Oh Snap – Senator Lindsey Graham Pledges to Block Testimony of U.S. Politicians Coordinating With Ukraine…

Senator Lindsey Graham appears on Fox News with Maria Bartiromo and announces he will take all appropriate efforts to stop the truth about Ukraine from being exposed in the Senate.   This interview is a critical first step to understanding motives. CTH will expand in the next few posts that will highlight *WHY* Graham will bury information.

First, watch Senator Graham say unequivocally he will not call witnesses and will quickly move to dismiss the House impeachment effort.  Pay close attention to the part where Graham says calling congressmen to testify is dangerous, and he will not call Adam Schiff because he does not want to go down this path.


These comments by Senator Lindsey Graham are very self serving. Why?… Because Senator Graham participated in the exploitation of Ukraine for his own benefit. In essence Graham is fearful that too much inquiry into what took place with Ukraine in 2014 through 2016 will expose his own participation and effort along with former Ambassador Marie Yovanovich.

Graham is attempting to end the impeachment effort because the underlying discoveries have the potential to expose the network of congressional influence agents, John McCain and Graham himself included, during any witness testimony.

[Full length interview below]


This entry was posted in Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Donald Trump, Election 2016, FBI, IG Report FISA Abuse, Impeachment, Legislation, media bias, Notorious Liars, President Trump, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Spygate, Spying, THE BIG UGLY, Ukraine, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

347 Responses to Oh Snap – Senator Lindsey Graham Pledges to Block Testimony of U.S. Politicians Coordinating With Ukraine…

  1. Boots says:

    Graham’s a damn word parsing weasel. See how his voice went up an octave when asked the hard questions?

    See his misdirection when he said he’d not call Adam Schitt or any other witnesses about Ukraine because “this is tearing the country apart”?

    What’s tearing the country apart is the swamp’s tortured contortions to protect the criminality of FBI, DOJ, Dept of State, CIA, and every crooked politician accepting foreign bribes.

    IN FACT, except for a small handful of reps and senators, all are guilty, in spades, of what Schiff and his Gestapo henchmen accuse Trump of.

    Did you hear him warn Trump, “if the Senate votes to acquit he should celebrate”?

    In a thriller novel the crinal and corrupt political members would be stalked like prey by dogged Patriot detectives, exposed by undercover recordings, and duly sentenced, with the ringleaders sentenced to death.

    In other parts of the world, corrupt politicians are personally targeted by the outraged and engaged citizenry leading in extreme cases to their termination. And even then, there seems to be more still corrupt politicians willing to take the place of the fallen.

    What then, course would best to restore the rule of law and good order to America? The ballot box, with all it’s attendant fraud and cheating by Dems?

    Or the bullet box, with its horrors beyond imagination except for those that know them, and the possibility of failure with all the attendant risks, penalties, and prices?

    Which then is worse, life as a subject in a prison, or the possibility of preventing our subjection to the vile vision of America awaiting us after Trump leaves office in 2024?

    Or is there a third course? One that’s surest of all? “If My people who are called by My name humble themselves and pray, then I will hear from Heaven, and restore their land.”

    “For while we walk in the flesh, we do not wage war according to the flesh. The weapons of our warfare are spiritual, and powerful to the tearing down of strongholds.”

    Could it be our salvation and the restoration of America will be found while we praise the Lord, and pass the ammunition?

    Liked by 5 people

    • Tl Howard says:

      Thing is, Graham KNOWS a Fox audience knows he’s lying. It’s the only audience that follows Spygate and he knows it.
      The guy is dangerous, Mr. President. He’s up for re-election and he sees he could be unmasked.

      Liked by 9 people

    • noswamp says:

      Was waiting for Graham to do this. Not surprised at all. He is just as crooked as those going after Trump.

      Liked by 1 person

    • The Demon Slick says:

      He sucks. You want to see how powerful the Senate judiciary committee is, give it to the dems. Suddenly it’s a mighty weapon against conservatives! My immediate reaction to the headline is: meh. Lindsey Graham says a lot of things. He’s always going on Hannity saying things like “someone should look into that!”. Hello! YOU’RE THE SOMEONE!!!

      Liked by 3 people

      • roddrepub says:

        Demon you hit the nail on the head! I don’t watch Hannity (not because I don’t like him) but because he’s always going on and on with guests to like Leslie who won’t do a damn thing.


    • The Demon Slick says:

      The Lord condones hatred, but only if it’s truly Righteous. It’s ok to Hate evil.

      Liked by 2 people

    • John-Y128 says:

      Sen. Graham is a POS, as bad as Biden, no wonder he wants to ‘end it quick’.
      Ukraine, Poroshenko awards Orders of Ukraine to US Senators McCain and Graham

      Liked by 1 person

  2. BigTalkers says:

    The tricky part will be the Q & A between any witnesses they do call and the Senators on the committee, where potential Ukranian-Congressional “dealings” may inadvertently be exposed.

    And I don’t believe keeping the lid on all this is as cut and dried as Sen Graham would like us to believe. He’ll be taking serious heat from the White House and Republican voters if his scheme starts to go South!

    Liked by 2 people

    • marc kotlovker says:

      So wouldn’t a lot of corruption in Congress and the Senate be easily exposed if IRS audits were conducted?

      Liked by 2 people

      • III% says:

        You mean the same IRS that targeted conservative non-profits and have leaked tax returns? Yeah I wouldn’t put my faith in them. Way to easy to compromise or already be partisan. Plus there are a hundred ways to hide money that are legal, and ten times as many ways that are illegal.


      • The Demon Slick says:

        I’m actually laughing right now. Not at you because you’re so right. But what is humor, really? I define it as delight in the absurd. And it’s (sadly) absurd to expect any kind of accountability from our elected officials. Unless they buck the system, of course.


  3. Zy says:

    Ms. L is channeling Singbird from beyond the grave.

    Liked by 5 people

  4. sticknca says:

    I say we do what the Vatican did to old Pope Formosus. Dig him up, dress him up, put him on the witness stand and convict him. Sometimes the old ways are best.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. bluecat57 says:

    Scumbag. That’s the politest word could think of.

    Time for someone to out him.


  6. Sentient says:

    It may have been asked in earlier comments, but can’t the president’s legal counsel call the witnesses THEY want during an impeachment trial? I mean what the heck?! How can one weasel thwart the truth coming to light?

    Liked by 2 people

  7. Anyone here thinks that Trump and Guiliani do not know what Graham is up to? Seems to me they letting all this play out by themselves.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Orygun says:

      Indeed! He spent many years in McCain’s back pocket and everyone knows he is a crook. If I had to guess I would say he is on a work release program and any missteps will land him in a dark place with his buddy McCain.

      Liked by 4 people

    • Sentient says:

      Knowing and being able to do anything about it are separate things. Also, there is the chance – if they push it – that enough Republican senators had sketchy connections with Ukraine that they could vote to remove the president rather than have their sins come to light. Then there’s the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence where they’re all crooked. If they vote to remove the president it would mean the end of the GOP, but they might prefer that to getting caught for being crooked.

      Liked by 1 person

      • gigi says:

        Sincere question: Whether or not this impeachment sham proceeds to the Senate, once Trump wins re-election, can all this stuff be revisited, then “Lindsey Panty-” (LOL!) and his ilk can “land … in a dark place” (equally LOL)?


  8. Wouldn’t a lot of this corruption be easily exposed if IRS audits were conducted for Senate and House members?

    Liked by 2 people

  9. Dances with Wolverines says:

    I cannot believe the Department of Justice has allowed all of this corruption to go on for all these years without holding even one elected official accountable. If we lose our Country, it will be because of of unelected bureaucrats who have betrayed their country by failing to apply justice equally. I really believe the Judicial Branch is just as corrupt and complicit, including the Supreme Court.

    Liked by 3 people

  10. Perot Conservative says:

    Naive question.

    Did these return funds just come back as politican donations and junkets? Or is it possible there are also monies wired to foreign bank accounts?

    One if the big reasons why we were told General Flynn was a threat. Exposing corruption like ONA – no longer doing ONA analysis. Col James Baker instead trotting around the globe, undermining PDT, and Millions going to a former Clinton staffer and Chelsea Clinton BFF. Sickening.

    Liked by 1 person

    • dd_sc says:

      Stock dividends.

      1. Congress approves the budget.
      2. Foreign aid is sent out and dispersed to family and cronies.
      3. Congress and their friends have investments in the companies – like Burisma – that recieve the money.

      John Podesta got ~$800,000 in stock options for being an intermediary in the Uranium One deal; he signed it over to his daughter when he went to work in the Obama administration.

      Look up what the Clinton’s did in Haiti after the earthquake.

      Harry Reid had friends in the land development business that always seemed to land sweet deals; Reid’s son Rory was often a consultant/lobbyist for their companies.

      Liked by 3 people

      • jello333 says:

        Okay, you just partially answered my question (just below this). Thanks.


        • dd_sc says:

          It’s no accident that Congress has passed laws exempting themselves from insider trading.

          There was a link posted on CTH a few days back indicating Schiff held stock in a company that invested in Burisma (not sure if it was verified). That would close the loop on the money laundering.

          In Ukraine, Team Obama first had to back a coup – enter Victoria Neuland and her assistant (I forget his name) – to put their man in charge. Post coup, they needed to remove that pesky prosecutor.

          Liked by 1 person

        • dd_sc says:

          There is also the PAC money, donations, dark money etc ..- keep the Congress critters that benefit your operations in office.

          Liked by 2 people

    • jello333 says:

      Yeah, I have never really bothered to ask that myself. I mean it’s obvious that many (most?) politicians in DC manage to enrich themselves in various ways. But exactly HOW do they do so? I’m assuming we’re not just talking the value of a vacation or whatever. But more like hard cash (or the equivalent). Are we talking direct, 100% illegal “kickbacks” for projects they agree to vote for? I’m also thinking about Ukraine specifically… I’ve never bothered to wonder how exactly they benefited. Though again, I’m NOT saying I doubt for a second they DID benefit, it’s just it’d be nice to be able to point in a certain direction and say “Look there, you will find the proof right there.”

      Liked by 1 person

      • Redzone says:

        Jello – I just saw recently where Obama admin gave $350MM to Pearson Publishing to produce all the Common Core books for schools. They produce about 80% of the books used in schools.

        Then, Penguin Publishing, the parent co. of Pearson, is the company that paid the Obamas about $65MM for their book publishing deal.

        Of course, it could just be a coincidence.

        Liked by 4 people

    • Redzone says:

      Many many ways. Ever heard of the Panama Papers? If not, do a search. Way too much for here.

      Liked by 2 people

  11. Chilidog says:

    It sounds like Graham is announcing that he will not allow the president to mount the defense of his choosing. The president maintains that the phone call was “perfect” and that he was elected to fight corruption. Trump wants to be acquitted with this as the core of his defense. He will need to call witnesses that outline corruption. If he is unable to do that, than the GOPe will acquit him by lamenting how disturbed they are by Trumps behavior, but it doesn’t rise to the level of removal.

    Liked by 2 people

    • dd_sc says:

      Exactly, big win for the Uniparty.

      Trump will have the stigma of being impeached.

      House Democrats will say he got off on a technicality and Senate Republicans are cowards etc ..

      The GOPe will behave like you have outlined.

      The media will go on and on about it; drowning out MAGA and immigration.

      Liked by 1 person

      • RAkin says:

        And we will Ignore all the On and On and Re-elect Trump which is the main goal. Then he will replace RGB and other Judges. While doing what he can do. Undoing a Century of corruption will take more than Trump if it can ever be undone.

        Just watched The Irishman. No difference from the Mob and our Politicians. One and the same.

        Liked by 3 people

    • evergreen says:

      They may not even acquit.
      Why would Graham announce that the president’s chosen defense is out of bounds, and the Graham is doing the president a favor in this? Why does Graham discount the trial as irrelevant and that he’s predisposed to acquit? Why wouldn’t he go on record saying it should never arrive in the first place, that it’s null and void, and he won’t even hear it?
      Probably because he’s signalling the opposite of what he intends to do: convict the president, or grease the House skids so that it reaches the Senate and some other senator will stick his neck out to convict while Graham rubs his hands in angst and says, oh, darn it.
      “You know, Maria, I believed in my heart that the president was in the clear while all of this House business was going on, but when the new facts came out, well, well, well, what can I say? I cannot condone that behavior. It was not my desire, and I really pulled for the guy, but in the end, this is about something greater than one man; it’s about America, and I just had to do the right thing. It really pained me to convict the president.”


  12. RAC says:

    He didn’t look very comfortable during that interview.

    Liked by 2 people

  13. berniekopell says:

    “[Tomorrow] December [9, 2019], a date which will live in infamy, the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by [a mealy mouthed, weak-knee IG report. the swamp, and the main stream media]. We will gain the inevitable triumph, so help us God.”

    Liked by 3 people

  14. Doug Amos says:

    A man may change his sex but a snake is always a snake and a whole bunch more snakes are about to be exposed. All that easy $ in Ukraine comes with a price after all. Only 1 man in the entire world could bring them down and that is what President Trump is going to do.

    Liked by 2 people

  15. dd_sc says:

    Sen. Graham – “Look at all of this other stuff outside of impeachment.”

    Sure, Wray will get the FBI right on that.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. Sugarhillhardrock says:

    In a previous thread I opined that I took Graham’s dismissal sentiment to acknowledge the Constitutional insufficiency of the House indictment.

    Well, this article lays waste to that thought.
    Graham is covering the a$$ of the uniparty.

    Here’s to Guilianni and PDJT NAILING all of these basturds, including Ms. Lindsey, Wetstart, Burr, Warner, Feinstein (a Beyotch,I know) and any other uniparty scum who get in the reticle.

    Gather the trigger play and squeeze, Mr. President. Blow their heads off. No mercy.
    Terminate with extreme prejudice


    Liked by 3 people

  17. California Joe says:

    Well, be that as it may, shutting down the impeachment hoax with a quick vote will destroy Pelosi and the Bolshevik wing of the Democrat Party as well as Lawfare making look like idiots. So, take the victory and we can fight the Ukraine corruption another day after the 2020 election! Sometimes we don’t get everything we want but we get what we need!

    Liked by 3 people

  18. Right to reply says:

    The only question I have is, is what they are doing legal? If not, why has no one been charged?

    Liked by 1 person

  19. Jeremey Hustman says:

    Looks like Lindsey Graham is a fact witness and has no choice but to recuse himself. Adam, the leaking and lying, Schiff needs to be questioned under oath. Maybe Lindsay needs to go under oath for questioning too.

    Liked by 1 person

  20. ezpz2 says:

    I’m a bit confused…

    The other day, I said that Lindsey would not call Schiff to testify, and was told that in an impeachment trial, Lindsey would have no say. Rather, It’s the President’s legal team that would control who testifies.

    It’s been a while since there’s been an impeachment of a president, and back then, I really wasn’t paying attention to what I felt was political pornography.

    Can someone shed light on who has control of a senate trial? Lindsey or President Trump’s legal team?


    Liked by 1 person

    • iwasthere says:

      Great point. And you know what? You might be correct. In an impeachment, there is a defense, and a defense can call witnesses. . But, i’ll bet McConnel gets some ‘extraordinary rule change.’ because – same excuse Lindsey is using. Just my 2 cents.

      Liked by 1 person

    • SHV says:

      Best I can tell, the issue of “control” is unclear….the Judiciary committee formulates “bipartisan” rules, which may include witnesses and that is voted on by the Senate. In the Clinton trial, the “rules” were approved 100-0 but the issue of calling witnesses was avoided. During the trial the issue of witnesses was raised and a compromise was reached behind “closed doors”. The compromise was to depose witnesses in private with audio/video, the tapes were edited and snippets presented at trial. Trial is basically the House Managers and the President’s atty each presenting their stories and arguments. Senators can only asked questions in writing sent to the Presiding Officer/Chief Justice. The Chief Justice and majority vote decide how the trial is conducted and best I can tell there is no guarantee of due process, fairness, Federal Rules of evidence, and there is no appeal.

      Liked by 1 person

  21. iwasthere says:

    Two thoughts. 1. The keating 5 part 2; and didn’t at one point – like the 70’s – we have an FBI public integrity section? Man, those guys and gals have been asleep.

    Liked by 1 person

  22. ChampagneReady says:

    Graham brings bile to my mouth. Resign you McCain buttlicker.

    You haven’t done shit the entire year since you have been Judiciary Chairman.
    Not ONE investigation
    Not ONE subpoena
    Not ONE hearing on Muller total crap
    Not ONE hearing on Ukraine shanghai job

    Now you want to hide in your hole and don’t want to bring Biden and Schiff to the witness stand to be grilled until they’re twitching in the witness chair like a 5 year old that has to go to the bathroom?

    All you do is flap your jaws on TV shows. Do the Republicans a favor and RESIGN !!

    Liked by 2 people

    • Mister Stewart says:

      Sir, this article told you why he’s done everything you’ve listed. Lindsey Graham & numerous unknown Republicrats & Demopublicans in the Senate are guilty of taking bribes from Ukraine exactly like the Biden’s.


  23. gunrunner03 says:

    Lindsay Graham needs to be voted out of office and replaced with a Trump supporter.

    Liked by 1 person

  24. Barnestormer says:

    Despite his procedural bluster, with the likes of Romney, Murkowski and Collins to deal with (for starters), Lindsey Graham may find it’s harder to get to 51 than to not get to 67.


  25. icthematrix says:

    With this, I am absolutely convinced this is the corrupt Senate’s play. If, or when, the impeachment is received from the House, Turtle will immediately call the Senators for a vote on whether to move forward based upon the “merit” of the order…which will be summarily dismissed by enough to keep any defense or evidence presented. No defense equals covering up their corruption.

    This statement from the Debbie says they are in on it, Dims get to play this for maximum angst.



  26. nimrodman says:

    So about 3 weeks ago Graham was saying any impeachment proposal passed from the House would be voted down on a simple motion to not proceed

    Then about a week ago McConnell was saying “No it wont – there’ll have to be a trial”

    Now Graham again is saying it’ll just be voted down
    … or at least GOP won’t call the kind of witnesses people are clamoring for


  27. Cam Heck says:

    Lindsay is in deep:


  28. namberak says:

    You had to know there was no actual Lindsey 2.0 …


  29. Mikal Dene says:

    I’m not happy. These Aholes collecting all this money on our backs has to stop. We worked for that money. We scrape to get by and feed our children while they pop champagne every time they get over on us. They are stealing our futures to line their pockets and we sit on our collective ass doing nothing to stop it. I don’t know what is more infuriating. Them stealing us blind or we the people letting them do it. I for one am sick of this nonsense. If the President is truly working on our behalf then why is this continuing? The DOJ should clean house along with the other three letter agencies. Is there no one left who has some ethics or morals? At this juncture I’m not even certain we are a Constitutional Republic. This wreaks more of a criminal organization at the highest levels. It certainly explains why no one has gone to jail at the government level. During the Obama administration, My wife and I were audited like so many conservatives were during the targeting of conservatives in this country back then. They forced us to pay them $10,000. For some that may seem like nothing but for us it was our home. They decided my wife’s disability was income. According to the tax preparers and the SSI people, it was not taxable since we never filed jointly. The IRS said no repeatedly even after we hired a cpa who confirmed it was not taxable. We lost our home, I sold my truck, and we lived in a camper for three years all while these bastards were stealing our taxes to enrichen themselves. Bullshit. I have lost faith in the system and I am losing faith in those who I believed were standing up for all Americans. They’re all thieves, all of them. They lie, cheat, and steal at every opportunity. They in my opinion are not Americans and are no longer welcome in my home. It’s no wonder why Americans are so pissed off at our government with corruption like this continuing to flourish and no one trying to stop it…Who you going to call?

    Liked by 2 people

  30. MD says:

    LG – “I’m not going to be a part of something that’s going to tear the country apart” ????

    How is that going to tear the country apart??? It would tear the swamp apart!!!

    Liked by 1 person

    • jello333 says:

      Oh he’s probably right. It DOES have the potential to tear the country apart, depending on a few things. Notice he’s not saying that won’t happen anyway… he’s just saying that HE will not personally be involved in bringing it about. So I think another way of looking at this is that Graham KNOWS what could very well be about to go down, but he doesn’t want anyone pointing at him saying “See what you did?!”


  31. Magabear says:

    And thus why I’ve floated the idea that the GOP Senate may just decide to decline even taking up the sham impeachment from the House. It would look like they’re being rule of law, rock ribbed conservatives by telling Pelosi and her poodle Schiff to take a hike while hiding their real motive of protecting themselves.

    Call it duplicity of motives.


  32. TreeClimber says:

    “Adam! Stop! We told you to implicate Trump, not us, and not exonerate him!”

    Liked by 1 person

  33. The Far Side says:

    Uhhh no, Senator Graham. If your implicated we’ll talk forgiveness later. What’s at stake is much larger than you and yours.
    We’re seeing the “whites of their eyes”.
    Time to fire!

    Liked by 1 person

  34. Brad garrett says:

    We cannot allow the republicans in general or Lindsey graham in particular deny President Trump his right to a fair trial including all due process rights. Right to confront his accuser or accusers. Right to call rebuttal witnesses (with the vague charges that’s a lot of rebuttal witnesses). Right to a presumption of innocence. Who does Lindsey Graham think he is to deny the president his basic rights and the opportunity to completely clear his name. This cannot stand and I ask anyone who agrees with me to call and write to rush/Hannity and other media outlets as well as their own swamp senators. Here’s a short list for you. McConnell, Cronyn, thune, Blount, Murkowski, Romney and Graham. Don’t wait on Barr and Durham. Do what you can and fight these swamp republicans


  35. patti says:

    Flashback Sunday

    Frick & Frack…..Things look different in hindsight.


  36. Unsk says:

    Graham is playing with fire here. He had better back up and do the right thing right now. The base will go frigging nuts if he pulls this stunt. He will never hear the end of white hot criticism and humiliation for this ridiculous behavior if he tries it for the rest of his life. HIs name will forever be associated with duplicity, corruption and treason. The people are really getting fed up with this corrupt Uni-Party BS.


  37. Justin Green says:

    Calling the President’s witnesses in the Senate is dangerous for politicians, but healthy to heal the near-mortal wounds Congress has caused.

    Graham is a snake.

    Liked by 2 people

  38. Justin Green says:

    Graham knows Team Hillary killed Seth Rich, too. Any time I hear a politician claim that Muh Rusha hacked the DNC, I feel the urge to punch something.

    Liked by 1 person

  39. Justin Green says:

    If there’s a trial, what makes Lindsey think he gets to choose who the President calls? It appears if there’s a trial, Lindsey plans on denying Trump due process as well.

    What a degenerate.


  40. aumechanic says:

    I know I’m gonna catch hell for this, but schiff is looking like a damn hero pushing this investigation to the Senate, he must know for sure certain that they won’t look at anything, or its like I’ve said, they may convict him (VSGPDJTRUMP )just to cover it all up. Sarc. On/off I aint sure


    • Hey aumechanic;
      Schiff can’t push an investigation to the Senate.
      They haven’t even impeached POTUS yet.
      Stay tuned: More to happen first, so we’ll see what really happens.


    • Justin Green says:

      Yep. Schiff and Pelousy will be talking all next year about how Trump should have been impeached and removed from office if it weren’t for the crooked Republicans who weren’t interested in “truth”.

      Graham is a bastard.


  41. albertus magnus says:

    PDJT, Rudy, Barr, Durham, StepnFetchit, etc. can have all of the evidence in the world on how crooked DeepState is.



  42. Justin Green says:

    Graham is switch hitting from the Democrat side here, too.

    By refusing a trial, Graham is giving Democrats huge talking points here, and leaving them with tons of room to attack in 2020. I can hear it already…

    Democrats: We impeached Trump in the House, but Republicans shut it down without a trial to protect the GOP.

    If the House passes it, let’s have the damned trial, Lindsey. Congress is already a degenerate circus. Might as well finish the act.


    • IMHO: Senator Graham does not have as much authority in the Senate as he may project during an interview on any TV network.
      Senator McConnell sets the tone. Chief Justice Roberts also has a say in the matter of Impeachment.
      I always try to keep that in the back of my mind when Senator Graham bloviates.


  43. X XYZ says:

    “Crooked, isn’t it?”
    “I’d like to see something in this joint that isn’t crooked.”

    Honest John. Welcome to Congress.

    Liked by 1 person

  44. DTnTX says:

    I hate to say it, but I think Sundance got it wrong this time. Sen. Graham is saying he won’t call members of Congress into his oversight committee and Adam Schiff has endangered the structure of our government by going after another member of Congress (Nunes via the phone records) – I believe what he’s saying about the trial is that as soon as 51 call it BS, it should be done.

    Liked by 1 person

  45. Troublemaker10 says:

    My question would be “how does Trump want this handled”?

    I can see an advantage to the Senate dismissing the charges on day one vs weeks long trial and acquittal. I can also see an advantage to Trump presenting defense witnesses.

    Either way, congress can’t investigate itself about corruption. This should come from FBI/DOJ. If these institutions want to gain back much needed public trust….they will pursue these allegations coming out of Ukraine and honestly let the dominoes fall wherever they fall.

    Failure to do so just makes these institutions part of the corruption problem.


    • dawg says:

      I think it was on Fox and Friends a couple weeks ago, the phone call interview with the President. And they asked PT specifically, something to the effect of “Wait, so you WANT a trial?” He started to say “Yes” and then clarified and prefaced that by making it clear it was all bogus and should be shut down, but that if it wasnt, he would call lots of witnesses and go all the way with it.

      That just seems like common sense to me.

      I think ideally, he wants it shut down, either by not passing the House or being dismissed by the Senate. I think he is purposely letting it be known that if it does get that far, he has big plans, in order to deter them from taking it that far.

      Liked by 1 person

  46. Mark Spencer says:

    Graham, our “Gang of 8” McCain/Flake/Rubio comrade, wants people “disciplined?” Really? Flynn wasn’t disciplined. Stone wasn’t disciplined. Papadopoulos wasn’t disciplined. Martha Stewart wasn’t disciplined. The “bribery college” parents weren’t disciplined. The Navy Seals weren’t disciplined. Even the Duke Lacrosse team wasn’t disciplined. Criminal indictments and convictions are par for the course for those who are NOT protected by the swamp nor embraced by the Deep State. Barr has already turned down criminal recommendations against Comey. Sessions recused himself. Clinton wasn’t indicted. One would not be unreasonable to expect disappointment based upon a third world two-tiered criminal justice system demonstrated by past practice from the DC stage. If one expects indictments and/or convictions then one shouldn’t be surprised this December to find a lump of coal in their Christmas stocking.


  47. dawg says:

    Im just as convinced that Sen Graham is corrupt and has Ukraine skeletons in his closet as anybody. I totally understand that he is just wanting to end it before it exposes him and his buddies.

    BUT, why are people accepting the narrative that the only way to expose and prosecute the real criminals is to have AN IMPEACHMENT TRIAL OF THE PRESIDENT IN THE SENATE?

    Is there not another way that doesn’t involve our 98% Corruptocrat Senate and Chief Justice Roberts?

    Can anyone answer that?

    It just sounds like insanity to me to suggest that in order to expose the corruption in our government, we have to “TRY THE PRESIDENT FOR IMPEACHMENT IN THE SENATE”.

    Like, WTF? Am I in the effing Twilight Zone???

    (And by the way, if I was President Trump, and I wanted the impeachment hoax to end, I would be saying the same things he is saying right now, with regards to threatening to call Schiff, Biden etc…as witnesses. I dont doubt he would, and wants to if it comes to that, but how much of his reason for saying that is a deterrent?)


  48. mostlyogauge says:

    The only vote the House has had regarding “impeachment” was to endorse Peolosi’s call for an “impeachment inquiry”. Now, I’m no legal or Constitutional scholar, but to me, that sure doesn’t sound like the House voted to impeach. An endorsement of an inquiry? Seriously?

    If this shiff show continues, and the “impeachment inquiry” results are sent to the Senate by the House, with the House calling the results an impeachment, I would think that the Senate would just ignore it because there is no impeachment, or President Trump would go to court to stop all this because the “impeachment inquiry” is a hoax, a joke, a sham, a fake impeachment.

    The dems have nothing. They can’t even conduct an impeachment in the proper manner.


  49. SharkFL says:

    Are we ever to be free?


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