UPDATE – First Schumer Rules Amendment Defeated – House Managers Attempt To Rectify Inherent Impeachment Flaws…

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is attempting to rescue two legally and structurally deficient articles of impeachment rushed from the Lawfare community in the House of representatives.   However, in his first effort to introduce new documents and force the Trump administration to hand over new executive branch information, related to President Trump foreign policy decisions and delayed foreign aid to Ukraine, the Schumer amendment was defeated.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell moved to table the amendment, dismissing the request, and won a floor vote as all republican senators stayed united 53-47.

It is anticipated that Schumer will next move for another amendment making the same request for new State Department documents the House committees did not seek.

The primary reason Chuck Schumer has to make this ridiculous effort for more evidence, is how the House never established their ability to enforce subpoenas via “Judicial Enforcement Authority”.  The failure of a full House vote to authorize the House Judiciary Committee to pursue evidence -via enforceable subpoenas- was a defect by design of Nancy Pelosi’s decision to initiate an impeachment inquiry by her decree, not an authorizing vote.

CTH noted this structural issue last August, and the issue remained throughout the heavily manipulated proceedings.  None of the House requests for testimony or documents held any enforcement authority because the House did not follow the constitutional process.

The House was not issuing subpoenas, it was issuing letters requesting voluntary witness participation and document production.  Recently the DOJ Office of Legal Counsel explained this issue in a lengthy legal finding that leads to the same conclusion.


BACKSTORY – Last year House Democrat leadership took a climate assessment of democrat House members and Speaker Pelosi announced they would not hold a House impeachment authorization vote.   As a direct and specific consequence all committee subpoenas did not carry a penalty for non-compliance.


“Lawful subpoenas”, literally require an enforcement mechanism; that’s the “poena” part of the word.  The enforcement mechanism is a judicial penalty, and that penalty can only be created if the full House voted to authorize an impeachment inquiry, and charged the House Judiciary Committee with the authority therein.

Absent the vote to authorize, the Legislative Branch never established compulsion authority (aka judicial enforcement authority), as they attempted to work through their quasi-constitutional “impeachment inquiry” process.

Instead of subpoenas, Adam Schiff (House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence); and Chairman Eliot L. Engel (House Committee on Foreign Affairs) were only sending out request letters. The compliance was discretionary based on the outlook of the recipient.

Nancy Pelosi did not have the vote or political capital to start by initiating a full House impeachment authorization.  Pelosi, Schiff, Engel and Cummings had to rely on the duplicity of the media to help them hide their scheme; and the media complied.

Speaker Pelosi & Lawfare’s impeachment scheme could only succeed with a compliant media protecting it.  The media was entirely compliant in not explaining the fraudulent basis for the construct.

If the media would have ever asked questions the fraud would have collapsed.

Adam Schiff had to hide his hearings because the foundation of the impeachment fraud was to create a public impression.  There was no structural impeachment process or guideline being followed.  The committee leadership used the closed door hearings to leak information to the media to create a needed narrative.

A legislative “letter” or demand request needed to carry judicial enforcement authority –A PENALTY– in order to be a “subpoena”.

There was no penalty that can be associated with the House demands because the Legislative Branch did not established compulsion authority (aka judicial enforcement authority), as they worked through their non-constitutional “impeachment inquiry” process.

It has long been established by SCOTUS that Congress has lawful (judicial authority) subpoena powers pursuant to its implied responsibility of legislative oversight.  However, that only applies to the powers enumerated in A1§8. Neither foreign policy (Ukraine) nor impeachment have any nexus to A1§8.  The customary Legislative Branch subpoena power is limited to their legislative purpose. 

There is an elevated level of subpoena, a power made possible by SCOTUS precedent, that carries inherent penalties for non-compliance, and is specifically allowed for impeachment investigations.  However, that level of elevated House authority required a full House authorization vote, and only applies to the House Judiciary Committee as empowered.

In 2019 the Legislative Branch was NOT expressing their “impeachment authority” as part of the Legislative Branch purpose.  So that raised the issue of an entirely different type of subpoena:… A demand from congress that penetrates the constitutional separation of powers; and further penetrates the legal authority of Executive Branch executive privilege.

It was separately established by SCOTUS during the Nixon impeachment investigation that *IF* the full House votes to have the Judiciary Committee commence an impeachment investigation, then the Judiciary Committee has subpoena power that can overcome executive privilege claims. 

There was NO VOTE to create that level of subpoena power.

As a consequence, the House did not create a process to penetrate the constitutionally inherent separation of powers, and/or, the legally recognized firewall known as ‘executive privilege’.  

The House needed to vote to authorize the committee impeachment investigation, and through that process the committee would have gained judicial enforcement authority.  That would have created a penalty for non-compliance with an impeachment subpoena.

Absent a penalty for non-compliance, which factually makes a subpoena a ‘subpoena’, the Executive Branch had no process to engage an appellate review by federal courts. This was the purposeful trick within the Pelosi/Lawfare road-map.

Pelosi and Lawfare’s plan was designed for public consumption; she/they were creating the illusion of something that did not exist.  The purpose of all their fraudulent impeachment activity was to create support for an actual impeachment process.

Because the Lawfare/Pelosi roadmap intended to work around judicial enforcement authority, the impeachment process was destined by design to end up running head-first into a constitutional problem; specifically separation of power and executive privilege.

The Lawfare impeachment road-map was designed to conflict with the constitution. It was a necessary -and unavoidable- feature of their sketchy impeachment plan, not a flaw.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her Lawfare allies changed House rules (SEE HERE). Pelosi and Lawfare changed House impeachment rules (SEE HERE). Pelosi/Lawfare changed committee rules (SEE HERE); and in doing so they removed House republicans from the entire process… Which They Did.  However, what Lawfare and Pelosi could not change was The U.S. Constitution, which they were destined to collide with.

Speaker Pelosi’s ‘Lawfare House rules‘ and/or ‘Lawfare impeachment rules‘ could not supersede the constitutional separation of powers.  She was well aware of this.  Nancy Pelosi could not decree an “official impeachment inquiry”, and as a consequence nullify a constitutional firewall between the Legislative Branch and Executive Branch.

Pelosi’s impeachment scheme required a compliant media to support her construct…

they did.

This entry was posted in 4th Amendment, 6th Amendment, AG Bill Barr, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Cold Anger, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Donald Trump, Election 2020, Impeachment, Lawfare, Legislation, media bias, Notorious Liars, President Trump, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

242 Responses to UPDATE – First Schumer Rules Amendment Defeated – House Managers Attempt To Rectify Inherent Impeachment Flaws…

  1. listingstarboard says:

    “all Republican Senators stayed united” if only they did that 100% of the time! Imagine how great our country would be doing ……

    Liked by 32 people

    • dougofthenorth says:

      What is stunning to me is given the blatant facts of improper procedure and its blatant unconstitutionality not even one crazy a$$ed dem could find his or her way to side with the truth. Just unbelievable to me. We are being ruled by liars. I just wish our side would call them for what they are and begin shaming the begezzers out of these idiots.

      Liked by 32 people

      • Zorro says:

        Sobering truth. DC is a sanctuary district from the eighth commandment.

        Liked by 12 people

      • Rob Allison says:

        dougofthenorth – I don’t mean to sound rude, but I have to say that I find it stunning that anyone here would think that any Dem in the House or Senate would ever side with the truth. They proved a long, long time ago that they are on the side of lies, evil, and treachery. I don’t think you can find one of them that isn’t of that ilk. I find it hard to believe that anyone who reads CTH regularly would think that any of them could do what is right. I think they are that far gone and that the evidence has been plain that they are that way for a very long time. I appreciate that there’s still some feeling that there might be hope for some of them, but I just don’t see it. I think the Democrat Party is a wasteland of lost souls.

        Liked by 20 people

        • Merle Marks says:

          BOOYAH…The Dims ALWAYS choose lies…MANY Republicans choose truth, but some choose money over country…that why the Left is always united and the Right is often fractured…

          Liked by 2 people

        • doohmax says:

          Any person, in any jurisdiction, who declares as a Democrat, knows what the Democrat Party stands for. There is no excuse. The “conservative” Democrat no longer exists. Any Democrat in any district that voted for Trump by a substantial majority should be considered “toast”. If not, the voters in that district are idiots. Or the Dems in that district have figured out a way to cheat themselves into that seat. There is no gray area in politics today. Trump has made them show their cards and it is a lousy hand.

          Liked by 6 people

          • WR Johnson says:

            I would like to add that no voter is an idiot, just poorly informed and bamboozled because of the time to read through all the crap the media is feeding. I don’t even think some of the senators based on statements made have read as much as I have. I call this POS crap what it is just like our great PDJT.

            Liked by 1 person

            • WR Johnson says:

              Sorry, not well punctuated and written. I cannot stand the Senate proceedings as it is just a repeat of the garbage from the House Dems. How stupid do they think we are. I have tweeted my feelings thoroughly and tried to be close to respectful, but Chuckie, Nancy, Shitt and Nadler are so abusive to our system that I am ill from this garbage. I have my second amendment rights and will never willingly surrender my country to these creepy dolts who are abusing our constitution and the voters. President Trump is our president. I barely tolerated the BO from before. I hope the house flips republican and then let’s impeach BO!

              Liked by 3 people

          • RobInPA says:

            Knowingly, unwittingly or out of sheer ignorance, those that support Democrats and/or Uniparty RINO’s are the enemies of the Republic.

            Liked by 1 person

          • sharon goodson says:

            In my district – there are no republicans running for any office – I must go to state-wide office candidates to begin to vote for anything other than a democrat


          • X XYZ says:

            You nailed it. Conservative Democrats are extinct. But there are LOTS of Liberal Republicans (RINOs) and FAUXCONS.

            I wish there were some way to expel them from the R party.


        • GenEarly says:

          An Excellent Preamble!!! Now, What are the conclusions to be drawn??? What happens Next after 22,000+Citizens turn up in Richmond, VA to petition an uncaring, unlistening, and obviously Blind democRat state government??? Armed Citizens declaring they Will Not Comply with tyrantical democRat passed “laws”.
          Our President is attacked Illegally for over 3years by these democRats. We are under Attack!!!
          What’s next, to see their next outrage??? Maybe we can get to the election in November to correct the situation, maybe we don’t make it to Nov.
          2020 ???


        • Tim says:

          # Rob Allison it takes time for peoples eyes to be opened. Especially if they have a strongly held, but false belief. To start with, any fact that is eye opening, is assumed to be the exception, not the rule. If the eye opening continues, the false belief is overturned.
          There is the example of the congressman who recently switched from Dem to Republican.
          He met with Pres Trump. His story was he proposed a law defending Americans right to pray and to display the American flag ( in America ). As long as the flag was displayed in a respectful way..Other democrats told him , this idea was divisive and he should not try to go ahead..( His eyes were beginning to be opened. ) The dishonest impeachment of Trump was the last straw for him. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-welcomes-rep-van-drew-an-impeachment-foe-to-the-gop/2019/12/19/76bccad2-226c-11ea-a153-dce4b94e4249_story.html its Rep Van Drew. there is video of the Rep and Pres Trump.

          Liked by 4 people

      • Loggerman says:

        Yeah, your post ought to be shouted in West Virginia to show what a fraud Joe Manchin is.

        Liked by 6 people

      • fangdog says:

        Part of what may be the issue is, there are so many politicians who are completely out of touch with the average everyday American. They have no concept or clue how we all think. The average American cares less about all the legalese.

        The average American knows right from wrong and deals with it everyday without the necessity of a lawyer on a day by day basis. Trump knows this to be the case because Trump is not a politician. Trump thinks as we do when it comes to commonsense right and wrong and more important the TRUTH.

        Liked by 11 people

      • WR Johnson says:

        Plastic faces Pelosi, Schitt, Nadler and Schumhair, are of unscrupulous behavior. They are anti voter, anti constitution and a bunch of dolts of the highest/or lowest level depending on point of view. What insufferable idiots. I am not stupid. I have actually read transcripts. I am so upset with this debauchery that I cannot contain my anger with this BS. Terrible for our country, our sanity, and moral platitudes. These idiots should be impeached along with BO! I hope they are involved in the scams that got us here. They are covering up something and thus the reason for the stupidity. I hope they all get jail time! Did I mention how angry I am?


      • What about the guy that switched parties?


    • Red Mosquito says:

      No kidding. Sadly too many are too worried about how CNN will report on them.


  2. Bogeyfree says:

    And she is third in line for the Presidency?

    Liked by 7 people

  3. TwoLaine says:

    They remind me of the recent hearing when the lefties said they would have a gun battle if necessary to get the docs. During that hearing one of the female judges asked if they had other remedies within their own powers that did not involve the court to get involved.

    The same applies here. If you want this stuff, go do it in the House, through the legal process and channels you have available and then come back and see us, when you are ready.

    Liked by 8 people

  4. jnr2d2 says:

    Ok. If the Senate doesn’t shit can this as unconstitutional articles,and actually starts a trial, then soon as Repubs control the House, we can Impeach Holder for his Contempt of Congress. And Hillary for her many corrupt practices, as well as Libya and Benghazi, and Obama for Fast and Furious, IRS targeting, Benghazi, Libya, Syria, spying on Congress, his opponents, and his unconstitutional actions that had been slapped down by the Supreme Court.
    One can impeach them even after they are out of office. The purpose: to deny them the ability to ever hold a office of public trust forever! Maybe lets go back and do Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter.
    The Dems should beware what they have started — just like what they did with the Federal courts as to eliminating the 60 vote requirement (the filibuster), and made it just a majority for the courts, except for Supreme Court. Repubs just followed that president and extended it to the Supreme Court!!!

    Liked by 11 people

    • There’s no reason to stop there, either.

      The precedent is SET!

      Impeach EVERY SINGLE Obama Judge whose overturned Court Orders interfered with Presidential authority … for ABUSE of POWER!

      Liked by 19 people

    • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

      Actually the Rubicon was crossed when the Senate accepted the Articles.
      The Trial has already started and the Parliment of the US is open for business.

      The only practical remedy I can see is to somehow have Pelosi’s Impeachment Inquiry method itself put to the constitutionality test at SCOTUS.

      Andy McCarthy commented: “I fear an we have entered an ERA of Impeachment”
      Took 20ish years for Congress to figure out what a bad idea having their own Independant Prosecutor was and finally call a truce.

      This is FAR worse as the Prosecutor, Judge and juror is not “independant” but is one of there own.

      Liked by 8 people

      • Jan says:

        Excellent points!! Future Presidents stand to lose right to counsel, right to assert legal privileges, ability to direct foreign policy & trade, ability to protect our troops overseas & a lot of other powers if Senate Republicans like Romney, et al., link arms w/Democrats.

        Of course, this applies only to non-Democrat presidents. All future Democrat presidents can be tyrants, changing everything by Executive Order.

        Liked by 6 people

    • Snellvillebob says:

      If we get control of the House, we could impeach Pelosi, Schiff, Nadler, Waters…

      Liked by 1 person

      • Boots says:

        Great idea except not enough R’s would have the guts to do it.

        Liked by 3 people

        • TarsTarkas says:

          Impeachment is not possible for Congressmen. They can be censured or expelled.


          • zekness says:

            They can be indicted and tried in a normal court for real crimes..and that’s really what it’s going to take to actually have them removed from office.

            I can think of at just 8 violations of the law.

            What is it going to take before the GOP starts to understand how to actually get things under control.

            Where is the line?

            Seems we have crossed the Rubicon.

            I can think of


        • Snellvillebob says:

          Yeah, but then President Trump could say: “Hey Nancy, impeachment if forever”.


  5. Michael Kunz says:

    The phrase Hoist with their own petard, comes to mind.

    Liked by 4 people

  6. Linda K. says:

    So, SanFranNan did all this wrong on purpose, to what end?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Snellvillebob says:

      To destroy the office of the President. That way she or her predecessor can control half the Congress plus whoever is president by threat of impeachment. The President will have to ask the Speakers permission to walk his dog.

      Liked by 2 people

    • liveoak53 says:

      I think she was hoping that public sentiment would go against the President to the point that they would be able to score big points off of the Republican’s insistence on following the rules in the Senate.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Merle Marks says:

        The Dims may have been planning for a while, but I’m convinced Kavanaugh confirmation freaked them into action…knowing RBG is on her deathbed everyother week has them screaming in their dreams…


        • TarsTarkas says:

          They may have been planning this for awhile, but the Ukraine call is what set this current insanity off. Something in that call scared the s**t out of them, whether it be Biden’s corruption, the DNC server, Crowdstrike, or something entirely different. IMO I don’t think they wanted this to occur until months closer to the election.


    • konradwp1 says:

      It appears the plan was to get articles of impeachment that seemed plausible to a public misinformed by the establishment media into the senate.

      Then after much legal debate that the public wouldn’t follow, a number of foul RINOs could do their “It is with a heavy heart … good of the nation … blah, blah, blah …” speaches, and vote with Democrats to reverse the will of the voters.

      The problem is the plan was doomed when Trump outplayed them by releasing the phone transcripts. They ended up with articles of impeachment that are clearly unconstitutional, and even RINOs desparate to bring down the President can’t find a way to support them.

      Their backup plan to turn the Senate trial into a continuing “investigation” is not traveling well.

      Liked by 8 people

      • doohmax says:

        The true villain in this entire fiasco is the Media. They could stop this in a heartbeat by telling the truth to the low info masses out there. Trump is correct. The media is the enemy of the Truth.

        Liked by 7 people

    • Child of Morning says:

      To keep it out of the courts


    • As a man thinkth says:

      Lawfare doesn’t make many mistakes…all of the cards are not on the table yet.
      IMO, the impeachment coupsters were counting on access to Muillers GJ docs, that did not pan out so they go with plan B: the lying Ukrainian ….

      Liked by 1 person

  7. I hope the American people are watching. I can’t, but I know what’s going on. Should be plain as day.

    Liked by 1 person

    • vikingmom says:

      Unfortunately, it is only “plain as day” to those Americans who have actually been paying attention and seeking factual reporting on the entire illegal process. Those who have been getting all of their information from Rachel Maddow and Stephen Colbert still think that President Trump is covering up massive corruption and that Brett Kavanaugh is a serial rapist!

      Liked by 3 people

      • I really think that is a small % . Those lib dem outlets have very small viewership. My point was to people who , unlike us , pay scant attention to politics.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Your Tour GUid says:

          Unfortunately, the true believers that watch all that
          swill have the biggest mouths. Spreads the manure
          much wider. They also have this bad habit of being
          emotional terrorists. Which scare many others of
          actually daring to correct them in any way, shape, or
          form. This may sound backasswards, but the only
          persons I find myself correcting on all things Trump
          are my black coworkers. By and large, they are far
          less insane then the wealthy, (mis)educated whites
          that are the true believers. The absolute worst?

          White, gay males. They’ll have you wrote up and
          fired in HR, and not think twice about costing a job.


          • But in the voting booth there will be us, the new PDJT supporters, the used to be Dems , the young people who didn’t vote last time and see the truth, and those who didn’t vote last election, or ever! As long as we can keep the dem cheating to a minimum we are looking at a landslide.
            You can quote me.


        • vikingmom says:

          I hope you are right! I am surprised, and saddened, by the number of people I talk with who get ALL of their news from the MSM and insist that they are “well informed”.


        • X XYZ says:

          What is your idea of a small percentage? Remember, at least 45% of the Democrat base votes Democrat, no matter what. In 2016 Bernie was more popular than Hillary and he had lots of support. The dirty little secret is that Democrats actually like socialism. They just don’t like to be called Socialists.


  8. California Joe says:

    The news media is complicit in not reporting the impeachment hoax so now President Trump’s team will make them wish they had. The whole process is a hoax just like Climate Change! Why would Obama spend $15 million on an oceanfront home on Martha’s Vineyard an island 15 miles off the coast of Cape Cod? Same reason for this illegal impeachment process. They think that the American people are idiots and the news media will protect them!

    Liked by 8 people

  9. GB Bari says:

    Excellent synopsis, Sundance. Thank you. Although you have repeated this analysis several times, it is good to refresh, and is the first time for many.

    IIRC, Pelosi knew did not have enough votes guaranteed to hold the formal vote to authorize the committee investigation in the House, that’s why she went foward with the sham.

    Liked by 9 people

    • VegGOP says:

      Sundance was pretty redundant, but what he didn’t repeat or elaborate on was her not having the votes. I want to know WHY she couldn’t get the votes.


      • GB Bari says:

        17 or 18 Dem Congress critters in districts that trump won in 2016 were not happy to vote for the official investigation – would cause them to lose votes in their home districts. That was enough to keep the final tally in question so Pelosi, always the hard planner and never one to go forward without a plan, went forward without the formal vote, trying to fool their not-too-bright voter base – as Sundance has described.

        Liked by 5 people

        • Barnestormer says:

          Then what accounts for the shift of those 17 or 18? How did they overcome their re-election worries and vote for the articles of impeachment?

          It’s anti-intuitive to believe a vote for an impeachment inquiry would be more perilous in a pro-Trump district than would be an artilce of impeachment itself.

          It seems more reasonable to me to believe that it was Pelosi herself who, under pressure, relented on her prior impeachment-resistance position and went with the flow.


    • mopar2016 says:

      And Lawfare is getting their butts kicked now.

      Liked by 5 people

  10. Publius2016 says:

    in other words, now that the DIMMS see 45 legal strategy, the DIMMS need to change the rules…Dimms say: “Without double standards, we have no standards.”

    Throw this case out like 3 Day old Fish!!!

    Liked by 3 people

  11. James Carpenter says:

    Let’s see if I have this straight…
    Nancy, Lawfare, and “the crew” hastened to draft Articles of Impeachment because of the National and Constitutional Emergency our nation suffered under, every day that Donald J Trump was allowed to remain in the White House.
    Then Nancy sat on them (the “Articles”) for weeks.
    And now, after finally parading the Articles over to the Senate, Nancy’s Managers and Chuckie Schumer want to splice a never-ending investigation and “witness” and “document” scouring into judgement of the Articles already tendered. The “trial” could go on for longer than the 911’s mastermind’s!!!
    Heck, why didn’t Nancy and crew have their case already nailed down, ready for presentation-and-conviction before they marched their Articles over to the Senate?
    Why is America forced to listen to “Peach 45!!!” ad nauseum, ’till the cows come home, the cows die of old age or Trump does (of old age)?
    November 2020 can’t come soon enough.

    Liked by 8 people

    • Jan says:

      We are here because Democrats will not stop until they secure both Houses and the White House so they can complete their hold on all who serve them AND destroy/kill all who do not.

      The most important is to destroy our Constitution and Bill of Rights, make the House more important than the Senate, & make the presidency powerless.

      Liked by 3 people

  12. TheWanderingStar says:

    All of this in an attempt to break loose the supporters of PDJT. All of whom appear to remain steadfast. No swell of calls for the removal of this President from the electorate. The only force capable of doing what the dems want to do, is PDJT. I don’t believe that is likely. Vote and Keep America Great!

    Liked by 4 people

  13. Val says:

    I don’t understand it…who was the media persuading? Who allowed all those changes? The way I see, even with the media manipulating the narrative, someone in charge inside Congress should have stopped that, no?


    • WES says:

      Hokkada:. I am under the impression that being named a house manager, Schiff cannot be forced to testify. The whole purpose of naming so many House managers!


      • Wethal says:

        No legal authority for any immunity for Schiff from testifying. He’d have to testify, just like a prosecutor who is called as a witness for the defense has to recuse himself and testify.

        Hard for the Dems to say Trump can’t stop a witness with executive privilege, and then turn around and say Schiff has some prosecutor’s “immunity.”

        Especially after they demanded Cipollone recuse himself because he might be called as a witness.

        Liked by 1 person

    • BigTalkers says:

      That’s an assumption that someone IS “in charge” in Congress. The framers didn’t design it that way, and doubled up by cutting it into two halves just in case.

      Liked by 1 person

  14. hokkoda says:

    “…all republican senators stayed united 53-47.”

    And that, I believe, is pretty much game over. The only question I had going into this was whether the GOP would hang tough. 51-49 would be concerning, since the Democrats’ goal isn’t removal (not the sane Democrats, anyway). The true goal is 51 votes to convict, giving them the election issue that Trump is “guilty” and therefore illegitimate.

    Instead, the GOP could pick up additional votes to acquit from the Democrats. Not many, but enough to call it bipartisan…2 or 3 in tight re-elects.

    Doesn’t feel like we will see additional witnesses. I could see the GOP Senate getting its hands on ICIG Atkinson’s testimony which Schiff is withholding far as I know. If there’s a witness, it’ll be the whistleblower, to give Trump an opportunity to confront his accuser.

    A cleanup task will be to get all the House lawsuits dismissed. They don’t need the info they are suing for since the Senate has officially voted “not needed” for the trial. You don’t need evidence for a trial that you already lost.

    Presumably, the House managers are also under oath. Looking forward to Schiff being asked, under oath, to explain his and his staff’s communications with Ciaramella and Atkinson prior to the complaint being forwarded by Atkinson…

    Liked by 4 people

    • bigd57 says:

      Agreed that the democrats would love to have the final impeachment vote at 51-49 with four republicans voting to impeach, even with the President staying in office.

      Liked by 1 person

      • jnr2d2 says:

        Takes 67 votes to convict –NOT 51!! 20 Repubs would have to go with Dems, NOT happening!


        • WRB says:

          But if repubs vote to convict they will be despised by the base (93% in favor of POTUS). The senate could flip to the dems. POTUS without the Senate is in a much weaker position.

          Liked by 1 person

        • Jim in TN says:

          bigd27 did say 51 votes would leave the President in office.

          Getting a bipartisan vote to convict is a big goal. Getting a majority vote to convict is also a big goal.

          Remember they win if Trump loses reelection, despite being acquitted. Don’t forget Mueller was a major opposition research effort. Smearing Trump has always been part of their complex multi-layered plan.


    • mimbler says:

      51 votes wouldn’t convict – it takes 2/3 to convict. And if the dems had enough votes to convice (they won’t of course), they absolutely would go for removal IMO.


  15. Zydeco says:

    This explanation should be mentioned with the same frequency as the Dems script that every peachmint mangler is reading.


  16. Lion2017 says:

    Did the President’s attorneys state this argument today?


  17. WSB says:

    Is this an attempt to have Roberts rule this farce legit?

    Liked by 1 person

  18. RUSSELL SMITH says:

    I sincerely hope that some of the strategic nuances aren’t totally lost to the general public’s understanding- forest and trees are one and the same to many, then they are left to the devices of persuasion. What a shame.


  19. calbear84 says:

    I thought we’d never see a bigger political blunder than Cankles calling voters “deplorables”, but this impeachment / coup takes the cake. An army of Trump supporters are chomping at the bit for 2020.

    Liked by 4 people

  20. T2020 says:

    2nd to last nail in the Dumbocrat political coffin.

    Liked by 1 person

  21. Gov Jay says:

    The demo☭rats claim they have “overwhelming” evidence against President Trump… yet they continue to push for additional documents, witnesses, etc… explain that one…

    Liked by 9 people

    • prtomr says:

      The House Managers are repeating their talking points ad nauseum. They have NO fact witnesses and as Sundance has said, the House Dems did not follow the Constitutional process for proper impeachment. What is on display is House managers/attorneys wordsmithing a dead cow.

      Liked by 6 people

    • decisiontime16 says:

      We would all like to see this overwhelming evidence. Where is it?

      Liked by 4 people

    • konradwp1 says:

      This appears to be a serious mistake on the part of the Lawfare clowns.

      The Democrat’s plan after falling to establish any high crime was to turn the Senate trial into a continuation of the House “investigation”. But they have claimed they impeached on the basis of “Overwhelming evidence”. So requests for more evidence just signals to even the most uninformed public that they lied when they said they had a solid case for impeachment.

      Liked by 6 people

  22. Ono says:

    A Classic “Cart infront of Donkey” situation.

    Reminds me of the “We have to approve it to see what’s inside it”

    Liked by 4 people

  23. sundance says:

    Liked by 16 people

  24. agreed.nancy and the crew are trying to bypass the authorizing of the articles.they did not want to go to court and wait for the courts to side one way or the other.this way they get the senate to do their dirty work.just look at the mueller GJ and trump tax cases before the SC it will be i think april before those get heard.
    Also by not authorizing they basically locked the minority party out of calling witnesses in the house.they did not want chalupa,ohr’s,etc to testify.these are some grade school playground antics,and as mike tyson said “everybody has a plan til they get punched in the mouth”they need to be punched in the mouth.

    Liked by 4 people

  25. Dutchman says:

    This, like the kavanaugh hearing, like the Mueller investigation, will backfire on the Dems, and increase PDJT’s already considerable support.

    Perhaps the precedent that should be set from all this, is anyone considering running for POTUS better be cleaner than clean,..squeaky clean, cause they are going to get “Trumped” from election nite, or even before.

    (Trumped, like Borked will become a verb in DC, and mean to get constantly investigated and smeared with false allegations).

    Can you imagine any current candidate, or candidate of the last 30 years, that could have withstood the public anal probing DJT has withstood?
    “Even I am surprised how clean I am!” He recently quipped.

    He has set a standard very few, and extreamly few who desire the office, could meet.

    This is the first time in my 65 years (today, yea! Happy B-day to me!) That I have been absolutely confident my President was not a crook, and had no scandal or skeloton in his closet.

    Refreshing, isn’t it?

    Liked by 27 people

  26. decisiontime16 says:

    Schumer’s new mantra is “it’s a cover up”.

    Liked by 1 person

    • decisiontime16 says:

      More of the “cover up” mantra from HRC..
      Must be the dems new talking point.

      The rules Sen. McConnell has proposed for the president’s impeachment trial are the equivalent of a head juror colluding with the defendant to cover up a crime.

      Call your senators and urge them to push for witnesses and evidence, not a cover-up: https://t.co/CZcWI5zjm5

      — Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) January 21, 2020


    • mopar2016 says:

      Strike 4 coming up for Schumer right after the break.

      Liked by 5 people

    • rcogburn says:

      Shumer is telling the truth. It IS a cover-up, just not of anything he says it is. It’s a cover-up of:

      -the attempted coup d’etat of a duly elected president
      -FISA abuse
      -illegal domestic spying
      -illegal leaks
      -illegal whistleblower complaints
      -rampant abuse, fraud and lawlessness in the IC, DOJ, DOD, NSC, and US Congress
      -billions of dollars in Ukraine corruption
      -the Uranium One deal
      -the DNC server “hack”

      Liked by 3 people

  27. Unsk says:

    This is a big victory for POTUS. All the Pubs hung together for once. Maybe now we will have no witnesses and this terrible thing will be over quickly.
    If the Dems do get witnesses will they get subpoena power for them? With lack of supporting info from either the Exec branch and State will the Dems even try?

    Besides witnesses- will those witnesses be deposed or will they be cross examined? Will hearsay be allowed? If no hearsay is allowed what will the Dem witnesses be allowed to say? It would be game, set match then for them with a long line of Republican called witnesses that expose the Democrats treachery. Are the Dems that stupid?

    Liked by 1 person

  28. MDiceman says:

    The Lawfare impeachment road-map was designed to conflict with the constitution. It was a necessary -and unavoidable- feature of their sketchy impeachment plan, not a flaw.
    Was this conflict designed to create a precedent (via SCOTUS) to break the congress-executive firewall>


    • yucki says:

      They couldn’t possibly expect the Court to go so WRONG.
      Unless they’re delusional…
      …so yeah, maybe.


    • Jan says:

      First we get activist judges, now activist lawyers working with communists in Congress. And now we’re faced with the House seeking to strip the President of his/her legal defenses AND powers.

      Let’s also take out the electoral college so we can live our lives as NYC & California dictate. And oh, BTW, everyone is presumed guilty with an unreal high bar to prove innocence
      ….if you don’t agree with Democrats.

      Illegals have more rights than U.S. citizens and all criminals, especially murderers, must be released from jail, & no one should be prosecuted for committing crimes, not even murderers. Oh, but Pres. Trump is guilty of heinous crimes because he is doing his job & winning.

      Liked by 2 people

  29. MAGADJT says:

    Funny we are forced to celebrate when the GOP caucus “sticks together”. Dems never have to worry about that problem.

    Liked by 8 people

  30. the founding fathers screwed up big time.they should have required a 2/3rds majority in both branches to impeach.


  31. mike11946 says:

    I am a very involved political junkie. These Amendments being put forth by Chuckie are so exciting that more than 99% of the viewers turned on Days of our Lives for some real excitement. By the time this is finished even Susan Collins with vote to acquit, the Burn himself will have fallen asleep, and Liz will ask her husband for a beer and a cigar, and Sleepy Joe will again forget what city he is in and the Nadler will fart so bad it will clear out the whole Senate and Shifty Schiff will swallow his pencil neck and die. Just keep up the Amendments Chuckie and they will send in the Virginia Governor in blackface with the left over patriots and their AR-15’S and close off the Senate until after the election. Better yet we will just make our Great President the President for life.

    Liked by 2 people

  32. woohoowee says:

    What you gonna do when The Swamp runs dry honey,
    What you gonna do when The Swamp runs dry babe,
    What you gonna do when The Swamp runs dry, just set on the bank and cry, cry, cry,
    honey, baby mine

    Liked by 1 person

  33. The American Patriot says:


    The Commies got their a$$es whooped!

    Liked by 1 person

  34. Frankie says:

    Here’s a search for truth.
    Does Nancy’s surprised face mean someone in her caucus touched her inappropriately?


  35. the Conservative media should make the MSM “eat their own petard”, The one they have tried to use against the VSG for the last three years, and qualify every report with, “…without evidence…”

    as in, “in a show of bitter partisanship, the House Democrat impeachment managers, WITHOUT EVIDENCE, launched their final coup attempt at the Oresident today.”

    Or…”Representative Adam Thuneberg, without evidence, claimed that there was evidence of President a Trump’s high crimes hiding in plain site,”

    Or, “Speaker Pelosi, without evidence, today stated that ‘we need to impeach the President in order to find the evidence for impeaching him.”

    “Representative Nadle, for his part, bucked the Media Matter/LAWFARE talking points, and today, asked, ‘if you’re not going to eat that donut, could I have it?”

    Liked by 2 people

  36. eguthr3 says:

    The other thing here, President Trump had until September 30th to release the funds to the Ukraine. When did he release them? September 12th, so the democrats got nothing. They are clearly hoping for an ignorant electorate and I’m sorry to tell them, we are a woke electorate NOW. They are only fooling themselves that they got anything to impeach Trump for, but remember in trying to remove Trump from Office, it was they who broke the law, committed sedition and treason in the process. And don’t you think that Barr and Durham have that evidence against ALL OF THEM. They have certainly been racking up their crime spree. WITH the things Obama, Hillary, Kerry, the NSA mass surveillance program, the FISA abuses, the spying on a political opponent have done, the false allegation against General Michael Flynn, Carter Page and Roger Stone. Pelosi and her demonRat friends, have abused their Legislative Authority, well beyond its constitutional authority and scope. So, it is they who should be charged with abuse of their constitutional powers. I actually can’t stand Mitch McConnell. But he is up for reelection in 2020 and he has three democrats running against him in a state Trump won in 2016. Any actions against Trump on light of no evidence on the impeachment, I think he’s safe to win reelection. Schumer is drooling at the thought of becoming the majority leader, it’s a wet dream. And the GAO has 45 days to file a complaint against any President and they WAITED FOUR MONTHS, that just so happened to coincide with Pelosi signing farce and the delivery of the articles of impeachment to the Senate. Coincidence? I don’t believe in coincidence but especially political ones.

    Schumer can make any demands he wants, and he can demand a fair trial all he wants, but it’s about a fair trial for Trump NOT for them, something that was denied to the GOP and the president in the House committees. I would tell him to go fuck himself, you have no power here in the Senate and FUCK OFF. Nancy said we’re in charge of the House, well the GOP controls the Senate. While the democrats and the media were distracted by the impeachment farce, the Senate republicans and Trump packed the Judiciary Appeals court and district court openings with 183 conservative judges already confirmed, with just 6 remaining, including the 9th Circuit, which now leans right. Now, the democrats want to slow down those last 6. Their demands, arrogance and ignorance are truly astounding. Do you think Trump and the GOP might have set the democrats up? I believe they did.

    Liked by 1 person

  37. Jim in TN says:

    These people spend lots of time trying to come up with ‘heads I win, tails you lose’ plans. One of those features is to layer in multiple ways they can win.

    Trump impeached.
    Trump acquitted but smeared and loses reelection.
    Trump acquitted, wins 2020, but acquittal used to retake Senate. Trump impeached again.

    On and on with their conniving.

    As long as the media covers for their perfidies, the Democrats will never concede and never stop.

    The American people need to make the Democrats stop by giving Republicans massive 2020 victories.

    Liked by 1 person

  38. Genie says:

    The sham “rule of law republicans” ad on TV is a project of the NeverTrumpers Bill Kristol and Mona Charen and their defendingdemocracy.org gang.

    The ad ran a few minutes ago on FBN. What a crock, showing Bolton with duct tape on his mouth and appealing to voters to demand Republicans let him speak.

    Nothing said about the long list of irresponsible acts and abuses of the Constitution by the demo☭rats.


    • Jan says:

      I don’t watch the likes of NBC, CBS, etc. often–usually football. So in watching football playoffs, etc., I’m seeing all Bloomberg ads. This guy has no personality, is humorless, & absolutely sucks as a human being.

      I’d just as soon bite my arm off than live in a country where Bloomberg is president.

      As to Bolton, if he wants to hurt the President, he can. But somehow I don’t see Bolton doing that. OTOH, Bolton is not the President, only an advisor. The President sets foreign policy, not advisors.


  39. We seriously do not need “Lawfare in the Senate.” And Sen. Schumer really ought to know that by now, no matter what his “party affiliation” happens to be. After four long years, the shenanigans that have been going on in the House of Representatives (and in the Deep State) finally come in view of scrutiny by the Senate. For the first time ever, House members like Schiff, Nadler, and Pelosi might actually be made to face questioning. (First question: “WTF?!?!?!”)

    Our country has been manipulated by lawyers who have made a ton of money – entirely at our expense – by pressing the notion that “the law is a weapon.” Well, you know, I’m damned-tired of that construct. I do not look to the US Senate to continue it.

    Liked by 2 people

  40. clodfobble says:

    Stick with your cheese business, Chuckie. Politics is clearly too deep for you.


  41. DesertRain says:

    Sundance…. just read your last tweet thread.

    “If separation of powers, or executive privilege, can be fractured by an end-run around the Judicial branch to the senate, then it’s not only impeachment at stake.”

    Congress would then be weaponized to remove judges… including supremes?

    Liked by 5 people

    • TarsTarkas says:

      Congress would effectively become a bicameral Parliament, and the President would effectively become a Prime Minister, able to be removed at will by impeachment aided by the standing bureaucracy.

      Liked by 2 people

  42. rcogburn says:

    When Trump released the readout, the entire thing blew up, leaving them with this glorified fishing expedition using dubious legal theories to kick the can down the road.

    This carefully constructed and coordinated plan required the corrupt Atkinson report marked “urgent concern” to be delivered to the ODNI (to whom Ciaramella reported) who (at minimum) was supposed to withhold it from Congress citing executive privilege, triggering Impeachment 2.0. At the time the call occurred, the ODNI was Dan Coats (before him, Fiona Hill). Coats was fired two days after the call, which no doubt triggered an urgent need to get “their own” into place ASAP. This is exactly what ODNI Maguire did. Coats and Gordon were already gone by that time.

    July 25, 2019, the Zelensky call happens. Vindman is activated to pass info to Ciaramella.
    Who did Ciaramella work for? Per the Washington Examiner, Eric Ciaramella was, “detailed by the CIA to the National Intelligence Committee, where he works as a deputy national intelligence officer for Russia and Eurasia. He reports to Trump’s acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire.” On 7/25, the ODNI was Dan Coats. Coates #2 was Sue Gordon. This entire thing was hatched when Coats and Gordon were still in place. It was most almost certainly hatched with the assumption Coats would be in place when the ICIG report would be sent to the ODNI.

    Also, FWIW, at this time, Vindman’s boss was Tim Morrison (who had replaced Fiona Hill in June). And Mary McCord was now working with Schiff.

    7/28: Trump fires Coat and nominates Ratcliffe. This must have been a major hiccup. Impeachment 2.0 was now working its way through Schiff/Mary McCord/Atkinson, ultimately to be returned to the ODNI who, had it been Ratcliff, would have blown the hole thing up. Remember the overwhelmign pressure on Trump to make acting ODNI Marcy McCord a permanent replacement.

    8/2: Trump pulls Ratcliffe with tweet: “Our great Republican Congressman John Ratcliffe is being treated very unfairly by the LameStream Media. Rather than going through months of slander and libel, I explained to John how miserable it would be for him and his family to deal with these people.” Reminds me of the threat described by Patrick Byrne, “they will grind you to dust.”

    8/8 – Sue Gordon resigns. Joseph Maguire will become ODNI starting August 15

    8/12: date Schiff claims whistleblower first sent a “disclosure intended for Congress” to the Atkinson

    8/15: Maguire becomes ODNI

    8/26: Atkinson concluded WB, “met a legal standard of “urgent concern.” He then submitted a copy of the disclosure and “accompanying materials” to acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire, beginning another seven-day countdown to the deadline for Maguire to forward the information to the congressional intelligence committees.”

    Maguire withholds due to executive privilege.

    9/9 Atkinson, “sent the committee a letter notifying the House that the whistleblower complaint existed.” which triggers

    9/10: ” House Intel demanded that Maguire produce a full copy of the whistleblower complaint, the inspector general’s evaluation of the complaint, and any communications about the complaint between the national intelligence director’s office and “other Executive Branch actors including the White House.”

    9/13: Maguire DENIES the request, and Impeachment 2.0 is officially launched, “hat evening, the Intelligence Committee chair blew open the situation with a public press release, and spent part of Sunday on CBS’s Face The Nation discussing the issue.” Schiff concluded that “the serious misconduct at issue involves the President of the United States and/or other senior White House or Administration officials

    The Trump admin wrestles with whether or not to release the call.

    9/27 – Trump releases the call, and Impeachment 2.0 is effectively over, and the fishing expedition begins.

    Liked by 4 people

  43. dammit_janet says:

    It’s all about the Senate. Purposely doing outrageous things to get R’s fired up and outwardly dismissive of their fake Articles of Impeachment so they can create that visual for the media of Senate Republicans protecting the President. All to GOTV to turn the Senate blue in 2020. That and SCOTUS appointments. Probably even see RBG’s health take a turn for the worse as their big October surprise. I hope they find themselves the minority in every branch of government and President Trump has a Super Majority in the House & Senate in his 2nd term. Just imagine what can be accomplished!

    Liked by 1 person

  44. is it just me or does schumer look alot like beavis?the great cornholio.can use the article as tp for his bungholio!


  45. I am so glad you laid all this out. As I watched a few minutes here and there all I caught was the dems going on and on about documents the White House refused to give them, and then repeating that the president does not have executive privilege here, I couldn’t figure that out.
    Now I totally understand.
    Their slander, and liabolous words about the president being a corrupt criminal like a mobster was more than I could take. I expect their vile unfounded accusations on TV, but not in this setting. How naive of me.

    I was was also lucky enough to hear Shifty claim that Republicans were lying when they said they were not permitted to br present during witness questioning in the basement. He called them liars.

    Liked by 1 person

  46. If the dims get the Senate to subpoena, do they lawfare a procedural win that negates the above points?


    • TarsTarkas says:

      If the Senate can issue subpoenas under these circumstances, there is not a f**kin thing they cannot subpoena under penalty of law. Phone conversations, tax records, etc. The possibilities of mischief and corruption are endless. Russia might even be interested in buying a House Committee chairman or two!


  47. Zy says:

    Sundance, Schiff just made the argument (About 10:18 eastern) that because the House has the “sole power of impeachment” that they get to say what is and what is not a “subpoena”.


  48. Mr. Morris says:

    So Sen. Schumer has presented five amendments for witnesses, documents, etc. Each amendment was debated for several hours then voted down, 53 to 47. Schumer said he has more amendments to present, will he get up to 50 amendments or more? It’s ridiculous.

    Liked by 1 person

    • jebg46 says:

      50 amendments is what I heard, 50 x 2 hours each = 100 hours. And this allows Sciff to present his whole case before the trial begins. Major mistake to allow presentations of evidence. Did McConnell just get played?

      Why can’t there be an objection to this ploy?


  49. PVCDroid says:

    I would be so PO’d if I was a Republican Senator right now. Nadless is just going on and on. I think they pulled Schiff off duty so he wasn’t pummeled by Republicans.


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