Looking at Past Impeachments

I did a quick review of the past (actual) impeachments and the one that almost was (Nixon).  Andrew Jackson was first in 1868.  He was convicted by Congress of a couple charges stemming from him violating a law Congress passed despite his veto (which was later revoked).  He was not removed from office and finished his term.

Slick Willy Clinton was impeached AFTER a 70 million dollar Independent Council investigation (The Starr Report).  There were no committee hearings, only the debate and vote on the House floor.  Clinton was not convicted of anything by the Senate.  His crime was lying under oath about his “affairs”.  We all know the history of this for the most part, no need to rehash that mess.

Nixon was never actually impeached, but after he released a recording of his coverup of the Watergate break in, which was ordered by SCOTUS, he promptly resigned in shame.  Nixon SHOULD have been impeached, convicted and removed, but he quit.  We know that mess well too, at least those of us with a higher level of life experiences  😛

Now, we have Trump and these hearings, that are NOT related to the 40 million dollar Independent Council investigation that has already occurred with his complete exoneration.  Now, this.  I’ve read the transcript.  I’ve read what the Ukraine President said and what the Ukraine PM has said.  I have no idea what “crime” the Crats are talking about.  We shall see  😀

Comments

  1. Have a nice weekend!

  2. re: Trumps’ tweet about Yovanovitch should have been fired, and her feeling intimidated about it…so …witness intimidation blah, blah, blah…

    Hillary decides to opine: Witness intimidation is a crime, no matter who does it. Full stop.

    In comes Juanita Broderick with THE SMACKDOWN! Gotta love it!
    https://twitchy.com/dougp-3137/2019/11/15/full-stop-juanita-broaddrick-levels-hillary-clintons-witness-intimidation-is-a-crime-soap-box/

    • The swamp critters are being exposed now. The Crats are helping Trump by exposing them, live, for all to see. 3 this week and more to come 😀

  3. WASHINGTON, D.C.—Acme Forks & Knives was trying to block a lawsuit brought against them by the obese community. The lawsuit suggested that the company’s utensils were deadly tools that caused people to become overweight.

    The Supreme Court has blocked the company’s attempt to block the lawsuit, paving the way for victims of heart disease and other diet-related ailments to sue Acme.
    “Finally—the big forks and knives lobby will be held accountable for contributing to heart disease and obesity, the leading causes of death among American adults,” said a spokesperson for the oppressed obese community. “No human action leads to these deaths. It is entirely on the sentient utensils used to carry out the mass eating events.”
    “Blood is on their hands!” protesters cried. “Fight the corporate fork and knife lobby!”
    Lawyers for the plaintiffs in these lawsuits have presented evidence that Acme Forks & Knives have marketed their utensils to the obese, specifically encouraging them to shovel a bunch of food in their mouths. They also said it was dangerous and irresponsible for the company to market a “fully automatic assault spork” that can shove “300 rounds of chili” into your face in under 10 seconds.
    “Nobody needs that kind of forkpower,” said one lawyer. “We will get justice for the obvious cause of this epidemic of deaths: the guys who make the utensils.”

  4. Why was all the other nonsense needed?

  5. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    Two and one half hour drive yesterday gives one time for thinking.

    It is fairly obvious that the US engineered a coup in Ukraine in 2014 allegedly to replace a “corrupt” regime whose main sin seems to have been aligning more with Russia than the West. For a Slavic nation, despite their troubled history under communism, this is NOT a surprising thing. That group was replaced with a demonstrated MORE corrupt regime aligned with the West. Russia then made its move on Crimea. If you bothered to watch “Catherine the Great” (recommended) on HBO you will UNDERSTAND why Russia and Crimea are so closely linked and ESSENTIAL to Russia’s survival.

    On further reflection it also seems that 2014 coup was part of a criminal enterprise designed to make the Ukraine a money laundering operation for American Politicians. US aid in, jobs, grants, donations, out!

    Ambassador Yovanovitch was identified earlier this year by the newly elected anti-corruption president of Ukraine as a problem, not a solution being too closely aligned with the defeated regime and not supportive of reform efforts. In other words, she was in the bag. Trump in his firing and tweets merely repeats comments made to him by the new Ukrainian President.

  6. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/rep-adam-schiff-says-democrats-will-send-charlatan-trump-back-to-the-golden-throne-he-came-from/ar-BBWRV75?ocid=spartanntp

    Sadly, the only threat to our Republic is a political party who cannot accept the results of an election.

  7. Looking at my Home page MSN newsfeed this weekend, one would think that Trump was all but finished. The problem with the feed, it was 97% liberal bullshit. I still haven’t heard of ONE thing that’s impeachable. No crimes, no treason and damn sure no bribery. Pelosi has lost if and Schiff is a partisan hack who just wants power.

    The Horowitz report is coming out soon. Uh-Oh. Soon we will see the lengths the Left will go to get power. They seem to talk policies that many can get on board with, only to not do any such thing they speak of. Their followers can’t seem to grasp that, mainly because the liberal media has them so bullshitted they can’t see reality. Bummer. Good people, brainwashed into the abyss.

  8. Canine Weapon says:

    • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

      Zeddy may well have that one wrong for a variety of reasons. The slave in question was half sister to his late wife and according to contemporary reports 1/8th black and closely resembled her. Their relationship is confused at best and there were opportunities for others in the Jefferson line to have impregnated her. Jefferson, it should be noted never remarried on his wife’s death and is not known to have had other serious relationships with any other woman (unlike old Ben Franklin). Jefferson’s fault was that he was such a lousy businessman and spendthrift he was never able to financially free his estate from debt and free his slaves, including Sally Hemmings as he had promised.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Not to mention that Ms. Hemmings could have stayed in France upon Tom’s return and been a Free woman. But SHE decided to return with him. Of course there is the reported promise he made to free the children some day.

        This whole piece of history has been interesting to watch these past few years. Rumors and speculations combined with family legends have moved from the unknown to absolute fact, without any greater evidence than existed before. It is almost as if some body just wanted this to be the story in the worst way.

  9. Canine Weapon says:

  10. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    Almost total silence on Trump’s actions “pardoning” the three accused of war crimes.

    One would think the left would be jumping for joy with Lt. Lorance’s freedom. An openly gay officer who made a bad call and should never have received 20 years for it. But hate for Trump seems to always outweigh anything positive he may do.

    I loved this, a “quote” from an anonymous retired “general” too cowardly to put his name to it posted by ABC News.

    “This is so dangerous, nothing pisses me off more than these pardons,” a retired general officer fumed to ABC News after they were announced. “This undermines everything we have stood for — all my years of service goes up in smoke because we have a dictator who has no respect for the rule of law nor what we stand for.”

    I remind EVERYBODY that Lt. William Calley did exactly four months in jail for 107 direct murders in Mai Lai. Under the Obama ROE’s, everybody in a B-17 over Germany in WW 2 would have been eligible for the death penalty for clear “war crimes”. .

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Trump grants a pardon, which he is given the power to do under the “rule of law” and is called a dictator for following the “rule of law”. Seems to me the academies are failing our military if this is an example of the critical thinking skills they develop there.

    • Obama pardoned drug dealers, the Left was giddy. Trump could cure all Cancers and the Left would cry overpopulation.

      • Testing…..

      • If a POTUS wants to pardon and axe murdered….he can. It is his purview. I do not care what a POTUS does in the civilian world. In the world of the military, it is totally different. He is the CIC….of the military. He is not the POTUS of the military and THEY are different. Trump was wrong even if there was injustice in the military court. There are many things he could have done to correct any wrong doing……but this IS THE MILITARY.

        I wonder if anyone has thought past the end of their nose on this. Consider that all that Trump has done in this case, has “pardoned” people. He did not change any verdicts. A pardon does not clear anyone of anything…..you just open the cell doors. These individuals will walk the streets as guilty as charged, with this stapled to their resumes for life. They will always be known as “pardoned”.

        We know that in two of the cases, the military tribunal was wrong…yet…nothing is being done about it. No officers are being challenged. The rules of engagement under Obama were changed but not published. Officers knew this and applied the changes when no one else knew them. Shame on them. So, you let them out with apologies but you have changed nothing. You are a pardoned criminal. Not an innocent soldier. This sucks big time.

        You give back rank and pay to a Navy seal……yea! But it was a Presidential move for political purposes and this navy chief will go through life with his retirement but still a guilty charge.

        I am actually going to shut up about this now, but my CIC let me down and let the military justice system off the hook. Bad move.

        And before anyone asks, was there a better way? Yes, there was and it is already in the system. He just wanted to wave a wand over this one. If I could have Canine Weapon piss on his feet, I would do that. Instead, I am going to have raptor shit sent to the White House.

        Rant complete.

        • No, Sir Mathius, it is not enough to make me change a vote, but like you, I will hold my nose on this one.

        • So the question should be asked , is the military dealing with the prosecutor misconduct in the Navy Seal’s case (that has been reported)? Or is this being done quietly, as should be?

          • It will be dealt with quietly. It is not the public’s business.

            • Just A Citizen says:

              Bull Puckey my dear Colonel. EVERYTHING in this country is the public’s business. The military code of conduct is there as a result of public business in military conduct.

              The military is not an independent branch of the govt. which has zero oversight or accountability to the very people who authorized their existence.

              My rant is now over.

              • A military court martial is a public hearing. Typically, any member of the public is free to sit in and to observe. That can also include members of the press. Understand that any witness who will potentially provide evidence at that trial will be sequestered away from the trial, so as to prevent them from needlessly being impacted by the testimony of other potential witnesses. Perhaps they are also accused of the same crime, or perhaps there’s another reason that commander has given an order to keep them away from one or more people involved in your trial.

                The other major exception to the general rule of your trial being public is that the military judge can exclude members of the public in the event that there’s going to be an evidentiary issue for which they should be excluded. If it involves privacy interests of a complaining witness in a sexual assault trial, or in some cases, if the material is particularly sensitive or classified.
                —————————————–
                Now that you see the definition, are you ready to deal with the reality? If so, here is your test.

                Try to get on post or on base to attend a military courts martial. See what happens

            • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

              I’d be interested in your view Colonel on Lt. Lorence’s case. A mustang who was a desk pounder. he takes over a platoon for two days and gets “buck fever”. I watched teh Showtime 5 parter on him and the members of his platoon. They didn’t like him from the get go. A new PC taking over form a well liked one is gonna have a hard time no matter what.

              Not having held rank, I can only look at it from a common sense point of view. He made a mistake, in a combat zone. No women and kiddies dead like a drone strike would do. At best unfortunate collateral damage.

              Apparently because of comments he made early on they tried to make it “premeditated” but bravado in front of troops by a prior service guy to establish his “cred” is not a justification for a murder charge. I think it’s classic CYA. His “gayness”may well have played a role with senior command. I guess I would have transferred him back to a desk, given him an Article 15, a lousy OER and let him bounce out.

              • Well, sir…being a mustang myself, you walk a fine line. This guy should have never been put in charge of combat troops. He was a staffer who wanted some “battlefield cred” so he tries to play tough in front of a new platoon….especially one where the previous platoon commander was well liked. Also, brand new Lieutenants (first or second types) that get into combat have a tendency to be…….John Wayne-ish. They hunt medals. Think about it….a brand new LT that is 20 years younger that seasoned combat troops and sgts…..it is a fact that this will happen, we all know this. But in OCS (Officer’s Candidate School), we used to be able to weed out the glory hounds and the impulsive candidates. Not anymore….it is insensitive. Now we have ratios of officers that MUST be graduated…..thanks to the Obama Administration and no thanks to the Trump Administration for not taking it out.

                There is such a thing as the fog of war. It happens. You MUST guard against it but in doing so, you cannot err on the side of caution lest you get your own men killed. He orders the gunning down of men who fit all the descriptions of the enemy. He has enlisted in his ranks that do not like him….voila…a recipe for getting rid of an officer. The modern day “fragging”, if you will. HOWEVER, what has not been presented in public is the fact that some of the members if his platoon have been on record as saying “we need to get rid of this guy”…..so they did.

                What you also must remember and I know this will rile the left…..in the military, when you are supposed to get close to your men, create a bond, so to speak….homosexuality is a NO NO….it still is and it will still be……you cannot legislate the thoughts and minds of people…..ESPECIALLY in a combat zone. Commanders who knew this and put him on the front lines should be held responsible. (Responsible for WHAT, Mathius screams at his computer. Mathius says the officers that over looked his homosexuality should be praised). But Mathius forgets that the military is a close knit family where people’s lives depend upon decisions and you must trust the officers appointed over you. If homosexuality, while mandated by law, is still wrong for the majority…and you put that person in combat ant that person tries to establish street cred…….a recipe for disaster…and people die.

                No one knows for sure if the men gunned down on the orders of this LT were enemy or not. But, whatever the case, he was sentenced.

                What should have happened? Had I been his commander, I would have relieved him of command, issued a negative OER (which would ruin his career) and stick him in some obscure job until he was riffed…..

              • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

                I am happy to see that without having your military credentials, just using my civilian supervisor ones that we arrived at the very same conclusion. As they used to say, “Right on, bro!”

              • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

                PS, Thanks!

  11. Just A Citizen says:
  12. MOSCOW—Brutal totalitarian dictator Joseph Stalin has warned Democrats that they may be going “too far left.”

    “The Dems are kinda scaring me with all this far-left stuff,” Stalin said during a brief visit from his father’s house below. “Yes, I was one of history’s most deranged mass murderers, killing, like, 20 million people, but even I knew a boy is a boy and a girl is a girl. And we didn’t have any of this weird transgender athlete stuff—we just used steroids to stifle the competition and fired AK-47s at athletes’ feet until they ran faster.”
    “Honestly, I’m a little worried,” Stalin said, distancing himself from the leftist wing of the Democratic Party. “If they keep this up, they’ll kill even more people than I did.”
    Stalin’s comments immediately faced backlash on social media, with progressives sarcastically asking Stalin whether he thought “a livable wage,” “good healthcare,” and “mass starvation resulting from government’s inability to plan an economy” were “too far left.”
    He has been canceled, reburied, and his old tweets are being investigated.

  13. Now……

    I’m not here to point fingers and name names….

    But SOMEBODY in Idaho has been going to the library and hiding books which are critical of Trump.

    This – completely unknown person who we definitely do not know – this mysterious individual left behind a comment card saying ‘Your liberal angst gives me great pleasure.’

    Now, again, it could be anyone.

    Anyone at all.

    And I definitely do not have any idea who it might be.

    All we know is that he lives in Idaho.

    Hmm….

    https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/11/us/idaho-library-hidden-books-trnd/index.html

    • She said police are aware of the problem and the person could be charged with trespassing if they ever figure out who it is. So, just how does one get charged with trespassing in a public library?

    • Just A Citizen says:

      I WONDER WHO IT COULD BE???????????????

      Can’t believe CNN felt this needed to be part of their news cast.

      • Can’t believe CNN felt this needed to be part of their news cast.

        Well -I- can’t believe that you err… someone would go around hiding books for being critical of Trump…

        Can’t believe CNN felt this needed to be part of their news cast.

        In all seriousness, this is good counter-example of something I’ve been whining about for years.

        I’m always complaining that some fringe on the left says or does something stupid, and that Fox or Infowars, etc, pick that up and amplify it even though it’s stupid and immaterial. And that, then, the right gets a steady diet of these kinds of anecdotal vignettes which paints “the left” as though we were all these kinds of lunatics.

        Just this morning, while grabbing a coffee, I heard about “the liberal movement” to change Santa from a male to a “non-gendered entity.” Of course, I had to do a double-take. Of course there’s no “movement” – there might be a handful of bored college kids or busybody soccer moms. But the right-leaning media picked up on it because it fits their narrative and signal boosted it to the guy at my cafeteria.

        In this same manner, left-leaning media does the inverse to “the right,” by picking up stories like this (petty conservative is so butt-hurt and can’t take criticism that he spends his time hiding books which are critical of his dear leader and, in the process, just making life harder for some poor librarian). That feeds their narrative. Publish enough of these and you get a picture of “the right” as immature vindictive jerks who can’t handle even the slightest criticism.

        I know – I KNOW – that you see it when the left does it to your side. I agree with the sentiment “why is this even a story.” So my question is this: do you see it when the right does it to the left?

        • Of course…the whole world is becoming petty…….but, what bothers me more, is that people are giving in to this type of stuff to just shut others up….

          Don’t like the words to a particular song (Baby, It’s Cold Outside)…..re-write the song. Never mind that it was an Oscar winning song.

          Do not like Irving Berlin’s White Christmas because wishing for a White Christmas is racist? Ban it from TV. It is insensitive. No matter that White Christmas means snow…..I mean…let’s go after God because snow is WHITE and, therefore, insensitive to black people.

          Why is lava rock black and snow is white? Why is black lava rock associated with explosive volcanoes and fire and destruction while “WHITE” snow is gentle and beautiful and covers the eye sores of lava rock. This is now considered a racist expression.

          Why is Frosty the Snowman racist? Why does history have to be erased because it makes people today feel inferior?
          ———————————–

          And you wonder why the tern “Snowflake” when referring to thin skinned idiots has been termed.

          {{{heavier sigh}}}

          • Don’t like the words to a particular song (Baby, It’s Cold Outside)…..re-write the song. Never mind that it was an Oscar winning song.

            This one always drove me nuts.

            It is SO obvious that this is a dance.. that she is playfully putting up a resistance to avoid social stigma of staying. She wants to stay, but she worries that she’ll be judged (“the neighbors might say…” “or what will they think” etc). He’s not forcing her – he’s giving her the out.

            I get how a plain-text reading, and ignoring all context, could come off as creepy and rapey. And I can this conflicts with the “no-means-no” bright-line that’s part of today’s mentality.

            But come on! Get a grip, people!

            I think this one is a victim of lost context and an era in which this kind of nuanced dance is sacrificed for anti-rape female empowerment. When I was a kid, we were taught “no means no” – you hear “no” and you stop cold, back up three feet, and keep your hands and other appendages to yourself – full stop. But there’s always been a certain amount of nuance to the seduction and it can be tricky and subtle to figure out what message is being sent (by either side) when it’s not crystal clear. My generation was drilled with the message that you can use your discretion right up until the other person says “no” or “stop” or gives clear signs of not wanting to proceed. This song would certainly run afoul of that training. The generation after mine goes further. They are trained for what’s called “affirmative consent,” which is to say that it’s not enough for her to “not say no,” but rather, she must say yes. “Can I kiss you?” “Yes.” ::kiss:: I mean, I get it… I do…. but by god, it just sucks all the romance and fun out of it, don’t you think?

            Do not like Irving Berlin’s White Christmas because wishing for a White Christmas is racist?

            I don’t think anyone is saying this.

            This is probably another example of a few fringe lunatics being amplified.

            I think we all understand that snow is white.

            And snow – when you don’t have to go out in it, anyway – is pretty.

            Why is lava rock black and snow is white? Why is black lava rock associated with explosive volcanoes and fire and destruction while “WHITE” snow is gentle and beautiful and covers the eye sores of lava rock. This is now considered a racist expression.

            See, again, I don’t think it is.

            I think that this is a line of nonsense you’re being fed.

            I would be wiling to bet you could poll 1,000 liberals and might get one person to say that “snow is racist”… and odds are very good that that person would just be messing with you.

            Why is Frosty the Snowman racist?

            Because he hates Jews.

            • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

              If you don’t like a “White Christmas” because it is racist, then move to NYC and pray for snow on December 23rd. By the 25th it will be “of color”. All sorts of color from yellow to black.

            • OBJECTION: I did not say anything about Liberals………No where did I mention Liberals……I used the term “snow flake” referring to whomever fits the description….I DO NOT associate snowflakes to Liberals…….I know snowflakes that are conservative and I give them a ration of shit as well.

        • Just this morning, while grabbing a coffee, That was your first mistake….then you get to the office and grab a Red Bull….you probably ride a Vespa with a basket on the front…

          • you get to the office and grab a Red Bull

            I’ve been pretty sedentary of late.. put on a few pounds I decided I didn’t need.

            So I cut out soda / Red Bull and a bunch of sweets. My “diet” plan can best be described as “putting less food in my face hole.”

            I dropped ~20 pounds since about a month ago. No one has said a thing, so I presume I have not changed much visibly, but I feel better. I have, however, gone down two pant sizes.

            I’d like to drop just four more to hit my target. Then I start back up with the Red Bull. But those last four are being stubborn bastards…

            .you probably ride a Vespa with a basket on the front…

            No. I drive a neon-blue Smart Car.

        • It’s just another hoax that some Lefty is playing to make the Right look petty. I’ve seen this tv show before. 😛

          • The world according to Gman….

            The right seemingly misbehaves: The left drove them to it or left them no choice.
            The right seemingly misbehaves: The left started it!
            The right seemingly misbehaves: The left is even worse!
            The right seemingly misbehaves: It’s not actually bad. The left is just making things up.
            The right seemingly misbehaves: It’s a false flag by the left!

            The left seemingly misbehaves: See! The left are terrible!

            ——-

            Did I get that right?

        • Just A Citizen says:

          Mathius

          Yes I see it and that is why I do not comment on much of it. BUT……. here is a reality check for you………… unfortunately many things that seem stupid and isolated on the left somehow grow wings and become a “thing” among the left. Then a “movement” of sorts, with people demanding something. Frankly I blame the internet, OK stupid people using the internet, for much of this. Your dismissal that a few cranks want Christmas changed is undermined by the reality that it became Politically Correct for businesses to stop invoking Merry Christmas.

          After all, it was only a single silly lefty who started crying about a baker not baking him a wedding cake. Why pay attention.

          To be fair, it was only a handful of crazy people howling about Obama’s birth certificate. Why pay attention.

          • To be fair..er… these idiotic “movements” would never gain any attention and/or momentum if the right didn’t provide the oxygen…

            To be fair-er-er… Trump might not have won, had not the left gleefully promoted his candidacy as a way to damage the candidates they presumed would win the Republican Primary…

    • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

      It is called malicious mischief.

  14. https://www.theepochtimes.com/white-house-official-sues-politico-says-impeachment-witnesses-conspired-with-adam-schiff_3149649.html

    According to the lawsuit, Politico knew that the information it would publish about Patel was false.
    “The transcripts demonstrate that Politico, Bertrand, Schiff, and his staffers misled the public in the First and Second Politico Pieces, and intentionally lied about the substance of Hill and Vindman’s interviews,” the suit said. “Politico, Bertrand, and Allbritton knew that Schiff had a preconceived agenda that he was actively promoting. They knew about Schiff’s extreme bias and hatred of President Trump. Significantly, they also knew that Schiff was a wholly unreliable source because of his penchant to tell lies and to mislead.”

    So, for the sake of this chat, if Politico (along with Schiff) knew it iwas publishing false information, should they be held liable?

  15. Just A Citizen says:
    • This guy lost me in the first sentence. He claims to be a PA hunter and woodsman. I have tramped many miles of mountain forests in PA fishing and hunting and never seen sagebrush.

      • ROFLMAO! Correct T-Ray. The small areas where these “pads” are , are on mostly private lands and so small that, unless off main road, are unnoticeable. I live here, a major powerline runs across the Northside of our property, travels mostly East/West. A natural gas pipeline also runs mostly the same land. The legal access roads are a major PLUS for hunters and wildlife. The new (last 15 years) of fracking are also a plus, and allows better access to hunting lands for the elderly. It has had NO bearing on wildlife or hunting, other than better access.

        And, we don’t have sagebrush here, like you said.

        • I have traveled back to northern IL where I grew up. I find the windmills now there to be an eyesore. These are visible for miles around since the land is flat and wind mills tower above any trees. These gas well pads nestled in the dense PA woods would would be mostly invisible from the public. They might be visible on open farm land. But as you say, their foot print is small and once the drilling rig is removed very low profile. It is just more BS that we have to deal with.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        I noticed that one as well but having never been there couldn’t call it out. But generally sage brush is a west of the Big Muddy kind of thing.

      • WHAT? No sage? I am sure this violates some ethics somewhere….perhaps a hearing on capitol hill about the ABSENCE of sage is warranted?

  16. https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/nicholas-fondacaro/2019/11/18/nbc-speculates-trump-went-hospital-deal-heart-problem

    Trump goes for some tests and speculation is rampant. One story I read was that Trump’s food taster got very sick so they wanted him to get tested. The stuff people come up with.

    • Trump goes for some tests and speculation is rampant.

      The story I heard was asking “why didn’t the hospital know he was coming – does that suggest this was an emergency?”

      One story I read was that Trump’s food taster got very sick so they wanted him to get tested.

      His “food taster”?? What is he? Caesar? Does POTUS get a food tester?

      If someone had tried to poison Trump, he would be all over Twitter shouting about the liberal conspiracy.

      • That is not the question that I would ask……I would ask….WHO IS STUPID ENOUGH TO BE A FOOD TESTER.

        Perhaps Canine Weapon? After all he is JUST a dog.

        • Canine Weapon says:

          “Just”?

          “JUST”??

          JUST?!?!?!

          JUST!!!

          Actually, you know what? I’m in.

          But you’ll have to hire someone else to test anything with chocolate. I nominate Equine Weapon.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Turns out the hospital did know he was coming. It was not placed on the official calendar because of uncertainty over the scheduling. I am guessing this may have been on both sides of the schedule. But that is speculation on my part.

        • Who knows? Not me.

          It just… smells fishy.. that the official line is that he “had a free weekend in Washington” so he decided to get a jump start on his physical for next year, and will be completing the rest next year.. that just… I mean… does that sound right to you?

          I’m no conspiracy theorist, as you know, and I suspect the truth to be just what it appears to be.. a scheduling mess and some muddled messaging… but, man… it just… that doesn’t sound right to me… does it to you?

          I mean, it’s easy for me to imagine that an elderly man, especially one in a high stress job, who eats like a trash compactor, who is obese and sedentary, and also happens to be the President of the United States.. it’s easy for me to imagine that that guy’s “annual physical” is a much bigger and more involved process than my annual physical. It’s easy to see why it might take two visits.

          And it’s easy to see how you might want to head off your 2020 visit with a free weekend in 4Q2019. Especially when you have a ridiculously busy schedule and can never know when you’ll be able to fit it in next.

          So it’s probably just what he says it is.

          But it’s just… weird, you know…? Part of that, I admit, is that, having proven himself fundamentally untrustworthy, everything he says and does is automatically met with suspicion. Unless this forms a broader narrative, lets just chalk it up to “odd” and move on with our lives.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            Mathius

            Of course you know, you learned it here. You just refuse to let it pass your lips.

            His Doctor released a statement this AM……… this was a planned followup to the physical. Specifically his issue with Cholesterol and to see if the change in medication had an affect.

            Apparently it did and his count was down from the 180’s to 165.

            This was what happened to me when I flunked my physical one year. I had a followup exam about 4 or 5 months later to see if my “numbers” had improved.

  17. If the Supreme Court declines to hear Trump’s appeal, the documents would have to be handed over to lawmakers. Five votes among the justices are needed to grant a stay request. The court has a 5-4 conservative majority.
    In a separate case, Trump last Thursday asked the Supreme Court to review a New York-based federal appeals court’s ruling that local prosecutors can enforce a subpoena also issued to Mazars demanding Trump’s personal and corporate tax returns from 2011 to 2018.
    The House committee subpoenaed Mazars this year, saying it needed the records to determine if Trump complied with laws requiring disclosure of his assets, and to assess whether those laws needed to be changed.

    This is an excerpt from a CNN article that I was reading on suing for Trump’s tax returns. Does anything in the last sentence of this bother anyone but me?

    • YES, they are SEARCHING for a crime, without any real cause.

      • STOP MAKING ME AGREE WITH YOU!

        Minor clarification: the Trump organization and Trump’s tax returns themselves are, without a doubt, incredibly complicated. There is also a fine American Tradition of, shall we say, “fudging” a bit on taxes. The odds that there is an error in his taxes over the last nine years approaches 100%. The odds that there is something that could plausibly be called “fraud” probably also approaches 100%.. especially given a zealous prosecutor.

        I want to be clear. This is NOT a “Trump” or “Trump organization” thing. This is a matter of a large complex organization with a billion inputs and inflows and outflows and entities and sup-entities and Cayman registrations and and and… all held together by a small army of accountants wielding zip ties, duct tape, and bailing wire. You could pick any person with a net worth over, say, a mil, and I virtually guarantee that there are errors and/or “fraud” in their taxes somewhere, if only you search hard enough.

        For example, I give to charity. I do. I’m actually fairly generous. But on my taxes, it is.. possible… that I might have rounded up a bit. I’d bet my left arm that Trump did, too. And much, much more.

        Soooo………… to my clarification… it’s not that “there’s no cause.” There’s plenty of cause. He’s definitely “guilty” of something. The problem is that they’ve decided he’s guilty and are searching for the specific crime.

        The PROBLEM is that, when everyone is guilty, selective investigation vests the power of judge, jury, and executioner within the hands of a single body.

        It stops being “justice” and becomes a question of who they choose to point the cannon at.

        And that’s not ok.

        • Just A Citizen says:

          To add to your comment, if Congress was truly concerned about whether the tax law was working or how it might be circumvented, then why did they not go after ten years of records for each of their members and every corporate entity in the country?????

          The Court is hinting that it does not want the courts in the middle of this fight. I am hoping they quash the lower courts and toss this back to the Political Arena where it belongs.

          Can’t wait to see Bloomberg get the Dem nomination, maybe win, and then see what the R’s do to dig into his past financial records.

        • And, how about this part of the sentence……” and to assess whether those laws needed to be changed. “

          This really bothers me a lot.

    • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

      This morning our local radio station Joe Piscopo as host re-visited the Ed Koch, Mario Cuomo Mayoral race in which Young Andrew Cuomo (now governor) was daddy’s campaign manager.

      It brought back memories of how the Cuomo’s entered NY politics. THAT started with a very slow and quiet whispering campaign against Ed Koch where the secret chant, which spread throughout the City was “Vote for Cuomo not the homo” Andy owns that one. I knew one of his right hand henchmen from college who helped run that little campaign. Years later, I found out Ed Koch absolutely destroyed him politically which, sad to say, I totally reveled in.

      Koch overcame it by being Ed Koch, abrasive and tough as nails and by going everywhere with former TV Personality, and Miss America tucked under his arm. To this date, long after his death, no one has ever come up with any “male lover” of Koch’s. He seems to have been a throwback to an earlier era of the confirmed bachelor. Another thing that helped Koch anong Queens and Staten Island residents his age was this:

      https://army.togetherweserved.com/army/servlet/tws.webapp.WebApp?cmd=ShadowBoxProfile&type=Person&ID=334255

      Based on the performance of both Cuomo brothers the Governor one and the MSNBC Host one, these guys are the most evil SOB’s that have come down the pike in a long time. Andy still harbors hopes of being POTUS one day. My thinking right now is that the 2020 dem. convention may be so fractious that it will be a brokered convention. Andy Cuomo may well be nominated on the 42nd ballot.

  18. Report: Clinton Foundation reports a 16.8 million loss.

    We all know that the donations dried up almost immediately after the 2016 election. I think the wrong person is being investigated for bribery.

  19. Canine Weapon says:

    It is an annual tradition for the president to pardon one lucky turkey, saving it from being devoured on Thanksgiving Day.

    This year, however, President Donald Trump is breaking with tradition and pardoning something more dear to his heart.

    “Every year, some lucky turkey gets pardoned, but turkeys are gross,” the president said in a press conference earlier today. “This year, I’m pardoning the finest food America has to offer: a steak burnt to a crisp and doused in ketchup. Man, my mouth is watering just thinking about it, but I won’t be eating this guy.” The president then pointed to a plate of charred, indistinguishable food and a bottle of Heinz ketchup.

    When asked what will happen to the meat, Trump assured that the mass of protein will get to live a healthy life.

    “No one is going to touch Pedro,” the president said. “I named him Pedro; isn’t that cute? He will go to a meat farm and get to run with all the other meats and be happy and live forever, just like me one day.”

    While pardoning an overcooked piece of beef instead of the traditional turkey may seem unusual for a president, it certainly isn’t strange for Trump. Nevertheless, some analysts are questioning what he’s actually pardoning.

    “If Trump was concerned about saving something, why didn’t he pardon a cow before it was slaughtered?” fake news CNN reporter Jim Acosta asked. “I don’t even think he knows where meat comes from. I’ve spoken to several eyewitnesses who attest to Trump trying to put the pardoned steak into a three-piece suit and a wig.”

    Word is Trump also is making a few more changes to the celebration.

    “My aides have assured me that Pedro is OK with us eating his family, so we are going to have a meat feast on Thanksgiving, with a bucket of fries for all my guests,” Trump explained. “It will be just like eating at Texas de Brazil, but so much classier. God bless us, every one. Especially me.”

  20. Just A Citizen says:

    Colonel

    I thought you said the Military would take care of Vindman????? Now he is back on steroids. And claiming his family is threatened…………… and the Army said it will move him on base to protect him and his family. OK, this last part is probably appropriate………. even if inflated concern.

    Vindman’s superior is on record claiming he was a partisan hack……… yet the military is silent on his violation of the code of conduct and failure to follow the chain of command. They stand by and allow him to be shown as a “hero”.

    My point is this. Calling for the military to “quietly take care of its own” can have serious ramifications. Long term public policy ramifications. Here we have one of its own becoming an activist and the institution remains silent. One might think the high command is with him.

    • I doubt it, sir. I will guarantee you he is no hero…..and those of us in the military know this by looking at his uniform. *****

      His superiors are having a hands off approach and they should…….for now. I promise you. This man is burnt toast.

      ******You military types look at his uniform accolades….notice anything?

      • I had more ribbons, by far, as a Buck Sergeant.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Colonel

        I know he is not and his salad is light on substance, but the public only knows what is being portrayed. And when the Military meets out its justice, someday in quiet, nobody in the public will know.

        Excuse me for ranting but you know my record on how I feel about the military and this guy spouting is garbage just ticks me off to no end. Whats more, the lack of brass among the brass going back a decade makes me madder than hell.

        Note on your comment about promotions. You blamed Obama and Trump for not reversing Obama. But the reality is that these kinds of things don’t happen in a vacuum from POTUS. They get advise from someone that these changes are needed. I am guessing some serious boot lickers were involved. And if so, who is going to let Trump know who they are and that they need to be gone?? When the upper echelon consists of them.

        It is cold outside and I am feeling cranky.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        According to the Army, Vindman’s awards include the Purple Heart, Defense Meritorious Service Medal (2nd award), Meritorious Service Medal, Army Commendation Medal (4th award), Army Achievement Medal (3rd award), National Defense Service Medal , Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal, Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, Korean Defense Service Medal, Army Service Ribbon, Overseas Service Ribbon (4th award), Valorous Unit Award, National Intelligence Meritorious Unit Citation, Republic of Korea Presidential Unit Citation, Presidential Service Badge, Joint Chiefs of Staff identification Badge, and Navy Unit Commendation.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        During his time in uniform, Vindman has earned the Ranger Tab, which signifies the completion of one of the toughest schools in the Army, as well as the Parachutist Badge, earned after the completion of Army Airborne School, and the Expert Infantryman Badge, which denotes mastery of critical infantry tasks.

  21. Alright ladies, gentlemen, dogs, horses, and colonels…

    I’m off to go get my face jabbed with some needles so we can figure out if this lump is trying to kill me or not, and how it might be going about it.

    If I’m being completely honest, I’m not really looking forward to having my face stabbed with needles, but I guess it’s better than, you know, dying. So let’s go with it.

    • Good luck, my friend…….hope all is well. Don’t make have to come up there.

    • Break a leg, LOL …and report back ASAP

    • Good Luck Mathius. No flirting with the nurses, especially the guy ones 😛

      • Well, my face hurts.. feels swollen like I just took a solid hit to the jaw… but I’ve had worse and survived. Results in a couple days, so now we wait….

        Speaking of survival, I appreciate your wishing me good luck even if it’s somewhat self-interested given my pledge to outlive you and see that you’re buried with a copy of the collective works of Keynes.

        • Ahhh…..still a smart ass…..not enough needles.

          • Odd… that’s exactly what the doctor said yesterday before taking out one that would make Nurse Ratchet squirm.

        • Yeah, that waiting thing is a real pain.

          • Well it’s extra special annoying because everything comes to a full-stop while I wait.

            I can’t schedule the surgery even though I know I’m going to need it because the biopsy results aren’t in. So I have to wait 2-3 days, then I can schedule the surgery for ~7-10 days after that. If this thing kills me, I certainly hope one of you will avenge me for this bureaucratic bullshit.

            Here lies Mathius,
            A big government liberal.
            He lived by bureaucracy,
            He died by bureaucracy.

        • I’m happy to see that you made it through this. I don’t wish any harm to come to you.

          As far as outliving me, I may just let you, because at some point the Crats will get their Socialism wishes and you can hang around and suffer equally with the rest 😛

          I’m getting cremated so not worried about what I’m buried with 😀

          AND…I hope your results are good. 🙂

  22. So the LTC was offered the job of defense minister for Ukraine three times.

  23. JAC….I am not high on Vindman….most of his accolades are standard….Meritorious this and that…..simple to get. His Ranger tab is NOT the 75th Ranger Battalion. Do not get me wrong, it is a tough school to go through but it is not the Ranger Battalion school. It was the same school the women went through just to get a ranger tab because under the Obama administration, the standards were relaxed so some rear echelon soldiers could get a Tab. But on the dress uniform, the color of the tab is different and he does not wear the combat badge. He does have what is called the CIB (Combat Infantryman’s Badge). You get those by being assigned to a combat unit. His purple heart was earned but it was from shrapnel from an IED. He never lost a day…a scratch, if you will. Now, I am not taking anything away from him. He was there as a staff officer and got hurt and he was in a combat zone. He is NOT a line officer.
    Now, that said….at least his purple heart was somewhat earned. He got hit by some shrapnel from an IED. Not like John Kerry…..who was “wounded” by flying rice when he tried to blow up a food storage area in the Delta.
    I wear a Ranger Tab…..but I was not part of the 75th. All Special Forces goes through the Ranger School….the same one that the 75th goes through. He did not.
    As to jump school….easy peazy….just go through the school, run a few miles and make 5 jumps out of a perfectly good airplane…But, he was never assigned to an airborne division that I can see. Staff officers often go through jump school to wear the silver wings. They used to be coveted but not anymore.

    Sorry, this guy is a rear echelon weenie. But you are quite right…the public does not know this. Another example..I wear the meritorious service award as well but mine has a “V” device…(meaning valor which only means I was young and stupid and tried to do superman things in war and did not die)…his Meritorious award could be for time served. It is important to look closely at ribbons and the “devices” that are on them. That differentiates a line officer from a staff officer.

    I also noticed, he does not wear any valor devices or ribbons….this not a slap at him..it is just he looks good on paper and he presents himself good. MY RUB against him…..he is just a rear assed flunkie that disagrees with the POTUS foreign policy and he says it violate national security…..but NO ONE….and I mean….NO ONE has shown where national security has been violated or even tarnished in the POTUS application of it. So, the democrats bring in a flashy staff officer with some minor accolades and people think he is a war hero…..nope.

    Now, the man does wear the uniform. He did earn those ribbons….and he is a LTC..and I know that he was paraded out there for public perception….but he is a laughing stock among line officers.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Colonel

      That is consistent with my view of his “record”. However, I have bigger questions about his posting these past years. One I hear nobody ask.

      He has been portrayed as and “EXPERT” on both Russia and Ukraine. Given his postings did not apparently involve either and he was infantry and spent ONE YEAR in combat, what the hell makes this guy a supposed “EXPERT” on these countries??

      Why in the hell would Ukraine offer this guy a job? One for which is is clearly not qualified. He dismissed it as funny but did not deny the offers were made.

      • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

        He is a Ukrainian by birth and speaks Russian and Ukrainian. He HATES Russia with a passion, that qualifies him as an expert. Now my father spoke Russian, Ukrainian and Polish but was born here and based on speaking the same dialect as Nikita Khrushchev actually thought the guy was for real which made my father persona non grata in some circles.

        My son lumps all these ex-pats together with our friend Max Boot. Their raison d’etre was SOVIET RUSSIA, without that they have NO life. Which, I think is pretty evident.

        There is this whole big thing on the other side of the earth called CHINA which they seem to have missed in geography class.

  24. I sure would like to know what the big deal is about the Ukraine stuff. It sounds to me like normal stuff that all President’s could/would do with such nations.

    • Let’s look at this from the Ukrainian side. They have lots of corruption which they admit. They are being lectured by the US knowing full well that Biden and his son were corrupt as well. It makes us look like hypocrites. They put Hunter on the Barisma board to grease the skids so they could get money for defense and oil and gas development. Joe did give them money for the latter purpose. Some of that money went to Barisma. So when the prosecutor started sniffing around, Joe used a $1B of our money to extort the government to lay off Barisma. Then he stupidly bragged about it on TV.

      Trump then tries to find out what actually happened. He did not in the call link the aid to investigating the Bidens. He essentially said have your guy call my guy and sort this out. I can imagine this conversation between CEOs happening every day around the world.

      Congress continues the hypocrisy by only investigating Trump and not Biden too.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      To me the big deal is the revealing of a STUPID ploy by Trump and Giuliani.

      After coming off the Russia hoax BS, where he was accused of conspiring with Russia to take down Hillary Clinton, he turns around and asks Ukraine to look into Burisma and the Biden claims….. knowing Biden is running for POTUS. And knowing the Dems were pushing Impeachment at all costs.

      Absolutely a STUPID move from a political point of view. Now it has destroyed his Presidency. He has been neutered for the remainder of this term.

      The only redemption possible at this point is a bombshell falling on the Dems with respect to the 2016 Ukraine DNC connection and actual corruption showing up involving either Biden or Obama. Given what is in the open, and how it is being ignored by the Press and DNC types, I see little chance of that bomb falling.

      • We aren’t getting the whole story. The main thing from Sondland is that he was told by TRUMP that there is NO Quid Pro Quo. I hope that the House votes to impeach on party lines and the Senate trial makes them look like fools.

        Also, other stuff is coming out soon, the Horowitz report and upcoming criminal charges (possibly). Along with the other investigation.

        I have to give Nunes some real credit, I couldn’t sit next to Schiff without going off. Tough minded guy there.

      • Destroyed his presidency? Pretty harsh. Didn’t see that coming and I’m not buying it.

        Trump 2020 in a landslide.

  25. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    Without the overthrow of the elected government in the Ukraine in 2014, you all realize none of this would have happened, right?

    The Russkies had a deal with Ukraine on the Crimea and their Naval base. That fell into question when the “pro west” Corrupt government replaced the pro east corrupt government.

    I am hoping the Ukrainians and Russians will sit down and cut a deal taking the Ukraine into a neutral status like Austria did seventy years ago. If that fails, if WE can have spheres of influence, Russia can have them too.

    The Crimea should be returned to ……Turkey. Historically they have more right to it than either the Ukraine or Russia! Hah! Take that cold warriors!

  26. I’m not sure what the Crat’s end game actually might be, but getting an impeachment conviction on anything doesn’t seem likely and would only hurt them in 2020.

    What I am seeing, this is likely crushing any ideas of investigating the 2016 interference on behalf of the Ukranians. HMMM, maybe that could be part of this in the long run. Destroy further relationship and all Crat malfeasance will go away concerning Ukraine.

  27. WASHINGTON, D.C.—Bernie Sanders has promised that Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez will play a key role in his White House if he’s elected, saying he will put her in charge of math.

    Sanders said he will create a Department of Math that will make sure everyone knows math and figure out ways to bend mathematical realities to conform to his socialist ideas.
    “I’m gonna have Alexandria here run all the numbers and make sure everything adds up,” Sanders said in a campaign speech, waving his hands around as though he were on a desert island signaling for help from a passing ship. “Every great socialist has a great math guy—or girl—running the numbers. She can approve the math textbooks, figure out the tax stuff, and count the number of people in the breadlines.”
    Sanders said he realized none of his plans made any mathematical sense, but he could just have Ocasio-Cortez crunch the numbers again if buying everyone internet, food, housing, and medical care doesn’t work out. “I’ll just wave my hand and say, ‘Hey, run them again.’ And she’ll run them again and it will all add up.”
    Ocasio-Cortez said she was flattered by his comments. “I’m real good at math. Things like adding, subtracting. Numbers, I do numbers. I can carry numbers in the division stuff, but I don’t like to do it much. They get heavy. Oh, and when you need to figure out a tip, you just double the tax. Doubling is when you divide something by 2. No, wait—“

  28. Take with grain of salt until confirmed:

    The head of Burisma Holdings, the energy company on which Hunter Biden served on the board, has been indicted by Ukraine’s Office of the Prosecutor General for money laundering and corruption, according to Ukrainian MP Alexander Dubinsky.
    During a Wednesday press conference, Dubinsky claimed that an investigation into Nikolai Zlochevsky and Burisma found a “link that reveals how money is siphoned [from Ukraine],” notably through Hunter Biden, who received $16.5 million “through criminal means and money laundering.”
    “The son of Vice-President Joe Biden was receiving payment for his services, with money raised through criminal means and money laundering,” Dubinsky said. “Biden received money that did not come from the company’s successful operation but rather from money stolen from citizens.”

    According to Dubinsky, Zlochevsky helmed a money laundering operation which included politicians from the previous Yanukovich administration who continued their criminal enterprise under his successor President Pyotr Poroshenko.
    “We will reveal the information about the financial pyramid scheme that was created in Ukraine and developed by everyone beginning with Yanukovich and later by Poroshenko,” Dubinsky continued.
    “This system is still working under the guidance of the current managerial board of the National Bank, ensuring that money flows in the interest of people who stole millions of dollars, took it offshore and bought Ukrainian public bonds turning them into the Ukrainian sovereign debt.”
    At the same press conference, Ukrainian MP Andriy Derkach claimed that the family of ex-President Yanukovich funneled $7.4 billion through American investment firm Franklin Templeton Investments, which they tied to the U.S. Democratic Party.
    “Last week, November 14, the Prosecutor General’s Office (PGO), unnoticed by the media, announced a new suspicion to the notorious owner of Burisma, ex-Ecology Minister Zlochevsky,” said Derkach.
    “According to the suspicion, the Yanukovych family is suspected, in particular, with legalizing (laundering) of criminally obtained income through Franklin Templeton Investments, an investment fund carrying out purchases of external government loan bonds totaling $7.4 billion.”
    Derkach then demanded that President Trump must get involved in rooting out the corrupt Democrat-Ukraine network.
    “President Zelensky must pick up the phone, dial Trump, ask for help and cooperation in the fight against corruption and fly to Washington,” Derkach demanded. “The issue of combating international corruption in Ukraine with the participation of citizens, businessmen and U.S. officials should become a key during the meeting of the two presidents.”
    As we reported, Joe Biden openly admitted extorting the Ukraine government if they didn’t squash an investigation into his son Hunter’s involvement with Burisma Holdings.
    Looks like Trump asking President Zelensky to look into Biden-Burisma corruption wasn’t without merit after all.

    • The Dems have a weak field and they know it. So they need to bring Trump down anyway they can. On top of that, they know that Barr could blow the lid off of their Russian hoax and start implicating several key individuals. So impeachment is a smoke screen they hope will overshadow the Barr and Horowitz findings. Barr gave a very strong speech at the Federalist Society that presages significant findings to come.

      If the Dems win in all this, the republic is lost. Tucker gave a very good interview on Breitbart yesterday that showed how we are missing the big issues; that they are being covered up by lots of smoke.

  29. If the LTC did in fact inform the whistle blower about the phone call, then he is not corroboration but but is the source.

  30. Warren wants a tax on wealth, i.e. money already earned and previously subjected to income tax. Under what clause in the Constitution can they tax possessions (savings, investments, etc.) at the Federal level? The Feds are limited to what they can tax, income, imports, excise taxes and a few others. They do raise money from fees but this is for “services” rendered.

    • Is it safe to “presume” that Liz doesn’t know what the Constitution says about double taxation?

    • Article I Section 1

      3: Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.

      Section 8

      1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

      Section 9

      4: No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.
      5: No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State.

      Amendment XVI
      The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
      ________

      Seems clear to me there is no authority to tax property, real, private or commercial. Savings and investments are property. Also except for income taxes, excise taxes and import duties, all direct (per capita) taxes are to laid uniformly by population and I believe assigned to the states for collection.

      So I ask again under what authority do the Feds have to tax wealth which is private property and to do so uniformly?

    • Now we can watch how the media and the Crats turn on Ukraine. From they desperately needed our help to they are totally corrupt and should have never gotten the money.

      Horowitz has outed the FBI on they’re poor vetting and hiding of their sources to protect cases.

      Dec 9th, the FISA abuse report will be released.

      The Swamp is in trouble and this may include some Republicans, or maybe not 😛

  31. Sir Mathius……you live in NJ or NY?

    • Nueva York.

      You couldn’t pay me to live in Jersey.

      • You couldn’t pay me to live in Jersey.

        The pirate told me you could be bought…he said that you were a might expensive but that you could be bought….he reminded me that you live in New York and that everybody is on the dole or take there….so…………………………………………………………….

        The reason I asked was because I saw the Head Cheese of New Jersey on the news saying that they are following Trump’s lead and are not going to allow deductions at the state levels now for income.

        • The pirate told me you could be bought…he said that you were a might expensive but that you could be bought

          …………….. he’s right. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

          Hell, I will sell you my vote in the 2020 election for $100 in silver.

        • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

          The Head Cheese if you did not know it already was a bigwig at Goldman-Sachs!

          Money makes the world go round! (saw “Cabret” last night, song sticks in my mind, a whacked out 1972 movie which does however give you an interesting theory of where the Nazi’z came from).

          • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

            Does anyone besides me agree that 90% of the movies made in the 1970’s make little or no sense if you are sober?

          • Cabaret……………..

            I met my first love at a high school play of Cabaret.

            I swear, I didn’t see or hear a single thing in the entire play… I spent the whole time fixated on her.

        • Hey, I lived in Jersey for 10 years after living in MA and suburban DC. . Then moved to CA. What’s wrong with me?

          • You breathed contaminated air……..I am telling you…..come to Texas. I will have you drinking Dr Pepper, eating fajitas (real fajitas), wearing boots and hat and riding horses and saying ya’ll in no time at all.

  32. Just A Citizen says:

    I guess we are now supposed to feel sorry for the guys at FUSION that are the root cause of the fiasco we now experience daily. I urge everyone to read the article completely.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/11/steele-dossier-fusion-gps/602341/

    • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

      Self serving innuendo?

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Journalists…………… one lies and the rest swear to it. Because they are journalists.

    • So where is the hard evidence that Trump is in Putin’s pocket?

      • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

        In a pipe dream T, In a pipe dream!

        • Just out of curiosity, Mr. T., what would it take to convince you that it was the case?

          That is, just imagining a world where it’s true… how much and what kind of evidence would it take for you to say “you know what? The Democrats were right! Trump is a shill for Putin.”

          I find T-Ray’s question telling. He doesn’t ask where the “evidence” is… he asks where the “hard evidence” is. It seems to me that the burden of proof required for all things Trump seems to be… unusually high. Whereas Obama and Clinton are/were immediately presumed guilty at even the more meager whiff of scandal, Trump seems to have to explicitly state his misdeeds and have them notarized in blood in front of a live studio audience before anyone will even admit that he might have done anything even remotely wrong.

          So, to you, I ask: What would it take for you – personally – to admit that he was guilty of, say, an illegal quid-pro-quo attempt with Ukraine.

          • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

            Since we are NOT living under the Napoleonic code, the proof is on the other foot so to speak.

            I guess it would take something like a secret deal between a member of the Trump family and some Russian conglomerate for a no show job or an excessively high speaking fee for a thirty minute BS speech or perhaps a deal on some waterfront property in the Crimea on the Black sea for a Golfing resort. Even then, it would very much take a quid pro quo as they say, something tangible in exchange which could be demonstrated.

            In my time in Civil Service, it could be alleged that I did favors for certain people. These “favors” involved nothing more than making sure what was supposed to be done by NYC got done. In exchange, I received nothing. It could and was alleged that I was being “corrupt” I always countered that with, How? By doing my job?” My favorite was a trifecta of transferring city owned property between three different agencies to get a parcel needed for Housing Construction in the hands of my agency where it could be transferred at minimal cost to a developer who would then build 156 units at below market prices. They would then be sold by lottery to qualified middle income homeowners. Years later, after it was wildly successful, I got accused of “corruption”. Funny thing, is I never even met the developer. My task, as I saw it was to get those 156 units built. So, someone on the outside could accuse me of something that had they been on the inside would have been obviously absurd.

            As Joe Friday, ably played by the late Jack Webb would say, “the facts, just the facts.”

            • As Joe Friday, ably played by the late Jack Webb would say, “the facts, just the facts.”

              BUUM DA DUM DAH!!!

              DUUM DUM-DUM DUM-DAH!!

          • So, to you, I ask: What would it take for you – personally – to admit that he was guilty of, say, an illegal quid-pro-quo attempt with Ukraine.

            The Ukranian President stating he was under pressure to open investigations to get US aid. However, no such admission exists. Presumptions and guesses don’t fly.

            I also keep wondering why they keep saying Russia and Ukraine are at war. It seems to me that if that were true, the war would have been long over.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            Mathius

            That was pretty weak, even by your standards. Come on man……. hard evidence = actual evidence.

            Nobody is applying a double standard here……….. just you whining about things not being equal because in your mind it is never equal. The criticism that is.

          • Hard evidence as others have stated is evidence that would stand up in court, documents, bank records of payments, tapes, eye (first hand) witness accounts, etc. The article that JAC linked is full of innuendo but not one specific fact. Simpson’s states that on looking into Trump’s past he found it troubling and unfitting for a president. That is his opinion. Does he find the Clinton foundation, Hillary’s Uranium One deal and emails, the Hunter Biden Ukraine and China connections also troubling or just Trump’s. How about all the passengers on the Lolita Express? Are they troubling too? There is far more documented public domain information on these issues than on the Trump-Russian connection.

            I supported the impeachment of Nixon. There was strong “HARD” evidence of wrong doing.

            I did not support the impeachment of Clinton since it was about sex even though there was “HARD” evidence (pun intended). I thought censure (although meaningless) and disbarment would have been better.

            This impeachment attempt is even stupider than Clinton’s. There is no hard evidence and there is an alternate explanation, uncovering corruption. If Joe Biden was selling his office to the highest bidder, wouldn’t you want to know it now so he does not get the nomination?

  33. Just A Citizen says:

    Tonight I have to agree with Schiff. We do not need to hear from the whistle blower.

    Because we have now heard from everyone who he talked to that cause him to make the complaint. We have seen and heard the actual whistle blowers.

    • I want to know how much he colluded with Schiff’s staff. This needs to go to trial. Let the truth be known.

  34. This story is going to blow up:

    https://www.westernjournal.com/ukraine-lawmaker-alleges-hunter-biden-partners-received-16-5-million-obtained-criminal-means-report/

    It’s going to be a slow news week coming, which is a nice break from the mess going on. Any ideas for a subject of debate to pass the time?

    • https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/11/revealed-adam-schiff-connected-to-both-companies-named-in-7-4-billion-burisma-us-ukraine-corruption-case/

      Oh the webs they weave. No wonder they are in such a hurry to impeach. The House of Cards is crumbling, get yer popcorn out.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Since Mathius passed on this one I will say it. That is a BS accusation.

        They are claiming a “connection” because he held stock in the two companies. That means millions of Americans are “connected” to Burisma, given that logic.

        • They are claiming a “connection” because he held stock in the two companies. That means millions of Americans are “connected” to Burisma, given that logic.

          Not even that…

          Schiff is connected to both BlackRock and Franklin Templeton Investments, two companies that were named in the $7.4B Burisma/US-Ukraine corruption claim that was announced…

          He’s connected to Blackrock and Templeton.. do you have any idea how enormous these two companies are?

          It’s not even like Schiff held the Burisma stock.. he had a “connection” with two MAJOR investment management companies.. and they are named (and not convicted) in some corruption claim.

          Talk about a stretch!

          No wonder they are in such a hurry to impeach. The House of Cards is crumbling

          Gman, proving again, that only the thinnest possible thread is necessary to mentally convict a Democrat despite demanding ironclad proof for his beloved leader.

  35. So, to you, I ask: What would it take for you – personally – to admit that he was guilty of, say, an illegal quid-pro-quo attempt with Ukraine.

    You did not invite me to play but I’m gonna play. It would take more than heresay….it would take a lot more than “I presume that is what he meant”….It would take the Ukranian President saying that he was blackmailed….it would take a taped recording of the phone call…It would take the Ambassador to change his mind and say that Trump ordered him to do this…It would take more than people, who do not like his foreign policy, to testify that Trump ordered the with holding of money until Ukraine succumbed to his threats and even then, it would have to be the Biden’s specifically. I have no problem with with holding money from corrupt governments until certain things were met.

    In short, it would take a “stained blue dress with his DNA on it”….Heresay is simply bull shit no matter who the POTUS is….and NO PERSON on his staff or a “lifer” has the RIGHT nor the AUTHORITY to circumvent a POTUS if they do not like his rhetoric. NO ONE!!!!

    That is what it would take for me.

    • Now, Sir Mathius, may I reverse the question because no one on here, to my knowledge, has asked you directly.

      Question: Setting aside “heresay”………other than your personal feelings and anti-Trump bias….where is the beef that he has done this. Where is the proof that Trump is guilty of bribery or extortion? Where is the proof of this “quid pro quo” when you have the Ambassador make the statement under oath that there was none? And when you have the Ukranian President saying the same thing? Other than your beloved “preponderance of heresay” opinion……what would it take for you to think him innocent?

      • other than your personal feelings and anti-Trump bias….where is the beef that he has done this

        There’s a smell to the whole thing. A stink.

        We can look at the timeline:
        1. He puts the aid on hold.
        2. He deploys Rudy as his unofficial state department.
        3. He has a call wherein he asks, amongst other things, for an investigation into Biden and suggests that the conversation continue elsewhere with representatives of his.
        4. Whistleblower
        5. Near immediate release of the money.

        Now, look, there’s a lot more, but it is is, as you say, mostly hearsay or “interpretation” or “I understood this to mean.” So it’s flimsy. But the above are hard facts, so let’s enter them into evidence. Just the facts.

        Though he’s under no obligation to do so, I find it interesting/telling that he hasn’t released the full audio recording of both calls. If it was, as he describes, a perfect call, then surely it would exonerate him.

        I understand that this shifts the burden of evidence to Trump to prove his innocence – BAD MATHIUS! – but if you, D13, were charged with a crime in California, but could prove you were in Texas and just… refused to do so.. I get that this isn’t a valid legal argument against you.. but as a civvy, I have to look at it and wonder why. JUSTICE Mathius would take a negative view of this idea.

        ———–

        I think he did do this.

        I think there – absolutely – is legitimate grounds to worry about corruption in the Ukraine and I think – absolutely – that it’s valid and appropriate and, even, praiseworthy, for the President to ensure that aid the US is giving is not going to be misused/stolen/etc. I think it is – absolutely – appropriate for Trump to have held the aid pending assurances that their corruption problem is in hand or at least being addressed appropriately.

        I think, couched within this, however, was a political advantage he thought he could grab. And I think he’s indignant that anyone would dare call him on it.

        I suspect that there are hundreds of examples of Ukrainian corruption he could have pointed at. I image that, at the snap of his fingers, a binder full of women binder full of corruption would have materialized on his desk. The fact that he just oh so conveniently happened to point at the presumptive/leading Democratic candidate is, well, just oh so convenient.

        I mean, what are the odds? How much corruption is there in the Ukraine? If I understand it right, the place is basically the a post-apocalyptic hellscape. yet he just so happens to pick Biden?

        Generally, I don’t believe in anything when it’s “oh so convenient.”

        ————-

        An analogy.

        My boss asks me to bring him a trade, to show him the full life-cycle of a trade, from the order to completion and settlement, so he can see how it works.

        We have a LOT of trades.

        I could pick any trade I wanted. Maybe I could pick the most recent. Maybe I could just grab the first one I saw. Maybe I could just use a totally random one.

        But a few years ago, I was out of the office and that guy I don’t like was covering for me and just so happened to have made a sloppy mistake on one trade in particular.

        And, again, I could pick any trade. But I just so happen to pick that one to bring to my boss.

        And I show him the full life-cycle, from inception to that guy’s error to how I fixed it to settlement.

        So here’s the question: did I do that on purpose to paint that guy in a bad light? Or was it just a happy coincidence in the course of doing my job?

        ————-

        what would it take for you to think him innocent?

        I suppose turnabout is fair play.

        I could be satisfied with the full audio of both calls which might give more color and context. I could be satisfied with the release of correspondence between Trump and Rudy with regards to what he was actually doing.

        The big one, the one I think would really just end this whole thing for me, would be if he could release, say, two transcripts with other world leaders of corrupt countries wherein he pressed them on their corruption in a similar matter when doing so didn’t just oh so conveniently happen to target his political opponents.

        Show me a phone call he had with Venezuela where he pressed Maduro (do we even give aid to Venezuela? I’m too lazy to google it) for assurance that he’d investigate or take some action to assuage his concerns re corruption.

        If he can establish a pattern, even a flimsy one, that shows he is concerned with corruption in this way, and that it stretches beyond the political expedience of getting his political rivals investigated by foreign governments, then I’d just have to shrug and say “oh well, them’s the breaks.”

        BUT – and I’ll turn your turn around back around on you, sir! – BUT if Trump hasn’t asked any other leaders about investigations or pressed them on corruption other than Ukraine, and there, predominantly re his political rival…… wouldn’t you find that… interesting?

        ————-

        NOW, here’s the thing: you’re asking me the wrong questions.

        The question you should be asking me isn’t whether he did it – I think it’s pretty clear he did.

        The question you should be asking me whether I think he was within his power to do so.

        • They have stated there are no tapes of the phone calls. This is why the transcript is created by listeners to the call who recreate it from their notes.

          The president has every right to request the our money is not corruptly used. He also has the right to ask for assistance in rooting out our own corruption. If Joe is dirty, why would you not want to know? You say that there is a smell around Trump. Well there is a $1+M smell around Joe and Hunter and a $100+M smell around Hillary. Personally I thank Trump for pursuing our own corruption. It’s about time.

          • They have stated there are no tapes of the phone calls. This is why the transcript is created by listeners to the call who recreate it from their notes.

            Maybe.

            Maybe not.

            I find that hard to believe, but what do I know.

            Regardless, the question was what could convince me.

            That could convince me… but, of course, only if it exists.

            Other things that could convince me are Jesus and Mohammad descending from the sky to tell me personally that Trump is innocent.

            The president has every right to request the our money is not corruptly used. He also has the right to ask for assistance in rooting out our own corruption.

            I think there – absolutely – is legitimate grounds to worry about corruption in the Ukraine and I think – absolutely – that it’s valid and appropriate and, even, praiseworthy, for the President to ensure that aid the US is giving is not going to be misused/stolen/etc. I think it is – absolutely – appropriate for Trump to have held the aid pending assurances that their corruption problem is in hand or at least being addressed appropriately.

            If Joe is dirty, why would you not want to know?

            I don’t think I ever said I wouldn’t want to know.

            Did I?

            Maybe I had a stroke and just didn’t realize it.

            You say that there is a smell around Trump.

            Yes… it smells like stale malfeasance and Big Macs.

            Well there is a $1+M smell around Joe and Hunter and a $100+M smell around Hillary.

            There may well be.

            I don’t think I ever once said otherwise, did I?

            The question isn’t “is Joe dirty,” and attempting to shift the conversation to that point is disingenuous.

            The question the Democrats are asking is “did Trump try to coerce a foreign government into investigating his (presumptive) political rival for partisan gain” … or some iteration of that general concept.

            Biden could be the most corrupt person on the planet, but the Democrats are question not whether he is corrupt, but whether Trump was illegally extorting a foreign government by withholding needed aid in order to influence domestic elections.

            We can imaging that I know you’re a bank robber. I tell the DA, and he doesn’t seem to care. So I break into his home and hold a gun to his head until he agrees to investigate you. Later, the cops show up at my house and say “you’re under arrest for threatening the DA.” Is it a defense for me to argue “no, it’s ok… T-Ray is a bank robber.”

            That you are guilty, that you are a bank robber, is beside the point. It is wholly irrelevant to the question of whether MY actions were appropriate. I can’t get out of it by pointing out your guilt.

            • Once again you and others are relying on intent. Was his intent to harm a political rival or was it to root out corruption on our side of the pond. Since we are not mind readers, this falls under reasonable doubt. It also relies on interpretation. At no time in the phone call did he link aid to investigating the Bidens. No one has testified to actually hearing Trump link the two. The one witness who directly asked him about it testified he adamantly stated he wanted not QPQ. There is also one senator (Kennedy?) who says he denied it as well. In addition, aid to other countries was also held up for various reasons. In general Trump dislikes giving aid out so freely.

              I might also point out that you and others freely accepted the intent argument in the HRC case even though the only true reason to have a private server was to circumvent FOIA laws. The destruction of subpoenaed documents was ignored.

              • Once again you and others are relying on intent.

                Intent, or mens rea, is a vital part of the law.

                If I run you over in my car because I sneezed and didn’t see you, that’s an “accident” and I do not go to jail.

                If I run you over because I’m mad at you for besting me in an online argument, that’s “murder” and I do go to jail.

                Was his intent to harm a political rival or was it to root out corruption on our side of the pond.

                Of course it was to harm Biden.

                There’s no way to prove that unless someone was stupid enough to save a document arguing this case or Trump has a recorder going on in his office a la Nixon.

                But COME ON.

                He doesn’t get the benefit of the doubt on this. He could have picked any corruption to focus on. The fact that he chose his presumptive political opponent is just too much of a coincidence to buy. He’s not a saint. He’s a politician. You would NEVER give Obama this kind of benefit of the doubt.

                At no time in the phone call did he link aid to investigating the Bidens.

                I love this argument because it sets a standard of evidence that “unless Trump is being explicitly overt and actually literally stating the details of the crime as he’s doing it, then no crime has occurred.”

                You think Ukraine hadn’t noticed they didn’t have the check yet? You think they hadn’t noticed that Trump hadn’t yet agreed to a WH meeting?

                You think that Presidents of entire countries are oblivious to that kind of nuance and that, unless Trump spells it out for him, that he’s oblivious to the nature of the deal being offered?

                Come on, man.

                No one has testified to actually hearing Trump link the two.

                Again, setting the goal posts…

                If the mob offers to “protect” your shop, do you have to prove that the enforcer actually “linked” the protection money to the threat of property damage? Or are we all adults here who are capable of adding one plus one and reaching two?

                The one witness who directly asked him about it testified he adamantly stated he wanted not QPQ.

                Yes… because once people were asking questions about him allegedly seeking “quid pro quo,” we’d expect that he tells his people directly that he wants a quid pro quo, right?

                I mean, if you’re being accused of stealing from your company, and your employee asks if you want help with your stealing, you’re going to say “yes, I love stealing from my company, please help me continue stealing.” Right?

                Of course not!

                As soon as it’s a dangerous topic, OF COURSE, you’re going to say no.

                There is also one senator (Kennedy?) who says he denied it as well.

                I was accused of murder, but I denied it, so the investigators just had to shrug and admit my innocence.

                In addition, aid to other countries was also held up for various reasons. In general Trump dislikes giving aid out so freely.

                Fine. That’s good evidence in Trump’s favor. I hadn’t heard that. Can you provide a link?

                Also, just out of curiosity, why was the Ukrainian aid released? What changed? What assurances did Trump receive that satisfied him? Or are we to believe that it’s purely a coincidence that it just so happened to be a day or two after the whistleblower complaint?

                I might also point out that you and others freely accepted the intent argument in the HRC case.

                I don’t think I made this argument. Maybe I did.. I can’t even remember what I had for breakfast.

                It is worth noting that there are very different standards of evidence required for “I believe” and “lock her up.”

                I might also point out that you and others freely accepted the intent argument in the HRC case even though the only true reason to have a private server was to circumvent FOIA laws. The destruction of subpoenaed documents was ignored.

                OBJECTION!

                You cannot clear Trump by attempting to tarnish Clinton.

                Clinton very well may have committed a crime. I don’t know. But we aren’t talking about her. We’re talking about him.

        • There’s a smell to the whole thing. A stink. Agreed but because he stopped short.

          We can look at the timeline: Lets
          1. He puts the aid on hold. Granted but nothing wrong with this. In his purview.
          2. He deploys Rudy as his unofficial state department. So? Stupid…but so what? Where is this wrong?
          3. He has a call wherein he asks, amongst other things, for an investigation into Biden and suggests that the conversation continue elsewhere with representatives of his. I do not know about this one….I am aware that the Ambassador said he asked no such thing and I am aware that the President of the Ukraine said no such thing.
          4. Whistleblower OBJECTION…..there is no such evidence on record. There, so far, is no whistle blower and to assume one exists is folly.

          I think, couched within this, however, was a political advantage he thought he could grab. And I think he’s indignant that anyone would dare call him on it. I think that you are correct on this but where is the violation of law? Let us say that he named “Biden” which no one has testified that he did name Biden…but let us assume that he did and he named him in connection with what appears to be corruption concerning him or his son or Barisma or both, where is the foul?

          I suspect that there are hundreds of examples of Ukrainian corruption he could have pointed at. I image that, at the snap of his fingers, a binder full of corruption would have materialized on his desk. The fact that he just oh so conveniently happened to point at the presumptive/leading Democratic candidate is, well, just oh so convenient. Yes…very convenient but where is the foul IF….IF…the investigation into corruption happened to include him.
          ——————————
          Your analogy – So here’s the question: did I do that on purpose to paint that guy in a bad light? Or was it just a happy coincidence in the course of doing my job? Either or….but where were you wrong?
          ——————————-

          The question you should be asking me whether I think he was within his power to do so. I did not ask you this question because you answered it some time ago. Your answer was affirmative.

          • I did not ask you this question because you answered it some time ago. Your answer was affirmative.

            I suspect this falls under “lawful but awful.”

            I think he “abused” and “misused” his valid authority in such a way as to target and damage a political opponent, but he was still, technically, within his power. Just like “yes, I was showing you a trade life-cycle like you asked!” when the ulterior motive was quite clearly to damage my coworker.

            But was it “wrong”?

            I’d argue it was “wrong” in the sense of “people shouldn’t behave that way” and “I wouldn’t want my employees behaving like that” and “you’re a jerk if you do this,” not necessarily in a “go to jail” kind of way.

            That said, I am no expert on the salient laws, so I could always be wrong.

            Then again, there soooooooo many laws.. it’s more likely than not that he violated at least something,, no?

            And, I suppose, technically, even a misdemeanor is grounds for impeachment, so…. . ::shrug::

            • And, I suppose, technically, even a misdemeanor is grounds for impeachment

              I wonder if anyone realizes the dangerous precedent that has been set with this impeachment process…..where, now, all Mathius has to do if G man pisses him off is say…I heard that G man is gay…..I have no proof but it is what I heard so I can assume that he is….let’s throw him out.

  36. WASHINGTON, D.C.—The exciting new TV show Impeachment Inquiry was poised to take the ratings by storm, promising to eclipse all the other shows in its time slot. But the show will be canceled after one season, like a lot of bad TV shows and also Firefly.

    After just five rocky episodes that failed to deliver any major plot twists, producers pulled the plug on the impeachment inquiry due to lack of viewers.
    “The showrunners promised all these big bombshells, shocking twists, and startling revelations, but they weren’t able to deliver,” said one reviewer writing in Hollywood Reporter. “When there are so many better options out there—rewatching The Office, checking out The Good Place, staring at paint as it slowly dries—why would people tune into this tepid, uninspired mess?”
    22% of Americans said they were disappointed with the show so far, while 78% said, “Impeachment hearings are going on?”
    At publishing time, sources had confirmed that J.J. Abrams had been in charge of writing the plot and simply forgot to tie up all the loose ends.

  37. I still say if the Russian goal was to create havoc in our democracy, they succeeded. An amazing return on investment. Which party aided them in their goal?

    • An amazing return on investment

      Yup.

      I don’t know what their actual goal was, whether they just preferred Trump or whether they sought chaos, or both.

      A great civilization is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself from within. – Ariel Durant

      Like a bee sting, the danger is never the actual sting. It’s the anaphylactic shock – the body’s own over-reaction to a minor trauma.

      I have made this case many times about 9/11. The damage of the attack is dwarfed by the damage we did to ourselves pursuant to it.

      Likewise, the actual harm of the Russian interference is comparatively minor… but what we’ve done to ourselves as a consequence will take a generation to repair, if even then.

  38. Dale A Albrecht says:

    Gman…it was Andrew Johnson, not Andrew Jackson.

  39. Query: Given the sheer number or laws and the complexity thereof, does anyone here believe that, since his election, Donald Trump has violated no laws at all, no matter how small or tiny or arcane?

    Not even a…….. high crime………… misdemeanor?

    • Mathius, have you seen the video of Biden talking about getting Ukranian Prosecutor fired?

    • If you drop the name Donald Trump and insert any and all Presidents….I will agree.

      • Sure. ANY President.

        Ok… given that a misdemeanor is grounds for impeachment, should Trump be impeached?

        And, yes, feel free to substitute “any President.”

        • Question….impeached or removed from office……..I do not care about a rebuke….but he has done nothing that warrants a removal from office….not yet and with what has been presented thus far……he said/she said does not cut it with me. I want someone to get up and look a trial in the face and say…”President Trump ordered me to threaten and extort Ukraine.”

          • I said impeached. I don’t think Jay-walking warrants removal from office.

            but he has done nothing that warrants a removal from office

            Sure he has.. just by the voters, not by an impeachment.

            …. that I know of.

            I want someone to get up and look a trial in the face and say…”President Trump ordered me to threaten and extort Ukraine.”

            And if they do, people will call that person a liar and a never-trumper and deep state hoax plant.

            It’s possible that Rudy might just blurt that out on live tv because, you know… Rudy..

    • Just A Citizen says:

      No doubt what so ever. Although I think the odds drop while POTUS due to all the ass hats surrounding you, the govt. transport, etc etc..

  40. The more I think about it…the more I want a full Senate trial…..where all witnesses are examined…..all of them including the House committee on what they knew before the inquiry. I want names. I think I want the House dems to impeach….because I have full confidence they do not have anything that amounts to more than a slap on the wrist but certainly not warranting removal from office.

    Thoughts?

    • I’m on board.

      Full and fair trial, and let the chips fall where they may.

      If there’s enough to get rid of the ass-hat, great. If not, then he goes back to work and the Democrats have to eat crow.

      Well, actually, they won’t eat crow…. the outcome of the senate trial is pre-ordained. Unless something significant changes, Red Team will back him no matter what. Facts and truth don’t matter either way. Blue will vote to convict, Red will vote to acquit, Reds have more votes, end of game.

      Blue Team will just point at it and say “see! We were winning, he had all the proof, but the Red Team is too in the bag for Trump. That’s why you need to vote for more of us!”

      Red Team, regardless of any facts presented will assert that Trump has been proven innocent of any and all wrong doing by the evil witch hunt hoax [ten more adjectives] by the Democrats, and then insist that that’s why people need to vote for more of them – so as to prevent the Democrats from succeeding next time.

      Trump could be dead to rights, and Red will back him.

      Trump could be pure as the driven snow, and Blue will try to remove him.

      …. ugh.. now I’ve depressed myself.

      • …. ugh.. now I’ve depressed myself.

        LOL….yup

        • I propose that in lieu of the Senate, I be appointed as sole juror in the case of Trump’s impeachment trial. I shall be vested with full authority to call any witness, including Trump himself, compel testifying (5th Amendment be damned, and to hell with “executive privilege”), and to ask any and all questions of anyone I damned well please. At the end, I shall render my verdict and it shall be so.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            Sorry but you are not an objective juror. You disqualified yourself with your list of facts. Which included a claim which is not a fact and has not been presented as a fact by anyone of those testifying. Namely that Trump withheld money to force investigation of Joe Biden.

            By the way, Trump has and is still withholding money from Jordan. He just asked S. Korea to pony up billions to cover our military protection. He has done the same to Japan and others.

            Lindsey Graham just yesterday explained that the money to Ukraine was released due to legislation in the Senate, that Trump wanted, being held up for an amendment that would force Ukraine funding. Passing the amendment would cause the legislation to lose. Graham informed Trump he would vote with Durbin on the amendment. The next day Trump released the funds, Durbin pulled his amendment and the legislation passed. I do not recall what the bill was but I suspect it was one of the budget bills, as this was September.

            Not once in testimony was Biden’s name connected to withholding funds. “Investigations” were mentioned in connection with “meetings” and face time with POTUS.

            • You disqualified yourself with your list of facts.

              It seems that you are confusing CITIZEN Mathius with JUROR Mathius.

              By the way, Trump has and is still withholding money from Jordan. He just asked S. Korea to pony up billions to cover our military protection. He has done the same to Japan and others.

              Withholding to get them to pay us money (that’s odd… you owe me money and I won’t give you money until you pay me money… I get it, but talk about circular…)… anyway, that has no bearing on the topic at hand.

              If he were withholding out of concerns regarding corruption, I would find that relevant.

              Lindsey Graham just yesterday explained that the money to Ukraine was released due to legislation in the Senate, that Trump wanted, being held up for an amendment that would force Ukraine funding. Passing the amendment would cause the legislation to lose. Graham informed Trump he would vote with Durbin on the amendment.

              First I’m hearing about that. And JUROR Mathius would be interested in verifying it.

              CITIZEN Mathius still thinks that Trump is an asshole who, of course did exactly what he’s accused of, and then released the money only after getting called out. CITIZEN Mathius remains unconvinced, however, only whether doing so was illegal in any way or impeachable.

              Not once in testimony was Biden’s name connected to withholding funds.

              This I find a weak argument.

              I would not expect someone engaged in malfeasance to explicitly spell out his malfeasance. When the mob asks you for protection money, they never say “or we’ll come back and break your face.” It’s just understood.

              “Investigations” were mentioned in connection with “meetings” and face time with POTUS.

              Whether it’s “funds” or “meetings” that’s a “quid.” It’s something “of value” which the Ukrainian President wanted. And, if in exchange Trump gets something of value – that thing being of political value – specifically damage to his opponent, that’s a “quo.”

              I believe it IS illegal to solicit a “thing of value” from a foreign government for your campaign. If so, soliciting that investigation would seem to fit the bill, regardless of other considerations.

              Once again, though, Mathius remains unconvinced that there is a “crime” here, but it is certainly “bad.”

              —————–

              Question(s) for you in return: Suppose – SUPPOSE – that there had been no whistle blower-

              JAC: Objection! Calls for speculation!

              ::JUSTICE Mathius whacks JAC with the gavel:: Overruled.

              As I was saying… suppose that there had been no whistle blower. Suppose further that Zelenski (sp?) had acquiesced to the request and announced an investigation. And, suppose that, at some point shortly thereafter Trump released the funds. Given this HYPOTHETICAL sequence of events, (A) would you opine that Trump did anything wrong (B) do you believe that Trump would have kept his role in instigating the investigation secret – and, if so, why? (C) do you think that Trump would have used the investigation as a political cudgel against Biden?

              • Just A Citizen says:

                Mathius

                per your hypothetical. A. NO, my opinion of him doing wrong or not has nothing to do with a whistleblower or whether Ukraine announced or did not announce the investigations. B. NO because he didn’t try to keep it secret as it was, so why would he under your scenario? C. Depends on if they found something bad. There would be little to gain otherwise. Because it would have allowed Biden and the Dems to cry foul and embarrass Trump.

              • Mathius says: C) do you think that Trump would have used the investigation as a political cudgel against Biden?

                C. Depends on if they found something bad. There would be little to gain otherwise. Because it would have allowed Biden and the Dems to cry foul and embarrass Trump.

                JAC…..

                You honestly don’t think that if Ukraine had announced an investigation of Biden’s son, that Trump wouldn’t be on Twitter bleeting about how corrupt Biden Sr. is? You think he’d sit there politely and wait for the investigation to reach a conclusion before jumping into the fray and bashing Biden with it? What President have you been watching these last few years?

                Maybe I’m delusional and Trump is a disciplined, self-controlled, respectful adult. I must be mistaken, and he’s actually inclined to wait until the matter goes to trial and reach a verdict there. I’m sure that, if asked, in the meantime, he would politely demur, stating that Hunter and Joe Biden are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law and that it would inappropriate for the President to weigh into a pending legal matter of this nature in another country. Is that the guy you think is President?

                This is the same man who lead the chants of “lock her up,” and who accused Ted Cruz’s father

                You think – you honestly think – that a foreign government opens an investigation into a major political rival’s son and Trump doesn’t make hay of it unless/until they find something?

                I would bet my kidneys that Trump would be on that like white on rice the instant it was announced.

                I would be SHOCKED if he didn’t lead chants of “lock him up” at ever rally from that day until the election.

              • Just A Citizen says:

                Mathius

                Trump didn’t need and doesn’t need and investigation to tweet about Joe’s corruption. I believe you will find such comments have already been made, before any of this Ukraine thing happened. All he needed was Joe’s public admission of blackmailing Ukraine to fire the prosecutor.

                I don’t think the investigation would have mattered in that respect. I am saying it wouldn’t have been much more than that, unless it found something wrong. Then he would have kicked it up to hyper drive. You may be right but not for the reason you state. His ego probably wouldn’t allow him to sit there quietly and let the surrogates do their job.

                Trump has many issues and lack of POLITICAL experience is a big one on these kinds of things. BUT…….. he has consistently been shown to be right or partly right when he tweets or says things that nobody thinks is real. So I think he doesn’t really fly off the handle on them as much as we may think. If some evidence exists then he reaches for the Tweeter. It may not be corroborated or definitive, but he seems to have a sense of when it will work out. Like his comments about the Govt. spying on his campaign. You and others laughed. In the end you had to fall back on technical definitions to rationalize why you were right, but the reality was that his campaign was being spied on.

                By the way, it appears they did restart the investigation given that Burisma’s head honcho has been indicted. We may soon find out just who was doing what, when and for how much.

  41. Just A Citizen says:

    According to the Dems this week we cannot and should never question the integrity of our hard working and loyal State and Intelligence Community workers.

    Headline today:

    “JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
    Former CIA officer sentenced to 19 years for conspiring with Chinese spies
    Jerry Chun Shing Lee is the third former U.S. intelligence officer to be convicted in less than a year of conspiring with the Chinese to give them national defense information.”

    • I’m not sure where the Democrats said that……

      But I do think there’s something… distasteful… about the way the Republicans and Trump have been working to discredit career diplomats and intelligence workers during this trial..

      • Just A Citizen says:

        What is wrong with that? These people are testifying in an impeachment hearing. Their testimony has been scheduled to match the mid day media releases. In the mid day news it is all about them dropping another BOMBSHELL on Trump. By the time the R’s get done in the afternoon it is “Oh SHIT……another nothing burger”.

        Besides, based on what I have heard and read, most of them deserve it. The R’s have been discrediting their testimony or how that is being portrayed by them. They have not gone after them personally. I grant that Trump does do that with comments like “Never Trumpers”.

        I would think you would be relieved to find out, thanks to the R’s cross examination, that Mr. Trump is not the biggest dolt in Govt. The ambassador to the EU now has that distinction.

  42. Just A Citizen says:

    And per Shep Smith, we shouldn’t be villifying the PRESS either,,,,………… cause you know it is a sign of totalitarian states.

    “Former Fox News anchor Shepard Smith railed against authoritarian governments who are making it difficult and dangerous for a free press in his first public words since leaving the network last month.

    Smith, a frequent on-air Trump critic during his Fox tenure, urged for press protection in his passionate speech as host of the 2019 International Press Freedom Awards on Thursday in New York City.

    “Intimidation and vilification of the press is now a global phenomena,” said Smith, alluding to, but never mentioning, President Donald Trump in his speech. “We don’t have to look far for evidence of that.””

    Hey Shep…………Chevy Trucks bursting into flames…………dead fish on the Clearwater River, caused by logging……………… Wild horses are part of nature………..Ted Kennedy was the Lion of the Senate……. on and on and on and on. Nope, shouldn’t ridicule these people at all.

    Now on a more serious note, I want you to notice how he blended two separate issues into one. Namely “intimidation” vs. “vilification”. There are times, many times, when the Press should be vilified. But that is not the same as intimidating. Trumps “Fake News” meme would have no affect if it were not for the disdain and thus “vilification” due the Press for its behavior. The blatant left wing/Democratic Party bias has been obvious to many avg. Americans for a long time. That is why Fox rose to dominate cable news. As soon as Fox started acting like the others, their ratings dropped. Most people know BS when they hear it and when it comes to the MSM, they have taken stock and issued their verdict.

  43. Just A Citizen says:

    This is evidence of the corrupt power in D.C. which I have mentioned before. These Dem Congress critters would not be begging for help if not for how the DNC/Pelosi/Schumer/Leadership has constructed the power structure. These folks have to beg for help.

    If they get that help and win…………. they are beholding to the King Makers.

    You know…………Quid..Pro..Quo

  44. Just A Citizen says:

    Question for all those long in the tooth at SUFA.

    Anyone else notice how willing witnesses were to chastise, criticize and even argue with the Republican House members asking questions? Notice any lack of such with the Dem members?

    • Yes sir….it was readily apparent that the witnesses were coached. Even my spousal unit made the comment..they are reading from a script and being led into the answers. none of what was happening in these hearings would have even passed the courts…..leading the witness, disallowing cross examination, reading from prepared scripts…..honestly, it was more embarrassing than watching the English Parliament…..

  45. I think you guys forgot the starting point of the whole whistleblower thing. I’m not about to go researching, but from memory… and I’m probably confusing which head of state or agency or ambassador or whomever, but IIRC…it went something like

    -Ukranian ( this is where I’m not naming an agency or any titled person because I’m not sure) investigators want to give Trump a heads up on Biden’s corruption

    -They, the Ukranians, reach out to our ambassadors for proper protocol on how to get to Trump

    -Our ambassadors want to stall….because Biden!

    -Ukranian somebady decides to go through State department (maybe not even state dept) channels instead…this Biden thing being so important to them, that this second attempt to get to Trump is tried. It stalls on the second attempt as well.

    A third attempt somehow involved this info being kicked around and ended up with the SDNY which is how Giuliani ended up jumping into the mix. Ukranians are desperate to get to Trump..somebody decides to get Giuliani in on it…which Giuliani did….alll this before Zelinsky was elected.

    I realize that all sounds flimsy. But there was a whole bunch of pre set ups going on before Zelinsky…where OUR guys weren’t letting THEIR guys get the info to Trump. So Mathius thinks Trump is targeting Biden. I call bullshit. The Ukranians tried every which way, trying to go by the book no less, It was several months of nothing but process. OUR government obstructed the whole way. So now Trump is the bad guy for targeting? Bullshit. But Trump is going to finish it.

  46. With all this gender change crap being legalized, can I use my doe tag on a buck? Asking for a friend.

  47. Special request for JAC……would you please contact your Seattle Seahawks and get themto beat Philly…..thank you.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      DONE………….. They should win but one thing for sure. They will make it close when it shouldn’t be and then who knows what will happen.

  48. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    The scary Brit broad who testified the other day pointed out it is a Russian goal to make us question teh legitimacy of our government and governmental agencies. I submit that it is a radical leftist goal also and Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” make that quite clear. If you break down the other side, you win!

    The Rules
    “Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have.”
    “Never go outside the expertise of your people.”
    “Whenever possible go outside the expertise of the enemy.”
    “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.”
    “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”
    “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.”
    “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.”
    “Keep the pressure on.”
    “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.”
    “The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition.”
    “If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside.”
    “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.”
    “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”

  49. First evil is overlooked
    Then it is permitted
    Then it is legalized
    Then it is promoted
    Then it is celebrated
    Then those that expose it are persecuted

  50. Sir Mathius…..what do you do now? Bernie has partnered up with AOC…..Bloomberg is now running for POTUS and has billions, Warren has an impossible dream she is trying to put forward….Biden is….well just Biden.

    NOw, are you still a Bernie fan?

  51. Special to Adam Shit….I mean Schiff……….if you have iron clad evidence…..FILE THE IMPEACHMENT CHARGES RIGHT NOW………get it done.

%d bloggers like this: