Posted on 01/25/2020 7:08:16 AM PST by EyesOfTX
Today’s Campaign Update, Part II (Because The Campaign Never Ends) Don’t count on hearing from Hunter Biden or the fake whistleblower, folks. – Adam Schiff, in his closing arguments Friday night, pounded the final nail into the coffin on the question of whether any witnesses will ultimately be called in this national disgrace of a Senate trial against President Donald Trump.
In the midst of repeating himself for about the 256th time over the past three days, ol’ Bugeyes made the mistake of tossing in something new, referring to a completely false CBS News report, citing only a “Trump confidant” – which could mean the Mooch – alleging that GOP senators were warned “Vote against the president and your head will be on a pike.” Many witnesses present in the Senate chamber said that audible gasps could be heard throughout the room, including from some of Pencil Neck’s own House colleagues:
Igor Bobic ✔ @igorbobic Braun says Schiff’s closing was “very melodramatic” and there were audible gasps among his colleagues when he mentioned the “head on a pike” report
82 8:06 PM - Jan 24, 2020 Twitter Ads info and privacy 95 people are talking about this
More to the point, Schiff’s reference to an obvious piece of despicable fake news pissed off some of the key GOP RINOs he had supposedly been trying to influence to vote in favor of calling witnesses during this trial, including Lisa Murkowski…:
Scott Wong ✔ @scottwongDC Murkowski & other Rs not happy with Schiff citing CBS “head on a pike” story:
“Head on a pike ... that’s where he lost me. I think he did fine until he overreached” - @lisamurkowski
47 8:17 PM - Jan 24, 2020 Twitter Ads info and privacy 57 people are talking about this …and Susan Collins:
Manu Raju ✔ @mkraju “That’s not true,” Susan Collins said several times on the floor, shaking her head when Schiff cited a news report saying WH warned senators that a vote against Trump means “your head will be on a pike.” Risch also said aloud: “That’s not true.” Cotton laughed when Schiff said it
4,446 8:07 PM - Jan 24, 2020 Twitter Ads info and privacy 2,929 people are talking about this Now, Collins and Murkowski are perpetually malleable as they tirelessly do their best to remain “open-minded” to siding with Democrats on an array of issues, but Schiff just handed them an ironclad reason to hold firm with their own Party for once. Now, when they go home to face their constituents and are asked why they voted not to call witnesses, they can simply recite Pencil Neck’s outright lying and utter lack of good faith as their justification.
Of course, the reality is that the Democrats in the Senate have been bluffing about calling witnesses all along. Doing so would prolong this disgrace for many weeks, given that any subpoenas would inevitably be challenged in federal court, and nobody wants that, not even Chuck Schumer’s imaginary, chair-stealing friend.
The senators involved in the presidential primaries – The Commie, Lieawatha, Amy Klobuchar and some guy from Colorado named Bennett – most certainly don’t want to spend several months tied up in the Senate chamber in what they all know to be a sham impeachment trial. So there was never really going to be any “deal” on calling witnesses to begin with, something Schumer basically admitted in a rare moment of candor on Thursday.
For Schumer and his Democrat senate caucus, this sham trial has been far more about establishing narratives for the Fall general election campaigns against vulnerable GOP senators than it has been about actually winning any votes or calling any witnesses. That has been clear from the start.
Given all of this, here’s the timetable we should anticipate as this impeachment scam winds down:
Starting today, the Trump defense team will present a very detailed rebuttal case; That rebuttal case will not consume the defense’s entire 24 hours of floor time – expect Trump’s team to wrap up either Sunday evening or early afternoon on Monday, much to the relief of the exhausted senators; The defense will file a motion to dismiss immediately following its closing arguments; The Democrat House Managers will file an alternative motion to call additional witnesses; At least 52 GOP senators, and possibly all 53 of them, will vote to dismiss without calling any witnesses. Democrats Doug Jones of Alabama and/or Joe Manchin of West Virginia will likely join them; The entire disgusting and disgraceful process will be blessedly over by COB on Thursday.
And then the Democrats – with the full support of the nation’s corrupt news media – will move onto the next scam in their never-ending coup d’etat.
They will never stop, until the voters stop them.
That is all.
laplata, I forgot I’ve got you on my “No Fly Zone” list, so I shouldn’t have responded to you like you were a normal reasonable person.
Go away.
Good. Fly around me. Lol
Bye Creep.
Bye one who uses little child responses. You’ll grow up one day.
I complimented you and then disagreed with you and you act this way. I’m glad I’m in your no fly zone.
Actually four members of President Trump’s defense team in their 2 hour presentation showed that the Democrat impeachment team hid evidence. The Democrats also gave false testimony. Why would the Democrats do that ? Why did they hide evidence, why didn’t they release the testimony of the “whistleblower? Why did they hide the testimony of Mr. Atkinson? The Democrat impeachment team presented their case in 23 hours so lack of time is not a credible excuse.
I disagree. that validates the impeachment.
what ‘crime’ are they voting on? how do you acquit someone for not a crime?
Excuse me. YOU’RE the one that lashed out with “Use your brain” - an elementary school response if I’ve ever heard one.
I have an argument against your half-baked response but as I said, my past encounters with you have shown you to be a sniper, unreasonable and not a good-faith debater. I cannot and will not try to have a reasonable discussion with someone like you who is unreasonable and not accountable.
Go away.
I’m flying around.
The very best long term news about all this Democrat posturing & lying & Impeachment farce is that EVERY SINGLE MEMBER OF THE HOUSE WILL HAVE TO STAND FOR ELECTION AGAIN THIS NOVEMBER-—every
one SCHIFF NADLER PELOSI ALL OF THEM NO EXCEPTIONS.
Exactly - buzz off.
While it's true that President Trump retains all of his Constitutional rights, this isn't a real trial. The right to face accusers and call witnesses only constitutionally applies to 6th amendment criminal trials, which impeachment is not (Article III Section 2 also excludes impeachment from trial by jury).
The Constitution says that the Senate is the SOLE power to try impeachment, and that the Senate has the power to make its own rules.
-PJ
“By not dismissing this nonsense right away, the GOP has effectively legitimized this travesty”
Exactly. They could’ve submitted a detailed written response covering everything they discussed today. Then say, “Based on the facts in this document, the case is dismissed.”
Acquit means “not guilty”.
What’s wrong with that?
Not guilty of what? There is no crime in the articles.
And technically what they’ve accused him of is just doing his job. And he is doing his job, so is he ‘guilty’ of that?
I would much rather they declare them null and void so Trump can claim he was not impeached.
I do understand your rationale - that having a trial lends legitimacy to the impeachment, whereas dismissal allows him to say he wasn’t really impeached.
But you could make the opposite argument - that an early dismissal allows the prosecution to say “so he was guilty but his fellow Republicans let him off the hook on a technicality, just because they had the majority” - whereas a full trial would allow the people to hear the defense explain why the Democrats failed to make a case for impeachment.
I can see the merits of both strategies, but I favor the latter - I think they are doing the right thing going for an early dismissal.
I think that’s where you’re missing my point. I don’t think they should have a trial and acquittal, I don’t think it should be dismissed, both of those options legitimize what they sent over.
What I think they should do is declare it null and void since it does not actually contain any crimes, and so it does not meet constitutional requirements.
Effectively send it back and say “what is this crap”?
Oh, I thought declaring it null and void was the same as dismissal - so I guess I did misunderstand.
Yeah. I guess if enough Senators agree with you, that could work.
My thought that’s similar is that the states should amend the impeachment clause to require 2/3 n the House, just like it already is in the Senate.
That would prevent sham political impeachments like this from ever getting off the ground.
Thank you, it was nice to finally have a discussion and come to a conclusion without someone calling me an asshole. (Which I are not!)
Yes that was exactly my point.
There is:
Acquittal (saying he didn’t do it)
Dismissal (saying there is not enough to prove he did do it)
and (my preferred option)- declare it null and void - since all they are claiming he did was his job.
So, How would you say he didn’t do his job? Or how would you say there is not enough evidence that he was doing his job?
He clearly IS doing his job (that’s what they are trying to stop)
So... Declare them as deficient and toss them out as not a valid impeachment.
Pelosi wants to say “he’s forever impeached” but that would allow him to say “No I wasn’t, they were tossed out, because they were so stupid. See how stupid you are?”
History can argue it forever from that point, but he wont be “the 3rd president to be impeached” he will be “the first president to have them tossed out as ridiculous”
They are trying to convict him of DOING HIS JOB.
“So... Declare them as deficient and toss them out as not a valid impeachment.”
The Senate not only needs to judge that the articles are deficient and invalid.
The Senate Republicans also needs to condemn the Democrat leaders in the House, and judge them as reckless and incompetent, and tell them if they ever pull a stunt like this again they will be the ones being impeached.
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.