Impeachment = Grounds for Firing
You’d think we were all in Newfoundland buried beneath multiple feet of snow given the blizzard of bullshit Trump and his reality TV cast have been spewing.
Like this idiocy on Twitter:
I JUST GOT IMPEACHED FOR MAKING A PERFECT PHONE CALL!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 16, 2020
Many have speculated that Trump can’t read; the above tweet is one more piece of evidence in their favor, because he’s clearly not read the rather simple Articles of Impeachment.
He can read because in addition to typing stupid tweets he manages to scratch out legible crap on paper using a Sharpie pen, writ large enough that passing cameras can read it.
Like this piece of brilliance snapped on November 20:Sure, we believe you, big guy. You didn’t want a quid pro quo BUT you told Zelensky you want him to “do the right thing,” leaving the possibility of future cooperation hanging in the air and $35 million in U.S. aid allocated by Congress still undelivered the day before this note was Sharpied.
Not bribery. Not extortive at all, with hundreds of Ukraine’s citizens dying due to Russian aggression.
But Trump’s ethically-challenged brain trust has his back, issuing a letter rebutting the House’s impeachment. They claim he can’t be impeached because [—enter bullshit excuse du jour—].
Like Alan Dershowitz’s ridiculous claim that Trump didn’t do anything illegal and therefore can’t be impeached.
I pity every student Dershowitz ever taught; the credibility of their credits earned has been thrown into question now that Dershowitz has decided to backpedal on his positions held back in the 1990s when lying to Congress about a consensual blowjob was an impeachable offense.
Putting aside the legitimacy of an election questionably won with foreign interference he solicited right in front of the American public on camera, impeachment isn’t a criminal prosecution. It’s a Constitutional act by which the people through their representatives indict the president for “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors” — it’s not a nullification.
Can’t believe I’m actually posting anything by Cato Institute, but this fairly brief explainer is straightforward:
In Trump’s abuse of office he acted illegally; these acts may yet be prosecuted once he leaves office if they are still within statue of limitations:
- bribery or extortion of a foreign official,
- conspiracy to defraud the U.S.
- violation of campaign finance law barring solicitation of anything of value from foreign nationals,
- Honest Services fraud, and
- violation of the Impoundment Control Act
There may be more illegal acts upon further investigation. We still don’t have all the details about the threat to former ambassador Marie Yovanovitch, for example.
The illegal acts themselves are not laid out in the Articles of Impeachment, offering instead only the high-level assessment that Trump invited foreign interference in the 2020 election for his own personal gain while damaging U.S. national security interests and in violation of his oath to faithfully execute the law. He obstructed Congress as they investigated his abuse of office.
The House was too kind by half, sparing him a detailed recitation of his illegal behaviors within the Articles.
A conviction by the Senate — unlikely as it is because its GOP majority is hapless and nearly as corrupt as Trump — won’t nullify the 2016 election. It would result in succession by Vice President Mike Pence, acknowledging both the election and the established order of succession.
And it would tell Trump what he truly deserves to hear for failing to do his job, that of faithful execution of this country’s laws, upholding the Constitution.
It’s a pity Trump and his legal minions refuse to accept the House has found ample grounds to tell Trump his work performance is unacceptable.
More than half of the U.S. don’t approve of Trump’s job performance as well. It’d be nice if the Senate GOP found a spine, convicted Trump, and told him in simple, familiar terms he knows all too well that he’s fired.
She doesn’t get shouty often but man, the stupid exposed when these GOP partisans roll over for their crime lord deserves 24-pt. all caps.
This is like Lindsey Graham’s roll over — someone who should know better like a former law enforcement official let their brain be eaten by zombie crime enterprise occupying the White House.
The *Sharpie* written words were NOT written by the Orange Poo – he`s dyslexic .
I don’t think Trmp is lysdexic; I think he’s semi-literate. Not the same thing. Using a mix of upper and lower-case letters is semi-literate. Consistent kinds of misspelling would be dyslexic.
Nah, some people just have writing styles like that. I would mix capital consonants and lowercase vowels all the time in like 7th grade. I was also a prolific reader.
Just pointing out that that’s no evidence to the President’s literacy or illiteracy.
Then he’s NOT typing any of his tweets, either?
I think if he has dyslexia it’s extremely mild. Whatever he has is manifest in the spelling of “Zellinsky.”
His signature on documents also matches his printing in pressure and line width; a Sharpie results in less variation but there’s no difference between the rendering of his signature and printing, same as in older samples of his handwriting.
Do note the mixed case which also appears in his older writing and won’t appear in the same way in typed tweets. Example:
I think it important, though I can’t explain no one else making any note of it, but Trump ‘signs’ his signature with his real name, Donald Drumph.
Every one of his signatures says Donald Drumph, not Donald Trump.
(there’s no T, not in any of his signatures)
edit: (sorry) Drumpf, Donald Drumpf
I disagree. The cross is there in the image I shared — it’s just down very low.
And that’s exactly what we should expect from him, a low-down cross.
You’ll note the rest of his signature consists of sharp, jagged points. Those are shark’s teeth, denoting someone who shouldn’t be trusted any more than a shark, capable of harsh, biting commentary. There’s virtually nothing below the line indicating someone who isn’t a deep thinker. The consistency of the line used also suggests rigidity, someone who can’t be easily persuaded.
As much as he disgusts me I have to admit he’s a perfect specimen for someone teaching graphology.
He signs his name like he shakes hands: unnecessarily aggressively and with big jerks.
His signature looks like a bad EKG.
Why the Shapie?
Seriously. A fussy dude insisting on using a messy tool is odd.
Visually, it does put whatever Trump writes in the “bigly” category when compared to the losers who use a comment pen.
Time to bust myself here, I am wasting my time obsessing about what Trump writes with.
Point goes to Trump.
Seems like a waste of time until you realize Trump’s Sharpie use helps hide some of his cognitive decline.
I think he uses a Sharpie because it’s what he thinks Important People use. (And possibly because he can’t read his sig without glasses, otherwise.)
LOL Every document arriving in his office from Congress is signed with a pen. I’m sure part of his rationale for using sharpie is his vision; we know from his teleprompter errors he has either a vision or processing problem, neither of which are obvious in his tweeting.
But he used to use pen and fine markers, now all Sharpie all the time. Something changed, doubt it was his job because his ego thought his business persona was as big or bigger than the presidency.
His health is failing, I think both physically and mentally, and his vanity won’t allow him to acknowledge it. His family won’t do anything because they’re enjoying the taxpayer-funded ride they’re getting (well, maybe not Barron), and Pence, the Cabinet, and the Rs in Congress have no intention of using the 25th as long as he can appear competent long enough in public for their purposes.
His family won’t do anything because they’re likely to be prosecuted once he’s left office.
They should have been prosecuted for the stuff they did before he got chosen by the EC.
Yeah your right.
Not to mention a Sharpie compared to a “normal” pen is big, fat and it’s markings are almost impossible to get rid of.
When I was a kindergartner, I came to acquire a fat pencil — something I’d never seen before. I proudly took it to school, where the teacher kept telling me to stop using it, finally explaining that such a fat pencil was for ~babies with no motor control, or with developmental “problems”.
Trump’s sharpie is for babies with no motor control, or someone with “problems”. Per my teacher.
Fat pencils and crayons were for first-graders, too. Maybe also second-graders. At least in my schools. (I remember getting actual dip-pens in junior-high art classes, although I’d met school desks with holes for ink-bottles long before that.)
Well this lady was *not nice* and practically made them sound like medical devices (which they can be sensu adaptive and rehab purposes, but which had a different connotation then, and to a child).
You’re incidentally reminding me of every teacher that ever trolled me: I can remember old wooden desks in shop class, trying to recall if any with holes. Instead recall the sub who made me refinish one, carved with decades of graffiti (however, he did not catch me making an, uh, “accessory” item from scrap. Who’s the better troll *now*, pal.)
I am very fussy about inks and pens for daily and arts (and sometimes like a nice broad-point pen or calligraphy nib). Uniball gel signos or vision elites or sometimes Sarasas preferred. (How odd that Trump has no *variability* or moods, as ____ as he is, you’d think he’d try on some colors here and there.)
I liked writing with a Speedball C6 and a bottle of ink. I liked the “Fountain Pentel” (a plastic fountain pen). And yeah, Uniballs. (I’ve also used technical pens and actual ruling pens, the kind you adjust the two blades with a screw.)
When I was a young lawyer, somebody gave me an exquisite Mont Blanc. I lost it, so bought a replacement. It cost a small fortune and before too long, I lost that one too. And that was the end of my time with expensive pens.
Now I use these Uniball roller gel pens. They write beautifully, smoothly and never leave globs. And you can get a pack of four of them for the price of a big meal deal at the local fast food joint. They really are superb.
Yeah they’re great pens, and the shame of it is that a box of new ones is far cheaper than getting refllls anymore. But yet I buy the new pens.
Oh, absolutely, just get a pack of new ones. No more replacements!
I am so old, we actually used those holes in the desks to put our ink in and we used those pens to write with. It wasn’t art class in latter grades. it was elementary school. You had to be very careful when you wrote. omg, I’m old…….had actually forgotten about those pens, at some level.
NFLD is digging out with the assistance of the Canadian military. Am so glad the parental units chose B.C. all those years ago.
Let’s see if I have this right. I think DT’s defense team is:
Jane “Loves These Meeses to Pieces”
Dershowitz is a joke, didn’t expect him to change his stance on the fly on such an important topic and in a moment of such heat. This is really weird, they’re just a perfect match with our “Zellinsky” writer, both are equally sad to watch. I hope that everything will continue to unfold around Trump and his puppets that try to defend his actions. This man should’ve been fired forever ago.
Marcy has touched on a meme that I am surprised Democrats haven’t been using more against Trump. Namely, the fact that an election is much like a job interview – and someone needs to tell fatass Trump, “YOU ARE FIRED!”
This was the first post in a while I didn’t add an author’s note reminding readers to check the byline.
Check the byline.
That said, I’m beginning to wonder if a lot of the whoop-de-doo generated with a incredibly sketchy reality TV cast legal team and their ridiculous six-page letter combined with McConnell’s hurry-up-coverup trial rules aren’t all a means to prevent persons like Pelosi from saying on camera during prime time TV that Trump is a shitty apprentice and he should be fired.
Each of you contributors has such distinct writing voices that it would seem clear by a line or paragraph in, anyway. (Though it has been well over a year since I’ve seen anyone call bmaz “Marcy”.)
Now I want Pelosi to *say it*; no doubt she will come up with some clever, well-placed words for broadcast, somehow, some way.
What I would give for a post-conviction address to the public by Madame Speaker in which the last two words were, “You’re fired.”
Umm, I can *taste* it. Occasion for the good-kind chef’s kiss.
“You’re fired. Okay, lock him up!”
I think of it more like a job where you are on probation your entire time served. It’s always a practice run, since it is term-limited by law. It is also limited by impeachment, as in, if you are f-ing up the job, it’s too important to just say that doesn’t matter, so we have to remove you and find a competent or non-corrupt person, or fill the position with someone that is qualified and without flaws that make him or her unsuited to the task. What is the task? Well, upholding the darn Constitution for one, and on that count, we’ve got an enormous fail going.
Had a sleepless night—read this as “You are Fried.” Lord!
That works, too.
This may be off point a bit, but as I sat here trying to absorb the absurdity of Moscow Mitch’s rules for admitting (or completely ignoring) all the evidence the House gathered, I realized there is one person who can throw a wrench into McConnell’s scheme. Though the odds are incredibly small and the risk to that person is already inhumane, that person would be The Whistleblower. If that person requested publicly that he/she wanted to testify in the Senate, the Red Coat Republicans could not ignore it, and Trump would absolutely drool at the prospect.
Thing is, the whistleblower is secondhand testimony, and they have several firsthand witnesses who have testified already. It’s like the Rs trying to get the Bidens as witnesses: they weren’t involved in any of Trmp’s actions, so there’s zero actual reason to call them.
But several of those Trmp has blocked from testifying, or even doing depositions, were present and can speak to what was actually said and by whom…if they’re willing to be truthful.
You are thinking like a lawyer. I am thinking like a fisherman. Trump would insist that testimony be taken so his Senate lackeys would get an opportunity to question/try to embarrass the witness and make a show of it. The Senators might not want to do it, but they would do it because they and the House Red Coats made such a show of demanding to see “the accuser” as part of the process. They would not suddenly throw away their ‘due process’ arguments. And Trump would want another person to humiliate. The dam for witnesses would break.
All that aside, I don’t advise the Whistleblower to come forward. Too much personal cost. But I can dream…
What Trmp says is, you may have noticed, not what he does. He talks about all these people who can exonerate him, but he’s blocked them all from testifying, for months. He’s not going to let them testify this time, either.
..”But several of those Trmp has blocked from testifying, or even doing depositions, were present and can speak to what was actually said and by whom…if they’re willing to be truthful.”
—-Or take the Fifth. If the Senate rules allow, I suspect the loyal Trumpies would do just that no matter how it might be perceived.
Oh my, that would be a wicked trap for sure
Thank you, Rayne. You write with such clarity and restraint on this … convergence of GOP cowards, enablers, active destroyers of our world, safety, security.
LOL when I see “I want nothing … ” again I hear some version of “I feel pretty, oh so pretty … ” (can’t recall what song now punaise had set that particular Trump scrawl to…if it was that song or not).
LOL that was the one where I inadvertently conflated West Side Story with Sound of Music… not sure what thread that was in.
“I JUST GOT IMPEACHED FOR MAKING A PERFECT PHONE CALL!”
And thanks to your proffer of a Perfect bribe during your Perfect phone call, it must be a Perfect impeachment!
“Mamma Mia”– here we go again
Barr misrepresented the Mueller Report
McConnell misrepresented the Clinton Impeachment Rules
Misrepresentation is yet another term in the Republican’s “do whatever it takes” ethics playbook.
The Ides of January have passed.
Let’s not put away our swords.
Adam Schiff — plunge that dagger into the hearts of Republican Senators!
Apparently, his defense is that the US is a superpower and impeachment is irrelevant now, Ukraine isn’t rich enough to buy Trmp’s help, and small countries exist to be bullied.
Hi EW folks,
Greetings from Tallahassee, FL. Please share this hysterical video far and wide. The deranged buffoon has earned widespread mockery: “EmoTrump vs. Windmills, Toilets, etc”
Trump: Article 2 Corinthians says I can do whatever I want.
(LOL I have to /s that)
Apparently there have been some (relatively minor) changes to Mitch’s rules since he introduced them yesterday. The 24 hours of opening arguments are now spread over THREE days. And they’re accepting the evidence from the House.
Schiff is doing a very good opening statement.
I wonder if Roberts told Mitch that there was no effing way he was going to stay up until 2am hearing bullshit arguments for Trmp’s lawyers.
I keep hoping that Roberts comes up with some type of intervention that completely fucks up everything these assholes are trying to pull off. Like, maybe forcing them to call witnesses.
now that would be fun to watch. Yes, how is Roberts going to take these new “working hours”. What if he deems the “jury” is asleep? Can he adjourn the proceedings? I actually don’t know the answer. it has crossed my mind with the hours.
O.K. it may not make much difference whether some of them are awake or asleep, but you’d think they’d like to at least have it look like they were doing something useful.
They’re only allowed to drink water or milk. No coffee! What was the purpose of that — to minimize the need for bathroom breaks?
When I was a kid, our family drove every summer nonstop from LA to Wisconsin. Five kids. We were only allowed bathroom breaks at gas stops. Now I know what it’s like to be a senator.
Why is Cipollone, or whatever his name is, allowed to blatantly utter complete falsehoods in today’s proceedings?? I turn it on for one fricking minute, and the first three sentences are just lies. Appalling. What is the point here if they are going to allow this BS? Its just another propaganda opportunity.
Because the floors of Congress are protected places of speech. Hopefully for the better, though not always, but that is how it is, and that is okay.
Thanks. My usual caveat, IANAL, so the chump citizen in me doesn’t grasp a lot of this. I did find this upon further inquiry : (not sure it is exactly what you refer to)
Now, I can see perhaps in terms of Congresspersons, that this applies. But in this case here, you have a lawyer uttering falsehoods, in a place where others are protected. Would the type of crap spewing from his piehole be acceptable in an everyday court of law? I’m struggling with the distinctions here. thx again.
That is true, speech and debate protection is for actual members of Congress in the performance of their duties. However, what lawyers argue in opening and closing statements in any trial is pretty much protected too. I make opening and closing arguments all the time that I would never do if under oath as a witness. But that is the leeway you get. And, arguably that is even more so in a “trial” proceeding on the floor of the Senate.
Now, honestly, I am not sure what is occurring is really a “trial”, but no court will touch that angle. So Cipollone and the others have pretty free space to utter whatever bullshit they want. And they are doing so.
Too soon for a Super Bowl open thread, so there’s this from The Atlantic:
If Mitch McConnell ran the Super Bowl, would the game even have to happen?
I would flip the script, however: no way the Brie-eating Chardonnay-sipping West Coast elite Niners are the chosen winners. Gimme some KC flyover country red meet instead. (*ducking Peterr’s ire*)
St Louis beer and brats?
BTW Brie and Chardonnay are so 1990s. These days it would be a good Sauvignon Blanc and Humboldt Fog goat cheese from Cowgirl Creamery…
Yer killing me. Don’t make me come over there.
Fog goat cheese?
Humboldt Fog. Punaise has excellent taste.
I’ve heard of it – and of Cowgirl. Never had any of their cheese, though.
The « fog »’in question is actually the farts of goats fed with that area’s cash crop. True fact!
I haven’t had the Humboldt Fog goat cheese. But when I was on vacation in Maui a couple of years back, the cheese from Surfing Goat Dairy was outstanding, and paired great with several different wines. And the baby goats were entirely too cute.
ohhhhhh! Cowgirl Creamery makes some of the BEST cheeses in the area!
Rick Reilly was always a fun read when he had a regular sports column. The chiefs would definitely be a more likely choice for the republicans to have the fix in for geographically but our racist president likely wouldn’t be on board with the team named after a native american leader
Still the obvious choice for any fixed outcome in The NFL has to be the Patriots after they’ve made a cottage industry of such behavior thru the years and of course they have known ties to the orange one
lol: Teeny onions
12:45 PM – 21 Jan 2020
I’m pretty sure she can pronounce “Cipollone”. It isn’t like there are no Italians in California.
She’s just, um, calling a spade a spade. He’s working for Trump. All he has left are tiny onions. He should be grateful he has those.
I mean, he could be like Lindsey.
PJ – Yes! And Lol, the Alioto family and restaurants say hi! Also, too, the DiMaggios. That is all I could come up with in the first 30 seconds I saw this, but you are sooooo right.
That said, Lofgren is from a different area, and is one of the good ones relatively speaking.
One of my grade-school teachers was a Ferrario. One of my classmates was a Caratti. We had a neighbor, later, named Armento (he’d been in the Italian army in WWI, and come over in the 20s); the house on the other side of him was – still is, AFAIK, the DiNapolis.
ma, che cazzo fanno questi stronzi di Senatori Repubblicani?
HAHAHA, just took the time to translate your post !!
I clicked the link. Hoo boy!
Certain things you don’t learn in a classroom. Picked that upon streets of Florence molti anni fa (many years ago).
The city where I went to grade school also had a fair number of people from Serbia and neighboring countries, a bunch of people of Portuguese descent, and at least one family who were Hawaiian, along with all the [email protected] Not many blacks, though, which was too bad for us.
Big Italian-American neighborhood in the part of S.J. that Zoe represents.
then there’s John Cipollina of Quicksilver Messenger Service with a bit of Fresh Air
From Jim’s twitter:
Eureka 2020: Arright, you’re being a little fucking dramatic
(I’m being extorted to get undone-for-humans dinner out of the oven post-haste)
Break’s over, Demings up —
Local broadcast networks have given up on airing the proceedings (none of four have them on on now, from two of four maybe an hour or more ago)
They’ve been liveblogging this at Kos. It’s easier on me.
They’re into thread 8 of the liveblog.
The House managers are playing it smart: they’re getting all their evidence in as support for their motions, which doesn’t count against their official 12-hour time allowance.
OT, Glenn Greenwald has been arrested in Brazil and charged with cybercrimes for his alleged role in a “criminal organization” that hacked into the cellphones of public officials and prosecutors.
Last fall the Brazilian courts told the government to stop prosecuting reporters for reporting. This is evidence their government isn’t going to follow rulings it doesn’t like, any more than ours does.
Well I think thre is a big difference between prosecuting reporters, and prosecuting someone/some group who is hacking into the phones of public officials and prosecutors.
As far as I can tell, the Rs in congress (and especially the Senate) have less spine than a baby tomato worm.
Oh, this is a delight:
And this, from the liveblog:
Tuesday, Jan 21, 2020 · 7:38:57 PM PST · Mark Sumner
Quote of the day: “If anyone remembers 1 PM”
It’s currently 11:20pm in DC…. And Roberts is stuck there until McConnell calls for a break or until they recess for the night.
Sounds like they are discussing some shambolic “witness trade” of Bolton for Biden (per Schmidt, guesting on MSNBC panel, whose “studious +/- angry constipated furrow” appears freshly botoxed).
or per Williams-Schmidt opening banter (not sure if the speculative info is NBC’s, NYT’s, or pool or whatever/ however the press is getting info out of the restricted setting).
I think it’s them speculating. It’s certainly not going on in the well of the Senate.
They’re still on break.
Mitch reportedly looks bad and is limping. They could recess and come back tomorrow afternoon.
Yep, I tracked it down and it was two separate — and both speculative (and apparently incorrect) — issues. They were presenting it as if such negotiations were going on _during the break_ (and that’s what piqued my interest).
Origin of story is from Costa et al. at WaPo (many tweets on his timeline). All things considered, the _general_ story of them doing that kind of deal seems off the mark [story photo features Chris Coons, but then Coons himself is tweeting (basically) no effing way at 1045p, etc.].
One example, w link to story:
Robert Costa on Twitter: “These Democrats said they believe having Hunter — or possibly Joe Biden — testify could backfire on Trump and the GOP, giving Biden and the party a platform to strike back and paint Republicans and the White House as obsessed with trying to damage Biden. [WaPo link to “Senate Democrats privately mull Biden-for-Bolton trade in impeachment trial.”]”
Senator Chris Coons: “I’m a lawyer, and here’s what I know: Trials have witnesses, and the witnesses have to be relevant to the case. It isn’t complicated. The President is on trial here, not anyone with the last name Biden. VP Biden and Hunter Biden are not relevant witnesses.”
Of course I looked into this _before_ Nadler came on at midnight, when it would have been clear no such thing was happening… lesson to beware the teevee (and symptom of the impact of the press restrictions on this listener; it’s definitely changed my perception of what may be ‘news’ and ‘how’ vs any other given day/ covered event).
5-minute break, then they get around to an amendment from Schumer adding a sentence concerned with providing new information not already in the house report.
This is what they’re looking at after the break:
Tuesday, Jan 21, 2020 · 8:35:47 PM PST · Mark Sumner
I finally got to a tv, I’ve been listening at work and in the car, and bummed I missed seeing our local guy Jason Crowe.
I started flipping back and forth between CNN and Fox and damn if they didn’t talk over what I think may have been all of Shiff’s turn on the John Bolton amendment.
I’m not sure if this went on all night?
I”ll take the need for a split screen, one showing a Historic event, the other featuring Matt Schlapp predictably snarking on Democrats as a positive sign that there is a story being told that they don’t want viewers to see.
They are showing all of Nadler now so many it was an isolated incident?
It appears that the House used their holiday break to do some heavy-duty planning for this kangaroo trial.
1:50 am: The Senate is adjourned.
Lol, this is such a shit show.
At least Baseball HOF twitter nonsense arguments provided some entertainment (“savvy” tweeters are trying to pin the Jeter holdout on someone in the Miami press, saying at least the Boston press recognizes game and wouldn’t do that).
Oh — and the big Kansas-on-Kansas brawl:
Lol, the baseball HOF voting is so bizarre. Rivera is the only unanimous selection ever. Only one voted against Jeter, and that has people in an uproar? Barry Bonds had HOF numbers just from his time in Pittsburgh, but he can’t get in.
This is how silly it is:
I mean, who the hell voted against Babe Ruth, Willie Mays, Hank Aaron and Ted Williams???
YES! I know the whole thing makes no sense (nor do most of the ensuing arguments — but they were a sight better entertainment than Jeffries’s case in the Senate at the time). And all the tweets about Bonds’s later head size/growth, ignoring he’d already earned his way before all that.
But lots of nice old clips to watch (and some old Seinfeld clips with Jeter, too, kind of brought me back in time).
…and then the Pete Rose-based measuring stick arguments dragged in (about who more deserves to be in/excluded)…anyway it was a silly fun fracas.
It was something like three votes against Mays, and everyone was like “WUT???”
Let the record reflect that Rep. Jeffries, in his pre-dinner (547p start) segment, brought up the Jeter holdout as an ice-breaker and pivot-point in The Impeachment of Donald J. Trump:
At outset of clip here:
Else go to main link, and search text ‘Jeter’ for the timestamp:
I have no problem using trivial current events to pivot into a topic of gravitas. But unfortunately Jeffries thwarted his own case, at least thrice, in forcing this example (he just needs a better editor, perhaps). Throwaway lines about enforcing purity and order (~subpoena who “voted against” (sic) Jeter) could have been better used, to, say, highlight the principle that breaking unanimity — leaving the unanimous horde to vote one’s conscience, like the GOP Senators before him *need to do* — is an American value.
He could have been Socrates to his fellow New Yorker _and_ the Senate, to get them to perhaps all agree that dissent with one another over short-term stakes to uphold founding principles is more American than baseball and apple pie. Or something like that (I’ll pay closer attention and do a better rewrite the day I’m on the clock).
…not just uphold, but exhibit, frankly.
The biggest sports newsflash is the renewal of the NCAA Women’s rivalry between UConn and UTK. Thursday, 7pm, ESPN. Awkward calling it a “rivalry” on the occasion of its friendly revival, but it started friendly back then, so… who knows what might happen. Anyone into 90s-aughts bball will remember. ESPN has a nice write up ahead of tomorrow’s game:
UConn-Tennessee — Inside the year the rivalry hit its boiling point
Lady Vols: Would Pat Summitt approve of UConn rivalry renewal?
UConn’s in much better shape these days, the balance at the new series origin tips there, now:
Lady Vols vs UConn: Tennessee hurt itself by canceling series
Afternote (OT sports; ^ this game came between the Trash pickup days):
UT Lady Vols vs. UConn Huskies Women’s NCAA basketball (*rivalry years: 1995 to 2007) was one of the most productive rivalries in sports history, with impacts to this day. Current players who know none of the history save for banners, plaques, and (HOF) trophy cases reap its benefits. It not merely symbolized but raised the esteem of women’s college hoops, and beyond many of the NCAA championships between the two schools (8 total for UT, 11 for UConn), it gave most of the fuel to the then-fledgling WNBA (founded 1996; initially as players transitioned to pro, then to coaching in the league), and enough Team USA gold medals, Olympic and otherwise, to anchor Betsy de Vos’s fleet of yachts.
*The late great Vols coach Pat Summitt, life and career prematurely ended from early-onset Alzheimer’s, cancelled the series over a recruiting kerfuffle, to put it mildly; while they stopped playing each other in 2007, the rivalry lived longer in some ~adjacent brackets, and still lives in the coaches and fans who were there (readily prompted by flashback video clips and current behavior). With yesterday’s (1-23-20) game renewing the series (they’ve agreed to two games so far), and so many familiar faces, all of the olds and plenty of the youngs are in on the competitive aspect.
What a time to be alive, to have witnessed this first-hand and then see it revive. Whether it withers to more nostalgia remains to be seen. Geno Auriemma still coaches the Huskies; new Lady Vols coach Kellie (Jolly) Harper, with a young, rebuilding team of mostly frosh and sophomores, played in the original matchups. Harper is 4-1 as a player vs UConn, now 0-1 as a coach.
Excepting the first bucket, 23-ranked UT led the entire first half. Third-ranked UConn came out hot for the second, and won decisively at home. UT seemed to have fallen apart — it was like they lost where their bodies were in space — gave up too many turnovers, and headed home to some tough SEC matchups. Post-game, Geno oddly praised UT, saying they were a better team than their rank. That might have been a case of not shading his own team’s lighter-to-date schedule. UConn is still a ~perennial Final Four type of team.
If anyone wants to know what Trump thinks about Bolton testifying, here’s a quote from a press conference at Davos:
4:31 AM – 22 Jan 2020
Justin Hendrix with more:
5:53 AM – 22 Jan 2020
The withholding of information is one of the frothy right’s weapons. They’re using it right now against Adam Schiff, as Marcy points out here:
5:16 AM – 22 Jan 2020
That’s about this the “frothy right” response to this Politico article:
4:53 PM – 21 Jan 2020
An example of Trump’s knowledge of/about “another leader”:
5:59 AM – 22 Jan 2020
She links to:
5:27 AM – 22 Jan 2020
Trump IS our national security “problem”.
TRANSCRIPT from [[0:27]
Trump finally granted them an audience and now they have to grovel in a public box….strangely familiar.
More evidence that he’s mentally incompetent to be president.
And as always, who’s the “WE”?
(partly rhetorical statement; I thought it was established that the oil “we” have secured is effectively RU’s.)
Summary of yesterday’s impeachment action:
The Press will be under the spotlight for how they handle impeachment.
1] Josh Holmes hypothesizes:
[President & Founding Partner of @Cavalry, LLC. Former Chief of Staff and campaign manager to U.S. Sen. Leader Mitch McConnell. Husband, Dad, GOP commentator]
7:34 PM – 21 Jan 2020
2] The New Yorker’s Susan Glaser responds:
[see next link]
7:41 PM – 21 Jan 2020
3] Conversation between Eric Boehlert and Charles Pierce about Glaser’s response:
5:01 AM – 22 Jan 2020
Another response to Glaser:
John Weaver Retweeted Norm Ornstein
Ornstein’s tweet jolted my memory of this, from [I think] the first Parnas document dump [1/15/20]:
Robert Hyde; 3/27/19 2:18:11 AM
What’s the word bro Any good stuff?
Parnas 3/27/19 2:22:12AM
Call you soon in studio
Hyde 3/27/19 3:42:33 AM
Let’s go Holmes
RG [Rudy] was good. But Ingraham had some hard questions
Opening of today’s liveblog at the Great Orange Satan:
12:31 PM – 22 Jan 2020
(a) they’re not in the chamber
(b) they’re clearly not paying any attention to any of the testimony and evidence the House already has
(c) they’re clearly ignoring the admissions of guilt – on video – by Mulvaney and by Trmp himself
(d) how did they get through law school?
…grade inflation and daddy’s money?
I’d hope that law schools are better than that. (The one person I know who went to law school and passed the bar says you have to be very organized.)
Klasfeld has a followup [see it at the above twitter link]:
1:00 PM – 22 Jan 2020
Once in each clip, these guys refer to each other as “General” instead of Attorney General.
Apparently, that’s not unusual. It isn’t correct – it’s like referring to a sergeant major as major – but it’s not unusual.
yes, but it’s still like scratching a blackboard.
True. I wish they wouldn’t do it.
It actually show that they have NO idea what the title means.
The blackboard scratching started for me back at “riffing,” an otherwise innocuous word choice which reminded me, due to this horrible general context, of the Jay Sekulow band.
So I’ve already left the building (lol)
Observation: House Managers appear to be using @ew’s signature narrative frame (timelines!) to great effect. :-)
Post script: In favor of including as many video clips as possible of Dr. Hill’s testimony. Beyond the content her speaking voice is riveting & welcome contrast to the the inevitable drone of the presentation marathon. ;-)
1] Trump Tweets Today:
1:49 PM – 22 Jan 2020
2] From 12/12/19
4:36 PM – 12 Dec 2019
7:15 PM – 12 Dec 2019
The Press is under unusual restrictions about where they can be and how they can do their jobs during the Impeachment Trial of President Donald J. Trump.
Also, somehow, this happened, about 20 minutes ago [via Justin Hendrix]:
3:24 PM – 22 Jan 2020
3:22 PM – 22 Jan 2020
3:23 PM – 22 Jan 2020
3:24 PM – 22 Jan 2020
Apparently an anti-abortion protester, because it’s the anniversary of Roe v Wade and nothing else matters to them.
Jeffries had been reading the statement about Trmp’s call to Zelenskyy, when he was interrupted.
4:04 PM – 22 Jan 2020
6:06 PM – 22 Jan 2020
It looks like they’ll get access in a SCIF. No declassification.
Here’s video of that:
6:23 PM – 22 Jan 2020
Lofgren also said:
6:48 PM – 22 Jan 2020
I thought at the time that this document going into the record was a pretty big win, but I have not heard much about it this am so perhaps I am wrong.
I’m no politician but if it contains worthwhile information, I would give it a little time and then use it to poke Republicans to the point the media is asking each of them to tell t(e folks back home if they have taken the time to read it for themselves, and if not, why?
If it is established that the document is meaningful, I think any clownish responses by the usual suspects run the risk of really pissing off the moderates.
It is classified, so it will not be discussed publicly.
I think “have you read it, and if not, why haven’t you read it?” would be a good question – doesn’t require revealing anything classified, and tells you if the senator has a shutter open in their brain.
Yes it is classified, and democrats are using it as an example of the Trump administration misusing the classification process to obstruct congress.
That seems to me a pretty bold claim considering all a Senator has to do is make the effort to go over and read it.
I understand they can’t discuss the contents of the document (not that it has stopped many a house clown from making all sorts of claims based on classified docs we will never see) but surely classification can’t be used as a reason not to answer whether or not they have bothered to look at evidence?
Perhaps I’m making something out of nothing, but it seems an easy way to separate many of these senators from the herd.
The past being any indication, the hard core Trump loyalists “won’t waste their time” and the hand wringers will “study it carefully”
If the media pushes the question, it could create the first divide in this process.
The Dem argument that it is wrongfully classified is almost surely correct.
Well then, damn straight, I think is fair to demand an answer from all of them including out suddenly mute senator (Gardner)
Im sure the dude is getting squeezed hard, but if I have anything to say about it, continuing to cover his eyes and hoping no one sees him is going to make him even more vulnerable
Senator Chris Murphy [D-Ct] says he has read the document:
9:14 AM – 23 Jan 2020
Senator Chris Van Hollen [D-MD] has read it, too…maybe we’ll have 43 statements about it, today.
To protect those who have not yet acquired the ability to unsee what they have seen, if I was a republican and afraid of what the document could show I would send over a hand wringer to scout it and report back….
It’s too bad there’s no one there who can do anything about it. Or who could have set up more reasonable rules. /s
(links to: https://apnews.com/326336f2b37f03a521e867db9a41d0f0 )
and that’s it for ‘Today in Impeachment’.
Welp, I’m one of the losers who checked out to check in in basketball. So now I don’t have to feel like a Bad Citizen anymore. Yipee?
I was bouncing in and out. I think the Dems have done a good job of getting evidence into the official record, even if the Rs have been ignoring the rules (and getting away with it).
I’m glad to hear that’s your evaluation (on the dems part). It seemed that way when I was in and out, too, but was hard to tell (with both the scope of evidence we’ve seen — and still could use — in mind).
I heard an interview snippet from Schumer [on MSNBC] where he said he thought the GOP senators were actually paying rapt attention to Schiff’s closing, despite their earlier lax attention.
Schumer also said that he didn’t think the GOPers (barring hardliners) _really_ wanted Biden testimony because of the (paraphrase) shitshow aspects.
They’re certainly ignoring the rule about staying in their seats (or at least in the chamber) during the trial.
And on the votes yesterday: Jack Ohman has some words.
Yep, that’s why I was surprised by Schumer’s ‘scoop’ there.
Long live the cartoonists!
~Related (from 1014pm):
Paul McLeod: “Unexpected moment just now as Lindsey Graham was leaving the Senate and walked by Adam Schiff. He patted Schiff on the shoulder and said “good job today. Very well spoken.””
Trump’s latest outrage (until the next one any minute now):
13 hours ago … President Trump appeared to admit the White House was obstructing Congress in their impeachment inquiry during a press conference on …
This link has the written version of the story with quotations from Trump:
“Soon we will find out if breaking the law is illegal.” Stephen Colbert
Let’s talk about CJ John Roberts role in the
Impeachment Trial of President Donald J. Trump.
This article might be an interesting take-off point [via Kyle Griffin]:
Why Is John Roberts Even in the Impeachment Trial?
Last night, the chief justice showed he wasn’t just a potted plant. But the founders would have wanted him to play an even stronger role in impeachment.
JAMES ROBENALT 01/22/2020 05:06 AM
The article was written after Roberts “admonished” both sides about civility in the early morning hours of 1/22/20.
Last night [1/22/20], as we noted above:
5:35 AM – 23 Jan 2020
But, Roberts said/did nothing about Senators [who are effectively both judges and jurors] not actually being present at the trial.
added: As Jennifer Rubin says:
And, as PJ Evans comments, above at January 22, 2020 at 9:44 pm, to some Senators, the whole proceedings are really, really dumb, and just so impossibly boring.
They evidently find it really really impossible to do their jobs….poor things…
We should relieve them all of their onerous responsibilities.
IMPEACHMENT TODAY begins
10:09 AM – 23 Jan 2020
[It sounds more like shade to me]
11:02 AM – 23 Jan 2020
It’s probably the book for her bible study.
The worst insult these leaders can conjure up is “it’s boring”?
I guess we know who they are pandering to.
I posted the first night on how Fox “news” seemed to be testing the strategy of grinding this historic event into irrelevancy when I noticed that Fox “news” anchors talked over an entire Schiff segment and then let Nadler talk without interruption.
Shame on all those ass-holes.
A public service from Texas Tribune’s Abby Livingston:
7:40 AM – 23 Jan 2020
That’s a useful drawing. Most of the artist drawings I’ve seen don’t give that much information (and some are so vague they’re nearly abstract).
Humor injection time:
‘Daily Show’s’ Trevor Noah Goes Wild Over Rep. Hakeem Jeffries’ Trump Impeachment Shout-Out to Biggie Smalls
Samantha Bee Dunks on Trump’s Impeachment Defense Team: ‘A Virtual Dream Team of Rape Culture’
Notorious B.I.G. Inspires A Rap Battle At Trump’s Impeachment Trial
Rep. Adam Schiff Passionately, Courageously Lays Out The Case Against Donald Trump
House Impeachment manager Jason Crow (D-CO 6) very clearly details Trump’s Ukrainian military aid hold and the consequences of it for Ukraine and for US and European National Security vis a vis Putin.
10:14 AM – 23 Jan 2020
Today’s liveblog at Kos starts here:
(I had to go by the post office, so I’m a little late to today’s Sisyphean effort.)
Minor (petty) aesthetic quibble: is anybody else bothered by the hideously jagged and busy marble or faux-marble backdrop for these proceedings?
I think it’s real marble – it’s in the videos of Graham during Clinton’s impeachment trial. It’s a little annoying, but I can tolerate it.
I find it to be rather soothing, actually. Go figure.
different streaks for different freaks! :~)
You know who would look really good testifying in front of that marble slab??
Mick Mul-vein-y, that’s who…
Or Roger Stone. (too easy)
and any of the other slabbering GOPologists.
Spoken like an Architect. It is “Levanto” marble from Italy.
*ding!*, and you know from stone.
insert metamorphic metaphors here: ____
Metamorphic indeed ! Can you imagine the heat that stone has felt in that chamber for all these years ? Bet there have been some blistering debates. I was amused that it was purple, before being purple was a political thing.
Charles Pierce respects the historical pressure.
It’s one of the classic marbles. I have a marble tile holding my electric tea kettle, and it’s one of the kind with large crystals, very pretty: white with grey and brown markings. (Marble and granite for trivets because they’ve already been fried: what damage would a hot pot do?)
Blackburn tried to put down Schiff via Vindman, and got flamed on Twitter:
another peeve: as a non-religious sort I was actually quite offended by all the god stuff in the invocation. YMMV
Ha ! I keep hoping that some well placed lightening bolts will smite some of the smug, self-righteous Republicans who are hoping for the rapture.
Preferably in whatever places they’re using to avoid having to do their jobs. But in the Senate chamber will do, and even better might be it happening when they’re doing an interview instead of being on the floor.
Where is Christopher Hitchens when we need him most?
Thursday, Jan 23, 2020 · 7:28:47 PM PST · Mark Sumner
Thursday, Jan 23, 2020 · 7:30:52 PM PST · Mark Sumner
live blog for today: