Politics The Probe

I'm going to browse through those when I have a hour to spare .



Mick Mulvaney might be jumping ship? Intentionally, or unintentionally? I wonder what he might know first-hand about Ukraine (and other questionable WH/Trump policies and actions) ?

Mick Mulvaney's bad week just got worse

https://www.usnews.com/news/nationa...ms-ukraine-aid-held-up-for-political-purposes


Mulvaney and Bolton could sink Trump IF IF IF, both of them (eventually) testify truthfully.

 

Just because Ukraine didn't do what Trump wanted, and some of the funds were eventually released, doesn't make the Quid Pro Quo any less illegal.

Of course Trump was not the first POTUS to dangle a carrot while asking for, even demanding, a favor, and he won't be the last. He did, however, get caught. If Trump wasn't so narcissistic and delusional he'd know further denials are meaningless, even harmful.

 

“When Nixon abused the power of the presidency, there were those who defended the president. Others defended the Constitution.”



Republican Group Urges GOP Lawmakers To Stand Up To Trump During Impeachment

 

There's a lot of thin ice involved. Namely the lack if precedent, which could (and most likely would with Trump) involve legal challenges.

I'm all in favor if it gets Trump out of office.

 

So we're going public today.

How many unrelated questions will be asked? Will there be attempts to sidetrack and derail the hearings? Who will have the authority to say, "Cut the crap, keep your questions relevant."?

 

The Democrats changed the process of today's hearing from normal hearings to prevent Republicans from turning it into a circus with distractions.

First, they changed the normal "five minute" rule that alternates between Democrats and Republicans asking questions. Instead, Democrats will control the first 45 minutes with no interruptions from Republicans, followed by Republicans having the next 45 minutes. And then, back to the 5 minute rule. for the rest of the hearing.

Those first 45 minutes will be where the Democrats emphasis "bribery and extortion" (terms the public understands) as opposed to "quid pro quo" and a focus on how Trump subverted the foreign policy process by turning it over to persons outside of government (Rudy Giuliani) who operated a "shadow policy" for Trump's personal benefit.

The Democrats also changed the process for Republicans raising a "point of order" that would force a stop in the proceedings to vote on the "point of order" each time is is raised. Instead, the "points of order" will all be held to the very end of the hearing.

 

I like that ^.

Now we'll see how/if it works.

 

So Counselori Giuliani has "insurance" JIC Trump throws him under the bus.............but he's joking, per his attorney.

Joking. Yeah, right.

I'd like to live long enough to see the attorney-client privilege between Giuliani & Trump declared null & void.

Rudy Giuliani Jokes That He Has 'Insurance' If Trump Throws Him Under The Bus | HuffPost

Rudy Giuliani says Trump will stay loyal to him but jokes that he has 'insurance'

 

Trump attacks former ambassador Yovanovitch as she testifies at impeachment hearing


View: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1195356211937468417?

White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham told reporters earlier today that Trump "will be watching [ranking House Intelligence Committee member Rep. Devin Nunes'] opening statement, but the rest of the day he will be working hard for the American people."

• Trump's 10:01 a.m. tweet came 35 minutes after Nunes' opening statement concluded at 9:26 a.m.
• Axios' Alayna Treene reports that Trump's tweet is the type of attack that Republicans told her they were hoping to avoid today.

House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) read the tweets directly to Yovanovitch about 20 minutes after Trump posted them, adding that "some of us here take witness intimidation very seriously."

• "It's very intimidating. ... I mean, I can't speak to what the president is trying to do, but I think the effect is trying to be intimidating."

 

I never thought of Trump's tweets as a form of intimidation. It would be very convenient if he would make clear threats of retaliation, and/or offers of rewards, and/or offers of pardons.

 

I agree. I find most of his tweets to be childish and petulant but....

CNN reports....

Fox News anchors say Trump's tweet raises the possibility of witness tampering

Two of the top anchors at Fox News said that President Trump's Friday tweets attacking ex-ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch raised the possibility of an additional article of impeachment being added against Trump for witness tampering.

Bret Baier, Fox's chief political anchor, said Trump's tweets "enabled" House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, who is leading the impeachment inquiry, to "characterize that tweet as intimidating the witness or tampering with the witness, which is a crime."

"Adding, essentially, an article of impeachment real time as this hearing is going on," Baier said.

Chris Wallace, the anchor of Fox's flagship Sunday show, agreed with Baier, noting the attack "played out in real time."

"It does raise the possibility of witness intimidation and witness tampering as a new charge here," Wallace said.​

 

Trump is considering testifying?

I can hear his advisors begging, "No, no, no! Mr. President, please no!."

 

It probably wouldn't be difficult to goad Trump into self-incrimination.

 

Are too many witnesses being called?

I'm starting to wonder if the testimony from witnesses who aren't revealing anything substantial is watering down the case against Trump.

At times the expression beating-a-dead-horse comes to mind.

Don't test the attention span of the average American voter too often and too long.