Good stuff. I particularly found interesting the dissection of lefty, lying, lawyer-witness Feldman’s “Deceptive legal analysis” ... which appears to have sucked in some of Trump’s supporters to the effect that Nanzi maintains control of the impeachment process.
HERE IS A QUESTION THAT I DID NOT SEE ADDRESSED: I just watched the Mark Levin interview with Kenneth Starr wherein Judge Starr opined that President Trump might be able to sue Congress for all its harassment, claiming this has been an utterly unlawful, anti-Constitutional Bill of Attainder.
I don’t what penalties could theoretically be assessed for Congress issuing Bills of Attainder, but it certainly seems to be a blatant violation of Donald Trump’s rights as a citizen as specifically protected by Article I, Section 9.
Starr says this issue is clearly litigable.
I think that applies only to the subpoenas for his - and his family's - financial records. They serve no legislative function, only to harass DJT. . . . Does SCOTUS assess penalties - other than legal fees?
Starr aptly labels this latest as 'impeachment in search of a crime.' I do not agree with him very much about comity. Stick your hand out in friendship and this Dem crowd will chop it off!