evidence.
This impeachment is the political version of “SWATting”.
If Roberts accepts the premise that a single anonymous person can level a charge that potentially removes a sitting president with the expectation that he/she will never have to answer for it,
_________________________________________________
The House and the Senate look at the facts and decide. What prompted the House and Senate to do so is irrelevant.
“What prompted the House and Senate to do so is irrelevant.”
That demonstrates the intelligence of a toad.
Allan says:
“What prompted the House and Senate to do so is irrelevant.”
_________________________________________
That demonstrates the intelligence of a toad.
______________________________________
If you were intelligent you might consider what would happen without the whistle blower.
If you think that aid would have been withheld and Ukraine would have announced and investigation of Bidens – well that is silly and useless.
To believe that you would have to have the intelligence of a toad. Without the whistle blower nothing would have happened. There would be no delay in aid noticed by anybody and it is unlikely there would be any investigation by Ukraine into the Bidens.
Even if there was an investigation in Ukraine nobody in the US would pay it any attention. How do we know that? Ukraine did investigate the Bidens and here is the result
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-16/ukraine-prosecutor-says-no-evidence-of-wrongdoing-by-bidens
The only way this whole thing works in Trump’s favor and destroys Bidens credibility in the eyes of voters is the whistle blower. And it doesn’t really matter if the whistle blower set this windfall for trump in motion to intentionally help trump or not. Once it is set in motion the whistle blower becomes irrelevant.
Wrong! Trump was destined to give the aid. He wanted to ensure that the American taxpayer was getting the most bang for the buck. Those in Washington D.C. have loads of money but the average American family has to balance a checkbook something D.C. doesn’t seem to understand.
Hunter was in trouble both before and after the Zelensky talk. That the Ambassador interferred with the prior investigation is well known and was appropriately fired. Zelelensky based on the transcript and comments before the House and by Trump apparently is going to reduce corruption in his country. Trump is asking the Europeans why only the US has to aid Ukraine.
This scares the daylight out of many of our legislators because so many have been dipping one way or the other into the till. Trump is doing a fantastic job in highlighting the corruption and that is the first step to getting rid of it. I don’t care what happens to Hunter or Joe. In my mind Hunter is a spoiled druggy enabled by his father’s connections just like Joe enabled a lot of other members in his family. Their corruption is noticed but the most important thing is not convicting them rather making others see that they may be next. The corruption must stop.
If you are in doubt of the corruption that involves more than just legislators then look at the costs and locations of the embassies in London and Jerusalem. Take note how much London cost for a lesser piece of property than already owned. Take note how much the embassy was going to cost and how Trump reduced that cost to a small fraction. That saves the taxpayer and the families that you don’t give a dam.n for.
Wrong! Trump was destined to give the aid. He wanted to ensure that the American taxpayer was getting the most bang for the buck.
______________________________________
If the objective was to save the taxpayer money then the thing to do is to stop pouring money into a corrupt country where the money all disappears into the hands of corrupt oligarchs. The whole purpose of funneling money into Ukraine has always been corrupt and nothing is being done to change that.
The fact remains that without whistle blower to help trump get the story out, the average voter would still be blissfully ignorant of the connection of the Biden’s to the corruption in Ukraine.
Anon, Trump follows the law and is honest. It appears that we might now have a less corrupt government in Ukraine thanks to Trump.
You are not honest and you know Burisma was under investigation having nothing to do with Trump. Even the NYTimes made mention of the corruption a few years ago implicating Biden.
Trump follows the law and is honest. It appears that we might now have a less corrupt government in Ukraine thanks to Trump.
____________________________________
That is a possibility but another possibility is the govt is as or more corrupt then ever. But what should be a greater concern is that the US govt seems to be heading towards greater corruption and you seem to think that is OK as long as the corruption is well hidden from any sort of regulation and oversight.
If Ukraine is more corrupt than ever Trump will try to prevent Ukraine from receiving American aid and the Bidens or people like the Bidens will try and steal more money from the Ukranian people.
As far as corruption in the US Trump is leading the charge against against corruption which seems to be a big fear of Democrats and their supporters. You can’t document any corruption by Trump but we sure can provide evidence of corruption where Democrats were involved.
Basic rules of decorum? That’s a one sided issue. There are none on the socialist party side.
The whistleblower should be unmasked
The attorney shielding this whistleblower is an ex-CIA employee, DNC cash donor & Uncle Joe Biden cash donor for his 2020 presidential election bid.
An old saying, “The fox is in the chicken coup”
The whistleblower should be unmasked
The attorney shielding this whistleblower is an ex-CIA employee, DNC cash donor & Uncle Joe Biden cash donor for his 2020 presidential election bid.
_______________________________________________
How would you know who the whistle blower is?
Thanks for admitting that you have no way of knowing who the whistle blower is.
Anon you may be one of the few Americans that do not recognize who the whistle blower is. That doesn’t surprise me because you don’t know very much about anything.
you may be one of the few Americans that do not recognize who the whistle blower is.
________________________________________
Now there is a grand delusion. You probably actually believe that.
Anon, apparently you are among the last to find out. Right now your brain is barely into the 60’s or maybe you destroyed it at that time.
apparently you are among the last to find out.
______________________________________
You don’t know who the whistleblower is
You are just regurgitating one of many stories that you have swallowed without any regard for their factual basis. Somebody in the WH criticized the President that is sufficient evidence as far as you are concerned that that person is the WB.
Anon, there is very little certainty but the name of the whistleblower is more certain than most other things we believe are true. Your lack of understanding is appalling.
name of the whistleblower is more certain than most other things we believe are true.
________________________________
Why?
The only evidence you have is you found somebody in the White House that is critical of Trump.
You have jumped to a ridiculous conclusion.
This whole thing is benefiting Trump and damaging Trumps leading opponent . That was completely predictable from day one. There is no way this could not have worked in trump’s favor.
So why is it not reasonable to suspect that the whistleblower is intentionally trying to help Trump?
“The only evidence you have is you found somebody in the White House that is critical of Trump.”
Not everyone is as stupid as you are Anon. There is plenty of evidence just not an admission.
“So why is it not reasonable to suspect that the whistleblower is intentionally trying to help Trump?”
It seems Anon that your mental state has sunk deeper and deeper from one alias to the next. You are heading in the direction from an impaired mental state to full blown psychosis. You seriously need psychiatric help.
jinn – John Roberts told us who the whistleblower was, actually confirmed it. When he refused to read Paul’s question, Paul ran out to the mikes and read the question to the press. Then when other Senators reframed the question dropping the whistleblower’s name, Roberts read the question.
And I heard that the whistleblower is dating Schift’s daughter. I don’t stand behind this because I don’t even know if Schift has a daughter and if he does, she is old enough to date. I saw the problem the press had when they were trying to send Senator Cruz’s pre-teen children to jail.
Paul, I think Schiff’s daughter is less than 10 years old, but I wouldn’t put pedophilia past the whistleblower nor would I put it past Schiff to sell his daughter to keep himself in the limelight
https://adamschiff.com/meet-adam/
My guess would be about 19 when this picture was taken. A public records search finds an Adam B. Schiff and and Eve M. Schiff resident at 525 Hampton Rd. Burbank in 1995. The velcro also picks up a date of birth of 22 June 1960 for him and 12 December 1962 for her. My guess would be that that publicity shot was taken several years ago. Sarah Palin, to take one example, was 37 years old when her penultimate child was born. I’d say 19 is the lower bound of estimates of their daughter’s age.
DSS – that was done before the 2018 election, since he lists himself as the Ranking Member of committee. Since he does not have time to up-date his website, I wonder what his constituent services are like. 😉 I am sure poor Griffith Park gets screwed over.
DSS, my guess was wrong. Thank you for the correction. I still wouldn’t put pedophilia past the whistleblower nor would I put it past Schiff to sell his daughter to keep himself in the limelight
Refer to comment at 5:33 PM.
(Jonathan, where do you find these people. Don’t answer that.)
…and this one (“This is absurd x XVI) took the time to do “a public records search” and couldn’t manage to find Schiff’s daughter’s age.
Best to ignore “Allan” and “This is absurd….” I’d take their comments with a grain of salt.
A thoroughly disgusting comment, below, posted by “Allan” who said this:
“Paul, I think Schiff’s daughter is less than 10 years old, but I wouldn’t put pedophilia past the whistleblower nor would I put it past Schiff to sell his daughter to keep himself in the limelight”
Alexa Schiff is 21 years old and a medical student at Northwestern University in Evanston, IL. She did her pre-med work at Stanford. I won’t dignify his other specious claims with a response.
“A thoroughly disgusting comment, below”
Apparently Anonymous the Stupid hasn’t followed the actions of these two people who probably belong in jail. They sound like they would do anything to achieve their ends.
You achived yours. You graduated from 6th grade.
“Anonymous the Stupid” —-> Really??
“You achived [sic] yours. You graduated from 6th grade.” —-> Oh my.
Again:
Jonathan, where do you find these people. Don’t answer that.
John Roberts told us who the whistleblower was, actually confirmed it. When he refused to read Paul’s question,
__________________________________________
Now there is a perfect example of some inside out and backwards thinking
Its amazing how you clowns think that when you hear 50 echos of the same story that makes it true. Never mind the lack of factual support for the story.
Did any Senators ask Schiff how an anonymous whistleblower can receive death threats, if he doesn’t know who he/she is…because they are anonymous?
OLLY – Schift really dodged the issue. He mealy-mouthed his way around an answer to protect himself.
Did any Senators ask Schiff how an anonymous whistleblower can receive death threats
____________________________________
Is this the death threat you are talking about?
https://www.thedailybeast.com/adam-schiff-trumps-death-penalty-threat-was-one-reason-we-didnt-have-whistleblower-testify
Is that what Schiff was referring to on the Senate floor?
https://youtu.be/rwpX0Ax0XCA
Olly, this short (2 minute) video is related to your question. Rep. Nunes asked Vindman how answering questions could be outing the whistleblower if, as claimed, Vindman didn’t know who the whistleblower was.
I think it was also Nunes in later exchange who asked Schiff a similar question.
What is clear here is that we have a President and Congressmen who have no respect for Due Process. The law is very clear that this whistleblower has the right to remain anonymous. The attempts to subvert the law and deprive this person of the equal protection of the law by these govt officials is despicable.
Corruption in Washington is rampant. The people who are supposed to be upholding the law are busy trying to subvert it.
Given that the right for the whistleblower to remain anonymous is the subject of debate, it is not “very clear” that the whistleblower has that right.
There are dozens of pro/con arguments about this issue in numerous articles since September.
Given that the right for the whistleblower to remain anonymous is the subject of debate,
______________________________
The law is very clear that the employee must give permission for the Inspector General to release the name of the WB.
But beyond that the attempt to out the WB is an attempt to subvert the entire whistleblower law. If whistleblowers know that they are going to be publicly attacked by this administration and its brown shirt followers its going to have negative effects on reporting abuse, fraud and govt malfeasance. Attacking whistleblowers is the very opposite of cleaning up the swamp.
Actually it is not clear. As long as we have people in positions that can allow for their sinful natures to act, we have to have laws that protect our institutions and the rule of law from them. This includes the President, Congress, Courts and Whistleblowers.
…we have people in positions that can allow for their sinful natures to act…
nice to see someone mentioning sin.
Cue Dr. Karl Menninger’s Whatever Became of Sin?
https://www.worldcat.org/title/whatever-became-of-sin/oclc/569125407
dated but relevant more so today
It’s the only reason government must exist.
As long as we have people in positions that can allow for their sinful natures to act, we have to have laws that protect our institutions and the rule of law from them.
_________________________________
That is babbling blathering bulldung.
We have laws to protect the people. As soon as your ideological butt buddies are no longer in power you will be saying the opposite. Laws are not supposed to be tools for furthering the ideology of those in power. That would be Sharia law.
I knew the jinn in you wouldn’t be able to resist exposing your evil support of
the Democrat party. Whistleblower’s are a weapon against government. They can be us ed for good or evil. Laws need to exist that protect us from a weapon being used for evil. You’re jinn, of course you have a problem with that.
https://www.factcheck.org/2019/11/legal-implications-of-outing-the-whistleblower/
Olly, this is one of the more cursory articles about the WB’s right to anonymity. There are a lot of other lengthier articles dealing with pro/ con
arguments about WB anonymity.
I knew the jinn in you wouldn’t be able to resist exposing your evil support of
the Democrat party.
_______________________________
Your assumption that disagreeing with you means support for the democrats shows how narrow your tunnel-vision world view is.
The fact is your views are aligned with the Democrats. They have been attacking whistle blowers long before your ideology led you down that path.
Nope. How quickly you forget your attack on Trump when asked about Snowden. The obvious response would have been to attack Obama. Your comments on this blog are proving you are living up to the name you chose.
https://www.islamreligion.com/articles/669/viewall/world-of-jinn/
How quickly you forget your attack on Trump when asked about Snowden. The obvious response would have been to attack Obama.
_________________________________
The current president is Trump and he is the one currently going after Snowden and Assange. When it comes to doing the bidding of the swamo there is no difference between Trump and Obama
https://youtu.be/LftKptf4HIE
Olly, this is a link to a video where Rep. Jordan goes after both Schiff and Vindman’s.
I don’t know if this came up in the Senate trial; I only caught maybe a third of it. But the format in the House made it easier for rapid, direct exchanges like this.
It was widely reported in September that the whistleblower was a CIA employee. I think that Vindman indicated that someone in the intelligence community was one of the people he talked to about the Trump- Zelensky phone call, but I don’t remember if he specified the CIA.
It was noteworthy that when questioned further about who he’d told about the phone call, Schiff and Vindman’s lawyer immediately interrupted the questioning.
Finding out who was the likely whistleblower was probably not that difficult given that there was a relatively small group of potential suspects
to start with. And there are probably additional details available to those like Rand Paul and others who are “closer to the ground” in getting additional details that puts them in a position to know who the whistleblower is.
we should sell Congress. Swap them for the Knicks. At least the Knicks and Grizzlies exchanged fists. Nadler would faint from running 15 feet to any direction, and Schiff would scream like a gurl at the site of Ron Paul charging him.
All hell broke loose at the Garden on Wednesday night, as the Knicks finally lost their cool after a season full of losing. The evening culminated with the worst possible Garden chant to owner James Dolan’s ears: “Sell the team.’’
NYPost
Estovir – I say, bring back dueling.
the Commonwealth of Virginia might have been the ideal location for your idea. Alas Virginia has lost respect for its role in creating the greatest country in the world, and they are reveling being turncoats.
Gov. Ralph “black face” Northam, Lt Gov Justin “rape women for kicks” Fairfax and the Democrats that Virginians recently elected to run the State Assembly have disgraced US History.
Bill loosening abortion restrictions passes Virginia Senate as Fairfax casts tie-breaking vote
….measure gets rid of a 2012 law mandating women to get ultrasounds and to wait 24 hours before getting an abortion.
https://www.wric.com/news/politics/capitol-connection/bill-loosening-abortion-restrictions-passes-virginia-senate-as-fairfax-casts-tie-breaking-vote/
The horror of waiting 24 hours to end a life and kill an innocent, defenseless baby. Getting a teeth cleaning can take 2-3 weeks and tonsillectomy longer. As for ultrasounds they are the latest technology based on solid scientific principles of showing the baby in utero, an image that makes most expectant parents weep for joy. The Dems hate science when it defends life
The irony of a rapist casting the tie breaking vote is rich. A Governor who depicts the days of racism and KKK influence will sign the bill. Black ministers in Virginia? Silent as a morgue
And they say Trump is a threat to America….
“the Commonwealth of Virginia might have been the ideal location for your idea. Alas Virginia has lost respect for its role in creating the greatest country in the world, and they are reveling being turncoats.”
Estovir, you are being too kind to present day Virginia.
They can’t allow ultrasounds. It would defeat the entire purpose of lying and calling a developing human a “ball of cells.” The blastula stage is incredibly short, and most certainly is not the time when an abortion would be performed.
I think sumo wrestling would be more appropriate for someone always sitting on his ass.
Tony – sumo does not have a weight class low enough for me to fight in. How about you?
It’s important to keep in mind that for purposes of an impeachment trial Roberts is not a judge but rather the presiding officer as defined by the Senate’s Impeachment Trial Rules. In addition, an impeachment trial is not a judicial trial and is not governed by Federal Rules of Evidence that control allowing witnesses, exhibits, testimony, etc. The validity of the presiding officer’s rulings rests on the Senate’s perception that the ruling is just, logical, etc. or it will be overturned by a majority vote.
A ruling by Roberts that the whistleblower’s name (Ciaramella) and picture have been widely published by MSM. As Turley notes the identity of this person is not protected and a ruling by Roberts to prohibit his name from being mentioned would probably be reversed by the Senate. If as Schiff claims this would put him in danger then appropriate protection can be provided by the government. I’ll bet Rand prevails if he chooses to push against Robert’s ruling.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/gop-senator-names-alleged-whistleblower-eric-ciaramella-needs-to-be-pulled-in-for-testimony
Just some background; Sen. Paul has been pressing this issue for 2 1/2 months.
I don’t think he’ll shy away from a confrontation with Roberts.
All you say is right except ” would probably be reversed by the Senate.”
No way. The RINO’s will surely charge on this one since they can get up and make all sorts of virtue-signalling honorable justifications for doing so. It’s also why there cannot be a fair trial, only no trial or a one-sided one. The fact is, Trumpians don’t have a majority in the Senate. Not enough votes to remove him, but enough votes to drag this out. Hopefully they will be persuaded not to do so for the simple reason that the more it IS dragged out, the worse the House – and any who support their case – looks.
On the one hand Sen. Romney is as useful as hen’s teeth to Utah citizens. OTOH he’s more useful than any Demoncrap. I truly wish he’d go crawl back into his old Mormon hole in Bahst’n, MA.
The whole question/answer process is a joke because one side can make claims in an answer that the other side cannot challenge. For example, yesterday Schiff claimed that the house managers had proved a mens rea. Seriously? Trump spoke on the phone call knowing that at least a half dozen people were listening. Then he released the transcript of the call. Are those the actions of a person with a guilty mind?
After Schiff made that claim the very next question should have asked Roberts to explain to the viewing public (and no doubt some senators) what mens rea means and how one goes about proving a defendant possesses a mens rea.
We have been up Schiff’s Creek without a paddle for three years +. It’s time to put a stop to this.
The WBs allegations have all been corroborated, so Paul’s lap dog act is ridiculous,not to mention corrosive to any future WB. You all may be on the other side of that when Pres AOC misbehave.
For those not keeping up, the WH is not pretending TruMp didn’t do it anymore. Of course he did. Now they’re arguing that anything he does to try and get re-elected can be described as in the national interest and therefore not impeachable. Amazing the things a grown man will say if someone has pics of him in his tidy whities, next to an underage girl.
The WBs allegations have all been corroborated,
This is a nonsense statement. The transcript was released months ago. The rest is a pantomime.
Well, btb is a liar’s liar. That’s for sure.
Putting aside absurd’s non sequitur, with typical GOP wilful ignorance he pretends there wasn’t a month’s long administration effort to shakedown the Ukraine after the call. Yes, the WB’s allegation was only about the phone call and has now been corroborated by 1st person witnesses to the call, and under oath.
A month long effort??? You are right! That is bad! It only took Joe Biden 6 hours to shakedown the Ukrainians!
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
They’re pikers compared to the Biden Gang!
Anon suffers from the ICNBW syndrome. He has a narcissistic personality disorder and sometimes in the process becomes abusive. His type of problem cannot be dealt with rationally so one has to recognize the problem and wipe out how he expresses it.
And you are just stupid, who is better off?
Amazing the things a grown man will say if someone has pics of him in his tidy whities, next to an underage girl.
That’s a perfect summation of your entire screed. Thanks Adam.
bythebook: once again you have proved well beyond a reasonable doubt that you are a complete imbecile.
Note the complete absence of counter arguments from our right wing tweedle dees. It’s almost as if they have none.
the counter argument is so simple it barely needs stating
Trump’s got a right to confront his accuser and if his accuser is Eric Chiaramella then why didn’t the house give him a sufficient opportunity in the house to examine witnesses — we know they did not, even though the house managers lie about that– and that includes naming and calling forward for testimony under oath and cross examination of the whispy bearded Obama administration stay-behind CIA saboteur, who was whispering things to him and why, and who he coordinated with and why?
The Senator has a question about this CIA disruptor who is at the heart of things.
The leadership of the entire nation is in question. The notion this fellow can’t be named or questioned is preposterous.
But knowing how insane DC has become, the CIA geeks have cunningly contrived to misuse the whistleblower statute to obstruct the POTUS’ defense along the entire way, and noble Senator Rand Paul is expertly cutting the Gordian knot about it.
Now the notion is that Roberts is telling the Senate they now can’t even say his name?
The unfairness of this farce is incredible.
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/385530.php
Great link! Thank you for posting it!
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Unelected Roberts ought to end this PC debacle by letting the people’s representatives do their jobs.
There certainly appears to be a culture within the IC that is subversive to the rule of law and effective oversight. If this version of the WPA is allowed to become the new normal, then the IC will have developed the most destructive weapon against future administrations imaginable. It would effectively make all future presidents serve at the pleasure of his subordinate agencies. Future anonymous WB’s will become an impeachment feeder source to any House controlled by the opposition party. And if the impeachment process we’ve witnessed recently becomes the new normal, then every future administration will be working for folks like this and not necessarily the American people:
I want to make the case for secrecy in government when it comes to the conduct of national security affairs and possibly for deception where it’s appropriate,” Bolton responded. He then approvingly quoted Winston Churchill’s assertion that “truth is so important it should be surrounded by a bodyguard of lies.
https://thefederalist.com/2020/01/29/in-2010-fox-interview-john-bolton-confessed-he-would-absolutely-lie-about-national-security-matters/?utm_source=The+Federalist+List&utm_campaign=018df4744c-RSS_The_Federalist_Daily_Updates_w_Transom&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_cfcb868ceb-018df4744c-79248369
I have heard they have the votes they need to acquit, so they would have the votes they need to overturn Roberts.
Hmmm. Maybe the whistleblower is actually a 16 year old girl, and releasing her name is a no-no because she is a minor??? Don’t laugh. The Democrats take Greta Thunberg seriously and she is a 16 year old girl with an underlying mental condition.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Squeeky – Greta turned 17 and is legal in many states. 😉
Oh, let us hope she does not reproduce.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
We are all grateful that you didn’t.
Justice Roberts hurt the credibility of SCOTUS and justices in general with his far fetched Obamacare ruling (to say nothing of his own credibility).
Now he is going out on a limb once again.
For a smart man, he is remarkably obtuse (and seemingly partisan).
Anyone with an IQ over 100 can read the text of the WPA and grasp that it ONLY applies to reporting wrongdoing of those working within the IC or on intelligence activities. It does NOT apply to reporting anything outside of the IC, let alone making up garbage lies about the president of the United States.
Barr should have publicly ended this sham months ago. This is yet another example of how far democrats will go to trample the rights of others in their pursuit of ousting a president they hate.
Enough. Either we are a nation of laws or we aren’t. Adam Schiff is NOT above the law, and neither is Roberts.
It is NOT about understanding anything. It is about winning. Like I have said for years:
““Expecting from, or trying to explain to, Democrats- “principles”,or “right vs. wrong”,or “rules”, or “logical consistency”, is like trying to explain to a bad, cheating, folding metal chair-using wrestler why he didn’t win the WWF Belt fairly. He is simply not able to comprehend what you are complaining about. All he knows is, that he won the match and the belt! The fact that his girl friend jumped into the ring when the referee wasn’t looking, and whomped the good wrestler over the head with a folding metal chair, knocking him unconscious- – -well, really what difference at this point does that make??? After all, he won! He has the championship belt! Isn’t that all that matters??? Frankly, he just doesn’t give a hoot about the morality of the whole thing. All he cares about, is getting what he wants. Period.
BUT- if in the re-match, your girlfriend whomps the bad wrestler upside the head with a folding metal chair while the referee isn’t looking – well that is a whole different story! Because you did it to him. To a Democrat, everything is personal. There are no principles of right or wrong. An action is right if the Democratic Party benefits, and wrong if it hurts the Democrats. It really is that simple. That is the only thing that is consistent for the Democrats, and it ain’t very logical.”
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
And 51 senators could override Roberts.
A better rebuke to Roberts is to strip him of his current health insurance coverage and force him to enroll in Obamacare with the help of a physician paid at Medicare reimbursement schedules…..via Electronic Health Record software
The best comment I ever read about that useless POS RINO.
Not the EHR. That’s cruel and unusual. COWs on wheels more geared towards organizing billing codes than creating any cogent patient history. They were better off with handwritten physician’s notes.
Yes! I agree! I was particularly pissed in 2013 with his ruling.