Mitch McConnell Prepares for Next Steps in Senate Trial – Questions, Then Possible Witnesses…

Earlier today Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced an agreement with Minority Leader Chuck Schumer for the Senate questioning phase of the impeachment trial that begins tomorrow.

Senator Schumer and McConnell have agreed to alternating back-and-forth questions from Republicans and Democrats over the course of two days totaling a maximum of sixteen hours.   The alternative would have been 8 hours of questioning by Democrats followed by 8 hours of republican questions.  Obviously, and curiously, McConnell and Schumer see a benefit to alternating back-and-forth over the two days.

Additionally, according to several media reports, McConnell took a ‘whip of the Senate’ regarding witness testimony and does not currently have enough republican votes to block the pre-planned House Managers’ unconstitutional scheme to call witnesses.

The appropriate constitutional position for the Senate to take would be that the House investigates; the House calls witnesses within their investigation; the House assembles articles of impeachment; and the Senate is the trier of fact from those articles.

Ergo if a witness was not included in the article assembly, that would be a defect of the House articles; incurable in the Senate.  However, it appears there are enough republicans willing to establish a new extra-constitutional process whereby the House can assemble speculative supposition; avoid the executive branch using their lawful process to appeal to the judicial branch for opinion; and put the burden of witness testimony on the Senate.

How and why any senator would agree to establish this precedent is beyond my comprehension.   Perhaps it would be a worthwhile endeavor to call, email or write our senators and ask them why they would even contemplate such an undertaking.

In the current quasi-constitutional House process, the Democrats refused to allow Republicans to call witnesses during their investigative phase.  As a result the articles as assembled are completely one-sided and partisan.  There are no republican witnesses in the evidence underpinning the article assembly.  This was obviously done by design.

As a result a one-sided, Democrat only, witness group is structured in the articles.  Now the same Democrats are demanding additional witnesses beyond those they called in the House.   The witnesses they are demanding are from the executive branch; and blocking the executive from access to the judiciary explains why the Democrat plan has presented this end-run around the constitution.   This was not a flaw in the article assembly, it was a feature.

I refuse to accept that Republican senators are stupid.  Obviously they, like us, can see how and why the House used this process; yet they are willing to allow it.  It makes no sense unless we accept there are GOP senators in alignment with the usurpation plans of the Democrats.

If the House Managers are successful in executing this scheme, the impeachment process will forever be severely subject to partisan manipulation.   There will never be a republican president not subject to the impeachment whims of the House…. and this new standard of making the Senate a participatory investigative body instead of a trier of established House evidence.   There’s no good answer why any member of the upper-chamber would permit such an abusive construct other than pure political power.

If I can make this argument understandable to you as readers, surely Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell could emphasize the gravity of this issue to his fellow colleagues in the Senate.   Yet apparently he has not.

The inability of Senators, regardless of party, to articulate this simple and dangerous constitutional issue is the most alarming development in this entire impeachment process.

In the most general of terms, DC politicians do not understand the level of intelligent understanding held by most voters.  Perhaps, as a final firewall against losing our constitutional republic, it would be helpful if we contacted with our senators and advised them we are aware of the issue.

Find Your Senator Phone Number HERE

(202) 224 – 3121 [Extensions Here]


This entry was posted in 4th Amendment, 6th Amendment, A New America, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Cold Anger, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Donald Trump, Election 2020, History, Impeachment, Legislation, media bias, Mitch McConnell, Notorious Liars, Occupy Type Moonbats, President Trump, Tripwires, Uncategorized, USA. Bookmark the permalink.

472 Responses to Mitch McConnell Prepares for Next Steps in Senate Trial – Questions, Then Possible Witnesses…

  1. my first question would be,why have we not seen the atkinson testimony??

    Liked by 7 people

  2. Zorro says:

    Interesting development reported on Ingraham by Lee Smith and Sara Carter. The Ukraine Whistleblower was also involved in Russiagate by promoting that Trump fired Comey for the Russians. You know what happened after that.

    Carter correctly points out that the person can no longer be called a “whistleblower” , The person is a Deep State operative trying to take out Trump on multiple occasions.

    Hang the seditionist CIAramella.

    Liked by 10 people

  3. Wethal says:

    On Friday, Mitch should ask his caucus:

    1) If the procedure was over and we were voting on impeachment right now, how would you vote?

    2) What could Bolton possibly say that would make you change your vote on impeaching Trump?

    3) If your answer is, “Well, probably nothing, I’m just curious about this bit….”

    Then there is no need to call Bolton. Anything he would say would not be considered material evidence.

    He could also point out:

    1) Closing arguments and a vote on Monday would enable Trump to go to the State of the Union forever acquitted.

    2) Finishing Monday would free up left wingers Warren and Sanders to get to Iowa on the last day of campaigning. Better for Trump and the GOP if Bernie wins instead of Biden.

    Liked by 9 people

  4. sundance says:

    Liked by 10 people

    • Zorro says:

      Optics, always optics.

      Liked by 4 people

    • WSB says:

      SD, both Zorro up above and I earlier caught an interview on Ingraham’s show.

      Not sure if this is important or not …

      “WSB says:
      January 28, 2020 at 11:13 pm
      Is there a way to search for Ciarmella in the Mueller Report?

      Sara Carter and Lee Smith are telling Ingraham that, within the report, there is an email by Ciarmella to set PT up …that PT fired Comey at the behest of the Russians… prompting McCabe to start the Russian investigation. This is in addition to the meeting that Ciarmella set up in the White House about Burisma in 2016.

      At 52 minutes in.”

      Liked by 6 people

    • Sherri Young says:

      Sorry, Schifty.


    • The Demon Slick says:

      Power grab. The Legislative branch is assuming powers it previously did not have. Every branch does it. Usually they’re not so petty and cheap about it. An Elimination of the judiciary branch from the impeachment process leaves the entire impeachment process solely to the legislative branch. If we’re lucky, Mitch will at least give us a reach arou…. er, at least maybe he’s going to drop the hammer on the dems. I have concerns about follow up questions in this format. The dems biggest enemy is a follow up question.

      Liked by 2 people

      • littleanniefannie says:

        Elimination of the judiciary branch from the impeachment process leaves the entire impeachment process solely to the legislative branch Democrats.

        What you meant to say, right? If not, you swung and missed. Strike one.


    • The Demon Slick says:

      I feel I haven’t explained myself clearly regarding the power grab.
      The house and the Senate together comprise the legislative branch. The question is this. Why wouldn’t the legislative branch want to have total control over the executive branch? People are saying things like this will totally change the way our government works. And that’s true. They point to England and say that is a parliamentary government we don’t want that! But if you are the legislative branch, why wouldn’t you want that? Routinely kick out the executive? Hold that kind of leverage over the executive? Of course you want that. Because power and control.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. Jorizabeth says:

    The articles are bogus because the entire House is supposed to vote and only the committee voted. It invalidates the entire thing! These Senators are WORSE than Democrats! Breaking their duty to the law when they know better, as shown by the presentations on Monday. We shouldn’t, but we could explain Democrats by TDS. Not as bad as Senators who know better. We aren’t having a problem with a Swamp, we have a problem with Hell!

    Liked by 4 people

    • WSB says:

      Short talking points for anyone who places calls or emails tomorrow:

      Fact #1) The articles are un-Constitutional since they do not specifically identify law violations.

      Fact #2) Impeachment was never authorized by a full vote of House members; therefore, an impeachment does not yet exist. The Senate would be violating its oath if it accepts further consideration.

      Fact #3) Constitutional witness testimony can only be initiated in the House. The Senate may only cross-examine House-initiated witnesses.

      The only remedy to this action is dismissal.

      Liked by 5 people

      • Kimmy K says:

        Thanks WSB

        Will be calling/e-mailing again tomorrow!

        Liked by 4 people

      • Ospreyzone says:

        We need to burn up the phone lines and not stop until they understand.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Please says:

        to WSB:

        Excellent summation! I just cut-and-paste your points after stating:

        “Facts for you that YOU ALREADY KNOW. I just want you to know that WE KNOW TOO”

        I tried calling but was put on hjold/busy for 20 minutes before hanging up. Also, but my Sens are scum..NY…Schumer and Gillibrand….no changing their mind.

        I also sent a second stating that I was considering volunteering for the campaign of their next Republican rival.

        Liked by 1 person

        • WSB says:

          My same Senator scum! And yes, I will be attending a GOPe dinner this week to get some scoop on the losers’ plan.

          I do know fhat Elise Stefanik will be heading up the Trump Pence Reelection Campign for NY.

          We’ll see!


      • Jorizabeth says:

        Done. Harris and Feinstein.

        Liked by 1 person

    • ms doodlebug says:

      “It invalidates the entire thing!” That ship has sailed. It is what it is ‘now’. It is what it has been all along. A smear campaign orchestrated by the democratic party enabled by the republican party.

      What I find more shocking and detestable is that we have a SCOTUS Justice silently enabling it. To quote Justice Roberts, “As the new year begins and we turn to the tasks before us, we should each resolve to do our best 𝐭𝐨 𝐦𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐚𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜’𝐬 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐰𝐞 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐟𝐚𝐢𝐭𝐡𝐟𝐮𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐠𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐬𝐨𝐥𝐞𝐦𝐧 𝐨𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐨 𝐞𝐪𝐮𝐚𝐥 𝐣𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞 𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐥𝐚𝐰”


  6. Deborah Fehr says:

    it seems its Bolton’s word against PDT? Was there any recordings? who can prove it either way? And how can a top adviser, scorned top adviser I might add, be allowed to publish a tell all of a President that is still sitting? This is craziness. This guy should be in prison for exposing top secrets to the world. MY GOD!! How can this be happening? And why is nobody moving to stop it?

    Liked by 7 people

    • Garavaglia says:


      Liked by 2 people

    • YeahYouRight says:

      I suspect this is a rope-a-dope. Bolton hates dems too. I think this was a leak trap and this book says nothing the msm has been led by the nose to believe, much like every other tell-all before it. I just don’t buy this from Bolton.

      As for witnesses…the Q&A phase must be so repugnant to the dems that they themselves are asking to forget about witnesses. This starts by swearing in Schiff before he says one syllable.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Ross says:

      Has anyone except Bolton, his lawyers and his publishers actually read what is reported to be in the book?


      • ms doodlebug says:

        The people reviewing it have read it. So what? PDJT has said, publicly, he believes the Bidens should be investigated. It’s his job to root out corruption in our government. After what we’ve seen, Biden’s video, and what we’ve heard from the Defense, the Bidens should be investigated. IMO, they ‘must’ be investigated. Corrupt politicians holding hands with corrupt oligarchs corrupts ‘both’ governments.

        Burisma is also ‘our’ business if ‘our’ aid monies are being funneled to corrupt oligarchs. It is ‘our’ business as it undermines ‘our’ country if any of ‘our’ aid money has been funneled back to the Bidens.

        We have no idea how many Ukrainian businesses are corrupt or who may be involved. But we do know Burisma and the Bidens are involved.


    • littleanniefannie says:

      it seems its Bolton’s word against PDT?

      Right now, it’s the word of that paragon of honesty, the New York Slimes, against PDT. If any of the Senators contemplating a vote for witnesses would take an honest look at this, they would see Lawunfair’s prints all over it. Do any of you really believe that it is merely coincidence that after only 2 hours President Trump’s Defense Team was dismantling the House managers arguments? Do any of you really believe that it is merely coincidence that the House didn’t have time to wait for the court to rule on Bolton, meaning thy didn’t need him for impeachment? Do you really believe that it is merely coincidence that the rules of impeachment were completely rewritten in the House by Lawunfair and the Dems in order to shut out the witnesses that Republicans wanted and that the only Republican witnesses were ones already on the Dems wish list and Jonathan Turkey?
      If you can honestly answer yes to all three of these questions, then go for it. If you can honestly answer yes to all three of these questions, then you are really a Democrat. The Democrats impeached on a rigged impeachment process and this will continue to judges and Congress people because any Senator who votes to allow this fiasco to progress will have allowed Lawunfair and the Democrats to continue this process ad nauseum.


  7. cambee99 says:

    The real question to all, “do the RINOs actually want the party to fail?”

    If we look at how the Republicans have lost all validity in New England and West Coast, then you start to realize that there is a common denominator. RINOs actually want the party to fail and allow the blue to take over. Romney going to Utah wasn’t cause he couldn’t win(he couldn’t), but rather to break the Red Firewall in the Mountains. Romney is a design of remapping the electorate for the elites. Trump may be the last Republican President, but it will be because the RINOs destroyed every resemblance of republicanism

    Liked by 1 person

    • kleen says:

      As Sundance pointed out, Mitch prefers to be minority leader. It’s where he thrives.

      Liked by 3 people

    • annieoakley says:

      It really seems that there is no valid Republican Party in Colorado anymore.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Sammy Hains says:

      Yes, RINOs want Republicans to fail. That’s their role as Democrats masquerading as Republicans.

      Romney most certainly wants Republicans to fail. He’s a 3 time loser who still continues to insist on running for office and carrying Republicans to defeat. Republicans losing doesn’t bother him one bit, all the better when he’s the cause.

      Throwing 0bama out in 2012 was a slam dunk that Romney blew. A failure like that could only be by design.

      Romney ran for the Senate with the sole intention of sabotaging the President and frustrating Republicans. He was tagged in by Flake on his way out. Just wait until President Trump has another SCOTUS nominee. And yes, Utahans of course knew exactly what they were getting when they elected Romney.

      Liked by 1 person

      • The Demon Slick says:

        The elders say Romney, it’s Romney and that’s that.

        Liked by 1 person

        • YeahYouRight says:

          Lee is not much better. Really, such a disappointment. What happened to you. Utah?

          Liked by 1 person

          • auntiefran413 says:

            What is the religion counterpart to the term racist? If you know what that is (I don’t), you might — I repeat — might want to call me that after I tell you what I think “happened to Utah”. A Mormon ran for the Senate. I just hope and pray that my conservative Mormon friends in Utah don’t hold this against me.


      • littleanniefannie says:

        The old SAT used to have analogies on it and the Miller Analogies Test was nothing but analogies. Here’s mine:
        Romney 2012 was to Obama as Clinton 2016 was to Trump.


      • webgirlpdx says:

        Pierre is still being blackmailed by the same corruption the Deep State had over him in 2012 that made him tank his campaign. Their marching orders included carpetbagging himself down to Utah to win that seat and continue on as their evil foot soldier.


    • Sherri Young says:

      Romney is a Bushie. Always has been.

      Liked by 2 people

  8. “According to media reports,
    McConnell took a ‘whip of the Senate’ regarding witness testimony and does not currently have enough republican votes”

    According to media reports

    “Trump has no chance of winning the election”

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Do you truly believe that a two-thirds majority would vote for conviction? Right now, my tear-stained belief is that won’t happen…it can’t happen.

    Liked by 2 people

    • kleen says:

      No, but here it’s what I think it could happen. A few sacrificial lambs/RINOs could switch party and give Schummer control.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Magabear says:

      There won’t be a conviction, but dragging this process out any longer than needed is allowing unnecessary punishment to us, POTUS and the constitution.

      Liked by 2 people

      • littleanniefannie says:

        It’s setting the precedent that I worry about. The Dems are so good at manipulating the process (HR1 and HR660 setting the precedent) and then, if they get away with it, manipulating the Senate to establish a precedent to circumvent the Constitution. Any RINOs that vote to allow witnesses will have neutered the Constitution forever.
        How many times have the Democrats invoked the “He thinks he’s a king” mantra. Projection, pure projection. The Democrats actually want a monarchy, a Democrat monarchy, a Socialist monarchy, a Communist monarchy. They “rail” against it now by attributing it to President Trump but only because they want to replace Trump with a Democrat to be named. The Supreme Court will be packed, a la FDR’s attempt but they will succeed just like they did in the 116th House, and then rendered lapdogs. The US will not even be as well off as Venezuela if the likes of AOC, Bernie, Liawatha, Mayor Pete, Schifft and the rest of the Schitt show gain control. Wake up Senate. Our country is in your hands.


    • ezgoer says:

      The Democrats’ goal is to drag this out as long as possible to inflict maximum smear damage to Trump to hinder his re-election. Then obtain a “conviction” of a Senate majority — at least 51 votes. So their 2020 campaign platform will be that a majority of the U.S. Senate found him to be a criminal who should not be president. It’s quite likely the Dems will get their 4 GOP traitors to accomplish this.

      Liked by 1 person

  10. Magabear says:

    First, it’s a good idea for Mitch to have questioning alternate between R’s & D’s, if for no other reason than to not allow the networks (looking at you Fox) to only show the 8 hours of dimms questioning and cut away from Republican questions like they have during the counsel presentations.

    I can appreciate that Mitch is probably trying to use a velvet glove with Collins and Murkowski right now, but if after the two days of questioning they still want witnesses, then he has to drop the hammer on them. If not, he failed as a leader.

    This isn’t hard, as SD and many others have laid out. To vote for anything other than acquital at this point is making a mockery of the constitution and the Senate.

    Liked by 6 people

    • L4grasshopper says:

      What hammer?

      He has very little leverage.


    • ezgoer says:

      The problem isn’t just Collins and Murkowski. Reports this evening have the Chamber of Commerce offering lucrative contributions and after leaving office jobs to Senators Toomey (PA), Burr(NC), Alexander (TN), and Thune (SD) to vote to allow witnesses. CoC and other corporate lobbying groups despise Trump and oppose most of his MAGA agenda — especially on immigration and trade. It’s simply selling out the troublesome outsider for cash for their bank accounts.


    • Sammy Hains says:

      What the networks will do instead is show the Democrats’ question then go to the panel to discuss it while the Republicans’ question is being asked. They can keep that up all day. Watch.


  11. kleen says:

    For those of you with any doubt about what a dirty, filthy, vicious scum bag Mitch is, just look at how he treats conservatives. He is as vicious as Pelosi. Race card and all. He funds attacks against conservatives.

    But when it comes to Democrats he plays dumb and nice and classy. That’s not who he is.

    It’s a game. He sides with Democrats but need to get re-elected as a Republican so they(uniparty) can keep winning.

    He needs his position, he needs us to believe she is just dumb and weak and a Republican.


  12. Hans says:

    I never thought we would get to this point in our Republic. I BELIEVE IT IS TIME… to stop a potential civil war by illegally removing the president of the United States thru a bill of Attainder.

    IMO it is now time for PDT to declare Martial Law. And arrest the coup plotters.


  13. H.M.P.D. says:

    Welp! It looks like it’s safe to say…if Bolton testifies…he’s gonna be one lying MFer! How do I know that? Cause he said so!

    Liked by 4 people

  14. Donzo says:

    By alternating questioning it gives the LSM lots of time to cut to commercials when Rs speak.

    Liked by 1 person

  15. WiseLobo says:

    In my opinion, the four senators will be the cause of the death of the GOP. Certainly will stop many of the donations to any of their campaigns. In effect, they are giving control of the Senate to the Democrats. Yet they hung together on judicial appointments; difficult to figure that out. I keep telling my wife there are too many votes to remove Trump; but I am thinking that could happen. If so, it is the end of the party for me. A third party may be needed as these two are not working for the common good of the people; only for themselves.


  16. woohoowee says:

    I refuse to accept that Republican senators are stupid. Obviously they, like us, can see how and why the House used this process; yet they are willing to allow it. It makes no sense unless we accept there are GOP senators in alignment with the usurpation plans of the Democrats. — SD

    It makes sense if you consider pretty much all of them wanted to find a reason to oust PT45, but he’s too clean, so they want a lynching. That’s what it was/is always about; how dare this political outsider put America back on her historical constitutional path and cut the pigs’ $ off, can’t fire him so lets lynch him! Find him guilty of our fabricated BS! Anything to shut him up so he’ll stop outing our corruption.

    Liked by 5 people

  17. L4grasshopper says:

    If they vote for witnesses, then this travesty stretches into April or even May.

    Which traps ALL Senators running for re-election.

    Including one Susan Collins, who will be in a tight race in Maine.

    Perhaps she might consider if sticking it to Trump one more time is worth being unable to campaign while her Dem opponent can 🙂

    Liked by 2 people

  18. Perot Conservative says:

    Senators? Senators? Likely a handful of key saboteurs.

    Sybil Romney

    Its Taco Tuesday, I can’t come up with red headed stepchildren 3 & 4.

    Romney, a Billionaire, who feels one-upped by Trump, and very likely feels morally superior. Not used to losing. And what other Mormon Billionaire or even over-50 Millionaire would ever think about boxing a former heavyweight champ? And shirtless at that.

    Liked by 1 person

    • hitgirl18 says:

      There is nothing superior about romney. He is an evil ignorant traitor! He is so jealous of Trump, he is buzzing inside! Do you remember how filthy romney spoke when Trump was running? He said the most disgusting words I ever heard!


  19. Susan Collins sounded (as) sincere (as any of them can manage) re. her (correct) vote on Justice Kavanaugh. Did she really have to wrestle with that one, or does she just feel she has to APPEAR “torn and conscience-stricken” to placate her New England constituents?

    There’s a lot of posturing going on. Does Mitt Romney really think he can get re-elected in Utah if he votes (or maneuvers) to remove a successful, popular Republican president? Does he plan to move back to Massachusetts?

    Remember, most Democrat “witnesses” never actually “witnessed” anything, and they’d now be appearing in a forum where a White House attorney could presumably stand up and say “Objection, Mr. Chief Justice, inadmissable as hearsay and opinion.”

    At that point, what “witnesses” do Schumer and Romney have who could swing 18 to 20 Republican votes? (Or, if Manchin and Sinema and other red-state Democrats are lining up to acquit out of simple self-preservation, should we make that 20 or 24 or more?)

    I understand the terrible precedent Senate witnesses could set. But i’m trying to envision how this would work. I can’t believe the Taiwan Turtle or “Yesterday it was a tax, today it’s not” Roberts would allow the optics of permitting “some more Democrat witnesses, ONLY.”

    If they allow “one each,” are the Democrats dumb enough (I know that’s a very low bar) to call Bolton without knowing exactly what he’s going to say? He could say “The Times got it all wrong” — either because it’s true, or because he’s thinking of his future employability. What if he (or the White House) asserts executive privilege (there couldn’t be a better test case than a White House NATIONAL SECURITY adviser) and asks for an expedited ruling from the Supreme Court to bar his appearance? (Trump has been fully cooperating with these a-holes for THREE YEARS; surely he’s allowed to show some spine at SOME point.) Does it go to an 8-member court with Roberts recused? How long does THAT take?

    I doubt Cipillone & Sekulow call Hunter Biden as their sole witness. He’s a space cadet who lies to get out of paying child support, claiming he’s broke when he made millions last year and he’s driving around in a new Porsche. He’s got about as much credibility as that Mafia don who used to show up in his pajamas. What if Hunter says “Thanks for inviting me here today; I respectfully invoke my Fifth Amendment right to not answer any questions”?

    For that matter, “one witness apiece” would be pretty weird. Five witnesses apiece? How would Cipillone & Sekulow prioritize a list of five? “Intelligence” Inspector General Atkinson? Eric Ciaramella? Adam Schiff UNDER OATH? President Volodymyr Zelensky of the Ukraine? Former chief of staff to the U.S. Attorney Genera Mark Levin? Former federal prosecutor Rudy Giuliani, reading a two-hour opening statement — with big charts — on “Corruption in the Ukraine”? Even the Vindman twins would be interesting: “Captain Vindman, before you depart for your new posting, guarding that really important mess hall on Guam, could you explain to us why you think the President of the United States has to follow the direction of some cabal of unelected bureaucrats when it comes to foreign policy. Did you leak details of his phone call with President Zelensky to CIA operative Eric Ciaramella? Do you know what the penalty is for leaking classified information from the White House?”

    Remember, the White House team already gets to eliminate all “hearsay and otherwise inadmissable” stuff from the House file — which could take a couple of butchers with really big meat cleavers. Where would Schumer and his new pals Romney and Murkowski FIND five Democrat “witnesses” to offer anything but inadmissable opinion and hearsay? In exchange for which they’re going to allow the White House lawyers to conduct a week-long seminar on Ukrainian corruption, including naming EVERY U.S. SENATOR WHOSE FAMILY GOT RICH ON UKRAINIAN LOOT? (“Hey, we’d rather not have, but if you insist . . .”)

    And finally, “OK, guys: To be fair, I’m thinking maybe eight witnesses for each side, call it another five weeks, and that’s after allowing two weeks for scheduling, I believe that takes us through the end of March. Too bad about some of you folks missing those presidential primaries . . .”

    — V.S.

    Liked by 3 people

    • All Too Much says:

      Great analysis, V.S.
      In terms of timing, I think the motions concerning admissibility of almost all of the Dem’s purported evidence, would take weeks just by themselves. Court rulings on executive privilege could take months, Thinking through other issues, procedure and scheduling for example, I think an end of March wrap up is not likely.


    • All Too Much says:

      I forgot.
      This is a great point:

      “Remember, most Democrat “witnesses” never actually “witnessed” anything, and they’d now be appearing in a forum where a White House attorney could presumably stand up and say “Objection, Mr. Chief Justice, inadmissable as hearsay and opinion.””


    • Monadnock says:


      Witnesses or no, I find it very hard to fathom that the senate has the stones to remove PDJT…

      Even with the media trying to hide positive news about the President, the August One Hundred no doubt are aware of the massive numbers of patriots that are waiting now two days in advance to get into the latest PDJT rally. In fact, if anything, what we are seeing over and over again with the rallies since 2016 is that the numbers have grown past what we were seeing in the leadup to the 2016 election. Way past. And unless senators are so in a bubble they can’t perceive objective reality, then they see it as well.

      Remove PDJT, and the Senate will in a moment create close to 70 million citizens who are no longer under any illusion that their votes mean anything. No more effecting change through the ballot box…

      Between the MSM and social media, we long ago lost access to the soap box…

      Top that off with what we are relatively certain is a broken jury box (see lawbreaking by the Left going completely unpunished from prior to 2016 all the way to this moment)…

      We all have a trigger point, and probably most of us have an idea of what our trigger points are… but the truth of the matter is that actively relying on the ammo box to deal with a rogue federal government would be a such sobering moment for just about anybody, that it will take a hugely significant act by the fed gov to activate that trigger for the vast majority.

      I suspect that removal of PDJT (i.e. declaring that our votes no longer matter) would be that sobering moment for millions, the kind of event that, once experienced, will lead to those of us who are paying attention realizing that in the absence of a response by the citizenry, the republic is lost…

      I believe that removal would leave us with two choices: 1) let it go, embrace our coming servitude, and plan for our children, and their children, and their children, to be farmed like cattle, or 2) hundreds of thousands if not millions of fellow citizens arm up, travel to DC, and remove pretty much all elected officials, their staffs, and untold thousands of Leftist federal bureaucrats.

      If they don’t fear this, because perhaps they believe they can weather the storm by disrupting communications to prevent our organizing, then they are even thicker than I thought. Such an event would be organic and unstoppable; planning and coordination, to the extent necessary, would take place in transit.

      And there’s nothing they could do to stop it.

      Those who don’t resist would likely find themselves remanded to their home states where they would finish their lives more or less under house arrest.

      Resist (which would be the absolute zero of stupidity), and it likely gets ugly.

      But, while wishing only to be left alone to lead a quiet life focused on our Creator, our families, and our neighbors, they will have given those of us who embrace “give me liberty, or give me death” no other choice.

      Pray they wise up before steering our Founders’ inheritance over a cliff.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Deplorable_Infidel says:

        These are my sentiments as well. Thank you for sharing.

        I am sure there are at least a few million Americans that feel the same way, that will never have an opportunity to read your post, or share their position with thousands of others here at CTH.


      • hitgirl18 says:

        I am so mad right now! How did we ever end up with such a bunch of losers and traitors in the republican congress! dirty demons will self implode when Trump wins!


  20. T2020 says:

    Lyndsey Graham is saying most likely acquittal on Friday.

    Liked by 1 person

  21. Lisette says:

    I have no senators ….New York:(

    Liked by 1 person

    • amwick says:

      I have Lindsey.. I know that a lot of people here just like to put him down.. I see a lot of insults… When that happens, I wonder what would become of any one of us that went to DC and attempted to be a Senator. It is a weird and I bet a toxic environment, it is easy to bitch and moan from afar, but actually trying to do it, yourself? Look at what happened to Mr. Smith.
      Sometimes he ticks me off, sometimes he makes me proud. I believe he gets it, he knows what is at stake here, hell, we all know very well. Both impeachment articles are fatally flawed, and really, they were delivered DOA. That parade was not House Managers, that was a group of pall bearers. San Fran Nan held them for a month, they had a month to rot and smell…


  22. hawkins6 says:

    I hope Lindsey’s optimistic prediction above is true but if not:

    It’s mind boggling that an important vote like this that will set a dangerous and harmful precedent for all future GOP Presidents in the USA does not have enough GOP Senate votes to avoid witnesses.
    If any of the 4 usual suspect Senators were being deluged with angry complaints or protests, we would hear about it. How many voters of any of these obstinate or corrupt Senators even know about the vote? Even Fox had limited coverage.

    A KSL Utah poll (Jan 18) claimed Willard’s positives dropped 8% with Republicans but went up 4 % with Dems, His overall positive was 48% while Mike Lee’s was 46 %.

    But not to worry as the Salt Lake Tribune reported on this important juncture 3 hours ago:
    “Sen. Mitt Romney downs BYU chocolate milk as impeachment trial drags on”

    Liked by 1 person

  23. Sherri Young says:

    Ruh-roh. Calling Bolton or even insisting on his manuscript might not be such a bright idea for the Dimms.

    Liked by 1 person

  24. Heckmant says:

    If there are witnesses the fiasco that ensues will make the Kavannaugh hearing look like child’s play.
    Witnesses means impeachment conviction is likely. To believe it’s not possible for the senate to convict is to forget the efforts to get rid of Trump on a daily basis since he was elected.
    The corrupt majority will tie it up as neatly as possible. The future plans may not be possible to implement without getting rid of Trump. Trump was not suppose to last this long.


  25. All Too Much says:

    During the round of questions, one point I have been thinking about is the managers who will be answering giving the senators answers. The Democrats are severely out gunned on that end of the equation, IMO.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Nick says:

      The Democrat House Managers are VERY bright, and incredibly evil.

      NEVER, EVER under-estimate how much the Democrats, with their very bright lawyers and other supporters, can twist any truth to sound like its exact opposite.

      They are all arrogant, sinister, cunning, satanic POS’s.

      NEVER, EVER under-estimate those a-holes.

      They are MUCH better at this political game than virtually ANY Republican, except maybe President Trump.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Aeyrie says:

        True, Nick. They are very clever and very evil. Not so sure about bright. There is one other thing to always keep in mind. Evil always sews the seeds of its own destruction. Always.


  26. roddrepub says:

    there are GOP senators in alignment with the usurpation plans of the Democrats.
    They do so at that their own peril.


  27. sunnyflower5 says:


  28. Sherri Young says:

    Do the Dimms really think they are going to impeach this movement?

    Liked by 6 people

  29. Kimmy K says:

    After 3 days of calling McCONnell’s DC office I finally got through and actually talked with a person, unlike all my other calls today which were VM’s.
    I gave the guy an earful. He was very nice, listened patiently while I told him what Sundance has been saying, etc. I also reminded him that we support PDJT as seen by the 100K+ RSVP’s to his rally tonight at a venue that holds about 10K.
    I also said we know the Bolton leak is straight out of the Democrat playbook and he needs to shut the impeachment DOWN, no witnesses, it never should have gone this far.

    Liked by 3 people

  30. Martin says:

    Done – two Senators contacted.


  31. kleen says:

    Brad Parscale – Text TRUMP to 88022
    · 5h
    Wow! New Jersey Data:

    ✅ 158,632 Requested Tickets (92,841 distinct signups)

    ✅ 73,482 Voters Identified

    ✅ 10.4% Didn’t Vote in 2016

    ✅ 26.3% Democrats

    Mind boggling. 🤯


  32. mr.piddles says:

    Lovely purple ties, Gentlemen.


  33. DebbieSemms says:

    All Big 3 networks ABC, CBS, NBC blacked out Trump defense lawyer Pam Bondi’s presentation this afternoon of Ukraine corruption related to Joe Biden, son Hunter Biden & Burisma. In contrast, Big 3 carried Schiff’s p.m. presentations live, preempting regular programming

    The questioning alternating between Dems and GOP helps avoid the media deception.


  34. Texian says:

    It’s too late..

    So let’s band together.. We The People.. Unconventional allies..

    We can divy it up.. then clean it up..

    I’m a reasonable man.. with one caveat.. Leave Texas out of it..

    I say the Bernie Brownshirts can have the D.C. Corridor.. The West Coast, the Antifans’.. Flyover country, the conservatives.. The cities, the warlords..

    We can work it all out later..

    Peace talks can be held in the neutral Texas Republic..

    Fourth Turning..


    • Garavaglia says:

      The South tried that..Washington wasn’t having it. Plus, it was geographically simpler then..clear regions. This is a was of ideology. Plus, I ain’t moving for nobody.


  35. Obake says:

    Leave it to the GOP to try to do everything in their power to betray the President and the Constitution and still try and get re-elected. They care only for themselves and not one iota about the people they purport to represent.

    Liked by 2 people

  36. dallasdan says:

    “McConnell took a ‘whip of the Senate’ regarding witness testimony and does not currently have enough republican votes to block the pre-planned House Managers’ unconstitutional scheme to call witnesses.”
    “… it appears there are enough republicans…(to) put the burden of witness testimony on the Senate.”

    The President’s enemies in his party appear to be winning.

    They seek to maximally elongate the trial and fatally damage his chance for re-election and/or somehow find bases for creating a narrative to support their votes of guilty.

    At a minimum, the testimony of witnesses, notwithstanding them first being deposed and under oath, will feed the DS and msm negative narrative that will continue indefinitely to be constructed with lies and misrepresentations. That aspect of this travesty will remain constant.

    Moreover, there is an obvious and gross incongruence in Graham claiming an acquittal vote by Friday and McConnell admitting that there are insufficient Repub votes to stop the calling of witnesses.

    The process of negotiating which witnesses will be called, deposing them and chasing the countless red herrings resulting therefrom, addressing Dem demands for more witnesses and investigations as a result of the testimonies will be endless…as planned by the DS to either maximize the political damage to the President prior to the election or to remove him from office.

    The longer this absurdity continues, the less likely the outcome will be positive. The most egregious, unconstitutional, political conspiracy in our history appears to be gaining momentum. JMO


  37. Ackman419 says:

    Peeps are gonna flip the freak out if this goes on much longer.
    Sensible citizens will disengage, or radicalize.


    • Garavaglia says:

      Nah..what they are trying to do is desensitize us to it. It’s an incremental psychological beat down. Will continue until the population takes action. They (uniparty) are not gonna stop themselves. This country needs an intervention, not phone calls.

      Liked by 1 person

  38. Joe says:

    Isn’t McConnell up for re-election in November?


  39. armie says:

    Have to wonder if they realize bringing in witnesses after the fact means that they have an additional constitutional conflict because there are then parts of the investigation where there has been no vote by the whole house. They are recreating the error that made all their subpoenas invalid for the same reason.

    Liked by 1 person

  40. jephfree says:

    Elected on-the-take Conmen. This isn’t separation of powers. It’s the house abusing her power, colluding with the senates disregard for using her power, so that one like President Trump will never be or stay elected again.
    Impeachment 4eva.


  41. Mike Robinson says:

    Over 230 years ago, the founders of our country anticipated this very thing. They didn’t know when it would occur, but they had themselves grown up in a Parliamentary system ruled, not by a President nor a token Queen, but by a Prime Minister who served at Parliament’s pleasure, as did the Ministers of the Supreme Courts. Our founders architected their new government to avoid these pitfalls. They trusted the US Senate. But, did they know that their government would one day become an organized crime ring whose supreme object would be to protect itself? Maybe they anticipated that, too. I hope so.

    Liked by 1 person

  42. Charles Dodgson says:

    Why does it seem the senators don’t care about the constitution? Because they don’t.
    They care about:
    1. Getting Re-elected, because that enables
    2. Accruing power to themselves through their position, which has the pleasant side effect of
    3. Funneling more money back to themselves and their families.

    It’s that simple. This is why Manchin, Sinema, and Jones are fuzzy on the Dem side, and why Collins and a few others are fuzzy on the Repub side. If they are not worried about 1, then they are mainly focused on 2 and 3. Romney appears to have personal motivations.

    Remember nearly all of them are in someone’s pocket due to their need for funds for item 1. Whether it’s the millitary industrial complex, the globalist corporation pocket, etc. My college daughter who has turned insane liberal is right about one thing. They should have to wear patches showing their sponsors like NASCAR drivers.


  43. gsonFIT says:

    Not sure Mcconnell is being completely transparent with his whipping or where he believes witness debate will ultimately end up. Most Senators that gave interviews after last night’s (R) caucus were very positive for an acquittal. Mitch being Mitch I guess. I hope for new leadership in republican Senate soon, but McConnell all in all seems fair to PDJT as long as McConnell gets his picks for Judges.

    I cannot imagine that any Senator can vote with a clean soul to move Obstruction charge any further. This will be the end of our constitution and our Republic. This would also mark the beginning of Socialism in America. Along those same lines allowing additional witnesses and documents is best case for satanic dems. This would be a victory for them and cannot be allowed. They will continue impeachment with future opposition admins until they create a parliamentary government and we have no Executive branch.

    In order for PDJT to be vindicated we will have to play the dem game and allow Bolton, and we must include Mulvaney (he will decimate dem argument) to testify. I would throw in Schiff and the Whistleblower. Who gives a shit about the drug addict son Biden. As I stated earlier cannot be included in trial before all 100 Senators but could be given to Senate Judiciary Committee and Uncle Lindsey. Let the Judiciary hear the witnesses and dont start down the parliamentary road

    I would think; tell Batman Schumer that we can negotiate a witness package for the dems on abuse of power charge but this requires UC on overturning Obstruction Article. Not sure of the suitable logistics but this seems it would be a path forward.

    BTW if senate convicts on Abuse of Congress PDJT needs to take it to SCOTUS. This should be unanimous if Senate cares about The Constitution


    • Garavaglia says:

      The “whipping” crap is nothing more than a successful attempt to hide from the sunlight. it will continue throughout this process, including the votes on impeachment. No way will they allow their votes be made public. Think they won’t do that? Watch em. One can only assume that ALL voted against Trump, absent any other information.

      Liked by 1 person

  44. namberak says:

    “Earlier today Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced an agreement with Minority Leader Chuck Schumer for the Senate questioning phase of the impeachment trial that begins tomorrow.” You know, just once, I’d like a post to start out “Mitch McConnell told Schumer to get bent.” So-called collegiality is a pantload as we say here in flyover country so let’s be done with it.

    Liked by 1 person

  45. coldanger says:

    McConnell is conceding he has less influence than Pelosi, or he’s making a conscious decision to align with the swamp. Every Republican senator knows they cannot make deals with the devil(crats). They need to know WE know it too…


  46. Gary Lacey says:

    So the article said 51 Senators want witnesses…..for the prosecution?
    Its highly unlikely they need them for the defense… isn’t necessary?!

    Two Senators,…..the Abomination from Maine and the Puke from Utah, want to see Trump impeached… their assassination an option?


  47. Get this bogus impeachment things over Republican,
    So sick and tired of this going on continue,
    Rino Romney and other Rino’s stop nonsense Then get on Vote,

    Liked by 1 person

  48. From the beginning, House Dems planned to “Shame” Senators into acquiescing to calls for Witnesses. They depended on the Mockingbird Media to pummel the public with “A Thorough, Fair, Non-Partisan Senate Trial Requires Witnesses”


    This is MORE than an assault on the President.

    It’s an assault on the Constitution, via the establishment of a process that legitimizes politically motivated Coups.

    Liked by 1 person

  49. peakae says:

    Unfortunately, one of my senators is Tester. You know he’s got a grudge.


Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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