Patterico's Pontifications

10/8/2019

Trump Blocks Interview of Ambassador Sondland

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:04 am



The Failing New York Times (which is actually doing quite well):

The Trump administration directed a top American diplomat involved in its pressure campaign on Ukraine not to appear Tuesday morning for a scheduled interview in the House’s impeachment inquiry.

The decision to block Gordon D. Sondland, the United States ambassador to the European Union, from speaking with investigators for three House committees is certain to provoke an immediate conflict with potentially profound consequences for the White House and President Trump. House Democrats have repeatedly warned that if the administration tries to interfere with their investigation, it will be construed as obstruction, a charge they see as potentially worthy of impeachment.

As a Twitter friend points out, in his tweets explaining the decision, Trump is not even bothering to claim privilege. He’s just saying Sondland doesn’t have to testify because the impeachment is being run by Democrats:

T̶h̶e̶ ̶w̶a̶l̶l̶ ̶j̶u̶s̶t̶ ̶g̶o̶t̶ ̶1̶0̶ ̶f̶e̶e̶t̶ ̶h̶i̶g̶h̶e̶r̶ The articles of impeachment just got 10 sentences longer.

Why is Sondland important? He talked to Trump before sending the “to be clear we are totally not committing any crimes here” text:

Apparently inquiry into how that text got written is not to be allowed.

Okay then.

[Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.]

244 Responses to “Trump Blocks Interview of Ambassador Sondland”

  1. “He’s just saying Sondland doesn’t have to testify because the impeachment is being run by Democrats“

    Really? I don’t think so. Actually, the reasons have been spelled out and are clear as day, for anyone interested:

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mccarthy-criticizes-pelosis-recklessness-asks-house-speaker-to-halt-impeachment-inquiry

    Munroe (53beca)

  2. Finally, Trump is being transparent.

    John B Boddie (31ccf0)

  3. “He’s just saying Sondland doesn’t have to testify because the impeachment is being run by Democrats“

    Really? I don’t think so. Actually, the reasons have been spelled out and are clear as day, for anyone interested:

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mccarthy-criticizes-pelosis-recklessness-asks-house-speaker-to-halt-impeachment-inquiry

    “We don’t like that you’re moving fast” is an expected complaint and one I find entirely unpersuasive. As for Republicans not being allowed to ask questions, it sounds bad in the abstract until you look at literally any question they have asked in a public hearing in the last several weeks and months and realize that they never ask about the substance of anything, but engage in repeated efforts to distract, obstruct, and divert attention. They are full of shit and the consequences of showing themselves repeatedly to be full of shit is that people like me stop caring about their whining.

    Support for an impeachment inquiry is very high among the public. Trying to stymie the process won’t help the perception. I think Trump is going to get impeachment on his resume.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  4. Hey I thought the talking point was that Democrats were slow walking this….

    tla (0e1896)

  5. I think you will be proved to be very wrong about this.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  6. Sondland may not be able to testify to some things because of executive privilege, but it’s not a reason for Trump to stonewall.

    Paul Montagu (7e74b0)

  7. “They are full of sh!t and the consequences of showing themselves repeatedly to be full of sh!t is that people like me stop caring about their whining.”

    Cowering in fear from a full vote is the definition of “full of sh!t”, if support is genuinely “very high among the public”.

    https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2019-10-07/subpoena-power-republicans-want-house-vote-impeachment-inquiry-pelosi-doesnt

    Munroe (53beca)

  8. These people are allowing their hatred of Trump to rule their lives. The Beltway is frightened by what will be detailed in the report resulting from the Horowitz/Durham/Barr investigation. The other shoe will drop.

    There was no treason, bribery, extortion, or illegal foreign campaign contribution. This is a continuation of the witch hunt with an objective of removing a duly elected president from office.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  9. Yes and their folger crystals strategy with the gossiper bares that out. He iuted the russian asset and keep this guy innthe cold?

    narciso (d1f714)

  10. Wtf?!? Did Munroe just make a substantive point backed by facts? That’s a new one.

    Time123 (3450f6)

  11. When you ignore the actual testimony,,and rest only on the text messages, when you jump the gun on the complaint before its beeen published.

    narciso (d1f714)

  12. Mocking Munroe aside, I agree that Republican Reps should be included in the process and able to ask questions. From the link it sounds like they were allowed to ask questions, but where limited in some way. They’re definitely trying to push the message that this is unfair, the dumb thing about not being able to start an inquiry until after you vote on impeachment is a example of that. It’s actually a dumb example as Narciso points out above. You need to do the inquiry first and then decide if impeachment is warranted. (at least that’s the way I think it’s supposed to work.)

    Time123 (b0628d)

  13. Gordon Sondland is the key witness, although people may not realize it yet.

    He would clear Trump, actually, but Trump wants to make sure he gets his full story out. He wants to allow Republicans to question him. Trump believes he has the legal (and political) ability to stymie a kangaroo court.

    Trump did not claim executive privilege because he has no intention of claimng executive privilege (except as a possible stalling tactic) on this matter.

    Sammy Finkelman (0d0ca8)

  14. Trump wants Sondland to testify because Sondland would clear him of the accusation of trying to force Ukraine to do anything.

    Although it would also show The Trump Administration to be dysfunctionnal in the field of foreign policy, with people working around Trump to try to stop things they believe to be wrong or bad from being done. But that’s not plausible grounds for impeachment.

    Sondland as quoted by Trump:

    The President has been crystal clear: no quid pro quo’s of any kind.”

    Sondland himself was not so clear. In fact he was saying the opposite, In fact, Sondland was telling different people that there was such a quid pro quo.

    Only, Sondland was the person whose idea it was to link two things that were moving on separate tracks: Ukrainian military aid, and Trump’s interest in having the storories that were beig tkld to Giuliani and others fleshed out. It was Sondland who came up with the quid oro quo, and, since he had not consulted Trump on this at all, and he was not sure it would work..

    On Saturday, August 31, 2019, during a phone call made to him from Poland, Trump found out on from Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson what Sondland was going around saying and trying to do.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-administration-used-potential-meeting-to-pressure-ukraine-on-biden-texts-indicate-11570205661

    n the call, Mr. Trump flatly rejected the notion that he directed aides to make military aid to Ukraine contingent on a new probe by Kyiv, Mr. Johnson said.

    “He said, ‘Expletive deleted—No way. I would never do that. Who told you that?” the Wisconsin senator recalled in an interview Friday. Mr. Johnson said he told the president he had learned of the arrangement from Mr. Sondland.

    Now Trump would have to explain himself what he did, or didn’t do, from that point on.

    Did it take till September 9 that they had a conversation and Trump told him no quid pro quo?

    The aid was rleased about that time.

    Sammy Finkelman (0d0ca8)

  15. “You need to do the inquiry first and then decide if impeachment is warranted. (at least that’s the way I think it’s supposed to work.)”
    Time123 (b0628d) — 10/8/2019 @ 8:27 am

    Yes, but that’s not the issue. The request, based on precedent, is that an impeachment inquiry (not impeachment) be authorized by a full vote.

    Pelosi, of course, doesn’t have to do this. And Trump has every right to use it to his advantage if she doesn’t.

    Munroe (53beca)

  16. The reason going quickly does not feel abusive is that the actions that are said to be the offenses are out in full view. We don’t have the head-scratchers that Mueller presented. We have Trump, live and in person, soliciting an investigation of the son of his political opponent.

    There is some vigorous something or other (it’s smelly and comes from cattle and Giuliani) regarding whether Trump really quid pro quo-ed in his discussions with Ukraine. It’s the fig leaf firm Republicans require, I guess, to stick with their do nothing. But, really, the matter in question is simple — there aren’t many more facts to get (or bother waiting for). Popular opinion — the only thing that will move Republicans to removal — is showing a realization that defenses of Trump are unpersuasive. We’ll see if it’s enough to remove Trump in 2020, or whether we will have to wait until January 2021.

    Appalled (1a17de)

  17. “Pelosi, of course, doesn’t have to do this. And Trump has every right to use it to his advantage if she doesn’t.”

    Munroe is right, of course.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  18. it’s not a legitimately constituted inquiry, until they vote on it, I know you want to hang and yet you still want to kiss obamas keester, but rules are rules,

    https://112.international/ukraine-top-news/burisma-group-and-prince-of-monaco-held-4th-energy-security-forum-in-monte-carlo-40289.html

    this is how much of an outlaw, mr z, is in the west, even before they sacked shokin,

    narciso (d1f714)

  19. In other Ukraine obfuscation news:

    (Senator Lindsey) Graham said Tuesday that he would invite Giuliani to testify before his panel about “corruption and other improprieties involving Ukraine.”

    “Have heard on numerous occasions disturbing allegations by @RudyGiuliani about corruption in Ukraine and the many improprieties surrounding the firing of former Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin,” Graham wrote on Twitter.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry-live-updates/2019/10/08/55dd0b64-e94c-11e9-9306-47cb0324fd44_story.html

    Bring out the popcorn!

    Rip Murdock (7f9b4d)

  20. it will have to stretch to reach the ridiculousness of the bulwinkle,

    https://www.axios.com/dispatch-steve-hayes-jonah-goldberg-conservative-news-26d43a86-3b69-4e61-a789-
    68bbb09b87dd.html

    narciso (d1f714)

  21. Just remove the mother-figure by the end of the year so some decent person or two can step up to run in the primaries.

    nk (dbc370)

  22. walsh, Sweeney todd welsh, or Appalachian trail, Sanford,

    narciso (d1f714)

  23. And, no, I’m not worried about this “precedent”. If, God forbid, we ever have such a bucket of pus in the White House again, I’ll want him impeached and removed too.

    nk (dbc370)

  24. how goes governor pretzel, has to left anything standing in search for highway robbery, (revenue)

    narciso (d1f714)

  25. if satire hadn’t gone zombie, it’d be worth a skit,

    https://dailycaller.com/2019/10/08/house-democrats-whistleblower-mask-identity-schiff/

    narciso (d1f714)

  26. this new outfit is charging 1,500 for membership,

    narciso (d1f714)

  27. it’s not a legitimately constituted inquiry, until they vote on it, I know you want to hang and yet you still want to kiss obamas keester, but rules are rules,

    That’s a crock. There is nothing in House rules or the Constitution that require a vote to conduct an impeachment inquiry, and if you rely on the fact it was done to n Nixon and Clinton impeachment’s, it’s Trump who has blown away the need to adhere to tradition.

    Rip Murdock (7f9b4d)

  28. Without Trump in the primary, a couple of good candidates will leave the three stooges in the dust, making them drop out by March.

    See, the problem is not the four or five million Trump butt gerbils. It’s the nine or ten million Democrats who’ll cross over, like they did in 2016, to vote for Trump, thinking he’ll be the easiest to beat. That’s what’s keeping the credible contenders out.

    nk (dbc370)

  29. I wonder if some of Trump’s GOP Senate support will waver if former Trump officials/Cabinet members or more whistleblowers come forward? Trump is very good at discrediting his critics but, at some point, if the detractors get big enough then “fighting back” doesn’t work well.

    DRJ (15874d)

  30. so you’re fine with this pantomime pony, what does due process mean anyways, you hang the warlock that’s the important thing,

    narciso (d1f714)

  31. see when there are actually people in danger, like the interrogators who were exposed by kirikaou, as well as their families, the times the post the Baltimore sun, all jump to burn them

    narciso (d1f714)

  32. Like I said in the other thread, Cy Vance’s abuse of prosecutorial authority bothers me, because if he can do it to Trump he can do it to anybody, and in fact has already done it on hundreds (some say thousands) of people. But this? What are the odds that we will ever have a Trump and Schiff again?

    nk (dbc370)

  33. narc,

    The House can set up whatever rules it wants to transact its business, and it can change those rules as it sees fit. Impeachment is a political action, not some fancy schmancy quasi judicial thing. But keep up with the deflections.

    Appalled (1a17de)

  34. Sondland was the person whose idea it was to link two things that were moving on separate tracks: Ukrainian military aid, and Trump’s interest in having the storories that were beig tkld to Giuliani and others fleshed out. It was Sondland who came up with the quid oro quo, and, since he had not consulted Trump on this at all, and he was not sure it would work.

    Interesting theory. Could be true. Would like to see evidence about it. What’s the testimony under oath? Is there any information that corroborates this testimony? That sort of stuff. Sondland should testify, or demonstrate what privilege prevents him from doing so.

    Time123 (6e0727)

  35. you didn’t care about Volker’s testimony under oath, you were on too much of a sugar high, we’ve seen how these things ‘gnashing and wailing’ hoping for another shot,

    narciso (d1f714)

  36. “You need to do the inquiry first and then decide if impeachment is warranted. (at least that’s the way I think it’s supposed to work.)”
    Time123 (b0628d) — 10/8/2019 @ 8:27 am

    Yes, but that’s not the issue. The request, based on precedent, is that an impeachment inquiry (not impeachment) be authorized by a full vote.

    Pelosi, of course, doesn’t have to do this. And Trump has every right to use it to his advantage if she doesn’t.

    Munroe (53beca) — 10/8/2019 @ 8:57 am

    If that’s the process they should follow it. My assumption is that there 2 political reasons for the way they’re doing it.

    1. The more evidence they can put in the table before the full vote the better the vote goes for them.
    2. The full vote will be a news event and by doing it this way they get to control the news cycle whenever they hold the full vote.

    I don’t think either reason is great or compelling and if there’s established precedent they should follow that. Not very worked up about this issue personally. This is a situation where everyone involved sucks to a greater or lesser extent.

    Time123 (6e0727)

  37. you didn’t care about Volker’s testimony under oath, you were on too much of a sugar high, we’ve seen how these things ‘gnashing and wailing’ hoping for another shot,

    narciso (d1f714) — 10/8/2019 @ 10:06 am

    This comment starts out somewhat coherent but you seem to loose the thread after ‘sugar high’. Did you hold your breath while typing and get light headed?

    Time123 (6e0727)

  38. I’d like to see Volker’s testimony. If the Senator’s vote on impeachment, they will certain have the opportunity to see it.

    I’d like to see Sondland’s testimony too. I guess the President wants to make sure we don’t see that.

    And, do I think, with Trump, it’s “we’ll get him this time”? Doubtful. There need to be more GOP senators for removal then seem likely to have the courage or inclination to vote to remove Trump, and be on the wrong side of one of those tweets. I do believe the Republicans will pay for that. There will be unpleasant consequences when the Democrats take the Senate as a result.

    Appalled (1a17de)

  39. I am curious, narciso: Is Schiff or Pelosi the pantomine pony? Is Trump the warlock?

    By the way, your concern for due process in impeachment hearings — where it does not apply — is noted. The House and Senate have special rules that govern impeachment/trial.

    DRJ (15874d)

  40. I’m pretty sure that a number of people here expressed various degrees of outrage when Obama stonewalled Congressional investigations.

    How many of them have expressed similar outrage when Trump stonewalls Congressional investigations?

    Some have, but others seem to think it’s fine when it’s Democrats being stonewalled.

    The main difference between the two is that Obama did it behind the scenes, bureaucraticly, and with a pretense of observing the correct protocols. Trump is doing out openly and with no pretense of doing anything correctly.

    kishnevi (0c10d1)

  41. #38 There are 2 things that I hope come out of this.

    1. Congress finally steps up, does their damn job, and starts forcing the executive branch to answer questions as part of their legitimate oversight responsibility. When this happened in the past there have been negotiations where party 1 agrees to give partial info and party 2 let’s them get away with it because they want to do the same thing when they get power. Trump doesn’t give a rats ass about anything but himself so he won’t play this game. Once this norm is broken I doubt it will come back. I think that would be a good thing.

    2. A death spiral of ethics investigations about sinecures for friends and family that results in businesses deciding it’s not worth the trouble.

    Both of those would be good systemic improvements in my opinion.

    Time123 (b53270)

  42. He still got away with 9 years later, remember how they armed a (redacted) cartel. Eric holder should be in a dungeon.

    narciso (d1f714)

  43. Geraldo Rivera: “There’s never been a presidency where the incumbent has been surrounded ― I don’t say it playfully ― by backstabbers and vipers and rats and snitches,”

    It all sounds like a crime family about to go down. Once again, with Giuliani playing a pivotal role.

    noel (f22371)

  44. “It seems to me, factually, that while some Ds accuse Trump of turning to foreigners to investigate a rival for political purposes, *they* are turning to foreigners to investigate a rival for political purposes. And some Ds already were proven to have done that in 2016.”

    — Sheryl Attkisson

    If what Attkisson says is true – and I think it is – do the Democrats come off as serious-minded, coherent players to you?

    Pull the other one…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  45. He still got away with 9 years later, remember how they armed a (redacted) cartel. Eric holder should be in a dungeon.
    You are proving my point, Narciso, and not in a good way. If you thought Obama stonewalling Congress was bad, then why isn’t Trump stonewalling Congress bad?

    It ties in with the Cooke article Dana linked yesterday. Congress letting Presidents stonewall them is another step in abandoning their responsibilities.

    kishnevi (0c10d1)

  46. Without Trump in the primary, a couple of good candidates will leave the three stooges in the dust, making them drop out by March.

    My dream of having Nikki Haley atop the 2020 GOP ticket might still be in play!

    JVW (54fd0b)

  47. My dream of having Nikki Haley atop the 2020 GOP ticket might still be in play!

    JVW (54fd0b) — 10/8/2019 @ 11:39 am

    2024 buddy. She’ll be a force to be reckoned with by then…

    Unless your Hawaiian sweetie is on the Democratic tickets.
    insert image meme JVW deciding which button to press while wiping sweat from his forehead…

    whembly (fd57f6)

  48. “How many of them have expressed similar outrage when Trump stonewalls Congressional investigations?”
    kishnevi (0c10d1) — 10/8/2019 @ 10:26 am

    Kish, I don’t think an administration that has been incessantly hounded from day 1 is a good candidate for a “stonewall” charge.

    Especially now when the Dems are pushing Trump into stonewalling as the goal. It’s the strategy. Read the NYT blurb in the post. It’s law craft as an impeachment strategy.

    Munroe (f2f14e)

  49. See, the problem is not the four or five million Trump butt gerbils. It’s the nine or ten million Democrats who’ll cross over, like they did in 2016, to vote for Trump, thinking he’ll be the easiest to beat. That’s what’s keeping the credible contenders out.

    I doubt that very seriously, but who or which blocs in the Dem universe fit that profile, nk, or was it a count by 3s maneuver and the 3s pulled a R ballot and voted Trump? BUt that was then, but yeah Trump 2019-2020 is becoming the perfect hippie candidate and probably could bring the Arab shopkeeper and brown Indian vote back to its pre-2001 party split.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  50. Theyre both…this could be the Sleep Number commercial election.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  51. Unless your Hawaiian sweetie is on the Democratic tickets.
    insert image meme JVW deciding which button to press while wiping sweat from his forehead…

    Nikki > Tulsi, mostly because she lacks the nutjob economic policy. It would be an easy vote.

    JVW (54fd0b)

  52. #47 Unless your Hawaiian sweetie is on the Democratic tickets.
    insert image meme JVW deciding which button to press while wiping sweat from his forehead…

    Nikki > Tulsi, mostly because she lacks the nutjob economic policy. It would be an easy vote.

    JVW (54fd0b) — 10/8/2019 @ 12:13 pm

    Absolutely… I was yanking your chain bub. 😉

    Nikki/Dan Crenshaw would be formidable. (if Dan’s interested in higher office).

    whembly (fd57f6)

  53. I would pay to see Ted Cruz’ fishfaced dejection on that one, whembly. He might go full Blago, if that is guide on when one’s fellow homestate pol gets “passed over”.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  54. 14. Appalled (1a17de) — 10/8/2019 @ 8:58 am We have Trump, live and in person, soliciting an investigation of the son of his political opponent. He;s not asking for awith hunt. He’s asking if something (that would be highly unethical) is true and what can they find out about it, and that wasn;’t his prioroty, something about Crowdstrike was. The problem is it’s not solidly based.

    There is some vigorous something or other (it’s smelly and comes from cattle and Giuliani) regarding whether Trump really quid pro quo-ed in his discussions

    He specifically said it was not a quid pro quo, nor something they had to do because he said it would be a favor.

    The problem is that when the suspicion has no reasonable basis, it might be seen as a request to fake evidence.

    Sammy Finkelman (0d0ca8)

  55. The words ” He’s not asking for a witch hunt etc” are mine.

    Rip Murdock (7f9b4d) — 10/8/2019 @ 9:47 am

    There is nothing in House rules or the Constitution that require a vote to conduct an impeachment inquiry,

    But there seems to be claim that in the House rules, an saying that in an impeachment inquiry, the minority and the target gets more rights to call and cross examine witnesses.

    Sammy Finkelman (0d0ca8)

  56. 31. I think it fits with all the evidence so far.

    Sammy Finkelman (0d0ca8)

  57. This is an interesting press conf. …all the way to the end.

    https://youtu.be/dPIfysPL0VU

    ColoComment (27e48b)

  58. The President just wrote a letter to the leaders of Congress refusing to cooperate on impeachment inquiry. Saying, in part: “Put simply, you seek to overturn the results of the 2016 election and deprive the American people of the President they have freely chosen.”

    What a weak assertion. Since nearly all Democrats and half of Republicans in the US Senate would have to vote to convict him before he could be removed from office, his argument is ludicrous.

    noel (f22371)

  59. What a weak assertion. Since nearly all Democrats and half of Republicans in the US Senate would have to vote to convict him before he could be removed from office, his argument is ludicrous.

    Chris Collins, Duncan Hunter, Jim Traficant, etc. should just tell the prosecutors that they were elected, while under indictment, so the voters spoke, you can’t possibly hold them accountable afterward.

    Impeaching a president is a political judgement, and doesn’t need the cooperation of said president, in fact that makes it more likely. Of course, letting these people testify could confirm everything, and may actually introduce all the other instances of Trump doing this, because it certainly doesn’t end with the ones we know about; Ukraine, Russia, China, Australia, UK. It was most likely SOP for Trump to ask for campaign assistance from foreign governments.

    Colonel Klink (Ret) (6e7a1c)

  60. obamacilles

    mg (8cbc69)

  61. Haley!
    lmao, another reason Trump will be the last republican president. The bench is full of neocon nut jobs that just want to kill kill kill our kids.

    mg (8cbc69)

  62. @16. ‘Bring out the popcorn…’

    ROFLMAO! Indeed: see about 3:20 into this—

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiKrWUoTq4s

    “Ain’t nuttin’ gonna happen…” – ‘Quincy Maddox’

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  63. Regarding Trump’s infamous phone call with Zelensky, I’ve gone back and forth with a lot of true-believing Trump loyalists who bring up our cooperation treaty with Ukraine regarding the prosecuting of criminals, as if such a self-executing treaty cancels the US Code, which it doesn’t.
    But that cooperation treaty isn’t mentioned wrt the chief prosecutor, Lutsenko, when he allowed Manafort employee and Russian spy, Kilimnik, to leave Ukraine for Russia, thus evading US indictment and extradition.
    At that time, Ukraine wanted Javelin missiles to defend themselves against Putin’s invasion in eastern Ukraine. The quid pro quo was that Ukrainian prosecutors stopped cooperating with the Mueller investigation in exchange for those missiles. It could be Count #11 for obstruction of justice.

    Kim Wehle, formerly an Assistant US Attorney, and a constitutional scholar and professor at the University of Baltimore Law School, told me that if President Trump helped Kilimnik avoid standing trial or testifying in the US, that might constitute obstruction of justice, as well as “high crimes and misdemeanors” bearing on impeachment as envisioned by the Founding Fathers: “To do anything to prevent a witness from testifying—here, by manipulating the massive power of your high office to protect yourself from [potential] criminal liability or impeachment jeopardy—might be an impeachable offense,” Wehle said.

    The previous Ukrainian president played ball, and it was expected that Poroshenko’s successor would do the same.
    Also in that infamous phone call, Trump really liked Lutsenko and encouraged Zelensky to keep him on board, which fortunately did not happen. Of course Trump would want that corrupt prosecutor to remain; he already helped Trump once. Like an alt-universe King Midas, everything Trump touches turns corrupt.

    Paul Montagu (88b43e)

  64. @42. Keep in mind, in Trumpland, everyone’s expendable. Spiro T. Pence does.

    Trump/Haley 2020.

    Place your bets.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  65. You don’t crow over the seriousness and open an ‘impeachment inquiry’ — then go on a recess four days later less than a month after your August recess.

    Incredibly stupid.

    Pelosi wants to dirty him up and let the voters to do her dirty work for her next year. Won’t wash. The Senate has his back; he’s gonna bulldoze his way through this–the way Nixon would have if he’d had Senate support- wear it as a badge of honor and if the economy holds and any troops come marching home– ride to re-election.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  66. klimnik, who had state department contacts, through the international republican institute, they hired him from gru language school, because that’s who you use for contacts, the prosecutors sought not to inform the judge about that, btw javelins fall under foreign military sales, handled through the defense department,

    narciso (d1f714)

  67. which is why he was indicted last year, despite obvious brady violations, vogel found him easy enough, but only told half the story,

    narciso (d1f714)

  68. Here’s the drill:

    World Series.
    Thanksgiving.
    Christmas holidays and recesses.
    New Year.
    House votes impeachment.
    Senate votes acquittal.
    Congress censures President; all butts covered.

    Trump wears both impeachment and censure as wins; victorious badges of honor over ‘deep state’ all the way to re-election.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  69. we’ve seen through this charade, disco, go sell crazy somewhere else,

    lbj became a millionaire, on a public salary, jfk won on the strength of mob wrangler of dead voters in Illinois,

    narciso (d1f714)

  70. klimnik, who had state department contacts, through the international republican institute

    The IRI fired Kilimnik when it became clear to them that he is a Russian spy. Funny how Manafort didn’t check Kilimnik’s previous employer’s references. Or maybe he did…

    Paul Montagu (88b43e)

  71. they hired him from the gru language school, because that’s where you go for a guide, now you want to scrounge every gobetween with doha, Riyadh, kiev, and everywhere else,

    narciso (d1f714)

  72. @65. ‘Crazy’ was bought in 2016, narcissy. There’s a market for it these days; should last 8 years. You outta know Trump by now; if business bankruptcies and failed marriages didn’t bother him, trivial paper punishments like ‘impeachment’ and/or ‘censure’ by supposed ‘deep sate hacks’ won’t. He’ll simply deny their veracity.

    He knows his audience- and knows what passes for ‘justice’ in Entertainment, USA:

    Felicity Huffman and Amanda Guyger will do more time than Donald Trump ever will– or Richard Nixon ever did.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  73. Watergate was payback for uncovering fair haired boy hiss, on the track to secretary of state by 56 maybe even president by 64.

    narciso (d1f714)

  74. There’s zero reason, politically or constitutionally for Trump to cooperate with this “impeachment” clown show. I suppose if the liberals and Never trumpers cared about the country, they’d hesitate about using IMPEACHMENT to score cheap political points, but hey “Orange man Bad”.

    Reading Mittens and some never trumper David French’s twitter feed, I’m struck by the ratio of trump criticism vs. attacks on Pelosi or Schumer. IT must be at least 10-1 in favor of hating Trump. I guess that’s what Romney and French mean by being even-handed and “severely conservative”.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  75. Little do we know that when Kristol, French, Boot, Romney, will, et al, call themselves “Conservative” they meant helping Liberal Democrats get elected. that’s some conservatism.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  76. What a weak assertion.

    He just wiped his fat, orange ass with the Constitution, is what he did.

    Saying he’s immune from impeachment because he thinks – in his “great and unmatched wisdom” – that the charges against him have no merit isn’t “weak”. It’s revolutionary.

    Dave (f7ed81)

  77. Little do we know that when Kristol, French, Boot, Romney, will, et al, call themselves “Conservative” they meant helping Liberal Democrats get elected. that’s some conservatism.

    Trump endorsed Hillary and bankrolled her, Pelosi, Reid, Schumer, Kerry, Carter, Rangel and Weiner.

    But for some reason that isn’t a problem.

    Dave (f7ed81)

  78. There is no reason for Trump to cooperate with his impeachment, and every reason not to. Y’all do understand that it’s a prosecution and trial for “treason, bribery, and other high crimes and misdemeanors” even if the penalty is only removal from office, right? Any defendant would be very ill-advised to cooperate with the prosecution. He should be trying to stymie it (within the bounds of the law) at every turn. There’s no there there.

    nk (dbc370)

  79. Yes 10 years when kanye was made at taylor, lets focus on more recent events

    narciso (d1f714)

  80. @70 In all fairness, I’m pretty sure that Bill Clinton was impeached for lying about oral sex. So it isn’t like the Rs have much to stand on when they complain about impeaching someone for political purposes. At least Trump might be impeached for doing something that is vaguely relevant to the government.

    Nic (896fdf)

  81. He still mad at her…and if Romney had any kind of spine, West doesnt make it home from SLC this weekend after hosting one of his cult gatherings next to the temple.

    urbanleftbehind (f6300a)

  82. That said, West^2 (Allen, not Kim K) might be an intriguing 2024 ticket.

    urbanleftbehind (f6300a)

  83. @74 Obviously any defendant in this position would resist. Congress needs to steel their resolve to be firm on their end if they want to progress their case.

    Nic (896fdf)

  84. I was putting things in context, now shippong guns to a cartel, thats a different kettle of fish, seeing as these weapons keep popping up.

    narciso (d1f714)

  85. @72. No…

    It’s entertaining.

    After three years, you should get it by now.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  86. There’s zero reason, politically or constitutionally for Trump to cooperate with this “impeachment” clown show.

    There is reason constitutionally. Congress is a co-equal branch of government with constitutional oversight. If Trump cared about this country more than himself, which he doesn’t, he would cooperate instead of add to the list of articles of impeachment.

    Paul Montagu (88b43e)

  87. Everything you dont like is russian, just following reid hoffman and shawn pryces bad of crumbs

    narciso (d1f714)

  88. Take adam waldman former justice departmemt official who was deripashas more effective gobetween deripasha and the committee also assange.

    narciso (d1f714)

  89. Everything you dont like is russian

    No, I like Russia, I don’t like Putin because’s been hostile to American interests for awhile, he attacked our 2016 election, and he’s a geostrategic foe. Romney nailed it back in 2012. The question I have is why you and Trump consider him not a foe.

    Paul Montagu (88b43e)

  90. You make excuses for when obama served russian interests in syria in iran in venezuela, when exploration bans left us a t the mercy of at least two of those powers

    narciso (d1f714)

  91. The question I have is why you and Trump consider him not a foe.

    He helped Trump get elected, and gives him that same tingly feeling Chris Matthews experiences when thinking about Barack Obama.

    Dave (32c540)

  92. The health care exchanges were hacked by the russians, that we know for certain, snowden burrowed his way into the nsa and escape like hamilton or mitchell on obas watch,

    narciso (d1f714)

  93. We’re talking the personal info of hundred of thousands if not millions of persons, because the bid for the exchanges went to a a crony.

    narciso (d1f714)

  94. You make excuses for when obama served russian interests in syria in iran in venezuela, when exploration bans left us a t the mercy of at least two of those powers

    That one is Stage 5 (actually, you’re lying), with sprinklings of Stages 2 and 3. You’re boring and predictable, narc.

    Paul Montagu (88b43e)

  95. The dems wanted to keep their collusion with the press secret, and all their dirty laundry. Our so called allies thought they could pay a ransom to the regime and be keft alone.

    narciso (d1f714)

  96. Trump endorsed Hillary and bankrolled her, Pelosi, Reid, Schumer, Kerry, Carter, Rangel and Weiner.

    And then Trump got smart, turned Republican, ran for POTUS, and has been making people like you bat-bleep crazy for 4 years. But keep writing “Orange Man Bad” its so fascinating – 600 times in a row.

    Meanwhile all the clowns you’ve mentioned are dead, retired, crazy, or un-indicted crooks. Like most Democrats.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  97. Yes theyll be over macho grande until they run out of gas, but they cant tell us a winning strategy in afghanistan or syria, that justifies another five years there.

    narciso (d1f714)

  98. Congress is a co-equal branch of government with constitutional oversight

    I see impeachment in the constitution. I see that we’ve had two of them, and a 3rd in-process, in 230 years. I’m still looking for a “Impeachment Inquiry

    Maybe its in the fine print somewhere.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  99. Its in the cracker jack box,

    narciso (d1f714)

  100. Now what else came out of ukraine when tend of billions of aid were going in, well the ukrainian boosters that ended up in north korea, the benficiary of another ransom

    narciso (d1f714)

  101. Also there was this hezbollah connection that ran drugs from south america through europe, with the chief operator working for ukrainian arms exports.

    narciso (d1f714)

  102. Vanity Fair had an article on Mittens. He’s now a GREAT MAN to the liberal MSM for opposing Trump. A very “Brave” man. but its states that mittens doesn’t want to primary Trump. After all, he’s lost 3 elections/nominations and doesn’t want to lose a 4th. He also knows he only got elected in Utah because he’s a Mormon.

    So, Mitt’s big thing is Impeachment. Romney DREAMS of getting back at Trump during an Impeachment trial. He’d be the new Jeff flake. Pondering – in public – whether to vote with the R’s or the D’s. Asking Tough questions (of the R’s). Making pompous “we need to avoid politics and follow the Constitution” speeches and doing LOTS of grandstanding and “Reaching across the aisle”. LOTS Of LOVE from the New York Times for being a “Reasonable” Republican. Finally, Mitt Romney would be important and all of the USA would look to Mitt – Yay or Nay Mitt?

    Sigh. Look for Mitt to work behind the scenes. Hoping and praying that Trump is impeached by the House.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  103. @95, so the can vote to impeach, but aren’t allowed to do any inquiry first? Does that make sense?

    Time123 (ea2b98)

  104. I’m still looking for a “Impeachment Inquiry”

    That would be under the category of oversight, an implied but not enumerated power of Congress, which is a co-equal branch of government.

    Paul Montagu (88b43e)

  105. @99 it would be great to get to vote for Romney again. I trusted him enough once to vote for him for president. I haven’t seen him do anything to change that assessment. But I get that you’re less focused on “capable leader” and more looking for “Rage tweets into a bucket for fast food”

    Time123 (ea2b98)

  106. That would be under the category of oversight, an implied

    Yeah, that must be why it took them 230 years to find it. Its IMPLIED. You need the right people to find those invisible IMPLIED powers that were so hidden for 230 years.

    Maybe President Trump has found his own IMPLIED powers in the Constitution.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  107. No they have to take an initial vote, i called the possum congress but its more like barcalounger.

    narciso (d1f714)

  108. Lots of democrats, liberals, and liberals who hate taxes (Libertarians) love Romney. He got elected in Liberal Massachusetts after all. But his outside of Utah or New England, he couldn’t get elected dogcatcher on an R ticket.

    He’s not a bad man, if you can stand flip-flopping liars, and backstabbers.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  109. There wasnt an initial enquiry untill johjson ran afoul of the radical republicans, nearly 80 years in

    narciso (d1f714)

  110. @105, you object to flip flopping liars and backstabbers but love Trump? Cant’ get that one figured out.

    Time123 (52fb0e)

  111. Now why did they end up with putin, because the embrace of western economy, ended up being a firesale where the new class changed outfits but still made out loke bandits.

    narciso (d1f714)

  112. “Don’t ask, don’t tell”? That was for gays in the armed forces, not Fifth Avenue fancy boys in the Oval Office. Everybody is allowed to inquire whether Trump committed treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. Or is it Alice in Wonderland alongside the Wizard of Oz? First we vote to impeach, and then we inquire if there’s a basis for it?

    nk (dbc370)

  113. Twenty or so year before Lindsey Graham revealed himself as a stark, raving hypocrite, here’s what he had to say about Congress and subpoena power over the Executive Branch.

    “The day Richard Nixon failed to answer that subpoena is the day he was subject to impeachment because he took the power from Congress over the impeachment process away from Congress, and he became the judge and jury,” Graham said two decades ago.

    Paul Montagu (88b43e)

  114. Implied and backed up by case law, ocean, just like judicial review.

    Paul Montagu (88b43e)

  115. What happens if Trump gets impeached after the primary season and then wins re-election?

    kaf (0363f1)

  116. The 3 House committees have yet to issue a subpoena. They are request letters. Schiff has declared that ignoring the request letters, is evidence of obstruction. The subpoenas (request letters) carry no weight—-because while Nancy says there is an impeachment inquiry going on, The House of Representatives is unaware, because no vote has been called. No where in the Constitution gives the power to have an impeachment inquiry to a single person. The House has an Impeachment Inquiry. Not the speaker of the House.

    Why would I think anybody cares about impeachment, even the Democrat Majority House has no interest in an Impeachment Inquiry

    Inquiring minds want to know.

    iowan2 (9c8856)

  117. An impeachment can include being disqualified from holding any future federal office as well as removal from the current office.

    Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States; but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

    — Article I, Section 3

    nk (dbc370)

  118. First we vote to impeach, and then we inquire if there’s a basis for it?

    Ready, Fire, Aim. That’s how Trump would do it.

    What happens if Trump gets impeached after the primary season and then wins re-election?

    If Trump is impeached and convicted, the articles will almost certainly disqualify him from holding any position of “honor, Trust and Profit” in the future (as the Constitution allows). Being ineligible, he could not be re-elected even if he appeared to win an election.

    Dave (1bb933)

  119. “Twenty or so year before Lindsey Graham revealed himself as a stark, raving hypocrite, here’s what he had to say about Congress and subpoena power over the Executive Branch.”
    Paul Montagu (88b43e) — 10/8/2019 @ 7:40 pm

    Newsweek.

    Twenty or so years ago they smothered the Clinton-Lewinski story, and Drudge was born. Stark, raving hypocrites are your muse.

    And stark raving hypocrites will equate a subpoena backed up with an impeachment inquiry voted on and approved with one backed up by nothing except stark raving butt hurt.

    Munroe (53beca)

  120. And drudge has been tamed like the lion in aesops fable, you were someone on e,

    narciso (d1f714)

  121. nk:

    so his VP-elect would get sworn in?

    by “impeached” I meant “impeached by the house and convicted by the Senate”.

    kaf (0363f1)

  122. by “impeached” I meant “impeached by the house and convicted by the Senate”.

    That’s what I meant too.

    so his VP-elect would get sworn in?

    If he dies. The 20th Amendment is clear on that. In case of disqualification, I’m not sure, but I’m guessing “yes” under the Presidential Succession Act, and then Congress would appoint a new Vice-President.

    nk (dbc370)

  123. “I see impeachment in the constitution. I see that we’ve had two of them, and a 3rd in-process, in 230 years. I’m still looking for a “Impeachment Inquiry”

    Since you’re such a constitutional scholar, perhaps you can share what the process in the house for impeachment is?

    Davethulhu (fe4242)

  124. If he dies. The 20th Amendment is clear on that. In case of disqualification, I’m not sure, but I’m guessing “yes” under the Presidential Succession Act, and then Congress would appoint a new Vice-President.

    The 3 USC 1 stipulates that “§ 8. The electors shall vote for President and Vice President, respectively, in the manner directed by the Constitution.”

    A vote cast for someone constitutionally ineligible to hold office would not be cast “in the manner directed by the Constitution,” and would be subject to challenge, so someone other than Trump would be elected and there would be no “succession”.

    If no eligible candidate won a majority of “regularly cast” (i.e. lawful) electoral votes when they were counted, the House would vote by state in what they call a “contingent election”. If they voted for someone ineligible, said person would fail to qualify, and the vice-president would act as president until someone did.

    Dave (1bb933)

  125. Newsweek

    Ad hominem. There’s no evidence that they caught his words wrong.

    Paul Montagu (88b43e)

  126. More Newsweek:

    During the 2016 campaign, President Donald Trump made an aggressive promise on federal finances: He would eliminate the budget deficit within eight years. Now, three years into his presidency, the deficit is 68 percent higher than when he started.
    Trump inherited a deficit of $585 billion when he took office in January 2017. That was 58 percent lower than the $1.4 trillion former President Barack Obama inherited in 2009 following the financial crisis, a number his administration slashed over two terms.
    According to the latest Congressional Budget Office data released on Monday, the full-year deficit for 2019 is estimated to come in at $984 billion, just shy of the $1 trillion that many analysts were expecting. In 2018 the figure was $779 billion and in 2017 it was $665 billion.

    At some point, conservatives may have to begrudgingly acknowledge that a liberal Democrat like Obama has been more fiscally conservative than Trump. And more fiscally responsible.

    Paul Montagu (88b43e)

  127. During the 2016 campaign, President Donald Trump made an aggressive promise on federal finances: He would eliminate the budget deficit within eight years.

    Fake news.

    He promised he would eliminate the $20T+ national debt in eight years.

    That would, perforce, require eliminating the budget deficit immediately, since enormous annual budget surpluses would be required every year to liquidate $20T+ of debt in only eight years. More than half the entire Federal budget would have had to be allocated to debt reduction for eight years to do what Trump promised.

    And despite this breath-taking display of complete ignorance and incompetence, Republicans voted for him.

    Dave (1bb933)

  128. And remember, he promised to do it:

    1) Without raising taxes
    2) Without cutting entitlements
    3) Without cutting the military
    4) By reducing the trade deficit with China

    Dave (1bb933)

  129. Having a house full of traitorous pos that quit and go home leaving the house to be filled by democrats is as pathetic as one can get. Loser pos pauly ryan should be laced in tar and feathers, Dave. And the senate is a sucking group of wannabe notables.

    mg (8cbc69)

  130. History not only rhymes, but nowadays scratches and has auto-tune: http://www.huffpost.com/entry/rachel-maddow-trump-pence-document_n_5d9d645ee4b087efdba4cd7f
    That will give Trump the opening to be his true self, in the nk sense, and peel the rest of the alphabet from those sicko T’s.

    urbanleftbehind (c6dc41)

  131. Or Trump has Cohen-quality lawyers otra vez.

    nk (dbc370)

  132. Reed richards, does less stretching.

    narciso (d1f714)

  133. “…This makes (name) every bit as guilty as (name) for High Crimes and Misdemeanors, and even Treason. I guess that means that they, along with all of those that evilly “Colluded” with them, must all be immediately Impeached!”

    Who said this…. and who were the two people named in the quote?

    noel (f22371)

  134. Hint: Psychological Projection

    noel (f22371)

  135. Does maddow have any research staff, that isnt raving nazguls

    narciso (d1f714)

  136. Maddow is distracted with other concerns this morning, as in “how did I not get on that before Matt?”

    urbanleftbehind (c6dc41)

  137. Cbs and nbc were like meat markets, yet the attention is only on ailes who is conveniently dead, with matt being like pasdars profit, and redstone right out of chinatown

    narciso (d1f714)

  138. I’m mad at Ailes, not for what he did, but that a “4 or 5″ was the one that took him down.

    urbanleftbehind (c6dc41)

  139. Urbanleftbehind says…. “I’m mad at Ailes, not for what he did…”

    Oh really? Do people listen to you in real life?

    noel (f22371)

  140. Its a medieval power play, the murdoch boys are making newscorp conform with minitrue standards, lauer the real ron burgundy

    narciso (d1f714)

  141. Johnson is nobodys choirboy, but yet a necessary tool,

    narciso (d1f714)

  142. Not to wish bad, but what if…King Charles is a thing before 10/31?

    urbanleftbehind (c6dc41)

  143. The remainers have a powerful apparat, andrew marrs ‘head of state’ described it, think ‘weekend at bernies’ crossed with ‘yes prime minister’

    narciso (d1f714)

  144. The answer is: “She’s not my type”.

    What does Donald say when accused of sexual assault?

    Correct.

    Sleaze for $800 please.

    noel (f22371)

  145. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/06/25/stunned_anderson_cooper_cuts_to_commercial_when_trump_accuser_e_jean_carroll_calls_rape_sexy.html

    Maybe she is your type, noel?

    I’m not sure how polite the accused is supposed to be when confronted with unsubstantiated allegations. What would your response be?

    BuDuh (b9b9a0)

  146. Unsubstantiated? You funny.

    Ever heard of the Access Hollywood tapes?

    noel (f22371)

  147. Mr. Trump tried to give seats in his V.I.P. box to a group of women who have accused former President Bill Clinton of making unwanted sexual advances. (NY Times)

    The guy has no shame.

    noel (f22371)

  148. I gather that you have no idea where your “not my type” quote came from.

    BuDuh (b9b9a0)

  149. Seriously??

    “Not my type” quote was from memory but I just looked and the quote can be found…. virtually everywhere. As well as him saying “she would not be my first choice”. On video.

    noel (f22371)

  150. Off topic, I know. Patterico is gonna spank us pretty soon. I didn’t start it. I swear.

    noel (f22371)

  151. Ahhh. I wasn’t sure if you were worried about something specific or if this was just a rehashing of previous general arm waving. Now I know. Thank you.

    BuDuh (b9b9a0)

  152. I think most people agree that E. Jean Carroll put Trump’s name to one of her masturbatory fantasies, and that’s all her allegation was. I further think “she’s not my type” is a more polite response than she deserved. Mine would have been along the lines of “I wouldn’t touch her with a ten-foot pole”. (Not that I’m bragging.)

    nk (dbc370)

  153. I get you though @ 149… that Juanita Brodderick has a mug worthy of being hit with a frozen ham. But methinks Trump would pick and choose invitees looks wise, M.L. being the floor.

    urbanleftbehind (c6dc41)

  154. part of Gloria alred’s traveling circus,

    https://thefederalist.com/2019/10/09/top-military-officers-misfire-in-atlantic-hit-on-trump-foreign-policy/

    so you’re fine with the folger’s crystal impeachment

    narciso (d1f714)

  155. 3. With the Dems in the House, I think impeachment is quite likely. With Republicans in the Senate, I think removal is virtually impossible. Gotta admire Trump for playing this game just the way Bill Clinton did.

    Gryph (08c844)

  156. But methinks Trump would pick and choose invitees looks wise, M.L. being the floor.

    Think again.

    Dave (1bb933)

  157. …what more would you expect of possible “Eskimo Brothers”.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  158. Says who? https://youtu.be/FN0vMgE0t3o

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  159. It appears Mueller may have lied under oath re: applying for the FBI Director slot.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  160. I kinda doubt this is as bad as they make it out to be, but I guess Trump should be asked to take a drug test.

    https://twitter.com/JRehling/status/1180505950613958658?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1180505950613958658&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.inquisitr.com%2F5675792%2Fdonald-trump-hides-boxes-sudafed-desk-photo-apprentice%2F

    These days, I guess I’m just surprised no one took a hair from a brush or a hat and had it tested.

    If this were Obama’s desk, Trump would be demanding a drug test in addition to lying about a Kenyan birth certificate.

    Unsubstantiated? You funny.

    Ever heard of the Access Hollywood tapes?

    noel (f22371) — 10/9/2019 @ 7:26 am

    Exactly. It’s not a theory that Trump is a total scumbag. It’s not a theory that he’s assaulted women. The people muddying waters about it are cool with their side committing these acts. It’s not like they actually believe Trump is innocent. They just think they have to pick a side because binary choice and Supreme Court. If they were honest about that, it wouldn’t be nearly as annoying. But all this ‘poor Trump with these terrible accusations’ was old years ago. No one thinks Trump is a victim here.

    Dustin (6d7686)

  161. I think it’s more like the deniro/ pacino scene in heat, but then you add rosensteins part in this, anyways his man wray got the job,

    narciso (d1f714)

  162. @162, link?

    Time123 (353edd)

  163. Let’s impeach Trump first. We can whine about all the needed investigations of everyone who ever looked at Trump without bowing and worshiping later. I know Mitt Romney and Mueller are super scary deep state bla bla, but let’s not emulate China here.

    Ever since Barr said “No Collusion” and we realized he was (of course) lying, and worse, they were screwing around with Ukraine too, there’s been no way to address any of these alt-right theories. No investigation by this administration is worth a thing.

    Even Lindsey Graham is critical of Trump, so those saying there’s no way the Senate flips on him are living in a dream world. This is a golden opportunity for the GOP, and that’s why Pelosi doesn’t want to lose the best advantage the democrats have had in generations. Turns out Nevertrumpers warned the right about how this would play out with remarkable accuracy.

    Dustin (6d7686)

  164. Aloha Col.

    health wise who looks worse Mueller or Bill Clinton?

    mg (8cbc69)

  165. yes graham who went whole hog on the arab spring, and signed off on the 500 million to Syrian rebels who weren’t kurds, who defected at first glance, taking their missiles over to al queda, idlib province is the sanctuary of hurras al din, hayat al Tahrir, or whatever name nusra front is calling itself these days,

    narciso (d1f714)

  166. D.C. Republican scabs need treatment. Become a vaper.

    mg (8cbc69)

  167. 166… aloha, mg. They are both looking the worse for wear.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  168. how goes it col, it’s been a little damp around here,

    narciso (d1f714)

  169. Nearly all of this Impeachment Noise is to distract Americans from upcoming events. A lot of these NeverTrumpers are frightened by what will be detailed in the report(s) resulting from the Horowitz/Durham/Barr investigation. The other shoe will be dropping soon.

    There was no treason, bribery, extortion, or illegal foreign campaign contribution. This is a continuation of what is now a three years plus witch hunt with an objective of removing a duly elected president from office.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  170. It appears Mueller may have lied under oath re: applying for the FBI Director slot.

    I’m more inclined to believe that Trump lackeys are lying about Mueller.

    Paul Montagu (88b43e)

  171. Alternative explanation: Mueller told the truth and it’s just another day at the office for Trump’s paid liars.

    Dave (1bb933)

  172. they do dial the noise to 11, well consider durham when he was investigating whitey bulger he ran into a wall at justice, that involved Sweeney todd weld, muller, Delahunt, and of course we know about morris, Connolly et al,

    https://dailycaller.com/2019/10/09/john-durham-fbi-cia-barr/

    narciso (d1f714)

  173. 170… hey, narciso… I’ve been enjoying your posts – along with Michael K’s – over at the Althouse site! Seem to be fewer Democrats who claim to be disenchanted/disgruntled Republicans over there.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  174. definitely gruntled,

    narciso (d1f714)

  175. 172… “Tuesday, Fox News’ Bret Baier and Jake Gibson reported that Mueller was indeed “pursuing the open post as the director of the FBI – something the former Russia probe special counsel denied under oath during congressional testimony this summer.”

    So, has Mueller been lying about this all along? Consider his July 24, 2019 testimony before congress:

    Mueller: “My understanding was I was not applying for the job. I was asked to give my input on what it would take to do the job.

    Question: So it is your statement that you didn’t interview to apply for the FBI director job?

    Mueller: That’s correct.”

    Mueller also denied telling Vice President Pence that he wanted to return to the top FBI post.“

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  176. Trump’s being impeached because he obviously used his office and enormous American wealth simply to screw with a politician he’s afraid of. It’s amazing to me that anyone would say that’s just a distraction. A distraction from what?

    A lot of these NeverTrumpers are frightened by what will be detailed in the report(s) resulting from the Horowitz/Durham/Barr

    barr’s the loser who lied to us about Collusion and Obstruction… to distract us from the report he kept from the American people for as long as he could. It’s amazing and quite hilarious that so many Trump Fan claims are literal 180 reversals of reality. No one cares what Barr has to say. Either you’re a hack for Trump and accept all his arguments, or you aren’t and ignore him because he’s such a shameless stooge.

    Alternative explanation: Mueller told the truth and it’s just another day at the office for Trump’s paid liars.

    Dave (1bb933) — 10/9/2019 @ 9:58 am

    Yeppo. And by letting it slide, Barr was helping Trump do it again and again.

    There was no treason, bribery, extortion, or illegal foreign campaign contribution.

    God is watching.

    ZELENSKY: I would also like to thank you for your great support in the area of defense. We. are ready to continue to cooperate for the next steps. Specifically, we are almost ready to buy more Javelins from the United· States for defense purposes.

    TRUMP: I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike … I guess you have one of your wealthy people. … The server, they say Ukraine has it.

    It’s telling that the Ace-quoting goofballs are more upset that whistleblowing is legal than that Trump is using his office to collude on our next election. ‘Oh he’s only investigating!!!’ After all the freaking out about Mueller and deepstate, now investigating corruption justifies Trump’s ridiculously unlawful behavior?

    But there’s no reasoning with these guys. Trump’s boots will be licked. It’s just a sport.

    Dustin (6d7686)

  177. they do dial the noise to 11

    Yes, Trump supporters are very interested in Trump’s critics being as quiet as possible. Why it’s just plain rude of them to speak up when Trump and his fans are so noiseless.

    Dustin (6d7686)

  178. yes only garbage from fusion, which whitewashed theranos, with the complicity of board members like George Schultz, and general mattis, (integrity only goes so far) reid Hoffman’s bogus astroturf, and Gloria alred’s flying circus, give us something real, the gossiper who was outside the loop for a year, repeating his previous hits doesn’t cut it,

    narciso (d1f714)

  179. Nearly all of this Impeachment Noise is to distract Americans from upcoming events.


    I’m hearing that the Great People of Utah are considering their vote for their Pompous Senator, Mitt Romney, to be a big mistake. I agree! He is a fool who is playing right into the hands of the Do Nothing Democrats! #IMPEACHMITTROMNEY,

    Huh. It’s almost as though Trump’s supporters actually don’t have a problem with weird and baseless impeachment threats used as a noisy distraction technique.

    A lot of these NeverTrumpers are frightened by what will be detailed in the report(s)

    that’s an ace of spades kind of thing to say, and probably a talking point from there. These guys really think there’s a deeply personal and invested loyalty from Trump’s critics, and somehow we give two craps what happens to Mitt Romney or some CIA whistleblower. Like we think there’s some truly vitreous angel in this swampy muck and we need to build a statue to him.

    When reality is that most Americans think our government is a mess of corruption and waste, and anyone shedding light on it probably also is dirty.

    Trump just happens to be worse, with very serious consequences. But what is there for Trump’s critics to be afraid of? Lock Hillary up. Toss Romney out of the Senate. So what? Sounds good.

    Dustin (6d7686)

  180. The concern trollers are mostly amusing, sometimes sadly so.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  181. “It’s telling that the Ace-quoting goofballs are more upset that whistleblowing is legal than that Trump is using his office to collude on our next election. ‘Oh he’s only investigating!!!’ After all the freaking out about Mueller and deepstate, now investigating corruption justifies Trump’s ridiculously unlawful behavior?

    But there’s no reasoning with these guys. Trump’s boots will be licked. It’s just a sport.”

    Literally talking points found at Daily Kos, Salon, Democratic Underground, etc.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  182. hahah, haiku. Sorry to see you’re upset again. Hope you make it more than a week without being banned for lying or racism or whatever this time. Maybe switch to decaf and accept that Trump will be criticized a lot these days. He’s really imploding lately.

    Remember when you praised Romney every day for a year on this blog? It was really amazing how mad you got when I said he was a RINO. Remember that? You said I got that from Daily Kos too.

    Now you get to praise the guy who wanted Hillary to be president, who said Bush caused 9/11 and was the worst president in American history (actual Daily Kos talking points).

    At any rate, I am quite sure many of my criticisms of Trump, which are rooted in his actual conduct, are shared by the opposing political party. That does not mean they are incorrect. That you base your entire criticism of me on such flaky partisanship is why you can go from licking Romney’s to Trump’s boots without recognizing how absurd that is.

    Dustin (6d7686)

  183. You have yourself a wonderful day, Dustin.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  184. Trump wants to force the House to follow past protocol and vote.
    He wants Democrat house members on the record so the RNC can use it against them.
    Remember as you pointed out so pointedly, Impeachment is political.

    So the two sides are playing politics. Go figure.

    steveg (354706)

  185. When do they do any actual work:

    https://mobile.twitter.com/HKFrese/status/1181387784633933824

    narciso (d1f714)

  186. Interesting read,narciso. Obviously a situation that requires much more than a knee-jerk reaction.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  187. Shes a retired naval intel officer, who doesnt follow the conventional wisdom.

    narciso (d1f714)

  188. 63. Paul Montagu (88b43e) — 10/8/2019 @ 3:47 pm

    At that time, Ukraine wanted Javelin missiles to defend themselves against Putin’s invasion in eastern Ukraine. The quid pro quo was that Ukrainian prosecutors stopped cooperating with the Mueller investigation in exchange for those missiles. It could be Count #11 for obstruction of justice.

    I am not that familiar with the details of Mueller’s investigation so I don’t know what you are talking about. Where did they stop co-operating? And where was there an quid pro quo of thsi kind offered>

    Now Giulaini was investigating accusations that Ukraine had interfered against Trump in the 2016 election by publicizing the “black ledger” which shws Manafort got laundered money. Manafort had to resign. The defense against that chare is, that that wsasa few Ulrainian ndividuals, inclding amember of Parliament, but not te government. So, if there wass any more co-operation needed, they miht have decided not to, in order not to take sides in U.S. politics.

    What did that have to do with Javelin missiles? In the telephone call on July 25, Zelensky seems to be afraid that Trump will think they are NOT going to buy Javelin missiles (that is, instead will buy something from France or Germany)

    Sammy Finkelman (e70ce9)

  189. Judas had his reasons too.

    nk (dbc370)

  190. I am not that familiar with the details of Mueller’s investigation so I don’t know what you are talking about. Where did they stop co-operating? And where was there an quid pro quo of thsi kind offered>

    The Ukrainian PGO stopped cooperating with the Special Counsel in April/May 2018, noted in this NYT piece, and it was that piece that prompted three Democrat Senators to write a letter to the PGO. There is a circumstantial case that Trump pressured Ukrainians to stonewall Mueller in exchange for their getting missiles. I’m sure that’s why Trump thought that Lutsenko was a swell guy.
    Regarding Giuliani’s “investigation” into alleged Ukrainian interference, it was a politician-journalist (Leschenko) and another guy (Sytnyk) who made the “black ledger” public. It wasn’t done by the Poroshenko government, and I’m sure those two did it because they knew (1) that Manafort political gun-for-hire who was paid by a Putin stooge and (2) the corrupt Manafort was wormed his way into the Trump campaign.
    In the Trump-Zelensky phone call, Zelensky specifically said that they were “almost ready to buy” those missiles from Trump. It’s right there in the memo.

    Paul Montagu (88b43e)

  191. 63.

    Also in that infamous phone call, Trump really liked Lutsenko and encouraged Zelensky to keep him on board, which fortunately did not happen.

    That’s what the Whistleblower stated, but…

    IMPORTANT POINT:

    THAT’S NOT WHAT’S IN THE CALL!!

    In the call, Trump never mentions Lutsenko, and Zelensky tells him that he’s going to appoint a new prosecutor by September who will be 100% his man, and Trump makes no demurral.

    To say that, you have to assume that when Trump said:

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Unclassified09.2019.pdf

    The President: Good because I heard you had a prosecutor who was very good and he was shut down and that’s really unfair. A lot of people are talking about that, the way they shut your very good prosecutor down and you had some very bad people involved.

    …he was talking about Lutsenko.

    But, although Trump was somewhat incoherent in everything he said, he was clearly talking about Viktor Shokin, who was replaced three years earlier in March 2016, even if nobody else would call him a very good prosecutor. But Giuliani had been told he was going after Borisma or maybe Hunter Biden (Shokin himself told Giulaini on January 23, 2019 that he has shut down the investigation in June or July 2015, but he blamed the U.S. Ambassador, not Biden, claiming the U.S. Ambassador had told him it needed to be handled with “kid gloves,” which he claimed, led him to do nothing further on the case)

    Anyway Viktor Shokin is the person whom Trumpp has in mind as the very good prosecutor who was shut down, and not Yuriy Lutsenko. That sentence I quoted will not bear the construction that it was Lutsenko that Trump was talking about. Lutsenko was still in office at the time of the call.

    Of course Trump would want that corrupt prosecutor to remain.

    Giuliani, by September at least, had Lusenko as a corrupt prosecutor who protected the Bidens and there’s nothing to indicate, except for that whistleblower complaint, and a very strained attempt to match that to some words in the call, that either Giuliani or Trump had any interest in Ukraine retaining Lutsenko as Prosecutor General.

    Sammy Finkelman (5b302e)

  192. 194. Paul Montagu (88b43e) — 10/10/2019 @ 7:21 am

    Regarding Giuliani’s “investigation” into alleged Ukrainian interference, it was a politician-journalist (Leschenko) and another guy (Sytnyk) who made the “black ledger” public. It wasn’t done by the Poroshenko government,

    That;s right, and that’s not the same thing as the Ukrainian government.

    and I’m sure those two did it because they knew (1) that Manafort political gun-for-hire who was paid by a Putin stooge and (2) the corrupt Manafort was wormed his way into the Trump campaign.

    I’m sure too, and it was also very relevant that Putin seemed to be supporting Trump – everybody assumed that, and t woud be only reeasoable for Putin;s enemies to attempt to counter that, and I don’t think there was anything wrong with this kind of “interference” and people in the United States should be grateful.

    But by the same token, there would be nothing wrong if Ukraine revealed true information about corruption or obstruction of justice by Joe Biden, even if requested by a potential political oppnent. What would be wrong is faking evidence, or someone attempting to get them to do that, and also not good would be asking, even in error, about something about which there’s no good grounds to suspect happened.

    In the Trump-Zelensky phone call, Zelensky specifically said that they were “almost ready to buy” those missiles from Trump. It’s right there in the memo.

    Well, from the United States, but Trump is a big hawk about the trade deficit. Zelensky clearly thinks that Ukraine not being willing to commit to buying the Javelin missiles could be a hang-up; that is, Trump doesn’t want them spending U.S. mi,itary aid on weapons from other countries if they can help it.

    Sammy Finkelman (5b302e)

  193. Javelins as je dyer explained are not governed by foreign aid packages, they are handled as military sales, the handling of same runs through defense attaches and probably company

    narciso (d1f714)

  194. PENCE 2019

    I thought… should I make a bumper sticker? Too late. Somebody beat me to it.

    noel (f22371)

  195. It would take just one allegation of whatever the left could concoct for Pence supporters to fold like a chair.

    Munroe (53beca)

  196. Oh Rudy, you’re the gift that keeps on giving. He’ll single-handedly put Trump in an orange jumpsuit. I mean, it’s not like Trump isn’t doing yeoman’s duty in getting himself impeached, but Rudy is going to put him in jail, he’ll roll over before he goes to jail. Of course Trump is also a blatant coward too, but who’s he gonna roll on?

    Colonel Klink (Ret) (6e7a1c)

  197. Of course Trump is also a blatant coward too, but who’s he gonna roll on?

    The Kurds?

    Dave (4b15f7)

  198. Yeah, yeah, the walls are closing in, Schiff’s a true patriot, blah blah, blah blah, yada, yada.

    If the Democrats are so sure, put it to a vote. By all means, they should stop cowering, stand tall and do their duty.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  199. Yeah, yeah, the walls are closing in, Schiff’s a true patriot, blah blah, blah blah, yada, yada.

    If the Democrats are so sure, put it to a vote. By all means, they should stop cowering, stand tall and do their duty.

    You should educate yourself on how this works. You investigate before you vote, but your Trump’s Taint™ method seems to be to Fire, Ready, Aim because Cheeto jeezus says it must be so.

    Colonel Klink (Ret) (6e7a1c)

  200. “You should educate yourself on how this works. You investigate before you vote”
    Colonel Klink (Ret) (6e7a1c) — 10/10/2019 @ 12:03 pm

    You mean we have an “impeachment inquiry” before we vote to conduct an impeachment inquiry?

    Looking forward to some serious education on this.

    Munroe (53beca)

  201. Give him a break, Klink – he doesn’t write the talking points, he just repeats them.

    Dave (4b15f7)

  202. If Trump really wants Hillary locked up, he should put her on his legal team.

    Dave (4b15f7)

  203. Dave (4b15f7) — 10/10/2019 @ 12:19 pm

    Now that’s funny.

    felipe (023cc9)

  204. You mean we have an “impeachment inquiry” before we vote to conduct an impeachment inquiry?

    Looking forward to some serious education on this.

    Well, since you want an education outside of the simplemindedness of Trump’s Taint’s™ fact free talking points.

    At the federal level, the impeachment process is a three-step procedure.

    First, the Congress investigates. This investigation typically begins in the House Judiciary Committee, but may begin elsewhere. For example, the Nixon impeachment inquiry began in the Senate Judiciary Committee. The facts that led to impeachment of Bill Clinton were first discovered in the course of an investigation by Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr.

    Second, the House of Representatives must pass, by a simple majority of those present and voting, articles of impeachment, which constitute the formal allegation or allegations. Upon passage, the defendant has been “impeached”.

    Third, the Senate tries the accused. In the case of the impeachment of a president, the Chief Justice of the United States presides over the proceedings. For the impeachment of any other official, the Constitution is silent on who shall preside, suggesting that this role falls to the Senate’s usual presiding officer, the President of the Senate who is also the Vice President of the United States. Conviction in the Senate requires a two-thirds supermajority vote. The result of conviction is removal from office.

    If you want to go to that pesky old piece of parchment where it defines how the House should conduct itself.

    Section 2, Clause 5

    The House of Representatives shall choose their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

    You should now be slightly more educated, but please, feel free to tell more lies, and obfuscate the facts by making mouth noises while reality keeps battering it’s way into the noggin’ juice.

    Colonel Klink (Ret) (6e7a1c)

  205. But whatever…how ’bout that Rudy? He’s so smart, not as smart as DJT, but second, for sure.

    Colonel Klink (Ret) (6e7a1c)

  206. Over at emptywheel, Jim White notes that one of Giuliani’s associates has a company unfortunately named Fraud Guarantee (website scrubbed).
    Another co-conspirator is David Correia, whose social media presence is mostly re-tweeting pro-Trump propaganda, including those from our hyperpartisan friend, John Solomon. And this:

    As a postscript for those of us in Florida, it’s also especially juicy that the fraudulent shell company set up to funnel money to political campaigns, Global Energy Producers, also made a $50,000 contribution to the campaign to elect currentFlorida Governor Ron DeSantis.

    More from Marcy Wheeler:

    Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman were arrested last night as they tried to flee the country in advance of Congressional subpoenas for their testimony.

    Their attorney is none other than John Dowd, who was trying to prevent them testifying before a House subcommittee. I suspect we’ll learn soon enough who this “Russian businessman” is, the guy who was bankrolling the four co-conspirators. And Ms. Wheeler brings up a John Solomon connection.

    Putting together the Dowd letter and the indictment, it becomes clear that the John Solomon propaganda that Trump was pushing (and which Rudy sent to Mike Pompeo’s State Department as part of the effort to get rid of Yovanovitch and which Lindsey Graham just invited Rudy to come present to the Senate Judiciary Committee) was funded by an as yet unnamed Russian.

    One last thing. The politician whom Parnas and Fruman gave money to was none other than Pete Sessions and Kevin McCarthy.

    Federal records show Parnas has donated a total of $25,200 to Republican candidates and political groups since the 2016 presidential election, including $2,700 to Representative Pete Sessions and $2,700 to House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy. Fruman has donated $44,201 over that period to Republicans, including Sessions, the Republican National Committee and Trump’s presidential campaign.

    I’m a little surprised that Nunes was named, but I suppose he’s so in the bag for Trump that more campaign cash wouldn’t change anything.
    Anyways, the Trump Taint is strong in all those fellas.

    Paul Montagu (88b43e)

  207. Your rudytooti and cheetojesus descriptive weren’t funny two years ago when the other Dems were using them, klink.

    204… tired and sad, but give ’em an “A-” for effort…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  208. Colonel Klink (Ret) (6e7a1c) — 10/10/2019 @ 12:26 pm

    Wow, to think all prior impeachments weren’t following the rules.

    Klink, I think you’re on to something historically significant.

    Munroe (53beca)

  209. A snippet from the Clinton Impeachment…

    October 5, 1998: The Judiciary Committee of the House votes, 21 to 16 along party lines, to recommend an impeachment inquiry.

    October 8, 1998: The House of Representatives votes, 258 to 176, to conduct an impeachment inquiry.

    Your “lesson” from Wikipedia loses much of its bluster when one notes it was “last edited one day ago by “nyook”

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  210. nyook-a-no-no… nyook-a-no-no…
    Watch out where the huskies go, don’t you eat that yellow snow…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  211. LOL, Colonel!

    Munroe (53beca)

  212. The above prefaced by…

    January 16, 1998: Kenneth Starr is authorized to investigate the Lewinsky matter. FBI agents seize Lewinsky in a food court and take her to a hotel room, where she is threatened by six Office of Independent Counsel prosecutors with federal charges (the prosecutors even suggest that they could charge her mother) unless she agreed to wear a body wire for conversations with Clinton, Currie, and Jordan. Prosecutors effectively prevent her from calling her lawyer, who still would have had time to stop the filing of her false affidavit in the Jones case. She is finally released at 12:23 am, after being held for 11 hours.

    A kangaroo court/investigation presided over by Schiff-for-brains Adam Schiff is a yuge joke.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  213. September 9, 1998: The Starr Report on the Lewinsky matter is submitted to Congress.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  214. ah marcy, she was sooper sekret source, mueller relied on, snorfle,

    greg craig can fix a case in the Ukraine, acquitted (judge amy Jackson provides the doctors note) podesta and weber, who were the ones actually doing the lobbying for the Hapsburg group not even charged, of course the former laundered the money in bad art,

    narciso (d1f714)

  215. Your “lesson” from Wikipedia loses much of its bluster when one notes it was “last edited one day ago by “nyook”

    There was a vote for an inquiry back then, but it’s not required under the Constitution or House rules.

    Paul Montagu (88b43e)

  216. ah marcy, she was sooper sekret source, mueller relied on, snorfle,

    Stage One. Ad hominem in lieu addressing the content, followed by Stage Two.

    Paul Montagu (88b43e)

  217. That appears to be an opinion that was the result of the commenter’s amusement at the background and history of your source, Paul.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  218. Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 10/10/2019 @ 1:22 pm

    A kangaroo court/investigation presided over by Schiff-for-brains Adam Schiff is a yuge joke.

    The reason Pelosi did this I think is that they have to protect Joe Biden, and nless they are verycareful, something not good for Biden;s political prospects is going to come out, and they want him to win the nomination, because they think he;s about the only moderate Democrat who can.

    Not that Biden did what Donald Trump or Giuliani were accusing or suspecting him of, that is, arrange to fire a prosecutor in order to protect his son’s sinecure of a job, and it’s not even because more attention would be devoted to why in the workd did Hunter Biden get such a lucrative job, but because Biden lied in that January 23, 2018 speech to the Council on Foreign Relations about his instrumental role in firing that (actually bad) prosecutor, and you can’t ask Biden too many questions, without the story he told in that speech being blown to smithereens.

    That’s why they need a tightly controlled process (besides perhaps concealing that the leak that started this whole thing was orchestrated, although that’s not fatal to the impeachment move.)

    If they allow anyone, Republican members of the House, Republican counsel, or the president’s lawyers to summon Biden as a witness and just ask him questions, somebody is going to ask him to give his version of that scene in Kiev where he threatened to withhold loan guarantees right before a press conference where that was going to be announced, and why he did it, just to get his denail on the record and see if they can poke holed in his story, and when that happens Joe Biden will have no choice but to say:

    I made the whole story up!.

    Already right now the Washington Post has had to run a story saying that that didn’t happen in March, when the prosecutor was fired, which hakf spoils the story and means that Biden at least mixed his facts up.

    They do things like that when other outlets have corrected the record, but make it sound like they’re revealing it, and don’t mention anybody else who noted that Biden’s visdit would have had to have been in December 2015, three months before the prosecutor lost his job.

    Sammy Finkelman (1d7dd8)

  219. Biden said other things in that speech that possibly or defintely may be untrue. I’m not talking about faulty general analysis.

    He said it was his 12th or 13th trip to Kiev – by December 2015, he’d made only 5.

    He said: “I spent more time than any member of our administration trying to deal with making sure that this revolution of dignity did not blow up in the face of what is a great opportunity for Ukraine.”

    The question of Russian election interference in 2016 was “the only engagement with the House and Senate that I wasn’t asked to lead, and because—anyway. I always was being sent to the Hill to try to settle things. But the gang of 12 were called together.”

    “there wasn’t a week that went by I wasn’t on the phone with Barzani or Abadi or any—I mean, literally, both cajoling, threatening, negotiating among them and between them, et cetera.”

    “I’d say to the president, I’d say, you know, when our kids are writing their doctoral thesis and they’re asked the question, what’d they do about the Arab Spring, the kid who starts off saying what made them think they could do anything about the Arab Spring will win the book and the course. And I’m being a little facetious, but not very.”

    ” when foreign leaders call me, and they do, because I never, ever, ever would say anything negative to a foreign leader, and I mean it sincerely, about a sitting president, no matter how fundamentally I disagree with him. And it is not my role—not my role—to make foreign policy. But the questions across the board range from, what the hell is going on, Joe, to, what advice do you have for me? And my advice always is—I give them names of individuals in the administration who I think to be knowledgeable and committed. And I say you should talk to so-and-so.

    You should—and what I do at every one of those times, I first call the vice president and tell him I received the call. Tell him—ask him whether he has any objection to my returning the call, and then what is the administration’s position, if any, they want me to communicate to that country.”

    Sammy Finkelman (1d7dd8)

  220. there are many problems with bidens statements, after they fire shokin, they continued to shut down the remaining charges into mr. z, maybe the fact he had sponsored yet another global energy conference in Monaco, like a bond villain, take blofeld, or modern incarnation with dominic greene

    narciso (d1f714)

  221. ‘and when that happens Joe Biden will have no choice but to say:

    “I made the whole story up!“ ‘

    Oh, man… well… I guess that shoots that whole Corn Pop story in the hindquarters, too…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  222. Maybe he can say “Fake News” and blame the press.

    Davethulhu (fab944)

  223. Oh, man… well… I guess that shoots that whole Corn Pop story in the hindquarters, too…

    Also makes the moronic conspiracy that Trump’s peddling a more stupid than needed. But being a moron is the Trump brand.

    Colonel Klink (ret) (a6ea8b)

  224. like recalling fdr speaking on television, during the 1929 crash, that little vignette went down the memory hole, he’s always been a hack, and more often then not he served soviet interests from making salt 2 acceptable to the nuclear freeze, he came up with the fisa formula, that has worked spectacularly well,

    narciso (d1f714)

  225. That appears to be an opinion that was the result of the commenter’s amusement at the background and history of your source, Paul.

    Um, duh.

    Paul Montagu (88b43e)

  226. “Um, duh.”

    And yet you had to call it out?

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  227. To defend his horrifically bad decision to betray our best Muslim allies in the Middle East, Trump has resorted to bald-faced lies, such as this…

    The United States was supposed to be in Syria for 30 days, that was many years ago. We stayed and got deeper and deeper into battle with no aim in sight. When I arrived in Washington, ISIS was running rampant in the area. We quickly defeated 100% of the ISIS Caliphate, including capturing thousands of ISIS fighters, mostly from Europe.

    No one has heard of this “30 days” thing, they were well on the path to defeat when Trump took office, they are not “defeated 100%”, and the detainees are not “mostly from Europe”. Four lies in one tweet. Presume his comments false until proven true.

    Paul Montagu (88b43e)

  228. And yet you had to call it out?

    He replied to my comment, I replied to his. I regret that you have a problem with that. The guy is Joe Ad Hom.

    Paul Montagu (88b43e)

  229. “like recalling fdr speaking on television, during the 1929 crash, that little vignette went down the memory hole, he’s always been a hack, and more often then not he served soviet interests from making salt 2 acceptable to the nuclear freeze, he came up with the fisa formula, that has worked spectacularly well,”

    Yeah, narciso… he’s not the sharpest tool in the shed, but who else do they have riding their bench? Nothing but Fugawi tribe. The poor Dems don’t have more than a handful of brain cells sparking in their entire party and their media operatives are all jacked up on Adderall, bug-eyed like Schiff and speaking on these “news” shows like they’re at a mid-80s Hollywood Hills party.

    Caught something about the whistlepuffer working with Biden in the Obama administration? Just caught the tail end of something on the radio…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  230. No, he’s narciso, no thin-skin he.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  231. I know small particle of brain, remaining,

    narciso (d1f714)

  232. So they say, who was his briefer on eastern european matters

    narciso (d1f714)

  233. Did they ever do and AUMFfor Syria?

    JD (734fdd)

  234. Did they ever do an AUMF for Syria?

    JD (734fdd)

  235. Hey jd, no they didnt.

    narciso (d1f714)

  236. Did they ever do an AUMF for Syria?

    Don’t need one. The AUMF passed after 9/11 authorizes use of the US military against Al Qaeda and its affiliates anywhere in the world:

    Section 2 – Authorization For Use of United States Armed Forces
    (a) IN GENERAL- That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.
    (b) War Powers Resolution Requirements-
    (1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION- Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.

    Passed the House 420-1 and the Senate 98-0.

    Dave (1bb933)

Leave a Reply

Comment moderation is enabled. Your comment may take some time to appear.


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.6735 secs.