Day Seven – Senate Impeachment Trial, Defense Wraps Up – 1:00pm ET Livestream…

There will be 24 hours of presentation by House Impeachment Managers (over 3 days); 24 hours of presentation by Defense team (over 3 days); 16 hours of Senate questioning; 4 hours of closing arguments, equally divided; and then a Senate debate/vote on further motions to include witnesses. If there are going to be witnesses, they will first be deposed prior to testimony. No witness testimony will be permitted without first being deposed.

The Senate Trial continues today on day seven at 1:00pm ET. Today is the third and final day of the Trump defense presentation. The next phase is two days of Senate questioning.

Fox News LivestreamNBC News LivestreamPBS Livestream Link

.

.

This entry was posted in Big Stupid Government, Conspiracy ?, Donald Trump, Election 2020, Impeachment, Legislation, Mitch McConnell, Notorious Liars, President Trump, propaganda, Ukraine, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

747 Responses to Day Seven – Senate Impeachment Trial, Defense Wraps Up – 1:00pm ET Livestream…

  1. Biden Free Zone (BFZ) LOVE IT!

    Liked by 6 people

  2. novanglus86 says:

    OK – Sekulow hammering away at articles of impeachment being over policy differences. He needs to take it the NEXT STEP and say that allowing this DISENFRANCHISES the voters (63 million of us) from choosing policy. And thus we allow TYRANNY. Say it!

    Like

  3. dleach02 says:

    and other nonsense … I like that

    Liked by 5 people

  4. gadeplorable says:

    A 15 min recess and Pencil Neck could be seen grabbing his notes and heading out of the chamber prior to the feed going dark.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. beach lover says:

    That was great. Although I wanted him to bring up more plainly the illegality of the process used by Pelosi and Schiff, but guess he’s taking the higher ground.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Learned Hat says:

      The higher ground is going to destroy the nation – better get mean. “Now remember, when things look bad and it looks like you’re not gonna make it, then you gotta get mean. I mean plumb, mad-dog mean. ‘Cause if you lose your head and you give up then you neither live nor win. That’s just the way it is.”

      Liked by 4 people

    • Eastender says:

      That was brought up in detail during the 3 hour slot on Saturdat and again on Monday

      Like

  6. hoosiertruthfan says:

    The bar for impeachment cannot be set this low… fabulous!

    Liked by 7 people

  7. Seadoc66 says:

    TIME’S UP! THE VETS ARE COMING!

    TIME’S UP! FAR TOO MANY OF YOU POLITICIANS/BUREAUCRATS/ACADEMICIANS/MEDIA HAVE CROSSED THE LINE! WE OUT HERE IN THE HEARTLAND KNOW THIS IMPEACHMENT SHOW IS NOTHING BUT ANOTHER ATTEMPT TO COVERUP YOUR OWN CORRUPTION. D.J. TRUMP IS OUR PRESIDENT AND YOU ARE NOT GOING TO REPLACE HIM.

    SEEMS THERE IS ONE GROUP YOU SWAMP CREATURES FORGOT ABOUT. YOU FORGOT ABOUT THE 1000’S OF COMBAT VETERANS STILL ALIVE AND FULL OF TOTAL DISDAIN FOR ALL OF YOU. WE ARE COMING TO TEACH EACH OF YOU THAT YOU ARE OUR SERVANTS, NOT OUR LEADERS. SEE YOU SHORTLY, SUGGEST YOU GET READY!

    SOLDIER/COP/GRUNT, RETIRED

    Rape, Pillage,Plunder; America, You’ve Been Had!

    How much more before you stand up to those who have made the following lessons learned facts?

    1. The American people are the most effectively lied to people in modern times thanks primarily to the American political class, the American bureaucracy, the American media, and American academia.

    2. Arrogance coupled with ignorance equals stupidity.

    3. The greatest threats to the American people are the corrupt and/or incompetent politicians/bureaucrats/academicians found at every level of government/academia, and the majority of the American so-called media.

    4. Most of the politicians/bureaucrats/academicians I have encountered during my years as a soldier/cop I most kindly refer to as; self-serving, witless, cowards.

    5. The American Profession of Arms and our brothers/sisters in blue have failed to protect the American people from all of their enemies, both foreign and most especially domestic.

    Soldier/Cop/Grunt, Retired

    PS These lessons learned were first presented to a gathering of Americans in 1989. The only positive change to the American political environment since then has been the arrival of one, Donald J. Trump! Since D.J. Trump took office I have added more lessons learned thanks to the overall behavior of the parties highlighted in lessons learned 1-3 above. Seems approximately 25% of the American population has declared war on the rest of the nation!

    6. After carefully watching the whole of the political class since Donald J. Trump walked down that escalator in Trump Tower to date, I can say without reservation that most of the group will sell their souls and our bodies just to remain in power. (Added 2019)

    7. Want to see what the United States of America will look like if the left takes control of the government? Take your pick, New York City, Baltimore, Chicago, San Francisco, Los Angeles, or the complete package; California. (Added 2019)

    Liked by 4 people

  8. Blind no Longer says:

    I can see Team Trump winning over a few Dems like Jones and Manchin after that outstanding argument by Jay. Fantastic…

    Liked by 7 people

    • doohmax says:

      I was about to comment on the idea that Manchin and Jones could possible think that their constituents want them to vote to remove President Trump 10 months from the next election? These are not stupid men. They know what the facts are.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Rileytrips says:

        Ahhhh, but they are slick Democrat politicians, remember? They are creating an “out” ( at least Jones is) with their constituents. Jones keeps sending out emails and posts on Facebook how “we HAVE to allow witnesses to be heard in this trial to get to the truth” and other such nonsense. I think, then, if the Senate R’s stand together and vote to acquit the charges without calling witnesses, Jones and other D’s who have to answer to majority R constituents, will have that excuse to vote to impeach. Looks that way to me.

        Like

    • WRB says:

      But they will vote for “witnesses” with the intent to drag this fiasco out as long as possible. Meanwhile, no judges, a constant negative drumbeat in the news, a purposeful irritation of the republican base that will turn them off from voting for repub senators.

      And the fact that Schumer is pushing so hard for witnesses suggests to me they have something more up their sleeve beyond the obvious points I just made.

      Like

  9. FPCHmom says:

    Short 3 tweet take down of Warren by Dershowitz.

    Liked by 13 people

  10. If Manchin votes guilty ,his name will be Mudd in WV.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Nick the Deplorable says:

      Manchin will vote with the dems until 2023 when he has to run for reelection.

      Liked by 2 people

      • G. Alistar says:

        Absolutely, I sensed that every mention of the voters, in an election year and references to a duly elected President is by FAR the most relevant and effective. Democrat Senators could care less about the Constitution, the horrible precedent it sets and the evidence. Said best by Michigan Rep. Rashida Tlaib congresswoman “I’m going to Washington DC to impeach the m.f.” The only thing that will change their minds….the thought of losing their Senate seat and accountability to the citizen votes in November 2020.

        Like

  11. pucecatt says:

    This is eerily similar to the “ Salem witch trials” we all should be terrified of what is happening in the senate right now , the democrats have stepped over the line once again and we must vote them out come November. TRUMP 2020🇺🇸

    Liked by 3 people

  12. fred5678 says:

    Sekulow pounding, rightfully so, on Javelins — and some House managers voted AGAINST supplying them while now accusing POTUS on pausing military aid. So pausing military aid is impeachable, while DENYING the same aid is good policy!!! The significance of Javelins cannot be overstated to show the absolute hypocrisy of the House managers.

    BTW — I cannot link to any reference materials to illustrate, buy later today do a duckduckgo and find the videos and see why House managers are the biggest hypocrites in the world, saying that Ukrainian soldiers are DYING because of POTUS’ pause for FUTURE lethal aid, while Obama sat on his azz and DENIED Javelins which would have stopped cold the armored invasion by Russia and SAVED all those lives of Ukrainian soldiers..

    Liked by 7 people

    • G. Alistar says:

      The aid was not even in the current year and thus, had no impact on the current fight. The multi million dollar aid package to Ukraine was for the following fiscal year…legally, not even available until AFTER the 1st of October. Jay Seculow made that clear in his presentation today.

      Liked by 2 people

  13. icanhasbailout says:

    Game over.

    Dems will not want witnesses.

    Like

    • FrankieZee says:

      I say call the DEMORATS bluff and vote to call in the BIDENS and the whistleblower and let the chips fall where they may. You would see the DEMORATS fold.

      Like

      • icanhasbailout says:

        Mary McCord and IG Atkission are two good ones to have on the list, those two rigged the whistleblower process to qualify someone who does not qualify as a whistleblower.

        Liked by 1 person

  14. Paprika says:

    OK, I count under 1 hour and 15 minutes for both Philbin and Sekulow presentations today.

    Keeping it short, pointed, and powerful. Good job, well done!

    One more presentation to close and finish the opening statements segment.

    Liked by 1 person

  15. Zydeco says:

    How did the impeachment of Obama turn out for withholding military aid to Benghazi?

    Liked by 4 people

  16. jeans2nd says:

    Chrissy Wallace thinks Sekulow is a riveting speaker, unlike the other two attorneys today, who allowed Chrissy’s mind to wander.

    Jay Sekulow is a Christian, you dummy. We Christians knew all along what would happen when Sekulow turned it on.

    Liked by 4 people

    • FPCHmom says:

      Sekulow’s presentation was less legalese and more regular talk. The other speakers were covering important legal issues in detail. Sekulow was doing a wrap up of sorts. All were great.

      Maybe Chrissy just isn’t intelligent enough to follow the more complicated stuff. Remember, he is really just a news reader, as are all of them.

      Liked by 5 people

  17. dottygal says:

    If they vote to convict Trump for those 2 articles….Danger. Danger. DANGER!

    Liked by 2 people

    • Admin says:

      If they vote to convict on those 2 articles. It’s not just Danger. Danger. Danger. It’s CIVIL WAR 2 because our Republic demands from us our efforts to save it.

      Liked by 7 people

      • TarsTarkas says:

        Reminder: It’s two-thirds vote to convict. Unlikely to happen. Democrats IMO want more witnesses to drag this to election day and beyond. If they don’t get witnesses they want at least one Republican senator to cross over so they can scream ‘The vote to convict was bipartisan’ and run on that.

        It. Will. Never. End.

        Like

      • G. Alistar says:

        The veiled message every time Team Trump lawyers mentioned that “we are in an election year, a duly elected President, let the voters decide” — was a threat. And a very smart and effective one. The ONLY thing that senate democrats and RINOs respect and fear, the voters. They could care less about the constitution which they took and oath to uphold and defend, care less about the rule of law and even less about the facts and evidence. Prediction, none of the dems come around. I hope the majority of the citizen are watching and importantly, that they vote as well.

        Like

    • Rowdyone says:

      Interestingly enough I didn’t hear the phrase “precedent setting” with regard to emphasis on using such a low threshold to impeach a President. They danced around it without actually saying it to their audience, most of whom are lawyers. Is it deemed to be legal jargon and similar to quid pro quo?

      Like

  18. Garavaglia says:

    How does hearsay from a “manuscript” have any bearing on a senate impeachment hearing, magically appearing AFTER the articles are delivered from the house? I will wait for an explanation, because, from where I sit, it’s a nonstarter. Fascinating that the Republican Senators are even entertaining such a thing (sarc). Hmm..maybe the Bolton thing was planned..surely not…and the Republicans are in on it..but surely not. That’s not possible..is it. Trusty planners?

    Liked by 7 people

    • thedoc00 says:

      This is a test to see if McConnell follows through on HIS OWN RULES of vetting evidence if the vote is taken to admit NEW Evidence.

      It is supposed to be a 2-step process, with Lindsey Graham’s Judicial Committee deposing and vetting, then evidence is presented on the floor of the senate.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Brutalus says:

      It’s all about holding Trump and us up until the last minute…just like Flake and the Kavannaugh fiasco…inflict as much doubt and uncertainty (and probably something for the effort for them)…I dont know how we reached this point with these Collins, Murkowski, Romney squishes holding everything up…but we seem plagued by them and they should know in uncertain terms we’re sick of it…At least Collins and Murkowski have electoral concerns…Romney’s just a deep state snake…and an obvious one at that

      Liked by 5 people

      • madeline says:

        This is the only power they have. Pathetic…

        Like

      • Issy says:

        Lisa is not up for reelection until 2022. I actually would like to see lame brain Susan lose. I am so sick of her making herself the center of attention I could scream. She is never there when needed anyway, so what difference does it make. It might be a lesson for others.

        Like

  19. Tl Howard says:

    There is another consideration some of these Dems have to make. They fear Durham and Barr revelations, whether before Nov. or into the next Congress and their next term. Will they vote on the side of history, or against a POTUS and FAMILY that was framed and spied on for political reasons? Will they be on the side of the corrupt higher ups or on the right side?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Tl Howard says:

      Or on the “Schiff side”?

      Liked by 1 person

    • Eric says:

      These people fear NOTHING. They’ve done far worse than trying to pin a couple BS impeachment articles on a sitting president yet there they are. These grifters that occupy both sides laugh their a…s off behind closed doors to the scam perpetrated on U.S. citizens 24/7/365. IMO they now believe the mask no longer needs to be worn hence their contempt and disgust spit directly in the faces of half this country. 3 to 5 more years of third world trash being flooded upon us and the commies, who’ve infiltrated every nook and cranny of government can finally let their hair down and really start implementing social justice. The majority of Rs in the house and senate are also enemies of conservatism so don’t hold your breath on any revelations of justice coming.

      Like

  20. Admin says:

    Remember this actual statement in this trial by Schiff regarding Dershowitz:

    “Apparently they could not go to their own attorney general, who… in a memo he wrote as part of the audition for attorney general… opined that a president can be impeached for abusing the public trust,” Schiff said. “Couldn’t go to Bill Barr for that opinion, could go even to Jonathan Turley, their expert in the House, for that opinion. No, they had go outside of these experts to a criminal defense lawyer and professor.”

    https://www.rawstory.com/2020/01/watch-adam-schiff-takes-a-thinly-veiled-shot-at-alan-dershowitz-during-impeachment-trial/

    Like

  21. decisiontime16 says:

    President’s defense team was impeccable in looks, content and delivery.

    Liked by 7 people

  22. Maquis says:

    So glad there’s to be only one short break…just seeing the twisted lib faces on PBS, even with the sound off, is putting me off my feed.

    Liked by 2 people

  23. Reserved55 says:

    Three tweets

    Liked by 3 people

    • jeans2nd says:

      Oooooo – brutal, that’s a throw-down
      but true

      Liked by 8 people

    • FPCHmom says:

      Worth reading for the replies alone.

      Liked by 2 people

    • JMC says:

      Under a Breitbart article reacting to Warren’s statement that she couldn’t comprehend Alan’s presentation, commenters of all professions, including construction trades and truck drivers, are saying that they had no problems following Alan’s brilliant defense.

      Liked by 2 people

  24. JohnCasper says:

    No one can question the Bidentollah.

    Like

  25. hokkoda says:

    Hey folks, don’t forget that YOU get a vote on impeachment. Be sure to call or write your Senators today and tell them they’re not going to win any votes by helping the Democrats try to fix their sham impeachment. But they can lose a LOT of votes by helping the Democrats extend their slow-motion coup.

    They’re never going to retain their seats by helping the people that hate them. Make sure they know you have a long memory.

    Liked by 4 people

  26. snowshooze says:

    I had hoped Sekulow would mention the two FISA warrants that were judged invalid.

    Liked by 2 people

  27. paintbrushsage says:

    Liked by 2 people

  28. muckeyduck says:

    Maybe some can explain this to me.

    I hear comments from those on conservative sites, perhaps some have made similar comments on this site, that Justice Roberts is not to be trusted, that he is a “snake in the grass” so to speak.

    Yet, when I see ruling after ruling on issues like, ” Supreme Court Allows President Trump to Enforce “Public Charge” Rule For Immigration…”, where Roberts could easily have went the other way, I begin to wonder if Roberts really deserves to be labeled an untrustworthy champion of conservative principles.

    I am aware that his position on Independent Business v. Sebelius earned him much suspicion, but in my view he has been been a pretty solid conservative vote on most cases.

    Where am I wrong?

    Liked by 1 person

    • boogywstew says:

      People are still concerned about his vote for Obamacare. There is speculation, “speculation” mind you, that he is an easy mark for blackmail due to supposed under handed adoption methods he might have utilized to bring Irish orphans into the US. I never could understand Roberts voting for Obamacare but I’m not ready to make that leap, myself, to him being blackmailed. I would tend to believe that if he was being blackmailed, he’d have continually voted with the liberals on the court and he has not.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Wethal says:

      He doesn’t like being the swing vote on big public issues (Obamacare, citizenship on the census). (Yes, that’s spineless. if big public issues are being decided in the courts and not by the voters, well then stay off the court if you don’t like the job.)

      This was really not a big public issue, and he can see in a broader context the trouble that allowing one federal district judge to issue a nation-wide injunction is bad in general, not just on this “public charge” issue.

      If a district judge issues a nation-wide injunction, it gets an immediate appeal, and then on to the Supreme Court for an expedited appeal…he’d like such matters to go through the ordinary hearing and appeal process, and not so many expedited appeals.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Linus in W.PA. says:

      I think most of it comes from the ACA/Obamacare, but I could be wrong.

      Word on the street was that someone had some kind of dirt on him.

      I have no idea if that’s true, so be forewarned.

      Like

    • Trump2020 says:

      Its because of Obamacare. The individual mandate was unconstitutional until John Roberts took it upon himself to declare it was a tax. I don’t think that was presented by Obama’s people but his own conclusion. After that he lost a lot of support. Then there was his role in overseeing the FISA court. These things have made him appear compromised. I know I don’t trust him. It’s a shame.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Rileytrips says:

        And questioning the President’s administration on their “intent” on the citizenship question regarding the next Census. How can you prove your intent to someone? You can’t.

        Like

  29. Avi says:

    Im in a waiting room with MSNBC on and Marcia Wallace and the inbred looking McCaskill are saying that the Trump kids are worse than Hunter. Complaining that Jared was in the MidEast roll out.
    Different worlds

    Liked by 3 people

    • Chimpy says:

      I have a colleague that plays that same card. He constantly states that the Trump family is raking in millions as daddy is the President. He makes vague comments about a Kushner in the Middle East or Ivanka being unqualified. He asks me constantly how this is different from Hunter Biden.

      I show him evidence of corruption/ conflict of interest (the Biden boast video, etc.) and ask him to provide any evidence on the Trumps.

      He never responds. Just keeps repeating the same talking points or pivoting to a different topic.

      It’s useless to reason with these people. It’s like debating with a pull-toy doll that keeps saying the same thing, “To infinity and beyond!”

      Liked by 3 people

  30. Admin says:

    POTUS must feel good enough about this if he is permitting them to end their opening statements. I hope he is correct. And hopefully Mitch has signaled they have the votes.

    Liked by 2 people

  31. Avi says:

    Had Pompeo ran in 2012 he’d have the balls to stand up to Candy Crowley, unlike mittens

    Like

  32. Grandma Covfefe says:

    I’m watching and taping on PBS. There’s a break and Schumer came on…I don’t know if any of you are watching this channel, but Schumer’s hair look greenish than normal…ugh? Is Schumer getting green with jealousy.

    Liked by 1 person

  33. Deplorable Canuck says:

    Boom! Naddler is a complete contradiction in terms!

    Liked by 1 person

  34. Ken Maritch says:

    Geez, how long have these people been “serving?”

    Like

  35. Admin says:

    Haha a Big F YOU to Schumer

    Liked by 2 people

  36. gadeplorable says:

    25+ years ago and Schumer and Nadler are still holding their seats.

    Liked by 2 people

  37. Deplorable Canuck says:

    Boom Boom Boom Boom! That right there, those videos ends this impeachment right now!

    Liked by 5 people

  38. giveadamn says:

    during closing arguments, think trump’s defense team needs to “link” their compelling, legally-based arguments that the impeachment is unconstitutional with a video of all 100 of these so-called senators being individually sworn in–taking their oath of office (w/hand on the Bible) and stating that “i will support and defend the Constitution.” might be able to hear a pin drop at the end. a few of them could be shamed into doing the right thing. so easy to dismiss this farce—it’s unconstitutional and you, the jury, each took an oath of office to defend the CONSTITUTION!!!!!! but, let’s continue to twist ourselves and the country in countless knots, just because we’re bought and paid for globalists. burn in hell.

    Liked by 3 people

  39. bertdilbert says:

    Brilliant, they used film clips of democrats including Nadler and Schumer talking about lowering the standard of high crimes and misdemeanors.

    Liked by 3 people

    • fanbeav says:

      I believe Pelosi also had a video from Clinton impeachment where she stated we should never do this for political reasons. They should have shown that one also!

      Like

  40. Blind no Longer says:

    Brilliant move to show the Dems railing in Clinton’s impeachment!!

    Liked by 1 person

  41. Maquis says:

    “End the Era of Impeachment.”

    Liked by 2 people

  42. Troublemaker10 says:

    Summary of Jay Sekulow’s closing arguement…

    Liked by 1 person

  43. minnesotamike55 says:

    A question about the question phase. Can the house managers plant questions with the dem senators in order to get the questions they want? Or, would talking point questions be considered jury tampering? Guarantee all the dem questions will be coordinated some way or another.

    Liked by 2 people

    • ncbirdnwrd says:

      Considering what the lying Dems have done up to this point, they will stop at nothing. Expect Lawfare tricks that we haven’t even thought of.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Wethal says:

      “Can the house managers plant questions with the dem senators in order to get the questions they want?”

      Sure. But they still have to answer questions from the GOP senators. And the GOP senators could plant a few themselves (“Why didn’t the House release the Atkinson transcript?”)

      Liked by 1 person

    • TarsTarkas says:

      I believe the Senators can ask whether the President thinks the moon is made of green cheese. The Senators aren’t a sequestered jury.

      Like

  44. calbear84 says:

    Great job defense team! Thank you, thank you, thank you!

    Liked by 7 people

  45. Reserved55 says:

    Thunderstruck

    Liked by 6 people

  46. Dances with Wolverines says:

    Why didn’t two patriotic senators stand up before adjournment and move that the articles be dismissed on grounds of unconstitutionality? At least get the traitors’ names on record even though they will vote nay.

    Liked by 2 people

  47. mark says:

    What did Roberts say? The Senate is now in recess? Is that the word we are looking for?

    Like

    • Paprika says:

      Yes, but it has to be longer than 3 days in length, which is why we have the plethora of 3 minute, 3 congressmen “pro forma” sessions throughout any vacation, “state work” period, or Summer recess.

      Like

  48. Deplorable Canuck says:

    Well folks, I feel great, and confident, about this overall defense of your wonderful President. I watched none of the prosecution presentation because I just cannot take Naddler and Schiff! They drive my BP up! If the senate vote to impeach him after this defense, in which the Democrats own words actually acquit the President, well they are voting to end the USA as a Republic as we know it. I am praying that reason and common sense prevails in the Senate. Given that they are supposed to be the body of sober second thought, I can only hope they live up to their billing!

    Liked by 12 people

    • howie_roak says:

      I wish I had your optimism but can not because I also listen to the democrat senators. To a person they still demand additional evidence and still assert that the President must be guilty of “something or the other”.
      Both sides have conceded that this is a political process and while each side has sworn to be impartial neither side really meant it. the end result was know even before the articles were voted on in the House so this is kabuki theater to taint Trump and his presidency. Along with Trump convince enough swing voters to elect democrat senators — they assume they will retain the house in democrat control.
      It worked once for the democrats — Nixon impeachment — and they think they can pull the rabbit outta the hat once again.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Lawrence says:

      I could have written this myself. Right on.

      Liked by 1 person

    • LIG says:

      Totally agree deplorable c ! To distract myself I started watching the sci-fi movie the”Arrival “. The first word used is the word Human! How many humans in the Senate watched the brilliant Trump team destroy the demon team in every argument? So how dumb do they and the talking brain washers on tv think the American public has become? Looking forward to tonight’s rally. I’ve been in that line for a much Bigger venue. Enjoy Patriots.

      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