I probably am giving him too much credit. I’m sure this kind of idiotic brinksmanship followed by reaching some kind of you scratch my back deal worked well in his white collar crook wannabe Mafioso world prior to the presidency.
I know and I want all branches of govt. to be equal, as it was made out to be. I’m a Classical Liberal, and I think the Constitution is one of the greatest documents written in history. But the Democrats have shown many times for their judgement to be impaired, given their obsession with Trump and their bitterness from Hillary losing the election.
The man has constantly lied to the American people for years and engaged in reprehensible, corrupt behavior. Wanting him to be held accountable is not “obsession” or “bitterness”. It is respecting the rule of law and basic human decency.
I’m going to indulge in some completely unsupported speculation about what has happened today.
Earlier in the day, Adam Schiff reported that the Whistleblower’s lawyer had contacted Schiff to say the Whistleblower wanted to testify before the House Intelligence Committee, (Open session, closed session? Don’t know.)
Schiff’s a former prosecutor. His first question is likely to be “What’s your client got?” At that point, in confidence, Schiff learns more about the whistleblower report… which rumor has said goes far beyond the Ukraine call.
Schiff is not going to leak what he has learned to the press; far more effectively to get the report out legally. But the one person he is likely to take into his confidence is Nancy Pelosi.
Later in the day, Pelosi reverses on an impeachment hearing. She’s been very cautious about this. What would cause her to abandon caution… because she’s gotten insight into what the DNI knows.
It’s speculation on my part, but unlike the Biden nonsense, the timeline actually works.
Sounds perfectly reasonable to me. And I just read a tweet posted by @acsirip, I think, that said that Schiff had said Trump was asking the Ukraine to manufacture dirt, not to dig it up.
What’s going to be fun is watching how all the players in this Trump madhouse react.
[quote=“Weedhopper, post:212, topic:213533, full:true”]
Remember the FBI and DOJ will never admit they are conducting an investigation, they review the case then determine weather or not to investigate.
One week before the 2016 election James Comes announced the re-opening of the Clinton email investigation. You might want to revise your claim of “never” there Weedhopper. Or you can continue to erroneous material. Your choice.
I stand on calling what I said “speculation”. I’d be very careful about promoting tweets. One of the simplest tactics is to get your opponents all excited by offering them disinformation and then using their falling for it to make the argument that everything they say is wrong.
These processes need to work out with all deliberate speed to borrow a phrase.
What a load of hogwash, Obama didn’t get a status of forces agreement because he didn’t want one. Or are we supposed to forget he campaigned on withdrawing already?
Do you have any knowledge of Heather Caygle… prior credibility for instance? A quick scan shows she’s affiliated with Politico but I’m curious about prior scoops. Did they pan our or not?
The newsies are saying Nancy changed her tune, at least in part, due to 7 or so freshmen congresspersons who came out today in support of impeachment. She was worried about their ability to survive in their districts, but they are standing up and doing, reportedly, what the feel is the right thing to do.