Reply With Quote
Guess we may get to see what he has to say. He is still a -head, but if he is willing to speak truth to power that puts him head and shoulders above most Trump party officials.
Bolton gonna talk
I wish I could disagree with you. RIP Republican principles, o Trump Party.
Guess we may get to see what he has to say. He is still a -head, but if he is willing to speak truth to power that puts him head and shoulders above most Trump party officials.
Bolton gonna talk
The Repugs have been pro-Trump since the VRWC corruptly got Useful Idiot St Ronnie and his gang into office.
Trash is 100% Republican, in the flow where Repugs have been for 40 years, NOT that the Repugs have been converted to Trumpolics.
Bolton is still fapping to that drone strike on the Iranian general tbh
Herr Gaetz
Chris is all about Herrenvolk democracy
Twitter Qhris
Working on 6tph
When is she going to hire her closest advisors off Of FOX? oops I mean CNN?
Never mind. only a president can hire people that have real government jobs with power.
sorry, never mind.
Thanks for sharing.
"seems"
NYC Bar Association gives Bill Barr a stunning rebuke — and
asks Congress to investigate him for bias
the Bar Association is claiming that Barr’s recent statements and actions indicate that
he may be enabling and encouraging “political partisans willing to use the levers of government to empower certain groups over others.”
also accuses Barr of
disregarding “fundamental obligations in several public statements during the past few months,” including
his duty to “act impartially,
to avoid even the appearance of partiality and impropriety, and
to avoid manifesting bias, prejudice or partisanship in the exercise of official responsibilities.”
his speech made last October at the University of Notre Dame in which
he vowed to put the Department of Justice “at the forefront” in the battles against the “forces of secularization”
that he said were harming America’s traditional moral order.
“appears to be
the first time the New York bar or any comparable bar association has asked Congress to investigate a sitting attorney general.”
https://www.rawstory.com/2020/01/nyc..._campaign=3435
Pelosi won't do , like censure Barr for his blatantly LYING synopsis of Mueller report.
Reporter busts GOP’s Kevin McCarthy for saying he only met indicted Giuliani henchman Lev Parnas ‘one time’
McCarthy (R-CA) on Thursday tried to distance himself from Lev Parnas
https://www.rawstory.com/2020/01/rep..._campaign=3442
Hannity issued “strict orders” last night to senate repukes;
”do NOT give this hoax/sham impeachment ANY credibility, only ONE witness- Sondland- who “already cleared dear leader”
and that is it.
not shocking that repukes will obey the opinion talk show russian propaganda host
Dem lawmaker drops the hammer on McConnell for co-sponsoring
bill dropping all charges against Trump
Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) called out Senate Majority Leader
Mitch McConnell (R-KY) for co-sponsoring a bill that would dismiss all charges against the president.
she continued.
“I just saw that he also signed on as a co-sponsor of [Missouri Republican] Senator Josh Hawley’s resolution to dismiss this whole thing and
I find it stunning that that is
the person who is putting together the rules for the trial,
is making the decisions,
is essentially the chief juror and
also from the very beginning saying that he’s going to violate any oath of impartiality.”
“He’s the 13th co-sponsor,” the Democratic lawmaker broke in. “He is the 13th cosponsor of the dismissal motion.
https://www.rawstory.com/2020/01/dem..._campaign=3447
Last edited by boutons_deux; 01-11-2020 at 01:19 PM.
Collins Says She And Other GOPers Working On Impeachment Rules To Ensure Witnesses
she is coordinating with a “fairly small group” of Republicans, including senators and party leaders, on an agreement on impeachment trial rules that will allow witnesses to be called,
after spending her week on Capitol Hill expressing support for Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s proposal to start the trial without an agreement guaranteeing witnesses.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/susan-collins-impeachment-working-group-witness-rules
Collins?
actually- this is part of the planCollins Says She And Other GOPers Working On Impeachment Rules To Ensure Witnesses
she is coordinating with a “fairly small group” of Republicans, including senators and party leaders, on an agreement on impeachment trial rules that will allow witnesses to be called,
after spending her week on Capitol Hill expressing support for Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s proposal to start the trial without an agreement guaranteeing witnesses.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/susan-collins-impeachment-working-group-witness-rules
Collins?
after the repukes DISMISS the trial and complete their criminal cover up
Collins will go to the podium- shake her head side to side with every syllable she utters and say, “we could (shaking head) never convince a FOURTH juror to vote with us to allow witnesses and do ents to be presented”
mark my words
Hannity threarens to give out Senators' personal phone numbers if they allow witnesses in the trial.
Doxxing good now.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/hannit...ment-witnesses
Good move by Pelosi. There was no reason to delay this any longer.
Roberts won't do it, but
Supreme Court can legally step in if McConnell tries to push through an unfair impeachment trial
attorney James Robenalt laid out the legal basis for the Supreme Court to step in and review the impeachment trial of Donald Trump if there is evidence it was not conducted properly.
Robenalt explains there is precedent for the Supreme Court to intervene.
“If Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell follows through on his desire to hold an abbreviated impeachment trial without witnesses — as many in his party would prefer — he will be testing the limits of the impeachment trial clause of the Cons ution,”
there is a stronger case than many think that the Supreme Court has the power to review impeachment trials, to ensure that Senate procedures meet a basic level of fairness.”
“The only Supreme Court decision addressing the Senate impeachment trial clause is Nixon v. United States (1993) — which has nothing to do with Richard Nixon. When Walter L. Nixon,
a federal judge in Mississippi
was impeached in 1989 and removed from office, he sued the United States, the secretary of state and the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts,
arguing that the Senate had not conducted a proper ‘trial’ as required by the Cons ution.”
Byron White, Harry Blackmun and David Souter — argued that, while Nixon deserved to lose, it was possible that one day the Senate would conduct such an unfair impeachment trial that the courts would be obliged to hear a case if an aggrieved party sought a judicial remedy. That’s precisely the situation we may face today.”
As the court noted in Nixon, the Cons ution lays out several indispensable elements of an impeachment trial:
The Senate ‘shall be on Oath or Affirmation’;
if it’s the president who’s on trial, ‘the Chief Justice shall preside’; and
conviction requires a two-thirds majority of the members present.
Beyond this, the terms of how the Senate tries an impeachment are left to its discretion,”
McConnell’s public pronouncements that
he plans to obstruct justice and
absolve the president before he has even been handed the articles of impeachment
opens the door for judicial review.
“McConnell has said he does not intend to be impartial ... violate his oath to ‘do impartial justice according to the Cons ution and laws.’
“Collectively, such actions could be seen by reasonable judges as ‘seriously threatening the integrity of the results’ — the standard [Justice David} Souter suggested should trigger judicial review.
“Since the Cons ution grants the chief justice the privilege of presiding over the trial,
he ought to have — and in my view does have, under proper cons utional interpretation —
considerable power to steer the Senate toward reasonable standards
for weighing evidence and rendering judgments.
He cannot and should not be a potted plant.,”
https://www.rawstory.com/2020/01/the...e+Raw+Story%29
George Conway and Neal Katyal advise Pelosi on how to trip up McConnell’s impeachment plans
Pelosi should “split up” the articles of impeachment —
submitting the article of obstruction of Congress,
but holding onto the article of abuse of power for further investigation.
“Separating the two articles — our preferred approach — would make perfect sense,” they wrote.
“When it comes to the second article, all the evidence about Trump’s obstruction is a matter of public record.
There’s nothing more to add, so the second article is ripe for trial.
But as to the first, although there is plenty of evidence demonstrating Trump’s guilt,
his obstruction has prevented all of the evidence from coming to light.”
“Since the House voted to approve the articles of impeachment last month,
new revelations of Trump’s involvement have emerged,
including emails showing that aid was ordered withheld from Ukraine 91 minutes after Trump’s supposedly ‘perfect’ phone call with President Volodymyr Zelensky,” they wrote.
“Trump’s former national security adviser, John Bolton, has said he is willing to testify before the Senate if subpoenaed, and
Bolton’s lawyer has said he has new information,
“McConnell claims he is adhering to the rules in the impeachment of President Bill Clinton,” they said.
“But there’s one big difference:
Clinton didn’t gag all the witnesses and do ents in the House
and the predecessor investigation;
as a result, there was a full record before the Senate.
And there were, in fact, witnesses who were deposed as part of the Senate trial nonetheless.
This time, the reason this evidence wasn’t generated in the House has everything to do with the defendant in the impeachment case itself.
That is the case for sending up the second article now, to put the spotlight on Trump’s obstructionism.”
https://www.rawstory.com/2020/01/george-conway-and-neal-katyal-advise-pelosi-on-how-to-trip-up-mcconnells-impeachment-plans/
The only, but tiny hope, is that Roberts will force a true trial, rather than allow Moscow Mitch to violate the Cons ution, his oath, and insult the myth that America is a country of laws, proving that it isn't, and that Repug/oligarchy politics is out of reach of the law, with neoliberal/ less Dems in silent complicity.
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
