Sunday Talks: Andy Biggs Discusses Heavily Rushed Impeachment Schedule…

Representative Andy Biggs appears on Fox News to discuss the next two weeks.  The Democrats are rushing to impeach President Trump prior to the Christmas recess.

  • December 1st – Deadline for White House response for participation in “groundwork” hearing.
  • December 2nd – Schiff’s HPSCI Impeachment Committee presents draft report.
  • December 3rd – HPSCI Committee votes on impeachment report.
  • December 4th – HJC “groundwork” impeachment hearing at 10:00am.
  • December 6th – Deadline for White House response for participation in HJC Impeachment Hearing.
  • December 6th – Deadline for House Republican witness list.
  • December 9th – Hearing to deny House Republican witnesses.
  • December 13th – House recesses for Christmas break?

This entry was posted in 1st Amendment, 4th Amendment, 6th Amendment, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Donald Trump, Impeachment, Legislation, Nancy Pelosi, President Trump, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

120 Responses to Sunday Talks: Andy Biggs Discusses Heavily Rushed Impeachment Schedule…

  1. HBD says:

    So the democrats are in a rush to fail?

    Liked by 15 people

    • HBD, By now the dems must know they are failures at impeachment, I think they are just trying to keep our POTUS off the Nov ballot by any means now.

      Liked by 5 people

    • Clue says:

      Watch them try to give the lunatic left an impeachment vote on Dec 12 to take all the air up in the room over the holidays and try to push the fisa abuse report off the front page.

      I guarantee they already have their articles of impeachment written and ready to go.

      Liked by 9 people

      • Garavaglia says:

        As does the senate.


      • Sugarhillhardrock says:

        Let. them try; they are about to fall into the briar patch.

        AG Barr, Durham, Huber, and Horowitz likely possess hard core and irrefutable evidence that will prove hundreds of felonies committed by dozens of coup plotters.

        There are multiple whispers of cooperation.
        Let’s say your 40, have multiple children at home, and maybe a law license you would like to keep. Hillary ain’t ever going to be president and it looks likely DJT will be reelected. Do you want to keep your mouth shut while others are giving up facts, or do you want to mitigate your vulnerable position?

        We are going to find out shortly that John Durham has multiple fact witnesses helping his team, and that they have given up hard evidence of crimes. The only real issue is how far up the food chain will Durham go? How many indictments and which statutes were violated?

        Logic dictates we wait and see what the prosecutors do. If they F it up, we Patriots can fix injustice down the road.

        Your choice, AG Barr.

        Liked by 9 people

        • James Carpenter says:

          Sounds like an ultimatum.
          I don’t like ultimatums.
          They always seem to involve hard choices.
          But then, we don’t always get to choose what we must ultimately choose.
          I pray Barr makes the right decisions, the right moves.

          Liked by 5 people

  2. Trump Train says:

    What a sick joke. These fools have lost their minds.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Cam Heck says:

    Sure, sure, Fat Jerry is half of the ‘1-2 punch’ to take out President Trump: Jerry’s gonna cinch up Impeachment in the house, and then this guy is gonna beat President Trump in the election:

    Liked by 13 people

  4. L4grasshopper says:

    Question to SD or anyone else:

    The GOP invoked an obscure rule that was supposed to allow them to call witnesses before the House Intel Committee.

    So what is the status of that? Did the Dims deny it? Or are they just ignoring it! And in either case, is McCarthy making a stink about it?

    As well…do not the GZoP have a right to add their addendum to Scfiff’s Report? Again, if so — are they making a stink about it?

    Liked by 12 people

    • Good question GH. I haven’t heard a thing about it. Smalls like another rat in the wood pile………a dead one at that.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Midnite says:

      Yeah the Minority invoked House Rule XI 1(a) I (A) and from what I can tell the ONLY comment I’ve seen so far is from the Republicans siting Shiff for not letting this be a fair and even process using the exact wording from their request. Given the current events I’d say Shiff simply ignored the request, just as I expected he would, after all the entire inquiry wasn’t designed to be fair or even handed, so the Dems are continuing to play it that way.


    • Amy2 says:

      Yes grasshopper I asked that yesterday as well. I was looking forward to it. Did Schiff perhaps close the inquiry early in anticipation of that? He’s a weasel either way.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Sherri Young says:

      See SD’s entries for Dec 6 & 9 underneath the calendar.

      Liked by 1 person

      • justlizzyp says:

        I thought 6th and 9th were the deadlines for the Judiciary Committee refusal to hear Republican witnesses and that McCarthy’s rule invoking was with regard to Schiff’s refusal to allow them to call witnesses to the Intel Committee farce.

        Please forgive me if I have tangled up my Dem weasels and their shenanigans!

        Liked by 1 person

    • John Hyland says:

      Yep, I asked this same question a week or so ago, hoping for attention by Sundance. This is the kind of stuff that really gets my goat. What’s the deal, is it required or isn’t it, why isn’t it the focus of ALL the Republicans, etc.? Nowhere else across the intertubes am I seeing any attention to this, either. Is it just going to be you and me, L4? That won’t work….no one listens to me.


    • Genie says:

      I think this is what Schiff said about that: “Listen, Grasshopper, I’m only gonna tell you this eight times, see. You better stop asking about that debunked Republican ploy, see, and listen only to what we Democrats say, see. Orange Man bad. We Dems are better than that!” (Hammers gavel loudly to conclude inquiry.)

      Liked by 1 person

  5. Dollie says:

    If only they would work so hard for their districts…

    Liked by 5 people

  6. redthunder238 says:

    I’ve always thought they would extend it another week somehow just to push how big of an “emergency” it was. Get it as close to Christmas as possible. It’s all about the spectacle.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Sherri Young says:

      The congress critters need to show up in their districts and be seen while the constituents are in a festive spirit. They will want to keep commitments, show up for great photo ops, and create goodwill for votes and campaign contributions. Not a good time to be stuck in Washington DC tending to business.

      However, Friday the 13th lurketh. LOL

      Liked by 2 people

  7. LouisianaTeaRose says:

    Big ole hole in his bag o’ marbles.


    Let’s pray.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Ellis says:

    They don’t have a crime, they don’t have full support of house democrats, the polling is terrible, and the media narrative has fallen apart. What is the end game? Impeachment would be a political disaster both at the polls and in a senate trial.

    A hyper-partisan censure, as embarassing as it would be for the left, seems to be the only viable way for Pelosi to save face.

    Liked by 6 people

    • Caius Lowell says:

      The media are beyond complicit in this impeachment scheme — they are full-fledged partners! My guess is that Dems are counting on the media to provide them with a get-out-of-being-held-responsible-for-their-crimes-free card, as usual. And don’t expect them to feel bad about doing that — Dems *LOVE* doing that!

      Liked by 5 people

    • SAM-TruthFreedomLiberty says:

      They know what’s coming for them. FISA, FLYNN, DURHAM.. (CTH is far too negative on these)
      This is preempting the revelations to make it look like we did it for political reasons to squash their impeachment.
      They know Biden will be the collateral of the impeachment cause of Ukraine. That’s why more candidates are jumping in..

      Their scheme will at least work with their base..Without any defense they would’ve lost them too.

      Liked by 2 people

      • jrapdx says:

        The Democrats will probably still lose some measure of support within their “base”. The impeachment farce is an embarrassment to the Democrat party, a stain on the “image” presented as their public “face”.

        I’ve maintained a theory similar to yours—that the rush impeach is in service of getting in front of the revelations that start to be unveiled on Dec 9. However, I don’t think that maneuver is going to work, the FISA malfeasance will be undeniable hyper-documented FACT, no way to get around it. The puny weak-tea impeachment drive will be blown away by a harsh reality implicating major Democrats.

        Easy to predict we’ll be getting great gifts early this holiday season!

        Liked by 1 person

    • Scott says:

      Plus their senators can’t campaign if this farce gets to Cocaine Mitch. A censure would seem to be best for them, but AOC and co. would have a cow!


    • Donzo says:

      I think she’s had enough of her face saved for one lifetime.


  9. Caius Lowell says:

    Don’t worry — Democrats rushed 0bamacare too, and look how *AWESOME* that turned out!

    Liked by 8 people

    • Super Elite Lt. Col. Covfefe999 says:

      That’s right. I think our tendency is to belive that these people have some kind of solid plan, but this impeachment mess is a complete disaster for the Democrats. They timed it so poorly, now they’re in a mad rush right at the end of the year and just months away from the 2020 primaries. What a bunch of idiots.

      Liked by 2 people

  10. gitmo4crooks says:

    I am VERY Very worried about voting fraud….take a look at this article:
    Election voting systems are Rigged…see below

    Liked by 6 people

    • redthunder238 says:

      You’re talking about Leftist’s. There’s a 100% chance of voting fraud.

      Liked by 1 person

    • The Devilbat says:

      We may all vote for President Trump but I wonder how the Soros owned voting machines will vote? The turtle denied Trump’s request for an investigation of voter fraud way back saying that there were insufficient funds available. What an SOB that man is.

      Liked by 3 people

      • littleanniefannie says:

        Yet there are more than enough funds to pay Lawfare after paying Mueller. What a complete and total waste of my tax dollars! The DNC should have to pay for Lawfare, not the taxpayers!!

        Liked by 1 person

    • Judith says:

      We absolutely SHOULD be focused on election fraud. IMHO this impeachment *farce* is the latest red laser dot to hold our attention elsewhere. It serves to bolster the lie that PDJT is losing support, and it lends plausibility to their planned election fraud in 2020.

      Liked by 4 people

      • no-nonsense-nancy says:

        I live in a county in PA that uses paper ballots that are marked with pens. No place in this country should use voting machines. When are we going to learn?

        Liked by 4 people

    • gitmo- don’t forget, as someone said- if we win by a big enough margin, they can’t cheat!


  11. Sherri Young says:

    At this time of the year, schedule ~ narrative control. Nearly the only topic that could drown out the upcoming Horowitz report would be the impeachment topic.

    Well played, Nanzi. Most citizens will be too busy to watch hearings, read testimony, and dig deeply. The ones who seek to stay informed while dealing with other obligations will have to satisfy themselves with morning shows while getting ready to leave the house and NPR in the car.


    • donna kovacevic says:

      You mean to say people can’t walk and chew gum at the same time? This impeachment you are having is a joke outside the USA and we are interested and will listen and read carefully what the IG report says. I have spoken with different people in Canada about the hearings last week or so, and the response I get is “Insanity” and laughter.God Bless PDJT.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Sherri Young says:

        Just thinking back to when my daughter was younger and I barely slept while dealing with baking, shopping, decorating, attending school functions, trying to spend time with her, and juggling my work schedule. Under the circumstances that prevailed back then, I could not have devoted nearly the attention required to be a decent single mom with a full-time job plus keep up with what will be transpiring over the next two weeks.

        We lean on SD to help lay out the important points. Others will depend on NPR and Good Morning America. There won’t be much time for as many people to do as much digging.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Sherri Young says:

        Thanks for the OCONUS perspective. That is quite encouraging.


    • Amy2 says:

      Yes but if they are reading the Horowitz report, at least they’ll be getting educated (not that they’ll use it). Either report shows a president getting railroaded, so I think Nan loses here no matter what she does. She might check a victory box, but it’s a loser in the end.

      Liked by 1 person

  12. EnoughIsEnough says:

    I would add one date to the schedule above. December 10: Rally in Hershey PA. The day after the IG report drops and the hearing to deny Republican witnesses takes place. President Trump should have plenty of material to work with to expose the corruption and connect some dots. I have never looked forward to a rally as much as next Tuesday’s.

    Liked by 8 people

  13. tbated says:

    Here is a theory on Bidens candidacy.

    Biden and the Dems neck deep in Ukraine corruption.

    2016 Despite Trumps victory, Biden/Dems unconcerned with being exposed since Poreshenko still runs Ukriane

    2018 Zelensky is popular in opinion polls in Ukraine -although not a candidate – Poreshenko still in power (Biden/Dems not worried – but keeping an eye on how this will evolve)

    Dec. 2018 Zelensky announces candidacy Dec. 31 (Biden/Dems now begin to worry – if Poreshnko goes down he risks being exposed – and must now lay groundwork to avoid being investigated – time to ramp up interest in candidacy )

    April 21, 2019 Zelensky wins Ukraine Presidency – (Biden now needs to insulate himself from any and all investigations)

    April 25, 2019– Joe Biden announces candidacy for POTUS.

    If you overlay the timeline of the ascent of Velensky, and descent of Poroshenko, with the timeline of Bidens non- candidacy, well maybe candidacy – and then full blown candidacy, a pattern emerges.

    The Trump impeachment is based upon a “quid pro quo” of Trump withholding funds to Ukraine to force Zelensky to investigate Trumps political opponent – Biden. The lynchpin to this narrative is that Biden is a political opponent.

    So my question is, what if Biden were just a past VP – a private citizen no longer involved in poitics? Would Biden and the media still be able to paint this as a crime committed by Trump? My thought is no – at least not in the manner they are doing now.

    So my theory is that Joe Biden and family are just as dirty as evidence would indicate. Joe had no concern that any of this would see the light of day, as Poroshenko would hold off any investigation by new POTUS Trump.

    As Poroshenkos popularity diminished, Joe starts getting worried and has to think of a plan to shield himself from investigation.

    So the plan is hatched to run for POTUS.

    Except Joe is in no shape to actually run for Potus. While always a walking gaffe machine, Joe was at least quick on his feet. But not now – you can see that Bidens mental acuity is waning badly. But the only chance he has to keep the investigation at bay, is to run.

    I don’t think he wanted to run – I think he had to.

    Media and Dems are fully on board – and the “fact” that Trump apparently “bribed” the Ukriane into investigating Biden, is a very large part of the impeachment game being run by Dems. Without the Biden as a candidate angle they would need to find other grounds to impeach, and there aren’t any.

    If Poroshenko had won the Presidency, I don’t think Biden runs for POTUS.

    The entire impeachment Circus is an arm of the Biden strategy to avoid being investigated for his crimes.

    Liked by 6 people

    • Biden as a man who, while Vice-President, confessed on camera to a felony offense, and implicated the President while doing so. He took over $1.5 billion from the Chinese with no good reason, and embezzled more billions of US Aid into his own bank accounts.

      Both Ukraine and the USA share a ratified treaty pledging mutual cooperation in law enforcement, specifically with regards to corruption. Investigations against many present and former US politicians are known to be actively underway in both countries.

      Being (supposedly) a political candidate does not render you immune to criminal indictment and prosecution.

      Liked by 4 people

    • … but they cannot stop the Ukranian investigations which are very actively in progress. Nor can they prevent the US DOJ from fully cooperating, as our treaty demands.

      They firmly believe that it is their birthright to use their elevated positions to conduct organized crime anywhere and everywhere on Planet Earth, and to steal for themselves billions of dollars from the American Taxpayer. They firmly believe that they have the right to throw out the duly-elected POTUS in order to protect numerous felons … namely, themselves.

      And they’re somehow certain that the American Public will never catch on. (But then again, they never cared about the American Public anyhow.)

      Liked by 4 people

      • Can you imagine the heads exploding if the Ukrainians charge Quid pro and Kid and want them extradited???

        Liked by 2 people

        • It is very likely that Biden and his family will be charged. But, Pelosi, Nadler, and Schiff could also be charged, along with many others. Ukraine was the go-to place if you wanted to turn your $330K-a-year salary into a six- or seven- or ten-figure net worth in the space of a couple of years. They were “famously corrupt,” and US politicians were among those driving it.


    • WES says:

      tbated:. Very well thought out argument! Many thing fit like a hand into a glove. Maybe in time we will know more pieces of the puzzle.


  14. LouisianaTeaRose says:

    Deck chairs on the Titanic.

    These people have lost their minds.

    Liked by 3 people

  15. FairTaxGuy60 says:

    Can the Republicans stage a series of old-fashioned filibusters when they have the floor to delay the schedule?

    Liked by 1 person

  16. no-nonsense-nancy says:

    And my President just keeps going on doing things so impressive that it makes me marvel at him every day. God has blessed us tremendously. Those fools will be sorry.

    And Biden is a sick, sick man. He shouldn’t be allowed in public.

    Liked by 3 people

  17. This is a classic “Bill of Attainder” in every respect – as expressly prohibited in §1.9.3. The Democrats don’t care.

    First, after systematically denying the 5th and 6th Amendments, and after the President wisely declines to testify against himself, the House will declare, on its own supposed authority, that the President is guilty of some “high crime.” Then, it will maliciously punish him by impeachment. All without a trial or the due-process rights that we would perfunctorily grant to any common thief.

    A bill of attainder is an act of a legislature declaring a person or group of persons guilty of some crime and punishing them, often without a trial. As with attainder resulting from the normal judicial process, the effect of such a bill is to nullify the targeted person’s civil rights, most notably the right to own property, the right to a title of nobility, and, in at least the original usage, the right to life itself. Bills of attainder passed in Parliament by Henry VIII on 29 January 1542 resulted in the executions of a number of notable historical figures. – WikiPedia

    “No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed.” – US Constitution §1.9.3.

    “Who cares?” – Lawfare

    Well, it’s time to throw the Attainder monkey-wrench officially into their well-laid desperate plans. The House has no legitimate Constitutional authority to impeach, because there are no “high crimes and misdemeanors,” and the House has no judicial authority with which to find that any such crimes exist. This is by the careful intention of the authors of our Constitution.

    Liked by 8 people

  18. ristvan says:

    Don’t think formal impeachment happens this year if at all . Two separate reasons.

    1. The Dec 4 Nadler hearing is about defining ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’. But the meaning has been historically defined by the constitutional convention when they substituted it for the original ‘maladministration’, and further explained by Federalist Paper #65. That gives Nadler an impeachment off ramp to censure.

    2. Pelosi and a Congressional delegation of 25 left today for Madrid and COP25. She is doing this to spite PDJT, who is withdrawing from the Paris Accord and therefor sent a lower level diplomatic mission to Madrid. COP25 runs from Dec 2 to Dec 13. Pelosi cannot symbolically attend the closing ‘decision day’ and be back in the US before Dec 15. No floor impeachment vote will happen in her absence. So the impeachment show will conclude in 2020.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Roger Duroid says:

      PDJT was very generous to let peloski and the gang of 25 travel on luxury military flights again to go to COP25 to berate him and state that the “people” of the US support the paris accords. Last year at this time, he grounded her.


      • Jederman says:

        True, but she doesn’t know that PT manifested swalwell for the flight too. Who wants to be on a aircraft, no matter how big, for 8 hrs, with a guy that can’t control his bowels.


    • Amy2 says:

      #2 gets her past the Horowitz report and dragging it into 2020. She must be sweating bullets (if she can sweat anymore…) wondering who the nominee is going to be and if she can bump PDT (can’t) out of his chair before the election. You go Nan; it’s gonna be great to watch your fall, especially since there is no bottom. You just keep falling.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Johnny Boost says:

      Pelosi is overseas to let Schiff and Nadler twist in the wind.

      Maybe the Democrats’ best move is to act like the past couple of weeks of impeachment nonsense never happened. Just drop it and don’t mention it ever again, like a badly written scene in a movie or something.

      Liked by 1 person

    • sundance says:

      Given that Pelosi pushed the CR deadline date to 12/20, it looks like she added another week to the congressional calendar prior to recess.

      The budget vote and the impeachment vote could happen in this extended week.


    • Battleship Wisconsin says:

      ristvan: “Don’t think formal impeachment happens this year if at all. Two separate reasons.”

      IMHO, impeachment has been a certainty since the Democrats took control of the House in January 2019. Impeachment is all about using media optics to energize and motivate those many millions of true blue Democrats who want Donald Trump voted out of office to get out to the polls in November 2020.

      The basic text of the articles of impeachment have probably already been drafted and will just need some touching up here and there before being voted upon. When the House vote actually occurs depends on what Nancy Pelosi and her team of lawfare strategists believe to be the best timing for holding the impeachment vote.

      ristvan: “1. The Dec 4 Nadler hearing is about defining ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’. But the meaning has been historically defined by the constitutional convention when they substituted it for the original ‘maladministration’, and further explained by Federalist Paper #65. That gives Nadler an impeachment off ramp to censure.”

      Nancy Pelosi is the ringmaster for the House impeachment circus, not Adam Schiff or Jerry Nadler. Trump’s alleged high crimes and misdemeanors as described in the draft articles of impeachment will be whatever Nancy Pelosi and her lawfare legal team say are his high crimes and misdemeanors.

      ristvan: “2. Pelosi and a Congressional delegation of 25 left today for Madrid and COP25. She is doing this to spite PDJT, who is withdrawing from the Paris Accord and therefore sent a lower level diplomatic mission to Madrid. COP25 runs from Dec 2 to Dec 13. Pelosi cannot symbolically attend the closing ‘decision day’ and be back in the US before Dec 15. No floor impeachment vote will happen in her absence. So the impeachment show will conclude in 2020.”

      Sundance notes that Nancy Pelosi has added another week to the December House calendar. That’s time enough to push through a quick vote on articles of impeachment after her return from COP25.

      We should not be surprised if Pelosi uses that additional week to stage a pre-Christmas media circus extravaganza in which she hands millions of the true blue Democratic Party faithful their fondest dream for a Christmas present — articles of impeachment voted against Donald Trump.


  19. The reason the Dems launched the impeachment witchhunt, despite its obvious non-starter evidentiary staus, and downside reputational risk (now playing out) was because of a far greater risk- that DOJ would look further than FISAgate, and look into Bidens corruption.

    See Schumers warning to Trump and Bidens warning to Graham and the obvious indications of lots of fingers in cookie jars like the Ukraine, all the way to the top.

    Pelosi’s latest WrapUp Smear with parallel construction once again manufactured by the Deep State is a classic dezinformatzia technique: sow massive FUD while pointing fingers at ones enemy for what you are guilty. Classic Alinsky, Goebbels, US progressive marxist leninist PR with the full help of the MSM in some quarters, leaking as ordered, following prepared Narrative (LawFare).

    Liked by 1 person

  20. Superman says:

    It seems odd to have a date specifically centered around denying Republican witnesses.


  21. LouisianaTeaRose says:

    One Dem/Left talking point is that the Trump team is “missing a huge opportunity” to “participate” in the Judiciary Committee “proceedings”….I want R’s to hammer home over and over that the process is ILLEGITIMATE therefore participation falsely validates the Dem efforts to make this thing look real.

    I know it is hard to square that when R’s show up for the rest of the sham, because the truth is that nothing here is legit. Very strange place to be “legally”….wish there was better strategy….


  22. littleanniefannie says:

    Why didn’t they just introduce the Articles of Impeachment on January 5th of this year? They could have saved the country a lot of aggravation. The reasons are irrelevant since they have yet to come up with anything short of BullSchiff! Either do the people’s work or forfeit your paychecks plus all perks. IOW, Schiff or get off the pot!

    Liked by 1 person

  23. Trumpeter says:

    The appropriate response?

    We will see you in the Senate.


  24. vikingmom says:

    The most important dates, IMHO, are December 2-16th…those are the dates for the rest of this year that SCOTUS is scheduled to meet publicly and hear arguments on cases currently before them. They will then recess until January 13, 2020. IF Roberts announces tomorrow that Justice Ginsburg will be participating “from home” for the December sessions, then we will know for certain that her latest “flu bug” was in fact far more serious than the media let on…and if that’s the case, the Democrats HAVE to get a vote for impeachment (however fraudulent it is) on record before her death so that they can demand that the President hold off on nominating a replacement until after the trial in the Senate is over…and then they will pull out all stops to make sure the trial doesn’t happen, because they know they cannot actually risk that, since they will not be able to rewrite all the rules, like they have in the House!

    I will be VERY interested to see if RBG shows up tomorrow morning in person…

    Liked by 3 people

    • Just because she’s there in person does not means she’ll be ali……ah, never mind. It wasn’t appropriate.

      Liked by 1 person

    • taxpayer here says:

      I’ve been wondering WHAT is with dRats trying to push this through. Your comment makes the most sense and you are most likely right.

      Liked by 1 person

    • GB Bari says:

      ..they can demand that the President hold off on nominating a replacement until after the trial in the Senate is over..

      Not sure it will be an issue since, IMHO, McConnell will put a conservative replacement for RBG on the SCOTUS bench well before November 2020 regardless.


      • vikingmom says:

        I hope you are correct and I think the President has enough leverage on Turtle, due to all of the money he and the missus have received from her Chinese connections, to make sure that Mitch does his duty to “Advise and Consent” the President’s nominees…My main concern is that the MSM will scream all day, every day about how it is “wrong” that a President who has been impeached should be allowed to nominate a Supreme Court Justice before his trial has been held. And if they can get the nomination delayed until after the election, there are dozens of cases, both in this term, and the next term, that will be deadlocked 4-4 and the left will win through the courts again, which is the main way that they have won for the past 50 years!! They lose at the ballot box but then “win” anyway through the efforts of a biased press and an activist judiciary and an uniformed electorate


        • Rhoda R says:

          The trouble with that approach is that, technically and legally, the President is innocent until proven guilty and so far the dems have come up with nothing that resembles proof, let alone a trial.


          • vikingmom says:

            Oh, you are absolutely correct but the Democrats and their willing allies in the media are so determined to push this farce through that silly little things like legalities mean nothing to them! Every single witness that the Republicans were allowed to question was asked the same thing. “What crime did the president commit?” Not a single one of them ever provided an answer…


  25. ale81inn says:

    What all these swamp rats are in fear of is that the malfeasance, corruption and often just downright criminal behavior in every Department and Bureau of our federal government has gone on for decades. Both parties are complicit and NONE of the institutions that are held up with reverence are free of it. In fact it is especially those who are most exalted; Defense, Intel, the FBI, these are tarnished the worst. The FBI is not now nor has it ever been “the best of the best”. It is the American equivalent of the Soviet NKVD. Every little piece that comes unraveled leads to more, and more, and more. Washington has been ripe as a breeding ground for every form of graft for over a hundred years, but the Clintons elevated the game. They monetized their politics and weaponized law enforcement and intel to a degree that was unprecedented up to that point. In every one of the current scandal narratives you follow the thread back and find that it is at least tainted with, if not firmly attached to, the Clintons. Their people remained dormant during the Bush years and then their numbers were bolstered through eight years of Obama. There is at least a quarter centuries worth of poison in that well. He may never get all of them, but the President is doing one magnificent job of flushing them out

    Liked by 4 people

  26. MikeN says:

    House rules say the minority has a minimum of two days to provide a minority report.
    This isn’t in your timeline.


  27. jeans2nd says:

    Why is Adm Mike Rogers not included in any of this? Why has the Admiral not been deposed?
    Adm Rogers was there when this whole mess started. The AAdmiral, of all people, should have much information to offer.


  28. MO Pragmatist says:

    Is the schedule as shown in this story what is published by the House Majority? If so, the December 9 entry is interesting; “Hearing to Deny House Republican witnesses”. The Dems apparently already are set to deny the R’s any witnesses in their Act 2 of the show trial. What a joke!

    Liked by 1 person

  29. taxpayer here says:

    Any ideas why they’re rushing this through? It’s not like this is typical behavior to rush anything…short of rushing to judgment against our duly elected President Trump.


  30. jello333 says:

    Okay, this is just hilarious… in a Kafkaesque way:

    December 6th – Deadline for House Republican witness list.
    December 9th – Hearing to deny House Republican witnesses.


Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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