Posted on 01/22/2020 5:49:32 AM PST by EyesOfTX
Rumors abound that small groups of Democrat and Republican senators are contemplating a “deal” on senate trial witnesses that end up with Democrats getting their wish to have John Bolton testify in exchange for Republicans calling the scummy Hunter Biden in to soil the Senate chamber. This would be a terrible deal for the President.
Yes, there is no real doubt that Joe Biden and his son played a sleazy influence peddling game with the Ukraine while Biden was vice president. Yes, there should be legal consequences for both men, although we can be sure that our utterly corrupt Department of Justice will make sure no justice ever arrives for either of them. Yes, it was perfectly valid for President Trump to insist that the Ukrainian government do its duty to investigate the Biden corruption before releasing any U.S. aid to that country.
All of that and so much more is true and right and lovely. But it’s also a distraction from the heart of this impeachment scam, which was concocted out of whole cloth by Adam Schiff, Nancy Pelosi and their highly-paid team of Lawfare contract lawyers, working in concert with their fake “whistleblower,” Eric Ciaramella. Yes, I know we are all supposed to pretend that we don’t really know that Ciaramella is in fact the fake whistleblower, but we all know that he is, and I’m not really very good at pretending.
We know without any doubt at all that Ciaramella met with Schiff and his staff well before he filed his fake “whistleblower” claim targeting President Trump. We know there is a very high degree of likelihood that that claim was in fact written at least in part and perhaps entirely by Schiff’s lawyers. We know that Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson himself is an Obama loyalist holdover who illicitly changed the whistleblower rules in order to accommodate Ciaramella’s false claim against the President.
And we know without any doubt whatsoever that Ciaramella himself is an Intelligence Community plant who has been a part of the Deep State’s neverending coup d’etat against this President. This morning, Paul Sperry has a new report at RealClearInvestigations documenting that Ciaramella was already busy conspiring with other plants inside the White House barely two weeks after Mr. Trump took office in 2017.
Sperry identifies one of Ciaramella’s co-conspirators as Sean Misko, who left the White House last summer to join the staff of – wait for it – Adam Schiff! Oh, you don’t sayyyyy.
From the Sperry Report:
Sources told RealClearInvestigations the staffer with whom Ciaramella was speaking was Sean Misko. Both were Obama administration holdovers working in the Trump White House on foreign policy and national security issues. And both expressed anger over Trump’s new “America First” foreign policy, a sea change from President Obama’s approach to international affairs.
“Just days after he was sworn in they were already talking about trying to get rid of him,” said a White House colleague who overheard their conversation.
“They weren’t just bent on subverting his agenda,” the former official added. “They were plotting to actually have him removed from office.”
Misko left the White House last summer to join House impeachment manager Adam Schiff’s committee, where sources say he offered “guidance” to the whistleblower, who has been officially identified only as an intelligence officer in a complaint against Trump filed under whistleblower laws. Misko then helped run the impeachment inquiry based on that complaint as a top investigator for congressional Democrats.
If you want to make a deal for a witness exchange, Republicans, make it for Ciaramella, not Hunter Biden.
Oh, and you might want to make a 2-for-2 deal so that you can also force Mr. Atkinson to testify publicly about his own role in this clear conspiracy to take down a President. As Sperry points out, Atkinson already spent hours testifying in the basement of the Capital Building, but the equally sleazy Adam Schiff still refuses to release the transcript of that testimony:
The investigators say that details about how the whistleblower consulted with Schiff’s staff and perhaps misled Atkinson about those interactions are contained in the transcript of a closed-door briefing Atkinson gave to the House Intelligence Committee last October. However, Schiff has sealed the transcript from public view. It is the only impeachment witness transcript out of 18 that he has not released.
Schiff has classified the document “Secret,” preventing Republicans who attended the Atkinson briefing from quoting from it. Even impeachment investigators cannot view it outside a highly secured room, known as a “SCIF,” in the basement of the Capitol. Members must first get permission from Schiff, and they are forbidden from bringing phones into the SCIF or from taking notes from the document.
Atkinson’s transcript is the only one Schiff has refused to produce. Obviously, the Democrats are afraid to reveal its content to the American public.
If Republican Senators want to call the Democrats’ bluff on calling witnesses, they should be focused on the fake whistleblower and the guy who enabled him, not the sleazy, drug-addled son of a sleazy former vice president.
That is all.
IMHO, there should only be one vote on subpoenas to testify. The impeachment managers should submit their list and President Trump’s legal team should submit their list. Then there would be one up or down vote on the entire list.
There should not be separate votes in each individual to testify.
I agree with you...No witnesses, end this nonsense!
This trial is to judge the merits of the impeachment articles, as sent from the House, not discovery and ongoing investigations.
Yeah. Figures.
McConnell is bending over backwards for the un-Fabulous Four.
Who cares if Collins is going to have a hard time with re-election? Is he willing to sacrifice the President for Collins?
Makes sense to me. Let’s hope the defense team for the president are onto this...that people are on their toes!
“our utterly corrupt Department of Justice will make sure no justice ever arrives for either of them (the Bidens).”
Whether the Bidens are convicted of anything is secondary.
Their testimony would show that Trump had good reason to look into their affairs.
Hunter Biden and the Whistleblower will NOT testify, other than to claim 5th amendment privilege. I don’t know why people don’t understand this; the calling of witnesses is a bad idea for the Trump defense. They should hold the line on forcing the prosecution to move forward and make their “overwhelming” case.
1. There is no "whistleblower."
2. There is a group of perhaps dozens of people in various Federal agencies who have been working to undermine President Trump and could plausibly be identified as "THE whistleblower" in a legal proceeding.
3. There is ONE "whistleblower," but it is not Eric Ciaramella.
So putting some guy named Eric Ciaramella on the witness stand and questioning him as if he is the "whistleblower" is not only pointless, but it seriously damages the credibility of the defense.
The House lawfare strategy is taking the position that impeachment is really no different than a political campaign for office; only the venue and process are different. As such, there is no due process, there is no false testimony, there is no witness tampering, there is no "lying" under oath, there is no obstruction of "justice". Rather, just like in politics, one can lie, slander, libel, invent and utilize a whole gamut of dirty tricks in an attempt to win elected office.
Since the constitution is silent on whether impeachment is subject to these standard, everyday campaign techniques, and because it is not up to the judiciary to determine a proper standard, the determination falls entirely on the Senate. Which is where the contra argument is being presented: impeachment should be based on actual high crimes & misdemeanors, whatever that might actually constitute.
So, the Cliff notes version of this process is: (a) Senate accepts basis/terms of House impeachment articles and proceeds to conduct a "trial". This will forever grant legitimacy to impeachment as just another political campaign; or (b) Senate rejects basis/terms of House impeachment articles, refuses to hold a trial and/or immediately acquits the president. Doing this would thereby establish a threshold (criminal) standard for any future impeachment attempts by the House.
It really is this simple - all else is noise. Any further Senate participation in this farce merely sanctions impeachment as a political alternative.
1. Calling Hunter Biden as a defense witness may be a bad idea, but not for the reason you mention. Having him assert his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination is actually a major asset to the defense because it completely justifies President Trump's interest in an investigation.
2. Pursuing the whistleblower would be valuable to the defense simply to destroy the credibility of the House impeachment managers. This is especially true if there is documented evidence that: (1) the whistleblower's initial complaint contained verifiable lies (I believe it does), and/or (2) he and Schiff (or Schiff's staff) were involved in a conspiracy to fabricate the charges out of thin air.
This is not a simple criminal case where the defendant is innocent until proven guilty. This is a political trial where the defendant has to humiliate and destroy the prosecution team.
Rather, just like in politics, one can lie, slander, libel, invent and utilize a whole gamut of dirty tricks in an attempt to win elected office.
That's exactly my point. The defense team in this case has to hammer and destroy the MOTIVES of the prosecution, not just the FACTS of the case. And the optics of a bunch of House managers getting exposed as liars in an impeachment proceeding will have tremendous political value for Trump.
The Democrats know this. That's why they appointed a group of stunted misfits from safe Democratic districts to serve as the House managers in this case. That's also why the Trump team added a group of GOP House members to its defense team who had previously exposed these lies in public impeachment hearings last fall.
Small groups of senators making deals across the aisle are like chunks of poo in a salad.
The biggest mistake Trump and his lawyers have made is not playing Biden’s words.
They really don’t know how to play to the American people.. At all.
Trump’s lawyers didn’t even use their allotted time and the result was that it felt like Democrats were the only ones talking all day.
It was a terrible display by all and I expect better.
Don’t you mean...they haven’t played Biden’s words *yet*?
So, once again, if the novel House lawfare standard is allowed, then impeachment will forever be cemented as just another political process. The attack should not be on the obvious tactical elements & weaknesses of the managers, articles & process that you have identified and called out. Rather, it should address the very heart of the determination of whether this particular event should establish a precedent for future generations.
That's up the Senate: accept and seal the fate of the republic; reject the legitimacy and create a threshold standard. Most importantly it would establish requirements not only for (criminal) actions, but also common legal standards for due process, evidence, witnesses, etc that were entirely absent under the 'political' doctrine used by the House.
Whenever a dem senator wants to make a deal with a Republican, the rules of the deal are heads I win, tails you lose. And the Republican goes for it nearly every time. As Bugs Bunny says, What a maroon.
I’m not all that confident that they will since I thought it would be a great way to kick off the proceedings. It should have been played in commercials for the last 3 months. I pray they get around to it.
That's up the Senate: accept and seal the fate of the republic; reject the legitimacy and create a threshold standard.
Another Freeper posted a great idea last week: Instead of a fast trial, the Senate should let the thing drag on for months and bore Americans to death over it. At some point there will be a massive public outcry to put a merciful end to it, so people can get back to their regular daily TV schedules.
Rush just covered this story...12:25 ET
You are 100% correct, uncle joe would lie his ass off, BUT, he can't remember his name or where he is.
Can you imagine crazy uncle joe, under oath, trying to remember which lie he told 3 or 4 hours prior?
Excellent point.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.