The Impeachment Trial of President Donald J. Trump

[keepthefaith]

3 hours ago, Capco said:

"Never before, in the history of the republic, have we been forced to consider the conduct of a president who appears to have solicited personal, political favors from a foreign government."

 

Is it that Trump supporters simply think the above is bogus/hot air?  Or do they just not care and turn a blind eye even if they think he did do what he is being accused of, perhaps by citing other presidents who they think did the same or worse?  

 

I'd hope it's mostly the former.  

 

Not a Trump voter here, not in 2016.

 

One big flaw (there are several) in the dems impeachment proceedings is their stance of Biden being characterized as a political opponent.  That completely disregards the fact that Biden's actions in Ukraine and the desire to investigate him, his son, Burisma, missing aid money and Ukraine support for Hillary by Ukranian government officials substantially pre-dates him becoming a candidate for President. 

 

Why should Biden be given a pass just because he is in a political campaign?  

Edited December 5, 2019 by keepthefaith

[DC Tom]

Just now, 3rdnlng said:

But Pamala Karlan knows that "us" means "me". Must be those numerous degrees that she has have enlightened her.

 

Yes, Trump was using the royal "we," because he's a monarchist.  Just like he was using the royal "our country." 

 

Again...preconceived notions.  Which are not evidentiary.  

 

(Yes, I know you know.  I'm telling Tibs.)

[3rdnlng]

9 minutes ago, B-Man said:

Nancy Pelosi’s dramatic statement about how they must move forward with articles of impeachment for Trump because the founders would want them to (or whatever hot mess she was babbling about) was just a hot mess.

 

Truly.

 

Nobody was surprised that they’d move forward (Nadler has been bragging about doing it since 2017), and ultimately it came across as a Hail Mary of sorts. Mollie Hemingway noticed something else very telling coming from several reporters this morning:

 

 

 

 

Democrats are in trouble.

 

We know it.

 

They know it.

 

Even the media know it.

 

But you know, Ben Franklin and they have a heavy heart and stuff.

I understand Ben texted her about it.

[B-Man]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

Edited December 5, 2019 by B-Man

[GaryPinC]

2 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

Democrats are in trouble.

 

We know it.

 

They know it.

 

Even the media know it.

 

But you know, Ben Franklin and they have a heavy heart and stuff.

 

The democrats aren't in trouble.  They have the upper hand.  From the minute they stopped humming and hawing and Pelosi decided to proceed this was going to be the end result.  Turn it over to the republican Senate and politicize the hell out of it with help from the media of course.

How hard will it be for the media to proclaim bias and a corrupt process when Lindsey Graham says and does things like this?

 

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/469992-lindsey-graham-basks-in-the-impeachment-spotlight 

 

“I’m not going to read these transcripts. The whole process is a joke,” Graham declared in an impromptu hallway press conference.

  

So, conservatives decry how if GOP were doing the things Schiff and dems did during impeachment there would be a media uproar?  Well, it'll happen for sure in the Senate if the GOP isn't intelligent and careful about how they do this.  They need to be more respectful of the process and carefully plan the trial as the media will be working against them.  If GOP senators had brains they would have the media believe they would be willing to impeach.  Graham or some other GOP sen already declared a few weeks ago that if it gets to the Senate Trump won't be convicted.  Those on here who enjoy how much Trump gets the media and far left riled up?  Well, don't look now but Pelosi and Schiff are doing the same to the GOP.  Big difference will be the media coverage.  

 

Repubs better grow up real fast, realize what's at stake and very carefully plan this to undermine the propaganda.  They need to play the game far better, they are getting beaten badly.

 

The endgame is very simple here:  lack of impeachment the fault of the Senate GOP (see inflammatory quotes from Graham et al), give Dems control of government in 2020.  You can even leverage all Trump's judicial appointments to that end.  

 

IG report and Barr?  Well if they can water down the IG report enough, they can and will demonize Barr's work as biased and politically motivated.

 

Things have been delayed so much already, if Dems can stretch it to the elections and win, then it all goes away, just 4 years later.  Ah, that darned government red tape!

[Koko78]

3 hours ago, Capco said:

So you really think those three law professors are insane?  

 

Insane? Probably. Idiots? Definitely.

 

2 hours ago, Gary Busey said:

A medical examiner called to the stand in a murder case is not a fact witness.

 

They can be - bad example.

 

Should have gone with a S.A.N.E. or an expert on racial bias in identification as not being a fact witness.

[Deranged Rhino]

1 minute ago, GaryPinC said:

 

The democrats aren't in trouble.  They have the upper hand. 

 

Incorrect. By almost every measure.

 

1 minute ago, GaryPinC said:

Big difference will be the media coverage.  

 

Which is why your analysis is incorrect. The media's credibility is lower than Congress's at this point -- both of which are lower than Trump's. 

 

The people are tuning the media out. The only people still relying on the media to get their information are either partisans interested in having their partisan opinions confirmed, or those not paying attention. 

And the people NOT paying attention, have had every chance to pay attention to the Ukraine nonsense and have rejected it outright. 

 

It's a losing issue, and the dems are bleeding votes in battle ground states and within the African American community (who know when someone is being set up by the cops). 

 

This has been a disaster for the dems on every level. 

 

And when/if it gets to the Senate, that will only be exacerbated because they will lose all power.

 

[Koko78]

1 hour ago, DC Tom said:

 

"I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot..."

 

What Trump actually said.  "Us" and "our country" are the antithesis of asking for a personal favor.

 

Now hold on, I thought the "expert" clarified that Trump was using the royal "we", after retroactively granting a (misspelt) title of nobility to his child!

[TakeYouToTasker]

3 hours ago, Capco said:

 

As a matter of fact I know a paranoid schizophrenic who is fully aware that he's insane.  Some do know and some don't.  No need to paint with such broad strokes.  

They are highly partisan actors, not insane; and they were cherry picked by Schiff and company for exactly that reason.

 

One of them had pressed for the President’s impeachment over his tweets in 2017.  
 

They are anti-Trump resisters, and were used for theater, to lend their credentials to this sham.

 

The a president of the United States is not only permitted, but rather required to conduct foreign policy within the standards set forth by international treaties we are a party to. 

Edited December 5, 2019 by TakeYouToTasker

[GaryPinC]

2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Incorrect. By almost every measure.

 

 

Which is why your analysis is incorrect. The media's credibility is lower than Congress's at this point -- both of which are lower than Trump's. 

 

The people are tuning the media out. The only people still relying on the media to get their information are either partisans interested in having their partisan opinions confirmed, or those not paying attention. 

And the people NOT paying attention, have had every chance to pay attention to the Ukraine nonsense and have rejected it outright. 

 

It's a losing issue, and the dems are bleeding votes in battle ground states and within the African American community (who know when someone is being set up by the cops). 

 

This has been a disaster for the dems on every level. 

 

And when/if it gets to the Senate, that will only be exacerbated because they will lose all power.

 

I don't disagree with your thinking, but that's in a purely intelligent rational world.  I would say people are intellectually and emotionally tired of the entire situation, are definitely tuning out, but will track the media blurbs from a distance.   And that will favor the Democrats UNLESS a vast majority of the country agrees with you about MSM credibility.

 

And that's a hell of a risk to take.  Which is why I say Repubs need to get their heads our of their asses and realize they need to plan this very carefully, respectfully, and not just assume the facts will seal the deal. 

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, GaryPinC said:

I don't disagree with your thinking, but that's in a purely intelligent rational world.  I would say people are intellectually and emotionally tired of the entire situation, are definitely tuning out, but will track the media blurbs from a distance.  And that will favor the Democrats UNLESS a vast majority of the country agrees with you about MSM credibility.

 

I agree that the media still has clout -- but their numbers have dropped significantly more than they're letting on. To the point that they are, imo, accurately seen as partisans more than objective journalists by most of the country at this point. That's a big swing from where we were at the start of 2017. 

 

1 minute ago, GaryPinC said:

And that's a hell of a risk to take.  Which is why I say Repubs need to get their heads our of their asses and realize they need to plan this very carefully, respectfully, and not just assume the facts will seal the deal. 

 

It's not just facts they're banking on. They're banking on indictments and prosecutions. 

 

Without those, the "republicans" (ie, non establishment republicans) will lose their support in droves. There's too much evidence and facts already in the public sphere for there to NOT to be a serious push by Barr and the DOJ to hold the bad actors responsible. 

 

That will be met by outrage by the press. But it won't last because they don't have the sway they used to -- and the majority of Americans, by and large, are still more interested in truth and justice than they are partisan bickering when it comes down to it. They just have to see the evidence, which the media has done its best to hide, obscure, and obsfucate for the past three years.

 

Trials with convictions won't allow them to run that gambit. 

[GaryPinC]

1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

 

Trials with convictions won't allow them to run that gambit. 

And how likely is it that happens before the elections?  How overdue is that IG report again?

[TakeYouToTasker]

1 hour ago, 3rdnlng said:

Generally speaking, those that stay in the academic world are so insulated from the real world that they believe in such things as The Green New Deal.

Those attempting to foist the GND on the public aren’t doing it for ecological reasons.  Climate is their useful boogeyman.  The GND is nothing more than a Trojan horse designed to seize total control of the global economy, and implement international socialism to create a permanent caste system.

[Buffalo_Gal]

5 minutes ago, GaryPinC said:

And how likely is it that happens before the elections?  How overdue is that IG report again?

Monday is OIG day. Hence the Democrats having a shampeachment day! ? ? ? ?

There was a small OIG report today and a small one three weeks ago. It is being ignored by the press, which proves the point that the press isn't going to cover this unless they have to. Which makes a Senate trial veeeerrrrry interesting.  
 

Edited December 5, 2019 by Buffalo_Gal

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, GaryPinC said:

And how likely is it that happens before the elections?  How overdue is that IG report again?

 

There's NO chance all of it gets done by 2020, I do not disagree. But they don't need it all. They need one or two trials to make their case stick in the minds of voters. 

 

The OIG report was delayed for the purposes of the election -- a move which I disagree with entirely then and now. But that's the play they're running because they knew two things: 

1) The impeachment gambit was going to be run, and this is the ultimate "Trump" card. 

2) The evidence uncovered (despite Horowitz having no teeth) will fundamentally transform the narrative and set the stage for Durham. 

 

People do not realize that Durham has been working on this just about as long as Horowitz. It was being done on a parallel track, in secret, since late 2017. That was by design, the goal is to move fast when the hammer falls because they know the truth about what you stated above re the media/spin. This will be a cascade of revelations, indictments, and "discovery" during the trial process if they do it right. Even then, it won't all be done by 2020 -- which is why I have loudly protested the decision to tie this all to the election. 

 

What you're likely to get between now and the election is a series of referrals from Horowitz's report of up to a dozen or more senior officials from the DOJ/FBI. We know there are at least two for sure, but I'm betting that number gets closer to 12 by Monday. Durham and Barr won't let those referrals just sit. They will be used as political cudgels in some segments of the media, but the DOJ will have to follow them up with indictments by spring for at least several of them (the others might cut deals to roll on bigger fish).

 

Seems fast, but it's really not. If Durham's really got three grand juries empaneled outside of DC at present, which is what I keep hearing from people who know, they will likely be ready with indictments and trials by Spring, into summer. 

 

There's NO way they can get it all done before the 2020 election. Again, Horowitz is only a small fraction of the story as he's only focused on the FBI/DOJ. But the federal team which was investigating Trump was a fusion team of both FBI and CIA personnel. That CIA angle, which is tied to the State Department directly, will be MUCH more difficult due to the nature of the spook world not blending with our justice system. 

 

That comes in the second term. What Horowitz will do is shatter the notion that the Russia investigation was done on the up and up. It will expose that it cut corners, illegally in some cases, because they were out to get Trump -- not the truth. Horowitz's report can do that with the evidence he brings forth, even if his "conclusion" is more watered down. We saw that with the MYE report he did, and the McCabe/Comey reports. He eviscerated them all -- but couldn't "prove" intent. 

 

Which should sound familiar. 

[Uncle Joe]

 

 

[snafu]

3 hours ago, Capco said:

 

Well now you're jumping the gun a bit yourself.  Unless you think the Democrats intentionally picked insane witnesses.  

 

At Wednesday’s session, three legal experts called by Democrats said impeachment was merited.

 

Noah Feldman, a Harvard Law School professor, said he considered it clear that the president’s conduct met the definition of “high crimes and misdemeanors.” Said Michael Gerhardt, a University of North Carolina law professor, “If what we’re talking about is not impeachable … then nothing is impeachable.”

 

The only Republican witness, Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, dissented from the other legal experts. He said the Democrats were bringing a “slipshod impeachment” case against the president, but he didn’t excuse Trump’s behavior.

 

“It is not wrong because President Trump is right,” Turley said. “A case for impeachment could be made, but it cannot be made on this record.”

 

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/pelosi-gives-approval-for-drafting-impeachment-articles-against-trump

 

Idk, but I think it would be pretty difficult to get a job as a law professor at Harvard if you were insane.  Just a hunch though.  

 

For some time now, the whole process needs to be played out.

What I find  interesting is whether the House will limit Articles to just what the hearings have been about (Ukraine).

 

Pelosi started her announcement today by quoting the Declaration of Independence from a Tyrant/King/Despot.  I find this comparison extremely hard to agree with.  If you consider it, Trump didn't withhold funding.  If you think about it, Ukraine didn't make its "public announcement".  If you think about it, the Whistleblower's complaint accomplished its intended purpose -- to alert the government and the public about allegedly objectionable conduct by the President.  How does any of that make Trump a despot who refuses to conform to laws?  What Article of Impeachment can the House pass that doesn't sound like "we wish he acted like us"?  

 

And to answer your question -- I think those Professors are partisans.  They came in with an agenda.  Being politically motivated doesn't make one insane, just biased.

 

 

 

 

 

[GaryPinC]

5 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

Monday is OIG day. Hence the Democrats having a shampeachment day! ? ? ? ?

There was a small OIG report today and a small one three weeks ago. It is being ignored by the press, which proves the point that the press isn't going to cover this unless they have to. Which makes a Senate trial veeeerrrrry interesting.  
 

Yep, I understand all that.  But my points remain.  How many Americans have taken a deep look at the facts in these cases?  Obviously that has happened in our little PPP bubble but how many nationwide have?  For those people, they see 2 truths being yelled, both sides equally emotional and imo immature.  Which side will they fall on when the MSM stays on point with their approach?

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, GaryPinC said:

Yep, I understand all that.  But my points remain.  How many Americans have taken a deep look at the facts in these cases?  Obviously that has happened in our little PPP bubble but how many nationwide have?  For those people, they see 2 truths being yelled, both sides equally emotional and imo immature.  Which side will they fall on when the MSM stays on point with their approach?

 

The side with the better story, backed by the most evidence. 

 

That's not the DNC's story. Their story is tired, played out, and has been seen before (many times). 

[Buffalo_Gal]

Just now, GaryPinC said:

Yep, I understand all that.  But my points remain.  How many Americans have taken a deep look at the facts in these cases?  Obviously that has happened in our little PPP bubble but how many nationwide have?  For those people, they see 2 truths being yelled, both sides equally emotional and imo immature.  Which side will they fall on when the MSM stays on point with their approach?

I honestly do not know. Over Thanksgiving I got to chat with some relatives from the very blue Boston area, one of them is an attorney. Let's just say that in their opinion (so anecdotal)  the Democrats are idiots (they are Democrats) and this is all a charade.

If I had to guess (and it is only a guess) I'd say most people are tired of this. They have had enough of #OrangeManBad and a do-nothing Congress. That is only my guess though. 2020 will tell a bigger tale one way or the other.