Lindsey Graham Wants To Call Whistleblower After Trial To Ask 'How All This Crap Started'

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  tessylo  •  8 months ago  •  106 comments

By:   Mary Papenfuss, HuffPost

Lindsey Graham Wants To Call Whistleblower After Trial To Ask 'How All This Crap Started'

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



Politics

Lindsey Graham Wants To Call Whistleblower After Trial To Ask 'How All This Crap Started'







1b7bcfa0-ffe6-11e8-abbe-535ccd54ed26 February 3, 2020, 5:29 AM EST







Sen.   Lindsey Graham  (R-S.C.) told   Fox News   on Sunday that the Ukraine whistleblower will be called before the Senate Intelligence Committee after the impeachment trial because “I want to find out how all this crap started.”

Graham is also threatening to go after former Vice President  Joe Biden   and his son Hunter when the trial is over, even though   Donald Trump ’s impeachment defense team failed to demonstrate a single ethics violation or crime by either man.

As for the whistleblower, whose identity is protected by federal law, Graham told Fox host   Maria Bartiromo : “The Senate Intel Committee under [Sen.] Richard Burr (R-N.C.) has told us that we will call the whistleblower. Why is it important? I want to find out how all this crap started.” 

Graham, a vociferous apologist for Trump, added: “The day of reckoning is coming.”

Graham said he wants to know “if the whistleblower is a former employee [or] associate of Joe Biden,” or “was working with people” on Rep. Adam Schiff’s (D-Calif.) staff. Republicans have presented no information that either case is true. 

“We’re going to get to the bottom of all of this to make sure this never happens again,” Graham said.

The whistleblower did not testify at the House impeachment hearing (the Senate called no witnesses) because information the whistleblower provided was confirmed by other documents or witnesses under oath.

Corroboration included Trump’s   own rough transcript   of his phone call last year with Ukraine President   Volodymyr Zelensky   in which he pressured Zelensky to launch an investigation into unfounded accusations against Joe Biden — while Trump was withholding military aid from the nation.

Federal law protecting a whistleblower’s identity is designed to encourage government employees with information of wrongdoing to come forward. Some Republicans and Trump supporters have revealed the identity of someone they claim is the whistleblower, which the whistleblower’s attorney has argued puts his client’s life at risk.

At the Senate impeachment trial last week, Sen.   Rand Paul   (R-Ky.) submitted a question to Chief Justice   John Roberts   reportedly naming the whistleblower in order to deliberately expose the person’s identity. Roberts refused to read Paul’s question. 

Republicans claim that Biden, who was pressuring Ukraine to crack down on corruption in the nation while he was vice president, was attempting to block investigations into Ukraine energy company   Burisma   while his son was on the company board. But the vice president was pushing Ukraine to oust a prosecutor widely viewed by U.S. and European allies as corrupt. A Ukrainian investigation into Burisma   was closed before Biden came on the scene , according to reports. 





Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
[]
 
Tessylo
1  seeder  Tessylo    8 months ago

Graham said he wants to know “if the whistleblower is a former employee [or] associate of Joe Biden,” or “was working with people” on Rep. Adam Schiff’s (D-Calif.) staff. Republicans have presented no information that either case is true. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @1    8 months ago

A fair question which goes to the matter of whether leftover partisan Obama officials conspired with House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff] in order to devise an impeachment scheme prior to the beginning of the proceedings.

 
 
 
Ender
1.1.1  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1    8 months ago

And your proof of this is....

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1.2  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1    8 months ago

No, it's not a fair question.

The impeachment is not a 'scheme'.  

No one conspired with Schiff.

What a load of nonsense.  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.3  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @1.1.1    8 months ago
And your proof of this is....

It is a question not an answer. So, Senators can't question certain people? Why?

There is reason for questions:

" Rep. Adam Schiff, chair of the House intelligence committee, wrongly implied that his committee had no contact with the whistleblower before receiving the complaint. Schiff claimed, “We have not spoken directly with the whistleblower,” when the whistleblower had in fact reached out to a committee aide before filing a complaint.

A Democratic committee official told us Schiff “could have been more clear” but was “referring to the Committee officially interviewing the whistleblower, and himself personally.” It was clearly known, however, that the committee hadn’t officially interviewed the whistleblower at that time."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/11/13/factcheck-adam-schiff-wrong-whistleblower-contact/4180342002/

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.4  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @1.1.2    8 months ago
No, it's not a fair question.

Why not?

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1.5  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.3    8 months ago

So during the 'impeachment', senators can't question certain people?  Why?

 
 
 
r.t..b...
1.1.6  r.t..b...  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.3    8 months ago
So, Senators can't question certain people?

They had every opportunity to call witnesses but voted against it. And you and they know exactly why.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
1.1.7  Sean Treacy  replied to  r.t..b... @1.1.6    8 months ago

So did the house.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.8  Vic Eldred  replied to  r.t..b... @1.1.6    8 months ago
They had every opportunity to call witnesses but voted against it.

You mean in the Senate trial?  I don't know if the Senate intends to look into the false statements Schiff gave on the WB, but the Senate does have the power to look into lots of things.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.9  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.3    8 months ago

In far right propagandists upside down bizarro world , the motives of the whistleblower are a hundred times more important than the actions of the president. 

It's an odd , pathetic, viewpoint. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.10  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.9    8 months ago

The motives are important. If he was conspiring to bring down a president, he is not a whistleblower.

It might give him a chance to clear his name:

According to a March 2019 article in Politico:

Trump political appointees were believed to frequently talk to journalists who worked for conservative media outlets. For months, those outlets published names of career Civil and Foreign Service officers in the NSC and other government agencies whose loyalties they deemed suspect. Career staffers who had joined the U.S. government many years, sometimes decades, earlier were suddenly cast as Obama loyalists determined to derail Trump’s agenda as part of a “deep state.” The people targeted included a State Department civil servant of Iranian descent who’d joined the government under the George W. Bush administration; a highly respected Foreign Service officer who dealt with Israeli issues; and an NSC staffer who dealt with European and Russian issues. The latter, Eric Ciaramella, reportedly left the NSC after receiving death threats.

https://heavy.com/news/2019/10/eric-ciaramella/
 
 
 
Ender
1.1.11  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.3    8 months ago

Did you read what that says? It does not say that Schiff talked to the WB beforehand.

What graham is doing is going after process, which seems to be the fallback republican position. 

No actual defence of donald just attack the process.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.12  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @1.1.11    8 months ago
Did you read what that says?

Um-hum


What graham is doing is going after process

No, I don't believe he is. I think what he is going after is the past actions of Eric Ciaramella.



 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1.13  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.9    8 months ago

'In far right propagandists upside down bizarro world , the motives of the whistleblower are a hundred times more important than the actions of the president. 

It's an odd , pathetic, viewpoint.'

It's quite deplorable as are all things republicon/gop.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1.14  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.10    8 months ago

So calling out corruption when someone hears/sees it - is an attempt to take down the 'president'?

Nonsense.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1.15  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Ender @1.1.1    8 months ago
Graham said he wants to know “if the whistleblower is a former employee [or] associate of Joe Biden,” or “was working with people” on Rep. Adam Schiff’s (D-Calif.) staff. Republicans have presented no information that either case is true. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.16  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @1.1.14    8 months ago
So calling out corruption when someone hears/sees it - is an attempt to take down the 'president'?

Leaking would be. Has Ciaremella been leaking in the past?   Don't know?   Maybe we should have a look see...

 
 
 
Ender
1.1.17  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.12    8 months ago

Ah yes...retribution....

 
 
 
bugsy
1.1.18  bugsy  replied to  Ender @1.1.17    8 months ago
Ah yes...retribution....

So you would be OK if someone spread false rumors about you that could jeopardize you well being, and when it is proven those rumors are untrue, you would not want to find out why those rumors started, who started them or what the reason why the rumors were started?

I bet you would want to know all that and maybe even more.

 
 
 
evilgenius
1.1.19  evilgenius  replied to  bugsy @1.1.18    8 months ago
So you would be OK if someone spread false rumors about you that could jeopardize you well being, and when it is proven those rumors are untrue...

That's precisely what Trump is trying to do with the Bidens.

...you would not want to find out why those rumors started, who started them or what the reason why the rumors were started?

We now know they are NOT rumors. Most of the Senate is on record saying Trump has done what was reported. They just don't care. The only reason to call the "whistle-blower" now is to score cheap political points with the Republican base during an election year to distract from the multiple still ongoing House (and NY) investigations of Trump wrongdoings. Trump better hope he does get re-elected or he'll be in jail as co-conspirator #2 next to his ex lawyer.

I bet you would want to know all that and maybe even more.

Of course, let's call witnesses and declassify the documents Trump is hiding!

 
 
 
bugsy
1.1.20  bugsy  replied to  evilgenius @1.1.19    8 months ago
That's precisely what Trump is trying to do with the Bidens

We can let the Senate do that after the impeachment sham is over.

No one that the democrats called to testify said that Trump did what they are claiming he did. Quite the contrary, they said the opposite. As far as the leaker, er, "whistleblower, most Americans want to find out why he did what he did, who he is affiliated with and who coordinated to do what he did with them. My guess is the name "Schiff" will come up often if the guy is forced to testify to the Senate.

BTW, the "I don't care" attitude came up with democrats during the house investigation. All they wanted to do was impeach, many of them openly stating that since before they or he was inaugurated or sworn in. There is much video of such claims.

Witnesses and documents collected was the job of the House. They failed.

Game over.

Let me ask you this question....Over and over and over and over..for days and months, we heard Schiff and company say that the "evidence" against Trump was overwhelming and indisputable. So, if the evidence was so overwhelming of guilt, why would they want to get more witnesses? It should be a slam dunk and Schiff and company would not have needed 24 MORE hours over 3 DAYS to claim Trump guilty? Also, to beg for another week to get witnesses.

Schiff and company overstepped and they lost because of it.

 
 
 
Ender
1.1.21  Ender  replied to  bugsy @1.1.20    8 months ago

So you now want the senate to being an investigative body after they spent the last several weeks saying they would not be an investigative body...

No one said he did? Hell Mulvaney said in a press conference he did and that it didn't matter.

Besides, now all they have to do is refuse to testify. Everyone else can do it why not others.

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.1.22  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Tessylo @1.1.2    8 months ago
The impeachment is not a 'scheme'.   No one conspired with Schiff.

then according to current liberal logic,

they will/must rush to the stand to defend themselves.

 
 
 
Ender
1.1.23  Ender  replied to  bugsy @1.1.18    8 months ago
So you would be OK if someone spread false rumors about you that could jeopardize you well being

Jeopardize his well being?  Haha   Where do you all come up with this.

No matter how many times you say it, it is more than rumor.

 
 
 
Ender
1.1.24  Ender  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.1.22    8 months ago

According to conservative logic, they can ignore subpoenas and refuse to testify at all.

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.1.25  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Ender @1.1.24    8 months ago
According to conservative logic, they can ignore subpoenas and refuse to testify at all.

those are the old rules.... this is a brave new world created by dems

one reaps what they have sown

enjoy :)

 
 
 
Steve Ott
1.1.26  Steve Ott  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1    8 months ago

And what part would this play in Lindsay's witch hunt?

Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989, 5 U.S.C. 2302(b)(8)-(9), Pub.L. 101-12

 
 
 
Dulay
1.1.27  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1    8 months ago

Please DO tell me how they got Trump to make the 'perfect' phone call Vic? Oh and how did they get Trump to order the OMB to hold the aid to Ukraine? 

I mean, these guys must be sending cyber rays into the WH from a super secret bunker as we speak right? /s

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.1.28  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Steve Ott @1.1.26    8 months ago
Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989

"whistleblowers" do not get to remain anonymous. and yes they can be questioned. this one surely will be.


No federal law exists that entitles  whistleblowers  the statutory right to remain anonymous—no matter what their government position, location of employment or the nature of the alleged improper incident.

https://www.fedsmith.com/2019/12/10/whistleblower-expect-right-remain-anonymous/


schiffs anonymous whistleblower had better have their shit together as they will not be anonymous for long.

hint: questioning a whistleblower is not retaliation.

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1.29  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.1.28    8 months ago

Hint:  You don't have a clue.  

That's just WHACK!

Cheers jrSmiley_82_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.1.30  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Tessylo @1.1.29    8 months ago

[Deleted]

[cheers :)]

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.31  JohnRussell  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.1.30    8 months ago

If the whistleblower had made the shit up one could see why you might be upset with the whistleblower. But he didnt make up anything against Trump, he revealed Trump's wrongdoing. 

No one has a reason to be against the whistleblower, unless they want Trump to be protected against the public's justified reaction to his wrongdoing. 

I'm sure after you reflect on this you will agree. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1.32  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.31    8 months ago
'I'm sure after you reflect on this you will agree.'

jrSmiley_86_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.1.33  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.31    8 months ago
I'm sure after you reflect on this you will agree. 

not a chance.  

the whistleblower had better have his shit together - we will know his name and he will be questioned about any contact with schiff and/or his minions prior to making the complaint

 

you don't have to agree here... just sit back and watch.

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1.34  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.1.33    8 months ago

Sit back and watch what?

 
 
 
Dulay
1.1.35  Dulay  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.1.28    8 months ago

You realize that your link states that the IG MUST keep the identity of the whistleblower confidential right?

So if the IG can't out the whistleblower, HOW does anyone else find out who they are? 

Oh and here is another tidbit from your link:

However, it can be argued that the disclosure of a whistleblower’s name in and of itself could be considered retaliation. For example, exposing an individual’s name could be interpreted as witness retaliation and an act of obstruction if it is related to a congressional investigation, thus constituting it as criminal. 
 
 
 
Dulay
1.1.36  Dulay  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.1.7    8 months ago
So did the house.

False. The House NEVER voted against calling witnesses. 

 
 
 
Dulay
1.1.37  Dulay  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.1.33    8 months ago

Why 8? The whistleblower complaint stands on it's own. It's been corroborated. WTF does his name matter except for Trump's cultist taking revenge? 

You and your fellow travelers don't seem to care that the whistleblower was OBLIGATED by regulations and oath to report wrongdoing or crimes up the chain of command, who in this case is the ICIG. 

 
 
 
It Is ME
1.1.38  It Is ME  replied to  Tessylo @1.1.14    8 months ago
So calling out corruption when someone hears/sees it - is an attempt to take down the 'president'?
Nonsense.  

Then comes Biden ? jrSmiley_9_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.1.39  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Dulay @1.1.37    8 months ago
Why 8? The whistleblower complaint stands on it's own.

no, it does not.  but you can think otherwise...

here is what will happen.

we will know his name and he will be questioned about any contact with schiff and/or his minions prior to making the complaint

 
 
 
Steve Ott
1.1.40  Steve Ott  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.1.28    8 months ago

Could it be construed that the committees questioning is retaliation, especially in light of Graham's words?

Hint: I suggest you bone up on your legal research.

 
 
 
Dulay
1.1.41  Dulay  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.1.39    8 months ago
no, it does not.  but you can think otherwise...

So tell me what was false in the whistleblower complaint 8. 

here is what will happen. we will know his name

And then what? 

and he will be questioned about any contact with schiff and/or his minions prior to making the complaint

And then what? 

BTFW, are you pissed that the whistleblower honored his oath? 

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.1.42  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Dulay @1.1.41    8 months ago

personally, id rather you remain clueless.

just sit back and watch the show.

the next episode is awesome :)

 
 
 
Dulay
1.1.43  Dulay  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.1.42    8 months ago

Did your magic 8 ball tell you that? 

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.1.44  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Dulay @1.1.43    8 months ago

LOL

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1.45  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  It Is ME @1.1.38    8 months ago

Why?

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1.46  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.1.39    8 months ago

Like all of your prophecies, that have never come true, neither will this.

That's just WHACK, like usual.  

CheersjrSmiley_82_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1.47  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.1.42    8 months ago

You're the one with no clue 8 ball.

WHACK!

Cheers!  jrSmiley_82_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1.48  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Dulay @1.1.43    8 months ago
'Did your magic 8 ball tell you that?'

That magic 8 ball is cracked and WHACKED.  

 
 
 
Dulay
1.1.49  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.3    8 months ago
There is reason for questions:

Graham and the Trump cult could have subpoenaed the whistleblower anytime they wanted to, including during the trial. WTF has Graham et al been waiting for? 

BTFW, Barr could have had the FBI interview the whistleblower before the complaint was made public. Barr chose to try to cover up the complaint instead. 

Lastly, the question you have is the Intel Committee's to answer, NOT the whistleblower. 

 
 
 
Dulay
1.1.50  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.10    8 months ago
It might give him a chance to clear his name:

Clear his name of WHAT? 

I find it ironic that you quoted the article yet utterly ignored the FIRST sentence. 

Trump political appointees were believed to frequently talk to journalists who worked for conservative media outlets. 

Yet THEIR names haven't been thrown out as fodder. Why not? Let's talk to them too. Let's have the FBI interview the lot of them. 

BTFW, it's obvious that someone in Trump's NSC leaked content of the Bolton transcript, where is the investigation for that leaker, who obviously continues contact with the media to trickle out more information? 

 
 
 
MAGA
1.2  MAGA  replied to  Tessylo @1    8 months ago

That’s what we need to find out.  It’s time to investigate Biden and. Schiff now. 

 
 
 
Ender
1.2.1  Ender  replied to  MAGA @1.2    8 months ago

Says the one that believes donald tells the truth.

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.2.2  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  MAGA @1.2    8 months ago
 It’s time to investigate Biden and. Schiff now. 

they will.

 
 
 
Dulay
1.2.3  Dulay  replied to  MAGA @1.2    8 months ago

Why didn't they subpoena them during the trial Xx? In fact, why hasn't Graham subpoenaed them in all of this time? Hell this all started way back in May. WTF has Graham been doing other than playing golf with Trump? 

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.2.4  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Dulay @1.2.3    8 months ago
why hasn't Graham subpoenaed them in all of this time?

they have plenty of time for that.  no rush.

 
 
 
Dulay
1.2.5  Dulay  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.2.4    8 months ago
they have plenty of time for that.  no rush.

Then why have they been demanding that the Democrats do it for them for months? 

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.2.6  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Dulay @1.2.5    8 months ago
Then why have they been demanding that the Democrats do it for them for months?

no one has been demanding they do anything... LOL

they could have done it in the house but chose not to expecting the senate to do their job for them

epic failure by the resistance.

 

 
 
 
Dulay
1.2.7  Dulay  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.2.6    8 months ago
no one has been demanding they do anything... LOL

Oh come on 8, the Trump cult has been whining about needing to out the whistleblower since day one. The GOP Congressmen tried to question witnesses about who the whistleblower was. Hell I read that Rand Paul announced the name of the suspected whistleblower on the Senate floor today. 

they could have done it in the house but chose not to expecting the senate to do their job for them
epic failure by the resistance.

Are you under some delusion that the whistleblower would honor a House subpoena? Why would he? 

Oh and BTFW, IF the whistleblower HAD testified, you'd just bitch about it being hearsay. 

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.2.8  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Dulay @1.2.7    8 months ago
the Trump cult has been whining about needing to out the whistleblower since day one.

and we will know his name. count on it.

 
 
 
Dulay
1.2.9  Dulay  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.2.8    8 months ago
and we will know his name. count on it.

And THEN what 8? What is the goal of that disclosure? Please tell me that you have a goal other than revenge against a citizen that FOLLOWED THE LAW. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.2.10  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Dulay @1.2.9    8 months ago

I heard Rand announced on the Senate floor after Roberts blocked him twice at the 'impeachment hearings'

What a scumbag.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.4  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Tessylo @1    8 months ago

I think it's time to investigate Ms. Lindsey.

 
 
 
Tessylo
2  seeder  Tessylo    8 months ago

Heaven Forbid corruption is called out when it is seen Ms. Lindsey.

 
 
 
Ender
2.1  Ender  replied to  Tessylo @2    8 months ago

It seems to be the republican way now. Attack and go after everyone. Now a certain republican senator has said that if Biden would somehow win the presidency, they would immediately start to impeach him.

Bunch of sick bastards.

 
 
 
Tessylo
2.1.1  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Ender @2.1    8 months ago

How dare we say the emperor has no clothes.  

So they'll continue to do nothing, the gop, like since tRump has been 'president' and when Obama was President.  Just continue to obstruct and draw a salary and get nothing done.

 
 
 
Tessylo
2.1.2  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Ender @2.1    8 months ago

84162753_10221421361951983_1209177785113772032_o.jpg?_nc_cat=106&_nc_ohc=tQh8n2JI6Q0AX9fCrY7&_nc_ht=scontent-iad3-1.xx&oh=d9130137c94441ebe88b9be464236908&oe=5EBD24A0

 
 
 
Ender
2.1.3  Ender  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.1    8 months ago

Well to be fair they have gotten a bunch of people that were rated as not qualified on judicial benches.

republicans, determined to ruin the country.

 
 
 
katrix
2.1.4  katrix  replied to  Ender @2.1.3    8 months ago
republicans, determined to ruin the country.

They certainly do love incompetence and they hate our country.

 
 
 
Ronin2
2.1.5  Ronin2  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.2    8 months ago

What, you don't like impeachment based off of feelings, innuendo, and second and third hand reports?

That is the can of worms the Democrats opened up. Get on their asses for lowering the bar for impeachment.

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
2.1.6  Freedom Warrior  replied to  Ender @2.1    8 months ago

Yeah shame on them for behaving like Democrats.

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
2.1.8  Freedom Warrior  replied to  katrix @2.1.4    8 months ago

Economy is doing just fine without the Dems.   Of course the Dems would to prefer to drag us all into their hell and put the nail in the coffin with Socialism and Green New Dumbphuckery.

 
 
 
Ender
2.1.10  Ender  replied to    8 months ago

Si in bizzarro world impeaching him in his third year is doing it from the start....

 
 
 
Ender
2.1.11  Ender  replied to  Freedom Warrior @2.1.6    8 months ago

Maybe dempcrats are acting like the repubs and they don't like it thrown back on them. Hell they investigated Hillary for years on end costing millions of dollars.

Stop acting like they have their hands clean when we all know different.

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
2.1.12  Freedom Warrior  replied to  Ender @2.1.11    8 months ago

The problem was they didn't lock up HRC and throw away the key.   

I read she just buried another body recently.   Nothing could compare to the criminality of that bitch.

 
 
 
Tessylo
2.1.13  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Freedom Warrior @2.1.12    8 months ago

What a steaming pile of shit.  Nothing can compare to the criminality of tRump and his administration of gangsters, thugs, grifters and thieves

 
 
 
Tessylo
2.1.14  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Freedom Warrior @2.1.12    8 months ago

Lock up Hillary for what?

Do tell

 
 
 
bugsy
2.1.15  bugsy  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.13    8 months ago
Nothing can compare to the criminality of tRump and his administration of gangsters, thugs, grifters and thieves

Like who and what did they do, and who is in prison because of Trump?

 
 
 
Tessylo
2.1.16  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  bugsy @2.1.15    8 months ago

Don't waste my time 

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
2.1.17  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Ronin2 @2.1.5    8 months ago
What, you don't like impeachment based off of feelings, innuendo, and second and third hand reports? That is the can of worms the Democrats opened up. Get on their asses for lowering the bar for impeachment.

that would be fun enough.

what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
2.1.18  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Ender @2.1.11    8 months ago
Maybe dempcrats are acting like the repubs

Wow.  That is some serious spin you are trying to put out there.  

 
 
 
Ender
2.1.19  Ender  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.1.18    8 months ago

So it is spin to say the repubs have had investigations for years?

Sure....

 
 
 
MAGA
2.2  MAGA  replied to  Tessylo @2    8 months ago

That’s why Biden and Schiff need to be called out. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
2.2.1  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  MAGA @2.2    8 months ago

Why?

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
2.2.2  Sean Treacy  replied to  MAGA @2.2    8 months ago

It's scary to think Adam Schiff had the power to prosecute people. How many innocent people did that liar send to jail?

 
 
 
Tessylo
2.2.4  seeder  Tessylo  replied to    8 months ago

'For various high crimes and misdemeanors like bribery, bearing false witness, abuse of power, etc.'

Sounds like you're describing the tRump administration of gangsters, crooks, mobsters, gangsters, grifters, thugs, and thieves.  

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
2.3  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Tessylo @2    8 months ago
Heaven Forbid corruption is called out when it is seen Ms. Lindsey.

The corrupt was voted out of the WH in 2016.  And will more than likely be denied it again in 2020.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
2.3.1  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.3    8 months ago

The corrupt was placed in the now White Trash House in 2016.  

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
2.3.2  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Tessylo @2.3.1    8 months ago

Maybe if you are blind to the obvious like the leftis.

 
 
 
Tessylo
2.3.3  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.3.2    8 months ago

Who are the leftis?

It is quite obvious this whole administration including Ms. Lindsey is complicit and corrupt.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
2.3.4  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Tessylo @2.3.3    8 months ago

And yet you offer not a single piece of evidence of being corrupt.  But you go on with your inept self.

 
 
 
Tessylo
2.3.5  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.3.4    8 months ago

It's quite obvious to those who don't kiss tRump's big fat ass.  

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
2.3.6  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Tessylo @2.3.5    8 months ago

So, you dont have anything aside from a case of TDS.  Although it's not that I expected anything more from you.

 
 
 
Tessylo
2.3.7  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.3.6    8 months ago

Who are you?  

 
 
 
Tessylo
3  seeder  Tessylo    8 months ago

The Next Trump Crisis Is Already Here

Ukraine is by no means the only dirty secret being covered up.

David Frum

The Atlantic

7:00 AM ET
Republicans voted down a measure to call witnesses in President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial and are moving to acquittal in a hell-for-leather dash to put the crisis behind them. It’s a doomed errand. With Trump, the next crisis is always just ahead.

Actually, the first “next crisis” has already arrived.   The New York Times   reported   Friday that, in his forthcoming book, former National Security Adviser John Bolton writes that Trump first tried to put the squeeze on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in early May 2019—and White House Counsel Pat Cipollone was a witness in the very room where the plot was hatched. Even as Cipollone argued on the president’s behalf that witnesses were unnecessary, he was plausibly alleged to be a crucial fact witness by another fact witness.

Then will come the crisis of the administration’s battle to suppress Bolton’s book—and all the other narratives that current insiders may want to tell in order to clear their own besmirched reputations. Does Mulvaney enjoy being the designated sucker in chief of this story? Maybe not.

Even worse for Trump and the Republicans, Ukraine is by no means the only dirty secret being covered up. There are others, and perhaps even more damaging. Sometime before the end of June, the U.S. Supreme Court will rule in consolidated cases about whether Trump can continue to keep secret his tax returns and other business documents.

One case began with a New York State grand-jury subpoena of Trump business documents, to probe whether he broke laws when he allegedly paid hush money to two women during the 2016 campaign. The others involve subpoenas by House committees—Oversight, Financial Services, and Intelligence—of tax returns and banking records.

The multiple subpoenas raise different legal issues, especially because the Financial Services and Intelligence subpoenas were served not on Trump or his organization, but on his accounting firm and two of his banks.

If the Supreme Court rules in favor of some or all of the subpoenas, damaging financial information will tumble into the public domain right as the election season begins in earnest. Worse, the New York State case could conceivably lead to an indictment of Trump. The current practice is that a serving president cannot be prosecuted for a federal crime. What about a state crime? Vice President Aaron Burr was (unsuccessfully) prosecuted for the killing of Alexander Hamilton in 1804. Beyond that, there are not many relevant precedents. Whatever the ultimate constitutional answer to the question, it’s not a good look for a serving president to end a campaign arguing that he should be immune to state as well as federal criminal law. It raises questions like “Maybe we should have a president who has not committed so many crimes?”

Trump can of course hope that he wins on every point in the Supreme Court. Yet such a victory will not protect him unless it is overwhelming. If Trump wins 5–4, with the newest justice, Brett Kavanaugh, casting a vote for secrecy, this outcome will not command much legitimacy among Trump’s political opponents. Instead, they will charge that a justice whose guilty secret was protected by the president is now protecting the president’s own guilty secrets: yet another quid pro quo in an administration notorious for them.

Trump is driving a poorly packed egg cart over stony roads. He holds too many secrets, too ill-concealed, shared with too many people and companies with too little loyalty to him. Michael Cohen’s prison sentence stands as a reminder of the ultimate consequences of loyalty to Trump. Gordon Sondland jumped off before that point, and so, sooner or later, will Mulvaney. Everybody turns on Trump in the end, if only because they can no longer endure the abuse. His party in Congress follows him only so long as he looks like the path to success. If things begin to go south before Election Day, the defections will begin and then accelerate.

An acquitted Trump will be an immunized Trump. Is it vexing to hear Trump’s team misrepresent Robert Mueller’s report as an “exoneration”? Imagine what they will say and do if they defeat impeachment on a party-line Senate vote.  It was all fake news, a plot by the Deep State.  As false and wrong as those claims will be, how will Democrats sustain the momentum to hold Trump to account after a trial and acquittal? Won’t they then have to submit to the jeers of Trump henchpersons:  This issue was litigated, and it’s time to move on ?

Yet the impeachment process has achieved something. It has removed deniability from the Republicans. They were enablers; now they are accomplices. They are all Carmela Soprano in the classic scene with the psychiatrist who speaks the truth about her criminal husband: “One thing you can never say: that you haven’t been told.” The Republican Party as an institution has utterly merged itself into the Trump cover-up machine, and there is no escape for any of them—not the concerned Susan Collins nor the troubled Marco Rubio nor the thoughtful Ben Sasse.

The story of the senatorial Republican Party since 2016 has been the story of people almost, kind of, any minute ready to step up and do the right thing—and then pitifully failing, one by pathetic one: Ted Cruz urging an anti-Trump vote at the Cleveland convention and then collapsing into abject support of the man who defamed him and his family; Foreign Relations Chair Bob Corker   needling   Trump on Twitter and then lapsing into frightened passivity; the China hawk Marco Rubio   shrugging off   Trump’s appeal to China for help against Joe Biden.

If the impeachment remedy has failed, the ballot remains, as corrupted as Trump is determined to make it. If Trump loses in 2020 and pulls the Republican Senate majority tumbling after him, then the rickety old constitutional system will be vindicated after all. Crime will not have paid off. But if he does win, this first Trump term will be only the choppy prelude to the storms to come after 2020.

 
 
 
Tessylo
4  seeder  Tessylo    8 months ago

To see men and women who had a positive vision beaten down and broken by Trump is a poignant thing.

FEBRUARY 2, 2020
Contributing writer at   The Atlantic   and senior fellow at EPPC
3 more free articles this month
Sign in
lead_720_405.jpg?mod=1580655788 A statue representing "Grief" lays her covered face on the shoulder of the statue representing "History" outside the U.S. Capitol. MARY CALVERT / REUTERS


On Friday, Republicans in the United States Senate—with the exception of Mitt Romney and Susan Collins—voted to prevent John Bolton, Donald Trump’s former national security adviser, from testifying in the impeachment trial of the president.

The reason they did so is undeniable: They did not want to hear from the most credible fact witness of all, one whose account would further implicate the president in his corrupt scheme—his “drug deal,” in Bolton’s words—to pressure the Ukrainian government to open an investigation to harm Trump’s main political opponent.

This is simply the latest act in an unfolding political drama, one in which the party of Lincoln and Reagan has now become, in every meaningful sense, the party of Trump.

I have  written before  about the massive moral and ethical defects of the president; there’s no need to rehearse them here. The point I want to make is a somewhat different one, which is that Trump’s takeover of the GOP has happened not because he is widely loved or admired by Republican lawmakers but because he is feared; not because most of the people in the Republican Senate Conference aspire to be like him, but because they are too timid to challenge him.

From a certain perspective, their timidity is understandable. They know that to publicly challenge Trump—to call out his ethical transgressions, cruelty, and indecency even as they support his policies—invites impassioned attacks from Trump supporters and, in some cases, a primary challenge. No one likes to be under attack, particularly by the base of one’s own party, and no one wants to lose a job.

Moreover, they will argue, they must defend the president in public so they can have influence in private. They have also convinced themselves that they are essential to the project of repairing the Republican Party post-Trump, and that this requires that they not be viewed as disloyal to Trump while he’s serving as president. “What good does it do to attack Trump?” they will ask. He won’t change his ways, and they will only weaken themselves in the process. (Many of them are happy to attack Trump in private conversations, citing, chapter and verse, things he has said or done that alarm them, showing that they both know better and are playing a cynical game.)

That, at least, is the story they tell themselves. Some of what they say is worth taking into account. But what they don’t tell themselves, probably because it would be too psychologically shattering, is that they have become fully complicit in a corrupt enterprise called the Trump presidency. (Romney is the rare exception.) They are defending actions they know are wrong and that, if they had been done by a Democratic president, they would be outraged by. More than that, they are validating Trump’s approach to politics—the hyper-aggression, the lawlessness, the mendacity, the shamelessness—and therefore guaranteeing imitators. It also happens that their influence on the president is far smaller than they tell themselves. They have made concession after concession after concession, justifying each one along the way. Then you look back at the road they’ve traveled, and it’s breathtaking. Donald Trump has changed them far more than they have changed Donald Trump.

In 1991, when Václav Havel received the Sonning Prize for contributions to European civilization, he spoke about those “who are starting to lose their battle with the temptations of power.” It is an insidious thing, Havel   warned , to become captive to the perks of power. Politicians, he said, soon learn how easy it is to justify staying in power even as they give up bits of their soul in the process. It is easier than they think, he said, to get “morally tainted.”

“Politics is an area of human endeavor that places greater stress on moral sensitivity,” Havel concluded, “on the ability to reflect critically on oneself, on genuine responsibility, on taste and tact, on the capacity to empathize with others, on a sense of moderation, on humility. It is a job for modest people, for people who cannot be deceived.”

What Republicans who have rallied behind Trump don’t fully grasp yet is the toxic effect he’s had on the younger generation, and on college-educated, suburban, and nonwhite voters. (Trump is wildly popular among blue-collar and rural voters, who are shrinking as a percentage of the voting population.) The damage done by Trump won’t be limited in its reach. He has imperiled the future of the party he leads. And those who think the GOP will simply snap back to the best of what it was pre-Trump—who think the worst elements of Trumpism will vanish once he leaves the White House—are kidding themselves.

Those who fell in line behind Trump have empowered him (and his many acolytes and media propagandists) to redefine much of conservatism and the principles that once informed the Republican Party. I don’t think that is what they intended, but that is what they have helped achieve.

Few things in life are permanent, most of all in the realm of politics. The fight for the future of the Republican Party, post-Trump, will be an intense one. Those of us who are conservatives and those on the center-right who believe the soul of GOP is still worth fighting for will not go gently into the good night.

But for now, Donald Trump has an iron grip on the Republican Party—and Republican lawmakers who privately lament what he has done have publicly enabled what he has done. That is something that must haunt at least a few of them, at least in their private moments, when they lay aside their rationalizations for just a moment and reflect on the role they have played in this horror show.

PETER WEHNER   is a contributing writer at   The Atlantic,   a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, and Egan visiting professor at Duke University. He writes widely on political, cultural, religious, and national-security issues, and he is the author of   The Death of Politics : How to Heal Our Frayed Republic After Trump .
 
 
 
bbl-1
5  bbl-1    8 months ago

Gee Lindsey, all of 'this crap started' when a candidate, a campaign and certain politicians had just to many and questionable connections to Russians and Russian Intelligence.  You know, like Dana Rohrabacher and several others.   Are you sure you really want to go there, Lindsey?

 
 
 
Tessylo
6  seeder  Tessylo    8 months ago

Ms. Lindsey is complicit and corrupt just like the rest of this administration.  

He's been on his knees for tRump the whole time.  

 
 
 
freepress
7  freepress    8 months ago

Cool? Then why, why, why did Republicans block every witness, every subpoena, and challenge every attempt to have witnesses that could shed light on the crime committed? The whistle blower just brought it to the attention of those who could prosecute or investigate. If there were witnesses that can prove the whistle blower lied then why doesn't ANY Republican including Trump allow witnesses to truly exonerate him come forward? Republicans don't do it because they won't like the truth or what comes out with actual witnesses and documentation.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online










56 visitors