Official Impeachment Thread 2.0: House Judiciary Committee Hearings

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Nostra, Dec 4, 2019.

  1. Zorro!
    Offline

    Zorro! Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2019
    Messages:
    5,408
    Thanks Received:
    818
    Trophy Points:
    200
    Ratings:
    +3,754
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. Zorro!
    Offline

    Zorro! Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2019
    Messages:
    5,408
    Thanks Received:
    818
    Trophy Points:
    200
    Ratings:
    +3,754
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2019
  3. Zorro!
    Offline

    Zorro! Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2019
    Messages:
    5,408
    Thanks Received:
    818
    Trophy Points:
    200
    Ratings:
    +3,754
    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi charged the House Judiciary Committee with the preparation of articles of impeachment against President Trump yesterday. From the perspective of the Star Tribune editors, it’s probably the biggest news of the day. The AP story touting it sits at the top left of the Star Tribune home page (“Democrats say Trump impeachment charges must come swiftly”).

    Readers, however, seem to be pursuing other interests. Below is a screenshot of the Star Tribune’s top five most read online stories as of 5:45 a.m. (Central) this morning. The tragic loss of three members of the Minnesota National Guard in the helicopter accident yesterday afternoon comes in at number 1; it is featured in the center column of the home page. We see in the number 2 most read story that Twins fans continue to wait till next year. News of Trump’s prospective impeachment does not make the top 5. It’s almost funny.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
    Doesn't Find Democrats Impeachment Farce Interesting
     
  4. Zorro!
    Offline

    Zorro! Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2019
    Messages:
    5,408
    Thanks Received:
    818
    Trophy Points:
    200
    Ratings:
    +3,754
  5. kyzr
    Offline

    kyzr Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2009
    Messages:
    11,625
    Thanks Received:
    2,278
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +11,213
    1. The democrats will impeach Trump on a party line vote with a few democrats voting no.
    2. The Horowitz report will be out documenting FISA abuses and how the FBI and DOJ were after Trump
    3. The Barr, Durham, and Huber reports will be out documenting the illegal start of the deep state's coup plots against Trump
    4. The senate trial will begin with a dynamite list of potential witnesses: Schiff, Ciaramella, Hunter Biden, Joe Biden, Chalupa, Comey, Baker, Gaeta, McCabe, Page, Strzok, the Ohrs, Rosenstein, Yates, Kavalec, Brennan, Clapper, Downer, Halper, Mifsud, Rice, Steele, Mueller, Rhee, Weissman, Zebley, Flynn, Carter Page,
    5. The various democrat's plots against Trump will be exposed
    6. Trump will be re-elected in a landslide, and the House will switch back to the GOP
    7. In his 2nd term Trump will replace RBG, Breyer, and Thomas on the USSC with young conservative justices.
     
  6. hadit
    Offline

    hadit Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2013
    Messages:
    23,184
    Thanks Received:
    2,665
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +13,811
    A vote of that magnitude should never be private. People need to be on record. Of course, if it were private, more democrats would vote against it as well.
     
  7. Zorro!
    Offline

    Zorro! Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2019
    Messages:
    5,408
    Thanks Received:
    818
    Trophy Points:
    200
    Ratings:
    +3,754
    They are trying to spin their looming vote loss.

    [​IMG]
     
  8. Zorro!
    Offline

    Zorro! Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2019
    Messages:
    5,408
    Thanks Received:
    818
    Trophy Points:
    200
    Ratings:
    +3,754
    Impeachment hearing didn’t go as Fat Jerry planned.

    The House Judiciary Committee hearing featuring four law professors — three of them urging the imminent impeachment of President Trump — did not go as Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) planned. Instead of a panel featuring reasoned analysis by liberal academic rock stars, the country witnessed exaggerations and the ridicule of a child’s name, all tinged with a tone of obsession and mania by the majority’s witnesses.

    The hearing might also leave many Americans wondering what in the world is being taught at elite law schools.

    Noah Feldman compared Trump’s behavior to Richard Nixon. As president, Nixon, according to Feldman, “sent burglars” into the Democratic National Committee’s headquarters in 1972.

    Nixon, of course, did no such thing and didn’t even know about the break-in until after it happened. Feldman was recklessly exaggerating the facts of Watergate or he doesn’t know his history. Neither possibility helps the House impeachment train.

    Karlan served in the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) Civil Rights Division and has a reputation among Democrats as a top-shelf expert on voting rights. Had Hillary Clinton won the presidency in 2016, Karlan would certainly have been nominated to the federal bench.

    Karlan represents what has gone wrong in the nation’s elite law schools. By the end of the hearing, Karlan effectively became a Republican witness, turning off viewers to any impeachment of Trump.

    Karlan was bitter, detached and radical. Her testimony provided a glimpse of what is occurring inside law schools, where students today are treated to ideologically saturated political law. She showed viewers in mainstream America what some of us have been warning them about for years — that a detached group of academic legal elites have profound hostility to “flyover country” values and are willing to use their intellectual skills and tenured perches to get their way, no matter what.

    Karlan also has a troubling academic record when attacking Republicans. In the Duke Journal of Constitutional Law and Public Policy, she incorrectly smeared the George W. Bush DOJ’s Civil Rights Division record of voting rights enforcement. She wrote that “for five of the eight years of the Bush Administration, [the Civil Rights Division] brought no Voting Rights Act cases of its own except for one case protecting white voters.”

    Karlan wasn’t telling the truth then, and hasn’t corrected the record since.

    Doubt it? Just go to the DOJ’s website. Numbers don’t lie: The Bush Justice Department, in fact, brought 16 cases under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act — three in 2001, one in 2002, one in 2003, three in 2005, three in 2006, one in 2007 and four in 2008.

    The same Bush Justice Department brought even more cases to protect language minorities during that same time period. Ironically, Karlan’s tenure at the Justice Department overseeing voting rights enforcement during the Obama administration saw a fraction of the Section 2 cases filed compared to the Bush years.

    The Duke Journal of Constitutional Law and Public Policy editors said it was up to Karlan to retract her work. She hasn’t.

    Just like her testimony before the House providing legal justifications for impeachment, Karlan’s incorrect Duke Journal article was designed to package a smear of Republicans in the fancy dress of a respected academic.

    For good measure, Karlan revealed in her testimony that she is so unsettled by the results of the 2016 election that she has to cross Pennsylvania Avenue to avoid passing the Trump International Hotel. And if that wasn’t enough, Karlan’s nasty ridicule of the president, using his son’s name as a prop in a quip about royalty, was something most parents would find grotesque. First lady Melania Trump did, taking to Twitter to scold the professor’s cold incivility.
     
  9. Jitss617
    Offline

    Jitss617 Gold Member

    Top Poster Of Month

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2019
    Messages:
    21,867
    Thanks Received:
    1,918
    Trophy Points:
    275
    Ratings:
    +13,457
    167AC027-C0F4-420F-9D26-902EE269228F.jpeg
     
  10. Zorro!
    Offline

    Zorro! Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2019
    Messages:
    5,408
    Thanks Received:
    818
    Trophy Points:
    200
    Ratings:
    +3,754
    NADLER SAYS HOUSE CAN READ TRUMP’S MIND, THEN IMPEACH HIM: It’s an extraordinary claim in the House Judiciary Committee’s just released report on the constitutional grounds for impeachment.

    You will find it on page six in the graph beginning “Fourth” where it is stated that:

    “The question is not whether the President’s conduct could have resulted from permissible motives. It is whether the President’s real reasons, the ones in his mind at the time, were legitimate. Where the House discovers persuasive evidence of corrupt wrongdoing, it is entitled to rely upon that evidence to impeach.”​
     

Share This Page