20200129: ShaMMMpeachment Wednesday ~ Question Day

Please consider this our Impeachment thread for the day. Today is Question Day. Questions are submitted to the Chief Justice and he asks the Managers. No grandstanding by Senators.

What would be your questions?

We have rampant rumors about the Senate GOP not having the votes to shut the proceedings down. Waffling Senators. We have no idea.

Senator Lankford and Senator Blackburn cleared up a bit of the mystery tonight. Every single witness called and every single document added, will require a vote of 51 Senators to be added. We could be here to May, June, or next year.

Let’s see what happens.

693 thoughts on “20200129: ShaMMMpeachment Wednesday ~ Question Day

        1. imo, after DiFi spoke her mind, she was met with some nasty threats from either Pelosi or the Dem leadership that she better toe the company line or she’ll regret it. (just my opinion)…
          so if there are some dems now wavering they can ask her what changed her mind so rapidly? and she can discreetly tell them Nanzi offered her new shoes…cement ones…

          Liked by 7 people

          1. I think the threats came from higher up than Pelosi. Pelosi is hired muscle. Whoever is pulling the strings at this point does not have complete control of the troops, or at least is not communicating anticipating what some of the water carriers are going to think without threats hanging over them.

            Liked by 5 people

            1. I believe Brennan is telling Pelosi what to do…

              In fact, I believe it is Brennan who is pushing the entire shampeachment…

              Greg Rubini has excellent THREAD on this with a little sauce if I recall correctly…

              theory: Durham is on Brennan’s butt, has enough for mil trib, dth penly… and Brennan’s only hope in order to survive is to remove President Trump. (Don’t know what Brennan thinks about Pence)

              Liked by 1 person

        2. MA_kswiss
          “now they know what will happen if they do.”
          “Seth Rich”
          “Vince Foster”
          JW McGill, Hillary Clinton’s “medical handler”, days before he was to appear to testify before Rep. Gowdy’s committee about Hillary’s personal email server issue.
          Secret Service Special Agent Todd Morrison, one of Hillary Clinton’s Secret Service detail. He’s the one who got her into her specially-equipped van after she collapsed while leaving the Ground Zero ceremony on September 11, 2016.
          Tony Rodham, her own brother
          Jeffrey Epstein, who didn’t commit suicide

          You get my drift.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. yea, I get the drift……how can they live with themselves (rhetorical question).

            It’s absolutely disgusting….. when I stop looking at that sort of list as a ‘meme’ and as an actual reality it makes me physically ill.


    1. 3608
      20 Nov 2019 – 1:18:53 PM
      All assets [F + D] being deployed.
      [Some] who once supported POTUS [sleepers] have/will turn [puppets & puppet masters].
      Control of narrative = control of public opinion
      Control of public opinion = power

      Liked by 6 people

    2. For Zoe and others: text of tweet above

      THE TRUTH ⭐⭐⭐
      What happened in those 20 minutes? I think we deserve to know.@SenFeinstein why the sudden 180?

      WHOA! Democrat Senator Feinstein Suggests She Leans Toward Acquittal As President’s Lawyers Wrap Up Opening Arguments …UPDATED https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/01/whoa-democrat-senator-feinstein-leans-towards-acquittal-as-presidents-lawyers-wrap-up-opening-arguments/ … via @gatewaypundit

      photo of ChiDiFi and text beneath as follows:

      The Democrats sure didn’t expect this! Following the Trump attorney’s opening statements on Tuesday Senator Feinstein told reporters she was leaning towards President Trump’s acquittal. Feinstein…

      thegatewaypundit.com link to article



    1. Nadler had his chance in the House proceedings to call a hundred witnesses, Kelly, Bolton, McMaster, Bannon, Tillerson, even Scaramucci and Omarosa, all the folks who didn’t pan out in the Trump administration.

      Liked by 6 people

      1. …oh and Yates and Comey too. But that meant the Republicans aces like Gowdy and Stefanik could cross examine and the cowardly scurrilous Democrats sure didn’t want that to happen.

        Liked by 5 people

        1. No – the cowardly scurrilous Democrats kept their secret basement impeachment proceedings hidden from Republicans and the public eye. They want to ram-rod the impeachment through the house by hiding it until the last minute, as they did Øbominable-care.

          Liked by 4 people

      2. The democrats are fishing for a crime. What did Stalin’s hunch man say ” show me the man and I find you the crime.” Or something like that.

        They are taking an innocent man in a search of a crime. They have done this since day one.
        This has to stop because it will be us one day. I have seen this before in the DDR.
        hey did this to Flynn, Stone, and others they broke them and ruined them financially that is how communist work.
        This is the United States of America not China not USSR not DDR not Hitler’s Germany.
        How do we stop this injustes? Do our phone calls help our letters help and or emails?
        Who is behind wanting to oust POTUS? The people we see are only the low lives the nothing burgers and they are owned by powerful people.
        Who runs the country the Government apparatus? Is it the CIA the Military Soros a foreign country?
        Have our intelligence agencies been taken over by foreign entities just as our labs have been taken over by Chinese Russians Indians and other foreign entities?

        Liked by 2 people

    1. For Zoe and others, text of tweet above:

      45 🇺🇸 – Text TRUMP to 88022

      Democrats put a provision in their Articles of Impeachment that if Trump is removed from office he cannot be re-elected.

      3:40 AM – Jan 29, 2020


    2. I believe that ONLY the Senate can make and approve a Resolution that an impeached AND convicted President can be barred from ever holding any future “office of trust in the United States”

      Liked by 1 person

    1. AND demand the ICIG testimony, or whatever D-rats call it be delivered to senate before ANY witness is considered. Even wimpy RINOS would support that.

      Liked by 1 person

  1. Sure Joe. That’s the reason. (sarc)

    Liked by 3 people

    1. For Zoe – text of above tweet (careful, you may fall out of your chair reading this !)

      Joe Biden (Text Join to 30330)


      Let’s remember one thing when it comes to impeachment: Donald Trump is on trial because he’s afraid to run against me. He knows I’ll beat him this November.

      2:35 PM – Jan 28, 2020


  2. GOP develops aggressive ‘Plan B’ in impeachment trial, as several Dems appear to support acquittal: source

    With several Democrats openly floating the possibility they might vote to acquit President Trump, congressional Republicans are planning an aggressive “Plan B” strategy in the event some Republicans break off and demand additional witnesses in the president’s impeachment trial, Fox News has learned.


    Liked by 5 people

  3. just saw a great question in the comments about the question session: will the House Managers be under oath when they answer questions today? that’s extremely important if questions about the whistle blower arise and Schiff’s knowledge of him…

    Liked by 6 people

  4. President Trump makes his position on Senate trial very clear!

    Last night:

    This morning:

    Liked by 8 people

    1. For Zoe… text of tweets from POTUS

      Last night

      Donald J. Trump

      No matter how many witnesses you give the Democrats, no matter how much information is given, like the quickly produced Transcripts, it will NEVER be enough for them. They will always scream UNFAIR. The Impeachment Hoax is just another political CON JOB!

      9:25 PM – Jan 28, 2020

      This morning:

      Donald J. Trump

      Remember Republicans, the Democrats already had 17 witnesses, we were given NONE! Witnesses are up to the House, not up to the Senate. Don’t let the Dems play you!

      7:56 AM – Jan 29, 2020


  5. If they want just 1 more witness, maybe get that hidden transcript from Atkinson 🙄

    Liked by 8 people

    1. For Zoe – text of tweet above

      Rep. Jim Jordan


      Remember, the witness count is already 17 to ZERO in favor of Democrats.

      But they need one more (still none for us) to make their case?

      How’s that fair?

      10:30 AM – Jan 29, 2020


    1. For Zoe, and others… text of tweet above:

      Dan Celia


      “Shifty” Maybe the biggest understatement @realDonaldTrump has ever made. Dem’s looking to this man to save them. Or destroy them, which ever comes first. I think the destroying has already happened.

      (photo of Shifty appears below text)

      Liked by 1 person

  6. my 2 cents ?

    There will be NO witnesses… if there are, the Constitution is shredded.

    There will be questions and then a vote for acquittal (or even ‘dismissal’ – which would be my preference)

    Will all be over by Friday evening, perhaps even Thursday evening.

    “Witnesses” is the responsibility of the House, NOT the Senate. House blew it.

    Not only would allowing witnesses be unconstitutional… it would tie up the Senate (they would not function as a Senate, but as an Impeachment Court until next January, and if we don’t take back the House, beyond, when POTUS is re-elected.)

    This is not just about acquitting President Trump, it is about survival of this Republic, our Constitution.

    Isn’t that what Constitutional Lawyers have been saying all week?

    Liked by 11 people

  7. I really hope the Repubs hold the line on witnesses…because if they cave, then I will bet that we will see “bombshell” after “bombshell” memoirs come out–from former admin personnel…and the Dems will scream we HAVE to have (insert traitor name here) testify or it’s a cover -up!
    this could drag on forever…


    Liked by 6 people

  8. Off the top of my head, Republican senators should be directing the bulk of their questions on whom the defense will be calling for witness’s and what they expect to show by calling them.

    Additionally the Republican senators should ask the defense if they think they will fight any subpoena’s based on Presidential Privilege. (Answer Hell Yes!)

    Additionally ask what they think about the ICIG’s testimony being withheld, what it might show and why it is important.

    Finally the Republican Senators should direct questions to the prosecution primarily to Liddle Adam Shit for answers to his and his offices involvement with the Whistle Blower. Sooner he’s started on the better.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Well, maybe I should not call it an illegal procedure, but witnesses are part of the house’s responsibility and not the senate’s. Perhaps unconstitutional would be a better word.

      Liked by 4 people

      1. True and the answer can include such a statement and then go into the hypothetical so as to scare the snot out of the democrats and by the way they should be demanding if witnesses it is be then they will be demanding and fully expecting to be granted all they ask for while at the same time demanding executive privilege be vetted in the courts all the way up to the Supreme Court if necessary.

        Liked by 2 people

  9. Rex posted following gem on Flep’s daily news thread… Nice read.


    January 29, 2020 at 09:59

    Hey GA, Great post Flep. Sorry been away, starting a new business with my daughter, and it has occupied all my free time. I want you all to think about something that I have been pondering. On this witness vote flap. I KNOW that this was a Trump variable. Look how many times the dems (IE Charlie Brown) have gotten their “bombshell” witness to “testify” only to be SHREADED even worse than if they had simply SHUT UP.

    This too is another Trump (as Lucy) holding the ball, for the dems to “kick”. Bolton will be NOTHING more than all hat and NO cattle. It will ALL be HIS opinion, minus ANY facts, makig his book, his opinion, and his testimony less than WORTHLESS.

    Except, and you will LOVE this, Quid pro quo Clarice (Schumer) You call Bolton, and Trump gets to call a witness. One RELEVANT to the FACTS. One who KNEW about ALL the Ukraine corruption, in fact Joe Biden HIMSELF said so. NO, it is not Hunter Biden, No it is not Alexandra Chalupa, NO, it is not Eric Ciaramella, NO it is not Alexander Vidman, NO, it is not Gordon Sondland, NO it is not Marie Yovanovich, NO, it is not the IC IG, and NO it is not even Joe Biden.

    WHO could it be? Well, it is QUITE simple, and QUITE brilliant. ANOTHER Trump TRAP. One the RINOS in Romney, Murkowski, Collins, Alexander, and ALL the deep state WILL fall into HEAD first. LET the Dems call Bolton, quid pro quo Trump team gets a witness, THE witness….Barack Hussein Obama. WHAT?

    That’s right, Obama was THE boss. He put ALL these moles in place. He put Biden in charge of Ukraine corruption. HE KNEW it ALL. Biden even said so. Remember the Ukraine PM ” You can’t with hold the money, you are NOT the President” comment? What was Biden’s response? “Call HIM, get him on the phone and ASK him” Game, set match! Obama KNEW, and $$$ to doughnuts HE was getting a CUT on all the corruption money, AND using Ukraine, and that Crowdstrike server there in for ALL his dirty schemes on his opponents.

    This is a MASTER stroke by Trump. The dems get Bolton, who will be HEARSAY at BEST, and Trump will call Obama, and drag it ALL into the light. Obama CANNOT refuse, he can ONLY plead the 5th or try the national security cover up routine. BUT, IF he does EITHER of those, we the people will KNOW. We will know ALL that Trump has said WAS TRUE. Obama CANNOT answer, even though he THINKS he is smart enough to answer and lie, Trump and his team, have ALL the evidence to DAMN him, and his cronies. ALL Obama could do is clam up, or refuse to show. That in itself would be DAMNING, and WOULD go to the SCOTUS, FORCING him to testify. Obama is THE fact witness on it ALL, and he cannot deny it, because, as I told you, it was IN his PDB. Nunes SAW it.

    IF Obama TRIED to play coy, they will simply admit to EVIDENCE his PDB. IT will require declass, and probably a court battle, which Obama would LOSE, making him even MORE guilty. This was a LEGENDARY trap. It will go down in HISTORY. Want to know how I came up with this? Simple, Q told us ALL, MONTHS ago. ” It will be public, and UNDENABILE. The MSM will HAVE to cover it, in it’s ENTIRITY, no spin, no cutting away, lest the REVEAL their true selves to the WORLD. NOT THIS TIME.

    Did Trump look WORRIED? NOPE. Because he has this on LOCKDOWN. If the RINOS screw up and traitor him by ALLOWING “witnesses” Then Trump wins BIGLY, he gets them ALL, INCLUDING Obama ( He will not go down ALONE, I bet he will SING like a canary). If the RINOS do NOT call witnesses, Trump still wins, because by this time next week, he will be ACQUITTED, and I bet even 3 or more Dems join in the acquittal. That means the Dems will be NEUTERED, and the American people WILL enact revenge in Nov, giving Trump the House back, AND bigger majority in the Senate.

    See the dems THINK they have this, just like Kavanaugh, they will KEEP asking for more and more witnesses, dragging this sham towards the summer, and prime election season. The will STALL ALL Senate business, and House will simply look to “pile on”. ONE problem, Trump will go STRAIGHT for the jugular, the Triple dog dare. They will NEVER see it coming. They THINK they are smarter, ignoring their OWN weaknesses, and there are MANY. That is their FLAW. Once we go down the corruption route, and witnesses are called, which NEVER happened in the House, EVERYTHING is on the table from this farce to Mueller, to the dossier, and where and from WHOM it ALL started.

    I bet, that some have or are starting to have these VERY thoughts in their wittle brains. I bet they will NOT vote for witnesses. If they DO, it is GAME on, and GAME OVER…for THEM. See, they thought this was the trial of Donald J. Trump, never realizing that it is REALLY the trial of Barack Hussein Obama and HIS corruption.

    I suspect they will NEVER see that, unless and until it is too late. Watch and see. I told you all long ago that Impeachment was a bad, but NECESSARY part of the plan. Whelp, now we
    FINALLY get to see the plan unfold. They CAN’T call it political, because Trump HAS to defend himself. They MAJORLY (again) underestimated just WHO they were dealing with.

    Oh, and the BEST part, even if Trump does not get witnesses, and is acquitted next week, Durham is STILL in the bullpen warming up…just in case. See, Trump WINS this, either way.

    Liked by 4 people

  10. Nadless wants Kelly now to be a witness–it will never end!
    Rep. Nadler just added John Kelly to his witness list. Kelly wasn’t in the White House when the Ukraine situation took place. Is Nadler going to call everyone who criticizes Trump or, as in Kelly’s case — likes his opponent? Will he call every employee who was fired? It’s the endless impeachment by any means necessary. There is no limit.

    He’s calling him because Kelly said he believes John Bolton’s comments since he sees Bolton as an honest man. Kelly has been out of the White House for some time and had problems dealing with some of the staff members.



    1. For Zoe – text of tweet above

      Go Trump 🇺🇸

      What do we have here….

      John Bolton in an interview describing the conversation between President Trump and Ukraine President Zelinsky as warm and cordial in August 2019.

      Video embedded

      Liked by 1 person

  11. Josh Hawley releases his list of questions…
    Hawley intends to ask the Democrat House managers the following questions:

    As Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, House Manager Adam Schiff lied about communications with the whistleblower prior to the filing of the whistleblower complaint. Schiff claimed on September 17, 2019, “We have not spoken directly with the whistleblower,” when the whistleblower had in fact reached out to a committee aide prior to filing a complaint. Why did Manager Schiff lie?

    The New York Times reported on October 2, 2019, that Representative Schiff learned the “outlines of a CIA officer’s concerns that President Trump had abused his power” days before the officer actually filed the complaint.
    What precisely did Manager Schiff learn in advance?

    Did Manager Schiff or any of his staff offer this individual substantive advice on his complaint?

    Did Manager Schiff or any of his staff help the intelligence officer draft the complaint in any way or to any degree?

    For House Managers: Since September 9, 2019—the date the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community notified the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence that he received a whistleblower’s complaint—please disclose and explain any and all contact that any House Manager or their associates or staff have had with any current or former presidential candidate, or candidate’s campaign staff, in the 2020 Democratic presidential primaries and caucuses?

    For House Managers: Under the House Managers’ theory of an impeachable abuse of power, did then-President Barack Obama or then-Vice President Joe Biden commit such an abuse when the Obama administration withheld aid from the Ukrainian government in exchange for the removal of Ukraine’s Prosecutor General?

    For House Managers: When he took office, Viktor Shokin, Ukraine’s Prosecutor General, vowed to investigate Burisma. Before Vice President Joe Biden sought to remove Shokin, did the White House Counsel’s Office or the Office of the Vice President legal counsel issue ethics advice approving Mr. Biden’s involvement in matters involving Shokin, despite the presence of Hunter Biden on the Burisma board?

    For House Managers: Was President Obama aware that Hunter Biden had been appointed to the board of directors of Burisma when Vice President Joe Biden withheld funds from Ukraine in exchange for the prosecutor’s removal? If so, did the President advise Mr. Biden to recuse himself?

    For House Managers: Do you agree with Hunter Biden’s statement in an October 15, 2019, ABC News interview that he would “probably not” have been named a board member if his “last name wasn’t Biden”?

    For White House Counsel: A significant portion of the House Managers’ theory of abuse of power depends on the idea that President Trump improperly withheld defense aid to Ukraine. Did the White House release the funds in question to Ukraine before they expired at the end of the fiscal year, on September 30, 2019? If so, did the Ukrainian government publicly announce any corruption investigation prior to the release?

    For White House Counsel: What, if any, criminal statutes do the House Managers allege President Trump violated?


    Liked by 4 people

  12. Never thought I would say this, but I have a man crush on Ted Cruz. That was awesome

    Liked by 5 people

    1. For Zoe – text of tweet above

      👠IStandWithTrump ⭐️⭐️⭐️ClearFlynnNow

      Boom, boom, boom! @SenTedCruz puts it out there. The Senate trial is about deciding whether @POTUS has authority to investigate corruption!

      If not, why not? If not @WhiteHouse then what branch does? The do-nothing Congress? 🤦🏼‍♀️

      video embedded CSPAN2

      Liked by 2 people

  13. RINO Traitorous Serpents – Romney, Collins, Murkowski – send the first question – insinuating Trump had a political motive for asking for investigation of corruption in Ukraine.

    They are truly nasty creatures.

    Liked by 4 people

    1. Philbin answers brilliantly! Impossible to detect mixed motives – and all politicians consider political interest – that’s part of representative democracy – and no way to remove a President from office.

      Liked by 3 people

  14. Philbin Is Brilliant !!!!!!!!!!!! Showing how stupid DIMs and the question from 3 Uniparty pieces of ___ is…

    BOOM – mixed motive impossible!

    Liked by 5 people

    1. Get some rest PR. We need you strong and healthy! You’re one of our most treasured Warriors!! 🥰💕

      Liked by 2 people

  15. Second question. Here comes Bolton allegations – false allegations – from scurrilous ‘manuscript’.

    WTH didn’t the Democrat House subpoena Bolton when they should have?

    Liked by 3 people

    1. ALL BOLTON CAN OFFER – is hearsay and allegations – and the 1.Transcript, 2. Zelensky’s and 3. Sondlan’s testimonies, contradict those allegations.

      Liked by 3 people

  16. 5th question – Did the House seek to interview Bolton.

    Schiff claims they did, but Bolton and his deputy refused and threatened to sue.

    Now Bolton claims to be willing (did $$ pass hands).

    Schiff claims Trump wanted Zelensky to do his dirty work….he’s slimy and slithery.

    Liked by 4 people

  17. Regarding Sen. Lankford’s statement: “Every single witness called and every single document added, will require a vote of 51 Senators to be added.”

    Are the Mittens/Collins RINOs nefarious enough to vote for Dem witnesses but vote against crucial Repub witnesses? That is the main danger that I see with calling witnesses. There is no guarantee we would get the ones we want and need.

    Liked by 7 people

    1. If they pulled that Captain Obvious stunt, there’s gonna be a lot of backlash!
      We do have Manchin, Synema, and Jones leaning our way.
      Collins is up for re-election, I advise her to tread carefully.

      Liked by 2 people

    2. Laura Ingraham asked that we call your senator 202-224-3121 to tell them “no witnesses”. She said it is working. It is posted on OT. I called Schumer today, I also mentioned Mitt drinking his chocolate milk on the senate floor and photos being all over the internet.


    1. They have a prepared slide to answer her question. Did she coordinate ahead of time with them??? Stinky !!

      Liked by 7 people

            1. I tried listening but cannot stomach it. They lying by the democrats is unnerving and evil. What decent person does that?
              Thank you for this thread and commentaries that keep me sane.

              Liked by 1 person

  18. Liked by 7 people

  19. NH sends a question. House Manager purport that a President can be impeached without a Constitutionally impeachable offense….merely a violation of public trust.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Yeah, I suppose getting a blow job in the Oval Office was a violation of public trust.
      Guess we didn’t need the Independent Counsel and 4 1/2 years of court fights with the administration, eh?
      What a joke.
      I don’t like her outfit, let’s impeach her.
      He’s an orange man, or mean to me, let’s impeach him. He called Lebron James a bad name!

      Liked by 2 people

  20. It is becoming obvious that the Democrats are desperately trying to cover up Biden, Pelosi, Romney and Kerry CRIMES/Abuse of Power/benefitting and enriching themselves and their families.

    ALL the crimes they are accusing President Trump of – are THE DEMOCRATS CRIMES!!!!

    Liked by 6 people

    1. this is the easiest one to answer and the most common misleading talking point of the left.
      Answer =
      The House did not VOTE for an impeachment investigation, as has been done in the past by independent counsel, etc. In fact, their LAST vote on impeachment failed.
      If the majority of the HOuse had voted to pursue, then the Repubs and President would have had rights to cross examine and call their own witnesses.
      The dems did not allow this.
      Pretty weird, as we all have the right to defend ourselves, even for a traffic ticket.
      But the dems did not allow the pres or Repubs to defend.
      So, the President took them to court, and THAT case is working it’s way through the courts, now.

      Who wants to participate in a kangaroo court?

      Liked by 3 people

  21. BREAKING: Gardner says he doesn’t want to hear from impeachment witnesses

    U.S. Sen. Cory Gardner said Wednesday that he thinks the Senate has heard from enough witnesses in President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial, taking off the table a potential Republican vote to subpoena national security adviser John Bolton.


    Liked by 7 people

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