(Yes, he really said that! I'm just waiting to see what he does with them!)
~Easy
Posted on 01/30/2020 9:15:53 AM PST by Jim Robinson
if the house’s case is so strong why ask John Bolton?
ABC just admitted no law prevents naming of whistleblower
Does Schiff want to be judged on his “mixed motives” for investigating the president?
By the time this is over, Dersh.... might become a Republican.
mixed motives even selfish ones are OK since none of them are High Crimss...
I think you may be right. It’s time for him to find new friends. That are fair and SANE.
It would seem to me that if the House Democrats were so certain that the Trump legal theories were so wrong, they wouldn't have shied away from taking them to court. But, instead, they didn't even try to fight.
Actually it’s where he belongs.
Yes it is!!
Jordan on C-Span
(Yes, he really said that! I'm just waiting to see what he does with them!)
~Easy
What’s wrong with Dersh? Praying!!!
If I heard Mitch correctly this morning he pretty much said that the Senate would continue to recognize Robert’s authority over the proceedings.
Shutting down Rand was the motive for that statement, I am sure. ****
Mitch, like the dems, does not want the ‘whistleblower’ involved. It would hurt the dems too much and help Trump.
His name should be out there.
He should have been deposed (who knows maybe he was)
Just like the 18th witness, who’s testimony/transcript was not released.
All part of the sham scam.
Schiff wants to tie up the senate until the election in November so the dems can say that the Republican Senate didn’t do it’s job.
Schiff actually admitted that with his comment that he would tie the process up in knots and drag it outt for months,
That would essentially hamstring the Senate.
If they vote to have witnesses, that’s what will happen.
Hopefully they will vote yes or no on impeachment on Friday.
If Roberts/Mitch will allow it.
President Trump is, by nature, a deal maker.
The Democrats are trying to turn Trump's positive into a negative by claiming that Trump's "deals" are impeachable "quid pro quo" schemes for personal benefit in the election.
Trump's defense team is saying that all politicians, at heart, feel they are the most qualified and therefore electing them over their opponents is in the national interest. Trump's skill at deal-making is what makes him better than his opponents, his deal-making is in the national interest, and his success at deal-making in the national interest benefits his reelection.
The Democrats' argument is absurd if it is applied to the economy. Most people say that a President benefits from a good economy and that voters will reward the incumbent if the economy is good no matter how much or how little the President's policies contributed to improving the economy.
Is it Schiff's contention that policies to improve the economy, and by extension improve the President's chances of reelection, are now by definition impeachable offenses because the President had *some* personal reelection motives behind his policies?
-PJ
GREAT graphics - thank you!
Yes, I believe he is.
I’m not saying that something IS wrong with him, it’s just that a couple have commented they don’t see him at counsel’s table, and he hasn’t spoken yet today.
It really doesn’t hamstring the senate. The impeachment will be put on pause and usual business will go on. Happened in Clinton.
Just to be clear, that Meme is about THEIR criminal intent, NOT our President... ;-) ~Easy
Remember Al Gore’s “risky scheme” campaign meme in 2000?
I Kind of miss the Goron, he was a hilarious buffoon regularly being caught in silly lies.
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.