-
Speaking today with CNN's Erin Burnett, Oregon Democratic Senator Jeff Merkley had harsh words for Trump's lawyers and their defense strategy: "They're telling Democrats, 'You have the burden of proof but we're not allowing you access to witnesses. You have the burden of proof but we're not allowing you access to documents.' This is something that goes on in Russia. This is not something that goes on in the United States of America. Democrats are pushing for the truth. Trump's lawyers are pushing for a cover-up."
Exactly. Welcome to Trumpworld, the topsy-turvy land of delusions where wrong is right, bad is good, down is up and the Constitution was made to be broken.
-
Despite holding meetings with them and posing for pictures with them, the Liar-In-Chief continues to insist he doesn't know Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, the Russian-born (and now indicted) Rudy Giuliani associates who assisted Trump with his Ukraine-aid-in-exchange-for-dirt-on-Joe-Biden scheme and pushed for the ouster of Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch, who objected to Trump's scheme. Parnas' attorney has released an 84-minute recording, made by Fruman during a 2018 dinner, of Trump, Parnas and Fruman discussing getting rid of Yovanovitch and questioning how long Ukraine would last without US aid in a fight with Russia. But Trump doesn't know the two men. He says so. And anyway, Donald Trump is always concerned with the best interests.......of Donald Trump.
Recording shows Trump talking with indicted businessmen he has said he doesn't know
https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/25/polit...dor/index.html
-
Neither federal law nor the Constitution allow a United States President to overturn an act of Congress – but King Donald the First is above the law and above the Constitution. He withheld Congressionally-approved aid to Ukraine and dangled it as a bribe in an attempt to coerce Ukraine into digging up dirt on the Bidens. King Donald abused the power of his office by using American assets for his own political gain. He wanted a foreign country to help him win the 2020 election by cheating. King Donald's lawyers, who obviously do not care about federal law or the Constitution, see absoutely nothing wrong with Trump's actions. At least they say there's nothing wrong with Trump's actions. That's what Trump is paying them to say. His lawyers, same as Congressional Republicans, have sold their souls to Donald Trump.
Trump tied Ukraine aid to investigations he sought, according to unpublished book by John Bolton
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...ays/ar-BBZlMfy
-
Presidential candidate Donald Trump vowed to "drain the swamp" in Washington DC. That is one of the few promises he actually kept – but then he quickly refilled the swamp with his own cadre of crooks, creeps, crazies, cronies, crackpots and criminals. He also started making shady deals to benefit his biggest donors. This is what happens when the Electoral College gives us a President who lost the popular vote and who loves money almost as much as he loves himself.
Trump-Parnas-Fruman recording shows that the swamp has not been drained
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...ned/ar-BBZm6ir
-
A majority of Americans want to hear from Bolton. Democrats want to hear from Bolton. Republicans do not want to hear from Bolton. If he winds up testifying that Trump abused his power by withholding Congressionally-approved aid and soliciting election interference from a foreign country, Senate Republicans will likely.......oh, who are we kidding? They've sold their souls to Donald Trump and will unanimously vote for acquittal. Bolton's testimony won't change a thing.
Bolton bombshell undercuts Trump's impeachment defense
The President ordered his national security adviser to keep military aid to Ukraine frozen in a bid to coerce political favors.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/27/polit...ial/index.html
Fact check: Trump falsely claims Democrats never asked John Bolton to testify
https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/27/polit...eck/index.html
-
"I did nothing wrong." Yes you did. "The phone call was perfect." No it wasn't. "There was no quid pro quo." Yes there was. Pressure is mounting on Senate Republicans to allow former national security adviser John Bolton and other witnesses to testify during Trump's impeachment trial. And how are Trump's lawyers defending him today? They aren't. They're continuing to attack Joe and Hunter Biden, who are not on trial and who have never been accused of wrongdoing.
Analysis: 3 ways Bolton's bombshells contradict Trump's defense
https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/27/polit...nse/index.html
-
Bolton says Trump told him about the quid-pro-quo offer of Ukraine military aid in exchange for dirt on the Bidens. Trump says he did not have such a conversation with Bolton. One of those two men is lying. Which one could it be? Hint: He has orange skin and has told more than 16,000 lies since he's been in office.
John Bolton just shattered Trump's defense in the impeachment trial and squeezed Senate Republicans into a corner
Business Insider, Jan 27 2020
Former national security adviser John Bolton proved over the weekend why he's President Donald Trump's worst nightmare as Trump battles a snowballing Senate impeachment trial. An unpublished manuscript of Bolton's upcoming book claims Trump personally told him last year that he would withhold military aid from Ukraine until it launched a politically motivated investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden. The revelation shatters Trump's biggest defense in the impeachment inquiry: that there are no firsthand witnesses who can directly confirm that he engaged in a quid pro quo regarding Ukraine. It also boxes in Republican Senators who have been against calling new witnesses in Trump's trial. Trump disputed Bolton's reported claim, tweeting that he had no such conversation with the former national security adviser. But Bolton is said to be a meticulous note-taker, significantly bolstering his credibility as a firsthand witness.
https://www.businessinsider.com/john...achment-2020-1
-
Toomey suggests Republicans could allow Democrats to subpoena John Bolton to testify in exchange for Republicans being allowed to subpoena Hunter Biden. MSNBC's Chris Hayes today pointed out that Republicans controlled both the House and Senate from 2015 to 2019 and during that time they never called for an investigation of Joe Biden, Hunter Biden or Ukraine natural gas company Burisma. Why, Hayes, asked, are Republicans now claiming there was wrongdoing, even though the Bidens were never charged with any wrongdoing? Why are Republicans now demanding investigations? And why would a President, who is sworn to protect Americans, ask a foreign country to investigate United States citizens? King Donald the First is the most crooked, corrupt, dishonest, amoral, unethical, self-serving person who has ever lived. Two hundred eighty-one days till Election Day.
Republican Senator Patrick Toomey discusses a 'one-for-one' witness deal in Trump impeachment amid Bolton revelations
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...say/ar-BBZnTdg
-
Rather than be the "impartial juror" that he swore to be, Mitch McConnell has been working with the White House, a.k.a. The Swamp, to coordinate Trump's defense. Now we learn McConnell, Lindsey Graham, Mitt Romney and other Republican Senators have gotten huge campaign contributions from three of the attorneys defending Trump. "Oh, what a tangled web we weave....."
Senators overseeing impeachment trial got large campaign donations from Trump legal team members
https://www.opensecrets.org/news/202...om-trump-team/
-
To help out Xi Jinping and Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, King Donald the First tried to influence Justice Department investigations of companies in China and Turkey. He refused to say anything negative about Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman for ordering the murder of Jamal Khashoggi. And if Trump Tower Moscow had been built, Trump would have given the penthouse suite, free of charge, to his BFF Vladimir Putin. Trump loves dictators. How can he not? He is one.
New York Times: Bolton wrote he was concerned about Trump granting favors to autocratic leaders
https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/27/polit...ina/index.html
-
Letter from Frances Mills of Glendale in today's Los Angeles Times:
"It didn't take more than a few minutes of listening to the defense of Donald Trump in the Senate to understand that his lawyers are using the President's playbook. His denial always has the same four pillars. First, make the audience mistrust the media. Second, make them also mistrust the Democrats by smearing them. The third pillar is important: tell the audience loudly and repeatedly that you did not do what there is proven evidence you did. Fourth and possibly most importantly, sow fear – fear that you won't find Trump on the 2020 ballot. What trash."
And from Thomas Oatway of Valencia:
"I have listened to the Republicans repeat the GOP talking points on additional witness testimony, falling in line with the President and his defenders. Getting Republicans to admit the President did anything wrong is like asking Trump to tell the truth. It just cannot happen. I predict the Senate trial will proceed without hearing from Mick Mulvaney or John Bolton and without receiving any documents. Then, an acquittal by the Senate will embolden Trump to take even more corrupt acts. This is the banana republic that we have become. Can the voters save us in 2020?"
-
John Bolton kept detailed notes of all his meetings, including the one during which Trump discussed his "quid-pro-quo" scheme to withhold Constitutionally-approved military aid from Ukraine and dangle it as a bribe to coerce Ukraine into investigating his political opponent. King Donald the First, who has told more than 16,300 lies since he's been in office, says no such meeting took place. He's lying, of course. And one of his sleazy lawyers says Trump can't be impeached even if Bolton's account is true. Spoiler alert: Bolton's account is true. Spoiler alert: Trump has already been impeached. Bolton should be allowed to testify at the impeachment trial.
Trump lawyer says Bolton testimony would make no difference, even if his book is true
Yahoo News, Jan 28 2020 4:56 PM
As Democrats continued to demand testimony from former national security adviser John Bolton in the Senate impeachment trial of President Trump, defense lawyers said today that Bolton’s testimony was irrelevant, because even if his account of his conversation with the President is accepted, the facts don't support a conviction under the Constitution. "You cannot impeach a President on an unsourced allegation," Trump lawyer Jay Sekulow said of Bolton's forthcoming book The Room Where It Happened: A White House Memoir, which disputes a key defense assertion. "Even if everything in there was true, it constitutionally doesn’t rise to that level."
In the book, Bolton describes a conversation in August 2019 with Trump, who told him he was withholding $391 million in military aid to Ukraine until the government in Kyiv announced an investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter. That is the crux of the first of two articles of impeachment passed by the House – the "quid pro quo" whose existence the President and his defenders have denied all along. Until the news broke about Bolton's book, which is scheduled to be published in March, the testimony directly implicating Trump in the scheme was mostly secondhand. It is unclear what Sekulow meant by "unsourced allegation," as Bolton's book recounts conversations he personally participated in. Sekulow went on to say that Trump denied Bolton's account.
https://www.aol.com/article/news/202...true/23911418/
-
The crooked, corrupt, dishonest, vain, pompous, narcissistic, self-centered, self-serving, orange-skinned parrot is continuing to squawk his tired old mantras: "Hoax! Witch hunt! Hoax! Witch hunt! Awwrkkk!" His brainwashed, blindly loyal supporters love to hear him talk this way. They believe he can do no wrong and they worship him as if he's a god. Anyone care for some cyanide-laced grape Flavor Aid?
Trump slams Democrats' 'demented hoaxes, crazy witch hunts and deranged partisan crusades,' says they will suffer 'crushing defeat'
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/elect...eat/ar-BBZpOsZ
-
Dershowitz called Trump corrupt and unpredictable but that was four years ago. Now that Dershowitz is being paid obscene amounts of money to be on Trump's legal team, he appears to love Trump almost as much as Trump loves himself – and who cares about the Constitution and the Presidential oath of office anyway?
Alan Dershowitz called Trump corrupt in 2016 and said he could be corrupt as President
https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/28/polit...ile/index.html
-
Former national security adviser John Bolton can provide first-hand evidence of Trump's quid-pro-quo offer. Mitch McConnell doesn't want him to testify. CNN's Don Lemon today stated the obvious: "In a trial, you have witnesses. Why are Republicans even debating this?" A new Quinnipiac University poll released today shows 75% of Americans want witnesses to testify. That breaks down to 95% of Democrats, 75% of independents and 49% of Republicans. The orange-skinned Tweeter-In-Chief squawked his usual mantra: "The Impeachment Hoax is just another political CON JOB!" Actually, Emperor Trump, the "con jobs" are that you somehow persuaded enough people to vote for you so you could win the Presidency via the Electoral College (which ignored the will of the majority) and then you somehow persuaded Congressional Republicans to sell their souls to you, worship you, protect you, defend you and place you above the Constitution and the rule of law.
Witness fight threatens quick ending to impeachment trial
Senate Republicans are wrestling with a dilemma over witnesses in Trump's trial in a tussle that risks antagonizing him and fueling claims of a cover-up.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/29/polit...ent/index.html
-
CNN headlines today:
White House has issued formal threat to John Bolton to keep him from publishing book
Alan Dershowitz argues Presidential quid pro quos aimed at reelection are not impeachable
Schiff calls arguments against testimony unprecedented
The House manager says both parties should bring witnesses as he states the Senate cannot use privilege to hide impeachable character.
The stories coming out of Trumpworld – the topsy-turvy land of delusions where bad is good, wrong is right, down is up and the Constitution isn't Constitutional – are getting increasingly bizarre as Trump's lawyers and Senate Republicans, all of whom have sold their souls to Donald Trump, continue to insist there's absolutely nothing wrong with Trump withholding Constitutionally-approved military aid from another country and pressuring them to dig up dirt on a political opponent (who is also a United States citizen). Cheating to win an election is just fine 'n' dandy. Trump has done nothing wrong, they insist – and yet they don't want any witnesses to testify at the impeachment trial. Gee, I wonder why. By the way, there is nothing in the Constitution about "executive privilege." That must come as a shock to King Donald the First.
-
Dershowitz isn't dumb. I figure what he's trying to do is prove himself worthy of being appointed Archduke, Grand Prince or Grand Duke by King Donald the First.
Why Alan Dershowitz's outrageous defense of Trump leads to completely absurd conclusions
Cody Fenwick, AlterNet, Jan 29 2020
As President Donald Trump's Senate trial moved on to the question and answer period today, attorney Alan Dershowitz – perhaps the most controversial and inflammatory lawyer on the team – began pushing the White House's arguments to extremes. Of course, choosing Dershowitz in the first place was an extreme – and extremely risky – move. He, just like his co-counsel Ken Starr, represented the highly despised Jeffrey Epstein, among other unsavory figures, and Dershowitz has even been accused by two women of being involved in Epstein’s sex trafficking. Aside from his massive persoaln baggage, he has a tendency to bloviate and take strong positions way outside the mainstream, often to the cost of his own credibility.
He's already taken this tack in Trump's defense, arguing that "abuse of power" cannot be an impeachable offense, despite the weight of academic opinion contradicting him. And today he took this defense to the absurd but necessary conclusion that even if Trump leveraged his Presidential powers to win his upcoming election, it would be improper for the Senate to remove him for this offense. He dismissed the Democrats' argument that because Trump engaged in an illicit quid pro quo to pressure Ukraine to investigate his domestic political rivals, the President must be removed. This is because, he said, Presidents often make foreign policy moves that are designed to help their re-election chances: "If a President does something which he believes will help him get elected in the public interest, that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment."
Many quickly pointed out that this sweeping claim would justify all kinds of misconduct by Presidents. "This is absurd," said Brian Klaas. "Dershowitz is arguing that as long as you believe that you winning an election will be a good thing for the country, you can do pretty much whatever you want – including using public money for personal gain – to help you win. That's not how democracy works." Daniel Jacobson, a former White House lawyer under President Barack Obama, noted: "His argument would mean, for example, that the President could hand out pardons in exchange for campaign donations and that;d be perfectly fine because the President thinks his reelection is in the 'public interest.'" Lawfare's Quinta Jurecic said, "It's worth underlining just how completely bananas this argument is. Nobody but Dershowitz believes this." Sherrilyn Ifill, the president of the NAACP's Legal Defense & Educational Fund, said, "Dershowitz has just articulated a legal justification for a President to declare himself dictator or King,”
https://www.alternet.org/2020/01/how...d-conclusions/
-
To Senate Republicans, a vote for witnesses is a vote for trouble
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...ble/ar-BBZsBeg
How about this: A vote for witnesses is a vote for truth, a vote for facts, a vote for the Constitution and a vote for the rule of law. Of course Senate Republicans have sold their souls to Donald Trump and some have actually admitted that hearing from witnesses would be a waste of time because they're all going to vote for acquittal anyway. We all knew Senate Republicans would not be the "impartial jurors" they swore to be. They will ensure that King Donald the First remains above the law and above the Constitution, answerable to no one and accountable to no one. все град короля!
-
King Donald the First worships himself. He sees himself as an all-knowing, all-powerful god who can do no wrong. Senate Republicans, all of whom have sold their souls to Donald Trump, see him the same way. They admit he withheld Congressionally-approved aid to Ukraine – but, hey, that isn't wrong. They admit he pressured Ukraine to dig up dirt on the Bidens – but, hey, that isn't wrong. They admit he ignored subpoenas and withheld evidence and ordered his aides to ignore subpoenas – but, hey, that isn't wrong. "Abuse of power"? That isn't wrong. "Obstruction of Congress"? That isn't wrong. Senate Republicans took an oath to be "impartial jurors." How are they "impartial" when they refuse to see anything wrong with Trump's actions? As I read Stephen Collinson's frightening analysis, I recalled the prophecy of Revelation 17:13, "They have one mind and one purpose and will give their power and authority to the beast."
Analysis: Republican theory for Trump acquittal could unleash unrestrained Presidential power
https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/30/polit...ion/index.html
-
Congressional subpoenas are useless if they can be defied and not be enforced by the courts. Of course King Donald the First is a dictator and autocrat who does not have to comply with subpoenas. Trump famously declared that Article II gives him the power to do whatever he wants. His lawyers and Senate Republicans agree: Trump is above the law and above the Constitution. He can do whatever he wants – and that should terrify every American.
In contrast with Trump legal team, Justice Department lawyer James Burnham says House can impeach over defied subpoenas
https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/30/polit...ing/index.html
