Senate Impeachment Hearings

[coorslite21]

1 hour ago, Shabibilicious said:

News

Manchin proposes lesser punishment of censure for Trump

By Burgess Everett

,

Politico•February 3, 2020

 

 

 

Manchin proposes lesser punishment of censure for Trump

More

Sen. Joe Manchin is floating the less severe punishment of censure of President Donald Trump’s conduct, although the West Virginia Democrat acknowledges it’s unlikely to go anywhere with the GOP.

In a floor speech on Monday, Manchin said he remains undecided on whether to vote to convict or acquit Trump of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress and said “what the president did was wrong” in soliciting foreign intervention against Joe Biden and delaying Ukraine aid.

But Manchin also said that with no path to 67 votes for removing Trump from office, a bipartisan rebuke would be more effective than a partisan vote.

“I do believe a bipartisan majority of this body would vote to censure President Trump for his action in this matter. Censure would allow this body to unite across party lines,” Manchin said. “Censure would allow a bipartisan statement condemning his unacceptable behavior in the strongest terms.”

Afterward in an interview, Manchin said he’s been talking to Senate Republicans and “trying for a while” to generate support system" rel="">support for censure. But he acknowledged that the GOP won’t go for it.

“They’ve shut it down I guess, as I understand it,” Manchin said. “It’s a shame.”

 

 

https://news.yahoo.com/manchin-proposes-lesser-punishment-censure-221350568.html

 

GO RV, then BV

 

Never gonna happen......not this late in the game......as Pelosi crowed......Trump will be impeached forever.......and Acquitted forever as well.....there was one voice of reason in Congress in December calling for censure instead of impeachment.....and that might have slid by in a bipartisan vote......but hey.....HRC says she's just a Russian asset......so never mind the common sense...

CL

ABCNews

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard calls for President Trump's censure

By Beatrice PetersonDec 18, 2019, 2:18 AM ET

 

WATCH: The House Judiciary Committee approved two articles of impeachment on Friday against President Donald Trump.

Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard is calling for President Donald Trump's censure on the eve a full House vote Wednesday on the articles of impeachment.

 

The resolution, which Gabbard planned to introduce late Tuesday, suggests that the president put personal political gain over national interest.

Gabbard has said she remains undecided on impeachment.

Democratic presidential candidate U.S. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard listens as family members of victims of the terrorist attacks on 9/11 speak during a news conference at the 9/11 Tribute Museum, Oct. 29, 2019, in New York.

"I'm taking this time for myself to be able to review everything that's happened, all the information that's been put forward," Gabbard told a crowd at Furman University in Greenville, South Carolina, on Monday.

 

"And just all the factors that go into really trying to figure out what what is the best action to take for our country. And for democracy. It's not a simple or easy decision to make."

 

She is the only member of the House in the 2020 Democratic presidential field eligible to vote on Wednesday.

 

Although she remained undecided about impeachment, Gabbard told voters, “I think it's really important that every member of congress cast their vote based on what's in the best interest of the country rather than based on political implications.”

In recent months she has gained support across the ideological spectrum, including Republican, libertarian and independent voters, as well as Democrats.

 

The former vice chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, said she’s focused on making the right decision, instead of the decision that might turn away the least amount of voters that she’s garnered this election cycle.

 

“Throughout my political life, I have always done my best to make decisions and cast votes based on what I believe is the right thing to do," the Hawaiian congresswoman told reporters earlier this week. "Even when that decision causes political damage to my quote-unquote, you know, career reelection chances, that is not a factor for me in my decision-making process whatsoever."

 

[Shabibilicious]

Trump Supporters Upset He Won't Be Acquitted Before State Of The Union Address

 

Igor Bobic

HuffPostFebruary 3, 2020

 

Some Donald Trump supporters are peeved the president won’t be cleared of wrongdoing by the Senate before he walks into the House of Representatives on Tuesday to deliver his annual State of the Union address. 

“It’s unacceptable that they’re going to have [the Senate impeachment vote] the following day after his State of the Union. And you know what they’re going to do...They’re going to have a counter-narrative to everything the president says,” disgraced former White House strategist Steve Bannon complained Sunday in an interview on Fox News.

“If I was the president, I’d say, ‘Hey look. Let’s do it the following Tuesday, let’s do it the night of New Hampshire. I’ll address the nation and see how they like that,’” Bannon added in the interview.

Senate Republicans hoped to move to a quick acquittal vote after successfully blocking witnesses and other evidence from his trial on Friday ― the first time in history a presidential impeachment trial will not feature witnesses.

But Democrats successfully pushed to prolong the proceedings for several days in order to allow time for both the House impeachment managers and Trump’s defense team to give closing arguments and to allow all senators an opportunity to speak on the floor before a final vote on removal on Wednesday afternoon.

“We are in the minority, but we do have some power in the minority and we will use it to prevent things from just being truncated in the dark of night,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) told reporters on Friday before announcing a deal with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) that laid out the end of the trial.

U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) walk together prior to the resumption of the Senate impeachment trial of U.S. President Donald Trump at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, U.S., Jan. 31, 2020. (Photo: Brendan McDermid / Reuters)

The terms of the agreement, which Trump reportedly signed off on, mean that the president will deliver his State of the Union speech on Tuesday before he is almost certainly acquitted by the Senate the following day. The schedule has created anxiety among some Republican senators about whether Trump will address his impeachment standing before the assembled Congress and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who will be seated directly behind him.

The situation has left some Trump allies grumbling about Senate Republicans who agreed to the schedule, which they view as robbing the president of a golden opportunity to tout his acquittal not only during his State of the Union address, but also during the annual pre-Super Bowl interview that has become a tradition for recent presidents. 

Bannon agreed in his Fox News interview, saying Trump was “boxed in” by the schedule.

“Why in the world would the majority leader agree to run this thing through the State of the Union address?” Fox News host Lou Dobbs, a favorite of the president, asked last week.

Asked about the schedule on Sunday, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) acknowledged that Democrats stood in the way of a quick acquittal, attributing part of the reason to the Iowa caucuses on Monday.

“Well, the Democrats have the ability to drag out the trial. There was an agreement reached to do it Wednesday at 4 to allow some Democratic candidates to go to Iowa. I think that had a lot to do with it. But we’re going to turn the page on impeachment at 4 o’clock on Wednesday,” Graham said on Fox News.

The far-right outlet Gateway Pundit, however, pinned the blame on Senate Republicans for agreeing to the schedule.

“Once again the GOP let down President Trump. They could not let him have his VICTORY SPEECH at the State of the Union Address,” read a Sunday post on the website.

White House official Eric Ueland, meanwhile, attempted to cast the combination of the State of the Union and Trump’s acquittal in the Senate as a “happy coincidence” that will “launch the president into 2020.”

“You could argue that the State of the Union — that successful vision the president will layout — actually, occludes focus on impeachment,” Ueland said.

 

https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/trump-impeachment-sotu-235915869.html

 

GO RV, then BV

[bostonangler]

And now we know why he wouldn't testify under oath....

 

 

Trump contradicts his own denial and admits he sent Giuliani to Ukraine to dig dirt on political opponents

 

Donald Trump has admitted sending Rudy Giuliani to Ukraine to dig dirt on a political rival, openly contradicting his own denials on the subject during the impeachment inquiry, just days after being acquitted of all alleged crimes.

Mr Giuliani, the president’s personal lawyer, is at the centre of a web of shadowy efforts in Ukraine to persuade officials to investigate the Bidens, questions around which were key to the abuse of power charge on which Mr Trump was impeached by the House.

Mr Trump previously insisted he “didn’t direct” Mr Giuliani to do “anything” in Ukraine, suggesting the attorney was likely there on behalf of “other clients”.

But less than a week after his acquittal the president gave a very different response when asked in a podcast interview: “Was it strange to send Rudy Giuliani to Ukraine, your personal lawyer? Are you sorry you did that?”

“Not at all,” Mr Trump replied, in a brazen U-turn. “Rudy was a great crime fighter, you know that, maybe better than anybody. And Rudy is totally on his game.”

Speaking to Geraldo Rivera, Mr Trump then claimed he “used” Mr Giuliani in Ukraine, rather than more official channels such as the FBI because “they spied on my campaign” in 2016, also detailing his mistrust of former FBI director James Comey.

“So when you tell me, why did I use Rudy – and one of the things about Rudy – number one, he was one of the very best prosecutors, and the best mayor,” Mr Trump said.

“But also, other presidents had them … they all had lawyers … and they do things for them. It’s really circumventing – but very legally – and maybe getting things done faster.”

The president appears to have been emboldened by his acquittal in the Senate, after a trial that saw his Republican allies increasingly move away from denying he had done anything wrong to merely playing down the severity of his actions in outsourcing attacks on his political rivals to foreign nations.

He has embarked on a campaign of vengeance against those who he views as having wronged him during the impeachment proceedings, and – in a move reminiscent of dealings with Ukraine – appears to have openly boasted of offering New York governor Andrew Cuomo a deal on a state immigration law in return for dropping investigations into his finances and tax returns.

His new admission regarding Mr Giuliani aligns more closely with what he said during his infamous call with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky, which sparked the impeachment proceedings.

Transcripts, released by Mr Trump, showed him telling Mr Zelensky he would like him to speak with Mr Giuliani, while suggesting that he investigate Hunter Biden.

“I would like him to call you. I will ask him to call you along with the Attorney General,” Mr Trump said. “Rudy very much knows what’s happening and he is a very capable guy. If you could speak to him that would be great.”

Now he has admitted sending Mr Giuliani to Ukraine, it remains to be seen whether the president will row back on other claims of ignorance.

Perhaps most notably, indicted Giuliani associate Lev Parnas – a Ukrainian-born businessman – claims to have been part of Trump-ordered efforts to oust the US ambassador Marie Yovanovitch, who was seen as an obstacle to any probe into the Bidens.

Mr Parnas has claimed Mr Trump “knew exactly what was going on”.

But despite a trove of photographic evidence showing the pair together, Mr Trump strenuously denied knowing Mr Parnas, calling him a “con man” and saying: “I don’t know him at all … know nothing about him. I can only tell you this thing is a big hoax.”

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-contradicts-own-denial-admits-095009228.html

 

 

B/A

[coorslite21]

8 minutes ago, bostonangler said:

And now we know why he wouldn't testify under oath....

 

 

Trump contradicts his own denial and admits he sent Giuliani to Ukraine to dig dirt on political opponents

 

Donald Trump has admitted sending Rudy Giuliani to Ukraine to dig dirt on a political rival, openly contradicting his own denials on the subject during the impeachment inquiry, just days after being acquitted of all alleged crimes.

Mr Giuliani, the president’s personal lawyer, is at the centre of a web of shadowy efforts in Ukraine to persuade officials to investigate the Bidens, questions around which were key to the abuse of power charge on which Mr Trump was impeached by the House.

Mr Trump previously insisted he “didn’t direct” Mr Giuliani to do “anything” in Ukraine, suggesting the attorney was likely there on behalf of “other clients”.

But less than a week after his acquittal the president gave a very different response when asked in a podcast interview: “Was it strange to send Rudy Giuliani to Ukraine, your personal lawyer? Are you sorry you did that?”

“Not at all,” Mr Trump replied, in a brazen U-turn. “Rudy was a great crime fighter, you know that, maybe better than anybody. And Rudy is totally on his game.”

Speaking to Geraldo Rivera, Mr Trump then claimed he “used” Mr Giuliani in Ukraine, rather than more official channels such as the FBI because “they spied on my campaign” in 2016, also detailing his mistrust of former FBI director James Comey.

“So when you tell me, why did I use Rudy – and one of the things about Rudy – number one, he was one of the very best prosecutors, and the best mayor,” Mr Trump said.

“But also, other presidents had them … they all had lawyers … and they do things for them. It’s really circumventing – but very legally – and maybe getting things done faster.”

The president appears to have been emboldened by his acquittal in the Senate, after a trial that saw his Republican allies increasingly move away from denying he had done anything wrong to merely playing down the severity of his actions in outsourcing attacks on his political rivals to foreign nations.

He has embarked on a campaign of vengeance against those who he views as having wronged him during the impeachment proceedings, and – in a move reminiscent of dealings with Ukraine – appears to have openly boasted of offering New York governor Andrew Cuomo a deal on a state immigration law in return for dropping investigations into his finances and tax returns.

His new admission regarding Mr Giuliani aligns more closely with what he said during his infamous call with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky, which sparked the impeachment proceedings.

Transcripts, released by Mr Trump, showed him telling Mr Zelensky he would like him to speak with Mr Giuliani, while suggesting that he investigate Hunter Biden.

“I would like him to call you. I will ask him to call you along with the Attorney General,” Mr Trump said. “Rudy very much knows what’s happening and he is a very capable guy. If you could speak to him that would be great.”

Now he has admitted sending Mr Giuliani to Ukraine, it remains to be seen whether the president will row back on other claims of ignorance.

Perhaps most notably, indicted Giuliani associate Lev Parnas – a Ukrainian-born businessman – claims to have been part of Trump-ordered efforts to oust the US ambassador Marie Yovanovitch, who was seen as an obstacle to any probe into the Bidens.

Mr Parnas has claimed Mr Trump “knew exactly what was going on”.

But despite a trove of photographic evidence showing the pair together, Mr Trump strenuously denied knowing Mr Parnas, calling him a “con man” and saying: “I don’t know him at all … know nothing about him. I can only tell you this thing is a big hoax.”

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-contradicts-own-denial-admits-095009228.html

 

 

B/A

 

Guess it's perception.....your head line says "digging up dirt".

 

Perhaps it would be better stated to say he was trying to uncover the truth on the political corruption in the Ukraine.....especially that corruption where US citizens are involved.......and then learning why the Obama DOJ and MSM seem so intent on covering it all up.....

 

To me that has a little more common sense for a headline.

CL

[Indraman]

Joe Manchin, who voted to oust Trump, says he may endorse his reelection

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/joe-manchin-says-despite-vote-to-convict-trump-he-could-endorse-his-reelection-everybody-can-change

 

I sat that you are intellectually inept to have just voted to remove the POTUS through Impeachment, and now want to ride his coat tails in the upcoming 2020 Election (LANDSLIDE). But most politicians will do and say anything to stay in power.

 

Indy

[bostonangler]

21 minutes ago, coorslite21 said:

 

Guess it's perception.....your head line says "digging up dirt".

 

Perhaps it would be better stated to say he was trying to uncover the truth on the political corruption in the Ukraine.....especially that corruption where US citizens are involved.......and then learning why the Obama DOJ and MSM seem so intent on covering it all up.....

 

To me that has a little more common sense for a headline.

CL

 

He couldn't testify under oath... That seems pretty obvious... I ask you which do you believe his denial or his admittance? He is talking out of both sides of his mouth and one has to be a lie.  JMHO

 

B/A

[Shabibilicious]

4 minutes ago, Indraman said:

I sat that you are intellectually inept to have just voted to remove the POTUS through Impeachment, and now want to ride his coat tails in the upcoming 2020 Election (LANDSLIDE). But most politicians will do and say anything to stay in power.

 

Indy

 

Absolutely right....they'll even go so far as to try and extort a foreign government to dig up dirt on their political foes.  Crazy stuff.  

 

GO RV, then BV

[bostonangler]

5 minutes ago, Indraman said:

Joe Manchin, who voted to oust Trump, says he may endorse his reelection

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/joe-manchin-says-despite-vote-to-convict-trump-he-could-endorse-his-reelection-everybody-can-change

 

I sat that you are intellectually inept to have just voted to remove the POTUS through Impeachment, and now want to ride his coat tails in the upcoming 2020 Election (LANDSLIDE). But most politicians will do and say anything to stay in power.

 

Indy

 

I agree Indy... These people want it both ways... Look at Susan Collins... She voted to acquit even though she stated what he did was wrong. That was to appease her party. Then the reaction of her constituents is she will be voted out, so now show votes against Trump trying to save her herself from her voters... These people are all so corrupt.

 

B/A

[coorslite21]

1 hour ago, bostonangler said:

 

He couldn't testify under oath... That seems pretty obvious... I ask you which do you believe his denial or his admittance? He is talking out of both sides of his mouth and one has to be a lie.  JMHO

 

B/A

 

The Forrest for the trees.....

 

Most important is to get to the bottom of who's involved in the Ukrainian corruption.....the rest is just symantec's ....   CL

[coorslite21]

1 hour ago, Shabibilicious said:

 

Absolutely right....they'll even go so far as to try and extort a foreign government to dig up dirt on their political foes.  Crazy stuff.  

 

GO RV, then BV

 

Dirt = Truth......good stuff there!    CL

[Shabibilicious]

1 minute ago, coorslite21 said:

 

Dirt = Truth......good stuff there!    CL

 

Ahhh....extort hoping for Truth.  Got it.  

 

GO RV, then BV

[bostonangler]

2 minutes ago, coorslite21 said:

 

The Forrest for the trees.....

 

Most important is to get to the bottom of who's involved in the Ukrainian corruption.....the rest is just symantec's ....   CL

 

Either he did or didn't... One is a lie. It's pretty simple...

Have you ever known a habitual liar? People who constantly lie can't remember their lies and get caught...

 

B/A

[nstoolman1]

16 minutes ago, bostonangler said:

 

Either he did or didn't... One is a lie. It's pretty simple...

Have you ever known a habitual liar? People who constantly lie can't remember their lies and get caught...

 

B/A

 

It was proven through testimony he did not.

 

People that have a great dislike for Trump don't want to admit he did not do a QPQ. 

As for the asking Ukraine to investigate corruption?  Trump was following a law put into effect by Clinton supported by Biden.