I heard on the radio that Nancy Pelosi has invited Trump to do the state of the union address. How very formal and cordial. I wonder if there’s any thought into letting the bastard stew in this long enough for him to lose his shit during the address.
Nothing like that good, old-fashioned racism…
Yeah, “perjury” is not right, looked wrong when I typed it. “Sworn Obligation” would better describe the change of narrative in the senate trial.
Haunt? Probably not, but suppose a future where the Dems control all three parts of the government. Suppose the people’s opinion swings significantly. Could there be a forced day of reckoning? My point is there may be a few to join Romney with their chilly feet.
Anyways, I don’t think this is a 2/3rds possibility, but I agree that 51 is a win here.
You guys really need to fix that mess you got down there.
You didn’t apologize. Where you from, really?
Like the oath of office, you mean?
Checkmate, mate.
Sorry about that, my bad.
SWIDT?
Things that additional witnesses can clarify:
Why was funding to Ukraine held? OMB, both political appointees and career service officials as well as Mulvaney can tell us exactly. Inquiry witnesses either didn’t know or assumed it was part of a quid pro quo. A definitive answer could clear this whole thing up.
When and why did the President become so concerned about Hunter and Joe Biden in Ukraine? What changed between 2017 and 2019 that made the President pursue this to such extreme lengths? I’m not sure who could answer this. Bolton, maybe? The Justice Department and Barr?The inquiry witnesses either didn’t know or assumed it was Biden’s candidacy. A definitive answer could clear this whole thing up.
When and why did the President become convinced that Ukraine meddled in our elections? What happened between 2017 and 2019? NSA, FBI, State Department, and other officials could give clear and concise testimony on whether this is true and where the information came from. The inquiry witnesses all agreed that Russia meddled in the 2016 election and that there is no evidence that Ukraine was involved. The whole server thing is an outright hoax and can be dismissed out of hand. A definitive answer could help clear this whole thing up.
What were the Three Amigos sent to achieve? Perry, Sondland, and Volker(?) could tell us what their orders were and how they were told to proceed. That could help clear this whole thing up.
What the heck was Rudy up to? Who was he working for? Who was he reporting to? Trump? The State Department? What was he trying to accomplish? Who did he talk to and why did he want Yovanovich removed? Let’s ask Rudy. That could help clear this whole thing up.
The House took what information they could collect from the few witnesses brave enough to defy the President’s blanket order not to assist in the inquiry. They came to conclusions based on that information. If those conclusions are contested, witnesses with different information should be brought forward. “Nuh uh, you’re wrong!” is not a defense. Show us where we are wrong. “He’s a liar” is not a defense. Show us the truth. “HEARSAY!” is not a defense if you’re completely unwilling to let the people more closely involved tell us what really happened. We’re stating conclusions based on available data. If you dispute the conclusions, you can’t also hide what may or may not be exculpatory data and assure us it exists.
The Democrats showed their work. Now the Republicans should show theirs.
Saw a comment to the effect that everybody who says he’s guilty have sworn to it already, and everybody who says he isn’t either won’t testify or aren’t allowed to. Must be an exception somewhere, but still largely true. Or should I say “hugely”?
No, I shouldn’t. That would be wrong.
Well, some people are saying that Trump got the conspiracy theory from Putin personally, potentially opening the case for a third article of impeachment.
One thing that’s been bugging me is his use of the term “perfect”.
Perfect phone call…
Perfect transcript…
What does that even mean? You could have a perfect transcript of two people planning a bank robbery and it’s perfection would in no way be an exonerating factor.
Is his use of “perfect” in this manner just more of his overall Trumpian weirdness? Is it something the spinmeisters have come up with for some reason?
Is it because saying “perfect” isn’t technically a lie, as opposed to using some other term such as “innocent”?
It’s not the same kind of oath; it’s similar to an oath of office.
I agree that Republicans are concerned about impeachment because anyone can say anything, and because there are all sorts of unexpected twists and turns that could emerge out of nowhere. They can pledge solidarity, but that doesn’t mean that individual senators will comply. And there’s always the risk that some new piece of information dump could trigger a public backlash that would completely change the dynamics of the situation.
What Republican strategists want – what they’ve always wanted in re impeachment – is to get Democrats to rush headfirst into an impeachment before they are prepared to deliver the goods. They knew almost from day one that Trump was at risk of impeachment - nothing that they could do to avoid that. And when the House changed hands, those odds went way up. Their best chance of surviving impeachment was to take advantage of the left wing rage machine (“We’re gonna impeach the mother f*cker”) and to bait them into an easy-acquit impeachment trial. That easy acquit impeachment became less easy when the subject moved away from Mueller’s investigation and into the Ukraine scandal, but there’s still been the chance that McConnell could sweep this under the rug once it gets into his hands.
That’s why Pelosi is holding off on sending it to the Senate. She knows what McConnell wants to do, and she’s not going to just play into his hands. Although the impeachment trial has yet to begin, the Senate Republicans have more to fear now because the hammer could drop at any moment, and worse, it could drop at a time that’s less advantageous to their political strategy (i.e. at a time when some new scandal comes out, or after an economic downturn, or after a foreign policy blunder, or all the above).
McConnell wants to bury this and move on to the 2020 campaign. Pelosi’s not letting that happen. And he’s growing both frustrated and concerned - for good reason.
It’s his usual PT Barnum-style carnival bombast. Nothing can be merely adequate or sufficient — it must be “the best — people say it’s the first time ever — “ yadda yadda.
He speaks and thinks like a 5 year old. Perfect is the best word he can come up with. 'Cause what is better than ‘perfect’?
Stupid is one of his defining traits, or characteristics. It’s just Trump being Trump.
One interpretation I’ve heard is that “perfect” is actually unintentionally revealing.
That he was involved, somehow, in deciding what to redact from the full transcript of the call. So to him, the call is “perfect” now; he decided exactly what could and should be released, it was his call.
I don’t normally engage in speculation about Trump, since the demonstrable facts already show him to be a disgusting person. But it does make sense, since it was a WTF moment when the White House eagerly released a partial transcript that turned out to be incredibly incriminating and really drove the need for further investigation. Trump is one of the few people stupid enough to have been involved with that.
It also would explain why he makes a point of telling people to read the transcript: he still doesn’t get what’s wrong with it and/or is in denial that his original judgement was incorrect.
This. Exactly, this. I have many Trump-supporting friends and I love to watch them try to dance around it.
I don’t think that’s the case. I’ve heard a lot of testimony from people that actually listened in on the call and, while they report what they feel are discrepancies, they were pretty minor, a few mumbled words about recordings.
Trump thinks the call was perfect in the same way that he looks down into the toilet and thinks his doody is perfect.
Remember the tapes Michael Cohen released during the Stormy Daniels scandal? The part I found interesting is that Cohen entered the room while Trump was on the phone with someone. Then, when Trump hung up, the first thing Cohen did was lavish praise on him for a great phone call. Because Trump. That’s how he is.
It is frightening that Trump still doesn’t comprehend that he did anything wrong. He thinks cheating is OK. This isn’t over yet.
Nobody has ever told him no where he worked. He’s always run his own business. That gave him a giant ego. the only nos he has heard is when people turned him down for projects.
Do you remember his very first cabinet meeting? They went around the table as each attendee heaped praise on Trump. And these were high-powered people. It was laughable and at the same time scary.
Bigly?
More perfect? As in: “to form a more perfect Union”. Although, I can almost guarantee Trump is unfamiliar with that phrase.
No, not quite that. He thinks it’s impossible for **him **to cheat. By definition. There **is **such a thing as cheating. And others do it all the time. But whatever he does, even if it’s exactly the same behavior as someone else, it’s never cheating. Got that? I didn’t think so.