Schumer Melts Down as Impeachment Implodes, Demands Every Senator Explain Their Impeachment Vote (VIDEO)
January 31, 2020
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer melted down on Friday as impeachment against President Trump imploded.
McConnell will be holding a vote on additional witnesses Friday after closing arguments wrap up.
In a huge blow to Democrats, Senator Lamar Alexander announced Thursday night he will be voting against new witnesses, giving the Republicans a probable victory with a 50-50 tie.
Chief Justice Roberts is not expected to cast a tie-breaker vote, according to Republicans.
Once the witnesses are blocked, Republicans will move to acquit President Trump.
Schumer knows it’s over and he looked defeated and angry Friday morning.
Schumer wants to drag out the impeachment circus as long as possible so he wants every Senator to explain to the American public why they voted the way they did.
“I believe that the American people should hear what every Senator thinks and why they’re voting the way they’re voting. And we will do what we can to make sure that happens.”
It’s over, Cryin Chuck. Move on.
Republicans are ‘actual demons,’ ‘zombies,’ says New York Times Nobel Prize-winning columnist
New York Times columnist and Nobel laureate Paul Krugman has doubled down on denouncing the Republican Party as “bad people,” insisting that there’s nothing wrong with “demonizing” opponents who “actually are demons.”
Krugman refused to budge from his declaration that “Republicans are bad people” during an interview with PBS’ Firing Line on Thursday. When interviewer Margaret Hoover pressed the Nobel Prize-winning economist on the risks inherent in “demonizing” political opponents, he only doubled down, taking his ad hominems into the mythical realm.
Is it demonizing if they already actually are demons?
While Krugman stressed he was referring to “professional Republicans,” and not “someone I might meet over lunch who declares herself a Republican [who] can perfectly well be a perfectly nice person,” he stood firm in his attacks on a party he described as “irredeemable, devoid of principle or shame” in a Times opinion column last month.
Nor were demons the only horror-movie monster Krugman saw in the GOP. He likened debating Republicans to “arguing with zombies,” declaring that “zombie ideas about fiscal policy, about climate change, about a whole range of ideas – healthcare policy – have completely taken over official Republican discourse.”
While he admitted the party’s calcified platform “doesn’t mean that every Republican in America is like that,” he maintained that “to be a serving Republican member of Congress right now” supporting the Trump administration “makes you a bad person.”
Krugman has been wearing his hatred for Republicans on his sleeve for years. Regular readers of his column will recall that he has blamed Republicans for everything from climate change to antisemitism, and has insisted that “good people can’t be good Republicans” since at least 2018.
NYT columnist ‘finds’ child porn on his computer – and rushes to the Times to save him
Eventually, however, even an Ivy League intellectual runs out of names to call one’s enemy, which is perhaps why Krugman called for the party to be “dismantled and replaced with something better” in last month’s ‘Republicans have no shame’ oped.
For someone so passionate about Republicans, Krugman had little interest in who would win the Democratic presidential nomination, telling Hoover it made “almost no difference” who ended up running against Trump. At the same time, he praised candidate Elizabeth Warren, his personal friend, as a “progressive.” Warren was a Republican until two decades ago. Hoover neglected to ask the Princeton economist if he makes the sign of the cross before meeting Warren for lunch.
Why was Rand banned? Sen. Paul reveals his CENSORED question at Trump impeachment trial
As Senators gathered for the last day of questioning in President Trump’s impeachment trial, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul found his question censored in a way that may have revealed the identity of the mysterious whistleblower.
With the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump nearing its final stages, senators gathered on Capitol Hill on Thursday to question the Democratic prosecution team, and Trump’s defense attorneys. However, Paul (R-Kentucky) found his question shot down by presiding Chief Justice John Roberts, who declined “to read the question as submitted.”
Paul left the chamber after Roberts’ denial.
Taking to Twitter afterwards, Paul revealed that he planned on asking whether Obama-era “partisans” within Trump’s National Security Council conspired with House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff to engineer impeachment proceedings against Trump, by sounding the alarm on the now-infamous July phone call between Trump and Ukrainain President Volodymyr Zelensky.
“Are you aware that House intelligence committee staffer Shawn Misko had a close relationship with Eric Ciaramella while at the National Security Council together,” Paul’s question read. “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.”
Ciaramella, a CIA analyst, is widely believed to be the ‘whistleblower’ who kickstarted the impeachment inquiry by alleging that Trump tried to strong-arm Zelensky into reopening a corruption investigation into Joe Biden’s son, Hunter, and his business activities in Ukraine.
According to a recent RealClearPolitics report, Ciaramella was reportedly overheard in 2017 “plotting” with Misko to have Trump “removed from office.”
Schiff, the lead prosecutor in the impeachment trial, has both denied knowing the identity of the whistleblower and called the report of Ciaramella’s plot a “conspiracy theory.” Schiff has also repeatedly warned Republicans against naming the whistleblower, citing a need to protect his or her identity – though no statutory requirement for that actually exists.
However, Roberts’ refusal to read Ciaramella’s name and the media furor that followed Paul’s question – with mostly liberal pundits hounding the senator for “naming the whistleblower” – all but confirms that he is indeed Schiff’s source. Paul never mentioned the term “whistleblower” in his written question, yet Roberts still refused to read Ciaramella’s name. Earlier, Roberts had vowed not to read any question that might “out” the whistleblower.
Roberts was not compelled to censor Paul’s question by law. Rather, his decision was a personal one. Contrary to Schiff, the whistleblower does not enjoy a “statutory right to anonymity.” If Ciaramella is indeed the whistleblower, his only guarantee is that the intelligence community inspector-general may not name him as such.
Senators will likely vote on Friday on whether to allow testimony from additional witnesses, beyond those heard during the inquiry led by House Democrats. While Democrats have pushed for testimony from former National Security Advisor John Bolton, some Republicans have argued that if they even agree to witnesses, they intend to call on the whistleblower, conclusively revealing their identity and giving Trump his constitutional right to confront his accuser.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has made clear that he will move to block any additional witnesses from testifying, bringing the trial to a speedy conclusion and acquittal as soon as possible.
Trump tweets ‘game over’ after Bolton, Schiff videos resurface
1/30/2020
Senator David Perdue weighs in on the Bolton and Schiff interviews that have resurfaced and brought their credibility into questions. He also discusses the ongoing impeachment trial.
Remember when the left hated John Bolton and called him a lying warmonger. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Rand Paul Reveals Impeachment Question Censored by Chief Justice John Roberts
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) opened Thursday’s impeachment trial proceedings with one of the first submitted questions for the record, but Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts refused to read the question to the Democrat impeachment managers and President Donald Trump’s counsel.
The text of the question to Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and Trump’s counsel, as Paul submitted it to Roberts, was subsequently obtained by Breitbart News. The text of Sen. Paul’s Thursday question exactly as submitted to Roberts, the senator’s office confirmed to Breitbart News, was:
To the Manager Schiff and counsel for the President:
Manager Schiff and Counsel for the President, are you aware that House Intelligence Committee staffer Shawn Misko had a close relationship with Eric Ciaramella when at the National Security Council together, 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?”
In the question, Paul does not identify Eric Ciaramella, a CIA analyst who has been widely reported to be the “whistleblower” whose complaint launched the Democrats’ impeachment proceedings, as the “whistleblower.”
But Roberts has now multiple times throughout the trial censored any mention of Ciaramella’s name, despite his direct involvement in these matters.
Paul also tweeted this after the fact:
Recent investigative reports from RealClearPolitics have indicated that Misko, now a Schiff staffer on the House Intelligence Committee, and Ciaramella have a close relationship and were overheard discussing efforts to try to plot against President Trump.
Roberts has not offered any legal argument for hiding the individual’s identity. As Breitbart News has repeatedly explained, the only statutory protection for people who submit whistleblower complaints is that the intelligence community inspector general (ICIG) cannot name him or her publicly:
Even left-wing mainstream media outlets—CNN, the New York Times, National Public Radio (NPR), and Reuters — determined that, certainly, no law prohibits President Donald Trump or members of Congress from disclosing the name of the leaker who sparked the impeachment inquiry.
Even Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA) confirmed this fact by reading a passage from the Washington Post into the record of the House impeachment hearings which states: “That appears to be the lone statutory restriction on disclosing a whistleblower’s identity, applicable only to the inspector general’s office. We found no court rulings on whether whistleblowers have a right to anonymity under the ICWPA or related statutes.”
Further, Breitbart’s Senior Editor-at-Large Joel Pollak has written President Trump has a right under the Sixth Amendment to confront his accuser at a trial where he is the defendant. He explains: “even if the Chief Justice were to rule that it does not, the Senate can overrule him. If the president wants to call the whistleblower to testify, he will likely have to do so.”
In October, RealClearInvestigations published an individual’s name whom author Paul Sperry believes is likely the “whistleblower” — Eric Ciaramella, an analyst at the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), who worked for the National Security Council under the Obama and Trump administrations.
Philbin Points Out Dem Impeachment Managers’ Contradictions, They “Can’t Have It Both Ways”
1/29/2020
CNN’s Toobin: Trump’s Defense Raised “Very Legitimate Point” About “Partisan Effort” Impeachment
CNN Panel: White House Defense “Very Effective,” Used Dems’ Own Arguments Against Them
WATCH: MSNBC Panel Featuring John Brennan Calls for State of the Union to Be Cancelled
January 28, 2020
An MSNBC panel discussion led by anchor Chuck Todd and featuring disgraced CIA Director turned NBC News analyst John Brennan called for the annual State of the Union address to be cancelled over the impeachment.
Brennan claimed that President Donald Trump speaking would be “embarrassing” and “very destructive to the image of the United States worldwide.”
President Bill Clinton also gave a State of the Union address during his impeachment, but that doesn’t seem to matter to these partisan hacks.
“And you know, one of the things that I really worry about is that we’re going to have a State of the Union very shortly, while all of this is going on,” Brennan said during the panel.
Todd quickly jumped in, mockingly saying “State of our union is strong,’ who the hell is going to say that?”
“I just cannot imagine. It’s not just embarrassing, but also I think it’s very destructive to the image of the United States worldwide to have this going on and have Mr. Trump up there,” Brennan stated.
“And you can imagine he’s going to use that State of the Union address not to address the state of the union, but to address the state of Donald Trump. And he is going to, I think, be on the offensive there. So I question whether or not it makes sense to hold that at this point,” Brennan continued.
MSNBC is akin to allowing Pravda to operate on our shores at the height of the cold war.
Tom's Blog 