funny thing happened in the impeachment trial of President Trump. Thanks to revelations regarding Trump and Ukraine from former National Security Adviser John Bolton, the trial went from being a speedy, all-but-certain path to acquittal to a potentially lengthy quagmire. But the timing of the Bolton bombshell might actually benefit Trump and Senate Republicans by preventing another round of impeachment, and allowing the GOP to dispose of this issue for good.
Trump’s legal team had just taken over the dais in the Senate impeachment trial, speaking to a Republican caucus ready for a quick acquittal. Democrats demanded testimony from Bolton, a move that Republicans had largely united to oppose. It appeared that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s argument that the Senate should not have to reopen the House investigation for impeachment would carry the day.
And then, Bolton testified anyway — albeit indirectly.
The New York Times published leaks from “multiple people” who had read the final draft of Bolton’s memoir, which is still under review by the National Security Council to protect any classified information that might have been included. Those sources told the Times and later The Washington Post that Bolton declared that Trump had demanded Ukraine conduct an investigation of the Bidens in exchange for congressionally appropriated military aid. The account appeared to rebut Trump’s oft-repeated denial of demanding a quid pro quo for aid Congress had already approved and Trump had signed into law. Furthermore, Bolton’s account reportedly contradicted earlier denials from both Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney and Attorney General William Barr.
Suddenly, Democratic House impeachment managers who had just concluded their presentation to the Senate saw an opening to increase pressure for subpoenas, especially for Bolton. Some Senate Republicans seemed open to the idea as well, worried about how it would look to have Bolton’s account made public without consideration at the trial. McConnell’s unity appeared to fray in the first 48 hours after the leak as GOP moderates talked about cutting deals for a witness trade.
Others, especially Trump, pushed back hard against the leak. Trump went on Twitter almost immediately to emphatically deny the description of Bolton’s account, accusing Bolton of cooking it up to “sell a book.” Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani called Bolton “John the Backstabber” while insisting the account was false. The RNC amplified Trump’s charge by questioning the timing in a statement noting “how convenient” it was that the leak came “at the same time preorders” on Amazon could first be placed. White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham picked up on the timing argument, calling it “very, very suspect” that the revelations came just after Trump’s defense team had begun its presentation.
The timing is notable, but not necessarily because it handicaps Trump.
Bear in mind that the publication date for Bolton’s memoir was in less than two months. The certainty that Bolton would speak out by mid-March one way or the other put Senate Republicans in an extremely uncomfortable position. If they voted to acquit Trump without knowing what Bolton had to say, the outcome would be widely seen as illegitimate. It might have even pushed House Democrats to vote a new article of impeachment on the basis of Bolton’s memoir and force the Senate back into a trial, but at the very least it would have made for campaign fodder against vulnerable Senate Republican incumbents this fall.
Now, however, the leak lets Republicans off the hook, even if still leaves Trump on it. Trump may not have told the truth in his outright denials on the quid pro quo allegation, but at least Senate Republicans now know that for certain. The New York Times leak put the worst possible conclusion from Bolton where they can openly consider it and then still move to the alternate argument. After all, as former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy writes at National Review, there is no need to deny the quid pro quo because it’s a moot point — the aid went without strings attached in the end, and it didn’t rise to the “high crimes and misdemeanors” bar anyway.
Trump’s legal team subtly shifted its presentation to emphasize this point after the leak. Alan Dershowitz told the Senate on Monday that a “quid pro quo alone is not a basis for abuse of power … based on mixed or sole motives.” In fact, Dershowitz said, “nothing in the Bolton revelations — even if true — would rise to the level of an abuse of power.”
https://www.nysun.com/national/new-bolton-accuser-is-a-liberal-from-mothers/12353/
Well, I guess we all just sweep this liberal’s accusation under the rug!
First and foremost, to take this seriously you have to believe the NYT. That is something that should be approached with caution. The NYT might be a (once) great newspaper, but when they report (attack) Trump, facts and truth is not always their first concern.
Second, until we show that Biden extorted Ukraine with the threat of withholding $1 billion (not $400 million) in aid unless they fired a prosecutor investigating a company that paid HIS SON a million dollars a year to serve the critical position of “Director of being there in case the we are investigated” (which, by the way, Biden actually BRAGGED about doing), Trump wanting assurances from Ukraine that they are addressing corruption before we hand them more money cannot be judged.
Third, Ukraine never knew the aid was withheld, the aid was delivered and Zelensky never did any of the things Trump is accused of demanding of him.
Add all this up and it amounts to a complete, total, unmitigated waste of time and money watching Democrats pursue this hollow, weak, idiotic goal.
The New York Times published leaks from “multiple people” who had read the final draft of Bolton’s memoir, which is still under review by the National Security Council to protect any classified information that might have been included. Those sources told the Times and later The Washington Post.
The National Security Council , possibly the least secure when it comes to leaks ever.
Bolton was warned on the 23rd iof this month that none of the script could be released. I guess multiple people in the National Security Council didnt get the memo, or they did.
@kitt:
Isn’t it ironic that the very people now defending Bolton as the most upstanding swamp rat EVAH are the very same people who previously hated his guts and railed Bolton was nothing but a war monger who needed to be keel hauled?
Someone has suggested that the Senate impeachment vote should be done by secret ballot, apparently thinking this would relieve republican senators occupying vulnerable seats of worries concerning 2020 election repercussions.
File that suggestion under Extremely Unlikely. It should take any attentive person about 60 seconds to realize that a secret ballot would also relieve all republican senators of any worries about personal retribution from Donald Trump—some of whom might cheerfully push him into a well if they knew they could do it without being caught.
Meanwhile, the White House is exploring the possibility of locking down both John Bolton and his unpublished book by declaring everything in it but the punctuation marks Highly Classified. They may also classify his mustache, preventing him from being seen in public.
@retire05: Not at all, it is a well established pattern.
If the NYT doesnt have the actual manuscript it could be just another WB style account of a call he was not on. Oh Bolton said Burisma once in the book? Spin it.
Bolton sure isnt coming forward to deny it as book sales are being made, they may change the jacket to the book that shook the trial.
@Greg: Actually, a secret ballot would benefit Democrats as some, if not many, are inclined to acquit and end this embarrassing episode inflicted upon them by Pelosi and her House of Idiots.
You’ve got problems.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/schiff-bolton-lack-credibility-senate-impeachment-trial?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed: foxnews/politics (Internal – Politics – Text)
John Bolton, according to the NYT, is a felon and should be in jail. It is alleged that Bolton had personal knowledge of a crime committed by DJT and failed to promptly report this crime to the relevant officials. It is a crime to exchange a political favor for cash. As a person in an office with the highest possible security clearances, Bolton was obliged to be scrupulous about the law.
His failure to promptly report this violation of the law makes him a felon.
Was he holding back this admission in exchange for continued employment? In other words, was Bolton involved in a quid pro quo transaction?
Inquiring minds want to know.
@mathman: Bolton and his publisher are denying they gave NYT a manuscript. Its just another NYT WaPo fart in a whirlwind.Neither is naming a source, so with their record why give it a thought.
It was below the dignity of the Senate to even consider the non named sources, should they also look at the headlines in the grocery store checkout lane? Batboy says Trump is his father, Bigfoot causes stir at WhiteHouse dinner. ( he didnt know which fork to use and slurped his soup off the teaspoon)
After reading the linked National Review article a few days ago, I predicted this twist of defense which now supposedly does Team Trump a favor.
Per the article, (in a real trial of course rather than a predetermined cover-up) the defense never builds is case on a lie as things can be exposed. It scolded the Trump defense for not going with the “it ain’t so bad” or even “everyone does it” defense rather than the “no quid pro quo”.
The scam of of trial is now following the same pattern of nonsense and dishonesty of the Trump cultists- “he didn’t do it”, “okay he did it but it wasn’t what he meant”, Okay, he did mean it but everyone does it”- okay maybe everyone doesn’t do it but it really isn’t that bad” to now Dershowitz just coming out with the argument that “okay, he did it and it’s pretty bad but the president is above the law” so it doesn’t matter. This a a dangerous slope and literally nullifies Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution.
@Deplorable Me:
With a realization you’ve become indoctrinated to the slow drip lies from the Trump regime and that critical thinking in any aspect is beyond the scope of your willful ignorance, and yes, that this comment will provoke you into asking some non-relevant off topic question in order for you to claim victory to your newly fabricated argument, I’d like to point out a few things about your deflection of actual news.
First, you have to understand and acknowledge that Trump is a blatant, serial liar. So far so good? Now, the arguments of “fake news” is a product originating from, promoted by, and sold by Donald Trump, the habitual and uncontrollable liar. There is no other group or movement out there discrediting these news outlets. Just Trump, the liar, and those who abet his dishonesty.
CNN, NYT, WAPO, and most that Trump rants about may lean left or have liberal commentaries and scolding editorials but their news, investigations, and reporting have very high credibility ratings, much higher than that of Fox or ANON.
It isn’t that they are “fake news” or “enemies of the people” as they are not. That is what Trump and his propaganda machine are brainwashing you into believing and to help them promote it. Why? Because Trump doesn’t want you to know the truth and even when you do, he tells you not to believe what you see with your own eyes or hear with your own ears. Trump, the known and undisputed liar, is lying to you for his benefit.
Have a hard time swallow that? I get it. But here’s where you might practice a bit of critical thinking or deductive reasoning if possible.
The NYT has been a prominent and worldwide respected investigative news source for almost 200 years and has won 127 Pulitzer Prizes. The Washington Post, since 1877 has won 47 Pulitzer Prizes, 2nd place only to the NYT. Both are historically well respected in their reporting and accuracy.
Now let’s ponder a rather simple notion. The NYT (as well as CNN and all the others), knowing that Trump at the very latest will be out of office in 2025, is somehow willing to toss all that aside and switch to “fake news” and lose all credibility for years to come because they just don’t like Donald Trump?
That just doesn’t make sense.
@Ronald J. Ward: Whatever Bernie child, Having their “journalists” get pre approval of their articles from the Clinton campaign. Pushing the Mueller debunked Russian fantasy for 3 years. Its fine you trust them they get Prizes for breaking stories that later are found to be totally false.
We will choose our sources for information.
Was that the same “someone” who admitted on the news that the reason House managers prefer witnesses to testify in front of the Senate is because there, as opposed to in front of the House, witnesses are NOT put under oath!?
Robert Alexander, the father of that UNCONSTITUTIONAL idea, is an opinion writer at CNN, the Communist News Network.
Grasping at straws, folks.
The idea that “Jeff Flake says….” is hardly reason to upend Senate rules whereby 20 Senators can demand a count.
Go politic 80+ Senators into NOT asking for it if you think that’s such a smart idea.
@kitt:
When it comes to Democrats, nothing is below their dignity… they have none. It’s been suspected for a long time, but their impeachment farce confirms it… without doubt. Uncontested. Irrefutable.
Let’s not forget CNN giving Hillary the debate questions to study and practice answering.
@Ronald J. Ward:
Wow. You are really channeling your inner AJ. Can’t you find a better way to support your ideology than fantasizing scenarios that IF they happened would support your position?
No, Trump did not originate fake news. That would be the liberal media propaganda machine. For instance, didn’t they remorselessly promote Schiff’s and other Democrat’s lie that they actually had hard evidence PROVING Trump colluded with the Russians? You, like all the other lie-addicted Democrats, run away from the question of where all that “evidence” went when it simply vanished when Mueller’s report was released.
How about the reports Trump, Jr. had the DNC emails before Wikileaks? Or, how about Trump’s Deutchbank records being seized? Or Cohen saying Trump told him to lie? How about Schiff lying before his own committee about what Trump really said in his phone call? The lies your Democrats have latched on to and promoted solely to try and destroy Trump are limitless, but you sure do seem to like them… PREFER them, actually, to the truth.
They are fake news and they are the enemy of the people, unless you feel lying to the American people in order to promote a particular ideology. Yeah… that’s what totalitarian regimes do.
Well, here’s an exercise in critical thinking for you; why is it you readily accept the false accusation that Trump withheld funds from Ukraine to have Biden investigated without wanting to know if Biden SHOULD be investigated, particularly after he CONFESSED ON VIDEO he did what needed to be investigated? How about this; how could Trump have extorted Ukraine when they didn’t even KNOW they were being extorted? Obviously, Biden is far better at extortion than Trump. Oooo…. TOO critical for a delicate mind?
The NYT is a shadow of it’s former self. It has less credibility than the National Enquirer and has made itself into nothing but a propaganda tool. They have even admitted it and been caught on tape strategizing on how to make Trump look like a racist. Now, critical thinker, WHY would a legitimate news organ need to workshop ways to make a President APPEAR to be racist? Why not simply report any racism he exhibits? OH! That’s right… he doesn’t exhibit any, so they, the propaganda arm of the DNC, need a strategy to make him LOOK racist to benefit their Democrat directors.
Your critical thinking is too decrepit to have noticed that the NYT and CNN (in addition to MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC and PBS) relinquished their credibility long ago. They did that when they were attacking Bush, made sure it was dead as they covered up and lied for Obama. Their function now is by no means surprising to actual critical thinkers.
@kitt:
Yes, I understand that. I realize that the last thing a Trump enabler would want to consider is actual facts or evidence.
Here’s another funny one for you, “The Wall”. There was never any actual study or analysis pertaining to “The Wall” It was just something that Trump mentioned during the campaign and it resonated well with his cultists, that and when he’d say “and Mexico will pay for it. His campaign managers, knowing Trump thrived on the attention, started telling him that anytime he got sidetracked or wanted to veer off course, just say “the wall” and “Mexico will pay for it”.
Yet, Trump cultists believed it proper he bypass Congress to pay for an unneeded “wall” that simply stokes his ego. Trump cultists fell for his nod of “choosing our sources for information”, forbidding them to accept unfavorable facts reported against him by actually credible sources. And the Trump cultists now who’ve adamantly refused to accept his guilt of bribery, now are content with completely disregarding Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution once there’s a possibility of a witness proving him guilty of bribery.
There you go again, believing the Mueller Report a hoax because while facts dictate differently, you have been programmed by Team Trump to continue that lie.
34 individuals and three Russian businesses on charges ranging from computer hacking to conspiracy and financial crimes, leading to 7 guilty pleas and 5 people sentenced to prison. Trump was never indicted but was determined to have been charged if he were not a sitting president AND that he could face charges once leaving the WH.
You folks have been brainwashed into rejecting what you see with your eyes and what you hear with your ears, just as instructed to by Donald Trump.
@Ronald J. Ward:
Wow. Talk about a cult; the cult of ignorance.
Congress has voted numerous times to build the wall; they just never did it. If you look around, walls in various locations work and work very well. But, for the time being, the Democrat stance is that walls aren’t needed and don’t work… while Trump is President.
If the case for impeachment was so strong, explain why Schiff blocked Republican witnesses and White House representation? Also explain how he can now have to position that the only “fair” thing to do is call more witnesses. Engage that “critical thinking” gear.
Keep working on that credibility; in no time at all, you’ll be down to Greg level… work real hard at it and you’ll be all the way down to AJ level. You’re trying to imitate his style.
@Deplorable Me:
AJ/Ward would have us believe that the NYSlimes is an honest purveyor of the news. It’s history, going back eight decades belies that claim.
Take the Holocaust; stories, leaking out of Europe and verified, were short and buried deep inside the NYSlimes and the Washington Compost. Both with Jewish owners, the papers “of record “ did not want to appear PRO Jewish.
Blaring headlines, once found to be wrong, find corrections buried deep in the papers.
Yet, for the left, the legacy press is a tool to attack its opponents with illegal leaks by anonymous sources who are not willing to risk their own tony tax payer funded jobs by going on the record. Remember, it was a high ranking FBI who was Deep Throat and who went to jail for illegal actions.
AJ/Ward’s comments are laughable.
@retire05:
It was The Washington Post investigations that led to the Watergate scandal.
Nixon hated them as well.
Wonder why?
@Ronald J. Ward: You are soooo funny. No connection was ever established for Trump or any of his campaign to be in any conspiracy with any Russians ever.
The birth of that hoax is now being investigated and will lead to charges.
None of Trumps associates were prosecuted for any crimes related to election interference, not one. The entire investigation was a Hoax, based on unverified Russian and DNC disinformation. That is a FACT and what our sources have been saying for a long time.
@Ronald J. Ward:
No shit.
You Left-cultists will believe anything your told. Nancy Pelosi could kill a baby in the street, and you’d find a way to justify it.
@Deplorable Me, #7:
FOX News is everybody’s problem. Some blond talking head this morning was speculating in between coy glances at the camera whether or not Mitch McConnell “has the votes to call for witnesses”—as if he hasn’t been lobbying every doubtful republican in the Senate in an effort to make certain no witnesses are ever called.
FOX has led half of the nation down the garden path. The only entertainment value comes from taking note of their sly efforts at audience manipulation. They don’t just tell you things straightforwardly, and then let you decide for yourself.
@Ronald J. Ward: Gosh… the WaPoo going after a Republican. What’ll they think of next?
@Greg: Wow… is bitter defeat making you surly? Who mentioned Fox? Was Fox wrong in reporting that McConnell wants the votes to end this charade? I can’t remember you complaining about Nancy threatening all House Democrats with no support for their reelection if they don’t vote for her sham impeachment… which she allowed a few air-headed anti-Semite radical socialists to drive her into. But, you apparently aren’t capable of seeing the flaws in your own party or ideology. When they lie, cheat, steal, extort it’s all for the good of the Party… the ends justifies the means.
You know the only reason to listen to anything Schiff says? To see if you can witness, first hand, the historic event where he actually tells the truth.
@Deplorable Me, #21:
You did, in the post I was responding to. Your first link in that post is to a FOX News article intended to discredit John Bolton—whom Donald Trump himself appointed as his National Security Advisor long after the exchange in the video clip took place.
Every reasonable American following the impeachment trial understands that Bolton and others have direct, first-hand knowledge of whether Trump is innocent or guilty as charged. They also understand that Trump is using his powers of office to keep Bolton and others from being heard, because that is happening right in front of their faces. They themselves are witnessing Trump doing one of the very things he’s presently on trial for. Trump, the man who has publicly bragged he could shoot a man on Fifth Avenue and not lose any voters… How pathetic is that?
@Greg: It isnt just Faux, it is every top cable network pushing partisan propaganda. Cut the cord.
Truth is we dont know how each Senator will vote, they must consider the Partisan House shoving their responsibilities onto the upper chamber, and what that can do to future Presidents.
Schiff says he made his case so lets go forward with the vote.
@Greg: Re-read it. It doesn’t discredit Bolton, it discredits Schiff, as if he has any credit to dis. Schiff is a liar and, apparently, has been for quite some time. Bolton, meanwhile, simply recounted what happened in the call. Quite creditable.
Right there in that clip you have Bolton’s first hand knowledge. So, done deal, right? Or, is it simply the need to grasp at straws to find SOMETHING you can desperately cling to.
Yet, Trump never shot anyone, did he? Biden, on the other hand, bragged about extorting Ukraine to cover his and his son’s corruption… something he ACTUALLY DID.
Jay Sekulow’s puffed up pretend-outrage at being asked who is paying Rudy Giuliani’s multi-million dollar international travel costs, lavish lunches, hotel bills, etc as he gallivants about trying to conjure up a Biden investigation was classic.
Apparently he thinks that might somehow cover up the fact that nobody is answering that possible hand grenade of a question. Rest assured that this is likely part of the criminal investigations related to the frequently-photographed people Trump “doesn’t know”.
The political minefield republican senators are walking into at White House orders only begins at the point the Senate trial ends. Surely they’re aware of that. They’ve lost their cover.
@Deplorable Me:
He’s been metaphorically shooting lots of people. His path is littered with them.
@Greg: WHO won’t answer questions?
https://thefederalist.com/2020/01/30/watch-dem-impeachment-managers-give-murkowski-the-middle-finger-when-she-asks-about-witnesses/
Covering up, anyone?
@Greg: Well, unfortunately for all you whiny, sore loser, crybaby, pouting, sky-screaming haters, metaphors are not impeachable.
@Deplorable Me, #27:
That doesn’t answer the 64 thousand dollar question, either. Who has been paying Giuliani and his accomplices? Who has been trying to buy Trump the next election? What might have been promised in return for financially levering that off-the-books campaign assistance?
We’ve got the impeachment charges, but 90 percent of the iceberg may still be underwater.
@Greg: Maybe at this point Rudy is doing this on his dime, the president will be sent a bill later. Do you think Rudy is without means?
Look it up, Rudys estimated net worth 45 million bucks.
@Greg: Who is paying Guiliani to get the information no Democrat is interested in is in no way a question at all. The question is, if Democrats feel they have such a solid case, why did they lie and suppress evidence throughout their entire hearing process?
@Nathan Blue:
I’m reasonably sure that it’s “you’re” and not “your”.
Your (or, you’re if you prefer) repeated mimicking rubber/glue parroting of me worshiping Pelosi is equally elementary considering I’ve never defender her on anything, thus exposing the strawman you are.
But when you’ve followed a con man so far down the rabbit hole of dishonesty while promoting his every scam, it’s understood you have no where else to turn. I’d say the GOP Senate has found themselves in the same predicament.
@Nathan Blue: One thing is for certain, as we have it on record; AJ will still follow a liberal even after they have been shown to have committed perjury, obstructed justice, tampered with witnesses and raped. That’s not hypothetical.
@Ronald J. Ward and spell checker:
My exact question was:(directed to the managers
Are you aware that House intelligence committee staffer Shawn Misko had a close relationship with Eric Ciaramella while at the National Security Council together 1/2
— Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) January 30, 2020
and are you aware and how do you respond to reports that Ciaramella and Misko may have worked together to plot impeaching the President before there were formal house impeachment proceedings. 2/2
The Judge refused to read the question.
Do you know why?
@Greg:
You say Trump has been “shooting” people.
How many people have ACTUALLY died because of Trump’s action?
Knowing you on the left now seem to care so much for the people of Ukraine, where was you empathy for the over 200 Mexicans who were murdered with Fast and Furious weapons or the (at least) 7 Americans who died because of Obama?
What a useful idiot you are.
@kitt, #30:
I think Rudy has become Trump’s golem. That doesn’t mean he works for free.
Who knows where the money is coming from? It literally could be coming from anywhere. And who is watching, now that Trump has conveniently rendered the Federal Election Commission nonfunctional by refusing to appoint anyone to fill its three vacant seats? The FEC no longer has the 4 out of 6 seats filled that are required for it to act.
If you think that isn’t deliberate, you’re not paying attention. Trump has been methodically smashing any legal constraints on his ability to do whatever the hell he wants, and he’s the last person who should ever be trusted in the White House without training wheels, guard rails, and adult supervision. Just as he uses money to acquire more money, he’s using power to acquire more power, and just as with money, he’ll never reach a point where he thinks he has enough.
@retire05: Jun 29, 2016 · One of the guns used in the November 13, 2015 Paris terrorist attacks came from Phoenix, Arizona where the Obama administration allowed criminals to buy thousands of weapons illegally in a deadly and futile “gun-walking” operation known as “Fast and Furious.” 89 dead in France. Another arm the terrorists action, matched by serial number.
No Impeachment of BHO and his blood stained hands. Those guns most likely are still killing.
@Greg:
Again, where were you when people were getting shot because of Obama?
@kitt:
People did die because of Obama and Comrade Greggie said NOTHING.
What a hypocritical bastid he is.
@retire05:
They didn’t need their votes then.
@retire05:
You should watch the Senate coverage. Maybe it would calm you down.
ALL THE WITNESSES: Ok we all agree. This is what happened.
REPUBLICANS: None of you were in the room!
BOLTON: *raises hand* Well I was in the…
REPUBLICANS: Who asked you?! Shut up! You’re a liberal pawn!
BOLTON: Um… I’m actually I’m a lifelong Republican and I was literally Trump’s national security advi…
REPUBLICANS: Shut your mustache! Somebody bring back the first national security advisor.
FLYNN: *in orange jumpsuit* Hey sorry guys I’m in jail lol.
REPUBLICANS: What? Why?
FLYNN: For lying to the FBI about the Russia investigation.
REPUBLICANS: Well what idiot told you to do that?!
FLYNN: The Pres…
REPUBLICANS: Shut up! No one believes either of you!
KELLY: *raises hand* I believe them. And I was Trump’s Chief of sta…
REPUBLICANS: Shut up! Let’s talk to the current chief of staff. Who is he?
MULVANEY: *raises hand* It’s me. Sort of. Well, I’m the act…
REPUBLICANS: Shit. Never mind.
PARNAS: *raises hand* I was also in the room. In fact, here’s a cell phone video of the President saying that…
REPUBLICANS: Wait what?! How in hell did you sneak a cell phone into a meeting with the President?
PARNAS: It was easy I just walked right in and…
REPUBLICANS: Shut up! You’re a criminal!
PARNAS: Correct. So I just walked right into…
TRUMP: I don’t know him.
PARNAS: And here’s 500 pictures of me with the President because we’re besties.
REPUBLICANS: Wait… What idiot introduced you to the President??
PARNAS: His personal lawyer.
REPUBLICANS: Cohen??
COHEN: *also in orange jumpsuit* Hey no sorry guys I’m in jail too. Oops.
REPUBLICANS: Why?
COHEN: For campaign finance violations.
REPUBLICANS: Who’s campaign?
COHEN: The Pres…
REPUBLICANS: Shut up! Who was the campaign chair??
MANAFORT: *also in orange jumpsuit* Yeah. Me. Also in jail. Heyyyy.
REPUBLICANS: IS EVERYBODY IN JAIL?!?
PARNAS: It was Giuliani.
YOVANOVITCH: Giuliani! That’s the guy who had me fired from my job!
REPUBLICANS: Who are you??
YOVANOVITCH: I was the ambassador to Ukraine.
REPUBLICANS: Wait, you had her fired? Do you work for the government??
GIULIANI: Nope. But I figured no one really follows any rules around here so…
REPUBLICANS: Well who is the ambassador to the European Union??
SONDLAND: *raises hand* It’s me. I was also in the roo…
REPUBLICANS: F@$&!!!
PUTIN: *rubs his bare chest*
@retire05: He knows damn well that Trump is going to uncover the corruption that has long followed the Biden crime family.
I wish I had the energy to do that much typing for so little point. On second thought, perhaps not. It’s stupid.
@Greg:
I am watching. I have not missed one day of this sham since it started. Schiff is the one who should be impeached. I know you disagree because you support liars.
And unlike you, I understand what is being said.
I also remember the promises to “impeach the mother f**ker” which was said long before July 25, 2019.
What I understand is that Trump will do anything to keep republican witnesses who have direct, first-hand knowledge of the situation from telling what they know under oath, and that this is not the behavior of an innocent man.
I also understand the consequences for our nation and system of government if he or any other president is allowed to get away with it.
@Deplorable Me: He’s just lifting, pasting and doesn’t even put a link to the original idiot who posted it.
Btw, it’s some actor **shocked**
James Tabeek
@Greg: Like Democrats kept witnesses with firsthand knowledge of Ukrainian corruption from being able to testify? Like Schiff kept anyone from questioning his confidant Ciaramella?
You have no room to complain. Your House Democrats screwed this up, bringing an empty case.
@Curt:
Lift and paste. It’s what Comrade Greggie does. His indoctrinated brain is not large enough to come up with the stuff he does.
You should have deleted his lift and paste as he violated copyright laws by not providing a link. Wonder why his buddy didn’t object to Comrade Greggie’s lawlessness.
@Greg:
Innocent until proven guilty, and totally exonerated of collusion and obstruction.
The President is under no obligation to prove his innocence. Get your head out of Soviet style injustice system.
This is the swamp closing ranks to protect corruption so their business as usual can keep fleecing the American taxpayer, like on your home island banana republic PR.