|
Post by nashville11 on Jan 31, 2020 16:59:28 GMT
conniefromct, such good news about your DH! Very happy for you both!
|
|
|
Post by DotRen on Jan 31, 2020 17:32:06 GMT
|
|
|
Post by lani on Jan 31, 2020 18:13:14 GMT
Marco Rubio actually said these words:
"Just because actions meet a standard of impeachment does not mean it is in the best interest of the country to remove a President from office."
So, got it? We all know the current state of the union.
ETA: Murkowski a no on witnesses.
|
|
|
Post by nashville11 on Jan 31, 2020 18:43:24 GMT
Murkowsky folds as usual. I hope they all live to regret this. They are shameless.
|
|
|
Post by nashville11 on Jan 31, 2020 19:33:04 GMT
I received this from Alexander today in answer to one of my many, many messages to him. Thought you might be interested in seeing it.
"Dear Joyce, Thanks for getting in touch with me and sharing your thoughts regarding the impeachment of President Donald Trump. I worked with other senators to make sure that we have the right to ask for more documents and witnesses, but there is no need for more evidence to prove something that has already been proven and that does not meet the United States Constitution’s high bar for an impeachable offense. There is no need for more evidence to prove that the president asked Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden and his son, Hunter; he said this on television on October 3, 2019, and during his July 25, 2019, telephone call with the president of Ukraine. There is no need for more evidence to conclude that the president withheld United States aid, at least in part, to pressure Ukraine to investigate the Bidens; the House managers have proved this with what they call a ‘mountain of overwhelming evidence.’ There is no need to consider further the frivolous second article of impeachment that would remove the president for asserting his constitutional prerogative to protect confidential conversations with his close advisers. It was inappropriate for the president to ask a foreign leader to investigate his political opponent and to withhold United States aid to encourage that investigation. When elected officials inappropriately interfere with such investigations, it undermines the principle of equal justice under the law. But the Constitution does not give the Senate the power to remove the president from office and ban him from this year’s ballot simply for actions that are inappropriate. The question then is not whether the president did it, but whether the United States Senate or the American people should decide what to do about what he did. I believe that the Constitution provides that the people should make that decision in the presidential election that begins in Iowa on Monday. The Senate has spent nine long days considering this ‘mountain’ of evidence, the arguments of the House managers and the president’s lawyers, their answers to senators’ questions and the House record. Even if the House charges were true, they do not meet the Constitution’s ‘treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors’ standard for an impeachable offense. The framers believed that there should never, ever be a partisan impeachment. That is why the Constitution requires a 2/3 vote of the Senate for conviction. Yet not one House Republican voted for these articles. If this shallow, hurried and wholly partisan impeachment were to succeed, it would rip the country apart, pouring gasoline on the fire of cultural divisions that already exist. It would create the weapon of perpetual impeachment to be used against future presidents whenever the House of Representatives is of a different political party. Our founding documents provide for duly elected presidents who serve with ‘the consent of the governed,’ not at the pleasure of the United States Congress. Let the people decide. Sincerely, Lamar"
So there you have it. The JA behaved "inappropriately." Silly me!
|
|
|
Post by lani on Jan 31, 2020 19:54:02 GMT
Like the country isn't already ripped apart.
We will see how many care to vote in Nov. It's going to have to be a larger margin of popular vote for the Democrat than the last time in order to overcome the Electoral College and all the gerrymandering that is in place in red states.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2020 20:16:13 GMT
Sounds like Murkowski is calling out EW for her question to Roberts about his role with the SC & then she didn't want her vote be the one that would tie it. Yup, I agree, shameless cowards. I hope they all go down in flames the next election they are involved in.
Well, at least Joyce, you got a response from Alexander. I doubt I will get anything but a "canned" response, brief at that, from Crammer & Hoven. You know, this last vote of his will define Alexander forever. Not what he did in the past, even if it was somewhat good for your State. His legacy is now set in stone! Wonder if he really realizes that. His friendship with McConnell probably persuaded him to to vote this way thereby giving McConnell the power to determine his, (Alexander's) legacy ....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2020 20:20:48 GMT
POLITICS 01/31/2020 10:52 am ET Trump’s Defense Lawyer Leads A Charity Barred From Engaging In Partisan Politics Charity watchdogs have long raised concerns about the blurred lines between Jay Sekulow’s for-profit and non-profit organizations.
WASHINGTON (AP) — Jay Sekulow, one of President Donald Trump’s lead attorneys during the impeachment trial, is being paid for his legal work through a rented $80-a-month mailbox a block away from the White House.
The Pennsylvania Avenue box appears to be the sole physical location of the Constitutional Litigation and Advocacy Group, a for-profit corporation co-owned by Sekulow. The firm has no website and is not listed in national legal directories. The District of Columbia Bar has no record of it, and no attorneys list it as their employer.
But Sekulow, 63, is registered as chief counsel at the American Center for Law and Justice, a non-profit Christian legal advocacy group based in an expansive Capitol Hill row house a short walk from the Senate chamber.
Including Sekulow, a half dozen lawyers employed by the non-profit ACLJ are named in recent Senate legal briefs as members of Trump’s defense team — including one of Sekulow’s sons. The ACLJ, as a tax-exempt 501(c)(3) organization, is barred under IRS rules from engaging in partisan political activities.
The Republican National Committee has paid more than $250,000 to Sekulow’s for-profit CLA Group since 2017, when he was first named to Trump’s legal team as special counsel Robert Mueller was leading the Russia investigation, according to campaign disclosures.
Sekulow has been one of Trump’s most visible defenders, enduring as a trusted attorney for the president even as other of his lawyers have been sidelined or entangled in controversy...........
The stinky swamp just gets stinkier & deeper....UGH!
|
|
|
Post by nashville11 on Jan 31, 2020 20:45:15 GMT
Everyone in this JA's orbit is just scummy. I can't think of any other word to describe it.
This is Alexander's legacy, and it's what he'll be remembered for. When he had the opportunity to do the right thing, he chose not to do it. He put party before his country. (By the way, I told him that in my response to his letter which, of course, he will never see. I'm sure he hasn't even seen the letter his staff is sending out in his behalf, because he just plain doesn't care.) Whatever he got in this bargain with the devil, and I've become cynical enough to believe he got something, he's got to live with his conscience. That's assuming he or any one of them still has even a semblance of a conscience, which frankly, at this point is very doubtful.
|
|
|
Post by nashville11 on Jan 31, 2020 20:57:08 GMT
Yep . . .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2020 21:00:54 GMT
I haven't been paying attention to JA rallies. I'm wondering how long or if they have already started the screaming mantra "Lock them up?"...referringto Biden & his son Hunter.
I also wonder how long it would be, if Biden gets the nomination & wins the presidency, that the Republicans will start Impeachment Proceedings again him....maybe in a nano sec from the time he wins?
I keep thinking this all has to just calm down, get back to normal politics, etc, but I see no end in site. Its just exhausting.
I guess this is the new normal!
|
|
|
Post by nashville11 on Jan 31, 2020 21:33:54 GMT
I guess this is the new normal! I'm afraid so. That surely is depressing, isn't it.
|
|
|
Post by birdgal on Jan 31, 2020 21:50:12 GMT
It is scary how stupid some people are.
I can't shake the image of "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil."
Can America be any more dumbed down?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2020 22:11:00 GMT
Here's he response Hoven sent. I'm sure he did this while sitting in the Senate Chamber today...LOL....Looks like a prepared statement his staff automatically sends out.
Dear Linda,
Thank you for contacting me. I appreciate having the benefit of your views and welcome the opportunity to respond.
As you may know, the Constitution grants the U.S. House of Representatives the power to formally charge a federal official with wrongdoing through the process of impeachment. Any articles of impeachment must originate in the House and be passed by a simple majority vote before they can be considered in the Senate, where conviction on any articles of impeachment requires a two-thirds majority of Senators. On September 24, 2019, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) announced that the U.S. House of Representatives would open an official impeachment inquiry. On December 18, 2019, the House voted to adopt two articles of impeachment. Subsequently, on January 15, 2020, the House voted to appoint managers for the impeachment trial and send the articles of impeachment to the Senate.
Now, the Senate is working to ensure a fair trial, and we are following the model used for the Clinton trial. The Senate rules address concerns raised by the House managers, such as including the House evidence in the record, addressing the question of additional witnesses at the proper time, and providing an additional day per side for opening statements. Both the House managers and the White House will be allowed sufficient time to present their cases. I believe we need to hear the arguments from both the House managers and the White House managers before determining whether or not additional documents or witnesses are necessary.
As the Senate trial proceeds, please be assured I will keep your concerns in mind. Again, thank you for taking the time to contact me. If I can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact my office at (202) 224-2551.
Sincerely, John Hoeven United States Senator
Senator Hoeven values your input. For further information or to provide another comment, please click here. Thank you.
WASHINGTON, DC Click here to E-mail Senator John Hoeven
Phone: 202-224-2551 Fax: 202-224-7999
|
|
|
Post by doordie50 on Jan 31, 2020 22:42:39 GMT
This sham has been maddening.
|
|