20191219: Mitch Becomes a Statesman, with responses from Schumer, Pelosi, McCarthy

It was Mitch McConnell’s finest hour.

Pushed to make a stand by rabid behavior of Lawfare Dems and Nancy Pelosi, Mitch sheds his RINO NeverTrump skin, and takes to the podium in the well of the Senate. What followed was the speech of a Statesman.

Link to transcript: https://www.republicanleader.senate.gov/newsroom/remarks/mcconnell-remarks-on-house-democrats-impeachment-of-president-trump-

McConnell Remarks on House Democrats’ Impeachment of President Trump

‘This is by far the thinnest basis for any House-passed presidential impeachment in American history… The prosecutors are getting cold feet in front of the entire country and second-guessing whether they even want to go to trial… It will be an unprecedented constitutional crisis if the Senate agrees to set the bar this low forever.’

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) delivered the following remarks today on the Senate floor regarding House Democrats’ impeachment vote:

‘Last night House Democrats finally did what they decided to do long ago: They voted to impeach President Trump. 

‘Over the last 12 weeks, House Democrats have conducted the most rushed, least thorough, and most unfair impeachment inquiry in modern history.

‘Now their slapdash process has concluded in the first purely partisan presidential impeachment since the wake of the Civil War. The opposition to impeachment was bipartisan. Only one part of one faction wanted this outcome.

‘The House’s conduct risks deeply damaging the institutions of American government. This particular House of Representatives has let its partisan rage at this particular President create a toxic new precedent that will echo into the future.

‘That’s what I want to discuss now: The historic degree to which House Democrats have failed to do their duty — and what it will mean for the Senate to do ours.

‘Let’s start at the beginning. Let’s start with the fact that Washington Democrats made up their minds to impeach President Trump since before he was even inaugurated

‘Here’s a reporter in April 2016. Quote, “Donald Trump isn’t even the Republican nominee yet… [but] ‘Impeachment’ is already on the lips of pundits, newspaper editorials, constitutional scholars, and even a few members of Congress.” 

‘On Inauguration Day 2017, this headline in the Washington Post: “The campaign to impeach President Trump has begun.” That was day one.

‘In April 2017, three months into the presidency, a senior House Democrat said “I’m going to fight every day until he’s impeached.” That was three months in. 

‘In December 2017, two years ago, Congressman Jerry Nadler was openly campaigning to be ranking member on House Judiciary specifically because he was an expert on impeachment.

‘This week wasn’t even the first time House Democrats have introduced articles of impeachment. It was the seventh time.

‘They started less than six months after the president was sworn in.

‘They tried to impeach President Trump for being impolite to the press… For being mean to professional athletes… For changing President Obama’s policy on transgender people in the military.

‘All of these things were “high crimes and misdemeanors” according to Democrats.

‘This wasn’t just a few people. Scores of Democrats voted to move forward with impeachment on three of those prior occasions.

‘So let’s be clear. The House’s vote yesterday was not some neutral judgment that Democrats came to reluctantly. It was the pre-determined end of a partisan crusade that began before President Trump was even nominated, let alone sworn in.

‘For the very first time in modern history we have seen a political faction in Congress promise from the moment a presidential election ended that they would find some way to overturn it. 

‘A few months ago, Democrats’ three-year-long impeachment in search of articles found its way to the subject of Ukraine. And House Democrats embarked on the most rushed, least thorough, and most unfair impeachment inquiry in modern history.

‘Chairman Schiff’s inquiry was poisoned by partisanship from the outset. Its procedures and parameters were unfair in unprecedented ways.

‘Democrats tried to make Chairman Schiff into a de facto Special Prosecutor, notwithstanding the fact that he is a partisan member of Congress who’d already engaged in strange and biased behavior.

‘He scrapped precedent to cut the Republican minority out of the process. He denied President Trump the same sorts of procedural rights that Houses of both parties had provided to past presidents of both parties.

‘President Trump’s counsel could not participate in Chairman Schiff’s hearings, present evidence, or cross-examine witnesses.

‘The House Judiciary Committee’s crack at this was even more ahistorical. It was like the Speaker called up Chairman Nadler and ordered one impeachment, rush delivery please.

‘That Committee found no facts of its own and did nothing to verify the Schiff report. Their only witnesses were liberal law professors and congressional staffers.

‘There’s a reason the impeachment inquiry that led to President Nixon’s resignation required about 14 months of hearings. 14 months. In addition to a special prosecutor’s investigation.

‘With President Clinton, the independent counsel’s inquiry had been underway for years before the House Judiciary Committee dug in. Mountains of evidence. Mountains of testimony from firsthand fact witnesses. Serious legal battles to get what was necessary.

‘This time around, House Democrats skipped all of that and spent just 12 weeks. 

‘More than a year of hearings for Nixon… multiple years of investigation for Clinton… and they’ve impeached President Trump in 12 weeks.

‘So let’s talk about what the House actually produced in those 12 weeks.

‘House Democrats’ rushed and rigged inquiry yielded two articles of impeachment. They are fundamentally unlike any articles that any prior House of Representatives has ever passed.

‘The first article concerns the core events which House Democrats claim are impeachable — the timing of aid to Ukraine.

‘But it does not even purport to allege any actual crime. Instead, they deploy this vague phrase, “abuse of power,” to impugn the president’s actions in a general, indeterminate way.

‘Speaker Pelosi’s House just gave into a temptation that every other House in history had managed to resist: They impeached a president whom they do not even allege has committed an actual crime known to our laws. They impeached simply because they disagree with a presidential act and question the motive behind it.

‘Look at history. The Andrew Johnson impeachment revolved around a clear violation of a criminal statute, albeit an unconstitutional one. Nixon had obstruction of justice — a felony under our laws. Clinton had perjury — also a felony.

‘Now, the Constitution does not say the House can impeach only those presidents who violate a law.

‘But history matters. Precedent matters. And there were important reasons why every previous House of Representatives in American history restrained itself from crossing this Rubicon.

‘The framers of our Constitution very specifically discussed whether the House should be able to impeach presidents just for “maladministration”— in other words, because the House simply thought the president had bad judgment or was doing a bad job.

‘The written records of the founders’ debates show they specifically rejected this. They realized it would create total dysfunction to set the bar for impeachment that low.

‘James Madison himself explained that allowing impeachment on that basis would mean the President serves at the pleasure of the Congress instead of the pleasure of the American people.

‘It would make the President a creature of Congress, not the head of a separate and equal branch. So there were powerful reasons why Congress after Congress for 230 years required presidential impeachments to revolve around clear, recognizable crimes, even though that was not a strict limitation.

‘Powerful reasons why, for 230 years, no House opened the Pandora’s box of subjective, political impeachments.

‘That 230-year tradition died last night.

‘Now, House Democrats have tried to say they had to impeach President Trump on this historically thin and subjective basis because the White House challenged their requests for more witnesses.

‘And that brings us to the second article of impeachment.

‘The House titled this one “obstruction of Congress.” What it really does is impeach the president for asserting presidential privilege.

‘The concept of executive privilege is another two-century-old constitutional tradition. Presidents starting with George Washington have invoked it. Federal courts have repeatedly affirmed it as a legitimate constitutional power.

‘House Democrats requested extraordinary amounts of sensitive information from President Trump’s White House — exactly the kinds of things over which presidents of both parties have asserted privilege in the past. 

‘Predictably, and appropriately, President Trump did not simply roll over. He defended the constitutional authority of his office.

‘It is not a constitutional crisis for a House to want more information than a president wants to give up. It is a routine occurrence. The separation of powers is messy by design.

‘Here’s what should happen next: Either the President and Congress negotiate a settlement, or the third branch of government, the judiciary, addresses the dispute between the other two.

‘The Nixon impeachment featured disagreements over presidential privilege — so they went to the courts. The Clinton impeachment featured disagreements over presidential privilege — so they went to the courts.

‘This takes time. It’s inconvenient. That’s actually the point. Due process is not meant to maximize the convenience of the prosecutor. It is meant to protect the accused.

‘But this time was different. Remember: 14 months of hearings for Richard Nixon… years of investigation for Bill Clinton… but 12 weeks for President Trump.

‘Democrats didn’t have to rush this. But they chose to stick to their political timetable at the expense of pursuing more evidence through proper legal channels.

‘Nobody made Chairman Schiff do this. He chose to.

‘The Tuesday before last, on live television, Adam Schiff explained to the entire country that if House Democrats had let the justice system follow its normal course, they might not have gotten to impeach the president in time for the election!

‘In Nixon, the courts were allowed to do their work. In Clinton, the courts were allowed to do their work. Only these House Democrats decided due process is too much work and they’d rather impeach with no proof.

And, they tried to cover for their own partisan impatience by pretending that the routine occurrence of a president exerting constitutional privilege is itself a second impeachable offense.

The following is something that Adam Schiff literally said in early October. Here’s what he said:

Any action… that forces us to litigate, or have to consider litigation, will be considered further evidence of obstruction of justice.”

‘Here is what the Chairman effectively said, and what one of his committee members restated just this week: If the President asserts his constitutional rights, it’s that much more evidence he is guilty.

‘That kind of bullying is antithetical to American justice.

‘So those are House Democrats’ two articles of impeachment. That’s all their rushed and rigged inquiry could generate:

‘An act that the House does not even allege is criminal; and a nonsensical claim that exercising a legitimate presidential power is somehow an impeachable offense.

‘This is by far the thinnest basis for any House-passed presidential impeachment in American history. The thinnest and the weakest — and nothing else comes even close.

‘And candidly, I don’t think I am the only person around here who realizes this. Even before the House voted yesterday, Democrats had already started to signal uneasiness with its end product. 

‘Before the articles even passed, the Senate Democratic Leader went on television to demand that this body re-do House Democrats’ homework for them. That the Senate should supplement Chairman Schiff’s sloppy work so it is more persuasive than Chairman Schiff himself bothered to make it.

‘Of course, every such demand simply confirms that House Democrats have rushed forward with a case that is much too weak.

‘Back in June, Speaker Pelosi promised the House would, quote, “build an ironclad case.” Never mind that she was basically promising impeachment months before the Ukraine events, but that’s a separate matter.

‘She promised “an ironclad case.”

‘And in March, Speaker Pelosi said this: “Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country.” End quote.

‘By the Speaker’s own standards, she has failed the country. This case is not compelling, not overwhelming, and as a result, not bipartisan. This failure was made clear to everyone earlier this week, when Senator Schumer began searching for ways the Senate could step out of our proper role and try to fix House Democrats’ failures for them.

‘And it was made even more clear last night, when Speaker Pelosi suggested that House Democrats may be too afraid to even transmit their work product to the Senate. 

‘The prosecutors are getting cold feet in front of the entire country and second-guessing whether they even want to go to trial.

‘They said impeachment was so urgent that it could not even wait for due process but now they’re content to sit on their hands. It is comical.

‘Democrats’ own actions concede that their allegations are unproven.

‘But the articles aren’t just unproven. They’re also constitutionally incoherent. Frankly, if either of these articles is blessed by the Senate, we could easily see the impeachment of every future president of either party.

‘Let me say that again: If the Senate blesses this historically low bar, we will invite the impeachment of every future president.

‘The House Democrats’ allegations, as presented, are incompatible with our constitutional order. They are unlike anything that has ever been seen in 230 years of this Republic.

‘House Democrats want to create new rules for this president because they feel uniquely enraged. But long after the partisan fever of this moment has broken, the institutional damage will remain.

‘I’ve described the threat to the presidency. But this also imperils the Senate itself. 

‘The House has created an unfair, unfinished product that looks nothing like any impeachment inquiry in American history. And if the Speaker ever gets her house in order, that mess will be dumped on the Senate’s lap.

‘If the Senate blesses this slapdash impeachment… if we say that from now on, this is enough… then we will invite an endless parade of impeachment trials.

‘Future Houses of either party will feel free to toss up a “jump ball” every time they feel angry. Free to swamp the Senate with trial after trial, no matter how baseless the charges. 

‘We would be giving future Houses of either party unbelievable new power to paralyze the Senate at their whim.

‘More thin arguments. More incomplete evidence. More partisan impeachments.

In fact, this same House of Representatives has already indicated that they themselves may not be done impeaching!

‘The House Judiciary Committee told a federal court this week that it will continue its impeachment investigation even after voting on these articles. And multiple Democratic members have already called publicly for more.

‘If the Senate blesses this, if the nation accepts it, presidential impeachments may cease being once-in-a-generation events and become a constant part of the political background noise. 

‘This extraordinary tool of last resort may become just another part of the arms race of polarization.

‘Real statesmen would have recognized, no matter their view of this president, that trying to remove him on this thin and partisan basis could unsettle the foundations of our Republic.

‘Real statesmen would have recognized, no matter how much partisan animosity might be coursing through their veins, that cheapening the impeachment process was not the answer.

‘Historians will regard this as a great irony of this era: That so many who professed such concern for our norms and traditions themselves proved willing to trample our constitutional order to get their way.

‘It is long past time for Washington D.C. to get a little perspective.

‘President Trump is not the first president with a populist streak…Not the first to make entrenched elites uncomfortable. He’s certainly not the first president to speak bluntly… to mistrust the administrative state… or to rankle unelected bureaucrats.

‘And Heaven knows he is not our first president to assert the constitutional privileges of his office rather than roll over when Congress demands unlimited sensitive information.

‘None of these things is unprecedented.

‘I’ll tell you what would be unprecedented. It will be an unprecedented constitutional crisis if the Senate hands the House of Representatives a new, partisan “vote of no confidence” that the founders intentionally withheld, destroying the independence of the presidency.

‘It will be unprecedented if we agree that any future House that dislikes any future president can rush through an unfair inquiry, skip the legal system, and paralyze the Senate with a trial. The House could do that at will under this precedent.

‘It will be unprecedented if the Senate says secondhand and thirdhand testimony from unelected civil servants is enough to overturn the people’s vote.

‘It will be an unprecedented constitutional crisis if the Senate agrees to set the bar this low — forever.

‘It is clear what this moment requires. It requires the Senate to fulfill our founding purpose.

‘The framers built the Senate to provide stability. To take the long view for our Republic. To safeguard institutions from the momentary hysteria that sometimes consumes our politics. To keep partisan passions from boiling over.

‘The Senate exists for moments like this.

‘That’s why this body has the ultimate say in impeachments.

‘The framers knew the House would be too vulnerable to transient passions and violent factionalism. They needed a body that could consider legal questions about what has been proven and political questions about what the common good of our nation requires.

‘Hamilton said explicitly in Federalist 65 that impeachment involves not just legal questions, but inherently political judgments about what outcome best serves the nation.

‘The House can’t do both. The courts can’t do both.

‘This is as grave an assignment as the Constitution gives to any branch of government, and the framers knew only the Senate could handle it. Well, the moment the framers feared has arrived.

‘A political faction in the lower chamber have succumbed to partisan rage. They have fulfilled Hamilton’s prophesy that impeachment will, quote, “connect itself with the pre-existing factions… enlist all their animosities… [and] there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.” End quote.

‘That is what happened in the House last night. The vote did not reflect what had been proven. It only reflects how they feel about the President.

‘The Senate must put this right. We must rise to the occasion.

‘There is only one outcome that is suited to the paucity of evidence, the failed inquiry, the slapdash case.

‘Only one outcome suited to the fact that the accusations themselves are constitutionally incoherent.

‘Only one outcome that will preserve core precedents rather than smash them into bits in a fit of partisan rage because one party still cannot accept the American people’s choice in 2016.

‘It could not be clearer which outcome would serve the stabilizing, institution-preserving, fever-breaking role for which the United States Senate was created… and which outcome would betray it.

‘The Senate’s duty is clear. The Senate’s duty is clear.

‘When the time comes, we must fulfill it.’

““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““`

Senator Schumer responded:

Speaker Pelosi responded:

McCarthy responded:

102 thoughts on “20191219: Mitch Becomes a Statesman, with responses from Schumer, Pelosi, McCarthy

  1. Just came across this from a friend. Sounds like Nancy has NO control of how the Senate handles the impeachment.
    Pollak: Senate Can Acquit Even If House Withholds Articles of Impeachment

    “If Pelosi refuses to submit the articles of impeachment to the Senate, McConnell can convene the Senate anyway, summon the Chief Justice, and swear in the Senators as jurors. Democrats can boycott, but they can’t stop the trial.

    McConnell can then propose to dismiss the charges or even hold a vote to acquit the president.

    Pelosi can hide the articles of impeachment in Adam Schiff’s basement forever, and it won’t make a bit of difference.”
    http://bit.ly/2M7kciw

    Liked by 20 people

    1. I think it was you I told the other day to NOT worry about McConnell, that he WOULD rise to this occasion is THIS is HIS legacy too. Whelp, there you have it, and that was just the OPENING salvo. Wait till he gets ROLLING. People underestimate McConnell, to their OWN peril. This is such a case for Pelosi, Schiff, and Schumer. He will RIGHTLY slap this down, put an end to it, and then CONTINUE approving judges. LOTS of judges, including a SCOTUS or two more SOONER rather than later.

      When McConnell ENDS this, Durham will START HIS part.

      Liked by 20 people

  2. This part has Sundance’s name on it!!!

    ‘President Trump is not the first president with a populist streak…Not the first to make entrenched elites uncomfortable. He’s certainly not the first president to speak bluntly… to mistrust the administrative state… or to rankle unelected bureaucrats.

    Liked by 13 people

      1. Both, actually. “Administrative state” is a “new Sundance” term, but McConnell is arguing positions that are classic Sundance – yet NOT something that either Sundance would likely believe were HONEST.

        Without looking on the site, my guess is that SD think’s McConnell’s stance is purely self-serving. But the truth is, the values McConnell is expressing are pure McConnell. If he’s lying to stop a trial, he’s doing it using every bit of McConnell TRUTH he can muster, and nothing else. Occam’s razor tells me this is McConnell’s honest position.

        I agree with McConnell that holding a trial on this crappy stuff is a terrible precedent. I know that POTUS would like to get his licks in, but McConnell is right – the Constitution ITSELF has to be protected above any of the three branches. This is an incredibly strong argument. It’s worthy of the history books!

        Liked by 5 people

        1. I see what you mean now,I was a lil confused because I no longer go to that site.
          My thing about a good site is the people who comment that to me shows the success of a site.
          This place has the best of it all, from top to bottom this is the place to be.
          Marica is my other go to site.
          That other dude he is a thing of the past and he will need a helping hand when this all comes out.
          We Are The News and Q is real WWG1WGAWORLDWIDE

          Liked by 2 people

  3. thanks Daughn for the transcript of Mitch’s speech–it was indeed a good one!
    I confess I did not watch the other two–I’ve had enough of their crap for the last 3 years…

    The 6th Amendment guarantees a swift trial…the right to face your accuser and so on…holding the articles of impeachment for a prolonged period of time continues to deny the President his rights…

    appalling that these assholes in the House are OUR EMPLOYEES. fire them all

    Liked by 19 people

    1. I wasn’t interested in listening to anymore DemonRat poison either. I have had my fill.

      Mitch, however was well worth listening to this morning. Thanks for putting up the transcript. I have pointed Hubby to it.

      Liked by 15 people

    2. Listening to Nanzi, Cry’n Chuck, Schitty or Nadsless, I invariably must turn it off, OR throw my laptop.

      Simply insulting the ignorance those assholes, Nanzi, Cry’n Chuck, Schitty or Nadsless spew. Largely without challenge.

      Liked by 8 people

      1. I watched the short clip in a q post showing Nanzi struggling for words or even a coherent string of words together and was appalled. these articles posting her quotes, should really include all the pauses, the memory farts, and the stupified looks on her face. by merely providing the words she eventually spits out, the effect is she has her shit together…but honestly she couldn’t find her ass with 2 hands and a map.

        Liked by 10 people

        1. About 45 years ago, just in the beginning of casinos in Atlantic City, there were summer “tent” shows with surprising very good, current entertainers. I will never forget a show that featured several “old timers”….long past their prime but still somewhat beloved by the general public. Each came out and did their little segment in a variety-type show.
          Then came Georgie Jessel (sp?)….very painfully sad to watch as 2 men, one in each side holding firmly onto his arms, literally carried the poor man to the front of the stage….wound him up like a toy and he spilled out this long-memorized series of jokes without pause……and then when he wound down, they carried him off stage. He had no clue where he was or had an awareness of the audience.
          Honestly, Pelosi often reminds me of poor Georgie….at this stage literally a performing puppet.

          Liked by 4 people

    3. Echoing thanks for the transcript….out and about all day and couldn’t find it..but returning home tonight it was a great ending to a busy, fun day for me.
      Proud of Mitch and he deserves our credit and thanks!

      Liked by 4 people

  4. When Senate leader McConnell took to the pit of the Senate floor he not only laid waste to the Democrats dream and crushed their hopes he revealed the HEART OF A PATRIOT!

    Liked by 16 people

  5. When blessed with a leader who fights for the right things, even some who strayed are compelled to stand with the persecuted.

    Senator McConnell has undoubtedly taken financial advantage of his Elite position, and often hurt us with GOPe anti-USA crap. Whether it’s a realization that he can ‘right’ his legacy in his twilight years; whether he has had a genuine change if heart; or whether he’s covering his own ass matters not.

    His accomplishments with judicial appointments, and his determination not to let this politically-motivated Shampeachment succeed, are worthy of our support and gratitude.

    Thank you, Daughn, for highlighting this speech. 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 #WWG1WGA

    Liked by 19 people

    1. I totally agree, Alison- and I am saying this as a long-time frustrated constituent of his who wrote him off as a Rino. I was amazed and awed. The President has an incredible gift for making people go from despising someone to cheering them on, and from being solidly in someone’s corner to despising him/her. (Bush) God has truly blessed us and our President!

      Liked by 12 people

      1. Hi Shadow *waving* Great to see you here. 💖💖💖💖🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸

        Optimism and belief in one’s potential are two GENUINE attributes I’ve seen POTUS display repeatedly, regardless of whom he is speaking to, or about. He gives every single individual the opportunity to make a GOOD choice.

        Liked by 6 people

    2. Sorry I’m posting so much…but I agree Allison and just remind that most people in positions of power/authority ( not just politicians!) have for decades, if not centuries, have taken advantage of their elite positions…primarily for financial gain. It’s human nature.

      Liked by 5 people

  6. From the Daily Wire…article by Ryan Saavedra

    FTA

    Wood, who is representing Covington Catholic High School student Nick Sandmann in his multi-million dollar lawsuits against numerous media companies, laid out his plan on Twitter in a nine tweets, which appear below in enumerated order:

    If House fails to timely deliver impeachment articles to Senate, @realDonaldTrump must immediately seek writ of mandamus from U.S. Supreme Court, ordering articles to be delivered. Constitutional process of impeachment mandates due process to the impeached, the President.

    Not only does Constitution mandate due process be afforded to the accused, @realDonaldTrump, the dispute between Executive & Legislative branches of our gov’t must be resolved with certainty by Judicial branch.

    Supreme Court must act. Such action will not be for or against @realDonaldTrump , it will only be FOR the document that is sole basis for our existence as a country, US Constitution. The chaos created by this dispute between 2 branches of gov’t threatens foundation of country.

    Dispute over impeachment of @realDonaldTrump between 2 branches is legally ripe for Judicial branch resolution as it threatens harm to US Constitution that is irreparable if allowed to occur. The voice of the Supreme Law of our country must be heard & obeyed.

    It is Constitutional DUTY of US Supreme Court to immediately intervene in dispute between Legislative & Executive branches over impeachment process arising from articles passed today by House to impeach @realDonaldTrump . Articles issued must now be tried & resolved by Senate.

    US Constitution requires Executive Branch (President) to execute law, Legislative Branch (Congress) to pass law, & Judicial Branch (US Supreme Court) to interpret law. If US Supreme Court refuses to act, NO Constitutional Branch of our Country can perform its required duties.

    To be clear, I presently support re-election of @realDonaldTrump , but my statements in 1- 6 are not made out of bias or partisanship. They are based solely on the truth of the law of our land the US Constitution, not on party affiliation or political support.

    The issue is NOT how US Supreme could or should rule on dispute. The issue is that US Supreme Court has a Constitutional duty to rule. Our Constitution demands a resolution by US Supreme Court. Our country is founded & based on rule of law. Our supreme law is US Constitution.

    IF House does not deliver articles for trial in Senate & IF US Supreme Court does not act at this time, @USSenate must force issue over articles of impeachment of @realDonaldTrump by taking action on its own authority. The issue must be forced to a resolution without delay.

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/famed-attorney-advises-trump-how-to-outmaneuver-pelosis-potential-next-move-on-impeachment?fbclid=IwAR075cXLoYwsl0_Y1w2STl–qUGV2Fa417Nx2myKnkOLMf8gWe7EltRxZkg

    Liked by 15 people

        1. I’m already tired of waiting and feeling as if the country is in limbo, so I can’t imagine what it’s like for Pres. Trump and his family. He has a right to a speedy trial — that is, if the articles of impeachment are even Constitutional. Pelosi and the Dems can’t be allowed to hold us all hostage while trying to coerce the Senate to do her bidding. These questions need to be resolved, ASAP.

          Liked by 4 people

      1. Same here. I am convinced that MicroSloth is paying the Daily Wire coders to write the code that will force everybody to upgrade to WinBlows 10. Would not be surprised to find out they are getting kickbacks from MS.

        Liked by 3 people

    1. Pat, Great information! Needed that. Had read possibility of going to SC, but this laid out a simple case of what I would call, required steps by House. NOT optional steps.

      Rule of The Constitution MUST prevail.

      Liked by 5 people

  7. I am impressed by Mitch McConnell’s speech. It was direct, easy to follow, full of information and there is nothing false in it. The Leader said, “‘The House has created an unfair, unfinished product that looks nothing like any impeachment inquiry in American history.”

    “The House has brought forth an Impeachment action that more resembles on face and in spirit a Bill of Attainder than it resembles Articles of Impeachment.” I wish Mitch McConnell had said this to close his speech.

    “Senate opinion of this House travesty is we declare this House Resolution is rejected now and always. There will be no Senate voting to imply credence on such unconstitutional and anti-American legislation. The Senate will not soil itself with this unacceptable attack on our Constitutional system of separation of powers.

    “The House may request a Supreme Court opinion on the merit of these Articles, but the Senate will not ask for Court input in this case. The Constitution is plainly written and it forbids Congress from doing this. The House of Representatives must do better than this.

    Therefore the Senate will not act with the House in this matter of impeachment of the President. We act to save whatever honor may be left in the Congress of The United States. We humbly ask for forgiveness by our fellow American citizens, and for their good will toward all while we repair the damage made to the country we love.

    Liked by 14 people

    1. Wictor on Graham’s statement:

      “Now Graham.

      So I was right.

      Trump, McConnell, and Graham set a trap. The Democrats fell in.

      The courts can’t force Pelosi to act, so the only way to prevent future extortion is for Trump to take the stand and utterly destroy the entire Democratic party.

      Both McConnell and Graham are explaining WHY Trump will do this.

      It’s because there’s no mechanism to prevent the House from from crippling the Senate with endless trials.”

      Liked by 7 people

      1. Yes!! Lindsey is right about the extortion.

        The courts can’t firce Pelosi to act, but they CAN rule the Senate is not bound by what the House does subsequent to their vote AND that President has the right to a speedy trial or dismissal from the Senate.

        The House cannot OBSTRUCT the process.

        Liked by 13 people

  8. I get a lot of pushback about my support for Cocaine Mitch. There is something about the Turtle that I admire. He knows that his legacy will always be tied to PDJT. He will be remembered for generations to come because he is linked to our President.

    He also knows that our President has been loyal to him and his wife. Elaine has not been able to get much accomplished. No fault to her because the infrastructure bill hasn’t been passed. Our President also knows what Mitch has done throughout the years. He has forgiven Mitch and to me, that is all that matters to the Turtle!

    Liked by 16 people

    1. Mitch is a pragmatist. His disability has hammered that home. All he could do was watch, document and wait for the right leader. He’s found it. He also held the sc seat from merrick garland. He was hodor before game of thrones. Without that seat and with gorsuch and Kavanaugh in place America is saved. That and the judicial appointments he’s rammed through.
      Grats tyrtle. You are a warrior

      Liked by 11 people

    2. There is something in Cocaine Mitch’s declaration that might suggest that they will not be looking to Supremes for clarification. This would (once again) be putting both Legislative and Executive in Judiciary’s back seat.
      He doesn’t look like that’s his inclination. Nor should it be. Thoughts on this?

      Liked by 5 people

      1. Pointing out that Mitch did not have anything personally involved with the shipping of cocaine found in his wife’s family business holding. Most likely he had no clue if it…why should he?
        Therefore, why would someone kept calling him Cocaine Mitch? Guilty until proven innocent? Isn’t this what outrages us about what’s happening to POTUS?

        Liked by 5 people

    3. fleporeblog
      He also knows that our President has been loyal to him and his wife. Elaine has not been able to get much accomplished. No fault to her because the infrastructure bill hasn’t been passed. Our President also knows what Mitch has done throughout the years. He has forgiven Mitch and to me, that is all that matters to the Turtle!
      _________________________________________
      I always admired POTUS that he is able to move on and forgive. So many people live in the past and mis today and possibilities.
      Yes POTUS sees the change in Turtle and both benefit but most of all they are benefitting the Country.

      Liked by 8 people

    1. Noah Feldman, the author of the Bloomberg article, was one of the anti-trump legal ‘experts’ who testified for the impeachment on PDJT on December 5th…

      “Gaetz then pointed out that witness Noah Feldman, professor at Harvard Law School, had written articles entitled: “Trump’s Wiretap Tweets Raise Risk of Impeachment” and “Mar-a-Lago Ad Belongs in Impeachment File.” Gaetz also noted that Feldman was the subject of an article that said, “A Harvard law professor thinks Trump could be impeached over fake news accusations.”

      Gaetz also got Feldman to admit that he once wrote an article entitled, “It’s Hard to Take Impeachment Seriously Now.” – Breitbart

      Feldman is also in collaboration with Facebook

      Liked by 6 people

  9. My opinion:
    **Nancy Pelosi will hold back on delivering the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate for as long as possible:
    She ( DOZENS of other House members, plus some Senators too) are terrified to their bones that THEIR OWN corrupt behavior will be dragged into the open (like Pelosi’s own involvement in Ukraine).
    **She also will hold the Articles back to see how much damage she (and her controllers) can inflict and/or lay the groundwork for, against POTUS for 2020, ALONG WITH similar damage to ANY other Republican running for office. This includes working with TOM PEREZ and the DNC to fill ALL the upcoming vacancies created by Republicans leaving the House and Senate with DemocratCommunists.
    **Nancy Pelosi is NOT ignorant of the Constitution. She knows what she’s doing. She ALSO knows that once the Senate begins the trial, the Articles will be proven to be worthless. THIS is why she’s working behind the scenes with SCHUMER in this “negotiate for witnesses” / “we Senate Democrats demand witnesses to testify” crap — they want to turn the Senate trial into something controlled by DEMOCRATCOMMUNISTS.
    **NEVER FORGET that Chief Justice Roberts is COMPROMISED — first, by his disastrous “switch” vote to enable Obamacare — and second, by the whispered controversy regarding how he adopted his children. I say: “somebody” has the goods on Roberts and therefore, Roberts CAN BE SWAYED.

    Liked by 5 people

    1. “…I say: “somebody” has the goods on Roberts…”

      Silly Wild Ass Guess….

      1. Remember the witness against Epstein said he wanted her to have a baby and to sign over all rights to the child.

      2. Epstein was active in the UK.

      3. Roberts children were adopted in Latin America.

      4. Arizona adoption scandal

      Then there is this: 15,000 illegal adoptions in Ireland, mothers told babies had died… “Over 100 institutions and individuals may have been involved in the illegal adoption scandal in Ireland”
      >>>>>>>>>

      WHO arranged and paid for those bio-moms to go to Latin America stay for a few months and have those children so Roberts could adopt them???

      Liked by 3 people

      1. If that adoption is all they have on him, sorry, but that’s small potatoes in comparison to sex trafficking. I can’t get worked up about it even if they skirted the law for perfect, white children. There are those who have a problem with that, too.

        Like

  10. Wtf?
    Majority Whip Clyburn just said “let’s give the President a trial, then hang him”

    A leading Democrat lawmaker just called for the public execution of our President

    And the media says Trump is dividing America?

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Pelosi: “frozen”.

      ^^^ Botox on a continuous basis does that. ^^^ Biotch looks simply horrid, AS her ability to speak simple sentences has vanished.

      Liked by 4 people

  11. I don’t see how Pelosi can continue much longer in this process. She is aging by the day, and her speech/mouth issues are becoming more prevalent. Her health is bound to be suffering.

    She’s also much testier than I’ve seen her in the past. She’s got a huge weight on her shoulders, with pressure from all sides. There are few things more momentous than the impeachment of a president. Every step the Dems take, that they hope will take down Pres. Trump, only leads to more problems for them.

    The contrast between his demeanor at the ralliy last night and hers is remarkable — and he’s the so-called accused! It’s a portrait of the innocent vs. the guilty.

    Liked by 3 people

  12. I’m kind of thinking that maybe there may be a bunch of sealed sedition warrants sitting around that can get unsealed the second this impeachment farce is handed over to the Senate.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s