BREAKING No Impeachment for President Donald Trump

https://gellerreport.com/2020/02/thank-you-pelosi-and-schiff-gop-releases-total-fundraising-haul-during-impeachment-sham-and-its-yuge.html/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook
Thank You, Pelosi, Schiff! GOP Releases Total Fundraising Haul During Impeachment Sham and It’s HUUUUGE!
By Geller Report Staff - on February 10, 2020
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP
The GOP hauled in a staggering $117 million in online fundraising, during the Democrats attempts to impeach President Donald Trump. The Democrats are in for a major ass whipping in November. How bloody will it be? Speaker Pelosi made the mistake of her political life when she agreed to proceed with this sham impeachment. #Trump2020! #GOP2020!

THANK YOU, PELOSI AND SCHIFF! GOP RELEASES TOTAL FUNDRAISING HAUL DURING IMPEACHMENT SHAM AND IT’S YUGE!
By WayneDupree, February 9th, 2020:

THE REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE JUST REVEALED THAT THEY BROUGHT IN AN ASTOUNDING $117 MILLION THROUGH ONLINE FUNDRAISING DURING DEMOCRATS’ ATTEMPTS TO IMPEACH PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP.
The money was raised through the RNC’s “Stop the Madness” campaign, which was promoted through TV and digital ads after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced in September that the House would launch an impeachment inquiry into Trump.


The ads continued to run until Trump was acquitted by the Senate on Wednesday, according to McClatchy.

RNC spokesman Rick Gorka said that the ads cost $11.3 million to make and garnered 460 million impressions, and he added that the money raised will be used to invest in states Trump lost in 2016 but hopes to win in 2020.
“I think it’s going to be a tremendous boom for the Republicans,” the president said.
Meanwhile, the Democratic National Committee has not released any data about their impeachment-related fundraising efforts. They were only able to raise $28 million in donations in the fourth quarter of 2019, while the RNC raised just over $72 million from October through December. On top of that, the Trump campaign was able to raise $46 million.

This proves once and for all that the left’s impeachment efforts completely backfired on them.

Americans saw right through what Democrats were doing, and they could tell that the impeachment effort was really just a witch hunt against the president.

Democrats were trying to remove Trump from office by any means necessary, but all they may actually have accomplished was ensuring that he would get four more years in the White House.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/feb/05/how-donald-trump-got-acquitted-after-impeachment
The great escape: how Donald Trump survived impeachment
How did Trump and his team pull off his successful defense? Here’s a look at key factors

Tom McCarthy in New York

 @TeeMcSee  Email
Wed 5 Feb 2020 21.34 GMTLast modified on Wed 5 Feb 2020 21.37 GMT
Shares
49
Elected Republicans went nowhere, supporting Donald Trump unwaveringly.
 Elected Republicans went nowhere, supporting Donald Trump unwaveringly. Photograph: Drew Angerer/Getty Images
Will historians find Donald Trump’s impeachment remarkable because Republican politicians turned a blind eye to such egregious wrongdoing and acquitted him? Or will they find it remarkable because it was the last time a cadre of Republican officials publicly turned against Trump?

While most of the career civil servants who defied the president by testifying in the impeachment inquiry do not publicly identify as Republican, many were Trump appointees with strong Republican ties, while other key figures such as former national security advisor John Bolton are wizened party warriors.

In the end, only one elected Republican, Mitt Romney, voted against Trump, making the question of his ultimate survival of impeachment not even close. So, while Trump will forever be an impeached president, his acquittal should count as a major political win. Here’s how it went down:

The base stuck with him
In a string of speeches this week, Republican senators have explained their votes to acquit Trump by impugning the strength of the Democratic case, repeating quibbles with the process in the House of Representatives, and expressing offense at various things the impeachment managers or top Democrats said or did.

But did Trump really avoid removal because House speaker Nancy Pelosi passed out pens after the articles of impeachment were signed, or because lead impeachment manager Adam Schiff made reference to a news story about senators’ heads on pikes?

A more likely explanation for Trump’s survival was the unchanging opposition of the Republican base to removal. The proportion of Republicans favoring removal fluctuated between 8% and 10%, while support for removal among Independents was likewise stationary at around 42%, according to FiveThirtyEight. That wasn’t enough pressure to get lawmakers’ attention.

Elected Republicans stayed in line
Where the base goes, the elected politicians shall follow, and in this case the base went nowhere. And so elected Republicans went nowhere, with the exception of Romney supporting Trump from (Senator Lamar) Alexander to (Representative Lee) Zeldin.

Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell, Republican Lindsey Graham and others said before the trial that they would not be impartial jurors, despite a sworn oath of impartiality they took as the trial began. Against such loyalty to Trump, what piece of evidence or argument could be expected to make a dent?

In some cases, the extent of Republicans’ defense of Trump seemed to exceed what was strictly necessary to protect the president from removal. Instead of questioning witnesses, Republicans in the House wove conspiracy theories about Hunter Biden. Instead of calling witnesses, Republicans in the Senate withheld at length on the sheer impossibility of knowing what Trump was thinking when he withheld aid to Ukraine.

The Senate is broken
From the dust of Democratic losses in the 2014 midterm elections halfway through Barack Obama’s second term rose a new Senate majority leader, McConnell, who cruised in with a 10-seat majority on sub-basement turnout.

In the two US Senate election years since then, Democratic candidates have attracted a whopping 29 million more votes than Republican candidates – but the Republican majority has shrunk by only a couple seats. That’s because each state gets two senators no matter how few people live there.

In short, the US Senate is not representative of the country, which as a whole favored the introduction of witnesses and documents at the trial, a step blocked by Republicans.
Ari Berman

@AriBerman
Mind-blowing stat: 48 Senators who voted to convict Trump represent 18 million more Americans than 52 Republicans who voted to acquit

47.6K
9:20 PM - Feb 5, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy
19.1K people are talking about this
No thanks to Schiff
Whatever factors Trump can point to that aided his survival in office, not on the list is the performance of the House impeachment managers, led by intelligence committee chair Schiff.

As soon as Democrats realized the White House was trying to prevent a whistleblower complaint from reaching Congress, Schiff opened the investigation that Pelosi deemed a formal impeachment inquiry on 24 September. Over the next four-plus months, Democrats fought against a blanket gag imposed by Trump to gather evidence and bring the details of the case to the public.

After Trump ordered his administration to refuse to comply with subpoenas, Republicans faulted Democrats for failing to gather evidence. After lawyers for Bolton threatened the House with a lawsuit if he were subpoenaed, Republicans faulted Democrats for not issuing the subpoena.

Against each obstacle, the managers and staff worked forward, conducting depositions, holding public hearings, issuing public reports and finally prosecuting the case in the Senate well. At trial, Schiff in particular anthologized the facts against Trump to weave damning accounts of the president’s conduct.
However Trump will claim victory at having escaped removal, the case against him is in the can.

***Live Updates*** Trump Impeachment Trial: Senators Ask Questions
169
The Associated Press
TONY LEE29 Jan 202017,283
39:21
President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial continues on Wednesday as Senators will get to ask written questions.

Stay tuned to Breitbart News for live updates. All times eastern.
—
11:05 PM: Trial adjourns until 1 PM on Thursday.

11:00 PM: Senators from Indiana ask both parties about witnesses/testimony. They say House managers promised evidence supporting each article would be overwhelming and uncontested while insisting the Senate cannot have a trial without witnesses. They ask if both parties agree that the Senate has included in evidence in this trial the testimony of every single witness except for the ICIG report that Schiff kept secret.

Schiff says the testimony of the witnesses before the House is not sufficient to relieve the Senate of its obligation to have a trial. Schiff then says they could have charged bribery but tries to make the claim that “abuse of power” is actually the “highest crime.” Schiff says if Trump’s team was operating in good faith, they would allow Roberts to make the decisions on witnesses/documents. He says they do not want the Senators to hear from Bolton. Schiff says when the American people hear Bolton firsthand, they will recognize impeachable conduct when they hear it.

Sekulow says House managers have used “overwhelmingly” and “prove” a total of 64 times in a couple of days.

10:55 PM: Sinema asks Trump’s team about the administration’s announcement to withhold aid from Northern Triangle countries and Afghanistan. She asks why the administration did not notify Congress or make Ukraine and other countries publicly aware of the hold.

Philbin says that in all of the other instances, it was clear that withholding aid was meant to sent a signal to the respective countries. Philbin contends Trump’s team did not want it to make it public because it was not being done to “send a signal” and instead was done because Trump wanted to better understand “burden-sharing” and “corruption” issues.

10:50 PM: Wicker asks Trump’s team, directed at Dershowitz, what specific dangers this impeachment poses to the republic/citizens.

MORE https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/01/29/live-updates-trump-impeachment-trial-senators-ask-questions/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=best_of_the_week&utm_campaign=20200201

***Live Updates*** Impeachment Trial: Team Trump Continues Opening Arguments
561
In this image from video, Alan Dershowitz, an attorney for President Donald Trump, speaks during the impeachment trial against Trump in the Senate at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, Monday, Jan. 27, 2020. (Senate Television via AP)Senate Television via AP
TONY LEE27 Jan 202011,599
16:40
President Donald Trump’s lawyers will continue to make opening arguments on Monday.

Trump’s team has about 20 more hours to present their arguments, but they are not expected to use all of their allotted time.

Stay tuned to Breitbart News for live updates. All times eastern.
—
9:02 PM: Trial is adjourned until 1 PM on Tuesday.

8:55 PM: Cipollone now up after Dershowitz and wants to make some quick observations before the Senate adjourns. He said he was thinking how Trump’s impeachment would look like on a law school exam. After going over the fact pattern, he says the first thought would be this could not happen in America. He says one would reject the impeachment. Cipollone says it is instructive to watch videos of past impeachments. He says it’s not playing a game of “gotcha”–it’s paying them compliments. He asks the lawmakers to listen to their younger selves. Cipollone also asks the Senators to consider what he says is the “golden rule of impeachment.” He concludes by saying the most important point is that this choice belongs to the American people and they will get to make their choice months from now. He says there is no basis in the law for Senators to remove the president from the ballot.

8:50 PM: Dershowitz says he is ending his presentation with a non-partisan argument for a fair consideration of his arguments. He says he does his own research and thinking and he has never bowed to the majority on intellectual or scholarly matters. He says there have been few responses to respond to the arguments of those opposed to Trump’s impeachment. He says his arguments have been rejected with negative epithets instead of being judged on the merits.

He says he would be making the same Constitutional arguments in opposition to the two articles regardless of who is the president.

He urges the Senators to not let their strong feelings about one man to undo what the founders created and do irreparable damage to the separation of powers. He asks the Senators to think beyond the emotions of the day and says impeaching Trump on these articles would neither do justice to the president nor the Constitution.

8:37 PM: Dershowitz says nothing in the Bolton revelations, even if true, would rise to the level of “abuse of power” or an “impeachable offense.” He says you can’t turn conduct that is not impeachable into impeachable conduct by using words like “quid pro quo.” He says words like “abuse of power” are standard-less and reiterates that the founders did not want the country to be a parliamentary democracy where the chief executive could be removed with a “no confidence vote.” He says that is why the framers set the impeachment bar so high.
8:28 PM: Dershowitz argues that even if the Senate were to conclude that a technical crime is not required for a crime, “abuse of power” and “obstruction of Congress” are not impeachable offenses. He says “abuse of power” is an accusation leveled by a president’s opponents. He says presidents like Washington, Adams, Jefferson, John Quincy Adams, Tyler, Polk, Lincoln, Grant, Wilson, Carter, Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Obama have been charged with “abuse of power” and would be subjected to impeachment under the House managers’ standard.

8:27 PM: Dershowitz takes a jab at Lawrence Tribe, saying he argued that a sitting president cannot be charged with a crime when it was Clinton. He says Tribe changed his mind like academics often do…
MORE https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/01/27/live-updates-impeachment-trial-team-trump-continues-opening-arguments/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=best_of_the_week&utm_campaign=20200201

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/01/31/senate-votes-down-extra-impeachment-witnesses-paves-way-for-trump-acquittal/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=best_of_the_week&utm_campaign=20200201
Senate Votes Down Extra Impeachment Witnesses, Paves Way for Trump Acquittal
58,486
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) announces impeachment managers for the articles of impeachment against US President Donald Trump on Capitol Hill January 15, 2020, in Washington, DC, next to Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler(L)D-NY and Adam Schiff(D-CA), the House Democrat who led the Trump investigation. - The House …JIM WATSON/AFP via Getty Images
JOSHUA CAPLAN31 Jan 202024,954
5:11
The Senate on Friday voted down a motion to allow for additional witnesses to testify as part of the upper chamber’s impeachment trial, all but ensuring a quick acquittal of President Donald Trump.

The 51 to 49 vote thwarted Democrats’ ongoing effort to hear from current and former Trump administration officials such as acting White House Chief of State Mick Mulvaney and former National Security Advisor John Bolton.

YEA 49 — NAY 51: Senators have voted to against allowing witnesses in the impeachment trial of Pres. Trump https://t.co/vwxdcibO1r pic.twitter.com/b1gMStPgg7

— CBS News (@CBSNews) January 31, 2020

Bolton shot to the top of the Democrats’ witness wish list after a New York Times report alleged that his forthcoming book — The Room Where It Happened: A White House Memoir — contains allegations that President Trump sought to make U.S. military aid to Ukraine conditional on investigations into former Vice President Joe Biden, and his son, Hunter Biden. President Trump vehemently denied the report and call the book “nasty & untrue.”

House Democrats’ impeachment managers failed to convince enough moderate Republicans to cross the aisle, falling short of the 51 votes need for more witnesses. Late Thursday evening, Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) revealed that he will join the overwhelming majority of his colleagues to vote against hearing from others.

“I worked with other senators to make sure that we have the right to ask for more documents and witnesses, but there is no need for more evidence to prove something that has already been proven and that does not meet the United States Constitution’s high bar for an impeachable offense,” the retiring Tennessee Republican said in a statement.

Despite Alexander’s opposition, Democrats still had a glimmer of hope if Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) voted their way, which would have set up Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts to decide on casting the tie-breaking vote. However, Roberts’ aversion to politics had always made the prospect of him voting highly improbable.

However, Murkowski announced Friday that she will oppose hearing from other witnesses. In a pointed statement, Murkowski slammed the impeachment process’s “partisan nature” and said Congress had failed to do its job.

“I worked for a fair, honest, and transparent process, modeled after the Clinton trial, to provide ample time for both sides to present their cases, ask thoughtful questions, and determine whether we need more,” said  Murkowski. “The House chose to send articles of impeachment that are rushed and flawed. I carefully considered the need for additional witnesses and documents, to cure the shortcomings of its process, but ultimately decided that I will vote against considering motions to subpoena.”

“Given the partisan nature of this impeachment from the very beginning and throughout, I have come to the conclusion that there will be no fair trial in the Senate. I don’t believe the continuation of this process will change anything. It is sad for me to admit that, as an institution, the Congress has failed,” she added.

Only two Republicans — Sens. Mitt Romney (R-UT) and Susan Collins (R-ME) — voted in favor of the motion for more witnesses, with the former saying he believes that it was important to hear from Bolton.

Shortly after Alexander’s announcement, Collins said she would vote for witnesses as “the most sensible way to proceed.”

“I believe hearing from certain witnesses would give each side the opportunity to more fully and fairly make their case, resolve any ambiguities, and provide additional clarity. Therefore, I will vote in support of the motion to allow witnesses and documents to be subpoenaed,” Collins said.

“If this motion passes, I believe that the most sensible way to proceed would be for the House Managers and the President’s attorneys to attempt to agree on a limited and equal number of witnesses for each side. If they can’t agree, then the Senate could choose the number of witnesses,” added the senator.

Sen. Joe Machin (D-WV) voted in favor of extra witnesses. Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) also voted in favor.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) issued a statement after Friday’s vote, predicting that the trial will draw to a close “in the coming days.”

“A majority of the U.S. Senate has determined that the numerous witnesses and 28,000-plus pages of documents already in evidence are sufficient to judge the House Managers’ accusations and end this impeachment trial. There is no need for the Senate to re-open the investigation which the House Democratic majority chose to conclude and which the Managers themselves continue to describe as “overwhelming” and “beyond any doubt,” said McConnell.

“Never in Senate history has this body paused an impeachment trial to pursue additional witnesses with unresolved questions of executive privilege that would require protracted litigation. We have no interest in establishing such a new precedent, particularly for individuals whom the House expressly chose not to pursue,” the Kentucky Republican added.

“Senators will now confer among ourselves, with the House Managers, and with the President’s counsel to determine next steps as we prepare to conclude the trial in the coming days,” he concluded.

https://www.dailyconservative.com/sc3/republicans-may-have-votes-to-block-impeachment-witnesses.htm
Republicans may have votes to block impeachment witnesses
January 30, 2020
Mgid
Skip
After months of speculation, the Senate is finally making a decision on impeachment witnesses.

And though Republican leadership in the Senate said just a few days ago that they likely did not have the votes to block witnesses, the events of the last few days appear to have reversed that.

Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming, the 3rd highest ranking Republican in the Senate, says he’s heard enough and he expects an acquittal vote this Friday.

“I’m ready to vote on final judgment,” Barrasso said.

And now even Democrats, including Chuck Schumer are admitting that the witness cause is probably a lost cause. “We’ve always known it will be an uphill fight on witnesses and documents because the president and Mitch McConnell put huge pressure on these folks,” Schumer said.

Schumer says there’s still a chance, but that it’s not looking like it will happen. This comes as good news to Trump. No matter what, he’ll be acquitted. But Democrats hoped to use impeachment to sully his reputation in an election year.

Now it appears that it will be entirely up to voters — as it should be.

Read the full story here.

https://gellerreport.com/2020/01/john-roberts-blocks-blocks-of-whistleblowers-name-blocks-trial-question-on-origins-of-the-house-impeachment.html/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook
John Roberts BLOCKS Mention of Whistleblower’s Name, Blocks Trial Question on ‘Origins of the House Impeachment’
By Pamela Geller - on January 30, 2020
IMPEACHMENT HOAX
Chief Judge blocking crucial evidence. He pulled this same switch during vote on Obamacare. Is the fix in?
Sean Davis

@seanmdav
Shameful and arbitrary abuse of power by Roberts, who has already done incalculable damage to the Supreme Court's legitimacy as a non-political institution via his tortured defense of Obamcare's constitutionality. Is he Chief Justice, or Chief Censor? https://twitter.com/AndrewDesiderio/status/1222696598481915904 …
Andrew Desiderio

@AndrewDesiderio
NEW: Chief Justice Roberts told senators that he will not read aloud the alleged Ukraine whistleblower’s name or otherwise publicly relay questions that might out him/her—a move that has effectively blocked @RandPaul from asking a question today.https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/29/john-roberts-whistleblower-name-mentions-109292 
Tom Fitton

@TomFitton
UNBELIEVABLE: John Roberts blocks mentions of alleged whistleblower's name. @realDonaldTrump  https://politi.co/36Gvrpo  via @politico
John Roberts blocks mentions of alleged whistleblower's name
Rand Paul has composed questions with the alleged whistleblower's name.
politico.com
8,263
2:13 AM - Jan 30, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy
6,809 people are talking about this
JUSTICE ROBERTS BLOCKS RAND PAUL SENATE TRIAL QUESTION ON ‘ORIGINS OF THE HOUSE IMPEACHMENT’
BY: Kristinn Taylor January 29, 2020:
Chief Justice John Roberts blocked a question from Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) from being asked at the Senate impeachment trial of President Trump on Wednesday, according to reports. The question and answer session involves written questions submitted to Roberts, who is presiding over the trial, who then reads the question aloud. The questions posed to the Democrat House Managers and President Trump’s legal team alternate between Republicans and Democrat senators. Paul could be heard arguing on the Senate floor to have his question asked.
Paul’s reported question had to do with the interactions of named persons with Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and members of his staff.
“Per source: Rand Paul is not being allowed to ask his question about the origins of the House impeachment. Unclear what the exact question is and what the issue is with it”
Burgess Everett

@burgessev
Per source: Rand Paul is not being allowed to ask his question about the origins of the House impeachment. Unclear what the exact question is and what the issue is with it
305
9:13 PM - Jan 29, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy
220 people are talking about this
“Sen. Rand Paul has been informed he won’t be allowed to ask his trial question related to the origins of the investigation, per source. Unclear exactly why at this point”
Phil Mattingly

@Phil_Mattingly
Sen. Rand Paul has been informed he won’t be allowed to ask his trial question related to the origins of the investigation, per source. 
Unclear exactly why at this point

871
9:18 PM - Jan 29, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy
563 people are talking about this
“A senior GOP senate aide tells me that Justice Roberts is screening questions and that’s why Rand Paul’s question — which contained names of people and questions about their interactions with Schiff and his staff — was disallowed. Odd bc Lee’s question was basically same.”
Jon Ward

@jonward11
A senior GOP senate aide tells me that Justice Roberts is screening questions and that's why Rand Paul's question --  which contained names of people and questions about their interactions with Schiff and his staff -- was disallowed. Odd bc Lee's question was basically same. https://twitter.com/Phil_Mattingly/status/1222630125390483456 …
Phil Mattingly

@Phil_Mattingly
Sen. Rand Paul has been informed he won’t be allowed to ask his trial question related to the origins of the investigation, per source. 
Unclear exactly why at this point
710
9:28 PM - Jan 29, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy
742 people are talking about this
“Per senior Senate GOP staffer, Roberts is “screening the questions” and “the question contains names of people who worked with Schiff and Schiff staff to start this whole mess in the House.”
Ben Jacobs

@Bencjacobs
Per senior Senate GOP staffer, Roberts is "screening the questions" and "the question contains names of people who worked with Schiff and Schiff staff to start this whole mess in the House." https://twitter.com/burgessev/status/1222628967779389441 …
Burgess Everett

@burgessev
Per source: Rand Paul is not being allowed to ask his question about the origins of the House impeachment. Unclear what the exact question is and what the issue is with it
9:30 PM - Jan 29, 2020
79 people are talking about this
Roll Call reported Paul could be heard by reporters arguing on the floor of the Senate for his question to be asked:

“During a break in the trial, Sen. Rand Paul could be seen on the Senate floor seeking assurances that he will not be blocked from asking a question. The Kentucky Republican appeared less than pleased with Secretary of the Majority Laura Dove. “I don’t want to have to stand up to try and fight for recognition,” Paul said loud enough to be audible from the galleries above the chamber. “If I have to fight for recognition, I will.“

Republican Sens. Mike Lee of Utah, Josh Hawley of Missouri and Ted Cruz of Texas asked the president’s counsel if the White House whistleblower worked at the National Security Council and if the whistleblower coordinated with Schiff’s staff. Trump’s attorney Patrick Philbin couldn’t answer whether the whistleblower coordinated with Schiff’s staff but said learning more about the whistleblower would be “relevant.”

THE TRUTH MUST BE TOLD
Your contribution supports independent journalism

Please take a moment to consider this. Now, more than ever, people are reading Geller Report for news they won't get anywhere else. But advertising revenues have all but disappeared. Google Adsense is the online advertising monopoly and they have banned us. Social media giants like Facebook and Twitter have blocked and shadow-banned our accounts. But we won't put up a paywall. Because never has the free world needed independent journalism more.


Everyone who reads our reporting knows the Geller Report covers the news the media won't. We cannot do our ground-breaking report without your support. We must continue to report on the global jihad and the left's war on freedom. Our readers’ contributions make that possible.

Geller Report's independent, investigative journalism takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce. But we do it because we believe our work is critical in the fight for freedom and because it is your fight, too.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/01/29/wh-tells-john-bolton-not-to-publish-book-until-classified-info-removed/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=daily&utm_campaign=20200129&utm_content=Final
WH Tells John Bolton Not to Publish Book Until Classified Info Removed
3,773
WASHINGTON, DC - MAY 29: White House national security advisor John Bolton walks to Marine One while U.S. President Donald Trump was departing the White House May 29, 2018 in Washington, DC. Trump is scheduled to travel to Nashville, Tennessee later today for a campaign rally. (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty …Win McNamee/Getty Images
JOSHUA CAPLAN29 Jan 20201823
3:03
The White House has asked former National Security Advisor John Bolton to delay the release of his forthcoming book, citing “significant amounts of classified information” contained in the manuscript.

In a letter dated January 23, Ellen Knight — who serves as the National Security Council’s Senior Director for Records, Access, and Information Security Management — wrote to Bolton’s attorneys that the classified information contained in The Room Where It Happened: A White House Memoir make it unsuitable for release and requested that the sensitive details be removed.


 

“Under federal law and the nondisclosure agreements your client signed as a condition for gaining access to classified information, the manuscript may not be published or otherwise disclosed without the deletion of this classified information,” Knight wrote to lawyer Charles Cooper.

Knight also wrote that a preliminary review found some of the upcoming book contains “top secret” information and would provide additional guidance after the NSC concluded its ongoing examination of the text. “We will do our best to work with you to ensure your client’s ability to tell his story in a manner that protects U.S. national security,” wrote the Trump official.

The letter was sent to Cooper three days after the New York Times reported that Bolton’s book alleges President Trump wanted U.S. military aid to Ukraine to be conditional on inquiries into allegations of corruption against former Vice President Joe Biden, and his son, Hunter Biden. The president has denied the report as “false” and took aim at his former top foreign policy in a pair of tweets earlier Wednesday.

“For a guy who couldn’t get approved for the Ambassador to the U.N. years ago, couldn’t get approved for anything since, ‘begged’ me for a non Senate approved job, which I gave him despite many saying ‘Don’t do it, sir,’ takes the job, mistakenly says ‘Libyan Model’ on T.V., and many more mistakes of judgement [sic], gets fired because frankly, if I listened to him, we would be in World War Six by now, and goes out and IMMEDIATELY writes a nasty & untrue book. All Classified National Security. Who would do this?” the president wrote.

The development has prompted renewed calls from Democrats to call Bolton as a witness in the Senate impeachment trial, though several reports indicate that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has the votes to block additional witnesses from testifying. Some Senate Republicans are already signaling that the upper chamber may move swiftly to acquit President Trump as early as Friday.

“That’s the plan,” Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY) replied when asked if an aquatical vote could be quickly called if Democrats fail to clinch the votes required for more witnesses. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) told Fox News on Tuesday that “the president will be acquitted, and I think it will be this week.”

“This is the weakest case you’ll ever see in the history of the country in terms of impeachment,” he added.

https://www.dailyconservative.com/sc2/graham-gop-votes-testimony.htm
Graham: GOP has enough votes to call for testimony of Bidens, whistleblower
January 29, 2020
Mgid
According to Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), if Democrats keep pushing to call their own witnesses in the impeachment trial, 51 GOP Senators are also ready to vote to call several witnesses Dems have been protecting for months now. 

Graham told reporters on Tuesday, “I’ll make a prediction: There will be 51 Republican votes to call Hunter Biden, Joe Biden, the whistleblower, and the DNC staffer at a very minimum.”

The recent leak of former National Security Adviser John Bolton’s memoir manuscript to the New York Times has re-ignited calls from the Democrats to subpoena the former White House official.

Although Senate Republicans have been mostly united against introducing new witnesses into the Senate trial, GOP leadership has made it clear that if Democrats force the issue, it will not be one-sided like the House impeachment hearings were.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), one of the rising anti-impeachment stars, said on Saturday, “We’ve got to be fair. We’ve got to follow the principle of reciprocity, which means if [Democrats] get John Bolton, we get Hunter Biden.”

So far, Senate leaders Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Chuck Schumer (D-NY) have been unable to come to a witness agreement in the Senate trial, although recent reports say that McConnell doesn’t believe that he will be able to muster the votes to block witnesses outright.

PROMOTED CONTENTMgid

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/doj-says-bolton-conversation-with-barr-about-foreign-leaders-grossly-mischaracterized
DOJ disputes Bolton’s alleged conversation with Barr
January 29, 2020
Mgid
After Bolton turned on Trump, we all began to wonder which shoe would drop next. In an expertly timed release of information, it appears that John Bolton is prepared to accuse President Trump of corruption, in an attempt to influence the Senate trial.

Bolton was fired by Trump and is no doubt mad that he was not allowed to continue in his job, where he was advocating for more wars and U.S. intervention in the middle east.

But now the DOJ has released a statement. One of Bolton’s key claims centered around a conversation with Attorney General Bill Barr. But that did not happen as he said it did, according to the statement.

The DOJ says Bolton badly mischaracterized the conversation about Trump’s relationship with foreign leaders. If true, this goes to Bolton’s credibility as a potential Senate impeachment witness.

The DOJ denied any conversation about Trump’s “undue influence” over investigations and went astonishingly far, saying, “nor did Attorney General Barr state that the President’s conversations with foreign leaders was improper.”

“If this is truly what Mr. Bolton has written, then it seems he is attributing to Attorney General Barr his own current views – views with which Attorney General Barr does not agree,” the statement said.

Bolton’s attempted smear job on Trump won’t work. He might sell some books — but at what cost? This shocking betrayal is going to backfire. It’s just a good thing that we have an Attorney General who is willing to come forward and tell the truth about what happened.

Read the full story here.

https://gellerreport.com/2020/01/joe-biden-admits-ukraine-dealings-look-bad.html/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook
Joe Biden admits Ukraine dealings ‘look bad’
By Pamela Geller - on January 28, 2020
DEMOCRAT HYPOCRISY
Biden, like the lawless Democrat House, consider themselves about the law.

Related: AG Pam Bondi Lays Out Corruption Case Against Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, Burisma

You'll Never Think About Solar Panels Again After Seeing This (Watch)
Smart Investors Zone
Sponsored by Revcontent
Find Out More >
53,515
Related: Dershowitz: Dems’ “lawless view” of impeachment “would place Congress above the law and the Constitution.”
JOE BIDEN ADMITS UKRAINE DEALINGS ‘LOOK BAD’ |
OAN NEWSROOM , JANUARY 23, 2020
ON WEDNESDAY, JOE BIDEN FINALLY ADMITTED HIS CONFLICT OF INTEREST OVER HIS SON HUNTER’S DEALINGS IN UKRAINE. WHILE SPEAKING ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL IN IOWA, THE FORMER VICE PRESIDENT SAID THE BURISMA SCHEME APPEARED TO “LOOK BAD.”
However, he reiterated his claim that Hunter did “nothing wrong.”
“There’s nobody that’s indicated there’s a single, solitary thing he did that was inappropriate or wrong, other than the appearance,” stated Biden. “It looked bad that he was there.”
Newly released State Department emails suggested Biden was selling his office to pocket the proceeds of Ukrainian corruption. A February 2016 email used Hunter Biden’s name in order to arrange a meeting between a senior State Department official and Burisma lobbyist Karen Tranmontano.
Raheem Kassam

@RaheemKassam
1/ This is an email from Feb 2016 that leverages Hunter Biden's name (and therefore link to VP Joe Biden).

The email requests a meeting for Blue Star Strategies chief Karen Tranmontano with a senior member of the Obama State Dept. 

This is abuse of power to influence US policy.

View image on Twitter
861
8:22 PM - Jan 23, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy
733 people are talking about this


File – Then-Vice President Joe Biden, right, and his son Hunter Biden, left, are pictured at a street dedication ceremony in the village of Sojevo, Kosovo, on Aug. 17, 2016. (AP Photo/Visar Kryeziu)

Republican senators are now calling for a probe into the Bidens’ dealings.

“I can promise you no one has looked at whether or not there was a conflict of interest,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham. “No one has taken the time to explain how Hunter Biden got rich in the Ukraine, and his father didn’t know anything about it.”

State Department emails also showed Tranmontano wanted to lobby the U.S. government for Burisma after it faced anti-corruption scrutiny by the Ukrainian government.

Reports claimed several Democrat witnesses were involved in the Biden-Ukraine corruption and benefited from it.

https://www.dailyconservative.com/sc3/adam-schiff-wants-chief-justice-roberts-to-rule-on-senate-witnesses.htm
Adam Schiff wants Chief Justice Roberts to rule on Senate witnesses
January 27, 2020
Mgid
After the stunts Democrats pulled during the opening arguments in the Senate trial of President Trump, it’s pretty clear at this point that Senate Republicans are unlikely to give him much of what he wants when it comes to witnesses.
But that won’t stop Schiff. He’s now hatched a new plan to try and block at least one witness who could prove catastrophic to Democrats: Hunter Biden.

His new plan: convince Chief Justice Roberts to rule on the witnesses issue himself rather than allowing Senators to vote, as rules provide.

“We have a very capable justice sitting right behind me who can make decisions about the materiality of witnesses,” Schiff said on NBC’s Meet the Press.

“We trust the Supreme Court chief justice to make those decisions,” he continued.

No, Mr. Schiff. We know the truth. You think the Supreme Court’s Chief Justice is a bit soft and concerned with how things “look” a bit too much — and he’s probably right about that. He reasons that if Democrats call witnesses of their own, Roberts could be the only way to block Hunter Biden being subpoenaed by the Senate to come testify.

Hunter Biden is at the center of this entire proceeding. If anyone testifies, it ought to be Biden.

Read the full story here.https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/479980-schiff-justice-roberts-should-rule-on-relevance-of-hunter-biden


https://www.conservativeinstitute.org/conservative-news/get-her-out-trump.htm
‘Get her out’: Trump calls for Ukraine ambassador’s ouster in newly released video
January 26, 2020
Footage released Saturday by Fox News shows President Donald Trump calling for then-U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch’s ouster.
According to the Washington Examiner, Trump can be heard on the video speaking to Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman — two associates of the president’s personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani — at a “private dinner” on April 30, 2018.
“Get rid of her,” Trump says of Yovanovitch, according to the Examiner. “Get her out tomorrow. I don’t care. Get her out tomorrow. Take her out. OK? Do it.”

Trump’s “biggest problem”
The existence of the recording was first reported by ABC News on Friday, according to the Examiner. ABC later released a copy of the video, saying it was made by Fruman, while Parnas provided a copy to the Daily Beast, the Examiner reported.
Parnas’ attorney, Joseph Bondy, gave the footage to Fox News.

“Given its importance to the national interest, we decided to release this recording in a manner intended to ensure equal public access, and in an effort to provide clarity to the American people and the Senate as to the need to conduct a fair trial, with witnesses and evidence,” Bondy told Fox.
In a clip of the footage posted to YouTube by PBS News Hour, the president can be heard asking: “So how’s Ukraine doing?” Parnas responds that the Ukrainians “love” Trump, but says the “biggest problem there, where you need to start, is [we’ve] got to get rid of the ambassador. She’s still left over from the Clinton administration,” Parnas adds of Yovanovitch.
He goes on to accuse the now-former ambassador of undermining Trump’s agenda, explaining: “She’s basically walking around telling everyone, ‘Wait, he’s going to get impeached.'”
This doesn’t go over well with the president, who promptly calls for Yovanovitch’s removal. Neither he nor anyone else can be seen on camera in the footage, however. Take a look:
“I am not a fan”
Yovanovitch was ultimately removed from her post by Trump in May 2019, according to NPR. Reacting to reports of the footage on Friday, White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham offered brief remarks: “Every president in our history has had the right to place people who support his agenda and his policies within his administration,” she said, according to ABC.
That message was echoed by the president himself on an appearance on Fox News’ The Ingraham Angle on Friday.
“I am not a fan of that ambassador,” he said of Yovanovitch, according to Fox. But he stressed that Parnas wasn’t the reason for her removal. “I want ambassadors that are chosen by me,” Trump said. “I have a right to hire and fire ambassadors.”

https://www.conservativeinstitute.org/conservative-news/ukraine-narratives-tape-giuliani.htm
Fresh Ukraine narratives take shape amid new Trump tape, Giuliani ‘evidence’
January 25, 2020
As part of their incessant effort to smear Donald Trump, Democrats and the media have latched on to the latest “We’ve got him now!” supposed bombshell report linked to the Ukraine impeachment controversy that insinuates some sort of unspecified, yet allegedly improper behavior by the president.

According to ABC News and unnamed “sources familiar” with the matter, it was reported that a secret audio recording exists from 2018 of President Trump instructing somebody to fire the then-U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch.
What those pushing this story utterly fail to realize — or they purposely ignore — is that the president can fire any ambassador for any or no reason at all. Furthermore, the alleged instruction to initiate this firing occurred in 2018, something which substantially undermines the Democrat argument that Yovanovitch’s recall in 2019 was part and parcel of Trump’s alleged pressure campaign on Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden.

The secret recording
According to the ABC report, the recording — which may very well be illegal in and of itself — was purportedly made during a private dinner at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C. on April 30, 2018 and included an alleged conversation between the president and two Ukrainian-born associates of Trump personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, namely, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman. Both of those men have since been indicted on separate and unrelated campaign finance violations.

It is alleged that in the secret recording both Parnas and Fruman can be heard informing Trump about what an undesirable character Yovanovitch was and how she was bad-mouthing him in Ukraine and working to undermine his agenda through her position as ambassador.

“Get rid of her!” Trump is alleged to have replied, though it is unclear to whom that supposed instruction was aimed. “Get her out tomorrow. I don’t care. Get her out tomorrow. Take her out. OK? Do it.”
The problem, however, is that Yovanovitch wasn’t actually recalled from her post until roughly a year later, not that the timing even matters, because as White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham made clear in a statement, “Every president in our history has had the right to place people who support his agenda and his policies within his Administration.”
In other words, this has all the hallmarks of yet another dud “bombshell” — based on potentially illegal secret recordings and anonymous sources — that has been blown out of proportion by Democrats and the media and will end up being proven as meaningless over time.
Giuliani hints at “shocking” new discovery
Meanwhile, Fox News reported that Giuliani, during an appearance on Fox & Friends on Friday, issued a sort of teaser ahead of the public release of what he described as “shocking new crimes” that he uncovered in Ukraine that implicate prominent Democrat politicians, including Biden.
Giuliani vowed, “I’m going to present over the next two to three weeks shocking crimes at the highest levels of government while the Senate is listening to a totally phony group of stories about non-impeachable offenses.”
Rudy Giuliani

@RudyGiuliani
Ready to do Fox and Friends and give them some new evidence about the extent of Dem corruption. Look for link on Twitter at or about noon today.

38.6K
11:50 AM - Jan 24, 2020 · Manhattan, NY
Twitter Ads info and privacy
14.7K people are talking about this
The president’s attorney hinted at some of what he had discovered related to “bribes” involving Biden, his son Hunter, and Hunter’s lucrative position on the board of a corrupt Ukrainian energy firm known as Burisma Holdings. Giuliani asserted that Hunter only received that position in exchange for Joe Biden’s help in preventing Burisma from being investigated by a Ukrainian prosecutor about whom the former vice president later bragged about getting fired.

Giuliani has been talking for some time now about evidence he says he has uncovered of wrongdoing in Ukraine that would have justified President Trump’s request for investigations into the Bidens. It appears that now — right in the middle of the impeachment trial centered on that very request — would be as good a time as any for Giuliani to start releasing what he claims to possess.

https://www.conservativeinstitute.org/conservative-news/scott-pelosi-help-biden.htm
Florida Sen. Rick Scott: Pelosi delayed sending impeachment articles to ‘help Joe Biden’
January 26, 2020

There has been plenty of speculation as to why House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) held onto the articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump for so long after Democrats passed them in the House — but now, one Republican senator thinks he knows why.

According to Fox News, Florida Sen. Rick Scott (R) suggested on Saturday that Pelosi’s delay was little more than an attempt to keep Democrat 2020 hopefuls like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren “off the campaign trail” and covered up in a Senate trial in Washington ahead of the Iowa caucuses early next month.
“I think the White House counsel showed that there was no due process in the House,” Scott said, according to Fox. He added that Trump’s team “knee-capped” lead House impeachment manager Adam Schiff (D-CA) and destroyed the Democrats’ arguments for convicting and removing President Trump from office.

But the bad news isn’t over for the left. According to Scott, there’s dissension within the party — and it’s affecting the 2020 race.
“I think I’ve come to the conclusion why Nancy Pelosi held the articles of impeachment for 33 days,” Scott told Cavuto on Saturday. “This whole thing has helped Joe Biden. I mean, all this is to keep Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren off the campaign trail and help Joe Biden.”

Biden roams free
Though it is highly doubtful that Pelosi would ever admit as much, the House speaker’s delay did in fact push back the start of the impeachment trial, forcing senators who are also running in the Democratic primary to stay away from the campaign trail and in the Senate’s chambers.
This includes lawmakers like Bernie Sanders (VT), Elizabeth Warren (MA), and even Amy Klobuchar (MN) and Michael Bennet (CO), all of whom are stuck in Washington while the likes of Joe Biden and Pete Buttigieg are free to roam the streets of Iowa ahead of its Feb. 3 caucuses.

Of course, if Biden is eventually called to testify in Trump’s trial, he may be confined to D.C. as well.

Impeachment is not working out well for Democrats, commentator says
January 26, 2020
Mgid
Skip
Impeachment has been a total disaster for Democrats, at least according to one prominent political commentator.

Liz Peek, who does political analysis for Fox News and others, wrote in an op-ed for The Hill that impeachment has been a dud for the Democrats.

Peek argues that there should be “a law against boring people to death” and that “Adam Schiff should be the first indicted.”

“It is hard to imagine that such a profound undertaking – the overturning of an American election – could emerge as such a dramatic dud. But it has,” Peek continued.

The reason is clear: Schiff used a partisan impeachment to try to take down a duly elected President. He held secret meetings which, if held in public, would have shown the weakness of Democrats’ case. Now that we’re finally at trial, Americans know the truth: they have nothing on Trump. Not one shred of real evidence that suggests he should be removed from office.

And now that we’re almost to that point, people are tuning the Democrats out. No one takes their arguments seriously, save the Democrat faithful. And they already supported removing Trump.

It’s clearer than every before: Pelosi caved into pressure from the left. And in doing so, she brought this pathetic, boring impeachment — and all of the ramifications that will come from it — on herself and those in the House who helped her pursue it, especially Adam Schiff.

Read the full story here.https://www.dailyconservative.com/sc3/impeachment-is-not-working-out-well-for-democrats-commentator-says.htm

https://www.dailyconservative.com/sc3/impeachment-support-dips-trump-approval-soars.htm
Impeachment support dips, Trump approval soars
January 25, 2020
Mgid
Trump is winning the battle of public opinion when it comes to impeachment — and his presidency more generally.
A new Washington Post/ABC poll has 49 percent of Americans saying Trump should stay in office, with 47 percent saying he should go. That’s a reversal from a month ago, when people wanted him gone by a 3 percent margin.

Perhaps even more important, Trump’s approval reached a record-high 44 percent in the poll.

It’s worth noting, of course, that these are some of the same polls that predicted a Hillary Clinton landslide victory in 2016. So take them with a grain of salt, of course.

But you know that the left is doing everything they can to hurt Trump, including making sure that they get only favorable polling data. The fact that this is close at all tells you something.

It’s clear at this point that Nancy Pelosi’s impeachment blunder has not paid off, and it is torching her party. Trump’s approval numbers continue to increase, and you have to wonder at what point Democrats start to panic.

With even the hyper-left Washington Post’s polling data showing Trump with record-high approval and a plurality of Americans opposing his removal, maybe it’s high-time Democrats find a strategy other than, “remove Trump.”

Read the full story here.

https://www.conservativeinstitute.org/conservative-news/poll-alter-views-trump.htm
Poll: 75% of Americans do not expect Senate trial to alter their views on Trump
January 23, 2020

As President Donald Trump’s Senate impeachment trial drags on, Democrats hope — and seemingly expect — that the proceedings will cause the president’s popularity to plummet. However, if new polling numbers are correct, then the left’s ambitions in regard to Trump’s political fortunes are seriously misguided.

An AP-Norc poll published on Thursday found that 75% of respondents do not expect the Senate trial to alter their opinion on whether or not the president should be removed from office.
Conversely, only 7% of those surveyed said it was “very likely” that their outlook would change, while another 18% said it was “somewhat likely” that their position on the matter would shift over the course of the trial.

Opinions largely fixed
Former chairman of the House Oversight Committee and current Fox News contributor Trey Gowdy addressed those figures in a recent interview with The Story host Martha MacCallum.
Gowdy indicated that he did not find the poll results surprising, although he did expect the number of those with fixed opinions to be even higher.

“I’ve heard nothing [in the Senate phase] that Adam [Schiff] didn’t trot out in front of the House before the impeachment vote,” Gowdy said. “He couldn’t get a single Republican in the House to vote for impeachment. In fact, he lost Democrats. So unless you have new facts, I don’t think positions will change.”
Daily News
Gowdy: Decide at the polls
For her part, MacCallum referenced a Pew poll showing that while 63% of respondents believe that Trump acted illegally with regard to Ukraine, only 51% want to see him removed from office. But Gowdy chalked the first of those two numbers up to misinformation.

“It tells me that they read the article about the GAO [Government Accountability Office] that the president ‘broke the law,'” Gowdy replied, referencing the independent watchdog agency’s report finding that the Trump administration’s temporary freeze on aid to Ukraine was in violation of the law.


“They’re assuming that there’s criminality, that it’s a criminal law, and they didn’t read the follow-up articles that said, ‘Oh, by the way, every president has run afoul of the GAO, including President Obama in implementing the law that was named after him,'” the former South Carolina congressman maintained.

He went on: “So when I hear that 51% of my fellow citizens want to remove him from office, what that tells me is they would acquit him too, because it has to be 67%. That’s what our framers decided, it has to be two thirds.”

Gowdy concluded by saying that Trump’s fate should be decided not by a partisan spectacle in the Senate, but at the ballot box this fall.

“If barely half of my fellow citizens want to remove me from office, then do the opposite of what Schiff argued today, wait until November. Don’t do it now,” Gowdy said. “If you can’t meet the threshold the founders set, then do it in November if that’s what my fellow citizens want to do.”

‘This is your job’: MSNBC host slams senators for leaving, sleeping during impeachment trial
January 24, 2020
When President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial in the Senate kicked off on Tuesday, the senators in attendance were informed of their expectations: remain silent and present for the duration of the proceedings, with no electronics or other distractions and only water or milk to drink. But not everyone was willing to fall right in line.

After a handful of senators were caught leaving the Senate chambers and even falling asleep during the hours-long proceedings this week, MSNBC’s Chris Hayes said those who couldn’t be bothered to pay attention should either step up or “resign tomorrow and go get another job,” the Washington Examiner reported.
“These people’s jobs is to do this,” Hayes told fellow MSNBC host Rachel Maddow on Wednesday, according to the Examiner. “This is literally the job. If you find it too annoying or frustrating or uncomfortable to sit for eight hours and listen, you can resign tomorrow and go get another job. But this is your job.”

Bending the rules
Hayes’ comments came after Maddow herself admonished the senators for failing to follow the rules.
Money Morning Paper
“It is a little bit weird that we all thought it was within the rules that they had to be there,” Maddow said. “They had to attend, they had to sit there and not eat or drink anything other than milk or water, and they needed to not have their phones and they needed to not speak, but a lot of them have apparently been leaving for long stretches, including even some senators maybe even leaving before tonight was done. It’s odd and it’s not something I expected.”

Indeed, the Associated Press reports that both Republicans and Democrats were spotted napping at times while the House’s impeachment managers, led by Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), delivered their opening arguments this week. Others were seen milling around, talking to colleagues or even retiring to the cloakroom for coffee and to check their phones.
Doing their “civic duty”
As for leaving early, Washington Post reporter Paul Kane tweeted that Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, left the building entirely about an hour prior to the end of the proceedings on Wednesday.

This left Hayes furious. The MSNBC host compared the senators’ role to jury duty, saying that Americans often have to set aside their regular lives in exchange for a “meager amount of money” for doing their “civic duty.”
Maddow chimed in: “I mean, the Senate sergeant-at-arms starts every day by saying ‘upon pain of imprisonment,’ you know, you must sit there silently is effectively what he says, and then people get up and they go and do Fox News interviews in the middle of the trial, which means they are not keeping silent.”
Of course, Maddow opined, “everybody knows there isn’t a Senate jail — or if there is, they’re not going to use it. And it doesn’t appear that Chief Justice [John] Roberts is planning on intervening in the trial, even on structural matters like this,” she added.
Wasting time
To be fair, it makes sense for Americans to expect their senators to be present and abide by the simple, if rather uncomfortable, rules agreed upon at the start of the proceedings. But with Adam Schiff and his Democrat comrades droning on and on about the same things he’s been talking about for months, it’s hard to blame someone for not wanting to waste any more of their own time.

We all know how this is going to end, anyway — and it’s certainly not with Trump’s conviction and removal.

https://gellerreport.com/2020/01/cnn-makes-up-impeachment-eivdence.html/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook
CNN FABRICATES ENTIRE CONVERSATION & MAKES UP QUOTES from GOP Senators to DESTROY President Trump
By Pamela Geller - on January 23, 2020
DEMOCRAT LEADERSHIP: FIFTH COLUMN
Like Schiff, they are making up whole conversations. Incredibly evil. And many Americans, especially young ones, just. don’t. know.

CNN ANALYST FABRICATES QUOTES FROM GOP SENATORS TO SMEAR TRUMP, FOX NEWS
By Tyler O’Neil, PJM, January 22, 2020:

On Wednesday afternoon, a CNN analyst cooked up a “conversation” between two Republican senators in order to smear President Donald Trump, his party, and Fox News. He later admitted to having completely fabricated the quotes, but only after The Washington Post’s self-described conservative Jennifer Rubin retweeted his “report.”
“OVERHEARD CONVO BETWEEN TWO REPUBLICAN SENATORS WHO ONLY WATCH FOX NEWS. ‘IS THIS STUFF REAL? I HAVEN’T HEARD ANY OF THIS BEFORE. I THOUGHT IT WAS ALL ABOUT A SERVER. IF HALF THE STUFF SCHIFF IS SAYING IS TRUE, WE’RE UP S**T’S CREEK. HOPE THE WHITE HOUSE HAS EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE,'” JOE LOCKHART, THE CNN ANALYST AND THE FORMER WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY FOR BILL CLINTON, TWEETED.
HIS MESSAGE RECEIVED 5,600 RETWEETS AND 20,600 “LIKES.”

@joelockhart
Overheard convo between two Republican Senators who only watch Fox News. "is this stuff real? I haven't heard any of this before. I thought it was all about a server.  If half the stuff Schiff is saying is true, we're up shit's creek. Hope the White House has exculpatory evidence
41K
7:13 PM - Jan 22, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy
17K people are talking about this
Ten minutes later, he added this caveat: “Ok maybe I made up the convo, but you know that’s exactly what they’re thinking.”

@joelockhart
 · 23h
Overheard convo between two Republican Senators who only watch Fox News. "is this stuff real? I haven't heard any of this before. I thought it was all about a server.  If half the stuff Schiff is saying is true, we're up shit's creek. Hope the White House has exculpatory evidence

@joelockhart
Ok maybe I made up the convo, but you know that's exactly what they're thinking.
NATURALLY, LOCKHART’S CORRECTING THE RECORD DID NOT RECEIVE NEARLY AS MUCH ATTENTION AS HIS ORIGINAL “REPORT” OF THE ALLEGED “CONVERSATION.” THIS FOLLOW-UP TWEET GOT LESS THAN 500 RETWEETS AND 5,200 “LIKES.”
To make this fake news even more rich, Lockhart hosts a podcast called “Words Matter,” which describes itself as “Dedicated to truth, facts and objective reality.”
The Babylon Bee owned the CNN analyst with this response: “Leave the satire to us; we’ll leave the fake news to you.”

@joelockhart
 · 23h
Overheard convo between two Republican Senators who only watch Fox News. "is this stuff real? I haven't heard any of this before. I thought it was all about a server.  If half the stuff Schiff is saying is true, we're up shit's creek. Hope the White House has exculpatory evidence
@TheBabylonBee
Leave the satire to us; we'll leave the fake news to you.
35.6K
10:55 PM - Jan 22, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy
8,318 people are talking about this
Yet Lockhart’s fake news reminded many of Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.)’s fabricated quotes from the transcript of President Donald Trump’s call with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky — the call at the center of the impeachment.

Schiff infamously read a false version of the transcript on the floor of the House of Representatives, acting as though Trump had said, “I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent, understand, lots of it.” He was rightly ridiculed for this, but most of the legacy media appear to have ignored it.
“I suspect this may come up in [President Trump’s] lawyers’ presentation as an example of what happens in an era when Representative Schiff pretends to re-enact a conversation and his party selects him as the key presenter of articles of impeachment. That which gets rewarded gets repeated,” radio host Hugh Hewitt tweeted.
Hugh Hewitt

@hughhewitt
I suspect this may come up in @POTUS lawyers’ presentation as an example of what happens in an era when Representative Schiff pretends to re-enact a conversation and his party selects him as the key presenter of articles of impeachment. That which gets rewarded gets repeated. https://twitter.com/MattHennessey/status/1220101028718284803 …

@MattHennessey
WTF?
View image on TwitterView image on Twitter
106
10:51 PM - Jan 22, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy
75 people are talking about this
Yet Lockhart would not back down. Rather than reconsidering his tweet and apologizing for it, he accused his critics of being conspiracy theorists.

“Seems like I poked the bear today. The purveyors of Pizzagate and the Seth Rich conspiracy are lecturing me on honesty. I told a joke, you guys are a destructive joke that is killing our democracy. Other than that, hope you’re enjoying the trial and have a nice evening,” the former White House press secretary tweeted.
Ted Cruz

@tedcruz
 · Jan 21, 2020
NEWSFLASH for Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff: @realDonaldTrump invoking Constitutional privilege is not obstruction of Congress.

If it were, nearly every president would have committed impeachable conduct.
Embedded video
Joe Lockhart

@joelockhart
Senators on the floor are sworn to silence and have no electronic devices.  So how is this Senator tweeting?  Did he sneak a phone in.  Is he willing to go to prison?  Or is the tweet from someone other than Cruz.  @jack you should investigate
Ted Cruz

@tedcruz
https://twitter.com/joelockhart/status/1219695347762716672 …
Joe Lockhart

@joelockhart
Replying to @tedcruz @realDonaldTrump
Senators on the floor are sworn to silence and have no electronic devices.  So how is this Senator tweeting?  Did he sneak a phone in.  Is he willing to go to prison?  Or is the tweet from someone other than Cruz.  @jack you should investigate
26.6K
7:08 PM - Jan 21, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy
6,758 people are talking about this
All kidding aside, it is beyond disgraceful that this CNN analyst — and former White House press secretary! — would tweet out an entirely fabricated story and only correct the record after it had picked up traction. His decision to act like it was just a joke after threatening Ted Cruz with prison seems particularly rich.
As for the claim in Lockhart’s follow-up tweet, the CNN analyst presented no evidence that this “convo” is what Republican senators are supposedly “thinking.” Seeing how Republicans voted in lockstep to reject Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.)’s amendments to the trial process, it appears there will be no defections. Even more moderate senators like Mitt Romney and Susan Collins should see this partisan witch hunt for what it is. If only Democrats could be so clear-headed!



https://gellerreport.com/2020/01/unglued-schiff-we-cant-trust-the-voting-system-we-must-impeach.html/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook
UNGLUED Schiff: We Can’t Trust the Voting System, We Must Impeach
By Pamela Geller - on January 23, 2020
HOW THE LEFT DESTROYS THE NATION
The Hill

@thehill
Rep. Adam Schiff: "The president's misconduct cannot be decided at the ballot box. For we cannot be assured that the vote will be fairly won."

Embedded video
5,205
10:45 PM - Jan 22, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy
5,693 people are talking about this
THE ABSOLUTELY UNGLUED ADAM SCHIFF SAID “THE PRESIDENT’S MISCONDUCT CANNOT BE DECIDED AT THE BALLOT BOX. FOR WE CANNOT BE ASSURED THAT THE VOTE WILL BE FAIRLY WON” (TWITTER).
In Schiff dramatic fashion, he also said witnesses risked everything and “I know what you are asked to decide may risk yours, too. But if they can show the courage, so can we” (ABC News).  From Ted Cruz: “Adam Schiff’s arguments to open the day today directly drew into question Hunter Biden and made not only his testimony relevant which it already was but it is now critical” (Daily Caller).  From Rich Lowry: it’s time to conclude that this is a failed model of impeachment. It constitutes a censure with bells and whistle, yet depends on a process that diverts the time and energy of the nation’s political institutions as if the survival of a presidency is at stake, even when everyone knows it really isn’t (Politico).  The Wall Street Journal explains this major problem with the Democrats’ argument: The House managers don’t assert that any specific action by President Trump was an abuse of power or a violation of law. They don’t deny he can delay aid to a foreign country or ask a foreign leader to investigate corruption. Presidents do that all the time. Instead they assert in their first impeachment article that Mr. Trump is guilty of “abuse of power” because he committed those acts for “corrupt purposes” (WSJ).
Thanks to Daybreak Insider

https://www.conservativeinstitute.org/conservative-news/trumps-removal-opposed-majority.htm
Poll: Trump’s removal from office opposed by a majority of Americans
January 21, 2020

New polling data on the subject of impeachment has been released, and it spells bad news for Democrats. According to the latest research from Gallup, just over half of Americans oppose the prospect of convicting and removing President Donald Trump from office.

The survey further revealed that 93% of Republicans stand in opposition to Trump’s removal. While that figure is not particularly surprising, the poll also found that 46% of Independents and even 15% of Democrats do not support the president’s ouster.

Partisan breakdown
Out of all respondents to the Galup survey, 51% agreed with the proposition that Trump should be permitted to finish out his current term. Only 46% of participants had the opposite viewpoint.

There is also no indication that impeachment has dented the president’s approval rating, as Gallup found it to be several points higher now than it was when the impeachment inquiry began last fall.

The poll of 1,014 adults was conducted via telephone from Jan. 2 to Jan. 15 and had a 4% margin of error.

Clinton comparisons
Gallup’s accompanying explanation of the data went on to compare respondents’ opinions about the push to impeach Trump with those concerning former President Bill Clinton’s impeachment over two decades ago.

The numbers indicate that there is a far more partisan political atmosphere in existence today than there was in the late 1990s, as only 65% of Republicans wanted to see Clinton ousted from office at the time, versus 84% of Democrats who say they support that outcome for Trump now.

Another key difference in this realm relates to the position taken by surveyed Independents during the Clinton impeachment compared to those queried in the current poll. Roughly two-thirds of respondents at the time favored a Clinton conviction and removal from office. Fast-forward to the present day, however, and only 49% of Independents believe that Trump needs to go.


Trial set to begin
Last week, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) finally appointed impeachment managers after weeks of delay. The Democrats, who essentially serve as prosecutors in the case, will be led by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-NY).

Pelosi’s decision in this regard drew scorn from members of the New York Post’s editorial board, who said that “a normal court would reject a dishonest prosecutor like Adam Schiff.”


“Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff has been lying to the world for years in his nonstop campaign to smear President Trump,” the editors further opined.

“Next to that,” they added, “the other lead manager, New York’s own Rep. Jerry Nadler, seems a paragon: He’s just a guy who won the Judiciary Committee chairmanship a year ago by claiming he’d be best to ‘lead a potential impeachment’ of Trump.”

https://www.conservativeinstitute.org/conservative-news/schumer-mcconnells-roadmap-disgrace.htm
Schumer calls McConnell’s Senate trial roadmap ‘a national disgrace’
January 21, 2020

Over a month after the House passed two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump, his trial in the Senate is finally set to begin.

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has drafted a resolution to govern the proceedings that establishes a fast pace for the initial phase of the trial, and the Democrat flank led by Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has declared its tremendous displeasure with it, according to the Washington Examiner.
McConnell in charge
The Washington Examiner reports that it has obtained a copy of McConnell’s resolution. According to the measure’s language, the Democrat impeachment managers will be given a total of 24 hours to make their case over a period of two days. Another provision in the resolution prohibits the calling of witnesses who have not first been privately deposed.

“This resolution provides for the production of materials from the House trial to be printed and made available to all senators, and it allows for a vote at a later time on the question of whether or not it may be admitted as part of the Senate trial,” a Republican aide is quoted as saying.
However, this approach isn’t sitting well at all with the Democrats’ leader in the upper chamber.

“After reading his resolution, it’s clear Sen. McConnell is hell-bent on making it much more difficult to get witnesses & documents and intent on rushing the trial through,” Schumer fumed in a tweet.

Impeachment rules “a national disgrace”
“On something as important as impeachment, Sen. McConnell’s resolution is nothing short of a national disgrace,” Schumer declared.

“Under this resolution, Senator McConnell is saying he doesn’t want to hear any of the existing evidence, and he doesn’t want to hear any new evidence,” he continued in a an accompanying statement.

“A trial where no evidence — no existing record, no witnesses, no documents — isn’t a trial at all. It’s a cover up, and the American people will see it for exactly what it is,” Schumer added.

“Furthermore, Senator McConnell’s resolution stipulates that key facts be delivered in the wee hours of the night simply because he doesn’t want the American people to hear them,” the New York Democrat complained.

Schumer’s incendiary comments did not stop there, as he flatly stated that “Any senator that votes for the McConnell resolution will be voting to hide information and evidence from the American people.”

The senator concluded by threatening direct action of his own to include the introduction of “amendments to address the many flaws in this deeply unfair proposal and to subpoena the witnesses and documents we have requested.”

Impeachment Poll: Majority Oppose Convicting, Removing Trump
8,312
US President Donald Trump gives a thumbs-up well wishers as he arrives at the 72nd US Women's Open Golf Championship at Trump National Golf Course in Bedminster, New Jersey, July 16, 2017.SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images
PENNY STARR20 Jan 20202,107
2:43
A Gallup poll shows the Republican Party firmly behind President Donald Trump as he faces impeachment, with 93 percent opposed to a Senate impeachment conviction and removal, and 51 percent of Americans overall agree.

Gallup led its reporting on its poll with Trump’s overall approval rating of 44 percent, a rating that has held steady in recent months. 
But the poll also reveals broader support for the president, reported later in the article: 

Forty-six percent of Americans say they would like their senators to vote to convict Trump and remove him from office, while 51 percent want their senators to vote against conviction so Trump will remain as president.

Like his approval rating, Trump’s impeachment figures are also sharply divided along partisan lines. Ninety-three percent of Republicans are opposed to convicting Trump and 84 percent of Democrats favor doing so. Independents are evenly divided, with 49 percent in favor and 46 percent opposed.

The poll also showed that 88 percent of Republicans, 37 percent of independents and 10 percent of Democrats approve of the job Trump is doing.

Gallup compared Trump’s impeachment with that of former President Bill Clinton, although the poll does not reflect the differences in the articles of impeachment for the two presidents.

“The president’s own party is about as opposed to impeachment for Trump as the Democratic Party was for Clinton; but the opposition party and political independents are more strongly aligned against Trump than they were against Clinton,” Gallup reported.

Seven percent of Republicans today, versus 8% of Democrats in 1999, wanted the Senate to remove a president of their own party.
65 percent of Republicans wanted Clinton removed, but 84 percent of Democrats want to see Trump ousted today.
Thirty-two percent of independents wanted Clinton removed from office, compared with 49 percent wanting the same for Trump.
Gallup notes that both Clinton and Trump’s impeachment trials took place during a strong economy, but “Trump is operating in a much more partisan environment than Clinton was” and the polarization in the country is holding Trump’s job approval ratings down.

The Gallup poll was conducted in telephone interviews from January 2 to January 15, 2020, with a random sample of 1,014 adults 18 years or older and all living in the 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.
The margin of error is plus or minus four percent with a 95 percent confidence level.

Follow Penny Starr on Twitter


https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/01/21/adam-schiff-mcconnell-senate-guilty/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=daily&utm_campaign=20200121&utm_content=Final
Adam Schiff: If McConnell Doesn’t Allow ‘Witnesses or Documents,’ It’ll Prove the Senate ‘Guilty’
841
AP Photo/J. Scott ApplewhiteAP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite
KRISTINA WONG21 Jan 2020931
2:25
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) during a press conference Tuesday said the Senate would be proven “guilty” if Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) does not allow their “witnesses or documents” in the impeachment trial.
“If the Senate and the Senate leadership will not allow the … calling of witnesses or the presentation of documents, Sen. McConnell makes this the first impeachment trial in history without witnesses or documents,” he claimed.
“It will not prove the president is innocent, it will merely prove the Senate guilty of working with the president to obstruct the truth from coming out,” he added.
Some online noted the irony of accusing the Senate of being guilty of obstructing itself, since Senate Republicans control the Senate and setting the rules of the impeachment trial:
Carpe Donktum
@CarpeDonktum
BREAKING: Adam Schiff accuses the Senate of Obstructing the Senate.
12.3K
3:35 PM - Jan 21, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy
3,396 people are talking about this
House Republicans noted the irony of Schiff — who they argue set the rules of the House impeachment hearings to disadvantage House Republicans — accusing the Senate of not being impartial.
The Republicans’ House Oversight Committee’s twitter account tweeted: “Remember when @RepAdamSchiff conducted depositions in a secret bunker? We do. Chairman Schiff is just playing politics. Don’t buy his fake outrage.”
Oversight Committee Republicans

@GOPoversight
Remember when @RepAdamSchiff conducted depositions in a secret bunker? 
We do. 
Chairman Schiff is just playing politics. Don't buy his fake outrage. https://twitter.com/ABC/status/1219643197556699139 …
ABC News

@ABC
NEW: Rep. Adam Schiff on Sen. Mitch McConnell's proposed rules for impeachment trial: "We can see why this resolution was kept from us and the American people." https://abcn.ws/36d0HMB 
Embedded video
10.6K
3:35 PM - Jan 21, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy
6,464 people are talking about this
Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ), chairman of the House Freedom Caucus, tweeted: “Adam Schiff has the audacity to talk about the American people’s desire for a fair trial for @realDonaldTrump. The public’s desire for fairness is largely what caused support for impeachment to plummet during House proceedings. Schiff is the LAST person to talk about fairness”:
Rep Andy Biggs

@RepAndyBiggsAZ
Adam Schiff has the audacity to talk about the American people's desire for a fair trial for @realDonaldTrump.

The public's desire for fairness is largely what caused support for impeachment to plummet during House proceedings.
Schiff is the LAST person to talk about fairness.
6,725
3:28 PM - Jan 21, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy
3,101 people are talking about this
Schiff is claiming that new evidence House Democrats have received and witnesses that the House did not interview should be part of the Senate impeachment trial.
Republicans argue that Schiff could have called those witnesses to testify, which could have entailed a court fight, but chose to press ahead with impeachment hearings. They also argue that they are only required to look at the articles of impeachment the House sent them, as well as the evidence that accompanied those, instead of taking on new witnesses or evidence.
In recent days, House Democrats have said they would continue their impeachment hearings, and some have threatened to impeach the president again.



https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/01/21/chuck-schumer-mcconnells-impeachment-resolution-could-be-darkest-moment-in-senate-history/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=daily&utm_campaign=20200121&utm_content=Final
Chuck Schumer: McConnell’s Impeachment Resolution Could Be Darkest Moment in Senate History
5,041
WASHINGTON, DC - JANUARY 14: Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-NY) talks to reporters following the weekly Senate Democratic policy luncheon at the U.S. Capitol January 14, 2020 in Washington, DC. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) announced that U.S. President Donald Trump's impeachment trial will begin in the Senate …Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
JOSHUA CAPLAN21 Jan 20201,684
1:23
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) asserted Tuesday that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R-KY) impeachment trial resolution could represent one of the darkest moments in Senate history.
#NBC7 San Diego

@nbcsandiego
WATCH: Sen. Minority Leader Chuck Schumer called Sen. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's proposed rules “as one of the darker moments in our history.” http://on.nbc7.com/C4tr0cZ 
Embedded video
7
6:01 PM - Jan 21, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy
See #NBC7 San Diego's other Tweets
“As on something as important as impeachment, the McConnell resolution is nothing short of a national disgrace,” Schumer said in a Senate floor speech. “This will go down — this resolution — as one of the darker moments in Senate history, perhaps one of even the darkest.”
McConnell issued a blueprint late Monday, which calls for House Democratic managers and Trump’s defense to receive 24 hours for opening remarks.
McConnell has said he will seek to have the trial follow the same structure as that of former President Bill Clinton’s in 1999, but the majority leader’s outline indicates Republicans want to fast track the trial.
Democrats criticized the plan, with Schumer saying it’s an attempt to “conceal” Trump’s misconduct “in the dark of night” — and Democratic manager Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) calling it a “rigged” trial process.
The UPI contributed to this report.

Schiff lashes out as impeachment trial begins
January 21, 2020
Mgid
8 Shady Things About Meghan Markle Everyone Ignores
As the impeachment trial begins in the Senate, Adam Schiff is not taking things well. Schiff knows that Trump is going to be acquitted – and he’s not happy about it.

Schiff lashed out at the President, who questioned Democrats’ intent on Twitter. “No, Mr. President, we did ask John Bolton to testify. You ordered him not to, and blocked others, like Mick Mulvaney,” Schiff said in a tweet.

“All Americans know what a fair trial includes documents and witnesses,” Schiff added.

Schiff went as far ask to ask President Trump what he is “hiding.”

Trump’s tweet, to which Schiff responded, was harmless. “They didn’t want John Bolton and others in the House. They were in too much of a rush. Now they want them all in the Senate. Not supposed to be that way,” Trump tweeted.

The fact that Adam Schiff is losing his cool over a simple tweet is revealing. It shows that as impeachment collapses, Democrats are bearing the brunt of the responsibility for their ill-advised decision to rush through a sham impeachment.

The Democrats must be especially worried about this failure, since this year is an election year. The Presidency — and Democrats’ precious House Majority — are about to be in the hands of voters angry over a misguided impeachment.

Read the full story here.https://thehill.com/homenews/house/479043-schiff-fires-back-at-trump-what-are-you-hiding

Ari Fleischer: Call for senators’ recusal from impeachment trial is ‘a joke on its face’
January 19, 2020

There has been increased talk in recent days about whether the four Democratic senators currently seeking the presidential nomination — as well as senators thought to be too biased to serve as jurors — ought to recuse themselves from the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump. But one well-known conservative pundit just put an end to that line of argument with a tell-it-like-it-is bombshell.

In an appearance on Fox News, Ari Fleischer, former press secretary for President George W. Bush, declared that there is no need for these kinds of recusals, because calls for them are based on a misguided understanding of what the Senate trial phase of impeachment really is. 
Constitutional misinterpretation
Fleischer’s comments came during an interview with Laura Ingraham of The Ingraham Angle. There, he was asked whether he agrees with those who believe that the likes of Democrat candidate Sens. Elizabeth Warren (MA), Bernie Sanders (VT), and Amy Klobuchar (MN) — or any senators from the Republican side of the aisle — ought to recuse themselves from the trial.

“It’s just such a joke on its face,” Fleischer said in video shared by Fox News, “because what they’re trying to pretend is that they’re a real court of law and they’re not.”
Fleischer went on to explain what he believes the framers of the Constitution intended for the impeachment of a president.

“If the founders wanted to put this in a real court of law for a real trial they would have done so and impeachment would have gone to a jury,” he said. “It’s not, it is going to a political body, it’s going to the House and now it’s going to the Senate. The framers intended it to be political because they want politicians who are accountable to the people to make these final decisions about whether to overthrow the people’s determination from an election.”

For this reason, Fleischer stated that people ought to “stop pretending it’s a court of law.”

Not a court of law
The argument for having the senators currently running for president recuse themselves is that they cannot objectively look at the matter because of their vested interest as candidates in seeing Trump ousted from the White House. Meanwhile, those advocating for the recusal of Republican senators such as Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) suggest that those lawmakers have already declared their impartiality and have made up their minds to acquit before any evidence is presented in the upper chamber.

If the Senate trial was indeed analogous to the proceedings in a typical courtroom, then these would be strong arguments for recusal. But Fleischer went on to explain to Ingraham the absurdity of applying this standard to the Senate trial.

“If it’s a court of law, why are they reading newspaper articles about it? Why are they appearing on TV?” he asked. “Jurors are not supposed to read articles about the cases which they’re hearing. So, aren’t all those Democrats who are reading newspaper stories biasing themselves?

“No,” Fleischer replied in answer to his own question, “because it’s not a real trial, and none of us should look at it the way we do, and the Democrats should stop this silly game. No one is buying it.”

There can be little doubt that Fleischer hit the nail on the head with this one.

Watch below: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ts4XSjOOnOI&feature=youtu.be

https://www.dailyconservative.com/sc3/top-democrat-says-trump-should-have-to-prove-his-innocence.ht
Top Democrat says Trump should have to prove his innocence
January 20, 2020
Mgid
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) made the comment last month while defending Democrat attempts to impeach President Trump and remove him from office, despite an overwhelming electoral victory in 2016.

Trump, Hoyer said, had been given “every opportunity to prove his innocence.” Hoyer said that instead, Trump, “ignored Congressional subpoenas for documents and for testimony by White House officials and ordered his subordinates not to cooperate.”

Of course, what Hoyer said isn’t even true: invoking executive privilege is by no means refusing to cooperate. It’s just upholding the principles of our constitution, such as separation of powers.

But one Republican has fired back. Rep. Doug Collins, a Georgia Republican, is having none of it.

“Mr. Hoyer from Maryland … made a very revealing statement for anybody who’s concerned about Constitutional rights — and especially for me — even those of my Democratic counterparts who worry about their communities, where they discuss police action and rights being violated,” Collins said.

Thank goodness we have people like Mr. Colins who understand the constitution and want to defend it against Democrats.

Lev Parnas contradicts earlier report that he spoke to Trump about Ukraine
January 18, 2020
https://www.conservativeinstitute.org/conservative-news/parnas-story-changing-credibility.htm
Indicted Ukrainian-born businessman Lev Parnas has contradicted his previously reported claim to have spoken with President Donald Trump directly about Ukraine and investigating former Vice President Joe Biden, according to the Washington Examiner.

It’s far from the only credibility problem with Parnas’ recent claims about the president and other administration officials, however, yet much of the media continues to latch on to his every utterance to further the “we’ve got him now” narrative against President Trump.

Conflicting accounts
CNN reported in November that Parnas told acquaintances that he spoke directly to President Trump in December 2018 about efforts to get Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden.

“At one point during the party that night, Parnas and Fruman slipped out of a large reception room packed with hundreds of Trump donors to have a private meeting with the President and Giuliani, according to two acquaintances in whom Parnas confided right after the meeting,” CNN reported. There, Trump allegedly discussed with Parnas “‘a secret mission’ to pressure the Ukrainian government to investigate Joe Biden and his son Hunter.”
DailyRevenue
Contradicting this report, the New York Times reported Wednesday that “Parnas said that although he did not speak with Mr. Trump about the efforts, he met with the president on several occasions and was told by Mr. Giuliani that Mr. Trump was kept in the loop.”

Parnas “will say anything”
The White House has unequivocally dismissed Parnas’ claims as baseless and without merit. Press secretary Stephanie Grisham said in a statement, “These allegations are being made by a man who is currently out on bail for federal crimes and is desperate to reduce his exposure to prison. The facts haven’t changed — the president did nothing wrong and this impeachment, which was manufactured and carried out by the Democrats has been a sham from the start.”

Parnas had also alleged that Vice President Mike Pence was involved in the supposed conspiracy involving Ukraine, which was similarly brushed off by Pence’s chief of staff Marc Short. “This is very simple: Lev Parnas is under a multi-count indictment and will say anything to anybody who will listen in hopes of staying out of prison,” Short said. “It’s no surprise that only the liberal media is listening to him.”

“A fantastical tale”
Likewise, the basic fundamentals of Parnas’ claims were also called into question by Wall Street Journal columnist Kimberly Strassel during an appearance on Fox News on Thursday. “The problem … for the media is that this goes beyond the question of Lev Parnas’ credibility,” Strassel said, adding that “the information that he claims to impart is irrelevant or unbelievable.”

“He claims to suggest that he knows what was going through Donald Trump’s mind. What [Attorney General] Bill Barr knew? What [Vice President] Mike Pence knew?” she continued. “Look, we’ve got people who are far closer to the president than Lev Parnas who would not … seek to make that claim. So this is just sort of a fantastical tale.”

“Serious credibility problems”
Even CNN anchor Jake Tapper cautioned his fellow liberal journalists to exhibit some caution before believing every claim put forward by Parnas, according to Newsweek. Tapper said on his show on Thursday that Parnas has “serious credibility problems” and aptly noted, “He’s under indictment for campaign finance charges. The foreign minister of Ukraine told CNN’s Christiane Amanpour that he doesn’t trust a word Parnas is saying.”