world

Republicans in Trump impeachment trial on the spot over Bolton book report

110 Comments
By Richard Cowan and Susan Cornwell

President Donald Trump's fellow Republicans in the U.S. Senate came under renewed pressure on Monday to allow witnesses in his impeachment trial, while his defense team largely ignored disclosures from a former White House adviser.

The elephant in the room on Day 2 of Trump's defense arguments was John Bolton, the former national security adviser whose unpublished book manuscript, according to the New York Times, included disclosures that go to the heart of the abuse of power charge against Trump.

Bolton wrote that Trump told him he wanted to freeze $391 million in security aid to Ukraine until Kiev helped with investigations into Democrats, including political rival Joe Biden, and his son Hunter Biden, the Times reported.

The Bolton disclosures prompted new calls by Democrats for Bolton and other witnesses to testify. Trump is accused of abusing the power of his office in seeking foreign interference in a U.S. election and of obstructing Congress.

Trump's lawyers said after about seven hours of arguments that they would resume their presentation on Tuesday.

Republican Senator Mitt Romney, a moderate who has at times criticized Trump, said there was a growing likelihood that at least four Republican senators would choose to call Bolton to testify, which would give Democrats the votes necessary in the Republican-led Senate to summon him.

The Senate may resolve the issue of whether to call witnesses in a vote on Friday or Saturday. Democrats said the Bolton manuscript made it all the more pressing for the Senate to call Bolton as a witness.

The Democratic-led House of Representatives impeached Trump last month, setting up the trial in the Senate on whether he should be removed from office. Trump is expected to be acquitted in the 100-seat chamber, where Republicans hold 53 seats.

The White House directed current and former administration officials not to provide testimony or documents in the House inquiry that preceded the trial, and Senate Republicans have so far refused to allow any witnesses or new evidence.

Senator Ted Cruz, a staunch Trump defender, said the Bolton book would not "impact the legal issue before this Senate."

Trump's legal team on Monday resumed its presentation of opening arguments in the trial, including remarks by Ken Starr, the former independent counsel whose investigation into a sex scandal led to the 1998 impeachment of President Bill Clinton, a Democrat. Another Trump lawyer, Jane Raskin, defended his personal attorney Rudy Giuliani.

Bolton was barely mentioned. In an apparent reference to the manuscript leak, Trump lawyer Jay Sekulow said: "We deal with publicly available information. We do not deal with speculation, allegations that are not based on evidentiary standards at all."

ALL ABOUT BIDEN

Instead, defense lawyers turned to Joe Biden, one of Trump's leading Democratic rivals as he seeks re-election in November, and Hunter Biden, who sat on the board of Ukrainian energy company Burisma while his father was U.S. vice president.

Attorney Pam Bondi defended Trump's use of unsupported corruption allegations against the Bidens as the basis for his demand that Ukraine investigate them.

She presented a series of media reports, Ukrainian gas company records and excerpts from impeachment inquiry testimony in an attempt to demonstrate that a range of independent observers were concerned that Hunter Biden's role posed a potential conflict of interest.

"All we are saying is that there was a basis to talk about this, to raise this issue, and that is enough," Bondi said.

Ukrainian officials have said they found no indication that Hunter Biden had broken any law. Biden campaign spokesman Andrew Bates on Monday dismissed Bondi's allegations, saying they had been widely discredited.

"The president's lawyers spent about two hours trashing the Bidens," said Representative Adam Schiff, the lead House impeachment prosecutor. He added that Trump's defense team could not explain why Trump took an interest in corruption and Burisma only when Biden became a presidential candidate.

Republican Senator Joni Ernst of Iowa said it was appropriate to bring up the Bidens, and looked to next Monday's presidential caucuses in her home state. "Will they be supporting Vice President Biden at this point? Not sure about that," she said during a break in the trial.

Some of Trump's strongest Republican backers in Congress have threatened to make the impeachment trial about the Bidens.

Biden himself predicted the attacks, warning voters at a campaign event in Ankeny, Iowa, over the weekend: Turn it on Monday, watch the news. It's going to be all about Biden."

AID TO UKRAINE

Democrats have said Trump used the aid to a vulnerable ally facing Russian aggression as leverage to get a foreign country to help him smear a domestic political rival.

Trump denied telling Bolton that he sought to use the aid to pressure Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to investigate the Bidens on unsubstantiated corruption allegations.

"I haven't seen the manuscript, but I can tell you nothing was ever said to John Bolton," Trump told reporters.

But moderate Republican Senator Susan Collins said the reports regarding Bolton's book "strengthen the case for witnesses."

"Every few days something comes out, and Americans are saying they want witnesses & documents," Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said on Twitter

Starr, who himself recommended Clinton's impeachment after investigating the former president's sexual relationship with a White House intern, called impeachment an overused tool.

"Go to court. It really is as simple as that, I don't need to belabor the point," Starr said.

This is only the third presidential impeachment trial in U.S. history.

Another Clinton impeachment alumnus, Alan Dershowitz, carried a pair of worn antique books as he began closing the day's defense with an argument disputed by most legal scholars."Purely non-criminal conduct, including abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, are outside the range of impeachable offenses," he said.

Dershowitz himself argued the opposite view during Clinton's impeachment.

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2020.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

110 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

More cracks appearing in the Republican's DC Oblast. Support one of their own swampmen, a known liar (Iraq WMD), a neocon who's led the country into war benefitting the big defense industries contributing to their campaigns, or back serial liar Trump in his ongoing attempts to undermine the principles the republic is built on. No doubt each pol has his wet finger in the air checking public moods while also checking the moods of their richest donors, i.e. those their party has long served. Party over country redux. For a few million dollars more.

10 ( +15 / -5 )

Question - if Bolton's testimony is so important, how come the Democrats didn't call him to the witness stand during their clown show?

He's just butt hurt over being fired and is trying to sell his book. Whatever he claims doesn't alter the facts.

No quid pro quo. No bribery.

-14 ( +5 / -19 )

This Republican controlled senate will bend over backwards with its head buried in the sand and ignore any damning evidence Bolton shines a light on. The best the Democrats can do is to expose this senate for what it is, the president's own personal kangaroo court. We'll see how this plays out in November at the ballot box.

8 ( +13 / -5 )

The best the Democrats can do is to expose this senate for what it is, the president's own personal kangaroo court. We'll see how this plays out in November at the ballot box.

1998 was the same kangaroo court.

-15 ( +3 / -18 )

The kangaroo court was the House hearings, stormcrow.

We'll see how this plays out in November at the ballot box.

We sure will! It's going to be glorious!

-13 ( +5 / -18 )

"I haven't seen the manuscript, but I can tell you nothing was ever said to John Bolton," Trump told reporters.

So he has seen the manuscript and something was said to Bolton. Toxic Don at his finest.

3 ( +8 / -5 )

I'll take President Zelensky's word over that butt hurt warmonger Bolton's.

-9 ( +5 / -14 )

So he has seen the manuscript and something was said to Bolton. Toxic Don at his finest

Strange that this unverified and unapproved transcript would come out now, the timing...hmmm, where have I seen this before? Oh, yeah, Comey!

-15 ( +3 / -18 )

I'll take President Zelensky's word over that butt hurt warmonger Bolton's.

The Slavic nations seem to have a Jedi Mind Trick thing going on with Republicans these days.

10 ( +14 / -4 )

Do you think Trump might say he’s never met Bolton?

12 ( +16 / -4 )

Bolton's book is not the only worry for Donny.

His legal dream team's amateurish attempts, peppered with falsehoods makes them look like lowest rung of legal aid.

Then there's Pam Bondi, hanging out with Parnas in the good old days, and not to forget the bribe she took from Donny as an AG in 2013......

Clowns and criminals are all Donny has on his side.

10 ( +15 / -5 )

As I predicted last week Romney starting time poke his head up once he has an opportunity.

so Bolton didn’t leak the book. It was sent to the NSC for review. Vindmans brother is in charge of such things there. So it’s not a stretch that he knows who leaked it.

on the good side Bolton doesn’t need to testify now as the rest of his book can just be leaked. Then no one will buy it cause already read it in NY Times.

-11 ( +4 / -15 )

I personally don’t mind if they call Bolton to testify, but the Democrats shouldn’t snicker too much, because if he or Mulvaney testify, it won’t be one for nothing, the Biden’s, Schiff and even the Whistleblower could be summoned to testify and Schumer and Schiff said that’s off the table and non-negotiable. If that’s so, the Dems won’t get their wish.

-10 ( +5 / -15 )

so Bolton didn’t leak the book. It was sent to the NSC for review. Vindmans brother is in charge of such things there. So it’s not a stretch that he knows who leaked it.

We can always count on Trumpophiles for a conspiracy theory before 9:00.

7 ( +12 / -5 )

I personally don’t mind if they call Bolton to testify, but the Democrats shouldn’t snicker too much, because if he or Mulvaney testify, it won’t be one for nothing, the Biden’s, Schiff and even the Whistleblower could be summoned to testify and Schumer and Schiff said that’s off the table and non-negotiable. If that’s so, the Dems won’t get their wish.

Why would we want to hear from the Bidens? How are they relevant to Donny abusing the office of president?

9 ( +14 / -5 )

Does vindmans brother not work in the legal section of NSC? Was the book not submitted to the NSC for legal review??

-8 ( +3 / -11 )

His legal dream team's amateurish attempts, peppered with falsehoods makes them look like lowest rung of legal aid.

I disagree, Trump’s defense saved the entire Senate from constant repetitive testimonies on cherry-picked one-sided facts and allegations by getting to the point, staying on point.

Then there's Pam Bondi, hanging out with Parnas in the good old days, and not to forget the bribe she took from Donny as an AG in 2013......

Yeah, funny how in the good old days the Democrats hated the intel agencies, the military, despised Cohen, Napolitano, Bolton and since Trump has been in office all of these people became the best friends of the Democrats.

Clowns and criminals are all Donny has on his side

That’s why McConnell stopped his chambers from becoming the clown show that went on in the House chambers.

-11 ( +4 / -15 )

I supposed you guys missed this fact?

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/478952-trumps-newest-russia-adviser-leaves-post-report

”security violations” of an NSC guy assigned to Russia and Europe. Who took the place of the other 2 Dem witnesses Morrison and Hill.

it’s simple now, if the leak is true Bolton has a responsibility to go on TV today and tell us what happened. Cant wait months or years to be subpoenaed.the election is at stake!

-10 ( +3 / -13 )

Trump’s defense saved the entire Senate from constant repetitive testimonies on cherry-picked one-sided facts and allegations by getting to the point, staying on point.

And we are all waiting for them to get to the point, instead of spouting lies and misrepresenting facts.

Yeah, funny how in the good old days the Democrats hated the intel agencies, the military, 

ROFL, everyone clearly remembers Donny standing next to Putin and bad-mouthing our intel agencies. I think the nutters better steer clear of this topic because it will come back to bite them again and again.

That’s why McConnell stopped his chambers from becoming the clown

Moscow Mitch is the biggest clown of them all, it's time he hangs up his suspenders and goes back to sipping Moscow Mules.

8 ( +12 / -4 )

Yep the same intel agencies that just leaked Bolton’s book that has classified material in it to be reviewed.

bad-mouthing our intel agencies

-8 ( +3 / -11 )

And we are all waiting for them to get to the point, instead of spouting lies and misrepresenting facts.

They did. that’s why you didn’t see so many people falling asleep and walking around. Case in point, what were the Dems trying to achieve? You think the Dems convinced the Senate to convict and remove Trump? ROFL!

ROFL, everyone clearly remembers Donny standing next to Putin

Obama was caught on a hot mic with Medvedev and?

and bad-mouthing our intel agencies.

Given what the senior officers have been trying to do to him, don’t blame him.

Moscow Mitch is the biggest clown of them all, it's time he hangs up his suspenders and goes back to sipping Moscow Mules.

We said the same about Harry Reid as well.

-8 ( +3 / -11 )

And the nightmares for Trump and the Trumpers have just started...

Bolton said Donnie lied and its was clear to everyone "in the loop" there was a QPQ and an attempted political smear of the Bidens...

Bolton said Pompeo lied and knew about Rudy smearing Yovanovich...and did nothing...

Bolton said Mulvaney lied when he said he wasn't in the room when Donnie and Rudy talked and Yovanovich...

Bolton said Barr lied when he said he knew nothing about the Jul phone call until Aug...

What we've known all along - it was a QPQ from the beginning and everyone is lying to cover it up.

He's just butt hurt over being fired and is trying to sell his book. Whatever he claims doesn't alter the facts.

I'll take President Zelensky's word over that butt hurt warmonger Bolton's.

And the hypocrisy continues - as per everyone else that has turned on Trump, they go from sainted hero to lying rats in one second. This is the second Trumper to now call Mr NEOCON-Republican stalwart scum...after saying he was god's gift to Trump's cabinet earlier. What do the rest of the Trumpers think?

Strange that this unverified and unapproved transcript would come out now, the timing.

Sure is - especially when the only copy was sent to the WHITE HOUSE for review...maybe Kelly Anne?

7 ( +10 / -3 )

No it was sent to the National Security Council per Boltons lawyer.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

And the nightmares for Trump and the Trumpers have just started...

Why?

Bolton said Donnie lied and its was clear to everyone "in the loop" there was a QPQ and an attempted political smear of the Bidens...

Already covered.

Bolton said Pompeo lied and knew about Rudy smearing Yovanovich...and did nothing...

Bolton said Mulvaney lied when he said he wasn't in the room when Donnie and Rudy talked and Yovanovich...

And? The President wasn’t in any sworn deposition and he had every right to claim executive privilege and not share that information.

Bolton said Barr lied when he said he knew nothing about the Jul phone call until Aug...

What we've known all along - it was a QPQ from the beginning and everyone is lying to cover it up.

And the Ukrainians still got their money, so now what. Impeach the man on wanting to make sure just sent the money knowing how corrupt the Ukraine is and why need to do so cautiously? Ok, so we get Bolton to testify, probably won’t happen since the Dems won’t allow the Biden’s to testify.

-6 ( +4 / -10 )

No it was sent to the National Security Council per Boltons lawyer.

Where does the NSC work? The White House. Who is its head? The President's National Security Adviser.

Bolton's lawyer also said this;

*The attorney for former national security adviser John Bolton released a scathing statement Monday implying that White House officials were responsible for the leak of details from his forthcoming book.*

“It is clear, regrettably, from The New York Times article published today that the prepublication review process has been corrupted and that information has been disclosed by persons other than those properly involved in reviewing the manuscript,” attorney Charles J. Cooper said in a prepared statement.

https://nypost.com/2020/01/27/bolton-lawyer-implies-that-white-house-leaked-book-manuscript/

The whole QPQ scam is unraveling. Bolton is the latest to fess up and tell the truth - and save himself a jail sentence. Pompeo is having rage fits because he knows he's now in the crosshairs. Mulvaney and Barr are scared stiff they'll be next.

Expect one or more of the Trump crime cabal to jump ship and join Bolton on the truth telling tour...those that don't, like the Dimwit, seal their doom - just like Manafort, Gates, Cohen, Flynn, Stone, etc....

2 ( +6 / -4 )

They did. that’s why you didn’t see so many people falling asleep and walking around. 

The GOP senators have a problem understanding facts and you are proud of that , ROFL.

No wonder the GOP leaders ask their followers to give up on education.

Obama was caught on a hot mic with Medvedev and?

Do continue, because there was nothing wrong in what was said, other than the fact that he would help stop the war with Russia.

Given what the senior officers have been trying to do to him, don’t blame him.

All the senior officers have been trying to do is defend the country against a Russian puppet, Donny!!

Don't worry Americans will not forget how the GOP enabled Donny to sell off the country....

We said the same about Harry Reid as well.

Yawn......

3 ( +7 / -4 )

And the nightmares for Trump and the Trumpers have just started...

Why?

Just a few weeks ago you were praising Bolton - he was your hero - and you admitted how much you admire him and other NEOCONs...

Two other Trumpers here have called Bolton a liar and scum - do you agree?

4 ( +8 / -4 )

I disagree, Trump’s defense saved the entire Senate from constant repetitive testimonies on cherry-picked one-sided facts and allegations by getting to the point, staying on point.

Someone afraid of the evidence.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

You already had enough evidence. It’s overwhelming! So based on what was submitted to support impeachment, they are trying that case. If you want a redo, then impeach again.

-6 ( +3 / -9 )

You already had enough evidence. It’s overwhelming! So based on what was submitted to support impeachment, they are trying that case. If you want a redo, then impeach again

Thats not how the process works.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

The line of people claiming quid pro quo just got longer. Gotta hand it to Bolton for knowing how to turn the screws to this president. Masterful.

Will it change the GOP's position? Of course not. They're trying to cover up for the President and they're all in. They will continue to humiliate themselves in the name of the documented scan artist and pathological liar. It's just who they are.

5 ( +9 / -4 )

I'm excited for certain posters here, after months of saying they love Bolton, that they always have, that they always will, say he's a dirty rat and a traitor and they never trusted him. Really excited.

7 ( +11 / -4 )

The whole QPQ scam is unraveling.

What QPQ? You mean according to the House Dems witnesses of “I think, I’m not sure, possibly, perhaps” here say, yeah, good luck with that.

Bolton is the latest to fess up and tell the truth

What truth? He has a book to sell just right before this farce was going to wrap up, a man that also has a close relationship with Romney....hmmmm

- and save himself a jail sentence. Pompeo is having rage fits because he knows he's now in the crosshairs.

I remember Rice, Holder and a certain woman having fits, even saying when our ambassador died what difference does it make.”

Mulvaney and Barr are scared stiff they'll be next. 

As is Hunter, Joe and E...,I mean, the whistleblower.

Expect one or more of the Trump crime cabal to jump ship and join Bolton on the truth telling tour...those that don't, like the Dimwit, seal their doom - just like Manafort, Gates, Cohen, Flynn, Stone, etc....

As of now, probably not, unless Schumer will allow one of ours for one of theirs.

-4 ( +5 / -9 )

The GOP senators have a problem understanding facts and you are proud of that , ROFL.

No wonder the GOP leaders ask their followers to give up on education.

The House Democrats had No facts. Hearsay and probabilities don’t amount to facts.

Do continue, because there was nothing wrong in what was said,

and there was nothing wrong with Trump saying what he said trying to get dirt on the political rival, the Democrats and even Republicans at the same thing on him.

other than the fact that he would help stop the war with Russia.

Which the previous administration did not do and didn’t even try to do it, shame on them for leaving an ally..

All the senior officers have been trying to do is defend the country against a Russian puppet, Donny!!

Ahhh, so you’re basically saying, we don’t need a President and therefore, why do we need to even vote, we should just vote the military in as the executive power branch.

Don't worry Americans will not forget how the GOP enabled Donny to sell off the country....

We didn’t either with what the Dems have been doing, really.

-4 ( +5 / -9 )

The House Democrats had No facts. Hearsay and probabilities don’t amount to facts.

You clearly don’t understand the rules of evidence. Hearsay can be a fact.

It’s so strange that anybody would be against witnesses in a trial to determine whether the president should be removed from office. Only partisan hacks that don’t care about our country are against witnesses.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

“I think, I’m not sure, possibly, perhaps”

Huh? Sondland laughed and said of course everyone knew it was QPQ. Taylor flat out said QPQ was going on directly to the Ukrainians.

What truth? He has a book to sell just right before this farce was going to wrap up

So why not come out with a bombshell saying everything the Dems are claiming is not true? It would have buried them. Seems he would have sold a serious number of books to Trump fans like yourself.

As of now, probably not, unless Schumer will allow one of ours for one of theirs.

I don't think you understand how much the Dems would support that. You get Hunter Biden and we get Bolton. That's more than a fair trade to me as no one really cares about Biden.

5 ( +8 / -3 )

Why are you afraid of the evidence?

I’m not. So why are you Democrats afraid of allowing the buying to speak or the whistleblower?

"Ours"? I thought you were an independent, not a Republican.

I am, so back on topic.

-8 ( +2 / -10 )

We sure will! It's going to be glorious!

Even if Trump loses at the ballot he won't leave anyway, so he will continue to be president. Trump will stay no matter what. He will call his defeat fake news.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

The House Democrats had No facts.

Don't believe everything Faux tells you, truth is just an inconvenience for them and bigotry a virtue!!

and there was nothing wrong with Trump saying what he said trying to get dirt on the political rival, 

Its good you have accepted that the only thing Donny wanted from Ukraine was dirt on his rival, and it's a crime.

Ahhh, so you’re basically saying, we don’t need a President 

Reading and comprehension issues I see!!

However we do need a President, one who works for America not Russia.

We didn’t either with what the Dems have been doing, really.

Yawn......

2 ( +6 / -4 )

You clearly don’t understand the rules of evidence. Hearsay can be a fact. 

In theory, but it’s not going to hold up. Again, based on that, he’s not going anywhere.

Anyway, it’s not going to be a one witness and Republicans get nothing, the Democrats have to give up something or did not get here from Bolton or Mulvaney.

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

Whether Biden committed a crime or not and there seems to be no evidence that he did, does not excuse Trump from committing his crimes and there seems to be sufficient evidence he did.

The impeachment isn't about Biden or anyone else, it's about President Trump using his authority and office for personal gain over an election candidate.

If Biden committed a crime then he should be charged.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

 Why would we want to hear from the Bidens?

To hear them try to deny their corruption.

If you want a redo, then impeach again.

Oh, no doubt, the Dems will impeach him forever again and again the next 4 years if they keep the House.

Instead of wasting time on this ridiculous impeachment trial we should be focusing on matters that are important like putting people in jail who illegally spied on the president for instance.

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

Me, 10:26am:

I'm excited for certain posters here, after months of saying they love Bolton, that they always have, that they always will, say he's a dirty rat and a traitor and they never trusted him. Really excited.

Bass4funk, 10:27am:

Bolton is the latest to fess up and tell the truth

What truth? He has a book to sell just right before this farce was going to wrap up, a man that also has a close relationship with Romney....hmmmm

This is too easy.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

Oh, no doubt, the Dems will impeach him forever again and again the next 4 years if they keep the House.

Trump will continue even after the next 4 years, no worries about that.

who illegally spied on the president for instance.

That's on Trump. He hired Barr to go after Hillary, Obama, and the rest but no arrests. Again, Trump won't leave office no matter what so no need to worry - even if he loses election since there is a lot of voter fraud.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

bass4funk

and there was nothing wrong with Trump saying what he said trying to get dirt on the political rival, the Democrats and even Republicans at the same thing on him.

Then you are admitting Trump did wrong which is why he is impeached.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

Now turns on his hero...and calls him a liar and a RINO...

Trump-world in a nutshell - yesterday an "icon of conservatism", today a "lying rat"...

So. who will it be tomorrow? And the day after....and the day after that....

Ok, so just liberal talking and no facts...typical. Stay tuned for acquittal and liberal meltdown to follow.

Whether Biden committed a crime or not and there seems to be no evidence that he did,

As with Trump, pheeew!

The impeachment isn't about Biden or anyone else, it's about President Trump using his authority and office for personal gain over an election candidate. 

And the Democrats still didn’t make a case, that is the reason why they had to repeat the same hearsay points over and over around seven times, but I do like what Alan Dershowitz said just a few moments ago.

"It follows from this that if a president, any president were to have done what the Times reported about the content of the Bolton manuscript, that would not constitute an impeachable offense."

Too easy.

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

Trump will continue even after the next 4 years, no worries about that.... Trump won't leave office no matter what so no need to worry

You really do believe that conspiracy theory, don't you?

- even if he loses election since there is a lot of voter fraud.

So you're saying that there are going to be a lot of fradulent votes for the Dem candidate. Hmmm, maybe we had better do something about that!

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

You really do believe that conspiracy theory, don't you?

No conspiracy, there is proof. But this proof should please the Trump people, and what's the problem with that. It's better than a Liberal being in the WH. Because if that happens the economy will crash down.

So you're saying that there are going to be a lot of fradulent votes for the Dem candidate.

Remember, Trump said 10 million people fraudulently voted for Hillary - not me. Trump still won, but there is a danger he might lost next time due to voter fraud. Trump will not leave even if he loses. Trump will stay in office. It should please Trump people.

PROOF:

"He's now president for life. President for life. No, he's great," Trump said at the time. "And look, he was able to do that. I think it's great. Maybe we'll have to give that a shot some day."

(Trump/news source)

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Alan Dershowitz is not a judge. He also said Epstein was innocent.

It only needs four republicans to support the impeachment so nothing is a done deal yet.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

The release of the facts on Trump committing his crime didn't come from Biden but from the whistleblower who's ID is protected by law.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

He also said Epstein was innocent.

If he was Epstein's attorney (was he?) they that would have been his job. But if not then....I don't know what to say about that. Maybe it would be to attract clients like Trump.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Two of the lawyers on President Donald Trump’s impeachment defense team have shared another client: Alan Dershowitz and Ken Starr both helped the late hedge fund manager and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein win a lenient sentence for abusing underaged girls.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

You really do believe that conspiracy theory, don't you?

No conspiracy, there is proof.

Yeah, just like Schiff had proof of Trump-Russia collusion. Oh, wait, he didn't.

Thread will soon close.

Yeah, isn't that a pain in the ass? What good is posting articles on a discussion site if debate is shut off after a few hours?

Oh my...

Tucker: John Bolton has always been a snake

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q61DOWIZeUA

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

Yeah, just like Schiff had proof of Trump-Russia collusion. Oh, wait, he didn't.

The president can be impeached for jay-walking. The impeachment depends on the economy and politics (like if Trump's people in states like Mississippi, Alabama, South Carolina, and Kentucky turn against him that could be a problem for Trump). Look at Clinton (good economy) vs. Nixon (bad economy). But again, if Trump is voted to be removed from office or defeated in election he won't move an inch. Again, what's the problem? Why complain?

0 ( +3 / -3 )

@bass,

......  Biden’s, Schiff and even the Whistleblower could be summoned to testify .....

keep on dreaming.

At least Biden and Schiff got nothing to do with the impeachment process of Trump.

At least not in reference to the accusations brought up against Donnie.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Some Trump supporters are confused over the impeachment. Trump was charged because of his own actions, not because of any actions by others. Even if Biden was guilty of something does not make Trump innocent. They are separate issues.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

It's a lawyer's job to say his or her client didn't do it. If I were in legal criminal trouble I would love to have the financial resources to hire OJ's lawyers.

It is also the president's job to leave office when he/she is politically required to do so, but Trump will never leave.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

bass: So why are you Democrats afraid of allowing the buying to speak or the whistleblower?

Well obviously because the goal would be to intimidate the whistleblower, make their identity known which would open them up to death threats from Trump nutters, and discourage others for coming forward. The whistleblower's complaint was marked as credible and urgent by an independent 3rd party. No bullying allowed as much as you'd like it.

And the Democrats still didn’t make a case, that is the reason why they had to repeat the same hearsay points over and over around seven times

You yourself said he used poor judgement and acted inappropriately, and that he was guilty but it didn't rise to the level of impeachment. Sounds like you're modifying your position?

Serrano: To hear them try to deny their corruption.

OK, so Hunter takes the stand and denies his corruption. Then what? Did you have something else to ask him as you have no actual evidence of wrongdoing, or will the one question suffice?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Bolton has always been a bit of an egocentric nutjob.  I wouldn't believe all he says or writes.  The whole basis for this "trial" is silly and contrived.  Whatever the aid to Ukraine deal was.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Some Trump supporters are confused over the impeachment. Trump was charged because of his own actions, not because of any actions by others.

If anyone is confuse it’s the Democrats and the flimsy case I’m basically trying to take the president down from making a stupid phone call

Even if Biden was guilty of something does not make Trump innocent.

Nor does it make Trump guilty. Anyway, he won’t be convicted or removed, so I’m happy.

But as you say, liberals should separate the issues.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

Blacklabel: Yep the same intel agencies that just leaked Bolton’s book that has classified material in it to be reviewed.

There's been no evidence there is any classified materials in it nor is there any evidence that classified material was leaked. You're making this up out of thin air.

The book is going to released in just over a month anyway. Good luck with your leak investigation while Trump's world burns.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

trying to take the president down from making a stupid phone call

Plus a half dozen diplomats, Mulvaney, and now your hero Bolton. I give you credit for forcing the evidence out of your mind personally but it doesn't change the fact it still exists for everyone else.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

The elephant in the room on Day 2 of Trump's defense arguments was John Bolton, the former national security adviser whose unpublished book manuscript, according to the New York Times, included disclosures that go to the heart of the abuse of power charge against Trump.

What? Another last minute, unauthorized, leak aimed at their opponents? Isn't that a Democrat Party specialty? And the Democrat's pet news media, and pundits, are busy assuming as fast as possible. Why am I not shocked?

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

Another last minute, unauthorized, leak aimed at their opponents? Isn't that a Democrat Party specialty?

Right, like the time Wikileaks leaked sensitive Democratic info right before the last election, all coordinated with Roger Stone. Typical Dem specialty. And like how Comey, a Republican, announced they were reopening the Clinton investigation. Typical Dems.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

What? Another last minute, unauthorized, leak aimed at their opponents?

Sure makes your guys attempted cover-up and obstruction to Bolton's testimony look bad.

I mean, he's come out and said the president is guilty, and you guys are finding excuses to not have him testify.

I wonder why hmmm?

Oh my.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Well obviously because the goal would be to intimidate the whistleblower, make their identity known which would open them up to death threats from Trump nutters, and discourage others for coming forward.

We don’t know that, you can’t possibly say or know that, but what you can’t say is without a doubt that the president has the absolute right to meet his accuser and shifty shift and the other Democrats are not allowing him or his lawyers to get anywhere near this guy and we all know who this guy is, let’s not beat around the bush here. But if the Democrats want to seriously go down this road, then they can expect pushback from the Republicans and if they refuse then they can equilibrium fuse to allow Bolton or Mulvaney to testify.

The whistleblower's complaint was marked as credible and urgent by an independent 3rd party. No bullying allowed as much as you'd like it.

Even the whistleblower said that he had no concrete evidence of any wrongdoing, just only going by hearsay is secondhand information, what are you talking about? And let’s not forget, this is a partisan impeachment and Nancy said, she wants this to be fair and in order to impeach the President it needs a bipartisan support and it does it, but that didn’t stop the desperate Democrats, did it?

You yourself said he used poor judgement and acted inappropriately,

Yes, but as Dershowitz said it doesn’t rise to the level of impeachment, so now you have one of the smartest legal minds in the country and a very deep loyal liberal and Hillary supporter throwing it right back in the Democrats face..

OK, so Hunter takes the stand and denies his corruption. Then what?

Ok, Bolton says there was a QPQ, Trump still won’t get convicted or removed because there was No evidence of a crime committed.

Anything else, sir?

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

Alan Dershowitz, a life long democrat who voted for Mrs. Bill Clinton, completely blew the case for the Schumer-Schiff sham impeachment totally out of the water.

Game, set, match.

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

What? Another last minute, unauthorized, leak aimed at their opponents?

It's the nature of the prosecution beast. Need to live with it. Prosecutors often have many bullets at their disposal. And more than likely more to come.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Bass: but what you can’t say is without a doubt that the president has the absolute right to meet his accuser

In this situation I can definitively say Trump has no absolute right to meet his accuser. Besides, what's your goal here? To find some technicality that suddenly makes all of the evidence against Trump disappear? No. You want revenge so you want the whistleblower exposed. You won't get it.

Even the whistleblower said that he had no concrete evidence of any wrongdoing, just only going by hearsay is secondhand information, what are you talking about?

The complaint went to a Trump appointed IG who deemed it credible and relevant as part of a clearly defined process. The end. You lose.

Yes, but as Dershowitz said it doesn’t rise to the level of impeachment

Great, but I already know Dershowitz's opinion. Both of them, the one when he wasn't on Trump's payroll and the new one on Trump's payroll. But what's your opinion? Innocent? Or guilty but not impeachable?

Ok, Bolton says there was a QPQ, Trump still won’t get convicted or removed because there was No evidence of a crime committed.

Except the diplomats, Mulvaney, and now your hero Bolton. You must either believe that they all got it wrong or they all are secretly working against Trump (the victim). Which is it?

1 ( +4 / -3 )

If anyone is confuse it’s the Democrats and the flimsy case I’m basically trying to take the president down from making a stupid phone call

The President of the United States of America never makes a "stupid phone call".

I’m basically trying to take the president down

???

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

To hear them try to deny their corruption.

Because the Bidens did nothing wrong, they were never charged.

Donny let his rabid pooch Rudy let loose in Ukraine and the only thing he managed to get done was open an investigation on himself.

And the path of calling Biden's son to trial is one Donny better not go down on.

Bart Sr and Jr along with baby Ivanka are deep in whit of their own making , so if daddy wants to keep them out of prison he'd better choose carefully what he wants to do.

Donny might not care about Bart sr and jr, he might care for Ivanka though....

0 ( +2 / -2 )

nishikat - It's the nature of the prosecution beast. Need to live with it. Prosecutors often have many bullets at their disposal. And more than likely more to come.

It's also unverified. Some news media outlet publishes an opinion piece, and other news media outlets pretend that it's true. Again.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

In this situation I can definitively say Trump has no absolute right to meet his accuser.

Because you say so? I see.

Besides, what's your goal here?

No goal, just the facts and the facts are: Trump won’t be convicted or removed. So it really doesn’t matter what the Dems do, it’s going to happen, squirm if you guys like.

The complaint went to a Trump appointed IG who deemed it credible and relevant as part of a clearly defined process. The end. You lose.

Doesn’t mean a crime was committed and as we have learned over the last 3 days, the Dems really have nothing but assumptions and second hand information.

Great, but I already know Dershowitz's opinion. Both of them, the one when he wasn't on Trump's payroll and the new one on Trump's payroll.

Yes and we know Nadler’s and Schiff’s opinions as well.

But what's your opinion? Innocent? Or guilty but not impeachable?

I think the President made a somewhat poor judgement, but do I think it’s impeachable, definitely not.

Except the diplomats, Mulvaney, and now your hero Bolton. You must either believe that they all got it wrong or they all are secretly working against Trump (the victim). Which is it?

I Think as much as I like Bolton, but he is and was part of the neocon nation that believes we should stay in these endless wars and Trump was a vessel for that or so he hoped, but since Trump’s been trying to get out and Bolton tried to undermine him, Trump gave him the walking papers and that tIcked him off.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Trump wants to meet his accuser.

Does that mean Trump wants to attend the impeachment hearings?

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Because the Bidens did nothing wrong, they were never charged.

We shall see or maybe we won’t, depends on the Democrats and the the GOP can cross examine him and we shall see.

Donny let his rabid pooch Rudy let loose in Ukraine and the only thing he managed to get done was open an investigation on himself.

Oh, yeah...

https://www.middletownpress.com/middletown/article/CT-U-S-Attorney-Durham-s-Ukraine-probe-could-14481202.php

And the path of calling Biden's son to trial is one Donny better not go down on.

Or the Democrats and Biden...both of them...

Bart Sr and Jr along with baby Ivanka are deep in whit of their own making , so if daddy wants to keep them out of prison he'd better choose carefully what he wants to do.

Donny might not care about Bart sr and jr, he might care for Ivanka though....

Huh?

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Does that mean Trump wants to attend the impeachment hearings?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YaSs9z8e6YI

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Without a doubt, I can say that the president does not have the absolute right to meet his accuser.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

bass4funkToday 08:05 am JSTThe best the Democrats can do is to expose this senate for what it is, the president's own personal kangaroo court. We'll see how this plays out in November at the ballot box.

1998 was the same kangaroo court.

The Clinton impeachment was kangaroo to the extreme. It was over some stupid sex acts by stupid people and pornography was in the papers, TV and radio. It was disgusting and it showed just how many sickos there are in America.

Trump is much worse. He's committing serious crimes and he wasn't even elected in the first place. He's committing treason.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

I Think as much as I like Bolton, but he is and was part of the neocon nation

That you love. You've said on multiple occasions that you love neoconservatism and Bolton in particular. But now that he's turned against daddy you've gotten upset.

Real conservatives have opinions and views that they stick to no matter what. GOP shills do and say whatever their master tells them. Repulsive.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Bass: Because you say so? I see.

Deflection.

No goal, just the facts and the facts are: Trump won’t be convicted or removed. So it really doesn’t matter what the Dems do, it’s going to happen, squirm if you guys like.

Deflection.

Doesn’t mean a crime was committed 

Deflection.

I think the President made a somewhat poor judgement, but do I think it’s impeachable, definitely not.

Then why do you keep arguing above evidence when clearly you see something he did wrong?

I Think as much as I like Bolton, but he is and was part of the neocon nation that believes we should stay in these endless wars

You supported Bolton but didn't support endless wars? Fascinating since he opts for military conflict each and every time.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

SuperLib - In this situation I can definitively say Trump has no absolute right to meet his accuser. Besides, what's your goal here? To find some technicality that suddenly makes all of the evidence against Trump disappear?

Everyone has a right to face their accuser. And in this case, the accuser is Schiff. I want to know to what extent the whistleblower, and Schiff and/or Schiff's staff, COLLUDED over the claims they made against the Republican candidate who was responsible for Hillary's 2nd failed attempt to become POTUS.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Ulysses - Because the Bidens did nothing wrong, they were never charged.

The Bidens were never investigated. Joe forced the removal of the prosecutor before the company who had hired Hunter could be investigated.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

arrestpaul: Everyone has a right to face their accuser.

Trump doesn't have this right in this situation. Get over it.

And in this case, the accuser is Schiff. I want to know to what extent the whistleblower, and Schiff and/or Schiff's staff, COLLUDED over the claims they made against the Republican candidate

And then the toothpaste will be back in the tube? All the evidence against Trump will vanish? Let's be real. The only reason why you want to explore this stupid crap is because you want to be able to say it was a setup as a response to 100% of the accusations against Trump. That's it. And you're desperate for it.

who was responsible for Hillary's 2nd failed attempt to become POTUS.

Second post. Right on time with the cut and paste.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

The Bidens were never investigated.

Neither were you. That's because, like you, there is no evidence of anything to begin an investigation.

Joe forced the removal of the prosecutor before the company who had hired Hunter could be investigated.

There's a tiny, tiny sliver of people in this world who believe that. Everyone else wanted the prosecutor gone and supported Biden's decision. If I'm wrong, produce some articles from that time that criticized him. You won't find it since it's a recently manufactured position by Trump to justify going after Biden politically.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Bolton says there was a QPQ, Trump still won’t get convicted or removed because there was No evidence of a crime committed.

I think you're a bit confused.

Trump still won’t get convicted or removed, but not because there was no evidence of a crime committed, but because the Republican senators have already admitted they have no intention of listening to or being influenced by clear evidence of a crime committed.

It's a shameful tactic that might 'save' the Chosen One in the short term, but one that will ensure the Republican party of 2020 will go down in history as being spineless, venal and unpatriotic.

Invalid CSRF

2 ( +5 / -3 )

For any investigation there must be initial evidence of wrong doings.

The republican senators will base their verdicts on political standings and not on the evidence. Judge and jury are suppose to remain neutral and just look at the evidence.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

SuperLib - And then the toothpaste will be back in the tube? All the evidence against Trump will vanish?

That is the House Democrats biggest failure. Repeatedly claiming that they have actual evidence, but being unable to actually provide any. The toothpaste has landed all over Pelosi's, Schiff's, and Nadler's shoes. Opinions are not evidence, rumors are not evidence, unverified claims are not evidence. House Democrats failed to make a credible case for impeachment, and have been begging Senate Republicans to make their case for them.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Without a doubt, I can say that the president does not have the absolute right to meet his accuser.

Well, there goes Bolton, too bad.

The Clinton impeachment was kangaroo to the extreme.

I agree as this one is far worse

Trump is much worse. He's committing serious crimes and he wasn't even elected in the first place. He's committing treason.

What? Oh, lol!

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

SuperLib - Everyone else wanted the prosecutor gone and supported Biden's decision.

Joe Biden's decision to do what? Remove the prosecutor who was investigating the actions of the company who had hired Hunter?

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Then why do you keep arguing above evidence when clearly you see something he did wrong?

Because it’s not impeachable.

You supported Bolton but didn't support endless wars? Fascinating since he opts for military conflict each and every time.

What’s more interesting is how the liberals are now worshipping Bolton, funny.

Clinton shouldn't have done what he did. It was power abuse and sexual abuse.

Still theHouse Republicans felt he needed to be impeached, their constitutional right.

The press' treatment of Lewinsky was criminal. A stronger man would have resigned and let Al Gore assume the Presidency.

ROFL! Thank God that didn’t happen, dodged that bullet!

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

I think you're a bit confused.

Not when it comes to US politics.

Trump still won’t get convicted or removed, but not because there was no evidence of a crime committed, but because the Republican senators have already admitted they have no intentionof listening to or being influenced by clear evidence of a crime committed.

Like with Clinton, ok.

It's a shameful tactic that might 'save' the Chosen One in the short term, but one that will ensure the Republican party of 2020 will go down in history as being spineless, venal and unpatriotic.

Liberals might say that, I did in 1999 as well.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

Superlib:

Everyone else wanted the prosecutor gone and supported Biden's decision.

Who is everyone else? The Clinton and the Biden clan (with the sun getting 80,000 USD/month for the hard work of.... being Bidens son? Yes, sure they did. People who wanted Berisma corruption investigated? No, they did not.

If "pressuring a foreign government" or some such is such an issue, the you can not get a clearer example for that than "in 6 hours I am out of here" Biden.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

SuperLib - Trump doesn't have this right in this situation. Get over it.

The voting public has a right to hear exactly how team Schiff colluded with the whistleblower. And the House Democrats extremely biased, and political, and weak impeachment case against the Republican who prevented Hillary from becoming POTUS continues on it's merry way. Now it includes rumors of something Bolton may, or may not, have written.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

The president can be impeached for jay-walking

Kind of diminishes the meaning of impeaching, doesn't it?

Trump still won’t get convicted or removed, but not because there was no evidence of a crime committed, but because the Republican senators have already admitted they have no intention of listening to or being influenced by clear evidence of a crime committed.

There is no evidence of a crime here. Asking the newly elected president of a country infested with rampant corruption to look into it is not a crime.

As you so often say, Invalid CSRF.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

The voting public has a right to hear exactly how team Schiff colluded with the whistleblower.

Nah. We'll pass on your unsubstantiated conspiracy theory. Get over it.

Hillary from becoming POTUS 

Twice already?

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Nah. We'll pass on your unsubstantiated conspiracy theory. Get over it.

Bye, bye Bolton

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

SuperLib - Nah. We'll pass on your unsubstantiated conspiracy theory. Get over it.

"We'll pass"? Who do you believe you represent, besides yourself?

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

arrestpaul, you're free to believe whatever theory you want. I really don't care. The evidence is out there regardless of what you think about Schiff personally.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

bass4funk, April 20, 2019:

Wish Bolton would run for President! Love that man! I totally agree,

bass4funk, today:

Bye, bye Bolton

Pick one.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

So you think he did something wrong but it's not impeachable.

I’m sorry, he’s already impeached, let me rephrase that, he just won’t be removed or convicted.

What's more interesting is how the conservatives. Check mate.

Check mate? Sorry, looks like you guys are gonna be stuck with Trump for another 4 more years.

Now we can say, Checkmate

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

SuperLib - So you think he did something wrong but it's not impeachable.

House Democrats only filed two charges of impeachment. One suggests that anyone who dares to challenge a U.S. House "committee's" subpoena is automatically guilty of obstruction. That one is dead on arrival. The other suggests that the phrase "do us a favor" means the President, and not the U.S.A.. While debatable in a lame, politically biased, sort of way, it's not an impeachable offense.

Democrats, and Hillary-worshippers, are becoming more, and more, desperate to call more witnesses in the vain hope of proving either charge, but need to limit any witnesses to only those who will help the House Democrats PR campaign to overturn the 2016 Presidential election.

If Pelosi, Nadler, and Schiff really want more witlesses, they should probably start over in the House, and do a proper job this time.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

SuperLib - arrestpaul, you're free to believe whatever theory you want. I really don't care. The evidence is out there regardless of what you think about Schiff personally.

Of course you care. That's why you reply. It's what the internet is all about - bringing people together.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

bass4funk

Check mate? Sorry, looks like you guys are gonna be stuck with Trump for another 4 more years.

Probably not. He won't be removed by the Senate he will be removed by the electoral college. The Senate can't do it, but the public know that how Moscow Mitch handled this impeachment is a sham.

In no other impeachment trial has the Senate tried to hide evidence. MM has and if there isn't a vote to get Bolton to be a witness, that won't matter. Bolon will publish his book. Game Over.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Probably not. He won't be removed by the Senate he will be removed by the electoral college.

In exchange for a socialist? Definitely not Biden, even the Dems admitted the other day they’re worried if Sanders or Warren would get the nomination because they know Trump would demolish them.

The Senate can't do it, but the public know that how Moscow Mitch handled this impeachment is a sham.

Going to be difficult with a booming economy, very, very difficult. When you got something good, you don’t want to give it up even if you might think it’s bad for you.

In no other impeachment trial has the Senate tried to hide evidence.

We never had corrupt Democrats that used or rather misused their power to lie and to impeach this President on the flimsiest of lack of evidence and try and overturn an election of a President that was duly elected by the people.

MM has and if there isn't a vote to get Bolton to be a witness, that won't matter. Bolon will publish his book. Game Over.

Not if he’s blocked and the Senate won’t do what the House wants because they have a child like tantrum, if Bolton goes, Biden, Schiff or the whistleblower needs to be called out, McConnell won’t accept anything else.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

The president can be impeached for jay-walking

Schiff: My best friend's sister's boyfriend's brother's girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid who witnessed the president jay-walking across Pennsylvania Ave. He must be removed from office!

0 ( +3 / -3 )

even the Dems admitted the other day they’re worried if Sanders or Warren would get the nomination because they know Trump would demolish them.

Yeah, that never happened.

I mean, I'm sure you guys are saying it happened in the bubble, but yeah, that never happened.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Schiff: My best friend's sister's boyfriend's brother's girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid who witnessed the president jay-walking across Pennsylvania Ave. He must be removed from office!

Pubs: This guy got oral sex. Oral sex! He must be removed from office. How dare he.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

bass4funk

In exchange for a socialist? Definitely not Biden, even the Dems admitted the other day they’re worried if Sanders or Warren would get the nomination because they know Trump would demolish them.

Interesting that they are polling better than him.

Going to be difficult with a booming economy, very, very difficult. When you got something good, you don’t want to give it up even if you might think it’s bad for you.

True. If it's still booming then...

We never had corrupt Democrats that used or rather misused their power to lie and to impeach this President on the flimsiest of lack of evidence and try and overturn an election of a President that was duly elected by the people.

Actually, it's very strong evidence. To say it's not is self-delusion, or self-preservation if you blindly follow Trump.

Not if he’s blocked and the Senate won’t do what the House wants because they have a child like tantrum, if Bolton goes, Biden, Schiff or the whistleblower needs to be called out, McConnell won’t accept anything else.

The vote will be on whether relevant evidence from Bolton will be allowed. Testimony from irrelevant witnesses is not required. Moscow Mitch may try that, but the public aren't stupid. It would be worse for the GOP if Moscow Mitch denies the Senate to look at the truth.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Yeah, that never happened.

It did.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/anxiety-rises-among-democrats-worried-about-partys-prospects-in-2020/2019/10/22/b9c015d4-f4d9-11e9-8cf0-4cc99f74d127_story.html

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/27/democrats-bernie-sanders-rise-105825

Uh-oh....

I mean, I'm sure you guys are saying it happened in the bubble, but yeah, that never happened.

Coming from the people thinking they can get the President convicted and removed. Lol

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

It did.

... he claims, while providing an article that doesn't substantiate his claims.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites