As I type this the second day of what's called the debate stage of the impeachment trial will happen later today. However, within the past few days the John Bolton book revelations have seem to shock a lot of people, leading to a nearly week long battle over whether he should be called as a witness. Repubs and the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago's legal team have claimed that since the House didn't call Bolton that he wouldn't provide anything new. Of course, they overlook that the House tried to subpoena him and it was blocked by the Mad Fuhrer's claim of executive privilege (just like when they tried to call other witnesses with first hand knowledge). But why is he wanted now?
According to news reports an excerpt form Bolton memoir leaked that claimed in his dealing with electoral vote winner Donny any talk of Ukraine has less to do with corruption and pretty much everything to do with Joe Biden and his son. Basically, if rue, this is first hand evidence of quid pro quo and what some would consider a slam dunk.
So how are the Repubs handling it? On their media outlets they're attacking Bolton, a hardcore neocon who almost has blood lust for war anywhere - but especially the middle East, and calling him a tool of the Democrats. The Mad Fuhrer himself has tweeted that Bolton is a liar (especially rich given that electoral vote winner Donny has been caught lying while in office well over ten thousands times). And his legal team are saying that Bolton would offer nothing new to the trial (even though his evidence would flesh things out).
As for the debate question and answer period so far? Most of it has been trying to reiterate what had been said in the opening argument with the House manager trying to state the case for why witnesses are needed and the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago's legal team spouting the usual dog whistle talking points about how this is a hoax, the Dems are trying to invalidate the 2016 election, and that - even if electoral vote winner Donny did something wrong - what he did wasn't impeachable.
Then there's the Alan Dershowitz argument that anything a President does isn't impeachable if he thinks his re-election is in the public interest. Obviously this isn't true as accepting foreign help to try and win an election is illegal regardless of who does it but they're still trying to tell people this is true.
Still, the best question of the night went to Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont who asked this to House managers:
"Given the media has documented President Trump’s thousands of lies while in office - more than 16,200 as of Jan. 20 - why should we be expected to believe that anything President Trump says has credibility?”
That is what all of us, both elected officials and us voters should remember time and time again between now and the elections in November.
Thursday, January 30, 2020
Live from Washington DC it's.......The Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago's Impeachment Special Part Two: THE REPUBS KIND OF SORT OF STRIKE BACK WITH THE SAME EXCUSES
So Saturday morning and the last two days saw the lawyers for the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago make their case that electoral vote winner Donny should remain in office and be acquitted of any charges related to the impeachment. Now, we'll get to the John Bolton book kerfuffle in another post but, while that leak seems to show clear evidence of quid pro quo and that he wanted the Ukraine to have an investigation specifically into Joe Biden rather than corruption, the Mad Fuhrer's legal team seems content to rehash the usual claims of perfect phone call, no corruption, no quid pro quo that the other side pretty much completely debunked.
I admit I haven't seen much of this side of the argument mainly because I had things to do. I ended up getting off the paying job extremely early and my nap afterwards pretty much covered that time. While this meant I haven't seen much of their case being made, the fact they keep making the same talking points doesn't help their case for those who haven't already drank a large cup of the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago's non carbonated soft drink mix.
We'll get to Bolton and the Debate stage next.
I admit I haven't seen much of this side of the argument mainly because I had things to do. I ended up getting off the paying job extremely early and my nap afterwards pretty much covered that time. While this meant I haven't seen much of their case being made, the fact they keep making the same talking points doesn't help their case for those who haven't already drank a large cup of the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago's non carbonated soft drink mix.
We'll get to Bolton and the Debate stage next.
Thursday, January 23, 2020
Live from Washington DC it's.......The Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago's Impeachment Special Part One Clarifications/Corrections and Thoughts
Hey! I know day two of the House Managers making their case for convicting the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago hasn't gotten up and running yet but I thought I'd offer a thought or two as well as start with a clarification.
In the last post I said yesterday was day three of the impeachment trial. While it is technically true (Friday being the naming of the House Managers and the House walking it over to the Senate and Tuesday being the rules day and the Repubs voting against every offered amendment, yesterday was the first day of the Manager making the case. I also want to clarify that the sitting in silence while the cas eis made was a Senate rule, not one of Addison the ZTurtle's rules (though, like much of the Repubs cases, it's hard to tell) along with some other rules such as Senators being only allowed to drin kwater or milk while in the Chamber. I want to apologize if anyone was confused by that.
So far, the House Impeachment Managers seem to be doing a steady job, making the case point for point between their speeches and a combination of Powerpoint graphics and video footage from the House inquiry hearings as well as other visuals (including some with the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago speaking on the issue). It has been both jaw dropping as well as educational for many (to be fair, there's so much out there that, even for news hounds, it's hard to keep track of it all in news reports). Their linking it to rule of law and what the framers of the Constitution may have meant was also a good touch.
As for the Repubs....they'r acting like Repubs for the most part. While a couple of Senators have found the case to be eye opening (including Repub Sen. John Kennedy of LA), many seem to be taking little breaks to either go to the can (though it seems a little excessive) or in a couple of cases z(Sen;. Blackburn of TN and MO"s new Junior Senator Josh Hawley (a/k/a:" Senator Joshy) do interviews with right wing media sources (apparently without consequences though doing so is supposed to lead to them getting arrested if done when they should be in the chamber). While some have reported that a few Senators on teh Repub side might be moved by the Dems case, it'll be later on when we learn if that is really the case or more BS designed to make us think that moderate Repubs still exist in either House of Congress or not.
So what to expect today? The HOuse managers will continue to make their case and, since I have to be at the paying job tonight, I'll have to wait until sometime tomorrow to catch up on the highlights or lowlights of it. So far the Dems are making a clear and solid case. Unfortunately, given that the Repubs are so into winning at any cost that they think rules no longer apply to them, the question remains over whether turth, justice, and rule of law will matter or not?
We still have more days of this so we'll have to see it unfold to see if anyone on the right wing puts country over party or not.
In the last post I said yesterday was day three of the impeachment trial. While it is technically true (Friday being the naming of the House Managers and the House walking it over to the Senate and Tuesday being the rules day and the Repubs voting against every offered amendment, yesterday was the first day of the Manager making the case. I also want to clarify that the sitting in silence while the cas eis made was a Senate rule, not one of Addison the ZTurtle's rules (though, like much of the Repubs cases, it's hard to tell) along with some other rules such as Senators being only allowed to drin kwater or milk while in the Chamber. I want to apologize if anyone was confused by that.
So far, the House Impeachment Managers seem to be doing a steady job, making the case point for point between their speeches and a combination of Powerpoint graphics and video footage from the House inquiry hearings as well as other visuals (including some with the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago speaking on the issue). It has been both jaw dropping as well as educational for many (to be fair, there's so much out there that, even for news hounds, it's hard to keep track of it all in news reports). Their linking it to rule of law and what the framers of the Constitution may have meant was also a good touch.
As for the Repubs....they'r acting like Repubs for the most part. While a couple of Senators have found the case to be eye opening (including Repub Sen. John Kennedy of LA), many seem to be taking little breaks to either go to the can (though it seems a little excessive) or in a couple of cases z(Sen;. Blackburn of TN and MO"s new Junior Senator Josh Hawley (a/k/a:" Senator Joshy) do interviews with right wing media sources (apparently without consequences though doing so is supposed to lead to them getting arrested if done when they should be in the chamber). While some have reported that a few Senators on teh Repub side might be moved by the Dems case, it'll be later on when we learn if that is really the case or more BS designed to make us think that moderate Repubs still exist in either House of Congress or not.
So what to expect today? The HOuse managers will continue to make their case and, since I have to be at the paying job tonight, I'll have to wait until sometime tomorrow to catch up on the highlights or lowlights of it. So far the Dems are making a clear and solid case. Unfortunately, given that the Repubs are so into winning at any cost that they think rules no longer apply to them, the question remains over whether turth, justice, and rule of law will matter or not?
We still have more days of this so we'll have to see it unfold to see if anyone on the right wing puts country over party or not.
Wednesday, January 22, 2020
Live from Washington DC it's.......The Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago's Impeachment Special Part One
Hey! So it's 2020 and we're a few days into the impeachment trial of the Senate for the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago (a/k/a: electoral vote winner Donny) on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. For a while Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi had held up sending the articles of impeachment over to the Senate in hopes that Senate Majority leader Addison the turtle (a/k/a: Moscow Mitch or Midnight Mitch) would send over the rules but the latter held off and Pelosi, for betgter or worse, decided to get the trial underway.
With yesterday's release of the rules it was clear the Addison the Turtle wanted to get things through as quick as possible so he could acquit the Mad Fuhrer (which, let's face it, the Repubs most likely plan to do). Among the rules included an attempt to get all the testimony done in two days (public outcry pushed that to three) and requiring all the Senate to sit in silence throughout this. In addition, some key parts of the trial will be blocked from Press coverage and Addison the Turtle does have an option to dismiss outright. While the Repubs claim this iin keeping of the rules of the CLinton impeachment in 1998-99, a brief study shows it's a world apart. As the House Impeachment Managers tried to get amendments through to allow additional evidence (some of which came to light after the house impeachment inquiry and some proving that the Mad Fuhrer and his minions committed crimes), the amendments get defeated by strict partyline voted of 53 Repubs to 47 Democrats.
There's also rumors of a witness trade which would make former Vice President Biden and maybe also his son Hunter to testify in hopes of getting Mick Mulvaney or John Bolton. For now Sen. Chuck Schumer claims such a trade is off the table but the establishment Dems do have a habit of caving so, while we hope it's off the table since Biden or his son would know little of the Mad Fuhrer's corruption and his blocking aid to Ukraine, this could happen down the road.
Meanwhile there's the case made by the House Impeachment Manager versus the cases made by the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago's legal team. The former, from what I've been able to see [like many of you I've seen bits and pieces since I have things to do], has given a somber multimedia presentation on the laws Donny broke, how it fits the criteria for impeachable offenses, and the like. As for the legal team for Donny, it;s gone from seemingly not knowing what they're talking about to outright lying. While logic would predict that Supreme Court chief justice John Roberts should do something about the lies, he seems to be quiet over it all.
As I said before, while it's too early to tell what will actually happen, it does appear likely that the Repubs will choose party over country, truth, or decency and not remove the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago from office (even though such as move would promote Mike Pence to electoral vote winner Mikey, who's a more sincere believer in the theocratic leaning bullshit the GOP has embraced for a long ass time than Donny, though Donny has shown open white supremacist views can help them as well). Since no President has ever been removed from office due to impeachment this is quite likely for the Mad Fuhrer as well. However, what is good about the impeachment is the lessons it seems to be showing us about politics in the U.S.
One- There is no such thing as a moderate Repub on the Federal level (and probably none in many of the states as well).
The mainstream media has long tried to pitch the idea of those "mioderates" such as Sen. Susan Collins or Sen. Lisa Murkowski or Sen/ Mitt Romney switching sides and choosing country over party to vote with the Democrats. Time and again this has been proven not to be the case (remember the Supreme Court confirmation hearings for justice Bretty Brett Kavanaugh). This time around appears to be no different.
Two - Neither the Mad Fuhrer nor the Repubs in the Senate appear to care about the truth.
Note that each amendment vote has found all the Repubs voting party over country almost oan extreme. Part of this is due to partisan gerrymandering (many are in such safe districts that the only challenge is being primaried on the even further right), but another part of it is the Mad Fuhrer's takeover of the party os so complete that if he is innocent (as they claim) then one would think they'd want evidence and witnesses to prove it. Nope, no evidence or testimony.
Add to this the orignal push for 12 hour days for each side to make their case, which would mean that good testimony could be made in the middle of the night and it's clear that the Repubs don't want people to know what happened.
Does that mean it's bleak and hopeless? While it once again shows that there needs to be an overwhelming get out to vote effort to counter the Repubs voter suppression tactics to steal 2020 and get Donny out, the impeachment will be good for one thing - all the votes will be made public somehow and that will be on their records for the rest of their careers. And that needs to be focused on as election time gets closer.
That's all for now. More on impeachment as things unfold.
With yesterday's release of the rules it was clear the Addison the Turtle wanted to get things through as quick as possible so he could acquit the Mad Fuhrer (which, let's face it, the Repubs most likely plan to do). Among the rules included an attempt to get all the testimony done in two days (public outcry pushed that to three) and requiring all the Senate to sit in silence throughout this. In addition, some key parts of the trial will be blocked from Press coverage and Addison the Turtle does have an option to dismiss outright. While the Repubs claim this iin keeping of the rules of the CLinton impeachment in 1998-99, a brief study shows it's a world apart. As the House Impeachment Managers tried to get amendments through to allow additional evidence (some of which came to light after the house impeachment inquiry and some proving that the Mad Fuhrer and his minions committed crimes), the amendments get defeated by strict partyline voted of 53 Repubs to 47 Democrats.
There's also rumors of a witness trade which would make former Vice President Biden and maybe also his son Hunter to testify in hopes of getting Mick Mulvaney or John Bolton. For now Sen. Chuck Schumer claims such a trade is off the table but the establishment Dems do have a habit of caving so, while we hope it's off the table since Biden or his son would know little of the Mad Fuhrer's corruption and his blocking aid to Ukraine, this could happen down the road.
Meanwhile there's the case made by the House Impeachment Manager versus the cases made by the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago's legal team. The former, from what I've been able to see [like many of you I've seen bits and pieces since I have things to do], has given a somber multimedia presentation on the laws Donny broke, how it fits the criteria for impeachable offenses, and the like. As for the legal team for Donny, it;s gone from seemingly not knowing what they're talking about to outright lying. While logic would predict that Supreme Court chief justice John Roberts should do something about the lies, he seems to be quiet over it all.
As I said before, while it's too early to tell what will actually happen, it does appear likely that the Repubs will choose party over country, truth, or decency and not remove the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago from office (even though such as move would promote Mike Pence to electoral vote winner Mikey, who's a more sincere believer in the theocratic leaning bullshit the GOP has embraced for a long ass time than Donny, though Donny has shown open white supremacist views can help them as well). Since no President has ever been removed from office due to impeachment this is quite likely for the Mad Fuhrer as well. However, what is good about the impeachment is the lessons it seems to be showing us about politics in the U.S.
One- There is no such thing as a moderate Repub on the Federal level (and probably none in many of the states as well).
The mainstream media has long tried to pitch the idea of those "mioderates" such as Sen. Susan Collins or Sen. Lisa Murkowski or Sen/ Mitt Romney switching sides and choosing country over party to vote with the Democrats. Time and again this has been proven not to be the case (remember the Supreme Court confirmation hearings for justice Bretty Brett Kavanaugh). This time around appears to be no different.
Two - Neither the Mad Fuhrer nor the Repubs in the Senate appear to care about the truth.
Note that each amendment vote has found all the Repubs voting party over country almost oan extreme. Part of this is due to partisan gerrymandering (many are in such safe districts that the only challenge is being primaried on the even further right), but another part of it is the Mad Fuhrer's takeover of the party os so complete that if he is innocent (as they claim) then one would think they'd want evidence and witnesses to prove it. Nope, no evidence or testimony.
Add to this the orignal push for 12 hour days for each side to make their case, which would mean that good testimony could be made in the middle of the night and it's clear that the Repubs don't want people to know what happened.
Does that mean it's bleak and hopeless? While it once again shows that there needs to be an overwhelming get out to vote effort to counter the Repubs voter suppression tactics to steal 2020 and get Donny out, the impeachment will be good for one thing - all the votes will be made public somehow and that will be on their records for the rest of their careers. And that needs to be focused on as election time gets closer.
That's all for now. More on impeachment as things unfold.
Tuesday, November 19, 2019
It's the Walking Talking Open Impeachment Inquiry Shuffle Part One...or George and Bill's Tesimony Adventure
Today marks the second week of open impeachment inquiries into the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago and whether, through his minions, he asked the Ukranian government to investigate a perceived poilitical rival (in this case, former Vice President Joe Biden, who is one of the nearly 20 candidates running for President on the Democratic Party primary for the 2020 election). Originally launched from a "transcript" (more like a memo or loosely transcribed yet edited note) from electoral vote winner Donny and his minions regarding a July 2019 call with Ukranian President Zelensky, the supposedly "perfect call" (in the Mad Fuhrer's words) actually gave a visible proof of "quid pro call" by asking for favors that allude to investigating the appointment of Biden's son Hunter to the board of a Ukranian gas company as well as into Crowdstrike, a tech company that, according to right wing conspiracy theories, helped Hillary Clinton rig the election[which, given the Mad Fuhrer won the electoral college, seems extremely far fetched at best]. While the later is brought up, it's the former that convinced establishment Democrats such as Rep. Chuck Schumer and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi that an inquiry had to happen.
The move to make it public came about as Repubs in Congress whined and moaned about lack of "due process" as well as attempts to barge into a SCIF (secure facility) where confidential testimony was given came a vote to make it public and televised. Of course, the Repubs then whined and moved the goal posts (complaining about keeping the whistle blower's identity private, even though Federal law requires it).. Which leads us to the testimony we have so far.
Last week (on Wednesday November 13) we had televised testimony from State Department official George Kent and Ambassador Bill Taylor. In this time we learned some of the background behind the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago's behind the scenes tinkerings in regards to withholding military aid to Ukraine either directly or from his lawyer, former NYC mayor Rudy Giuliani. unless there were invatigations from the Ukmranian government into both Crowdstrike and the Bidens. While Repub congressmen on the committees tried to claim this wasn't p[roof of quid pro quo it sure as hell looks like it to anyone not hell-bent on trying to claim electoral vote winner Donny is either completely innocent or that he did it but they aren't crimes.
The left turn in the case came when Taylor testified that one of his aides was present the day after the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago's second call to the Ukranian president have Ambassador to the EU Gordon Sondland (a Donny fundraiser who many felt bought his post) took a loud phone call with electoral vote winner Donny where Sondland told the electoral vote winner that Zelensky will go ahead with the investigation and that he loves the Mad Fuhrer before telling the aide that the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago doesn't care that much about the Ukraine and corruption but really cares only about the Bidens and what he perceives as corruption from them.
This was something that people didn't know about beforehand. It caused Sondland to amend his original testimony done behind closed doors and caused Congress to call him as a witness the next week. What it also did was give some rock solid proof that there was bribery, if not extortion, when Ukrainian military aid was withheld unless they played ball and called for an investigation and possible prosecution of the Bidens. They may have gotten away with it except Congress got wind of it and forced the White House to release the aid, which meant Zelensky didn't have to go on CNN (as the Mad Fuhrer and company requested as a condition for aid) to call for the investigation.
That alone should bring people a lot closer to understanding why the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago should be impeached. Then as news unfolded from that with Repubs trying to spin that there was no quid pro quo and he Mad Fuhrer claiming he was too busy but tweeted over 30 times about it beforehand, news broke of a second person who corroborated what Taylor said about the restaurant call.
All this in the first day or so. But there's more up ahead. While we don't know if the Mad Fuhrer was be impeached, much less removed from office yet what we're learning is that his corruption may be deeper and more intense than many people thought.
The move to make it public came about as Repubs in Congress whined and moaned about lack of "due process" as well as attempts to barge into a SCIF (secure facility) where confidential testimony was given came a vote to make it public and televised. Of course, the Repubs then whined and moved the goal posts (complaining about keeping the whistle blower's identity private, even though Federal law requires it).. Which leads us to the testimony we have so far.
Last week (on Wednesday November 13) we had televised testimony from State Department official George Kent and Ambassador Bill Taylor. In this time we learned some of the background behind the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago's behind the scenes tinkerings in regards to withholding military aid to Ukraine either directly or from his lawyer, former NYC mayor Rudy Giuliani. unless there were invatigations from the Ukmranian government into both Crowdstrike and the Bidens. While Repub congressmen on the committees tried to claim this wasn't p[roof of quid pro quo it sure as hell looks like it to anyone not hell-bent on trying to claim electoral vote winner Donny is either completely innocent or that he did it but they aren't crimes.
The left turn in the case came when Taylor testified that one of his aides was present the day after the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago's second call to the Ukranian president have Ambassador to the EU Gordon Sondland (a Donny fundraiser who many felt bought his post) took a loud phone call with electoral vote winner Donny where Sondland told the electoral vote winner that Zelensky will go ahead with the investigation and that he loves the Mad Fuhrer before telling the aide that the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago doesn't care that much about the Ukraine and corruption but really cares only about the Bidens and what he perceives as corruption from them.
This was something that people didn't know about beforehand. It caused Sondland to amend his original testimony done behind closed doors and caused Congress to call him as a witness the next week. What it also did was give some rock solid proof that there was bribery, if not extortion, when Ukrainian military aid was withheld unless they played ball and called for an investigation and possible prosecution of the Bidens. They may have gotten away with it except Congress got wind of it and forced the White House to release the aid, which meant Zelensky didn't have to go on CNN (as the Mad Fuhrer and company requested as a condition for aid) to call for the investigation.
That alone should bring people a lot closer to understanding why the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago should be impeached. Then as news unfolded from that with Repubs trying to spin that there was no quid pro quo and he Mad Fuhrer claiming he was too busy but tweeted over 30 times about it beforehand, news broke of a second person who corroborated what Taylor said about the restaurant call.
All this in the first day or so. But there's more up ahead. While we don't know if the Mad Fuhrer was be impeached, much less removed from office yet what we're learning is that his corruption may be deeper and more intense than many people thought.
Monday, October 7, 2019
The Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago in the fall fun movie...BEACH BLANKET IMPEACHMENT!!!
Wow! The last two weeks have been a ride.
If you asked me before then what the chances would be that the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago (also known as electoral vote winner Donny) would face anything near an impeachment inquiry much less any chance of impeachment,I would've been skeptical. Because while he's committed more than his share3 of what could be considered high crimes an misdemeanors the Democratic Party leadership always seemed gun shy, almost dismissive of calls for impeachment from Rep. Maxine Waters and later the four freshman Congresswomen known as the Squad (Rashida Talib, Ayanna Pressely, Ilhan Oman, and Alexandria Ocasio Cortez). When asked why the party leadership usually spouted a variation of a theme that mixed some truth (no President was ever removed from office by impeachment) with speculation (the public wouldn't approve.voters might go further to Donny) and a mix of the two (the Repub controlled Senate would never let it happen). However, as news of the Mad Fuhrer's phone call with the Ukranian prime minister got leaked the sort of scandal that normally went away whenever Donny and company did something beyond the pale seemed to not take hold this time. This was even further made clear when a summary of the phone found the electoral vote winner apparently ask for the new leader of the Ukraine to dig up dirt on former vice presdient (and perceived political rival) Joe Biden. Still, even as the Mueller Report (or what the DOJ under Atty General Billy Barr allowed to not be redacted slowly got some interest in impeachment, the Democratic leadership in the House was reluctant.
However, as more became known it became increasingly clear that something was up that needed to be addressed. Still, when Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi announced an impeachment inquiry would happen I was honestly surprised. As more details come out it makes one wonder why it took this long.
As for the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago himself, he's issuing his usual mix of smears and denials while the Repub politicians keep their distance, preferirng their hold on power to the interests of truth, much less interest of the country they're supposed to serve. As he ramps up claims of treason towards his opponents who are doing what they're allowed to do under the Constitution, Donny's fans and minions are still rallying around him publicly, even as news reports filter out claiming they're scared in private.
For now this journey can take any number of directions. What is apparent at this time though is that the impeachment beach party isn't going away any time in the near future. Time will tell what happens but things are getting scary and humorous at the same time.
If you asked me before then what the chances would be that the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago (also known as electoral vote winner Donny) would face anything near an impeachment inquiry much less any chance of impeachment,I would've been skeptical. Because while he's committed more than his share3 of what could be considered high crimes an misdemeanors the Democratic Party leadership always seemed gun shy, almost dismissive of calls for impeachment from Rep. Maxine Waters and later the four freshman Congresswomen known as the Squad (Rashida Talib, Ayanna Pressely, Ilhan Oman, and Alexandria Ocasio Cortez). When asked why the party leadership usually spouted a variation of a theme that mixed some truth (no President was ever removed from office by impeachment) with speculation (the public wouldn't approve.voters might go further to Donny) and a mix of the two (the Repub controlled Senate would never let it happen). However, as news of the Mad Fuhrer's phone call with the Ukranian prime minister got leaked the sort of scandal that normally went away whenever Donny and company did something beyond the pale seemed to not take hold this time. This was even further made clear when a summary of the phone found the electoral vote winner apparently ask for the new leader of the Ukraine to dig up dirt on former vice presdient (and perceived political rival) Joe Biden. Still, even as the Mueller Report (or what the DOJ under Atty General Billy Barr allowed to not be redacted slowly got some interest in impeachment, the Democratic leadership in the House was reluctant.
However, as more became known it became increasingly clear that something was up that needed to be addressed. Still, when Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi announced an impeachment inquiry would happen I was honestly surprised. As more details come out it makes one wonder why it took this long.
As for the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago himself, he's issuing his usual mix of smears and denials while the Repub politicians keep their distance, preferirng their hold on power to the interests of truth, much less interest of the country they're supposed to serve. As he ramps up claims of treason towards his opponents who are doing what they're allowed to do under the Constitution, Donny's fans and minions are still rallying around him publicly, even as news reports filter out claiming they're scared in private.
For now this journey can take any number of directions. What is apparent at this time though is that the impeachment beach party isn't going away any time in the near future. Time will tell what happens but things are getting scary and humorous at the same time.
Wednesday, July 24, 2019
Mueller at the House Judiciary Committee Hearing Today - Three Points and an Observation
As I type this former FBI Director and Special Counsel Robert Mueller had just completed his first of two hearing today in front of Committees in the House of Representatives by testifying under subpoena in front of the House Judiciary Committee (he later testifies in from to the Intelligence Committee). Having the day off from the paying job (ironically not because of this) and a long night last night I overslept but did catch the last couple of hours off and on. From what I've witnessed from both watching the hearing and commentary regarding it here are three points that came out that should be taken into account.
First - Mueller has now said that a President can be indicted once he leaves office.
The main reason from the Mueller Report why they didn't bring charges against electoral vote winner Donny was that DOJ had a rule that stated that a sitting President couldn't be indicted. This left open whether or not a President can be charged if he leaves office. Rep. Jerry Nadler got Mueller to state, for the record, that he was unable to indict the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago for obstruction because of Office of Legal Counsel decision that a sitting president couldn't be indicted. This was said by Mueller at his press conference a while back but then Nadler asked if [electoral vote winner Donny] could be indicted once he leaves office. Mueller replied with one word: "True."
This alone would be something that should be notable. However, it was later in the hearing that Repub Sen. Ken Buck of Colorado asked if you could charge the President with a crime after he left office. Mueller said yes. By stating this again, Mueller basically reaffirms the possibility that the decision of the DOJ not to charge electoral vote winner Donny did not mean he was exonerated and that other investigations can still (and will still) occur. It also leaves open a chance that leaving office doesn't mean that Donny can get away with it and he could still be charged if the Dept of Justice in the next administration after he leaves office would choose to do so.
While there can be some debate over whether this means the OLC decision was the only reason Donny wasn't charged, this and the fact that Mueller reaffirmed similar things means that the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago wasn't completely exonerated by the Report.
Second - Mueller Didn't Interview with Electoral Vote Winner Donny to Return to work as FBI Director
One of the things the Mad Fuhrer, his minions, and Repubs in general have tried to throw against the wall in trying to dismiss the Mueller Report is that Donny didn't hire him as FBI Director and that Mueller was probing him in a case of sour grapes. Donny even tweeted something to that effect this morning as the hearing was getting underway. Early in the hearing he was asked by Repub Rep Louie Gohmert of Texas if when they met the day before if they discussed FBI Director James Comey's firing. Mueller interjected immediately that he was not a candidate, The fact that Mueller preemptively shot that line down is important in that it derails somewhat this theory that Donny has thrown out on twitter. While the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago will likely continue to throw out that red meat Mueller saying that without actually being asked while under oath is important.
Third - It Looks Like The Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago and his minions had asked his staff to falsify records.
In one exchange with Rep.Cedric Richmond (D, LA) it was revealed that Donny and company tried to protect himself by asking staff to falsify information and that there was an attempt to get White House Counsel Don McGahan to provide a false written record of information, In other words, lie to those investigating your side.
Now anyone with eyes and ears who pays attention knows Donnya nd company seems to obstruct justice in regards to their BS on an almost daily basis (way too many instances to claim). What makes thids differnet is the fact that,if it were anyone else, there'd be charges and court dates involved but since OLC rules don't allow the Justice Dept to indict a sitting president, he still gets to stay where he is. It also reiterates Mueller's replay that the Report DID NOT EXONERATE the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago regardless of what the latter tweets.
With those three points (which likely have been made by others in a batter way) in tow let's tackle an observation I have regarding the Repubs on these committees.
The Repub Congresspeople Seem to Channel Someone who confuses talking too fast with making a good debate point
Granted I walked in on the middle of Matt Gaets' attempt to show boat to gain the Mad Fuhrer's approval as my starting point but I noticed that they all seem to channel their inner Ben Shapiro at some point. Usually they start slow but somewhere get to a point where they try to say a lot of words really fast regarding things that have little to do with what was supposed ot be talked about. Several of them even seemed to use Ben's phrasing. It would be funny if it wasn't for the fact these people were elected to guide this country yet seem to want a pat on the hand from Donny more than serving the people they supposedly represent.
In time I'm sure there will be a lot of things that people find in here that may sway thigs one way or the other. For now though I think the good of the hearings is more adding some context to what was in the Mueller Report since at over 400 pages many people don't have to time to check it out.
Woder how the Intelligence hearing will stand out.
First - Mueller has now said that a President can be indicted once he leaves office.
The main reason from the Mueller Report why they didn't bring charges against electoral vote winner Donny was that DOJ had a rule that stated that a sitting President couldn't be indicted. This left open whether or not a President can be charged if he leaves office. Rep. Jerry Nadler got Mueller to state, for the record, that he was unable to indict the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago for obstruction because of Office of Legal Counsel decision that a sitting president couldn't be indicted. This was said by Mueller at his press conference a while back but then Nadler asked if [electoral vote winner Donny] could be indicted once he leaves office. Mueller replied with one word: "True."
This alone would be something that should be notable. However, it was later in the hearing that Repub Sen. Ken Buck of Colorado asked if you could charge the President with a crime after he left office. Mueller said yes. By stating this again, Mueller basically reaffirms the possibility that the decision of the DOJ not to charge electoral vote winner Donny did not mean he was exonerated and that other investigations can still (and will still) occur. It also leaves open a chance that leaving office doesn't mean that Donny can get away with it and he could still be charged if the Dept of Justice in the next administration after he leaves office would choose to do so.
While there can be some debate over whether this means the OLC decision was the only reason Donny wasn't charged, this and the fact that Mueller reaffirmed similar things means that the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago wasn't completely exonerated by the Report.
Second - Mueller Didn't Interview with Electoral Vote Winner Donny to Return to work as FBI Director
One of the things the Mad Fuhrer, his minions, and Repubs in general have tried to throw against the wall in trying to dismiss the Mueller Report is that Donny didn't hire him as FBI Director and that Mueller was probing him in a case of sour grapes. Donny even tweeted something to that effect this morning as the hearing was getting underway. Early in the hearing he was asked by Repub Rep Louie Gohmert of Texas if when they met the day before if they discussed FBI Director James Comey's firing. Mueller interjected immediately that he was not a candidate, The fact that Mueller preemptively shot that line down is important in that it derails somewhat this theory that Donny has thrown out on twitter. While the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago will likely continue to throw out that red meat Mueller saying that without actually being asked while under oath is important.
Third - It Looks Like The Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago and his minions had asked his staff to falsify records.
In one exchange with Rep.Cedric Richmond (D, LA) it was revealed that Donny and company tried to protect himself by asking staff to falsify information and that there was an attempt to get White House Counsel Don McGahan to provide a false written record of information, In other words, lie to those investigating your side.
Now anyone with eyes and ears who pays attention knows Donnya nd company seems to obstruct justice in regards to their BS on an almost daily basis (way too many instances to claim). What makes thids differnet is the fact that,if it were anyone else, there'd be charges and court dates involved but since OLC rules don't allow the Justice Dept to indict a sitting president, he still gets to stay where he is. It also reiterates Mueller's replay that the Report DID NOT EXONERATE the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago regardless of what the latter tweets.
With those three points (which likely have been made by others in a batter way) in tow let's tackle an observation I have regarding the Repubs on these committees.
The Repub Congresspeople Seem to Channel Someone who confuses talking too fast with making a good debate point
Granted I walked in on the middle of Matt Gaets' attempt to show boat to gain the Mad Fuhrer's approval as my starting point but I noticed that they all seem to channel their inner Ben Shapiro at some point. Usually they start slow but somewhere get to a point where they try to say a lot of words really fast regarding things that have little to do with what was supposed ot be talked about. Several of them even seemed to use Ben's phrasing. It would be funny if it wasn't for the fact these people were elected to guide this country yet seem to want a pat on the hand from Donny more than serving the people they supposedly represent.
In time I'm sure there will be a lot of things that people find in here that may sway thigs one way or the other. For now though I think the good of the hearings is more adding some context to what was in the Mueller Report since at over 400 pages many people don't have to time to check it out.
Woder how the Intelligence hearing will stand out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)