Mitch McConnell: USMCA Ratification Vote This Week, Along With Impeachment Houskeeping Measures…

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell holds a press availability today and notes the USMCA vote will take place this week.  Additionally, if the House sends the impeachment articles to the Senate tomorrow the Senate would take some preliminary steps this week, which could include call-over Chief Justice Roberts to swear in senators as jurors and take care of other housekeeping measures by consent.

If the process follows the timeline outlined by the majority leader the Senate could begin the impeachment trial next Tuesday.

Leader Mitch McConnell, Majority Whip John Thune, Chairman John Barrasso, Vice-Chair Joni Ernst, Republican Policy Committee Chairman Roy Blunt, and NRSC Chairman Todd Young deliver remarks to the media.  WATCH:

This entry was posted in Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Donald Trump, Impeachment, Legislation, media bias, Mitch McConnell, President Trump, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

112 Responses to Mitch McConnell: USMCA Ratification Vote This Week, Along With Impeachment Houskeeping Measures…

  1. steph_gray says:

    “… the Senate would take some preliminary steps this week, which could include call-over Chief Justice Roberts to swear in senators as jurors…”

    For some reason I read this as “swear in senators as janitors…”

    Well, there will be a lot to clean up after this circus concludes.

    Liked by 12 people

    • J.Thomas says:

      Those Senators need to know that they are needed to counterbalance the absolute partisanship in the House with an equal measure of partisanship in the Senate with no goal other than to protect the president and discredit Democrats.

      It’s time to go on the offense. The other process was not bipartisan, they were not honest brokers. Do not play games with them on their terms. Use nothing but RAW POWER to turn this into a purely offensive exercise to politically destroy those on the left. This is the game they have played with you. This is not a time for cowards. Your constituents require not just a resolute spine like was had in the Kavanaugh hearings…they require brute force to squash your opponent and to take the control that the voters have given you.

      As for the people visiting this site…you need to let your senators know that you will not accept anything less but for them to go on offense, and if they do not exercise RAW POWER to squelch this coup, that you will see to it that this is their last term in office.

      Liked by 5 people

  2. If it weren’t an election year, I really believe that the never-Trump Republican leadership in the photo above would find a reason to vote to remove our President. Never trust never-Trumpers!

    Liked by 12 people

    • Issy says:

      I find them all super annoying.

      Liked by 3 people

    • vml9000 says:

      What a fol bunch of deceivers! I don’t trust these Vipers even if it is an election year! McConnell and his gopE posse are dirty deep state players. They want Trump out as badly as the Dimms.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Dutchman says:

        It would be reassuring, having watched and heard McConnell, on camera, say
        “I can’t imagine we would allow the Dems to call witnesses, and NOT allow,Trump to call witnesses.”(paraphrasing).

        However, having watched/heard McConnell get in front of the,cameras, and lead his fellow Republican leadership in a hearty rendition of”For Muellers an HONORABLE fellow, which none of us can DENY!” I am NOT reassured.

        Nevertheless, IFas someone posted above,..that there is no way Republicans will vote to convict, “in an election year”, then PDJT supreme genius, and/or divine intervention, is readily apperent.

        To wit, it was obvious,early on the,aim was for Impeachment. But what if they had got there SOONER, as they intended?

        Say, if PDJT had fired Sessions, Rosie, Mueller team? The House would have passed articles of Impeachment, for Obstruction of Justice, we would have heard endlessly about “Nixons Sat. Night massacre” (in 3 part harmony)
        and Mitch and Senate Republicons would have sung “Its Watergate2.0, no
        One is above the Law, not even the President, we have no choice but to convict!”

        To most monumentous decisions;
        PapaD deciding NOT to bring back the,$10,000, and PDJT deciding NOT to fire them all, no matter the provocation!

        Leak lies about me. No!
        Call me a Russian spy and Traitor? No
        Cast aspersion on me of sexual perversion? No
        Try to smear me sexually, to harm my marriage? No
        Raid my personal lawyers office, home etc.?No
        Raid friends and supporters in outrageous no knock early morning, televised swat raids? No

        Eventually, they had to give up, as they realised there was NOTHING they could,Do, that would trigger PDJT into firing them.
        They set a trap, that he refused to fall into.

        I wonder,…Melania is, I suspect, PDJT’s closest advisor. If she counciled him to follow that path, to NOT fire, and we know PapaD’s girlfriend now wife advised him not to bring the $, says a lot about the importance of intelligence of women.

        Thank you Lord, for PDJT! And for Melania,….and his whole team.

        Liked by 2 people

  3. Zydeco says:

    A period of time is required for GOPe to sharpen shives.

    Like

  4. deepdivemaga says:

    Sundance, at this point in time, how do you see the trial playing out?

    Witnesses, no witnesses, taped depositions…?

    McConnell has seemed set on the past Clinton trial precedents.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Remington says:

      Is there a long line of GOP Senators looking to play the role of Brutus?

      Like

    • Dutchman says:

      And, the precedent is not to make the decision of witnesses/no witnesses, until AFTER they have heard the opening arguments.
      And then “51 Senators will decide”, by vote, whether to hear witnesses, or not.

      Personally, I wouldn’t make bets on whether they,DO orDON’T hear witnesses.

      Then, do they vote to aquit, or convict?
      And if 51 vote not to convict, without hearing any witnesses, is that exhoneration? Or simply “not guilty, which despite attempts to spin, is NOT usually an “exhoneration”.

      Doesn’t mean the defendant didn’t DO it, just means we couldn’t PROVE, in a Court of Law, to a,Jury, beyond a Reasonable Doubt, using Admissable evidence, that the defendant was guilty of the crime.

      O.J was found not guilty, but he was NOT “Exonerated”, by any means.

      I would like to see PDJT exhonerated.
      I can not imagine that Prosecution witness’s could,POSSIBLY hurt PDJT’s ‘case’, but HIS Defence witnesses would DEVASTATE the House prosecutors case.

      So, I guess I am ‘in favor’ of them voting to call witnesses. I SUSPECT most Dems will vote for witnesses, so it wouldn’t take many Repubs to reach 51.

      My, we live in INTERESTING times!

      Like

      • Heika says:

        Me too Dutchman. I am having nightmare recurring echoes of The Mueller nonsense. What did he say? “Just because we found no evidence, that does not mean we exonerate him (Trump)”. I say, call ’em, call the ones that matter. BIDEN AND BIDEN and George Soros who is at the very head of this whole thing in Ukraine from the very start.

        Like

        • Dutchman says:

          I’m for calling witnesses. I should think PDJT’s legal team, would see it the same way.

          What can Bolton or White House Council say, really that can hurt?

          Unlike a trial, they have no pretrial depositions, so the Dems have no idea WHAT they will say.

          On the other hand, just the questions to Wheres Hunter, Joe etc., regardless what answers they give, will be DEVASTATING.
          PDJT’s team can call the Ukranian prosecutors, that Rudy has signed affidavits from.
          We KNOW what THEY will say!

          Like

  5. TonyE says:

    Hopefully by Wednesday they will repeal the whole thing and the RINOs can take a long weekend in Florida getting a tan alongside Boehner.. with a good bourbon and a Marlboro. 😉

    Meanwhile Schumie and the Commies can do as they always seem to do… complain, rant and be miserable while a snow storm hits the North East.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. A2 says:

    👇👇

    Liked by 6 people

  7. The Boss says:

    Passing USMCA before the “trial” is huge. That was supposed to wait until AFTER the trial. So…what kind of deal was made to get this done now?

    Liked by 8 people

    • abdiesus says:

      posted below before I saw yours – I agree – this is HUGE

      Like

    • Bogeyfree says:

      The reason is to ensure these trade agreements are in place BEFORE our 20 RINOS vote to oust a President on totally made up charges.

      To soften the blow to the market as best as possible.

      This is the biggest frame job and fraud on this country and many of the Republican Senators IMO are in on it.

      The Dems knew Ukraine would force them to decide……..

      Do I protect the President or myself.

      And IMO human nature will win out as those with dirt on their hands will vote to oust PT.

      Liked by 2 people

    • GB Bari says:

      IMHO McConnell and his cronies always wanted to get the USMCA passed and are only dealing with it ahead of the trial because they will have the bill and can vote on it before the trial is organized and can begin.

      If there were issues with USMCA in its current form (as passed by the House), this order of events would not happen. But it appears that the Swampists in both House and Senate see the USMCA as sufficiently benefitting both them and their PayMasters on K Street…

      Liked by 2 people

      • Dutchman says:

        USMCA always had broad, bi-partisan support, before and after Nany’s ‘tweeking’on the margins.

        It was recognised Nancy was the only hild up; it was always gonna pass tge House, if put to a vote, and the Senate then.

        Broad, bi-partisan support.
        Its good optics, passing before Impeachment trial.

        I am optimistic, despite my distrust of McConnell, Graham and Roberts.

        Because, as has been said, an Impeachment isn’t a,LEGAL trial, its,a,POLITICAL trial.
        The Jury is NOT 100 Senators, it is,WE, the PEOPLE of the United States.

        The Senators represent us. If WE, collectively support PDJT, the votes in the Senate will reflect that.

        The Senate will vote in ‘enlightened Self interest’.

        Liked by 1 person

  8. Tom! says:

    John thune hopes that in future impeachment’s the congress will send articles as the founders intended. Sick! Where does that leave P/T?

    Like

  9. There WILL be witnesses. Murkowski, Collins, Romney, Lee, Rubio, et al do not want to miss an opportunity to embarrass the President.

    Hopefully, PDJT payback with be a bitch….swift, aggressive, unrelenting and aimed at the jugular. .

    Liked by 6 people

    • Bogeyfree says:

      The problem is if you listen to them the witness they want is Bolton but you never hear them demanding that Biden, Hunter, Shifty, Pelosi, the ICIG, the WB or the Ukrainian officials testify do you??

      Why is that???

      Mark my words they will restrict in some way, PT team from calling any of the people I mention above and Roberts will rule in support of that.

      And know you also know why the DOJ IMO has chosen NOT to declassify anything because in a few weeks they will never have too.

      Maybe then the trust the plan folks will finally wake up, when it is too late!

      Self preservation will always win out over truth and justice in the end.

      Liked by 1 person

  10. Weird how the Senate is acting like this Impeachment charade is Legitimate…. Same as the Illegal Russian investigation hoax that was allow to proceed without a specified crime….but then again I have to remind myself how many in the House and Senate are Lawyers….Yep….Corrupt, unethical Lawyers running the Country……

    Liked by 10 people

    • bessie2003 says:

      Agree. They are legitimizing an illegal set-up. On top of that they are letting the Burisma Russia 2.0 story stand as if that too isn’t a hoax.

      My “worry”, okay, concern, is that they think that if they vote for and pass the USMCA before the impeachment trial they will then feel free to remove him from office hoping to stop the crushing defeat of their globalism agenda before President Trump can do more to end it.

      That they are all thinking yes on witnesses, that tells me they are giving in to Schumer’s demands. Republicans – continuing to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Dutchman says:

        HOW does allowing both sides to call witnesses do anything but HELP PDJT?

        They can NOT allow Dem prosecutors to call witnesses, and restrict PDJT defence from also calling witnesses.

        This usn’t the,”Grand Jury” equivalent, secret and behind closed doors.
        This is the,TRIAL, out in the open and with theWorld watching.

        GOPe might vote NOT to hear witnesses, and go straight to convict/aquit vote.

        Patriots might be those R’s that vote to hear,witnesses.

        Dems will vote to hear witnesses, I SUSPECT, cause they believe delusionally, that,witnesses hurt PDJT.

        However, Dem Senators in marginal districts like Manchin, and if there are any ‘smart’dem senators, would vote no witnesses, so it could get interesting.

        Perhaps there will be a,coalescing, for very different reasons, of a majority voting to hear witnesses.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Bogeyfree says:

      Amazing isn’t it how this is drifting from we must oust this sham day one to we need to hear witnesses.

      PT is and always has been snookered and in the end his own party will play the role of Brutus.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Justin Folkwein says:

      It’s cuz they are doing what they always do: play nice to show everyone how fair they are and willing to be bi-partison. The same damn mistake they make every time.

      Liked by 1 person

    • mike says:

      Somehow we start with DNC’s murder of their staffer/Bernie supporter over the HRC primary scam being exposed; HRC’s massive computer and secrecy breeches; Stasi++ FBI-NSA etc spying; systemic computer systems penetration of Dem congressional offices by Pakistani intelligence (Awans), and pedophilia a la Epstein and Weiner; Biden’s huge corruption, and wind up with the treasonous and bogus Russiagate coup attempt and then this bogus impeachment.

      Liked by 1 person

  11. abdiesus says:

    Big news here is: “notes the USMCA vote will take place this week.” If that is actually true, that’s huge winning.

    As Sundance has pointed out repeatedly, this is the keystone of the next phase of America First trade policy, the post-Brexit UK Trade deal, and resultant further decoupling from China.

    Liked by 7 people

    • TarsTarkas says:

      Any chance of someone a summary of the USMCA for people who don’t want to (or have the time to) wade through 10K pages of legalese? Or forced to be listen to or have to read ‘spin’ on why this provision or that provision is good or bad? I’ve heard some things I don’t like about it, especially concerning Big Tech.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Boots says:

      that’s huge winning.
      =====
      Not necessarily. Read some of the above comments. They state now that USMCA is passed, Senate can boot POTUS and 1) claim victory for USMCA, 2) stop POTUS from continuing to dismantle the govt’s globalist plans for our enslavement.

      Like

      • JBS says:

        This is not happening in any way shape or form. No Republican this popular would be voted out by his own party ever and that includes Trump. If that happened the stock market would immediately tank and the economy would teeter. And Trump is indecently rich. He would go scorched earth on all repub Senators. And the would lose. Actually it would be a bloodbath for Republicans in the 2020 election. All Senators know a vote against Trump probably costs them their next election. Also, while a dismissal vote would work great if Pelosi never sent over the impeachment articles, it really doesn’t work once she does. It would be a party line vote and give Dems cover for their impeachment charade in the house. What they really need to do is call all witnesses the House republican wanted, release all testimony the Dems have been hiding and set it up to take an early vote before the State of the union if possible.

        Like

        • zorrorides says:

          A vote against Trump isn’t needed to turn the GOPe Senators out of office. Only one thing is needed: for POTUS Trump to go to the state in person for a rally and ask the citizens there to send a new Senator to DC, because the current (old) Senator is working for the other side and against the causes of the People.

          This contingency is why I wish VSGT would be working on alternative candidates to run in the primary.

          Like

  12. bessie2003 says:

    These people (politicians) make me nervous.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. joebkonobi says:

    I fear we are about to witness the biggest circus of the century starting next week. I’m pretty sure the dems and Lawfarse are 100% prepared and in unity on a plan. I do not expect the 53 Senate Republicans will remain unified on anything. When chaos hits they will scatter like a covey of quail. I hope I am wrong.

    Liked by 8 people

  14. Gary Lacey says:

    Someone, anybody help me out,….HELP…… if the witnesses that testified in the House, riddle me this, why aren’t they good enough for the Senate. ……hmmm?
    And if they did not testify in the House, riddle me this,…..how can they testify in the Senate……hmmm?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Gary Lacey says:

      Without a continuation from the House into the Senate…..this has a G-D SHAM written all over it.

      Liked by 1 person

    • GB Bari says:

      No one has perfect answers. It’s all in uncharted waters.
      That is the controversy that the Senate will be taking up.

      1. Anti-Trumpers (both DemonRATs and RepubliCON / DecptiCON RINOs) want NEW “witnesses” who will bring new dirt that was most likely illegally passed to them by the Muller Coup Team & Other Lawfare “agents” but was not or could not be presented in the House hearings.

      Most if not all of it will be fraudulent dirt (“opposition research”) such as was used to fabricate both the false Russia Collusion and false Ukraine Quid Pro Quo “scandals”. But the Dem’s and DeceptioCON’s goal is to get it out into the public sphere in the attempt to “dirty up” (smear) the President and as many of his close supporters as possible.

      2. Pro-Trump / pro-Constitution Republicans will come down on both sides of the witness question as some clearly see the fraud in the DemonRAT House that resulted in the sham Articles of Impeachment. So those Republicans (I have no idea how many) want to NOT give the articles or the House process ANY credibility and want to dismiss the articles outright, precluding any possibility of a trial.

      3. Some Republican Senators claim they want to give the President an opportunity to clear his name by holding the trial with witnesses and letting the President’s team call all the witnesses they want.

      I think this third group is the smallest of the three and will probably NOT get their way, especially because of some witnesses (especially the ones Rudy has lined up) who represent a serious incriminating threat to some of the RepubliCON DeceptiCON Senators who have willingly participated in the coup to cover up their personal corruption and treachery.

      Like

  15. Ausonius says:

    Be prepared for anything: never forget…This is an attempted coup, and we have too many supposedly on our side, whom we cannot trust!.

    The whole fiasco can be blamed on the RINO GOP “leadership” for losing the House in 2018: lackluster campaigns, lackluster or incompetent candidates, or worse, no candidates at all to oppose the DEM.

    My favorite example is from the Senate: how on earth did war veteran, Afro-American Republican JOHN JAMES lose to a complete non-entity like “Debbie (Sic!) Stabenow” ? One big reason: he never received enough support from the national party to overcome his lack of “name recognition.” And why? The losing mentality in the national organization?

    He is trying again in 2020. But if the coup succeeds, what will it matter?

    I never thought I would live to see our country so torn with general immorality (including infanticide), general corruption, stupidity (staring at nonsense on (phone) screens for hours per day) , and apathy. I never thought Americans would be nodding in agreement with putting on the shackles of slavery in exchange for promises of “fairness” and “security,” and be willing to limit their freedom to the desire to inhale and inject drugs to fry their brains.

    Such things are always present in any society at any time, of course: but it is a matter of the percentage.

    We shall see what kind of a future

    Liked by 6 people

    • Ausonius says:

      …we create for ourselves.

      (WordPress: strange at times)

      Like

    • Gary Lacey says:

      Read EZEK:38( note Gog and Magog in the “latter years”) then go to Rev:20 (note again, Gog and Magog and note Satan is released from his prison)
      I think we’re in the latter years and Satan has been loosed

      Liked by 1 person

      • Ausonius says:

        Yesterday I quoted the German students at the University of Munich, who started an anti-Nazi underground, and who believed – as Catholics – that demonic forces had been unleashed in their country in the form of Hitler and the Nazis.

        “Every word from Hitler’s mouth is a lie” they wrote in one of their underground pamphlets.

        In our modern-day Atheist Socialists pushing their constant lies, we have a parallel to the Nazis and Communists of 100 years ago. In one sense they are appearing right on schedule: 100 years is long enough for many people to become ignorant of past history, especially given the slow-motion disaster known as American Public Education.

        Liked by 1 person

  16. rcogburn says:

    If you’re feeling uneasy about impeachment, you’re not alone! Lawfare’s Benjamin Wittes / Quinta Jurecic are very unhappy campers. They hold out a glimmer of hope for Bolton, but not much. Of course, anything can happen, but if their predictions are accurate, I’m good with that.

    Beyond that, this article all but make SD’s case for him: their impeachment strategy was not to build an actual case in the House, it was to carry the investigations into the Senate, where they would keep calling witnesses and producing documents for as long as possible.

    “It will be mostly—perhaps entirely—composed of arguments by the House impeachment managers and the president’s defense team, not a presentation of new evidence. …If the Senate allows witnesses to be called at all, it will do so in small numbers and in a stage-managed form.”

    “..partisanship is such that there is no doubt about the trial’s conclusion and very little margin of error in predicting the final vote.”

    “In a real trial, the members of the House … could call all of the witnesses who testified in the House impeachment proceedings and add to them key witnesses who declined to show up. They could seek documents that have not been turned over so far. …the live question is not whether we will hear a complete presentation of the evidence and the available witnesses but whether we will hear any witnesses at all.”

    “…even if the Senate ends up calling former National Security Adviser John Bolton and Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, it is most unlikely to call anywhere close to the wide array of witnesses who have new light to shed…like the president’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani, former Acting National Security Adviser Charles Kupperman, and other Office of Management and Budget and White House officials who could add details on what the president knew about the hold on aid to Ukraine and when he knew it, along with his motivations for holding it up in the first place.”

    “Republicans just want the matter to go away, to get to a final vote as quickly as possible. Whether there is enough Republican support to hear from any witnesses at all is very much in doubt: Senator Susan Collins is reportedly working with a “fairly small group” of fellow GOP senators to form a bloc in favor of calling at least some witnesses, but it’s not clear how successful her efforts will be or how seriously she is taking the project. And Democrats may not feel like pushing hard to secure lots of witnesses. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer’s initial letter to McConnell proposed only four, far from a maximalist approach. Democratic senators campaigning for the presidency may well want to get back to Iowa and New Hampshire quickly—while even those who aren’t seeking the White House worry that the impeachment proceedings will somehow strengthen Trump’s hand by enraging his voter base.”

    “…both sides appear ready to rely on testimony already given to the House to the extent possible. The most anyone is arguing for is hearing from a few witnesses whose testimony the House did not get.”

    And Re: Bolton:

    “Nobody knows whether Bolton will end up testifying. And nobody knows what he will say if he does…Bolton is a wild card—a friend neither to Trump nor to those who oppose the president. That makes him a fascinating, if morally suspect, figure against the boredom spread out before us.”

    https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/01/impeachment-trial-boring/604822/

    Liked by 1 person

    • Payday says:

      Bolton won’t testify. PT will announce executive privilege and that should be the end of it as the GOP won’t wait for it to go thru the courts. That’s not an issue McConnell or Roberts can make on their own.

      Liked by 3 people

    • G. Alistar says:

      Bolton is a trap….to make democrats look like the idiots they have been acting like during this impeachment coup.

      Like

  17. Troublemaker10 says:

    Liked by 2 people

  18. citizen817 says:

    Liked by 1 person

  19. thedoc00 says:

    Cost of Trade pact Passage = Trial + Witnesses. No guarantees on vote.

    Wonder if Republicans will even call for ALL materials gathered by Democrat hearings and not just the edited lawfare summaries.

    I am skeptical at this point. Remember how easy it was for democrats to turn Jeff Flake, during all the delays. Now there is Romney working full time as the republican quisling member of the Democrat effort.

    Liked by 3 people

  20. timothy says:

    Roberts is a skunk

    Liked by 2 people

  21. i want to see the atkinson testimony that the house wouldn’t release,they didn’t want it out for some reason.

    Liked by 4 people

  22. fangdog says:

    In the meantime with all the politicians focus on impeachment, Trump gets real important things done for the American people practically unimpeded.

    What Washington politicians and fake-news media fail to understand; Once a Trumper, always a Trumper.

    Liked by 3 people

  23. palafox says:

    I said it a few weeks ago, and it looks like some others have seen the same thing: Finding Trump guilty removes — immediately — all of Trump’s power to fight back against the swamp, and removes him permanently as a thorn in the side of swamp corruption. They all want him gone.
    It is very dangerous to let the trial go forth, especially with the talk of not bringing in the only real fighters for Trump (Jim Jordan, et al) over from the House. Who in the senate has been a steadfast supporter? And, especially since the senate seems reticent about witnesses [meaning they don’t want to a) allow Trump to defend himself, and b) they don’t want their corruption exposed].
    By bringing it to trial AND convicting Trump, they ALL can go back to business as usual: faux dissent/outrage, but with their usual helping of portmanteaux full of cash and their bipartisan cocktail parties.
    Let’s not forget that Plouffe tweet Sundance and others put up from time to time:
    “He must be destroyed thoroughly. His kind must not rise again.”

    Liked by 1 person

  24. SHV says:

    All of the GOPe pre-trial posturing seems to indicate a replay of the Clinton trial. I don’t think Mitch has the votes to deviate from that procedure. It will be interesting to see if the motion to dismiss ends up with at 50-50 vote; how will Roberts vote to break the tie? I predict that motion to dismiss will fail and a shot list of “witnesses” will be approved. Will the witnesses appear “live” or replay the “Clinton” procedure of selected video testimony?

    Like

    • Issy says:

      The VP would vote, not Roberts.

      Like

      • SHV says:

        Not after the trial begins, Roberts will be the tie beaker unless the Senate changes the “rules”. IIRC, during the Andrew Johnson trial, the tie break vote by the Chief Justice was challenged and was approved by majority vote.

        Liked by 1 person

    • The key difference between this and every other impeachment is that, until now, the accused party was guilty of violating some part of The United States Code as it was at that time. (Although the section that Johnson violated was later declared to be unconstitutional.) By every legal litmus-test, Nixon, Bill Clinton, and Hillary Clinton all were guilty of – among other things – obstruction of justice. Had the matter been presented by a Grand Jury to a Court, a trial would have commenced. After impeachment, had it occurred, it would indeed have been true that “the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.” (§1.3.7)

      But not now. Donald J. Trump is not of interest to the US Courts. He has been indicted of nothing and is not under criminal investigation. He is only right now facing a classic Bill of Attainder.

      And so, the real Constitutional question, which will be established for all time by the US Senate within the next seven days, is: “Is §1.9.3 and §1.10.1, in fact, an enforced part of the Constitution, or not?” If the Senate swallows Lawfare, Inc.’s cleverly-packaged bait and agrees to hold a trial, however brief, then Lawfare will have accomplished its only actual objective … and our nation will never again be the same. (But that’s okay: “the Law is a Weapon of War. It means whatever we say it does.”)

      Liked by 3 people

    • Sean Supsky says:

      If I remember correctly, Mr. McConnell already stated that he would be standing by the precedent the Clinton trial set.

      Like

    • MustangBlues says:

      SHV says:
      January 14, 2020 at 6:02 pm

      ”’a shot list of “witnesses” will be approved.”

      That’s all folks.

      Like

  25. decisiontime16 says:

    The President, the falsely accused, certainly deserves to be heard. In fact, he more than deserves equal time to make his case against the persecution prosecution.

    Like

    • WVNed says:

      The fact he has done nothing wrong up until now hasn’t mattered yet. I am sure it will soon though.

      Like

    • Heika says:

      I completely agree. AND he (or his lawyers) must have a hand in who the witnesses are! My concern is that Turtle says they get to choose (the Senate) and there are many in the Senate that have vested interests in the Ukrainian (and Chinese/Biden son) goings on – not coming out – including Turtle. Hence he and some others wanted to dismiss it. A trial is perfect ONLY if President is given HIS WITNESSES.. as chosen by himself or the likes of Rudy. I am totally unaware of how this works? Anyone?

      If Pres is on trial does HE choose his witnesses or is it as Turtle said, the Senate chooses? Sorry for my ignorance.

      Like

  26. Fools Gold says:

    Well there you have it folks. Anyone have confidence in that group to do what’s good for the Senate? I didn’t hear a damn word about US, the people and what’s good for the people and country! Ironically it is US who have actual power to choose who represents US. Failure to do so is the main burden our Magnificent President, Donald J Trump, has to put up with and that failure is on US, we the people! If you don’t make demands on them how do you expect to drain the swamp!

    Liked by 1 person

  27. akaPatience says:

    There’s so much doomsaying on this board anymore, sheesh! While I don’t dismiss the possibility that a couple of the Usual Suspects in the GOP may choose to grandstand one way or another during the Senate trial, think about it — it would be absolute POLITICAL SUICIDE for a GOP Senator to stick it to the POTUS at this point. Good lord, the economy’s roaring, trade agreements have been re-negotiated, NATO members are coughing up more, terrorism is being dealt with efficiently with no new wars, more money for the wall, historic employment figures, etc., etc. I suspect some GOP Senators may be giving [insufferable] lip service to the notion of “fairness” just to emphasize the contrast with the Stasi Star Chamber-like process that took place in the House, a process that succeeded to turn more of the public AGAINST impeachment.

    I realize it ain’t over just yet, but the way things are going the vaunted Lawfare and its impeachment strategy seems to have not only misfired but BACKFIRED BIG TIME. Only the most unhinged partisans (Bernie Bros, et al.) would think the Democrats were served well by all of this. That they threaten the possibility of future impeachments is in itself an admission of failure.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Magabear says:

      Well said. 👍

      Liked by 1 person

    • samw12 says:

      Voice of reason. Too many people have been acting like clowns on here lately.

      Like

    • Heika says:

      That people question things, does not make them ‘clowns’ or ‘doomsayers’. Just because someone says something you don’t agree with does not make them an enemy.

      I have been here for some years and if you think that is the case then you do not know Sundance’s work. He does not just swallow stories through blind faith that Pres Trump is some sort of super god. He maintains an eagle eye on all the potential underhand issues at play.

      There are a lot of very good sceptics here commenting who contribute valuable ideas through being sceptical. Scepticism is vital in a healthy debate and analysis. It is everything. I am happy to read of peoples doubts. I like to see all the arguments. Often the truth really is the ‘worse case scenario’, and we have been seeing this over and over these past 3 years. It seems as if it simply cannot get much worse, but it does! It is far worse than we know. We are only touching the tip. I hope this does not offend but now and again I see someone bag others for asking questions, and it is just a gobstopper.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Your Royal Highness says:

        Being a realist is not being a doomsayer! It isn’t looking good and this time it is for keeps. These people don’t care if they don’t get voted in and they totally disregard the emails and phone calls. IT. MAKES. NO. DIFFERENCE. TO. THEM!!!! That’s the truth. This trial is NOT going to be fair to President Trump. I believe at this point they are going to oust him. I hope not and I pray for him and our country but a country that allows child sacrifice daily is doomed unless it repents. I have always looked at the worse case scenario and if it turns out better then I am pleasantly surprised. I truly hope that I am pleasantly surprised!!

        Like

  28. Magabear says:

    Turtle will take some heat for not having the votes to just outright dismiss shampeachment, but the fact is that he has too many Pierre Dilecto’s in his caucus to do that. Kind of like a coach who has a gameplan A. but has to go with gameplan B. due to a lack of talent. 😕

    Like

  29. Heika says:

    And there you have it. We will all know ‘what is going on here’ with the GOP when the witness list is decided. Are they going to dismiss this stunning opportunity to smack the Democrats right back into the swampy pit they emerge from or will they just ‘go along’ and present pathetic useless insipid witnesses that have nothing to say other than to confirm the ‘narrative’. Methinks this is a VERY dangerous time, a very very dangerous moment in history. All will be known soon. Will they (the Rhinos and neocon GOP) stab President in the back or will they instead get behind him and lift him up?

    Liked by 1 person

  30. KMD says:

    If I had twit account, I’d be spreading #BillOfAttainder to everyone with a pulse…

    The fact that this has not been brought up publicly by ANY Republican, as of yet, gives me hope that this may be in McTurtle’s bag of tricks to get this mess over with, quickly. Remember, NO senator wants witnesses…NONE OF THEM. The ‘reports’ to the contrary are bull$hit.

    Defense discovery and witness testimony are two very potent weapons for POTUS. IMHO, the crooks on both sides cannot allow POTUS to brandish either one…

    Like

  31. If the Senate is foolish enough to make this move, they will have established the only “new precedent” that Lawfare, Inc. needs:

    “§1.9.3 is not an enforced part of the US Constitution. Bills of Attainder may be passed, and are considered to be acceptable to the Senate for trial. The accused does not need to be accused of any crime under the United States Code. §1.3.7 is hereby repealed – it does not matter whether or not the accused shall “be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.” Maladministration is valid grounds for impeachment of any public official. Therefore, both the Executive and the Judicial Branches shall henceforth “serve at the pleasure of Congress,” knowing that they can be removed by Congress for any reason – or, for no reason at all.”

    “Just consent to begin a trial next Tuesday. That’s all we need.” Because it doesn’t matter whether he wins or loses this time. For the remainder of 2020, the Senate will have nothing to do other than to “try” one Bill of Attainder after another after another. (“We are vicious, and we stick together.”) From now on, every President and every Supreme Court Justice will very quickly learn that they serve “at the pleasure of Congress,” and that this means they’d better “toe the line.”

    We’re six days away from demolishing everything Alexander Hamilton ever talked about. All we need for you to do is to agree to hold a Senate trial based on a Bill of Attainder. As long as you do not assert that what we are doing is Unconstitutional next Tuesday, it never again will be … no matter what the Constitution actually says. “The Law is a Weapon. It means whatever we say it does.”

    Liked by 1 person

  32. Mike in a Truck says:

    If the Republicans allow PDJT to call any and all witnesses, including HRC,BHO and all the rest of those turds the Communist Democrats are finished. If the Republicans oust PDJT- they are finished. Then the civil war starts.

    Like

    • Your Royal Highness says:

      We don’t want a civil war!! There are other nonviolent means! Look at Argentina when the people revolted. They didn’t even have weapons. There are plenty of other examples throughout history.

      Like

    • Your Royal Highness says:

      We don’t want a civil war!! There are other nonviolent means! Look at Argentina when the people revolted. They didn’t even have weapons. There are plenty of other examples throughout history.

      Like

  33. nimrodman says:

    banner on Fox: Flynn Moves to Withdraw Plea

    Like

  34. moe ham head says:

    GOP leaders lol now thats funny there isn’t a leader amongst them

    Like

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s