« 11 Nations or 1? | Main | Borovski and the Haredim »

05 December 2019


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Why is Nancy in a rush? I suppose since she’s got the votes to impeach on a purely partisan party line vote she may as well get it done sooner than later. And pass the ball to Mitch.

The NeverTrump media will have a field day as the amplify quotes from Romney and the other Republican senators who will vote to convict. The question is what process will Mitch follow, will he give Trump the right to call witnesses and cross examine which was denied him by Nancy. Will Mitch match Nancy’s partisanship in the impeachment trial?

My question will Trump have the balls to call Obama as a witness to testify under oath to get to what did he know and when in relation to Spygate? Will Trump attempt to prove to the Senate that there has been a pattern of abuse to frame him even before he was elected? The rubber is gonna meet the road soon enough as the Senate trial begins and we learn what rules Mitch gonna apply. Will 20 Republican senators join the Democrats to convict him?

Bill H

If you read Turley regularly, as I do, you will not be quit so sanguine about his position. He strongly favors impeachment and advocates doing so, and is disappointed only the Democrats have not yet found adequate grounds with which to do so. In his routine writings he is constantly urging Democrats to find a better basis upon which to proceed with the impeachment, and has never once pointed out the wrongness of calling for impeachment before finding a crime to fit the process.

The process properly would be that the president is accused of a specific crime, and the call for impeachment follows. Here we have the call for impeachment first. So the basis of "collusion" was first used a grounds for that impeachment, and failed. Then "obstruction of justice" was tried and never got off the ground. Then they drummed up a "whistle blower" to accuse Trump of doing what Joe Biden bragged of doing, and are trying to float that as grounds for impeachment, while denying that Joe Biden ever did what he bragged about doing.

And none of that prompted these "law scholars," Turley included, to say that the impeachment concept in this instance was in and of itself bogus?

blue peacock

"Hamilton spoke clearly but the Democrats and their constitutional scholars were tone deaf."


What the Democrats don't get is that by "weaponizing" impeachment as just another partisan political tool, as Rep. Al Green noted that they need to impeach Trump or else he'll be re-elected, that what goes around comes around. They will now normalize that either party that has a majority in the House can impeach a President of the opposing party for any or no reason. The impeachment inquiry can now be made into a completely partisan affair with the opposing party and the accused President having no due process rights. We have now devolved into complete Banana Republic status and the two centuries of constitutional norms have been completely shredded. We have also now entered into straight out partisan warfare with no guideposts like the constitution to temper the behavior of the political, governmental and business leadership. Naked power is what's it all about from now on.


Jack, Sundance has a plausible theory, given that McConell is a total Swamp Boy: https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/12/05/the-senate-and-impeachment-dynamic/#more-177899



You can have McConnell or you can have a 1984 style socialist state.



To frame or control the narrative. All upcoming indictments, if any are issued, will be labelled unjust retaliation by Trump.


I respect Sundance but can McConnell truly hope to win re-election in 2020 if he triggers Trump's wrath during Senate impeachment proceedings? I doubt it -- the people of KY seem to love the POTUS.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Blog powered by Typepad