Paul Revere by Cyrus Dallin, North End, Boston





Wednesday, January 22, 2020

On the first day of Donald J. Trump's impeachment "show trial"...

Trump's lawyers (SURPRISE!) lied:

Pat Cipollone kicked things off with a series of outright lies, a gesture that presumably brought tears to the big guy’s eyes. The first whopper was Cipollone’s claim that “not even [House Intelligence Committee chair and impeachment manager Adam] Schiff’s Republican colleagues were allowed into the SCIF,” the secure facility where members of Congress reviewed classified information relevant to the impeachment inquiry. 

This statement, of course, was not true at all. While some House Republicans tried to pull a publicity stunt at the time over colleagues who weren’t on the committees involved not being allowed in the room, those who were on the three relevant committees were granted the exact same level of access as Democrats.

Cipollone says “Not even Mr. Schiff’s Republican colleagues were allowed into the SCIF” during impeachment investigation.

That’s 100% false. Any member of the three investigating committees could attend, and many Republicans did!

Lie #2: Channeling the boss, Cipollone referenced the fact that during one of the House Intelligence Committee‘s hearings, Schiff paraphrased Trump‘s July 25 phone call with Ukraine president Volodymyr Zelensky. As the transcript had already been released, everyone knew that Schiff wasn’t claiming to be quoting it verbatim, but the president and Republicans pretended otherwise, and insisted the congressman was a traitor who should resign. Cipollone, an actual lawyer who you’d think would bring better arguments to the table, simply repeated the Trump talking point, telling the room on Tuesday, “When Mr. Schiff saw that his allegations [about Trump abusing his power] were false, and he knew it anyway, what did he do? He went to the House and he manufactured a fraudulent version of that phone call. He read it to the American people, and he didn’t tell them it was a complete fake.” 

In fact, Schiff disclosed up-front that his summary of what Trump said on the call was "shorn of its rambling character and in not so many words." 

Picking up where his colleague left off, Trump attorney Jay Sekulow also told a smattering of tall tales, falsely claiming that House Democrats delayed the articles of impeachment for “33 days”—he was off by about a week—and insisting that the president “was denied the right to cross-examine witnesses” during the House inquiry. 

That’s grossly misleading considering that 

(1) per the Constitution, the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses does not occur until the Senate trial, and 

(2) the administration outright refused to participate in the House’s proceedings. 

 Given his role as an impeachment manager, Schiff was afforded the opportunity to respond to these “falsehoods” in near-real time and he very gladly took it. 

“Now, I’m not going to suggest to you that Mr. Cipollone would deliberately make a false statement,” Schiff said on the Senate floor. “I will leave it to Mr. Cipollone to make those allegations against others. But I will tell you this. He’s mistaken. He’s mistaken. Every Republican on the three investigative committees was allowed to participate in the depositions. And more than that, they got the same time we did!”

Cartoon from Mad Mike's America



"If the Left gets all the documents they want, look out.

Personally, I believe this is all RUBBISH because I HOPE every president uses his office to get things from wayward countries…like what happened in holding back Ukraine’s money. And yes, it MIGHT have been for Trump’s election benefit, but who doesn’t do that, too? And who’s to say he’d go to that trouble when he doesn’t even know if Biden will be his opponent??"

Penelope said...

Please DO NOT dictate what us Christians should or shouldn't do, especially when it come to supporting our President.
YOU have NO right to speak for all Christians, or to paint them with your broad brush.
I am a Christian, and a Proud Trump supporter and I resent your doing that!

Shaw Kenawe said...

Penelope, nowhere on my blog do I "dictate what [you] Christians should or shouldn't do."

And I absolutely DO have the right to criticize Christians' political opinions, (I am NOT "speaking" for them.) Since they make their political opinions known all the time.

Most Christians I know support the 10 Commandments and believe it is wrong and a sin against their Savior to lie, cheat, and be false to the world, like the guy you support, Trump.

And the Christians I know personally resent Christians who preach family values and the 10 Commandments and still support a liar, cheat, and fraud (Trump) as their president.

Shaw Kenawe said...

TS (or whoever you are),

I'm not surprised that a Trump supporter is also all in for lawlessness so long as his/her president has an"R" after his name. What Trump did in extorting the Ukranian president to get dirt on his political rival was illegal. You're excusing Trump's abuse of power and obstruction of Congress purely for partisan reasons, not based on logic or rationality.

"Perhaps it should come as no surprise that a president who described the Constitution as “like a foreign language” would cling to such a legally preposterous claim. But to be fair to Mr. Trump and his lawyers, it’s the only one left. The evidence amassed during the House impeachment proceedings — that he shook down a foreign government in the service of his own re-election campaign — is overwhelming, and Mr. Trump has yet to counter any of it with so much as a single piece of paper or word of testimony. He has given himself no option but to say, in effect: “Yeah, I did it. So what?”

This is the Trumpian equivalent of, “It’s a free country!” And yet as every grade-school child quickly discovers, that does not mean you can do whatever you want."
--Jesse Wegman

skudrunner said...

It is to the US advantage to give billions to a regime who hates us because to ask them to commit to changing their ways would be a quid-pro-quo. We should allow them to develop a nuclear device so they can take on Israel because after all the then president would always side with the Muslims.

This is not a trial of illegal doings but a trial because princes was beat by orange hair and the democrats have no one who is reasonable running.

Now we have princes -H- saying no one likes bernie, talk about hogwash. Of course you have the spokeswomen for the democrats, AOC, saying no one earned a billion dollars it was given to them and that capitalism sucks. She must have read the former presidents playbook in you didn't build your business government did.

Penelope said...

Do you ever hear any of the Christians that YOU know personally resent people like Bill Clinton, or Hillary Clinton who preach family values and the 10 Commandments and still support a liar, cheat, a crook, and a fraud like the Previous president, or a Fairy-Telling Liar like Adam Schiff?
Maybe we'd all be better served if you'd not waste our time with this inane repetitive anti President Trump slanted stories. You know as well as I do that this whole shebang is a cooked up venture to get rid of the President because he dared to beat Hillary Clinton back in 2016. And even Nader,was overheard apparently planning to impeach Trump back years ago.
As for my original comment to you it’s so sad that you, have no other thing of interest in your life but being so hateful that you have to feed on every move that the President and his family does. That is my beef, not this insane impeachment trial. We will live through this, and the President will prevail but you and you pitiful ilk will go one with your miserable, shameful blog where you can express your venom, and hatred.

Shaw Kenawe said...

Penelope, (or whoever you really are)

You're not interested in a discussion. This isn't about the Clintons. They're not under investigation. And your baseless claim that Mr. Obama is a liar, cheat, and crook is nothing more than projection from the liar, cheat, and fraud you support.

President Obama was never impeached, nor were any of his closest aides convicted felons. So stop your useless projections.

The rest of your comment is nothing more than warmed-over FAUX NOOZ and Trumpian talking points that are lies and distortions.

No one forces you, "Penelope" to come here and read what I publish. That you choose to read my blog and bitch about my opinions shows me and everyone else that you're a foolish and insincere commenter.

Good day.

Shaw Kenawe said...

skudrunner, do you ever change your whining?

Trump broke the law. You're okay with a reckless, law-breaking (and morally corrupt) POTUS as long as he's part of your tribe. Got it.

Anonymous said...

Heads up Shaw.

"Penelope" is an escapee from the WYD asylum.

Dave Miller said...

Shaw, Skud and Penelope...

Look, there's no doubt that some Dems were talking impeachment even before Trump took office. Some Republicans were talking about impeaching Hillary before the elections too.

It's also no secret that Dems have been working overtime to find something on Trump.

But it is 100% in the realm of possibility that even with what the GOP would call nefarious motives, that the Dems actually have something here. Look, in a moment of lucidity, the person quoted by "Trump Supporter" at the top of this thread also said this... "I don’t believe all of what the scum Democrats are saying in this trial is easily rebuffed. The White House lawyers are fabulous but they can’t just keep bringing up Executive Privilege and other laws if they’re going to show America Trump did nothing wrong at all."

That person is 100% all in for Trump and she knows in her heart that he's got some dirt on him

The question is how much?

The person quoted is really asking the central question in her comments that I quoted... Trump has not shown the accusations to be false. The Dems have reams of evidence and witnesses. The only thing the GOP has is something called Jury nullification, whereby a jury finds the defendant guilty on the evidence, but chooses to acquit anyways.

Most of you guys on the right have never thought about Trump's defense. Not liking the process is not a defense. The GOP, and many of you, including Pres Trump, are arguing essentially that the House had no right to impeach the president. The problem with that is our Constitution. It gives the House that right. 100%.

Why not argue for Trump's innocence? Why not argue that a man of Trump's character would never try to do the things he's of accused of doing? Why not ask your Senators to allow Trump's witnesses who could support his case? Why not ask for the documents showing why the aid to Ukraine was illegally upheld?

All of this could go away if the Trump White House would mount a defense against the charges, with evidence to back up their statements, and stop arguing process.

It really would be simple.

Shaw Kenawe said...

Very good, Dave. You've set out what the problem for Trump is: He committed a crime, he will not allow documents or witnesses to defend or exculpate what he did, because THEY DO NOT EXIST.

Trump cannot allow people like Bolton to talk because they will be sworn to tell the truth under oath and penalty of prison should they lie.

Trump's lawyers are doing nothing more than throwing sand in the umpire's face.

If trump could show his innocence, he would have done so long ago.

I had a meme up for a while that stated something like "No one keeps witnesses who can prove their innocence from giving evidence. NO ONE."

No documents; not witnesses to shore up Trump's case?

Why? Trump's fans do not want to answer that question. And we know why.

Dave Miller said...

Penelope... as for your thoughts about Christianity and Trump. I get that Christians believe they have someone fighting for them. I do. But let me ask you a couple of questions and see if you can, or will respond.

For years conservative Christians said that character matters. That someone like Bill Clinton, with obvious moral failings, was unfit, because of those moral failings, to be President. Is that belief still true today, or were conservatives Christians lying back then?

We've heard that conservative Christians believe that Pres Trump was chosen by God, some say anointed, to be president, using Romans 13 as a justification. Do you believe that? Or are conservatives Christians who say that lying or wrong?

If you do believe that God ordains and chooses leaders, using the Romans 13 passasge as justification, would you agree then that all leaders are chosen, and ordained by God to rule his people? Or is that only President Trump?

Anonymous said...

Dave said:......Some Republicans were talking about impeaching Hillary before the elections too.


BlueBull said...

Serious question here -- Exactly what horrible thing in their past made today's Repubs as brain-damaged as they appear to be? Skid with his constant whataboutisms and these other sock puppets from the right wing blogs and their idiotic talking points, one is left with the inescapable conclusion that the right has just gone completely over the edge of reality and into total insanity. Looking back, I guess we all knew it was headed that way.

Dave Miller said...

Shaw... We know why? Of course we do!

But this really is about Hillary for them. They are convinced that the evidence is being buried on HRC, Benghazi, Obama's birth and a myriad of other reasons. So they don't care about DJT's guilt. To them, they are just playing by the rules that let "our crooks" off the hook.

What they re really saying is this... You guys cheated the system for years, covering up the guilt of HRC, WJC, Obama, Holder, the IRS and others. Now it's our turn.

Shaw Kenawe said...

For Anon @12:58

How the GOP is already working on how to impeach Hillary Clinton if she wins

Some Republican lawmakers seem to be trying to delegitimize a Hillary Clinton presidency before it's clear there will be one. They are threatening to block her Supreme Court nominees, investigate her endlessly, or even impeach her.

Remember when Republicans were prepared to impeach Hillary Clinton?
06/04/19 09:20 AM—UPDATED 06/04/19 09:31 AM
By Steve Benen
On Nov. 8, 2016, Donald Trump unexpectedly won the U.S. presidential election. Just four days earlier, however, the Washington Post published this report on Republican plans to impeach Hillary Clinton, whom they expected to win.

Senior Republican lawmakers are openly discussing the prospect of impeaching Hillary Clinton should she win the presidency, a stark indication that partisan warfare over her tenure as secretary of state will not end on Election Day.

Chairmen of two congressional committees said in media interviews this week they believe Clinton committed impeachable offenses in setting up and using a private email server for official State Department business.

And a third senior Republican, the chairman of a House Judiciary subcommittee, told The Washington Post he is personally convinced Clinton should be impeached for influence peddling involving her family foundation.

The same morning that article ran, Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas), the then-chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, told Fox News that he believed Hillary Clinton committed “treason” with her email protocols.

Two days before that, Senate House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) also suggested Clinton committed impeachable offenses. In reference to the Democrat’s email issues, the Wisconsin Republican said on Nov. 1, 2016, “I’m not a lawyer, but this is clearly written. I would say yes, high crime or misdemeanor.”

Hope this answers your request, Anon.

Soff O. Klees said...

"In DAVOS today they asked Trump, in front of THE WORLD about Nadler:

The Rethuglican Preznit called the senator a SLEAZE BALL.

Is Nadler a sleaze ball? No! but why oh why………"

Oh poor widdle clueless Trumper! Why? Because the person you admire and support as POTUS is a classless, infantile, narcissistic malignant liar who hasn't a drop of human decency in him.

But you love this colossal P.O.S. So have at it, you poor clueless sucker!

Dave Miller said...

Anon at 12:58...

“Assuming she wins, and the investigation goes forward, and it looks like an indictment is pending, at that point in time, under the Constitution, the House of Representatives would engage in an impeachment trial," Texas Rep. Michael McCaul said on Fox News. “They would go to the Senate and impeachment proceedings and removal would take place.” Wisconsin senator Ron Johnson declared that Clinton could be impeached for “high crime or misdemeanor.” And Donald Trump, who has turned “lock her up” into a rallying cry at his campaign stops, said Wednesday that Clinton would be impeached just as surely as Bill Clinton was. “You know it’s going to happen. And in all fairness, we went through it with her husband. He was impeached,” the Republican nominee said at a rally in Florida Wednesday, adding that Hillary is “most corrupt person ever to seek the presidency.”

So let's recap... a current sitting GOP Senator, the current President and current GOP House Rep Michael McCaul all called for Clinton's impeachment before the elections.

Is three enough, or do you need more proof?

Anonymous said...

Soff, read a book...Nadlers not a senator.

Unknown said...

First off...No "Penelope" advised...You are no christian. And even pointing it out to you is useless. So, to you, and the others who are lost, just this: Matthew7: 21-23 21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22 Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’
Emphasis on "you who practice lawlessness"... Nuff said.
Saw something else on another blog...the other term for Dolt45: "Baboon God-King"...
That really brings up and nails down the Occupant...It's inspiring!! Strange..I editorial cartoon coming on..
Must....draw....Baboon God-King......LOL...
Puts me in mind of that other commercial where a man is trying
to get a job, and ALL the execs in the room are chimps...acting like chimps...It really is done very well...
Kinda shows the Senate trial in all its ...well......

Anonymous said...

Ms.Shaw, what actual "laws" did Trump break?

Shaw Kenawe said...

To Anon @ 11:11 PM

G.A.O. Report Says Trump Administration Broke Law in Withholding Ukraine Aid

As the Senate prepared for the impeachment trial, the Government Accountability Office said the White House violated a law that limits a president’s power to withhold money allocated by Congress.

When all you watch is FAUX NOOZ and all you listen to are right wing hate radio, it is understandable that you don't know what really happened and what a liar, cheat, fraud, and crook Donald J. Trump truly is.


Shaw Kenawe said...

Let's look at the comments left here by two Anons:

One said he/she would like to see evidence for the claim that the Republicans were saying that they wanted to impeach Hillary Clinton while she was STILL a candidate.

We gave that Anon the evidence he/she demanded. What did we hear from that Anon?


Anon #2 asked what law Trup broke.

I provided the answer.

Will Anon #2 acknowledge that Trump broke the law? Probably not.

Anons #1 and #2 are not interested in evidence or truth. They support a liar, cheat, and fraud. We don't expect people like Anons #1 and #2 to be honest commenters. They're trolls, and nothing more.

They run away, tail between their hind legs when facts destroy their ignorance.

Dave Miller said...

Anon at 11:11 asked "Ms.Shaw, what actual "laws" did Trump break?"

A couple of thoughts in response...

1. The GAO, bi-partisan and respected by both sides of the political aisle has said that President Trump did break the law.

2. As Senator Graham said when he was a House Impeachment leader against Pres. Clinton, you do need to break a law to be impeached.

Finally, let's look at what Alexander Hamilton had to say about this... maybe you recognize the name Alexander Hamilton. But since he rarely comes up on FOX News, maybe not. Hamilton is the Founder Father of the US who wrote the section in the Constitution on impeachment...

Here's what he said in the Federalist Papers along with James Madison and John Jay after the Constitutional Convention... He said the purpose of impeachment was to deal with “the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust.”

Nothing about laws being broken.

Never Trumper Anonymous said...

I'm laughing my ass off at Trumptards trying to decide if they should be smugly confident or go into full meltdown panic mode.

Trump's tweets are becoming more illucid and unhinged than usual as aggregated national polling in support of impeachment removing him from office inches closer to 60%. He's going to have a pants-shitting aneurysm when it hits 70%.

Rational Nation USA said...


Anonymous said...

All the huffing and puffing by you folks aside, you know in your hearts DJT ain't going anywhere and you don't have a candidate who can beat him in Nov..

Shaw Kenawe said...

Anon @ 2:08 PM
Biden is ahead in majority of polls, tied in one and Trump is ahead 3 points (margin of error is -3/+3, so that's a tie.

General Election: Trump vs. Biden

Again, you Trumpers get your info at FAUX NOOZ and hate radio, you're getting b.s.

Trump has NEVER broken 50% approval. He's wallowing in the mid to low 40s approval. That's where Jimmy Carter was when he ran for re-election, also Geral Ford when he campaigned for the presidency. Both men lost with only 40% approval. Trump is widely and wildly unpopular with the American people. Only his cult likes him.

12/4 - 1/23 -- -- 48.5 44.5 Biden +4.0
Emerson 1/21 - 1/23 1128 RV 2.8 50 50 Tie
CNN 1/16 - 1/19 1051 RV 3.6 53 44 Biden +9
IBD/TIPP 1/3 - 1/11 846 RV 3.3 48 46 Biden +2
USA Today/Suffolk 12/10 - 12/14 1000 RV 3.0 41 44 Trump +3
FOX News 12/8 - 12/11 1000 RV 3.0 48 41 Biden +7
Quinnipiac 12/4 - 12/9 1553 RV 2.5 51 42 Biden +9

Anonymous said...

Ms.Shaw, have you seen Biden stumble and mumble threw an interview lately?

Dave Miller said...

Anon at 2:08...

I happen to agree with you that Trump will win reelection.

Look, you seem reasonable. Let me ask you a few questions. Conservatives say Pres Trump did nothing wrong. If that's true, and you guys are sure of that, why not allow the witnesses and documents connected to the phone call and policy to Ukraine to testify? Wouldn't those witnesses and documents show Pres Trump's innocence?

A majority of Americans and even a majority of Republicans and Independents believe President Trump did something wrong. Why not allow those witnesses that would exonerate him to testify? Why not allow the documents that would exonerate him to be made public?

What defendant, standing accused in a trial, who has evidence to his evidence, like an alibi, would not want that information to come out? Doesn't it seem to you as if Pres Trump is hiding something? Or working hard to make sure Congress does not hear or see potentially damaging information?

Anonymous said...

Well Rev, I believe your tizzy over a phone call is a tempest in a teapot, a total waste of time and money. Your smart enough to know this political exercise is going to die a slow death. The dems well know they will not remove Trump from office with this hoax and at present they don't have a candidate who can beat DJT in Nov., and there's no Obama or Bill Clinton hopping down the bunny trail to be their candidate.
The best the dems can hope for is they can scuff Trump up a bit prior to Nov.. Although there's a good chance this "impeachment" charade with actually help Trump at the polls.

Shaw Kenawe said...

Only an equally corrupt trump supporter would so casually dismiss the crimes Trump has committed and then brag about his re-election. Only an equally corrupt trump supporter would believe a majority of Americans are not sickened by trump's arrogance and ignorance of due process and the rule of law.

Feel smug, Anon. But remember this: “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.”

Enjoy your smug confidence. For now.

Anonymous said...

Well Shaw, if you believe DJT broke numerous "laws" and the majority of americans absolutely dispise the man then you should have no qualms about letting the electorate decide the matter in Nov..

Shaw Kenawe said...

Anon @ 5:32,

A MAJORITY of Americans have NEVER approved of Trump. He's never been able to break 50% approval. NEVER. Do I have confidence in the comiong elections? NO! Trump is a cheat. He cheated in 2016, he's been lying and cheating through these past 3 years. Why should I or any honest American feel confident in the coming election, especially when the Republican Senators acquit the liar and cheat?

The current Republican Party is holding onto power through voter suppression, cheating and lying. Once the criminal Trump gets acquitted, watch him become even more emboldened in commiting and getting away with more crimes.