Elise Stefanik – Improperly Constructed House Articles are No Excuse for New Senate Witnesses…

Representative Elise Stefanik is a member of President Trump’s defense team.  In this interview the issue of the deficient articles is raised surrounding witnesses.

House witnesses who gave testimony when the articles were framed could be considered appropriate, if needed, when debating those articles in the Senate.  However, witnesses not called by the House; and therefore not used in the assembly of the articles being debated in the Senate; are not valid for consideration.

.

It is not the responsibility of the Senate, nor is it constitutionally valid, for the Senate to attempt to rehabilitate improperly constructed articles simply because the House refused to assemble with due diligence.  Any evidence, including witnesses, that falls outside the originating assembly of the two House articles should be considered null and void.

This entry was posted in 4th Amendment, 6th Amendment, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Conspiracy ?, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Donald Trump, Election 2020, Impeachment, Legislation, media bias, Notorious Liars, President Trump, propaganda, Ukraine, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

180 Responses to Elise Stefanik – Improperly Constructed House Articles are No Excuse for New Senate Witnesses…

  1. Eric says:

    The Marxists have really targeted her in 2020. If you can, please consider supporting her.

    Liked by 30 people

    • RC23321 says:

      They’ve targeted everyone.

      Liked by 13 people

      • joebkonobi says:

        And this impeachment and the preceding coup is how they are getting the money to do it. Nothing but fund raising and mud slinging.

        Liked by 3 people

        • Speaking of money, and since Stefanik mentioned it as I KEEP hearing about it, I am pretty sick of hearing how America is the global ATM.

          WE, Americans, keep working hard daily so that Ukraine can have military defense?

          Not my job.

          We, Americans, are sending “AID” to every nation on the planet?

          Not my job.

          If the feral government wants to give money to every nation on earth it should find another way to do so.

          Who ever pays it back, with interest? How is it ever going to get back to the American people that didn’t buy a new car this year, again, after 20 years of not being able to afford to despite TWO working parents?

          When does it stop or where does it end? Not to mention, the tariffs President Trump has wisely place on nations that rip us off should be the feral government’s source of income UNLESS CONgress wants to come before us annually and tell us where they want to spend money that they get from US. That’s how it is supposed to work. I’m sick of being a SUBJECT.

          I will write this same post to our ESG President who I feel also feels the same way about the FERAL government spending run amock at OUR expense.

          Forgive the all caps in places, or no? lol

          Liked by 23 people

          • riverelf says:

            Amen!

            Liked by 2 people

          • Ockham's Phaser says:

            Thanks for putting into words what a lot of people are thinking.

            Liked by 4 people

          • Corn Puff says:

            The AID is a kickback scam and that’s evident with the whole Hunter Fiasco. Any other discussion on aid is a distraction from the root causation.

            They will stop giving $ when they stop getting $ it’s as simple as that.

            Liked by 2 people

          • X XYZ says:

            “Who ever pays it back, with interest?”

            Surely, you must be joking.

            Foreign aid is a global, guaranteed welfare entitlement program for foreign nations.

            Back in the 1970’s I had a bumper sticker on my car that read “Foreign aid MY ASS – IT’S YOUR MONEY”. (Actually, instead of the word “ass”, it had a picture of a donkey.)

            Nothing has changed for the better. Now, more than ever, Uncle Sam is Uncle SAP.

            Like

        • Mr e-man says:

          They just spent $50 million of taxpayer money on campaigning against Trump by using the Muller hoax. Now they are using taxpayer money to smear Trump and the Republicans in the Senate. And the citizens have to sit there and take it.

          Liked by 1 person

      • Eric says:

        True, but they REALLY hate her. Hollywood money flowing into upstate New York to unseat her.

        Liked by 4 people

        • suzbo says:

          Even NY has a tipping point. Illegals right to vote, criminals given baseball tickets/subway passes/no bail policy, homelessness, MS 13 gangs, Cortez, political corruption…Hope they’ve come to their senses.

          Liked by 3 people

          • Dutchman says:

            And you have to make a distinction, bfetween NYC, and NY State; politically very different, like most States.
            NYC is blue, but the rest of the State, except a little around Binghampton, is RED.

            And yes, its going to be intrresting this election, to see how many voters in these liberal big cities, on both coasts, finally wake up and see what the liberals have done to their cities.

            What the results of their sanctuary, homelessness, LE and other policies have wrought.

            Needles, crack vials and feces on the streets, etc. How deeply can someone bury their head, to NOT see the stark reality, right in front of them?

            Liked by 1 person

        • Chip Doctor says:

          Eric, thank you! When one of these swamp creatures proves themselves to be on the side of the constitution and therefore PT, we need to protect them. No doubt that she has a big target on her. We need to support her.

          Liked by 1 person

        • bbthevidiot says:

          I live in Hollywood. ALL the rich people had BETO signs and sent a ton of money to unseat Cruz. Same happening to Stefanik.

          Liked by 1 person

        • Lester Smith says:

          Trump needs to add her to a damn good position. She is a fire cracker. She has so much talent and potential. America needs people like her. Congress is her stepping stone.

          Liked by 2 people

      • Harlan says:

        And they’ve got wads of cash.

        Like

    • Bob says:

      She hit another cord with the Lefties….good for her…

      Liked by 2 people

    • Jimmy Jack says:

      After the Comey questioning (or was it Strzok?) she had a target on her back. I think she is fantastic.

      Like

    • Rhi says:

      Can’t the Republicans stop saying it’s a “weak case” and state there is no treason bribery high crimes and misdemeanors in evidence of this shampeachment and call it what it is, a legislative coup?
      And Martha is a swamp rat.

      Like

    • Aeyrie says:

      No doubt because Elise Stefanik is extremely articulate and effective in her commentary. Definitely a new star, as POTUS has said! I really like her.

      Like

  2. RC23321 says:

    *female

    Like

    • jambo says:

      “Most of us in the know WANT witnesses like Ciaramella, Misko and the Bidens”

      Nope, I want this farce kicked to the kerb asap. No witnesses, immediate vote to dismiss.

      Over before State of the Union.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Magabear says:

        Agreed. Kill this sham as soon as possible!

        Liked by 2 people

        • nimrodman says:

          Yep, kill it in its crib
          Oops, it’s up and toddling already

          Ok, then – kill the frikkin’ toddler – I’ve got the stomach for that

          Like

      • Publius2016 says:

        fully expect Schifty Schiff to call in sick tomorrow so Dimms can force Crazy Bernie off the trail this weekend!

        If Crazy Bernie was ethical, he’d call for dismissal too…

        Like

      • Loren says:

        Exactly. All of This should of been done in the House.
        Once presented to the Senate, the Senate becomes a deliberative body. The Senate looks over what has been presented and if they fined it necessary for clarification they can call those already questioned by the House.
        At the end the Senate votes to acquit or convict, its that simple.
        But hating President Trump has overwhelmed all reason in Congress.

        Like

  3. Publius2016 says:

    true…as the articles were submitted without any crimes meeting standard, SENATE MUST THROW THEM OUT WITH THE TRASH!

    Schifty Schiff and Penguin should also be required to listen to nails on a chalk board for 72 hours.

    Liked by 9 people

    • Publius2016 says:

      predict 53 to 47 and then 55 to 45…Acquittals…

      Should be dismissed once Dimm 72 hour period ends…if not, then 45 team should provide copies of call transcripts…US Constitution…and Supreme Court rulings on Executive Privilege…2 hours max then rest.

      Liked by 3 people

      • joebkonobi says:

        I disagree. Should not end with only dems having their say. POTUS has his representation ad they should be heard LOUD and CLEAR.

        Liked by 10 people

        • jbowen82 says:

          Here’s how I see it. Motion to dismiss the “Obstruction of Congress” article at the close of the Dems’ case, because even if every word therein is true, it still cannot be a basis for removal. President’s team then puts on a defense only against the “Abuse of Power” article. They take 1 day, then we go to Senate written questions, then a quick vote not to remove and it’s over.

          Like

      • John says:

        I agree with you, that it will take a day or less for the Trump Team to counter all of the impeachment charges. But that is not the reason that they want this to go to a full trial. The Trump Team are going to expose evidence of all the corruption. They are going to present a “stinging indictment,” against all of these perpetrators. The coup will be disclosed.

        Liked by 6 people

      • David says:

        What are you thinking? I massively disagree. Why do you want the dems to have three full days to filibuster and lie to the American people and the president’s team take a few hours to respond to 24 hours of non stop lies?

        The president’s team will and should take their 24 hours to refute and then spread the truth. It would be gross malpractice to do otherwise. They will take apart piece by piece every lie and every piece of the impeachment indictment. Then they will expose the lawlessness that Trump has been exposed to, particularly that we now know the last two FISA warrants are now judged illegally obtained. That is explosive and needs to be exposed because I doubt the mainstream media will cover this new development.

        Remember, politics is optics. If a politician does not respond to allegations, the voters believe the lies. So, most voters would only hear this: The president’s case is so weak, his team of lawyers could only muster a lame 2 hour defense. The result is devastating. The president has got you. He doesn’t need to convince you. Now, the president’s team need to convince others on the fence that the charges are baseless.

        There are many millions out there that have not been exposed to the truth. For the president’s team to forfeit that opportunity would be criminally negligent.

        Liked by 3 people

      • RC23321 says:

        “Should be dismissed once Dimm 72 hour period ends”

        That’s even worse than the people on here who don’t want the WB or the Biden’s to testify. I’m seriously starting to question the loyalty of some of you.

        Trump’s team needs to DESTROY these people. Expose EVERYTHING.

        Like

    • ATheoK says:

      As measured by a slow running clock.

      Liked by 2 people

    • They should be prosecuted for “filing false/bogus impeachment articles”.

      As happens with millions of Americans annually it is a total deprivation of President Trump’s Natural and Constitutional rights imo.

      Liked by 5 people

    • stripmallgrackle says:

      How about writing, “I will not make stuff up to advance an agenda.” on the chalk board with those nails for 72 hours?

      Liked by 2 people

  4. William Warburg says:

    When will the taxpayer be able to sue Shifty, No Nader, pees lousy and the rest of these demonrats for all the taxpayer dollars they have squandered on this schiffsham ? They are guilty of treason or sedition at the very least. Where is the pushback and safeguards so they can’t do this again in three months? They won’t stop – ever.

    Liked by 17 people

    • Dutchman says:

      Well, they can’t be sued, for doing their official duties, even if they are wrong.
      The $ they are,wasting on this shampeachment is peanuts, compared to the,taxpayer $ they have been squandering and skimming, their whole careers; CONgress has the ‘power of the purse’; so THEY decide where,…for instance, foreign aid goes.

      And no, they can’t be convicted of Treason or Sedition.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Mr e-man says:

      They haven’t squandered any taxpayer money. They have put that $50 million plus to very good use for the Democrat Party.

      Like

  5. dallasdan says:

    SD:
    “It is not the responsibility of the Senate, nor is it constitutionally valid, for the Senate to attempt to rehabilitate improperly constructed articles simply because the House refused to assemble with due diligence. Any evidence, including witnesses, that falls outside the originating assembly of the two House articles should be considered null and void.”

    Nothing more needs to be said about this situation. Thank you, SD.

    Liked by 19 people

    • IGiveUp says:

      “It is not the responsibility of the Senate, nor is it constitutionally valid, for the Senate to attempt to rehabilitate improperly constructed articles simply because the House refused to assemble with due diligence. Any evidence, including witnesses, that falls outside the originating assembly of the two House articles should be considered null and void.”

      But if the Senate was controlled by Dems, they’d have no problem fixing “defective” House articles. There is no law but what the pols say at any given moment in time. Or, in other words, there’s lawlessness.

      Liked by 2 people

    • 94corvette says:

      There are a lot of people who have negative opinions of CJ Roberts, myself included. Something I’ve picked up on in his rulings is that he will not correct legislative mistakes or laziness. There was some issue a while back where all the Republicans were saying, ‘Just wait until it gets to the Supreme Court” and when it did, nothing happened. He wanted Congress to clean up after themselves.
      With the way that the House purposely did not prepare proper articles of impeachment, I doubt very seriously if CJ Roberts will allow them to get a ‘do-over’.

      Liked by 2 people

      • dallasdan says:

        I share your feeling about Roberts. I would add “distrust” to your enumerated list if it is not already there. I don’t know what to expect from him, either in the SCOTUS or in the Senate presiding over an impeachment trial.

        Nothing he may do will surprise me, and I anticipate any extraordinary action he takes or sanctions will be to the President’s detriment.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Lee Moore says:

      “Any evidence, including witnesses, that falls outside the originating assembly of the two House articles should be considered null and void”

      I assume this is intended to apply only to the prosecution’s evidence. It would hardly be fair for the Senate to prevent the President’s defense lawyers from presenting evidence that the House prevented them from presenting earlier.

      Likewise, while the House managers should not be permitted to re-examine the witnesses that were allowed to give evidence to Schiff and co, the defense should be allowed to cross examine them, since they had no opportunity to do so in the House proceedings.

      Liked by 4 people

      • Dutchman says:

        I actually don’t have as big a problem with SOME aspects of the way the House ran their show.
        I look at the House Impeachment like a Grand Jury.
        Testimony is kept secret, not made public.
        The Subject of the Grand Jury doesn’t get to have his/her lawyer present, when he/she testifies, or when anyone ELSE testifies, let alone cross examine.

        The Prosecutor decides what witnesses to call and, again the Defence has no say.
        And then, the Grand Jury hands down an INDICTMENT, alleging there is reason to believe a crime has been committed, and that the person or persons indicted committed the crime.

        That LAST part, is where the House case fell down; they allege no crime.
        “Abuse of Power”, and even lamer “Obstruction of Congress” are not crimes.

        Now, the Senate is the trial, but a wierd one. There has been no ‘voir dior’, to excuse Jurors who are obviously biased, and since when does the jury get to vote, on whether to hear witnesses.
        So, the analogy to the criminal prosecution process isn’t 100%.

        Still, if you compare the House Impeachment to a Grand Jury, many of the PROCESS objections are unwarranted.

        Its the results that suck.

        Staying with the analogy, this Impeachment will prove that;
        “While its true that any prosecutor can INDICT a ham sandwich, CONVICTING one is MUCH more difficult!”

        Again, a prosecutor decides what witnesses to call, and doesn’t have to present exculpatory evidence or witnesses TO A GRAND JURY, nor give anything to a defence lawyer.

        And, its held in SECRET. The House ran their impeachment like a Grand Jury.
        And, like a Grand Jury, they returned an indictment.

        IF this were going to be run as a criminal trial, of COARSE both the prosecution and the defence would call witnesses, in THE SENATE, cause THATS the trial phase.

        But, after the torture these Senators are enduring, I just can’t see them voting for more.

        Like

        • Mr e-man says:

          “Still, if you compare the House Impeachment to a Grand Jury, many of the PROCESS objections are unwarranted.”

          The part you are missing is that the Constitution and House rules dictate how an impeachment proceeding works. Both of those were violated by the House, so “process” arguments are completely warranted.

          Like

          • Dutchman says:

            Oh, I GET it, I’m not missing anything. The full House has to vote, initially to start an impeachment, because the Constitution says “The House” impeaches. NOT a committe, not the Speaker in a press conference, the HOUSE.

            Hence, none of their ‘subpoenas’ were valid, they had no legal authority, or judicial penalty for failure to comply.

            I have thouroughly followed Sundances detailed and prescient predictions cum explanations, of Nanzi’s lawfare tactics, to manipulate the system.

            And, while NOT a Lawyer, I have extensive experience in dealing with the law and courts, and legal procedures.

            And, been a ‘political junkie’ pretty much my whole life.

            I was just pointing out that the impeachment process, as established in the Constitution, sets up the House as the EQUIVALENT of a,Grand Jury, and the Senate as a trial.

            And, having BEEN the ‘subject’ of a Grand Jury, I can guarantee you you can’t bring your lawyer in, when you are subpoenad to testify, your lawyer can’t cross examine witnesses, or present a case in your defence,…its Very “one sided”.
            Because a Grand Jury doesn’t detirmine guilty or not guilty; it only detirmines indict or don’t indict.
            So, as a mental excercise, every time you read “impeach” substitute “indict”. “Impeachment” substitute “Indictment”. It tends to clarify things considerably.
            PDJT HAS been ‘indicted’, he HAS NOT been convicted.

            What the,House is learning:
            YES, a prosecutor CAN indict a ham sandwich.
            CONVICTING one is a whole different story.

            Like

  6. Magabear says:

    Imagine one were sent to Hades, and on the downward road they envisioned a place of fire and brimestone, only to find out their eternal punishment is far worse than they ever could’ve imagined………as they instead are sat in a room forced to listen to a man with bulging eyes and a pencil neck tell the same shampeachment lies over and over for eternity. 😲

    This is kind of what Senators are having to go thru right now. My guess is even Collins and Murkowski are ready to pull the plug on this hellonic experience they’re having to sit thru as soon as the vote to dismiss/acquit is able to be taken.

    Liked by 3 people

  7. litlbit2 says:

    “witnesses like Ciaramella, Misko and the Bidens.” proven liars. Times up Americans or Deplorables are mov’n on, we got a country to run! Just step aside you’ve had your turn, we listened, game over! MAGA/KAG2020🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🙏

    Liked by 7 people

  8. ATheoK says:

    Elise Stefanik’s position is spot on for a court proceeding, especially for an important court proceeding.

    Her statement harks back to it is not in my remit to educate you jerks or aid you in improving your pathetic partisan impeachment.

    Ciaramella and Biden should both have their own appointments in court. They will be far better deposing, testimony and cross examined without the House Manager circus.
    Nor will their criminal trials be open to claims that it is impossible for these criminals to receive fair trials.

    Cross examining Schiftt, Nadsless and Pelosi would be useful. But, not if it slows or impairs the Senate clearing the President.
    It may well be that Durham is marching up the road behind these traitors and will bring them to trial.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. cja says:

    This woman has brains, political talent and charisma. It would be nice to be saying President Stefanik in the future

    Liked by 5 people

    • WSB says:

      I think Elise just needs to hone her voting skills. I am from NY, and so appreciate her stance on the Constitution….she just votes a bit left wing for most of us.

      But, we can help her!

      Liked by 6 people

    • I wouldn’t “want to” vote for her, based on her voting records and a few things she has said in the past partly, but mainly because I truly believe an American President should not qualify at 35 years of age in our day and age as we live longer, but 55 years of age.

      I would also prefer if possible one even in their 60s simply because it appears to me that getting on in years sure does cause a serious sense of common sense acceptance of reality vs the way we wish things could be and that level of maturity is worth plenty.

      This only applies to one of a truly conservative approach that is also fond of the constitutional way of life as well, obviously. Democrats at this point are nothing but howling monkeys flinging poo – when they aren’t worshiping the monolith.

      Liked by 4 people

      • X XYZ says:

        “…an American President should not qualify at 35 years of age in our day and age as we live longer, but 55 years of age.”

        That’s no guarantee for attaining wisdom or prudence. Just look at Crazy Bernie, or Doddering Biden, or Fauxahonkey, or Saintly Nancy.

        The only difference between an old fool and a young fool is that of a few years.

        Like

    • emeraldcoaster says:

      Elise Stefanik is certainly on the rise and infinitely better than anyone the Dems are pushing, but her support last year for Joan Perry over Greg Murphy in the NC-3 (special election) primary was misguided. Getting more GOP women in Congress is a noble goal, but Dr. Perry was the wrong horse to back. Fortunately the district’s voters got it right.

      Like

  10. cjzak says:

    Not true. She’s correct and I hope they get this over with long before any witnesses would have been called. This impeachment is a complete unconstitutional sham that should never have started in the first place. Let the left be hoisted on their own petard of not doing things correctly. No witnesses needed.

    However, I have no problem if it’s decided to call witnesses as long as both sides get to call whomever they want.

    Liked by 1 person

    • barnabusduke says:

      When it comes to even considering calling witnesses for this sham, I’ll go with the wisdom of Mark Twain. “Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.”

      Like

  11. Loren says:

    Its seems some at FOX News are ignoring what the lawyers for Trump are saying. That this calling witnesses and so called new evidence should have taken place in the house.
    I still say 24/7 news thrive on this continuing. The damage to the country is meaningless to them, as long as they can draw viewers.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Judith says:

      This is more than merely drawing viewers. These Enemedia hacks are paid to advance the cause of One World totalitarianism. It is blood money. These TRAITORS would instigate WWIII without even blinking an eye.

      Liked by 14 people

      • Straight up absolute truth Judith, nailed it. They don’t understand that the nature of these global feudalists means complete ownership of THEM too, and if totally successful would likely mean their demise as it goes useful idiots first to be useless eaters… always has.

        Liked by 2 people

      • mimbler says:

        Agreed, except I think these hacks are true believers and are driving the train. They are losing viewers with their radical views and don’t care.

        Liked by 1 person

  12. Troublemaker10 says:

    I think she did a good job here. I hope the Defense team sets aside some time for the House Repubs on the Defense team to make some presentations to the Senate.

    Liked by 5 people

  13. Pegon Zellschmidt says:

    Gad. My hope is that cable news ratings fall through the floor. Anyone who gets their news from a TV news editor, whether Faux News or anyone else is a boring, frightened, lonely person.

    Liked by 3 people

  14. montanamel says:

    This speaks to something I posted “late today” to the open thread from last night….

    Some place I heard that ALL doc’s and evidence gathered by the House investigations had been “sent or released” to the Senate….

    My point is: WHERE is that testimony from that worthless POS of an IC-IG ??? it’s been held under wraps….are they, the House, still trying to hold them “apart” for all the others???? Seems too good a chance to pass up, ie: lay it out for one of those mini presser’s… IF IT’s OVER THERE, it high time we all got a peek at it….without any redactions!!!

    Milk and Cookies at 11 o’clock

    Liked by 3 people

  15. Revelation says:

    No. Ciaramella, Misko and the Bidens need to be professionally and thoroughly investigated by US attorneys. They need to face charges, not be fodder for daytime TV.

    The impeachment bollocks will die its own death.

    Liked by 1 person

    • dottygal says:

      Every time these people take the oath at hearings they lie and perjure themselves. They do it because there are no consequences: I site Comey, McCabe, Brennan, Strzok, Clapper, Hillary, Blasey Ford, et al. Hopefully an investigation by Durham would bring justice but that still remains to be seen.

      Like

  16. Arrest Soros says:

    The house went on an historic journey, that of the impeachment of a president.
    A precedent has been set.
    You want to support that farce by legitimising the house hoax?
    If what you want happens, then whenever a house majority wants to get rid of a president, they just need an anonymous whistleblower, some secret hearings in the basement of the house and voila’ you have a damaged president.
    Way to run a republic mate.

    Like

  17. Bob says:

    You must have listen to a different person. She is the one that nailed Comey. So if you are trying to divert the video….perhaps you are the problem.

    Like

  18. Brant says:

    Hmmmm, rehabilitate something after the house does something goofy. I vaguely remember a certain person “saving” the house/congress by “fixing” the law they passed about Obamacare. Oh, who could that be and where is he now? I have no idea on either of those questions…….NOT.

    Like

  19. andy says:

    I want to have her baby

    Liked by 2 people

  20. iswhatitis says:

    RC23321 says: “Ok, this is absolute proof she’s a male Lindsey. Most of us in the know WANT witnesses like Ciaramella, Misko and the Bidens. She’s a RINO pos. This is RIDICULOUS.

    That’s a bit harsh IMO.

    Sure, many of us would love people like you mentioned to be deposed and “on the stand under oath”.

    BUT, she is a member of the defense team and is likely not speaking against the overall direction of the defense.

    No matter how the defense runs, there are going to be differences of opinion with the public. As a group, we’re chock-full of “shoulda coulda woulda’s”.

    Calling members of the the defense team RINO’s and their direction as “ridiculous’ is just a bit much.

    I’ll trust President Trump and his team.

    Like

  21. IGiveUp says:

    The questions put by Zeldin to the media are those the media should be putting to the Dem managers. The state press has nearly killed representative democracy. The press we do have is suitable for a different form of government. Much of what we see here and elsewhere flows from that. There could be no impeachment and trial without their connivance.

    Liked by 7 people

  22. litlbit2 says:

    Again what is it with the fascination of Fox and alphabet FAKENEWS questions only about Biden corruption when the world is very aware of the family Ukraine payment plan with Romney, Pelosi, Waters, Schumer any many more? Is the FAKENEWS commentators also on the benefit Ira from Ukraine?

    Liked by 3 people

  23. WSB says:

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!

    Like

  24. kleen says:

    Jack Posobiec 🇺🇸 Retweeted

    Jake Turx

    Verified account

    @JakeTurx
    40m40 minutes ago
    More
    SOURCE: Trump’s legal team will likely not use their full 24 hours, and will instead wrap up by Monday night/Tuesday morning. The timing behind Bibi’s WH visit next Tuesday is not a coincidence…

    Liked by 4 people

  25. Bogeyfree says:

    I really like this women.

    Finally an adult in the room with common sense!

    Liked by 5 people

  26. grlangworth says:

    This representative’s clear mind and calm questions have done more to disassemble Democrat perfidy than most any other House member. This forum has revealed this more than once. In my opinion, for what it’s worth, Elise Stefanik is exemplary.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Dutchman says:

      So, thats two that want to have her baby, and I make it three!
      A steller RepubliCAN, and with this being what has thrust her into the National spotlight, and being she IS a politician, I expect she is, and will remain MAGA.

      Like

  27. stenwin77 says:

    Senate needs to vote to send articles back to house for them to complete their investigation.

    How embarrassing would that be to Nancy ?

    Like

    • How about they just vote to dismiss completely for the total lack of credence?

      Maybe toss in a blurb about their more than obvious fear of the exposure of their own blatant corruption that will very soon be in the public limelight, then the courts.

      Liked by 4 people

    • Everett Miller says:

      How incredibly stupid is your suggestion? Have you really thought about what your “plan” means? Do you really want to give these losers a “do-over”?
      NO THANKS

      Like

  28. Stefanik is a superstar. No wonder the Dems are desperate to knock her out.
    I hope the people of her district realize what a gem they have…

    Like

    • What? A “superstar”?

      When did we need to glorify and label people with such incredible status as “superstar!!” for doing their duty as an American elected to represent a group of people?

      Since it all went to hell with corruption? I’d rather we go with “she’s a good woman doing a great Patriotic service to her nation. Good for her and great for us!”

      We might need to STOP celebrating people so that their heads remain a NORMAL SIZE!!!

      Maybe it’s just me, feel free to let me know… L 😀 L

      Liked by 1 person

      • Cobra227 says:

        Amen brother!

        Like

      • X XYZ says:

        Hyperbole and gross exaggeration abound. Words of praise cost nothing. Trump also uses them often to praise people.

        These days anyone who merely did their job in the military, the fire and police departments, etc. is a “hero”. It devalues those who are truly deserving of being called heroes. It’s inflationary terminology, and it is nothing new.

        Decades ago I can remember seeing a counter sign at a post office that described the window clerk as a “window technician”. A clerk is only a clerk – but that doesn’t sound too impressive. I doubt that that clerk would know anything about how to install a window.

        Like

  29. Reserved55 says:

    Mary McCord, Communist Hack, dressed in Communist Party suffrage garb, wants Communist witnesses to overthrow the Government of the United States.

    Did I understand correctly?

    And why does she have Mrs Fartwell on his show?

    Like

  30. beach lover says:

    Wow. Everyone must listen to the Levin segment on Hannity. Boy, if he could make that speech to the Senate, this thing could wrap up in 10 minutes. Powerful.

    Like

  31. Phil aka Felipe says:

    Anyone else notice Ms. Stefanik is a real cutie since the professional makeup folks at FOX have done her makeup and hair? 😉

    Liked by 2 people

  32. jus wundrin says:

    The fascist progs rushed this mess through the house so they could call witnesses in the senate? Even the most cnn addicted ignorant fool should be able to see how much of a sham this whole dim circus is.

    Like

  33. Don McAro says:

    lots of made up genders…..

    Lots of made of crimes….anyone see the connection?

    Liked by 2 people

  34. dbobway says:

    Vengeance is a road traveled by fools.
    Revenge isn’t justice, it’s revenge.
    The Congress is broken, not by the process, but the men and women running it.
    Revenge is a short term, feel good, not even a short time, fix.
    Our country has fit a lot of diversity into it’s vast area of tolerance, but the tolerance is finite.
    It is a messy way to govern, one reason the elitist slavers want to change it.
    These folks have no moral property, in their quest for the return to serfdom.
    This quest involves maybe 20% of our population,
    The rest of us are in the way.
    The best revenge, is stay in the way, on the high road with moral clarity and truth.
    There is a price to pay for individual freedom, while making human life the priority.
    We either have it with structure or return to survival of the fittest.
    None of that 20%, could endure, in a survival of the fittest world.
    They don’t have to, let us be an example, the structure, our way of government offers,
    Is the closest we can come to being truly free.
    It is not to much of a sacrifice to pay.

    Liked by 3 people

  35. Ackman419 says:

    She’s good.
    Looks just like my sister.
    Jr. Bulldog who made the right choice to side with Our Lion.

    Like

  36. Caius Lowell says:

    Elise Stefanik is a good American — Outstanding job Ma’am!

    Liked by 1 person

  37. 1stgoblyn says:

    Good grief! Schifty sure likes to hear the sound of his own voice. Haven’t we head him go on and on about the July 25 phone call?

    Like

  38. Ackman419 says:

    Ooh boy, I can’t wait for the defense to rebut.
    I’m positive there won’t be any witnesses or evidence admitted, at this point.
    The defense is going to spend 3 days lambasting the Dems and the MSM.
    We will get some juicy slams against the Obammy State Dept, and hopefully his DoJ.
    I am STOKED. I’ll likely be a bit disappointed, but there should be some major truth being laid down.
    I hope Sek and Cip bring up the fact that charges of sedition, perjury and libel are warranted.

    Liked by 1 person

  39. ezgoer says:

    The Senate is a club of thieves. They have a blood oath (like the Mafia) that they don’t expose each other’s thievery. That’s why McConnell and Graham are protecting the Bidens. They will never be called as witnesses no matter what.

    Liked by 1 person

  40. WhiteBoard says:

    the constitution did not envision Foreign Aid within the context of the Power of the Purse.
    the House has overstepped into Foreign Policy and is encroaching on the President’s duties with this Ukraine Impeachment.

    any thoughts?

    Liked by 2 people

    • Rick says:

      Whiteboard, your thoughts merit a deep dive into the subject. I would love to hear others chime in with references to the founding fathers, the Constitution, the federalist papers and or bill of rights.

      Like

    • X XYZ says:

      The idea of paying welfare was anathema to them. Welfare payments, domestic and foreign did not exist until the 20th century.

      Like

  41. mr.piddles says:

    “Any evidence, including witnesses, that falls outside the originating assembly of the two House articles should be considered null and void.”

    Somebody on Fox said this about the Parnas “evidence” that Schiff or one of his Schiffettes were rifling through during one of their “presentations” on the first day. The Parnas “evidence” has nothing to do with The Articles, but Team Trump didn’t object at the time it was being thrown out there.

    Like

    • Ackman419 says:

      I don’t think the defense gets to object in this part of the trial.

      Liked by 1 person

      • mr.piddles says:

        Well, that would explain it. Still, there should be SOME means to push back on the Schiffettes from just throwing any old thing they want out there, and tag it as “evidence”. Parnas come out a day or two before, and now that gets just rolled into the Dem presentation? How is that permitted in any way, shape, or form?

        Like

      • Rhoda R says:

        They certainly weren’t given a chance to object in the House Kangaroo Star (basement) Chamber.

        Like

      • Dutchman says:

        In criminal trials, the lawyers on both sides, have some latitude in both opening statements, and summation or closing statements.

        Rarely are objections made, or sustained. They are laying out their version of the facts, their case, and each allows the other to do so without interuption.

        Like

  42. Carson says:

    Listen, little Martha- we don’t care that Trump rode rough shod over those filthy dirty sleazebag bureaucrats.

    Liked by 1 person

  43. I Hear You Now says:

    if you wish to Donate to
    “Elise for Congress”

    https://secure.winred.com/EliseStefanik/donate

    Like

  44. GB Bari says:

    Rep. Stefanik is definitely a huge “plus” for the Republicans. Her voting record has been a bit liberal for a Republican but in these hearings she has a notably keen sense for keeping all of the facts in order and recognizing who’s lying or trying to elude those facts. And she speaks to the press very confidently, assertively, and eloquently.

    If the House Freedom Caucus reps encourage her to participate with them more frequently, she may begin to vote a bit more conservatively.

    Liked by 1 person

  45. Bird Watcher says:

    What really chaps my back side is that the media,Fox included, keep repeating the lie that Trump asked for Biden to be investigated. He asked that the 2016 election interference by Ukraine be investigated. Biden was an aside mentioned by President of Ukraine.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Jason Ross says:

      The transcript needs to be front and center for the defense

      Like

    • Everett Miller says:

      Read the transcript, Bird Watcher. While Trump WAS asking for corruption to be investigated, it was, in fact, Trump who first brought up/mentioned looking into Biden stopping the investigation of his son. Facts matter and you should not be misstating them.

      Like

  46. zorrorides says:

    The President’s team is going to tell the Senators that the Articles do not meet Constitutional requirements for valid charges, and ask the Senate to dismiss the charges.

    Why oh why do they leave out the important Stuff !?!?!

    Be exact and accurate, you President’s men. Tell the Senate what Constitutional requirements the Articles DO meet.

    The House of Representatives declares Trump has done wrongs not already codified in federal law; and these listed wrongs shall be punished by removal from office, plus disallowance from any future office. The citizen Trump is to be removed from the office he won by lawful election; thereby confiscating the electoral college votes of the States; and thereby confiscating the ballots cast by the citizens within the States.

    What should the President’s Team proclaim to the Senate? The House has presented the Senate with a Bill of Attainder under the disguise of Impeachment’

    The Constitution expressly forbids Congress from making or passing any Bill of Attainder.

    Senators, don’t even think of evidence, witnesses or debate. If you use this fraudulent impeachment to harm the President, you will suffer consequences painful and extreme.

    Like

  47. capetribulation1 says:

    Terrible interview by McCallum. Why dies she keep regurgitating Dem talking points. Really? Is that necessary to appear “fair and balanced “? Another sham.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Strangely Accurate says:

      This is indeed fair and balanced for Fox News. I believe they are positioning themselves to maintain their viewership after the Trump presidency…whatever that looks like???

      Like

  48. Ironclaw says:

    This young lady gives me a little bit of hope for the future. Common sense is not yet completely dead among the younger generations.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Drogers says:

      Ironclaw –

      I was just getting ready to post the same thing.

      I’m on the far side of 60yoa and try to be understanding of the newer generations. But I must admit to a recent growing concern when considering young progressives. Free this, free that, and the people on the other side disagreement are to be vilified; is apparently now the SOP.

      Anyway, you’re right, young people like her give me {a little} hope for our future.

      Like

  49. Shyster says:

    Martha Macalum (sp?) Is a never Trumper POS! She knows for a fact that POTUS was excluded from 72 days of so called percipient fact witness cross examination and was only offered to participate for one lousy day of constitutional expert witness testimony and yet she has the audacity to say “well the president was allowed to participate and didn’t” crap. She thinks she’s the new Sheppard Smith. Disgraceful POS needs to shut her pie hole, because we have been and are on to her snarky ass bias.

    Liked by 2 people

    • iswhatitis says:

      Shyster says: “Martha Macalum (sp?) Is a never Trumper POS!

      I used to think that way of her (along with many others of the MSM).

      But more recently I consider the term “commie propagandist” as having a more accurate description (because after President Trump’s terms have ended; or if he had never been elected – they’d still be there shilling for those “globalists”; pushing their narratives).

      Liked by 2 people

    • Peppurr says:

      I call Martha> a stuck-up Ms goody two shoes! Darn right she’s a never Trumper.

      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