Category: trump

How desperate are Senate Republicans to silence Bolton? Desperate enough to throw away the republic

Posted on by Kerry Eleveld

Republicans don't give a damn about how dangerous Donald Trump is, or about the fact that he's selling our democracy to whichever foreign governments will help him get reelected. They are absolutely desperate not to hear directly from former national security adviser John Bolton. In fact, nothing could be worse than simply calling Bolton to testify under oath about what he knew and what he heard directly from Trump about withholding aid to Ukraine in exchange for investigations into Trump’s domestic political opponents, the basis for Trump’s impeachment.

Sen. John Cornyn of Texas said that the Bolton account wasn't worth exploring because it was just a marketing stunt: “This looks like a marketing tactic to sell books is what it looks like to me.” Gee, John, why not find out by calling Bolton in and asking him?

Campaign Action

Sen. Deb Fischer of Nebraska prefers a statement to actual testimony: “It doesn’t take a subpoena to put out a statement. I think if Ambassador Bolton has something to say he could  do that.” Also, Fischer is pretty sick of being asked about the biggest news of the day and likely even the entire impeachment trial so far: “Do you guys have memos on the same question to ask all the time? Just curious.”

Sen. Roy Blunt of Missouri doesn't really care what the facts are—he's in Trump's camp no matter what: "I can’t imagine that anything he would have to say would change the outcome of the final vote."

Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming applied his blindfold to the "so-called blockbuster" Bolton report: "To me, the facts of the case remain the same."

Sen. John Thune of South Dakota echoed Barrasso’s nothing-to-see-here take: “I don’t think it changes the facts. ... I don’t personally see it as a game changer.”

And—wait for it—Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri is confused about what constitutes a first-hand witness: “Well, I don’t know. Is he a firsthand witness? I’m not sure.” LOL. Man, what a complete joker, unworthy of holding elected office—a proud moment for Missouri, no doubt. 

And Iowa Sen. Joni Ernst—who's already declared her undying fealty to Trump and the White House’s distorted version of events—is waiting to hear White House lawyers declare the earth is flat once again so she can agree with them wholeheartedly: “I’m sure they will address this now, and we go from there.”

Yep, that may be the one truthful thing uttered so far by Republicans on Monday morning. The White House counsel will absolutely try to twist the Bolton revelations one way or the other. Asked by a chorus of reporters about the Bolton report Monday morning, Trump was unusually short on words. "False" was all he offered. 

Senate Republicans were heading into an all-caucus meeting just before the impeachment trial resumes, and they will likely come out with a more tailored set of talking points intended to blunt the damage of the bomb that just dropped on them. They will also surely apply immense pressure on Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah, the only GOP senator to signal any interest whatsoever in hearing from Bolton. Romney called it “increasingly apparent that it would be important to hear from John Bolton.” That’s what counts for courage these days in the Republican Party.

Rep. Adam Schiff makes the irrefutable case for Bolton’s testimony

Posted on by Walter Einenkel

Donald Trump impeachment trial manager Rep. Adam Schiff has been so very stolid in his handling of the Republican-sham impeachment circus being orchestrated by the White House and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. As another day of appearances by Trump’s impeachment defense team began, House impeachment managers spoke to reporters in front of the Senate. The last question reporters asked was whether Schiff trusted former national security adviser John Bolton. Schiff used his response to point out the important issue: that the testimony of a witness such as Bolton is vital to a fair trial in the Senate.

REP. ADAM SCHIFF: It's not a question of whether I trust John Bolton or the Republican senators [trust] John Bolton, or the Democratic senators. He should be placed under oath. And this is why we think the testimony should be public. It should be live. Let the American people, along with the senators, evaluate John Bolton’s credibility when he testifies, and make their own judgment. But to say that we’re going to blind ourselves from a witness who has so clearly relevant testimony to one of the central most serious allegations against the president, I don't see how you could have a fair trial without testimony like that.

x x YouTube Video

‘Space Force’ debuts new uniforms, Graham’s 2020 opponent, and more you might have missed this week

Posted on by Cara Zelaya

Yikes, where does the time go? How is it Sunday already? The impeachment trial has dominated the news cycle and our front page, but our staff also picked some other stories that might have flown under the radar but are definitely worth reading.

Without further ado, here are our staff picks.

Trump's 'Space Force' debuts some new uniforms. There's only one problem with them…

By. David Nir

The “United States Space Force,” a particularly bizarre Trump fever dream given life to feed the black hole of his ego, released their first uniforms to the public on Friday evening. Get a load of these beauts:

Democrats across the country seek to make California's mistake, destroying careers of freelancers

By. kos

It’s not an either-or situation. We can help workers truly exploited by the gig economy, while letting people who want to freelance continue to ply their professional wares. That’s where the focus should be, not on copying a flawed and dangerous California law.

Group of parents deported without their kids by Trump admin return to U.S. following court ruling

By. Gabe Ortiz

Their trauma also manifested in other ways, a medical director said according to the report. “Physical symptoms felt by separated children are manifestations of their psychological pain. You get a lot of ‘my chest hurts,’ even though everything is fine [medically]. Children describe symptoms, ‘Every heartbeat hurts,’ ‘I can’t feel my heart,’ of emotional pain.”

Trump administration reportedly moving ahead with plan that could destroy Medicaid in red states

By, Joan McCarter

In a joint letter to HHS, patient advocacy groups addressed the threat to the health of millions. "The block grant will include vulnerable eligibility groups such as children and people with disabilities and requests unprecedented changes that could make it harder for patients to get the treatments and services that they need," they wrote.

Lindsey Graham's 2020 opponent releases impeachment statement using Lindsey Graham's own exact quote

By. Walter Einenkel 

As one of the big proponents of impeaching then President Bill Clinton, back in 1998, Sen. Graham has come under fire over the past year for how starkly contradictory his public statements today when compared to those from 1998. Harrison justifiably has decided to use Graham’s words against him.

That’s it for this Sunday night, folks! But tell us in the comments: What stories did you read this week that stuck with you? Anything that you think flew so under the radar that we might have missed? Looking forward to chatting with y’all below! 

‘Right matters and the truth matters’: Read Adam Schiff’s history-making impeachment trial speech

Posted on by Walter Einenkel

Thursday evening marked the end of a second long day on the Senate floor in Donald Trump’s impeachment trial. Democratic officials presented the evidence to America, detailing how and why Donald Trump must be removed from office. The highlight was lead House impeachment manager Rep. Adam Schiff's powerful 30-minute argument that closed out the day.

Schiff once again detailed some of the steps Trump and his White House took to obstruct the inquiry into his abuses of power. He underlined how the Trump White House went to his handpicked attorney general, William Barr, and got him to refuse to release evidence to Congress. “I know what the law says and it says you shall, doesn't say you may, doesn't say you might, doesn't say you can if you like to, doesn't say if the president doesn't object—it says you shall.” Just like at every other turn in this saga, it’s only because of the Democratic Party’s insistence that a whistleblower’s warnings be heeded that we even discovered how deep our executive branch’s corruption goes. 

Finally, Rep. Schiff finished with the powerful, already often-quoted conclusion of his argument, where he tied together why Donald Trump must be removed from office with what’s at stake for America. The final nine minutes of Schiff’s speech is transcribed below.

REP. ADAM SCHIFF: But even now, our ally can’t get his foot in the door. Even now, our ally can’t get his foot in the door. And this brings me to the last point I want to make tonight, which is, when we’re done, we believe that we will have made the case overwhelmingly of the president’s guilt. That is, he’s done what he’s charged with. He withheld the money. He withheld the meeting. He used it to coerce Ukraine to do these political investigations. He covered it up. He obstructed us. He’s trying to obstruct you and he’s violated the Constitution. But I want to address one other thing tonight. Okay, he’s guilty. Okay, he’s guilty. Does he really need to be removed? Does he really need to be removed? We have an election coming up. Does he really need to be removed? He’s guilty. You know, is there really any doubt about this? Do we really have any doubt about the facts here? Does anybody really question whether the president is capable of what he’s charged with? No one is really making the argument “Donald Trump would never do such a thing,” because of course we know that he would, and of course we know that he did. It’s a somewhat different question though to ask, okay, it’s pretty obvious whether we can say it publicly or we can’t say it publicly. We all know what we’re dealing here with this president, but does he really need to be removed? And this is why he needs to be removed.

Donald Trump chose Rudy Giuliani over his own intelligence agencies. He chose Rudy Giuliani over his own FBI director. He chose Rudy Giuliani over his own national security advisers. When all of them were telling him this Ukraine 2016 stuff is kooky, crazy Russian propaganda, he chose not to believe them. He chose to believe Rudy Giuliani. That makes him dangerous to us, to our country. That was Donald Trump’s choice. Now, why would Donald Trump believe a man like Rudy Giuliani over a man like Christopher Wray? Okay. Why would anyone in their right mind believe Rudy Giuliani over Christopher Wray? Because he wanted to and because what Rudy was offering him was something that would help him personally. And what Christopher Wray was offering him was merely the truth. What Christopher Wray was offering him was merely the information he needed to protect his country and its elections, but that’s not good enough. What’s in it for him? What’s in it for Donald Trump? This is why he needs to be removed.

Now, you may be asking how much damage can he really do in the next several months until the election? A lot. A lot of damage. Now, we just saw last week, a report that Russia tried to hack or maybe did hack Burisma. Okay. I don’t know if they got in. I’m trying to find out. My colleagues on the Intel Committee, House and Senate, we’re trying to find out, did the Russians get in? What are the Russian plans and intentions? Well, let’s say they got in and let’s say they start dumping documents to interfere in the next election.

Let’s say they start dumping some real things they hack from Burisma. Let’s say they start dumping some fake things they didn’t hack from Burisma, but they want you to believe they did. Let’s say they start blatantly interfering in our election again to help Donald Trump. Can you have the least bit of confidence that Donald Trump will stand up to them and protect our national interest over his own personal interest? You know you can’t, which makes him dangerous to this country. You know you can’t. You know you can’t count on him. None of us can. None of us can. What happens if China got the message? Now you can say, he’s just joking of course. He didn’t really mean China should investigate the Bidens. You know that’s no joke.

Now maybe you could have argued three years ago when he said, “Hey Russia, if you’re listening, hack Hillary’s emails.” Maybe you could give him a freebie and say he was joking, but now we know better. Hours after he did that Russia did, in fact, try to hack Hillary’s emails. There’s no Mulligan here when it comes to our national security. So what if China does overtly or covertly start to help the Trump campaign? You think he’s going to call them out on it or you think he’s going to give them a better trade deal on it? Can any of us really have the confidence that Donald Trump will put his personal interests ahead of the national interests? Is there really any evidence in this presidency that should give us the iron-clad confidence that he would do so?

You know you can’t count on him to do that. That’s the sad truth. You know you can’t count on him to do that. The American people deserve a president they can count on to put their interests first, to put their interests first. Colonel Vindman said, “Here, right matters. Here, right matters.” Well, let me tell you something, if right doesn’t matter, if right doesn’t matter, it doesn’t matter how good the Constitution is. It doesn’t matter how brilliant the framers were. Doesn’t matter how good or bad our advocacy in this trial is. Doesn’t matter how well-written the Oath of Impartiality is. If right doesn’t matter, we’re lost. If the truth doesn’t matter, we’re lost. Framers couldn’t protect us from ourselves, if right and truth don’t matter. And you know that what he did was not right.

That’s what they do in the old country that Colonel Vindman’s father came from. Or the old country that my great grandfather came from, or the old countries that your ancestors came from, or maybe you came from. But here, right is supposed to matter. It’s what’s made us the greatest nation on earth. No Constitution can protect us, right doesn’t matter any more. And you know you can’t trust this president to do what’s right for this country. You can trust he will do what’s right for Donald Trump. He’ll do it now. He’s done it before. He’ll do it for the next several months. He’ll do it in the election if he’s allowed to. This is why if you find him guilty, you must find that he should be removed. Because right matters. Because right matters and the truth matters.

Otherwise, we are lost.

You can watch Rep. Adam Schiff’s closing argument in three parts below.

x x YouTube Video

x x YouTube Video

x x YouTube Video

New clip of young Lindsey Graham talking about impeachment confirms his hypocrisy knows no bounds

Posted on by Walter Einenkel

Republican hypocrisy knows no bounds. It is hard to write this in new ways every few minutes, but it is the job of any honest person to acknowledge it. With Donald Trump’s impeachment trial playing out in the Senate and a Republican Party now actively colluding to cover up his crimes, old videos of very visible Republicans and Trump allies contradicting their current positions have started springing up.

Sen. Lindsey Graham is one of the more obvious examples because his 180-degree turnabout on executive powers, the abuse of those powers, and the subject of impeachment is arguably the most transparent example of how craven the Republican Party has become in its amoral quest for power. 

Dating back to Jan. 23, 1999, the clip below shows a younger Sen. Graham speaking at a press conference and basking in that camera limelight he so clearly desired and now requires.

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM: The law allows a different disposition if the offender comes before the court: “yes I’m guilty and I’m sorry and I throw myself on the mercy of the court.”  The sentence is usually different in a case like that versus someone who takes the legal system to the bitter end, and uses every twist and turn, and every gimmick, to try and beat the charges, for lack of a better word. So I’m going to argue that proportionality is something we need to consider, but is something that the defendant usually has to earn. And when you have someone who has flouted the law at every turn, then usually the sanctions are much more severe.

This was Sen. Graham’s attempt to dismiss the fact that the Republican Party’s “high crime” against then president Bill Clinton was that he obstructed justice in order to hide and lie about an extramarital affair he was having. The “proportionality” being brought to his mouth was the fact that none of it seemed very high crime-like, and Graham wanted to angle for the idea that Clinton’s lack of remorse showed an elitism and a belief he was above the law.

Meanwhile, Donald Trump has arguably committed high crimes not only every day that he has been president, but every day since he began running for president.

x

Tennessee senator tries to burn Adam Schiff, but Twitter roasts her almost instantly

Posted on by Walter Einenkel

Sen. Marsha Blackburn is well-known around these here parts for being a pretty detestable human being. Then again, detestability seems to be the only qualification for being a Republican senator these days. And Blackburn has indeed been doing her job as a Republican senator: groveling at the feet of Donald Trump while dismantling our democratic processes. 

As Donald Trump’s impeachment trial goes into another day, Republicans in the Senate are spending their time not paying attention with the deck already loaded, the fix already in. But having all of this obdurate criminality in place does not stop Republicans like Marsha Blackburn from being dumb as dirt. The senator from Tennessee decided to go and give her two cents, in a classic Republican attempt at gotcha-style politics:

x

Sorry! I should have warned you that your mind might be blown clear from your skull by Blackburn’s wit and wisdom. The Twitterverse very quickly realized that Marsha Blackburn had said something—something too stupid and unbelievably hubristic to let lie.

x

But people were also pissed.

x

Damn. “Guttersnipe” sounds awful.

x

x

And it didn’t stop. In fact, the ratio just took off on Sen. Blackburn

x

x

Some literature for Blackburn to read while she doesn’t fulfill her sworn oath on the Senate floor:

x

And some more reminders:

x

Before you knew it, #Marsha was trending. And not because The Brady Bunch is getting a reboot.

x

That Tweet is to remind people that Sen. Marsha Blackburn is trash.

x

And finally:

x

Kellyanne Conway’s husband on Senate Republicans: ‘What are they afraid of?’

Posted on by Walter Einenkel

Conservative lawyer and husband of truly awful person Kellyanne Conway continues to work to the left of his wife in the public sphere. Known for attacking the current administration, the one his wife works vociferously for, Conway was on CNN earlier Wednesday to discuss the first day of the U.S. Senate’s impeachment trial and investigation into the corruptions of Donald Trump. The most glaring corruption right now is Speaker Mitch McConnell’s transparent directive to use the Senate impeachment trial as a way to help Donald Trump cover up and pave over his crimes.

CNN host Jake Tapper, speaking with Conway, asked for his impressions of the first day of the Senate trial, and Conway started by saying that Trump’s lawyers were “outclassed,” underprepared, and “lying.” Calling their performance “distressing,” Conway explained that while that was bad enough, the more pressing disappointment was Republican senators.

CONWAY: The second is the Party-line votes on witnesses, the Party-line votes on witnesses. This is a trial. This is a trial where they should want to hear the evidence. If everyone is so sure, if they’re so sure that the evidence will exonerate President Trump then, yeah, let’s hear from John Bolton. We should hear from Pompeo. We should hear from Mulvaney.

Conway goes on to explain that yes, none of this makes sense.

CONWAY: Absolutely. They have no justification not to. I mean, when you get to a trial, you’re entitled to issue trial subpoenas. And even before that, even in a criminal case, you’re entitled to issue pre-trial discovery—both sides—even if evidence has been heard before a grand jury. You know, the United States against Nixon, a famous case that dealt with executive privilege back in 1974, involved pre-trial discovery where the defendants had already been indicted.

Tapper brings up the statements of Mitch McConnell who has said this trial should exist with no witnesses or much of anything. Conway points out that the Senate has the power and the “obligation” to try to get to the bottom of these criminal complaints against the president.

CONWAY: That’s what this is. That’s what a trial is for, and their job is to hear the evidence. Hear all of it. Not some of it, or none of it—which seems to be the way they are going.

Tapper, having now exhausted all avenues of discussion here, since the issue is clear, asks Conway again: what’s the deal with these Republicans?

CONWAY: What are they afraid of? They must be afraid of something. That's the thing that I find most disturbing about it, is they don't want to hear the evidence because they know the truth. They know he's guilty. And they don’t want to hear the evidence because they don’t want the American people to see the evidence.

x

Lindsey Graham’s 2020 opponent releases impeachment statement using Lindsey Graham’s own exact quote

Posted on by Walter Einenkel

Jaime Harrison is running for Senate as a Democratic candidate hoping to unseat incumbent Lindsey Graham. Sen. Graham, like Sen. Mitch McConnell and the rest of the Republican Party stoolie squad, have fallen into line under the single-most transparently corrupt president in any of our lifetimes. As one of the big proponents of impeaching then President Bill Clinton, back in 1998, Sen. Graham has come under fire over the past year for how starkly contradictory his public statements today when compared to those from 1998. Harrison justifiably has decided to use Graham’s words against him, tweeting out from his personal account, Harrison posted a video, with “Official Impeachment Statement:” as the header. 

In the video we see Harrison speaking to the camera, reading a statement from a paper in his hands.

HARRISON: For the good of the nation, I think, it would serve us all well if we thought about this one idea. After we’re all dead and gone,

It is here, on the second sentence, that we can hear Sen. Graham’s wilting southern accent come up behind Harrison’s, as it is revealed to be Sen. Lindsey Graham’s statement on impeachment, from Dec. 22, 1998, to reporters somewhere underneath the Senate’s chambers.

GRAHAM: [continued] do you have something to present history that will withstand scrutiny, where everybody had a chance to have their say, in a reasonable way, in a focused way, so that history would judge us based on the facts, and based on a meaningful hearing not just on the political moment.

The image fades back to Harrison reading the end of Graham’s words.

HARRISON: [continued] And if we think about that, it’s very important to me that we leave behind a legacy that meets the model of American justice.

x

It may be hard to believe but before Donald Trump there were many Republicans, like Sen. Graham, who used a patina of eloquence in order to drive home their bleak and cynical world views. Now that this mask has been ripped free and the soul of the Republican Party has been revealed to be the monstrous faces of bigotry and greed, it is hard to connect the senator from South Carolina, who spoke so eloquently about impeaching then president Bill Clinton for his extramarital affair, with the senator from South Carolina who has said in no uncertain terms that he will not even pretend to participate in an impartial trial concerning the abuses of power in the Executive Branch of government.

SemDem has been covering a lot of Harrison’s moves in his trip toward the Senate, and you can learn a lot more about Harrison’s chances and stances here.