Posted on 01/09/2020 2:48:22 PM PST by Kaslin
RUSH: You remember during the campaign, Trump asked people…? Well, he didn’t ask. He told people that, if they vote for him, they’re gonna someday become tired of winning. That we were gonna be winning so much that we were gonna call him and say, “Mr. President, slow down. We can’t handle all this winning. You gotta lose a couple just to keep people honest.” Remember that?
I have a question for the Democrats. When are you people gonna get tired of losing? (laughing) Do you even realize that you are losing, and you are losing magnificently, and you are losing in ways that you don’t even see? (interruption) What do I mean? Well, look what happened to Trump’s improval numbers — approval numbers — during impeachment. By the way, we could call them “improval” numbers because that’s exactly what happened.
During the impeachment, Trump’s approval rating shot up six points on average. The impeachment hearings were so absurd. (laughing) Pelosi won’t even send the articles to the Senate, and senators — the Democrats — are demanding more witnesses because Pelosi didn’t make a case. But, at the end of all of this, I don’t care what you say about it, and I don’t care what you do process-wise. If she sends them over there, there’s going to be an acquittal.
I maintain to you that that is the last thing that she or any of the Democrats want. So she’s said today… She had her press conference. She flew back from San Francisco for a press conference. She’s wearing Baltimore Ravens purple today, by the way, because she’s from Baltimore. Her husband is from San Francisco. His name is Paul, Paul Pelosi. He’s wearing red today for the 49ers and she’s wearing purple for the Ravens. He said they’re gonna be having a big family reunion and all that.
At any rate, with an acquittal as the no-doubt result of this, what will she do? There’s a school of thought that says even though she says that she’s gonna send them over, that she won’t. Now, let’s go to… Let’s start audio sound bite number 1. This is from her press conference today. I’m screwing up the broadcast engineer. I told him we were gonna start with Trump, but I’ve changed my mind on the fly here. See, this is…
Folks, this is another reason why I don’t like TV. I couldn’t do what I just did if it was on TV. If I was on TV, I would have to start with what was on the sheet that everybody had. I would have to start there. I have just decided on the fly here to broom that and start with something else. Television, you can’t do it without going to a commercial break and causing people various stages of panic because you’re changing the order.
Here’s Pelosi on Capitol Hill this morning, her weekly press briefing talking about the articles of impeachment…
PELOSI: In terms of impeachment, you all keep asking me the same question; I keep giving you the same answer. As I said right from the start, we need to see the arena in which we are sending our managers. Is that too much to ask? You probably heard one way or another some of them have suggested they might want to “dismiss.” Dismiss equals cover-up. Dismiss equals admission.
RUSH: Well, then if that… Miss Pelosi, I realize I’m not as smart as you are, but if you have two options — you send ’em over there and you get an acquittal or the Senate dismisses and you get a chance to run around and say, “That’s an admission of guilt. These partisan Republicans don’t even want the trial. They’ve dismissed the charges. Trump’s guilty” — which of those two options is the better? Certainly not acquittal! She’s just made the case for advocating that the Senate dismiss the charges.
Her own language: “Dismiss equals cover-up. Dismiss equals admission.” She should be pushing for a dismissal because the alternative is an acquittal, and an acquittal does not help her. It does not help the Democrats in the 2020 presidential campaign. It doesn’t help any of those candidates. It doesn’t help the media. After all of this — after three years of Trump colluding with Russia and now colluding with Ukraine and having mean ideas about Hunter Biden — acquitted, not guilty?
Democrats don’t get tired of losing until they run out of somebody else’s money.
Don’t gloat, Rush, please don’t gloat.
Trump has done a lot of good. But let us not lose sight of how much still needs to be done — and the utter depravity of our political Left.
Wasn’t Bill Clinton was acquitted by the Democrat Senate after he was impeached for perjury. And Clinton was on tape caught committing perjury.
Exactly. Still a VERY LONG WAY TO GO until November.
And keep an eye on Senate RINOS like Mitt Romney and Lisa Murkowski.
And to a lesser extent Lindsay Graham and Mitch McConnell...Not always the most reliable.
Clintoon was charged with 11 counts. All actual crimes under law. Perjury and suborning perjury were among the charges. Suborning perjury for those unfamiliar means he was coercing others to lie for him.
Exactly. Until someone comes up with a cogent strategy on how we are going to produce conservative youth in the education system, we don’t have anything to gloat about because time is on the Rats’ side.
Nancy has a school girl crush on Trump. Sound odd? She didn’t want this to happen and she is still trying to figure a way out. She has eyes for DJT. The ladies reading this can recognize it quicker than us men types.
“Wasn’t Bill Clinton was acquitted by the Democrat Senate after he was impeached for perjury. And Clinton was on tape caught committing perjury.”
Yes, he was charged with perjury, it was proven beyond any reasonable doubt and everyone knew (including the democrats) that he was guilty as hell. They just refused to remove him from office because they spun it as a crime not warranting his removal.
A small but significant number of voters like to be on the winning team and simply vote for who they think is going to win. ‘illary had those voters last time but they got burned badly. Trump gains these voters this time. They may not like Trump’s personality but they don’t want to bet against a winner.
“Democrats don’t get tired of losing until they run out of somebody else’s money.”
Yes.
Nah, the democrats say they still have “more to prove.”
The Senate was Republican during the trial and I think there were 2 or 3 charges. The Senate was 55-45 republican, I think and I recall only one charge getting 50 or 51 votes to convict, which I think was the perjury charge.
Same way the leftists did it.
The problem is that you’re gonna have to be patient during the long march through the institutions.
@SpeakerPelosi “Dismiss equals cover-up. Dismiss equals admission. “
Sounds like a Salem witch trial - if they drown, they were innocent, if they survive, they’re guilty and need to be burned at the stake.
And you speak of the Constitution with that sick and twisted mind...
STROLL DOWN MEMORY LANE-—Bill Clinton gets impeached
David Schippers was asked by his friend, Congressman Henry Hyde, to be Chief Investigative Counsel for the US House Judiciary Committee. Schippers, a lifelong Democrat, accepted and took the job in April 1998. The Hyde Committee was holding an inquiry on whether Clinton had committed impeachable offences in his handling of the Paula Jones sexual harassment suit..... during which Clinton committed perjury regarding his affair with Monica Lewinsky. The committee in December 1998 voted to impeach Clinton........a decision supported by Schippers.
On December 10, 1998, Schippers said to the committee:
“The President, then,
<><> has lied under oath in a civil deposition,
<><> he lied under oath in a criminal grand jury.
<><> he lied to the people,
<><> he lied to his Cabinet,
<><> he lied to his top aides,
<><> he lied under oath to the Congress of the United States.
"There’s no one left to lie to.”
Upon the passage of H. Res. 611, Clinton was impeached on December 19, 1998, by the House of Representatives on grounds of perjury to a grand jury (by a 228–206 vote) and obstruction of justice (by a 221–212 vote).
The Senate voted not to remove the impeached president.
=================================
The Schumer Principle: Lying Under Oath Is Not Impeachable
Townhall.com ^ | December 18, 2019 | Terry Jeffrey / FR Posted by Kaslin Twenty-one years ago, then-Rep. Charles Schumer worked to establish the precedent that a president could lie under oath.;_=[; The question for Schumer was not whether the president was lying but what he was lying about. The ultimate question underlying then-President Bill Clinton's impeachment was this: Did Paula Jones, an Arkansas state employee, have a right to fair and honest proceedings when she brought a federal civil suit against the former governor of Arkansas who had gone on to become the president?
"She claimed the Governor made boorish and offensive sexual advances that she rejected, and that her superiors at work subsequently dealt with her in a hostile manner and punished her in a tangible way for rejecting those advances," Judge Susan Webber Wright would eventually write in a 1999 opinion in which she held Clinton in contempt.
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.