Day Eight – Senate Impeachment Trial – Senator Questioning Begins – 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 eight at 1:00pm ET. Today is the beginning of two days of alternating questions from Senators 8 hours each party, totaling 16 hours.

Fox News LivestreamFox Business LivestreamPBS Livestream Link

.

.

This entry was posted in 4th Amendment, 6th Amendment, Big Government, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Donald Trump, Election 2020, Impeachment, Legislation, Live Streaming, media bias, Mitch McConnell, Notorious Liars, President Trump, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

1,372 Responses to Day Eight – Senate Impeachment Trial – Senator Questioning Begins – 1:00pm ET Livestream…

  1. Chiefco says:

    Fox News: Sen. Lindsey Graham Tuesday called on former national security adviser John Bolton to hold a press conference to expand on a New York Times bombshell report that claimed Bolton wrote in his upcoming book that President Trump explicitly tied $391 million in Ukrainian military aid to investigating the Bidens.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Garavaglia says:

      I call on Graham to publicly nix additional witnesses. Only material obtained during house investigation should be used. Grow a pair, you scoundrel.

      Liked by 17 people

    • Tl Howard says:

      You can’t be prosecuted for lying when you’re not under oath,LG.

      Liked by 4 people

      • booger71 says:

        Doesn’t seem congress can be prosecuted for lying under oath either….why do they bother placing their hands on a bible or saying the words?

        Liked by 3 people

      • ILOT says:

        Well they darn well should amend the Speech and Debate Clause and make it so that if you speak in the chamber or anywhere you are representing your constituents, it’s as good as being under oath. It’s a cover for the MSM and all the disinformation we are subjected to. The problem they have today is that we are smarter, better connected and have the likes of SD and this forum to call them out. In doing so, they blame it on PDJT for “dividing” when in fact he is merely exposing the division they all created.

        Liked by 3 people

    • Dee Paul Deje says:

      Liked by 5 people

      • hocuspocus13 says:

        Hasn’t Bolton taken money from Ukraine? 💰💰💰💰💰

        Liked by 1 person

        • litenmaus says:

          National security adviser John Bolton was paid $115,000 in the past year to participate in two panel discussions sponsored by the foundation of an Ukrainian steel magnate (Viktor Pinchuk) — including one in Kiev last September, during which Bolton reassured the audience that President Trump would not radically change U.S. foreign policy.

          “The notion that [Trump’s election] is going to represent a dramatic break in foreign policy is just wrong,” Bolton said, responding to a question from a British interviewer. “Calm down, for God’s sake,” he continued.

          https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/john-bolton-was-paid-115000-to-participate-in-two-panels-sponsored-by-foundation-of-ukrainian-steel-magnate/2018/06/12/df6d48a0-6e67-11e8-afd5-778aca903bbe_story.html

          Liked by 1 person

          • Hans says:

            Bolton receiving $115,000 for speaking at a conference. No wonder all this garbage is comming out. For that amount of money I’d confess my wife was a virgin and our three kids were a figment of your imagination.
            Looks like we have another money laundering scheme here. How to corrupt government official and make it legal. Time for congress to shut this down also. Why do I think that not going to happen anytime soon.

            Liked by 4 people

            • litenmaus says:

              Interaction with Viktor Pinchuk is used by the Democrats to ‘dirty up’ the Republicans….

              On November 22, 2016, information from Trumps 2015 tax return was reported by Buzzfeed and the attack began……

              Nov 2016 – “Pinchuk’s foundation confirmed to Buzzfeed that the money was given in exchange for Trump’s video-like speech in 2015 – leaving Trump open to similar questions about donors and conflicts of interest that plagued Hillary Clinton’s presidential run.” – Mail Online

              November 2016 – “In September 2015, when Pinchuk paid the money to Trump’s charitable foundation, the Ukrainian billionaire was also one of the largest donors to the Clinton Foundation. The payment to the Trump Foundation went undisclosed until this week, when it surfaced on newly-filed tax records for Donald Trump’s charitable foundation, RAISING ALARMS from some of the Clintons’ most vocal critics.” – abcnews

              Nov 2016 – “Pinchuk’s donation to the Trump Foundation appears to be more of a direct quid-pro-quo. Weihe said it was tied to an agreement that Trump would speak via video link at a an annual conference Pinchuk organized in September 2015. ” – Huffington Post

              April 2018 – Victor Pinchuk is the Ukrainian billionaire who paid Donald Trump’s foundation $150,000 for an appearance by video link at a 2015 conference in Kiev.

              That payment was UNEARTHED in a subpoena of the Trump Organization BY the MUELLER INVESTIGTION, reported The NEW YORK TIMES. It is one of a number of foreign payments made to Trump and his associates under the microscope. – Newsweek

              Like

            • Hans says:

              Let’s also remember Nation Building is a money laundering operation run by the State Dept.. contracts go to congressional contributors…
              let’s make no mistake why government officials dislike anyone who looks to close to State Dept spending…
              let’s take a look at a service station in Afghanistan.
              https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/u-s-spent-43-million-afghanistan-gas-station-sigar-report-n454036

              Liked by 1 person

        • Brewerbear says:

          No

          Like

      • Greg1 says:

        It would be interesting if there was enough video of Bolton saying positive things about Trump and Ukraine that it would undermine the alleged writings in his book. And if such videos kept coming out and media started revisiting them.

        Like

    • Robert Smith says:

      I call on Graham to actually do something, like NOW, with his committee?

      He doesn’t need to beg anyone to do this or that.

      Like

    • WSB says:

      Nothing John Bolton says, under oath or not, can now be considered truthful. He is a compromised witness.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. trumpthepress says:

    Posted this in the Presidential thread too.

    My brother recommended calling the fraud Pat Toomey in my State since he was on the fence about witnesses.

    Looks like all the calls may have convinced him. He has stated he doesn’t see a need now. I let him know he would not get my vote if he didn’t say no to this nonsense. And let him know we all know it’s a sham.

    I will never vote for him again if he can be primaried. He is deep state/rino and against our President in many things.

    Definitely recommend calling because if it works even just 1 time, it could make a difference.

    Liked by 3 people

    • ElTocaor says:

      I emailed him this morning. Told him that I know this is all a sham and voting to allow witnesses or more evidence to be entered would be seen as a betrayal of the Constitution and the People of the Commonwealth. Also said it would set a grievous precedent to any Presidential impeachment in the future. Pretty much relayed what we here at the Treehouse have known for some time. Glad I did!

      Call, email, and pray!

      Liked by 7 people

    • MAGADJT says:

      Where and when did he say this? I haven’t been able to find anything about it. This would be big news because last night he was the first one to come out and say he was going to vote to call witnesses.

      Like

    • Garavaglia says:

      He’s not on the fence. he’s pretending to be on the fence. this is how the swamp operates. It’s a numbers game..all it takes is a handful to be clearcut..then the rest can pussyfoot around and hide in the shadows. Over and over.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Jack Dempsey says:

      It appears that he is a “no witnesses” vote.
      I would believe this —– I contacted him prior to the USMCA vote (strongly suggesting he should be a Yea). I received 1-page NON-form letter which explained, with details, why he was voting no. I disagreed with his vote, but the letter was professional. A last-minute weasel maneuver is unlikely on his part.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Tess from Philly says:

        I hope the ghost of Rick Santorum’s loss is haunting him. I also called Toomey’s office and left a message. I told him years ago I went door to door and made phone calls to help him primary Arlen Specter. I told him how disappointed I was in him for his USMCA vote and that if he voted for witnesses he won’t be able to win back my support.

        I can’t help but feel it’s all a big sham. I’m thinking either the Republicans already have the votes they need for witnesses from seats that are safe (Romney and God knows who else) or the Dem Senators from W. VA and Alabama have decided to vote against witnesses. Either way I feel like the Swamp is letting Toomey off the hook since his vote won’t matter anyway.

        Liked by 1 person

  3. Effem says:

    Anyone know the rules for questions? Can they ask questions of Schiff? Is he under oath? Can questions be objected to?

    Liked by 1 person

    • L4grasshopper says:

      I know that the questions must be in writing, and submitted to Roberts. After that, I don’t know the mechanics.

      Does Roberts ask the question aloud to the party it was addressed?

      Does the party asked the question have to immediately respond verbally?

      Is there a time limit for an answer — both in terms of time to respond, and duration of response?

      Is there any mechanism for follow ups?

      I guess we’ll find out soon 🙂 I expect to be very disappointed at the usefulness of the process 🙂

      Like

      • Wethal says:

        The questions are addressed to either the House Managers or the Trump legal team. The senators were sworn in, as juries usually are, but I don’t recall the House Managers being sworn. Not sure about objections.

        However, any manager who is also a lawyer is an officer of the court. I’ve seen lawyers testify in court who were not sworn in, as they were considered sworn in in perpetuity when they were sworn in as lawyers. Not all courts follow this, but lying to a judge can get one referred to the Disciplinary Board. However, I seriously doubt Schiff takes any kind of oath very seriously.

        Even though the Atkinson testimony was classified by Schiff, Ratcliffe and Nunes saw it. They couldn’t make copies, but may remember enough to give the info to senators to frame questions of Schiff or colluding with the whistleblower and Atkinson. Hawley’s questions look like they’re designed to extract some of the information from the Atkinson deposition.

        If the GOP would take back the House, the first thing the new chairman would do would be to de-classify the Atkinson transcript, and Schiff knows it. I expect Schiff to be purposely vague, but if it looks as if he’s trying to weasel away from the truth or quibble, that will not go over well – especially on national television. Schiff looked very uncomfortable when the “parody” tape was played. Imagine his discomfort when he is asked questions by the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court while the country is watching. Make some popcorn.

        Liked by 5 people

      • cboldt says:

        Roberts delivers the Q orally to either house managers or defense. He also says which senators asked the question.
        The side questioned must answer immediately. There is a loosey goosey 5 minute time rule for answering. Time limit is not enforced, expect them to joke about it.
        Questions are supposed to be geared to getting a quick answer, that is, mindful of the 5 minute rule for answering.
        Questions alternate between those posed by DEM and GOP.
        Under Clinton, Q’s were exhausted after about 11 hours

        Liked by 1 person

        • dwpender says:

          There is no way any question of fact should require anything like a 5 minute answer.

          The ridiculous time allowance tells us all we need to know sbout this phase. The “questions” will be (short) arguments, rather than requests for information. The answers will be (long) arguments.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Wethal says:

            I’d bet that Roberts keeps them close to five minutes. In the Supreme Court, there are two lights on the podium for the speaker – yellow is the 60-second warning, and red is time’s up.

            I don’t know if they’ll have this in the Senate, but I assume Roberts could be keeping time somehow, and warn the speaker “You have 60 seconds left.” and gavel when the time’s up.

            Like

          • Is the question anonymous or is it grandstanding via chief justice?

            Like

            • Wethal says:

              Questions are not anonymous. The name of the person presenting the question will be stated.

              Like

            • cboldt says:

              No Q is anon. Senators names are attached.
              The 5 minute “rule” actually works okay, The first Q in Clinton case took 11 minutes to answer, and the answer was allowed with no interruption. There was a request for “time” and some laughter after. It, the timing, settles down remarkably well.
              Look for what isn’t asked, as much as for what is asked.

              Like

    • MAGADJT says:

      Managers aren’t under oath. Perfect scenario for Schiff.

      Like

    • Garavaglia says:

      Who the hell knows anymore. They will take another “whip” a la Mcconell style and just continue chugging along..we won’t know what the hell is going on.

      Like

    • Incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial. Went to the expert Perry Mason. /s

      Like

  4. Niagara Frontier says:

    It’s difficult to imagine how they will fill 16 hours with questioning, especially since senators and the Chief Justice requested that answers be kept to 5 minutes each. Might we be lucky enough to have this phase end today?

    Like

    • Garavaglia says:

      Nope.

      Like

    • Somebody says:

      I agree with you Niagara and had the same thought, but we’re dealing with dems here they’ll find a way to drag this out.

      If the same question is asked over and over, perhaps worded slightly different can Roberts rule it’s been asked and answered? What if to drag it out the D’s start asking irrelevant questions like what’s your favorite food? Can Roberts seen a question irrelevant?

      In my opinion I can’t imagine there are 16 hours worth of questions, but these are lawyers and politicians we’re talking about.

      Liked by 2 people

      • steph_gray says:

        My prediction on the first DementoRat question for Schitty: “When did Trump stop beating Melania? And please explain your outrage over it.”

        It will then take a bucket of water over Schitt’s head to get him to stop talking.

        Like

  5. novanglus86 says:

    We know Bolton has long been a military-industrial complex guy who never saw a war he wouldn’t support. He has shown very poor judgment as a former NatSecAdvisor to write a tell-all while his boss is still in office. Maybe he has been blackmailed into doing so. He has at least one connection to Ukrainian corruption, having taken money from Pinchuk.

    “A financial disclosure shows that Bolton accepted $115,000 from the Victor Pinchuk Foundation for a pair of speeches in September 2017 and February 2018.”

    Before the liberals loved him for betraying PDJT, they hated him – so the WashPo went after him. As Bongino says, use their sources. This can be used to discredit anything Bolton might say – he is part of the swamp and Ukrainian money laundering operation.

    source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/john-bolton-was-paid-115000-to-participate-in-two-panels-sponsored-by-foundation-of-ukrainian-steel-magnate/2018/06/12/df6d48a0-6e67-11e8-afd5-778aca903bbe_story.html

    Liked by 7 people

    • JohnCasper says:

      Any man, such as Bolton, who regards America’s own service men and women as disposable lab rats is depraved enough to claim anything.

      Liked by 4 people

    • vikingmom says:

      The biggest problem in all of this is the number of people in DC who have taken bribes funneled in some way through Ukraine. It appears to have been a “central clearing house” for all kinds of illicit money transfers and so there is great incentive to shut down any inquiry into the corruption there.I suspect that it will ensnare people in the House and Senate on both sides of the aisle, Cabinet level people from the past four administrations at a minimum, their families, and probably members of the media as well.

      Liked by 5 people

      • Tl Howard says:

        My hope is that Rudy has dirt on some GOP members with their hands in the till.

        Liked by 3 people

        • vikingmom says:

          I’m sure he does – but the problem is that the Democrats also know who is dirty. I suspect they were all drawing out the same pot – their pretend “feuds” are simply to appease the voters. In reality, they will protect each other and that’s why both sides suddenly hate Rudy and love John Bolton!

          Liked by 1 person

          • Hans says:

            Just think for a second..if you wanted to launder US tax money back to yourself would you use an honest government/country with a strong honest legal system o choose a country that everyone knows is corrupt and facilitates the laudering for a small fee. Let’s face it these government officials are CROOKED NOT STUPID.

            Liked by 1 person

      • novanglus86 says:

        Or an opportunity to roll up a widespread racketeering operation and push a real reset button on what “government service” actually means.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Old Lady says:

        I suspect you are exactly right. Very few in leadership roles have the integrity to do those jobs.

        Like

    • booger71 says:

      Like the Bushes, Obama and others, Bolton sees war as a means to an end…he loves nation building, and President Trump has stated many times the U.S. under his Administration will not be nation builders

      Liked by 3 people

      • JohnCasper says:

        Especially as it doesn’t work. Otherwise “we” wouldn’t still be in Iraq and Afghanistan after about 18 years with little, if any, progress made in the last 17 years.

        Liked by 1 person

    • markone1blog says:

      You know that the main stream media is publishing this stuff online and on the back pages of section E right now. However, should Bolton come out with testimony that benefits President Trump, you can bet that it will be on page one and above the fold on the New York Times, the Washington Post, and a number of other liberal rags.

      Like

  6. JohnCasper says:

    The Founding Fathers are projectile vomiting now.

    Liked by 7 people

  7. tozerbgood8315 says:

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/senator-hawley-releases-trial-questions-he-plans-to-ask-about-bidens-whistleblower-schiff

    “Senator Hawley Releases Trial Questions He Plans To Ask About Bidens, Whistleblower, Schiff”

    Schiffty in the hot seat. Who wants to lay odds on him even showing up?

    Liked by 3 people

  8. stenwin77 says:

    My Question: WHY ARE SENATORS SANDERS, KLOBUCHAR, WARREN & BENNETT ALLOWED TO VOTE.? This is a total one-sided sham. They are voting against their competition in an election that is 9 months away !

    They should be banned from the hearings.

    Liked by 14 people

  9. Hans says:

    Ok let’s call a spade a spade… what we have going is a Hillary rerun for the presidency. This whole impeachment scam is about tagging PDT and not being legally able to run in 2020.
    The whole democratic primary run if fraught with candidates with 1 percent to 2 percent national ratings. How are they able to fund their campaign. Harris, Booker dropped out and do not want to burn their chances for 2024.
    Brokered convention anyone…. all the Clinton Cash.. now I know everyone says she will not run and she cannot win… that does not matter she wants the glow and her name in lights and the flow of cash into the Clinton Foundation. It will be open for business once again. Access Hillary.. not a war or national emergency that will not go to waste to their crooked fellow travelers.

    Like

  10. We’ll get nowhere today. Schiff can Bloviate for 5 minutes and say absolutely nothing on every question. Hopefully Roberts will require him to answer.
    blo·vi·ate
    verbINFORMAL•US
    talk at length, especially in an inflated or empty way. (see A.Schiff)

    Liked by 1 person

  11. Tiffthis says:

    ‪Hi Treepers,
    My dad has received this chain letter via email, everyone in Florida is emailing Murkowsky of Alaska and Alexander of Tennessee. Below are valid addresses to use so you may contact them and tell them how u feel about impeachment. Also a template letter written by my dad if you just wanna copy n paste a note. Let’s all overload the inboxes of these 2.

    1731 Mallory Lane‬
    Brentwood Tn 37027‬

    https://www.alexander.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/email

    ‪ ‬
    550 W. Seventh Ave., Suite 500‬
‪Anchorage, AK 99501‬

    https://www.murkowski.senate.gov/contact/email

    Just a quick note to say I implore you to vote to deny witnesses in impeachment process. The whole matter has been a partisan sham. It has been a ponderous and extremely inefficient use of govt resources. Put a stop to it and let the voters decide in November.
    Pres Trump has been a terrific guy so far. He has made superbly positive fundamental changes to the way the US does business with the world and how all the nations interact with each other. Please dont stop that process, Pres Trump can do a lot more for the lasting good of the great US.
    Yours,

    Like

  12. Tree Knot says:

    The Republicans have Mr. Nadler & Mr. Schiff in the Senate chambers to ask questions of them.

    Like

  13. Wethal says:

    I’d love to see one of the House Managers dare ask a question of Dershowitz, just to see Dersh blow the twit question away.

    Like

    • Wethal says:

      Although there’s nothing to stop a GOP senator from asking Dersh a question – maybe someone should think one up, just for the fun of seeing him explain the Constitution again. The contrast between a Dersh answer and Schiff answer would be awesome.

      Liked by 1 person

  14. Zydeco says:

    One thing to keep an eye on, does every D question sound like it was written by Schitty and Lawfare.

    Like

    • Publius2016 says:

      there is no question they can ask that can’t be refuted by FACTS…only hypothetical questions which of course mean nothing…PURE SPECULATION MEANS NOTHING!

      Like

  15. Troublemaker10 says:

    I hope they can shut Schiff up after five minutes. Otherwise he’ll filibuster and eat up question time.

    I also don’t like this format (written questions read off by Justice Roberts). There is no way to follow up or clarify non-answers. No way to redirect the impeachment managers when they are not answering the question. (And are making political hits instead).

    Like

    • Wethal says:

      If Schiff wastes everyone’s time with political hits, he runs the risk of the four RINOS (and a few red state Dems) thinking, “Let’s kill this whole process on Friday. I am sick of this a**hole. This is just a political witch hunt.” More witnesses mean more Schiff.

      Like

    • Joebkonobi says:

      You can bet the dems have a script and have rehearsed. The republicans, not so much. Dems doing everything they can to turn the hearings into Circus DC.

      They tried to get Lev Parma’s into the gallery for today but judge would not let him take off his ankle bracelet to go into Senate Chambers. Would not be surprised to see him hanging outside chambers available to the media. Dems intent is chaos & confusion. Will republicans reciprocate? Probably.

      Like

      • Wethal says:

        Actually, I’d bet the Trump team had some attorneys working on questions as soon as the House case ended and they knew what the House case was, and gave the questions to helpful senators to ask.

        The Trump team had all the time through the Trump presentation to work on them, and no doubt some senators had them ready before the trial started (Hawley, for example?). Maybe Dershowitz suggested a few to a helpful senator – imagine a Dersh question to Schiff. 🙂

        Like

      • Merle Marks says:

        literally “hanging”?

        Like

  16. TheWanderingStar says:

    If additional witnesses are allowed and testimony taken, which in my opinion should not be in the trial phase, could that lead to an appeal to SCOTUS?

    Liked by 1 person

    • mimbler says:

      Constitution doesn’t define the process, so IMO, witnesses wouldn’t be a basis for appeal, if they follow the senate rules to vote for them.

      Liked by 1 person

    • cboldt says:

      There is no appeal. The decisions and rulings by the senate are final.
      One reason for this is that the consequences are not as serious as being found a criminal. Another reason is that 2/3rds of a substantially sized body usually does the right thing, even if for the wrong reason.
      Other than Clintoon, who but for being tried was a felon, I can’t think of a time the senate got an impeachment wrong.
      Letting Clinton off the hook is a signpost on the way to the present disresepct for oaths, honesty, rule of law, and so on. The system is a sham – it lets crooks off, and even rewards them.

      Liked by 3 people

  17. Deplorable_Vespucciland says:

    Fired White House national security adviser, John Bolton, pocketed $115,000 from Ukrainian oligarch Viktor Pinchuk’s foundation shortly before being hired by Trump. (The Washington Post noted, Pinchuk has exceeded $10 million in donations to the Clinton Foundation.) Bolton now claims he has an unpublished manuscript reportedly accusing Trump of wanting to withhold military aid to Ukraine. Bolton is known as an interventionist was fired by Trump who cited his opposition to Bolton’s foreign policy views accusing Bolton of undermining his negotiations with the North Korea. A financial disclosure shows that Bolton accepted $115,000 from the Victor Pinchuk Foundation for two speeches in September 2017 and February 2018.

    Perhaps Mr. Bolton should be testifying at the Department of Justice not the Senate Impeachment Trial?

    Liked by 1 person

  18. Troublemaker10 says:

    Bolton previously described both of the Trump/Zelensky phone calls as “warm and cordial”.

    Liked by 3 people

  19. MitchRyderDetroitWheels says:

    Expect the worse and you will never be disappointed. It’s going to get worse.

    Like

  20. Greg1 says:

    To any and all lawyers on here:

    What is there preventing Justice Roberts from telling the senate that witnesses called outside of the information and witnesses used for the impeachment articles would be unconstitutional?

    Like

    • Greg1 says:

      I’ve posted four times, two on this thread and two on another, including the name of someone who used to post here but the posts have not shown up yet. Weird.

      Like

    • cboldt says:

      No text or interpretation of the constitution contains the limitation you propose.
      The overarching missoin is “justice,” doing the right thing, faithfully applying the law. A certain amount of flexibility is built into much of that.

      Like

    • mimbler says:

      I’m not a lawyer, but what part of the constitution would that violate? None that I’m aware of.

      Like

    • thedoc00 says:

      Because he can’t as the calling or not calling of witnesses is the prerogative of the Legislative Body involved, with respect the Impeachment Process. That is why taking anything to do with rules made by either legislative body will not even be placed on the Court Docket.

      Now the actual Articles themselves, that is another question all together. Depends how the case is presented as to it’s viability as a case Roberts will allow.

      Liked by 1 person

  21. I bet Pencil Neck answers any question with I dont recall or that’s not in my purview……..

    Liked by 1 person

  22. ThingsWeTakeForGranted says:

    As requested by jello333
    ===================================

    jello333 says:
    January 29, 2020 at 4:44 am
    I Need to ask for a favor here.

    I have a question about the Q&A session that starts later on today. I of course could just wait and ask this question when the relevant open thread is posted later on today. Problem is, my schedule is pretty weird right now and I’m just now getting ready to go to bed, and won’t be awake yet when the new thread goes up. So… I need someone to copy&paste the following question to that thread when the time comes. Thanks in advance! 🙂

    I know the House “managers” and Trump’s team weren’t under oath up till now… for some stupid reason. But once the Q&A starts, will that be different? Or will they still be able to say anything they want, even flat-out Schiff-level lies, with no risk (perjury, etc) attached?

    ====================================

    Liked by 1 person

  23. Can Roberts hold Schiff and Nadler in Contempt of Court just for being Unlikable Asses ?

    Liked by 2 people

  24. maxwell102 says:

    “All the world’s a stage,
    And all the men and women merely players;
    They have their exits and their entrances”

    “Act well your part, there all the honour lies”

    There doesn’t seem to be any honor in government, but one can hope perhaps that while the senators are on stage playing their parts, some will be guided by honor and doing the right thing.

    Liked by 2 people

  25. Zorro says:

    At the end of the day this format will result in nothing but a stalemate.

    Liked by 1 person

  26. JohnCasper says:

    On Bolton –

    “If I listened to him, we would be in World War Six by now”
    – DJT

    Liked by 9 people

  27. coltlending says:

    It being the responsibility of the House to
    to perfect a case for impeachment of a POTUS and present it to the Senate, when the House has not properly done so as in the present case (for lack of some whitnessess or other proper formalities), why doesn’t the Senate simply vote to send the case for Impeachment back to the House telling the House to send it back after the House has properly perfected its case?

    Like

  28. cboldt says:

    Schiumer’s presser – he is saying the reason for witnesses is two words, “fair trial.”
    So, at the conclusion of an unfair trial, the DEMs will vote to convict? Is that the way it works?

    Like

  29. I don’t get it- who are they going to be questioning? Each other? Color me confused.

    Like

  30. Greg1 says:

    Apparently.

    For democrats wrong is right.

    Down is up and up is down.

    Fair is unfair and unfair is fair.

    Liked by 1 person

  31. Paul Gallant says:

    Lindsey Graham and Dianne Feinstein need to get the likes of Susan Collins & Mitt Romney back on the buss of ending this by next Tuesday. I.E no more witnesses, vote to acquit.

    Problem is Feinstein and Graham have way more ass to cover that Mitt and Susan hence the nervousness displayed by Lindsey Graham and Dianne Feinstein .

    Note: Dianne’s flub on Tuesday, “acquit” then walk it back. They need an acquittal but she would prefer the Republican’s do it.

    Like

  32. paintbrushsage says:

    My question, is, why didn’t you deny the New York Times report that an account of the whistleblower (person) allegations were made to the Intelligence Committee. Evidently there is nothing wrong with talking to the Intelligence Committee so why not come clean with what your staff and you knew and discussed about the allegations? Obviously the allegations were made public. Why hide what the ICIG knows about you and your staff’s interaction with this person who was not a whistleblower at that point as I understand it?

    Like

  33. Sherri Young says:

    The prohibition on double jeopardy does not apply in cases of impeachment.

    Acquit or dismiss.

    Make Nanzi start over.

    Like

  34. gadeplorable says:

    GADeplorable is very frustrated today. Lindsey Graham is all over the place with his sound bites, ‘Leader’ McConnell can’t (or won’t) ‘lead’ the troops to toe the line and end this nonsense. Romney, Collins, and Murkowski should have never been elected.

    We The People are powerless in regard to these shenanigans, primary because, although most all of us here at CTH stay on top of matters of the actions of our Government and how Government plays a role in our lives, way too many people pay no attention to what’s going on and simply show up to the polls without giving their decisions any thought.

    Any R who votes for witnesses needs to be primaried, if there is even a primary opponent running against them. The only thing I know to do is, although I live in GA, to find out who may run against these traitors and send them some $.

    It’s one thing to support our President with donations, as I have, but unless we give him some allies in Congress there is only so much swamp draining he can do.

    MAGA

    Like

  35. Tim Holden says:

    Expect the defence to win the question round. Also expect the media to fail to report this. It is unreasonable to hope for better from TV or main newspapers. At the same time it is more than reasonable to anticipate that the impeachment effort will be readily defeated. We witness the evident self interest of the various characters in the Senate, and various other travesties.

    Swamp Culture was worse than anyone thought, and it will be eviscerated when the time comes. Do not lose heart, everybody. When the time comes, the Cold Anger must be exercised. Part of the problem is that the President showed magnanimity in his victory when he took power in 2017, and the Swamp responded in Reptilian manner.

    Don’t criticise the President for the mercy he showed. It is reasonable to assume that he will treat the Swampies differently once these current travesties are over. All of them know that they are fighting for their lives, so it’s unreasonable to think that they won’t be desperate in their fight. Some considerable encouragement can be taken from the fact that Pelosi, Schiff, and Nadler are the best they’ve got.

    Liked by 3 people

  36. paintbrushsage says:

    My second question is: Why don’t you demand 1) #ReleaseTheBook 2) #ReadTheBook 3) Demand the House deal with Bolton’s book? President Trump is way more responsive. He #ReleasedTheTranscript and continues to encourage everyone to #ReadTheTranscripts.

    Like

    • paintbrushsage says:

      Oh, my bad. There’s classified and Top Secret information in the book per the Records Management letter released. Yikes. We hire NSC advisors for this mess?

      Like

  37. sunnyflower5 says:

    Unhinged Wallace can’t get it straight.

    Liked by 6 people

  38. bacillus says:

    I hope somebody asks Schiff why the transcript of the 18th witness’s basement bunker testimony has not been released.

    Liked by 1 person

  39. litlbit2 says:

    If you are a Senator setting in judgement on this Impeachment. Have listened to just the opening arguments. No crime, read the Constitution, took a oath of office, swore before the court to be unbiased. Then pander by voting to continue these illegal proceedings. You are, less than candor or where the Deplorables come from, you lied. You are not a juror, you are not American, you lack honesty, credibility, character and a failure not only to your constituents but your family name by also failing to fulfill the job you take taxpayer wages to perform. May your rewards be returned many fold.

    Liked by 3 people

  40. Paul Gallant says:

    Agreed Tim but it matters not now what the swamp media reports on or not. It’s all up to the Senators. The Democrats/House have lost the people.

    Liked by 1 person

    • MitchRyderDetroitWheels says:

      You may be correct but the entire DC complex wants Trump gone and that includes these useless and pathetic republicans. Trump is in real danger. He has cost these DC elites billions and 30 years of progress toward their goals.

      Like

  41. TrumpPatriot says:

    Serious question – Why are the House Managers NOT going to be sworn in for answering questions as stated by someone in the up thread, and the Senators will be? If this is true. .. ..
    I do not understand at all.

    Like

    • cboldt says:

      The House managers are not witnesses, they are advocates and as such are expected to deliver misleading narratives. That is what “adversarial system” runs on.
      The oath the senators take is:

      “I solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be) that in all things appertaining to the trial of the impeachment of —— ——, now pending, I will do impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws: So help me God.”

      That oath is obviously meaningless, or in the alternative gives each senator a license to do injustice and claim it can’t be injustice, because they took an oath. You will notice that witnesses sweat to truth, senators do no swear to truth.

      Like

  42. Nigella says:

    So Parnas is there.. Are they gonna let the criminal with the leg monitor in?

    Like

  43. cheekymeeky says:

    “Contains significant amounts of classified information. It also appears that some of this classified information is at the TOP SECRET level.”

    Liked by 1 person

  44. Seadoc66 says:

    TIME’S UP! THE VETS ARE COMING!

    TIME’S UP! FAR TOO MANY OF YOU POLITICIANS/BUREAUCRATS/ACADEMICIANS/MEDIA TYPES 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 THOUSANDS 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 1 person

  45. TwoLaine says:

    Ask Schiff if it is fair to President TRUMP that he gets NO witnesses while the DIMs in the House got 18 already?

    Or that he told those witnesses when to answer or not answer questions asked by the Rs when they were allowed to participate?

    Or that he allowed the President no representation or place at the table in any of the illegitimate or legitimate House proceedings.

    Ask him if they voted for witnesses after the closing arguments, wouldn’t it be fair for President TRUMP to get his 1st 18+ whatever 1 for 1 of however many they claim to want now?

    Ask the House Managers if what they are really after is the Mueller grand jury and investigative information?

    Liked by 1 person

  46. booger71 says:

    Of course crybaby Collins gets first questions

    Liked by 1 person

  47. islandpalmtrees says:

    Ask Schiff who the whistle bower is?

    Ask Schiff to provide transcript of #18

    Like

  48. talkaftercarefulthought says:

    after hearing the first questioners names I had to make sure I remembered my rodent pecking order: Rats are some of the most social rodents of all.. wonder if the “wonder triplets” will continue their farce the rest of this impeachment

    Liked by 1 person

  49. Question for the Democrat House Mgrs. –

    What concrete evidence did you obtain – either in first hand testimony or in document form – which shows that President Trump was acting in his “own interests” as opposed to simply doing his job and was rooting out corruption in our government?

    Anyone?
    Anyone?
    Nadler?

    I move to dismiss.

    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