Reason Roundup

Will Bolton Get To Testify Against Trump? All Signs Point to Yes.

Plus: 50 troops were injured in Iran attack, Bloomberg is beating Buttigieg, and more...

|

Bolton the Disrupter. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R–Ky.) says Republicans don't have enough votes to block witnesses from testifying in the impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump, which means we could soon see John Bolton, Trump's former national security adviser, giving us a personal preview of his new book from the Senate floor.

The upcoming booka draft of which was leaked to The New York Times recentlyincludes details about Bolton's alleged concern over Trump's relationships with leaders of Ukraine, China, and Turkey. It also backs up quid-pro-quo claims at the center of Trump's impeachment trial.

On Tuesday, Trump's impeachment defense team wrapped up its portion of the proceedings. (More on that here.) Now, the Senate will vote on whether to call in witnesses. And Bolton will almost certainly get the first invite from Democrats if they do.

In return, "Republicans may react to a subpoena of Bolton by summoning Hunter Biden and the government whistleblower, whose complaint sparked the impeachment inquiry, to testify," suggests Zachary Evans at National Review.

One fun thing about all this is how much Bolton seems to be getting under Trump's skin, judging by the increasingly exasperated digs at Bolton the president has been tweeting.

Then again, Trump isn't wrong that that Bolton would have us "in World War Six by now" (or at least well on the way there) if he got his way.

Firing Bolton may be the best idea Trump has had in office, and we're all safer and better off because of it. (It would have been nicer if he had never hired Bolton in the first place, but let's call that water under the bridge for now.) Bolton turning on Trump once fired just makes it all that much better.

Republicans on social media often rejoice in liberals "eating their own" during online outrage mobswhich, I admit, can indeed be fun to watch. But it's so much better when the people putting each other on the menu are power-wielding warmongers and corrupt bozos in high office.


QUICK HITS

NEXT: Virginia's Pending 'Red Flag' Law Includes Improvements but Still Falls Short of Due Process

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The number has now gone up to 50 troops who were harmed.

    You’re making the case for war with Iran!!!

    1. Oh, hey Sarge, I got a headache too!

      1. Sarge: “I’ll give you a headache!!!”

        1. Headaches? Come back when you’ve got some serious injuries like bonespurs.

          1. Unlike bonespurs, headaches get you returned to duty.

            Flatfeet are also a medical condition less serious than a headache but keep you from serving in the US Military.

            Nice try with the TDS though.

            1. Flat feet does not preclude military service. And Donny faked his bone spurs because he is a coward and a liar.

              1. Poor Little Jeffy. Such a sad bitter man.

                1. Not Jeff, and you don’t seem to have a response for why you support a lying coward.

              2. So you’re saying he’s like the democrats Pedo Jeffy? And when has Trump ever been a war hawk? Are all you faggots who cry about bone spurs supporting a return to the draft so you can be compulsorily inducted into military service.?

                Best you just kill yourself.

                1. Come get me, fascist.

          2. Ever had a Bone spur you litterally can not walk. it is fixable though

            1. Are you implying that Trump actually had bone spurs?

              1. It’s. Ore credible than all your lies Pedo Jeffy.

                Now go kill yourself.

                1. You realize you have never posted anything of substance? Why do you hang around here? No friends?

                  1. It’s projecting again.

              2. “”What value does his death add over keeping him in prison for the rest of his life? “”

                No. He’s saying you can’t walk with a bone spur but it is fixable. He said nothing about Trump.
                That is pretty obvious.

                1. Wow copy and paste fail.

                  Are you implying that Trump actually had bone spurs?

                  No. He’s saying you can’t walk with a bone spur but it is fixable. He said nothing about Trump.

                  That is pretty obvious.

                  1. So we can all agree that Trump has/had nothing wrong with his feet, and lied to get out serving his country, then?

                    1. Where was that stated in this thread? My Dad, who did serve in the Army stated he would have avoided the draft too, if he had been called up. I doubt he would have, but, he still felt the war was wrong.

                    2. And you stand by your assertion that draft dodging is only a noble and heroic act when, say Fortunate Son Al Gore gets his ultra-racist daddy to exempt him?

                    3. I never said that draft dodging is noble.

      2. All these soldiers are trying to get VA benefit documentation so when they leave the military, before the next Democrat President who will send thousands of them to die in war.

        1. Some of this could be for VA benefits, trying to get benefits without documentation is a fools errand. We were told to go to sick call for anything, just to have documentation, while at the same time the culture (and to a lesser degree the chain of command) discouraged going to sick call. You didn’t want to be labeled a sick call ranger.

          1. Same here about the sick call thing.

            Everyone knew who was always in the sick call line and who had the occasional medical problem that needed attention.

    2. 12 U.S. troops
      50 troops

      A troop is a group of soldiers, not individuals.

      1. Troop is like sheep, it is both singular and plural.

        1. Troop is indeed like sheep.

          1. Eunuch bleats, in a sad attempt to virtue signal

    3. They are showing how awful journalists are and not bothering to learn about delayed concussion symptoms.

      1. Lefties and the Propagandists here at unreason dont give two shits about soldiers.

        This is a semantic point to go after Trump.

        Trump said no US troops were hurt/harmed/killed by IRANIAN ROCKETS FROM IRAN and that was true. Then some time thereafter, soldiers reported headaches or other delayed medical conditions.

        IRAN FUCKING FIRED ROCKETS INTO ANOTHER COUNTRY The media has ignored this fact to go after Trump, which is why the MSM and unreason are lying media whores.

        1. 50 soldiers have reported concussive symptoms or what have you. Why does reporting on that enrage you so much? Why do you guys hate facts so much? Oh, that’s right: if it’s not flattering for your cult daddy, it is fake and offensive.

          1. These guys hate facts and the reality-based world because they’re poorly educated and gullible; are losing the culture war; prefer superstition to reason; and lack character.

          2. “or what have you“

            Smartest thing you’ve ever posted here.

            1. Hihn socks have been on a roll lately.

          3. You don’t get it, do you?

            The reason “nobody injured” was important was that it removed the imperative to respond with force against Iran, risking a full-on shooting war.

            In order to score cheap political points, CNN (chiefly CNN on this point, but others as well) keep pounding the drums of “He said nobody was hurt but concussions are totally the worst injury possible.” Why? What is the goal?

            So Trump says “not a big deal”. OUTRAGE! Trump is an unfeeling liar!

            What is the goal? Do they really want him to say “you know what? This changes everything. We are attacking Iran immediately and killing everyone in their military!” Because that’s where this push ends if Trump doesn’t just say “screw you.”

            1. The reason “nobody injured” was important was that it removed the imperative to respond with force against Iran, risking a full-on shooting war.

              ^ This.

              The outlets that were screaming their heads off about ‘escalating tensions’ when Suleimani was killed are now pissed that Trump isn’t escalating tensions.

              1. Trump tied his shoes this morning. Progressives outraged!!!

            2. So news networks have a responsibility to keep quiet and not report changing situations if those reports do not support the president’s goals? Seems like super legit libertarian policy.

              1. So news networks have a responsibility to keep quiet and not report changing situations if those reports do not support the president’s goals?

                No, I think it’s the warmongering that libertarians tend to object to (especially when it’s being done by people who just last week were accusing Trump of warmongering). Not that it shouldn’t be allowed, but you shouldn’t expect libertarians to cheer it on.

                1. So factual reporting = war mongering?

                  I’m not convinced.

                  1. what the hell are you talking about? Factual reporting?

                    Repeated questions crafted in an accusatory manner and dozens of hours of “analysts” talking about how Trump *lied* about there being no serious injuries, about how terribly serious the injuries Trump “covered up” are…

                    None of that is “factual reporting”.

                    Factual reporting would have been an article detailing how a bunch of soldiers sought medical attention after the fact due to continuing symptoms of concussion – none of which is inconsistent with what the government told us at the time.

                    There is no “great lie” being uncovered. There is no plausible argument that this is CNN’s motivation either. They clearly have one and only one goal… get Trump at all costs. This is the only plausible explanation for their shifting stance on issues like Iran. First, Trump was weak and feckless because he didn’t attack Iran in response to several military provocations. Then he was starting WWIII because of an extremely limited response to further provocations and direct attacks on US citizens. Finally, he’s weak and feckless again because he didn’t respond to a missile attack on an Iraqi base that initially was reported to have resulted in no injuries.

                    Of course, actions are the best measure of who you are… but sometimes your own words matter. CNN has been “outed” by reporting of their directives on “getting Trump” and other republicans as a main goal of the organization. So has the NYT, in their own words – the NYT editor told their staff that their years-long effort to use Russia to “get Trump” had failed and they needed to find a new way to get Trump. The result of this search was the 1619 project and a new focus on race. All explicitly designed as pro-democrat propaganda. There is no conjecture here, they said as much…. and then they did it.

                    There is no “factual reporting” involved in this story at all. It isn’t even ideologically driven…. it is purely a partisan game of playing “gotcha”. It is the worst of the worst in terms of political discourse.

          4. Pedo Keffy and Arty are with the terrorists. You faggots should be executed.

            1. You are such a sad sad man. Keep posting those vile, violent fantasies though. I’m sure the need to post such masturbatory drivel is driven by a complete and distinct lack of effectiveness and control in the rest of your life.

  2. A new report from the Congressional Budget Office says the federal deficit will reach $1 trillion this year and continue to exceed $1 trillion per year for at least the next 11 years.

    Gotta spend money to owe money.

    1. That’s why we need a woman in charge, really get the spend level up, amiright fellas?

      1. But we would be the best looking country in the World!

    2. *Looks around for all the fiscal conservatives and constitutional libertarians.*

      Hello?

      1. When are you going to finally commit suicide? You know you should. You have nothing to live for.

        1. Shitlord, when are you going to get off of your fat ass and actually do something about it?

      2. Yes? How can I help you?

        1. Can you tell me why all the people who used to claim to be fiscal conservatives now have nothing to say about Trump blowing up the deficit for no reason?

          1. “”Trump blowing up the deficit for no reason?””

            Lol, The deficit belongs to Congress. They control the purse.

            1. Trump refused to pass a budget because it didn’t spend enough.

              1. Are you referring to the 5 Billion he wanted for the wall?

                If so then you are mischaracterizing it. It wasn’t about more money per se, it was about building the wall. But that doesn’t change the fact that Congress controls the purse.

              2. Also, I think Trump caved and signed the bill anyway. Because Congress controls the purse and he decided not to have a government shutdown over it.

                1. And the side of the deficit equation, taxes? Which Trump cut without cutting any spending? This is Trump’s deficit.

    3. Gotta spend money to owe money.

      I actually heard some people on Bloomberg the other day saying that local municipalities need to start issuing more debt because investors need more bonds to invest in.

  3. West Virginia’s governor is calling on conservative counties in Virginia to secede and join his state.

    He just doesn’t want his state to look like a scrotal sack anymore.

    1. West Virginia, alone among the states, was formed out of another state – Virginia – during the Civil War. They might actually be able to do this.

      1. Or the feds could just demand VA finally lives up to its Constitutional responsibility and returns Alexandria to DC.

        1. Yes, that would be best. That way all those Donkeys would have no say in the election.

          1. The best would be Congress draining the swamp and getting rid of tens of thousands of federal workers.

            Runner up would be for all roads leading to D.C. be shrunk by a few lanes, so less bureaucrats can get to Washington each day to cause so much damage. Many would quit if they had 3 hour commutes.

            1. Getting your ass kicked by better Americans in the culture war for the entirety of your spectrum-tinged life has made you cranky.

              1. ╔════╗───────────────╔═══╦═══╦═══╦═══╗─╔╗╔╗╔╗
                ╚═╗╔═╝───────────────╚══╗║╔═╗╠══╗║╔═╗║─║║║║║║
                ──║║─╔══╦╗╔╦════╦══╗─╔══╝║║─║╠══╝║║─║║─║║║║║║
                ──║║─║╔═╣║║║╔╗╔╗║╔╗║─║╔══╣║─║║╔══╣║─║║─╚╝╚╝╚╝
                ──║║─║║─║╚╝║║║║║║╚╝║─║╚══╣╚═╝║╚══╣╚═╝║─╔╗╔╗╔╗
                ──╚╝─╚╝─╚══╩╝╚╝╚╣╔═╝─╚═══╩═══╩═══╩═══╝─╚╝╚╝╚╝
                ────────────────║║
                ────────────────╚╝
                ____________________________________________________

      2. Well, yes, but only if you include the qualifier “during the Civil War”. Maine was also formed directly out of another state, Massachusetts, in 1820. And, of course, every state in the area between the Mississippi and the original 13, starting with Vermont, were made out of territory that was originally claimed by one or more of the original thirteen.

      3. West Virginia, alone among the states, was formed out of another state

        What about Alabama and Mississippi that were once part of Georgia? Maine used to be part of Massachusetts. I believe Kentucky was briefly part of Virginia.

        1. Technically, Georgia ceded its claim to territories west of the Chattahoochee in 1802, so it returned to the federal government. Then Alabama and Mississippi became federal territories for about 15 years before Mississippi was admitted to the Union in 1817 and then Alabama in 1819. So directly before becoming states they were federal territories.

      4. Easy rearrangement of state borders could make for much more interesting national politics. And more honest political geography. I would imagine a few skinny coastal states plus a handful of city-states surrounded by much larger rural-suburban states. What would this do Congress?

        1. That’s probably inevitable at this point. I can’t imagine the red counties of eastern and far northern California feel that they’re appropriately represented by the radical leftists of the SF-LA SSR, nor the rest of Illinois being subject to the whims of Cook County, Oregon to Portland, or Washington to Seattle. I’m sure the Rio Grande Valley in Texas would love to break off and go back to Mexico if given the choice, and most of Colorado has always resented being crow-barred by Denver to serve its own interests for the last 150 years.

        2. Demographics change. Forming new/rearranging states is not a real solution. California was Red, now it’s Blue. Someday it will be Red again or maybe controlled by Libertarians.

          The problem is Socialists trying to usurp the Constitution. Non-Lefties in states like California, Virginia, Colorado just need to stand up and fight back. Lefties don’t care about Constitutional right and Due Process, so stop acting like they do. There is no more compromise. Take back all the power from.

      5. New York had also had a claim to most or all of what became Vermont (New Hampshire had a competing claim). How much it actually controlled is another question. Many of the original 13 states had extensive and often overlapping claims to territory to their west from their colony charters that were largely given up in the early days of the federal republic.

      6. Slight complication.

        Article IV, Section 3.
        New states may be admitted by the Congress into this union; but no new states shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other state; nor any state be formed by the junction of two or more states, or parts of states, without the consent of the legislatures of the states concerned as well as of the Congress.

    2. He just loves his sister state, it is West Virginia after all.

  4. Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is now topping fellow Democratic 2020 presidential candidate (and South Bend, Indiana, Mayor) Pete Buttigieg in some polls.

    Hey, come on.

    1. Bloomberg is a top?

      1. Well he’s the one with the money, so….

      2. They did not call him “Nanny Bloomberg” for nothing.

    2. Oh my!

  5. …we could soon see John Bolton, Trump’s former national security adviser, giving us a personal preview of his new book from the Senate floor.

    Personally enriching himself using our most sacred process in our most sacrosanct of institutions? Vulgar.

    1. Vulgar is the new black.

    2. I’m gonna ruin your joke a bit and make the punchline more apparent for the ones with their red hats on too tight.

      https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckjones/2019/07/10/trumps-golf-trips-could-cost-taxpayers-over-340-million/#1df67b1d28aa

      1. How much are you charging tax payers for Trumps rent in your head?

        1. Or all the imaginary sex where a Trump fucks his ass while Pedo Jeffy jacks it.

          1. That’s your fantasy, bud. I notice you are preoccupied with pedophillic and homosexual fantasies.

        2. So no response on Trump blowing taxpayer money at his own businesses, which goes right into his pocket? Or are you going to cede that you are not at all principled?

          1. From your link:

            “$60,000 in expenses paid to Mar-a-Lago (there have been 24 so far)”

            Out of $340M, most of which is AirForce One and security costs.

            And the $60k doesn’t go “right into his pocket,” although it’s not unlikely that some of it did, after expenses.

            This is not admirable, but it’s not really “sky is falling” territory, either.

            1. I understand that it takes a bit of money to adapt one’s home to accommodate the Secret Service detail.

              1. And at $2,500 a pop, it really doesn’t seem to me that Mar-a-Lago is overcharging, especially as a percentage of the $14M that each trip seems to cost.

                Now, if we could figure out how to make a golfing trip cost less than $14M, I think that’s a conversation worth having.

                1. Just to add some extra perspective as a public works guy – if I had a project that had a $14M budget, I would think nothing of dropping $2,500 on something I may or may not need, and I wouldn’t spend more than maybe 30-45 seconds thinking about it, if even that long.

                2. I just wish we could figure out a way to avoid paying for Presidents to golf at all. Maybe they should give up golfing.

            2. Pretty much business as usual.

              1. Unusually thrifty on the self-dealing end, even.

            3. You are characterizing the spending at Trump properties. The $60k was just the amount that could be directly traced to mar-a-lago, and did not include any meals, incidentals, etc.

              Another reporter found over $250k spent just by secret service at Trump properties, over just a 5 month period. https://www.politico.com/news/2019/11/21/secret-service-spent-more-than-250k-at-trump-properties-072465

              Libertarians should be fucking outraged by this clear and inarguable conflict of interest.

  6. The number has now gone up to 50 troops who were harmed.

    Aren’t we still paying benefits to Civil War kin? Pull all soldiers out of the Middle East.

    1. There is one Civil War pension remaining.

      1. U.S. Veterans and Dependents on Benefits Rolls as of May 2016

        VETERANS – CHILDREN – PARENTS – SURVIVING SPOUSES
        Civil War – 1 – –
        Spanish-American War – 46 – 42
        Mexican Border – 3 – 6
        World War I – 1,590 – 1,236
        World War II 144,938 9,360 10 178,251
        Philippines 1,776 155 3 2,598
        Korean Conflict 181,893 2,207 25 74,041
        Vietnam Era 1,525,400 4,570 1,198 251,543
        Gulf War1 1,990,094 4,488 1,788 26,799
        Peacetime 710,773 1,382 713 36,048
        Non service-connected2 292,297 10,175 – 193,442
        Service-connected2 4,262,577 13,627 3,737 377,122

        1. 10 parents of WW2 vets. They gotta be old old old.

  7. But there are signs this year that the media’s free Trump ride is over. In November, the Times shocked investors with the news that ad revenues had fallen over 6%. In early trading, its stock was down 9%. While there’s still plenty of money coming in, turbulence is growing and growth is becoming more uncertain. And, more significantly, the New York Times has been losing the engagement battle.

    In May, the New York Times fell out of the top three, displaced by the Daily Mail. By November, it had fallen to seventh place. Its Facebook growth fell from 25% in 2017 to 3.5%. Its Twitter follower growth also dropped from 50% annually to only 5%. Another way to see the 1619 Project is as a desperate bid for relevance and traffic even as the appeal of Trump Derangement Syndrome continues to crater.

    The TDS crash was even more obvious on cable news where CNN closed the year with a 9% decline in viewers and MSNBC suffered a 3% drop. Numbers like these foreshadow a much bigger collapse.

    1. The only thing that years of concentrated fury have accomplished is the derangement and corruption of the Democrats. Trump Derangement Syndrome didn’t defeat Trump, it defeated the Democrats. Even as the election approaches, the party base is tired and feels futile. Every effort to bring down Trump has fallen short. Instead of using the 2018 election to build momentum, House Democrats squandered it.

      And now they’re going to be heading into the primaries fresh off another defeat on impeachment.

      Trump Derangement Syndrome has burned out Democrats. It hollowed out the media, turned the House victory sour, overshadowed the primaries, and put the party on a path to another catastrophe.

      The mobs have left. The viewers aren’t there. Impeachment is the final act of Trump Derangement Syndrome. And the furious screamers aren’t sticking around for the miserable conclusion of the show.

      1. Crying wolf does have consequences. Someone ought to write a fable about that.

      2. interesting numbers, what’s the source? (Not calling you a liar, just curious). Quinnipiac’s got a new poll out saying that there’s now a majority (51%) wanting the impeachment over and done with, and considering how polls have usually been slanted against Trump… I think its higher.

        Then there are the stats that Trump’s campaign manager is putting out for the rallies Trump’s attending, they’re consistently hitting 20-24k folks at the rallies, with a good chunk consistently being registered as Democrats, independents, or not having voted the last time around. If that’s the case and the Trump campaign isn’t fudging the numbers… I am really, REALLY looking forward to November. There are a few idiots I know who’s reactions will be hysterical

        1. Really? Because this Quinnipiac poll of registered voters paints a much different story:

          https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=3654

          You can read it for yourself, but to summarize:

          75% want witnesses in the impeachment trial, including nearly half of Republican voters

          On Trump’s removal, it is split: 48% say no, 47% say yes

          53% think Trump is not telling the truth about his actions involving Ukraine, while 40% think he is telling the truth

          57 percent say they would like President Trump to provide more details about his actions involving Ukraine, while 38 percent say they are satisfied with the explanation he has provided.

          54 percent believe President Trump abused his power regarding his actions involving Ukraine, while 42 percent say he did not.

          52 percent think that President Trump obstructed Congress regarding its investigation of his actions involving Ukraine, while 42 percent think he did not.

          52 percent think the Trump administration’s withholding of U.S. aid to Ukraine was not justified, while 34 percent say it was justified.

          1. Yes one poll but the average of polling in RCP prints a different picture.

      3. Only the most insane and fanatical among us (like Welchie Boy for example) can maintain such a high level of spluttering rage day after day after day for years on end.

        Normal people simply can’t do it. It’s too exhausting, debilitating, and demoralizing.

        1. Only the most insane and fanatical among us

          It’s good that you count yourself among the insane.

      4. The only ones who are deranged in your little make believe scenario are the ones who are applauding trading a 233 year old system of checks and balances for a petty dictator (who isn’t even an effective leader).

        1. Poor thing. Bless your heart.

          1. The sock trolls have had a rough 3 years with Trump kicking their asses all over.

        2. How is being opposed to this impeachment trading checks and balances for a petty dictatorship? If you used actual arguments instead of hyperbole you would get less shit on this thread (some will still give you shit because that is who they are).

          1. The obstruction of congress. Wait until there is a dem president who can just tell congress to fuck off. Heads will be exploding around here like Trump isn’t setting this precedent.

      5. The owners of media outlets are not necessarily concerned about one year’s decline. It’s the overall trends of decline that scare the shit out of them.

        There are only so many billionaires willing to buy Propaganda outlets to keep them afloat which they bash political opponents.

        Even with the bailouts, more and more Americans are not to Lefties to be the gatekeepers anymore.

    2. They couldn’t give a fuck less about ad revenue — they’ll get another bailout from Carlos Slim or whatever other radical left wing billionaire wants to borrow their esophagus for a little while.

    3. LOL nobody who isn’t infected with Trump brain worms gives a single fuck about media ratings. I love how his followers uncritically adopt the same pathetic obsessions he displays in his senile ramblings.

    4. It won’t help MSNBC that one of its dedicated SJW announcers called the Lakers ‘The LA Niggers’ live on the air.

      1. Link. That’s f*ing hilarious.

  8. Bolton will not testify, unless Hunter and Joe Biden testify. The Democrats will never let the Bidens testify. This thing dies Friday.

    1. Unless the D’s have come to the conclusion that Biden is now terminally damaged goods in the race for 2020.

      If so, they might be willing to throw him and Hunter under the bus to try and damage Trump.

      1. Perhaps.

        I don’t think throwing the Biden in hot water, however, is going to damage Trump. But, it will definitely sink Biden and it would also make the entire impeachment imbroglio appear to be nothing more than an attempt to squash an investigation into Democratic corruption (even more so than it appears to be now).

        Throwing Biden under the bus would mean irreparably tarnishing the Obama administration as well.

        There is nothing to gain from it, in my opinion.

        1. You beat me to it. I can’t see how damaging Obama’s legacy helps the Democrats. I think their best chance against Trump was always some kind of “bring back the normalcy of Obama” message. And the truth about Biden coming out will make that a lot less appealing.

          1. Assuming that the Republicans will actually subpoena the Bidens and that they would actually show up. I can see the GOP letting Bolton do his damage and then pretending to be outraged when Joe and Hunter tell them to pound sand.

            If the GOP is smart, the Bidens testify first or no Bolton. But the GOP is not smart.

            1. The way it should work is that the proceeding should be used to pit democrats on trial, and make a Trump look good. As punishment for what the House did.

        2. So Trump wanted an investigation into Biden for the purpose of hurting Biden in the election. He didn’t get it, but the dems might give Trump the same affect by allowing Biden to be a witness? I don’t know.

          1. There is no way the Democrats want Joe or Hunter Biden testifying. The Democrat Party is willing to give up the House majority and never having a Democrat President ever again to prevent it.

            There are way too many Democrat skeletons in closets regarding Ukraine, The Crimea takeover, Russia, and the EU. This smells like it is more than just money.

            1. “There are way too many Democrat skeletons in closets regarding Ukraine, The Crimea takeover, Russia, and the EU. This smells like it is more than just money.”

              Most projecting comment of the day.

              1. It isn’t, faggot. Now why are you still alive? You have a suicide to commit.

                1. I’m guessing that no one loves you. Sad.

              2. How is it projecting?
                Please provide examples.

                1. Are you serious? Who has more skeletons in their closet regarding Russia and now Ukraine than Trump? Maybe Rudy?

      2. It is hard to believe that they haven’t made that conclusion. The problem is that taking Biden down does tremendous damage to Obama’s legacy. And that will have a very demoralizing effect on a lot of Democrats.

        I can’t see Bolton changing anyone’s mind or having much effect on the electorate. But, if it turns out that the last Democratic VP put US foreign policy up for sale laundering the money through his son, that would effect more than just Biden. It would do damage to the entire Democratic Party.

        1. Man , would that be funny or what?

          1. It would be hysterical. I want to see the Bidens try to explain how Hunter Biden made all of that money. Let Bolton talk. He is going to say exactly the same thing the rest of these people said; that “he feels Trump wanted this” but neither Trump nor anyone else ever told him that. It will be a big dud.

            The Biden boys, however, would be made for TV entertainment.

            1. I think there is a big old story in Russia, The EU, and Ukraine as it relates to Russia.

              There is way more to the taking over the Crimea, natural gas deals with EU, and Ukrainian national sovereignty.

              The Obama Administration was neck deep in it and it was NOT good for the USA or it would have been public knowledge.

              1. It would be hilarious if Bolton’s firing and his potential testimony were all a set up. Where the democrats are tricked into insisting he testify, building up his credibility the whole time. The Bolton comes in and testifies that Trump did nothing wrong and the real culprits were Obama and Biden.

            2. Why would the Bidens have any relevance in Trump’s impeachment? No matter what the Bidens did or did not do, Trump abused his authority by tying investigations to the release of funds. End of story.
              https://www.gao.gov/assets/710/703909.pdf

              1. He didn’t. Biden did. Democrats are traitors. And you need to kill yourself at the first opportunity.

                Now get on with it you fucking pedophile shitweasel.

                1. Poor, pathetic shithead. Needs someone else to do the work for him. This what happens when you stay indoors all day on your rascal.

              2. So Trump tried to get another government to investigate criminal behavior, he used funds to do so, just like every other President has (see the US and Mexico abd Columbia in regards to the war on drugs and Biden’s own actions). Trump is accused of abuse of power because he is accused of wanting Biden to be investigated for political purposes not because Biden was dirty. Yet you maintain that Biden’s testimony is irrelevant. Explain the logic behind that.

              3. “”Why would the Bidens have any relevance in Trump’s impeachment? “”

                Because part of their claim is that Trump was to receive a benefit political by making Biden look bad due to an announcement of an investigation. It suppose to be the quo in the quid pro quo. Or did we move away from that?

        2. I wish they’d do it. Take some of that fake-shine sparkle off Barry.

          I don’t appreciate when mediocrity is placed on a pedestal.

          1. I don’t appreciate when mediocrity is placed on a pedestal.

            Oh, Canada.

            (I kid.)

            1. It does get over praised from time to time in my opinion.

        3. I am not too sure they care about Obama that much. Not too many really like his policies, they just liked the man and the longer he is out of office the less they will care about him. Plus they have a long history of destroying black men for their own political gain.

          1. I do not think the activists and the party officials care anything about Obama. But, I do think a lot of Democratic voters care a lot about Obama. Electing Obama meant a lot to a lot of people and not just the black community. Of course it meant a tremendous amount to the black community but also to a lot of ordinary Democratic voters who were proud to have elected a black President.

            So, if Biden gets up there and disgraces himself and the Obama presidency, which he likely will, it will disappoint a lot of people. I think it would have a very demoralizing effect on Democratic voters and black voters especially.

            1. Agreed.

              Biden can’t even keep his shit together when friendly media are lobbing softballs at him. Can you imagine him being cross examined by Cipollone? He’ll bumble and yell his way, like a wrecking ball, through Obama’s entire legacy. More likely than not, he’ll end up absentmindedly dragging other people into the muck by implicating their involvement and/or tacit approval of his schemes.

              In short, it would be a nightmare for Democrats; a death knell for the party on live television.

              The Democrats are desperate, but they’re not stupid.

              1. They’re not ALL stupid.

                There are plenty of stupid short term Democrats. This Impeachment is an example. Pelosi and Establishment Democrats held out as long as they felt they could.

            2. They also want Trump to be gone so bad they have destroyed all their credibility and have gone off the deep end. I don’t think cooler heads will prevail until after they lose the next election. What I think saves Biden more is all the dirt he has from his long stint in Congress. You don’t stay in Congress long just by kissing babies.

              1. Plus, if Joe Biden really does have memory problems he might forget what NOT TO SAY.

            3. Politicians are fine with corruption and how it ebbs and flows in their line of work.

              There are millions of voters that voted Democrat just for Obama and if it turns out there is evidence he fucked the USA, those voters will be pissed and disenfranchised with the Democrat Party.

              People can suspect politicians of corrupt and crimes but when there is ample evidence revealed in public it really gets under most American’s skin.

              1. Read Jake Trapper’s book The Last Outpost about a COP in Afghanistan. He does a decent job discussing how the Obama administration’s personal disagreement with the Pentagon led to a US COP being nearly overran. He does try to lay the blame equally on both parties but it doesn’t exactly paint the Obama administration is a good light either.

                1. He also takes Rumsfeld and Bush to take, rightfully, for underequipping and supporting the war in Afghanistan and a total lack of long term strategy.b

          2. eh, I feel he pissed off a few of his buddies on the political scene. Way I heard it, part of the reason Congress couldn’t do anything during his presidency was as much because Barrack wouldn’t interact with his own allies as it was just Republicans refusing to play ball. You have folks on both sides of the aisle on the record saying Barrack was impossible to get ahold of and not returning calls.

        4. But the only people who care about the “Obama legacy” are establishment Democrats. The New Left hates them almost as much as they hate conservatives, and lumps them all together as capitalist-corporatist enablers. Bernie Bros and Lizzie Lesbos would publicly flay Biden, and make Obama watch, in a heartbeat.

          1. Obama getting torched endangers the Democratic stranglehold over the black vote. They are not going to risk that. Running roughshod over Obama’s legacy risks making the black vote competitive. Blacks voting Republican, even if it is still a minority of the total electorate, would destroy Democrats overnight. A few percentage points in the wrong direction and the Democrats risk losing nationally in every race that matters.

            1. A few percentage points in the wrong direction and the Democrats risk losing nationally in every race that matters.

              I think the consensus is that if Republicans ever hit 20% of the black vote, the Democrats simply could not win national elections. The swing in key states would be too much to overcome.

              Which is why the Dems have been going hard after pandering to Hispanics, because they are a far larger minority than blacks. The Dems have nearly 100 years worth of evidence that blacks will not vote in large numbers for Republicans, so it’s natural that they take it for granted.

              1. The new immigrants were supposed to replace the Black American vote which has been migrating Republican.

                Trump put the kibosh on that plan.

                1. Even Hispanics are increasingly leaning toward Republicans, somewhere around 40%. If these trends keep up, the Democrats will be in serious trouble. The Democrats, moreover, are not moderating. Instead, they seem all too eager to move as swiftly as possible in the socialist direction.

                  Even if we accept the premise that Hispanics have a tendency to be partial to big government initiatives (and I am not sure if that is accurate or not), nobody wants to be friends with the gulag worshiping nutbags in those Project Veritas videos. And, yet, Bernie Sanders seeming to be running away with the prize.

                  Crazy shit.

        5. I don’t think most Democrats see damage to Biden as damage to Obama. There’s a common view that Joe was just the goofy uncle that Obama took along for the ride, and any damage to Biden would be seen as irrelevant to Obama’s legacy.

          1. Obama did not know much about foreign policy and other government strategies. Plus, Obama only knew Chicago corruption not international corruption. Joe Biden has had decades experience on that stuff.

            Joe Biden was the middle man on some of those deals and clearly the Democrats dont want them public.

            Reagan tried to hide the Iran-Contra deal which Congress specifically made illegal use of federal funds.

            1. Nobody messes with Joe!

              He is messed up on his own.

    2. At best, they’ll be video depositions or some species of closed door testimony. Direct testimony means, ultimately, article-three court delays, which means months upon months of more handwringing.

      McConnell ain’t about to allow that; he’ll figure out a compromise. Schumer wants the politics of perpetual chaos, of course, since the longer this charade goes, the more he edges toward becoming majority leader.

      One more thing: even if we hear from Bolton directly and stipulate that he implicates Trump on the aid/investigation nexus, I’m wagering that his corollary testimony will put a damper on this “bombshell” du jour.

  9. The #BoltonBombshell marks the tipping point. The walls are closing in. It’s the beginning of the end.

    #ImpeachAndRemove

  10. Gates, Eastman win special election Texas House runoffs
    Republican projected to beat Democrat for Texas state House, in race watched for 2020 clues
    Jan. 28, 2020, 8:32 AM EST / Updated Jan. 28, 2020, 11:50 PM EST

    Sure enough, the Republicans won the Texas Special election.
    Gates, Eastman win special election Texas House runoffs
    “Democrats everywhere said this Texas election was a ‘bellwether’ — and that it would set the tone for the entire 2020 election cycle,” Chambers said. “Spoiler alert: they’re right, it was — just not with the outcome Democrats hoped for.”

    1. It wasn’t even close, either–the fat lesbian ran on a pro-impeachment platform and got smoked because people in red and swing districts don’t give a shit about getting rid of the Bad Orange Man.

      Also, this will hopefully render Beta O’Potatoes as politically irrelevant from here on out. He led a massive door-knocking effort that had every Democrat in the state kissing his ass over how hard he was supposedly working (that stupid “Powered By People” slogan was 2004-era cringe), and it didn’t actually change the overall percentage differential. Dude needs to go back to El Paso and stop letting the fashion-driven media tell him that he’s the chosen one.

      1. You had me at “fat lesbian”.

        1. He had me at “fat lesbian ran”. I would pay money to not see that!

          1. Would that be a woke version of the Simon Pegg film ‘Run, Fat Boy, Run’?

    2. So, I read the article you linked to. Gates, a Republican, won one of the special elections, while Eastman, a Democrat, won the other one. In fact, the seat Gates won had previously been held by a Republican, and the seat Eastman won had previously been held by a Democrat. So nothing really changed.

  11. Andrew Yang is in 4th nationwide in recent Emerson Poll

    1. I learned in college that Asian Americans don’t really count toward racial diversity the way African American, Latinx, and Native American people do. So Yang is practically a straight white cis-male to me. That alone keeps him out of my top tier.

      1. So now we’re inventing White Asians as an ethnicity?

        #Icantkeepupanymore

        1. No different then Italians now thinking they are white. Latinos will soon follow, see Zimmerman.

        2. I regularly see polling questions asking if you are Hispanic. If yes next question is what kind of Hispanic, Mexican, Cuban, Puerto Rican, Chilean, etc. Other question, Are you Asian. Not one question of what kind. All Asians apparently look alike.

          1. To many types of Asians to list, even China is trying to make them all one

            1. Yet Hispanics speak one language and are basically different percentages of three ethnic groups.

          2. You try to tell who’s who in a line up of Chow Yun-fat, Lucy Liu and Tommy Chong.

          3. What’s even stranger is that latinx/o/as ARE Asian.

            They’re either of native or mixed native descent.

            And the ‘natives’ are all Asians who came across the land bridge.

        3. Any ethnic group good at math and business, and with higher than average income and wealth, can’t be brown. Ergo, they are white.

        4. In NYC the school chancellor currently fighting to end gifted programs and merit-based special high schools, because these discriminate against minorities by not considering skin color, had to explain, when people pointed out these programs were majority Asian and not white, that Asian people also have white privilege. And not based on wealth either, as the average income isn’t any better than for other minorities.

  12. One fun thing about all this is how much Bolton seems to be getting under Trump’s skin, judging by the increasingly exasperated digs at Bolton the president has been tweeting.

    Trump isn’t much of an ideologue and seems to hold those types in contempt. Also, Bolton is testifying against him.

  13. House Democrats push back on Trump’s efforts to take credit for the economy

    HAHA. These Democrats are so full of shit. “Obama’s economy” runs all the way through Trump’s entire 8 years as President. HAHA.

    1. Unless something bad happens.

    2. “Obama’s economy” runs all the way through Trump’s entire 8 years as President. HAHA.

      Makes perfect sense, actually. Bush’s economy ran all the way through Obama’s entire 8 years as president.

      1. Really?

        I don’t remember Bill Clinton ever taking the blame for the 2000 Dot.com bubble bust and sending the USA into a slight recession during W Bush’s Presidency. That recession was over quickly due to deregulation and no bailouts.

        Then HUD mostly caused the housing bubble that bust sending the USA into another recession. This time TARP bailouts by Bush and Obama did keep the USA in recession for almost 10 years.

        Trump’s election was the turning point in the Great Recession that Obama and Bush were culpable in.

        1. I think he 2as being sarcastic.

    3. Stuff like this makes me miss the real Palin’s Buttplug. According to his economic analysis, Obama deserves all the credit for any good metrics during the Drumpf economy, and Drumpf deserves all the blame for the bad stuff. Like Sam’s Club closing stores.

      #IMissObama
      #PleaseComeBackButtplug

  14. But it’s so much better when the people putting each other on the menu are power-wielding warmongers and corrupt bozos in high office.

    Not really. Its so much better when the people on the menu are assholes that insult regular American people every day. For instance – when journalists tear each other down, most of us get a huge kick out of it. A lot more than we do when its about boring shit like withholding foreign aid.

    I’m not surprised you don’t see it that way since you are one of the disconnected journalists.

    1. Corrupt bozos = Joe Biden as Exhibit A. Has there been anyone less competent or more likely to burp up a malapropism in high office in recent years (say since 1900)?

  15. ECONOMIC EMERGENCY!!!!!!!

    Reason.com’s benefactor Charles Koch has fallen out of the top 10 richest people on the planet!

    The high-tariff / low-immigration #DrumpfRecession has caused so much suffering, I’d want to #ImpeachAndRemove even if #TrumpUkraine hadn’t become the biggest scandal in world history.

    #HowLongMustCharlesKochSuffer?

    1. May it’s because his brother was the brains of the operation.

      1. Hey, even in this awful Drumpf economy, Charles is still worth like $60 billion. You don’t accumulate a fortune like that unless you’re really brilliant.

        1. AOC: ‘No one ever makes a billion dollars. You take a billion dollars’

          1. Yep, demanding money in exchange for stuff is “taking”. Demanding money in exchange for nothing is robbery. Or taxes.

          2. I guess she was “taking” customer’s money while behind the bar.

            I wonder if she has an Amazon Prime account?

  16. The Pentagon last week said that only 12 U.S. troops had suffered brain injuries in an Iranian attack on a U.S.-manned military base in Iraq. The number has now gone up to 50 troops who were harmed.

    Notice unreason used the word “harmed”. The Pentagon didnt use that word. It’s all semantics until it isn’t with unreason.

    Of the 50 troops affected, 31 were treated in Iraq and returned to duty, “including 15 of the additional service members,” Lt. Col. Thomas Campbell, a Pentagon spokesman, said in a statement.

    “As stated previously, this is a snap shot in time and numbers can change,” Colonel Campbell said. “We will continue to provide updates as they become available.”

    The Defense Department said on Friday that 34 American service members had traumatic brain injuries as a result of the Jan. 8 attack. In the hours after the strike, President Trump said that no Americans had been hurt.

    If only unreason and the Lefty media were this attentive to what Obama said.

    1. Here’s what the article linked says.

      The Pentagon on Tuesday said that 50 American service members sustained brain injuries from Iranian airstrikes on Al Asad Air Base in Iraq this month, 16 more than it had acknowledged last week.

      Of the 50 troops affected, 31 were treated in Iraq and returned to duty, “including 15 of the additional service members,” Lt. Col. Thomas Campbell, a Pentagon spokesman, said in a statement.

  17. Where are the sex links?

    1. Senate Democrats are furiously fucking themselves, does that count?

    2. I don’t think ENB was faking her orgasm when she wrote this column.

      1. You had me at “ENB orgasm”.

  18. Republicans on social media often rejoice in liberals “eating their own” during online outrage mobs—which, I admit, can indeed be fun to watch.

    LMAO. Was that before you after you threw a histrionic bitch fit, doxxed somebody, and tried to get them fired from their job because they were mean to you on Twitter you disgusting festering cunt?

    But it’s so much better when the people putting each other on the menu are power-wielding warmongers and corrupt bozos in high office.

    It’s amazing how credulous one can be when one’s paycheck depends on it, isn’t it, you disgusting festering cunt?

    1. Nope. Bailey said yesterday that only women with XX chromosomes can be cunts, and ENB, being a transwoman, doesn’t qualify.

        1. Wow, really?

          My face is red.

      1. So then, ENB is a Decepticon?

  19. Trump allies are handing out cash to black voters

    THE ONLY CASH THAT CAN BE HANDED OUT IS TAXPAYER CASH!!
    -Lefties

    1. And only to black (and brown) voters.

  20. Still, as some other posters here have mentioned, we do not have any direct quotes from Bolton’s manuscript or a copy of the manuscript.

    Why is that?

    All we have is the NYT reporting on what someone else reported to them about what might be in the manuscript.

    Seriously?

    1. That’s how it’s done now.

    2. REO Speedwagon is all the rage these days

    3. Some memorable quotes from the book:
      “I’m the meanest, roughest, toughest bombre that’s ever crossed the Rio Grande – and I ain’t o nomby-bomby!”
      “I’m the hootin’est, tootin’est, bombing’est, bomb-tail wildcat, in the west!”
      “I’m the fastest bomber north, south, east, aaaaaaaand west of the Pecos!”
      “When I say whoa, I mean whoa!”
      “Ya long-eared galoot!”
      “I hates rabbits!”
      “Great horny toads!”
      “Say your prayers, Varmint!”
      “You rackin’ frackin’ varmint!”

      1. “I say, I say, I say”

    4. It doesn’t matter what it actually says, only what the legacy media says that it says. Remember the freak out when Barr gave his little talk before releasing the Mueller report? They were pissed they didn’t get to set the spin.

  21. Trump peace plan: Israeli control over settlements, Palestinian state

    You know who else wanted to give Jews control over settlements?

    1. Moses?

    2. Definitely not the Swiss.

    3. Every class action law suit?

  22. I’ve seen nothing but shit about the Republicans not having the the votes to acquit straight up do to the three Mukalski, Collins and Romney. What about Manchin(WV),Synema(AZ) or Jones(AL)? all those senators All the Republicans need is two of the six and they don’t whip the Republicans. Donald Trump is not getting removed even if he was proven he did what they are saying. My bet this shit ends friday.

    1. A least he should make the vote public.

    2. The Democrats need 20 Republicans to convict. It requires a 2/3 vote.

    3. It takes 2/3 to convict. The Democrats don’t have that.

      It takes a majority to move for or reject different procedural requests in the trial, like are they going to hear any more testimony or not. The Democrats might have that, if 4 Republican Senators join them. So far, Romney, Collins, Murkowski are being their usual pain in the ass selves on this topic.

  23. Will Bolton Get To Testify Against Trump? All Signs Point to Yes.

    Quite telling that you’re using a Magic 8-Ball to divine your answers, chicken entrails would work as well. Nobody knows. Does anybody care? While last-minute surprise witnesses play well in legal dramas and whodunit thrillers, in real life, last-minute surprise witnesses are severely frowned upon. You’d better have a damn good excuse for why we haven’t heard from this guy before – he’s publishing a damn book, it’s not like he hasn’t had a chance to get his story out there previously, so why is this only coming out now? It stinks to high heaven and at a real trial the judge would have counsel in his chambers wanting to know what kind of shit the prosecutor’s trying to pull.

    1. Yeah pretty much that. And what is he going to say? I seriously doubt he is going to claim that Trump told him all this in so many words. If he does, he will get destroyed because he will have no evidence it is true other than his word and everyone else in a position to know will say it never happened.

      I think Bolton is smarter than that. So at most you will get the same “I felt this is what the President wanted” song and dance the rest of these clowns gave. That didn’t convince anyone then and it won’t convince anyone now, especially coming from someone who is trying to sell a book and somehow never mentioned it before they wrote their book.

      1. I understand Bolton’s predicament. The Democrats despise him, so there is no “other team” to turn to. He clearly burned all his bridges with Republicans and, now, the Trump administration, so he has no refuge even among “friends.”

        The book is his only remaining shot as cashing in, which is precisely why the assertions in it (assuming they are what they have been reported to be) must be taken with a huge grain of salt.

        If Bolton was truly as adverse to President Trump as he is now being portrayed to be, he would have testified much earlier. That he did not, along with the circumstances described above, leads me to conclude that the entire “Bolton situation” doesn’t add up to a hill of beans.

        1. Plus, Trump gave him a job when nobody else would.

          Trump was fully aware of Bolton’s warmonger attitude. Bolton was aware very early that Trump would not start new wars without really good cause and Trump would set the bar high.

          Trump rewards loyalty and Bolton was loyal as far as I can tell. Trump helping Bolton with a book sales bump while freaking out the Lefties is reasonable.

        2. so he has no refuge even among “friends.”

          Johm McCain is keeping a seat cold for him.

      2. John, was that you commenting that Trump’s team purposely released incorrect about Bolton’s book to get Democrats to jump on it and support having Biden’s as witnesses in the US Senate?

        I thought that was a good possibility.

        I still agree with whomever opinioned that Trump’s team purposely released a few pages of his tax returns so the Lefty media went crazy for weeks over it.

  24. Latest polls primary polls:

    —-Iowa

    Sanders 24
    Biden 15
    Warren 19
    Buttigieg 17

    —-New Hampshire

    Sanders 29
    Biden 22
    Warren 16
    Buttigieg 10

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/democratic_nomination_polls/

    Biden certainly isn’t hoping he’ll be called as a witness in front of the impeachment inquiry. It will almost certainly hurt his chances of winning the nomination, and it will hurt him early. It may be too late to hurt him any more than this issue already has in Iowa, but it won’t help him ahead of New Hampshire or Super Tuesday–and he’s already lagging Sanders in both Iowa and New Hampshire.

    There is still a fat chance that there will be a contested convention for the Democrats, where none of the candidates have enough votes to win the nomination outright a nominee will be picked by way of the superdelegates and horsetrading among the candidates. Biden may promise to make Warren the Secretary of the Treasury or his Vice President if she drops out and urges her supporters to back Sanders like candidate Obama made Hillary Clinton his Secretary of State in exchange for her dropping out of the race.

    It’s hard to imagine Sanders winning that kind of support from superdelegates and through horsetrading during the convention, and it’s hard to imagine Sanders supporters latching onto the consensus candidate after they’ve snubbed Sanders that way–especially if Sanders won the most delegates. That being said, it’s still possible that Biden could emerge from the convention with the nomination–even if he wins fewer delegates than Sanders.

    As things stand now, however, we’re looking at Sanders emerging as the Democrat nominee to run against President Trump, and if that’s what happens, voting to reelect Donald Trump will be a no-brainer for this libertarian capitalist. Bernie Sanders is an authoritarian socialist, and as the Democratic Party becomes increasingly authoritarian and socialist, it is only reasonable for libertarian capitalists to become increasingly Republican.

    1. Biden won’t pick Warren as VP, and even if he entertains it she won’t accept. She wants to be the queen and realizes that playing second fiddle will leave her close to 80 for her next run as president.
      Biden will pick a black woman, probably Stacey Abrams, to shore up the black vote. He would be stupid to pick Harris, as his Three Strikes authorship combined with her history of separating black families will be a ticket for failure.

      1. Dunno, Warren could be counting on a Biden heart attack. And first female VP is something. Ask Julia Louis Dreyfus.

      2. I agree with Biden picking Stacey Abrams or other black woman.

        I just don’t think Biden will get the nomination.

        It’s pretty clear that Trump is winning reelection no matter who Democrats choose and the Democrats know it too.

        1. Encouraging speculation on your running mate is a sure sign your campaign is struggling and you’re desperate to pick up some free media time – I fully expect Biden to start hinting at possible picks, but it won’t be Stacey Abrams he’ll be announcing, it’ll be Shirley Chisholm. Count on it.

          1. What about Michelle Obama? Biden kills like five birds with that one stone.

            1. Michelle Obama only weighs 14 lbs?

          2. Shirley Chisholm…HAHA. Nice one!

            1. Don’t speak ill of the long dead. Save it for recent dead.

        2. I should have led with, “Not that #littlegirlsniffer will win, but…”

      3. If Warren become Secretary of the Treasury or Vice President, she becomes a national figure in the center of policy for the next four to eight years–and the presumptive nominee like Biden is now when Biden leaves office. I mean, the only reason Biden is a contender is because he was vice president under Barack Obama.

        George H. W. Bush
        Al Gore
        Hillary Clinton
        Joe Biden

        That’s a list of contenders who were only contenders because of their cabinet positions or because they were vice presidents, and they all eventually won the nomination of their party. This why Senators resign to become cabinet secretaries all the time. Warren wants to be on that list.

        If Warren wants to be the boss, the clearest path to the White House, apart from winning the nomination outright, is to take a cabinet position with national exposure or become Vice President.

        1. I agree with that assessment.

          Although Trump clearly shows that government service is not necessary to be a great President. To be fair, Trump has been around/deal with his fair share of politicians and government type people. He got a lot of experience from that, I’m sure.

          Trump being a near anomaly, yeah, people like Warren know what government experience list to be on.

        2. But then there are John McCain, Mitt Romney, John Kerry, George W Bush…

          1. George W. Bush was prominent because he was a governor and because he was the son of a former president.

            Hillary Clinton, likewise, was both the wife of a former president and a former Secretary of State.

            Liz Warren can’t become the wife or daughter of a former president. She better settle for a cabinet position or Vice President.

            I”m not saying you have to be a cabinet secretary or Vice President in order to win the nomination. I’m saying that it’s the clearest path open to Liz Warren.

            She also can’t become a war hero like Washington, Jackson, Eisenhower, or Colin Powell. Cabinet secretary or Vice President. That’s her best bet.

            1. Isn’t Warren the great great great granddaughter of Sitting Bull?

              Hence, her Indian name: Speaking Bull.

      4. I don’t get the Stacey Abrams love. Has she ever done anything beyond losing that election a few years ago? I guess all that matters is that she checks multiple diversity boxes.

        1. Yup. She’s black. That’s it.

          Abrams is a die-hard Socialist.
          Stacey Abrams-Issues

          1. Well, there’s also the fact that she won’t let facts get in the way of the narrative no matter how delusional it makes her sound. She still refuses to admit she lost the gubernatorial election.

            1. True.

              She is a running joke even among people who voted for her.

    2. //Bernie Sanders is an authoritarian socialist, and as the Democratic Party becomes increasingly authoritarian and socialist, it is only reasonable for libertarian capitalists to become increasingly Republican.//

      I have been saying this for some time now. Between socialists and Republicans (even for all of their flaws), the choice is simple.

      1. A lot of my fellow libertarians are obstinate when it comes to grokking Duverger’s law. They refuse to accept that the deck is stacked against third party candidates, like progressives who refuse to accept the reality of market forces. If we pretend that Durverge’s law doesn’t exist, maybe it won’t affect us! Sounds a lot like progressives talking about market forces, doesn’t it?

        This isn’t to say that voting for Libertarian candidates or vocally supporting Libertarians isn’t useful. It just means that when the libertarian party gets voted into office, it will almost certainly be called the Republican party–because some Republican candidates adopts our polices as his own platform, much the way FDR adopted the Socialist party’s platform when he ran for office.

        The most effective means to power is persuading our fellow Americans to support libertarian ideas. Meanwhile, when one party openly adopts authoritarian socialism, the means to stop them is to support the opposing party–to whatever extent they oppose authoritarian socialism.

        If I don’t use my vote to oppose authoritarian socialism, then I’m not being a principled libertarian capitalist. I’m just being stubborn.

        1. Even if Libertarians (capital L = Libertarian party, which may or may not contain actual libertarians) were able to get elected, the way committee appointments work in the House and Senate would guarantee that the Libertarian was completely powerless.

          The more effective path is to work within one party (or both parties, but the Blue Team is actively hostile to liberty at the moment) to push it in a pro-liberty direction.

          Trump understood that a third-party candidate has no prayer. That’s why he staged what was, effectively, a hostile takeover of the party through the primary process. Libertarians would do well to take notes.

          1. The only way LP politicians can be the big kid on the block is when the Democrat Party nationally dies off.

            The LP can fill that void. (literally and figuratively)

          2. I think the best thing the LP could do in 2020 would be to not run a presidential candidate but instead endorse Trump for President on the grounds that his opponent is a goddamn communist and, desperate times calling for desperate measures, this unprecedented threat to the Republic calls for unity in the face of such an existential threat.

        2. The hope is that voting Libertarian will get Libertarian candidates in office and the GOP/Democrat Party to become more Libertarian.

          The big sticking point for Libertarians in office is how fiscally conservative we are. Old Greatest Gen and Boomers are never going to vote to repeal Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Gen Xers might but its less likely as that Generation reaches 65.

          So then some Libertarian change has gotten the GOP to partly accept drug deregulation and other social compromises. Trump is very Libertarian-ish. He is a great choice for Libertarians because he has proven willing to be Libertarian-ish and can do it.

          The Democrats have never been fiscally conservative, wanting to protect the US Constitution, nor all civil rights.

    3. 2016 Democratic Party presidential primaries

      Bernie Sanders did really good against Hillary until those Super Delegates almost entirely sided with Hillary.

      Hillary: delegates 2,842 votes 16,914,722
      Sanders: delegates 1,865 Popular vote 13,206,428
      (712 Super Delegates and Hillary got 571.5 of them)

      1. 571.5 ?? Did they chop someone in half?? Or was someone bipolar?

        1. Yeah, that was weird. I didnt look into it but let us know if you do.

      2. Exactly.

        The superdelegates are the “establishment Democrats”.

        If we thought the left was bad when they found out about how the electoral college works–and Hillary Clinton wasn’t elected despite getting the most votes–just wait until they get a load of their own party’s superdelegate picking Biden over Sanders–despite Sanders having more delegates.

        They’d have a full blown conniption.

        1. Yup. Establishment Democrats all have money. Which means that they have stocks and other financial portfolios that Sanders advocates going after.

          There is no way the Establishment Democrats will not fight Sanders.

          Same happened to Trump. The Establishment RINOs had a heart attack when Trump was winning the GOP Primary. McCain, Romney, et al knew that they could not get away destroying conservatism in the USA with Trump running the Republican Party.

    4. How Hillary becomes president.
      1. Sanders gets the nomination.
      2.DNC manuevers to get Hillary on the ticket for VP.
      3. Sanders does not kill himself.
      4. Voila.

  25. A new report from the Congressional Budget Office says the federal deficit will reach $1 trillion this year and continue to exceed $1 trillion per year for at least the next 11 years.

    “This is UNSUSTAINABLE!!”

    1. Mileposts like “$1 trillion” are insignificant.

      Here’s Gross Debt as a percentage of GDP.

      https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GFDEGDQ188S

      It should also be noted that when the Senate put up a bill that would have cut $772 billion from Medicaid, President Trump promised to sign it but both Reason staff and commenters here opposed it on the basis of what it didn’t do. If Trump had opposed the bill, I wonder how many of them would have supported it.

      1. Serious question: Are mileposts like “Total Public Debt exceeds 100% of GDP” insignificant?

        1. The definition of unsustainable is the inability to service our debt with our earnings, and when our debt is only 50% of the value of what we produce in a year, it’s better than when our debt exceeds 100% of the value of what we produce in a year.

          If $1 trillion only represented 50% of the value of what we produce in a year, we should be less concerned about a debt of $1 trillion than we are if $1 trillion represents 110% of the value of what we produce in a year.

          Absolute numbers aren’t the issue in whether our spending is sustainable. The unsustainability is a function of proportion. The question isn’t whether we should spend $10,000 a month on a mortgage. The question is whether $10,000 represents 10% of our income or 150% of our income.

          1. But the viability of servicing debt also depends on terms, in addition to the amount of debt. As long as money is “free”, not much of a problem.

            1. Yeah, if and when Europe’s economy gets better and interest rates normalize . . .

              We won’t be able to roll our debt over at these interest rates forever.

              They had negative interest rates in Germany for a while! Investors were willing to pay the German government to borrow their money for fear of what might happen to their money if they invested it in the German economy.

              For far too long, the rest of the world has treated dollar denominated debt as a safe haven because we’re the prettiest horse in the glue factory. When their economy straightens out so that they don’t have negative interest rates (or close to it), they’re going to notice that we might be prettier than some of the other horses, but we are in line in a glue factory!

    2. The Top Five Contributors to National Debt by Percentage
      Franklin D. Roosevelt: President Roosevelt had the largest percentage increase. Although he only added $236 billion, this was a 1,048% increase from the $23 billion debt level left by President Herbert Hoover. The Great Depression took an enormous bite out of revenues. The New Deal cost billions. But the biggest cost was World War II. It added $209 billion to the debt between 1942 and 1945.3

      Woodrow Wilson: President Wilson was the second-largest contributor to the debt, percentage-wise. He added $21 billion, which was a 727% increase over the $2.9 billion debt of his predecessor. Wilson had to pay for World War I. During his presidency, the Second Liberty Bond Act gave Congress the right to adopt the national debt ceiling.

      Ronald Reagan: President Reagan increased the debt by 186%. Reaganomics added $1.86 trillion. Reagan’s brand of supply-side economics didn’t grow the economy enough to offset the lost revenue from its tax cuts. Reagan also increased the defense budget by 35%.3

      George W. Bush: President Bush added $5.849 trillion, the second-greatest dollar amount. This was a 101% increase, the fourth-largest percentage increase. Bush launched the War on Terror in response to the 9/11 attacks. It includes the War in Afghanistan, at $1.1 trillion, and the Iraq War, at $1 trillion. Military spending rose to a record level of $800 billion a year.
      2008 financial crisis: Approved a $700 billion bailout package for banks.

      Both Presidents Bush and Obama also had to contend with higher mandatory spending for Social Security and Medicare.

      Barack Obama: Under President Obama, the national debt grew the most dollar-wise. He added $8.588 trillion. This 74% increase was the fifth-largest. Obama fought the Great Recession with the $831 billion economic stimulus package.

      Obama increased defense spending to $855 billion. He sponsored the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

      Donald Trump
      FY 2020 – $1.281 trillion
      FY 2019 – $1.260 trillion
      FY 2018 – $1.271 trillion
      https://www.thebalance.com/us-debt-by-president-by-dollar-and-percent-3306296

      1. People will argue that congress is just as much to blame, but I don’t think that’s always the pertinent argument.

        Reagan dealt with a Democrat congress. They were going to have their way with him one way or another. He had bigger fish to fry. He wanted to increase spending to take on the Russians, cut taxes to stimulate the economy, and slash spending. He was lucky to get any of them from the Democrats–but he got two out of the three! He definitely traded the one (slash spending) for the other two–as you can hear from David Stockman.

        “Stockman was quoted as referring to Reagan’s tax act in these terms: “I mean, Kemp-Roth [Reagan’s 1981 tax cut] was always a Trojan horse to bring down the top rate…. It’s kind of hard to sell ‘trickle down.’ So the supply-side formula was the only way to get a tax policy that was really ‘trickle down.’ Supply-side is ‘trickle-down’ theory.”[7] Of the budget process during his first year on the job, Stockman was quoted as saying, “None of us really understands what’s going on with all these numbers,” which was used as the subtitle of the article.[7]

        After “being taken to the woodshed by the president”[8] because of his candor with Greider, Stockman became concerned with the projected trend of increasingly large federal deficits and the rapidly expanding national debt. On August 1, 1985, he resigned from OMB and later wrote a memoir of his experience in the Reagan Administration titled The Triumph of Politics: Why the Reagan Revolution Failed in which he specifically criticized the failure of congressional Republicans to endorse a reduction of government spending to offset large tax decreases to avoid the creation of large deficits and an increasing national debt.”

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Stockman#Office_of_Management_and_Budget

        “You can’t always get what you want”.

        —-Mick Jagger

        In Trump’s case, he was betrayed by members of his own party in the Senate, specifically Collins, Mukowski, and Rand Paul’s bunch. He fought like hell to cut Medicaid by $772 billion. It was passed in the House. Enough of his own Republicans voted against it. Meanwhile, Trump has done everything he can to keep us out of a direct engagement in Syria. He’s been negotiating with the Taliban for a long time to get us out of Afghanistan. He’s been complaining like hell about the Europeans not paying their fair share for the defense of Europe. There’s only so much he can do if the Republicans in his own party won’t vote to cut spending and the Democrats are so hostile to him that they want to impeach him at the drop of a hat. The spending they attribute to the Trump administration in the history books should come with asterisk.

        He’s not Emperor Xi. There’s only so much he can do.

        1. “He fought like hell to cut Medicaid by $772 billion”

          So when Trump lies and says he never intends to cut Medicaid but then tries to cut it how does that make you feel? Is the lying okay? Why can’t the politicians you support tell tbe truth about their intentions? Is Trump lying to you when he says he wants to cut Medicaid or is he lying to me when he says he’ll never cut Medicaid unlike the other Republicans?

          1. Well, for one thing, I don’t necessarily expect politicians to tell the truth about their own legacy. They’re politicians.

            At the time, President Trump said it was a harsh bill, but that he would sign it reluctantly–because it did some of the things he wanted a lot, like getting rid of the insurance mandate.

            He lobbied Senators hard to get them to pass that bill. This is what adults do. They don’t always get everything they want, but they look at the legislation that comes out of Congress and they weigh whether what they like is good enough to justify doing things maybe they don’t like.

            My point is that if Trump is willing to sign a bill that cuts $772 billion in Medicaid, then he’s head and shoulders above every president on the issue of entitlement reform since Johnson’s Great Society was launched. I look at Trump the same way I look at legislation. He’s got good points and bad points, and I think the good outweighs the bad–especially when I look at him issue for issue against someone like Bernie Sanders.

            And, no, I don’t see politicians putting their legacy in its best light as being an especially distinguishing characteristic. That’s what politicians do in a representative democracy. Might as well criticize fish for swimming in water or birds for having feathers.

            1. The American people don’t want Trump to cut Medicaid which is why so many Republican governors have expanded access to it. Going against the voters is a dangerous game you’re playing.

              1. Polling in the late 1940s did not show support for desegregating the military, but it was the right thing to do. Sometimes the right thing isn’t always popular.

                1. I should say polling likely didn’t show support for desegregating the military, not sure how much actual polling existed at the time.

                2. You’re right but there was a huge backlash from the voters right or wrong.

                  1. No there wasn’t troll.

                  2. Remind me did Truman win re-election after he desegregated the military? Why yes he did.

              2. “The American people don’t want Trump to cut Medicaid which is why so many Republican governors have expanded access to it. Going against the voters is a dangerous game you’re playing.”

                Libertarian capitalists are here to persuade them to stop wanting such stupid things. Regardless, claiming that you know what the people want to pay for when they’re only paying for it under the threat of criminal prosecution of they is absurd. If any taxpayers are paying for Medicaid willingly, they can continue to wiliingly contribute to charities that provide free healthcare for the poor after Medicaid is abolished.

                Socialism is all about using coercively collected taxes to redistribute wealth by way of government spending, with prices set by government and through providers that have been co-opted by government for that purpose. A libertarian and capitalist alternative has wealth redistributed by markets through assets owned by private hands, and prices set by markets. In case you’re unaware, markets are another word for people making choices.

                The problem with democratic socialism is that it’s insufficiently democratic. Markets setting prices and distributing wealth means that prices and distribution are done according to the will of the people. The reason you have to use the threat of criminal prosecution in order to collect taxes to pay for Medicaid is because most people wouldn’t do so willingly without the threat of criminal prosecution.

                Are there any other areas in which you want to throw people in jail for not sharing your opinion, or is Medicaid financing the only one?

              3. “The American people don’t want Trump to cut Medicaid which is why so many Republican governors have expanded access to it.”

                The American people don’t want to sacrifice their income to pay for other people’s free healthcare–and that’s why you have to threaten them with criminal prosecution in order to make them do it.

              1. Final US Senate vote 49-51
                H.R.1628 — 115th Congress (2017-2018)

                McCain – Nay
                Murkowski – Nay
                Collins – Nay

                1. Incidentally, those three are the anti-Trump people in the Senate.

                  1. McCain not so much any more.

  26. Toll rises to 21 from New Zealand volcano eruption

    Official inquiries into the Dec. 9 eruption and New Zealand’s response will take up to a year, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has said.

    But gun confiscation schemes only take weeks for some reason.

    1. Nobody needs an assault volcano?

    2. To be fair, it does take longer to melt down a *volcano* than, well, you know.

  27. “But it’s so much better when the people putting each other on the menu are power-wielding warmongers and corrupt bozos in high office.”

    I agree too bad this type of reporting and infighting is never reported or talked about when the corrupt bozo’s have a D next to their name.

  28. Senator Kelly Loeffler
    After 2 weeks, it’s clear that Democrats have no case for impeachment. Sadly, my colleague @SenatorRomney wants to appease the left by calling witnesses who will slander the @realDonaldTrump during their 15 minutes of fame. The circus is over. It’s time to move on! #gapol
    Twitter
    1/27/20 12:42 PM

    GO new Georgia US Senator!!!

    1. Let’s wait to hear from Doug Collins. Surely he has a better reason to run against Loeffler than it was his turn and he didn’t kiss all this Trump butt for nothing. I think Kemp might have appointed Loeffler to shore up the GOP’s base among suburban women and Collins either disagrees with the strategy or simply doesn’t give a shit about the GOP beyond his own political ambitions and we’re going to find out which one it is.

      1. Loeffler seems perfectly fine so far. Time will tell. Isakson was getting to be a real asshole for not resigning and letting someone else take over. These old timers just think that they cannot be replaced.

        Doug Collins is a true believer. A Chaplin and a Baptist. Not a good fit for all of Georgia.

    1. The Boeing 747 with red and gold stripes and no passenger windows

      *** facepalm ***

    2. On the one hand, if only one of them were exposed to the virus before they got on that plane, after a ride in a pressurized cabin with each other, all the way from China, they’ve breathed the contents of each other’s lungs repeatedly by now–so it’s safe to assume they’ve all been exposed.

      On the other hand, if we hadn’t picked them up and flown them here, they would have filtered back into the country, eventually, anyway, and we wouldn’t have been able to screen and/or treat every single one them without a doubt before they did so. So, I’m a big fan of this.

      If the only legitimate function of government is to protect our rights, then evacuating willing American citizens from a foreign city under quarantine and making sure each and every one of them is screened and treated before they mingle with the general population seems to me like a libertarian way to protect our property and our lives from a foreign threat.

      1. Keeping these passengers under doctor’s care for 5 days or whatever to see who gets sick is perfectly reasonable.

        Even if all these passengers get sick, we have the best healthcare in the World so that improves their chances greatly.

        1. Especially if they want that treatment, and I imagine they do.

          I doubt anybody got on that plane involuntarily.

          You’re in city under quarantine. You want out.

          You get out and you’re on an Air Force base, but you’re afraid you may have been exposed to a new virus. You want the best screening and care available. You want that treatment.

        2. It’s like when Reagan sent the troops to rescue those American medical students

          ”Every time there was a footstep in the hallway,” Miss Saccaro said, ”we were terrified because we thought they might be Russian or Cuban soldiers.”

          The discovery that the invaders were American, she said, brought hope for an evacuation and a sense of security.

          ”When we walked up the short hill to the airfield the next day,” Miss Saccaro said, ”there were American Rangers on the field and on the hills as far as I could see,

          ”They were all armed and waiting for any kind of sniper fire, and it was then that I realized that what they were doing – and the chances they were taking – were all to protect us. It made you feel proud to be an American.

          —-New York Times, November 6, 1983

          https://www.nytimes.com/1983/11/06/nyregion/students-reflect-on-grenada-invasion.html

          You’re in a foreign city under quarantine, you want to be rescued.

      2. Better to be quarantined here than there.

      3. To the bubble with them!

  29. You know what other warmonger had a mustache?

    1. Hillary Clinton?

    2. You know what warmonger has a beard?

      1. Hillary Clinton!

      2. “Had”… Bin Laden?

    3. Stalin?

  30. Trump should be the first and last witness. I wonder why Trump is afraid to testify? Hillary Clinton testified for 8 hours when accusations were leveled against her. So why is Trump so fearful? Is he a coward, a man with something to hide, and/or incapable of answering questions without looking like a complete degenerate idiot? If the phone call was perfect, if the accusations are so baseless shouldn’t Trump jump at the chance to explain himself under oath to the American people and this jury of Senators.

    1. Has he been called as a witness yet? Even the House never called him to testify. He can’t testify until called as a witness.

      1. Do you actually believe that? That if they would ask then he would.

        1. Arguing facts not in evidence. Do you have a crystal ball to state how he would have decided? He loved going on CNN despite their hostility to him, during 2016. It actually benefited him immensely, so it is obvious he has no fear of facing an adversarial questioner and the Republicans likely would have given him questions that would have strengthened his case. So, again, the Democrats never called him, your base assertion is based upon nothing, no evidence.

          1. But Trump and his representatives have clearly said they have obligation to tell the truth on TV. I’m talking about putting that hand on the Bible. Do you know what that means? Why is putting hand on the Bible such an important act? They kill people based off the things people say after putting their hand on that book.

            1. Again, arguing facts not in evidence. You are arguing that something that has not happened, has happened. Trump has not been called to testify, ergo you can’t argue he is afraid to testify. Why is that such a difficult concept to grasp?

    2. Hillary Clinton testified for 8 hours when accusations were leveled against her.

      So, is your recollection that HRC just trotted right down to Congress and testified eagerly?

      1. Hillary committed perjury for 8 hours, but was never called on it.

  31. Sessions, Bolton. Appointing scumbag idiots has consequences.

    1. I guess I’m not the only one who doesn’t understand 7-D Wizard Chess enough to appreciate Trump’s mastery of the game.

      1. Give them a job when everyone hates them.

        Buys some loyalty, sometimes.

  32. The military can’t get an accurate count of how many were injured during Iran’s attack on Iraq, how the hell do you expect Trump to have a correct answer. TDS

    1. Because the type of wounds being reported often have delayed symptoms, and therefore an accurate count is not possible at the time of the attack. Many soldiers would have not gone to sick call right away, because the military culture is to avoid going to sick call. They would only have gone after symptoms persisted or when their chain of command forced them too. Therefore it is not surprising that the number of TBIs being reported has increased as time has progressed. I have knee and back issues related to my time in the service, but I cannot collect any VA benefits (or it is an extremely difficult process) because I never went to sick call, just popped motrin and drove on. It is typical of soldiers to deal with injuries this way. Kind of like how pro-athletes will try to work through injuries that they should have treated.

      1. Uh, actually you can get VA benefits even if you didnt go to sick call.

        All you have to prove to a doctor that the VA sends you to is that you have a service connected disability. The doctor then determines what extent the disability is.

        Compression of joints is common for certain military fields.

        1. True but it is still a hassle and my insurance is adequate to treat it. So, at this point I haven’t decided to go through the hassle.

    2. The correct answer to the question of how many casualties the US suffered in the attack would be “I don’t know”. Or, as Trump was no doubt told at the time, “No casualties have been reported at this time”, which Trump took to mean “It has been reported there were no casualties”, absence of evidence not implying evidence of absence being beyond Trump’s reasoning skills. When it later turned out that there were in fact casualties, Trump being constitutionally incapable of admitting ignorance on any matter whatsoever, simply couldn’t admit that well, he didn’t know that at the time, but instead insisted he did know but didn’t consider those injuries to be real injuries, like bone spurs or something. Not being satisfied with demonstrating his ability to stick his foot in his mouth, Trump always insists you stay for the second act where he sticks it in up to his knee.

      1. Trump was correct and the Lefty Propagandists are wrong.

        In fact, the MSM is wrong most times.

        Trump likes to rub it in and his voters like him for it.

  33. Could it be because McConnell is trying to get the constituents of Utah and Alaska to call their senators and demand that they vote against witnesses (and possibly West Virginia for Manchin). Could McConnell’s announcement be a form of backdoor whipping? Or possibly a signal that voting for witnesses would be beneficial, as then the Republicans can finally question both the whistleblower and the Bidens? If the latter, it could be assumed that McConnell has a fairly good idea of what Bolton actually knows, and is certain it will not assist the Democrats.

    1. Why are you afraid of witnesses? I thought the accusations were baseless? The truth will set you free.

      1. No one is afraid of witnesses, except the Democrats. And everyone but paid sock puppets like you knows that the country long lost interest in this.

        1. If you really believe the bs you’re fed by right wing media then Trump should be witness No. 1 since the accusations are baseless and Trump is so perfect. Wouldn’t you want your perfect withess front and center?

          1. Trump doesn’t need to testify. Why should he? This isn’t going anywhere. Moreover, listening to people like you cry about it makes him not testifying all the better. He is going to be President until 2025. You have been lied to and played for a fool.

            Life is really hard if you are stupid. You know?

            1. Doesn’t need to? It’s an opportunity to educate us. 50% of the voters and a larger majority of independents want Trump removed from office. You’d think you might to want convince us that we’re mistaken and who better to do that then the man in the middle of this, Mr. Trump. I’ll be voting to “impeach” him in Nov 2020 and I imagine that 50% will to especially if the Republicans prevent witnesses because 70% want witnesses and documents produced. You can’t have a trial without witnesses.

              1. 50% of the voters and a larger majority of independents want Trump removed from office.

                That is just a complete lie. Trump is polling better now than before impeachment

                http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval-6179.html

              2. “It’s an opportunity to educate us.”
                Heh. You’ve already decided- he’s guilty of whatever it is you need him to be in order to remove him from office. Nothing he testifies to will change your mind about that.

          2. Yeah, because no one has ever been acquitted after not being called to the stand.

            1. If this was a trial the trial judge, i.e. Republican senators, would have been overturned by the appellate court and the relevant witnesses and documents would have been accepted into evidence. If you make the analogy that this is like a criminal trial then you can’t pick and choose. For instance you can’t complain about “due process” while you’re rigging the damn thing my suppressing relevant witnesses and documents. But of course you’re not an honest person John so I wouldn’t expect you to even understand this.

              1. You are not a trial judge. You are just a partisan idiot. So, what you would do in your idiot fantasies really doesn’t count for much.

                1. You know I have differing opinions on policy but I have no doubts about the character of Republicans these days. You mfers are something out of Orwell’s 1984.

                  1. Remind me again who uses cancel culture? Who goes to events with the exact purpose of barring others from attending or hearing the speakers? Who has called for socialism? Who requires adherence to the government almighty? Hint: it isn’t so much the right.

                  2. “”You mfers are something out of Orwell’s 1984.””

                    Trying to convict someone by innuendo and hersay is very 1984. Does the venue matter?

                  3. LOL, get the fuck out of here with that lefty gaslighting. It’s not us that’s labeling the refusal to put an iron fist around the sharing of internet content as “authoritarian.”

                    And definitely don’t act like you give a shit about “character.” I have an eight-year period from 2009-2017 that provides enough proof of the exact opposite.

              2. A trial judge would allow the defense to call their own witnesses, especially if the case hinges on the propriety of the accused use of power when asking for an investigation of another.

              3. If, if, if, if.

                Get back to us when you come out of that rage-induced fog.

      2. How do you get I am afraid of witnesses? I offered two possible scenarios as to McConnell’s possibly motives, at no point did I or did I not state rather or not witnesses were required or a good thing.

      3. “Why are you afraid of witnesses? I thought the accusations were baseless?”

        1) Non sequitur
        2) Pity you believe the “more witnesses” chant is about obtaining truth.

    2. Just wait until the “whistleblower” testifies behind a screen and with voice modification.

      1. Yawn. That’s yesterday’s bs.

        1. Why are you afraid of witnesses? Taking a page out of your playbook, just as pertinent to your statement as you using that question was to my statement.

          1. Call the whistleblower. Call the Bidens. Call Zelensky. I keep hearing you morons claiming “Biden stopped the prosecution of his son” Fox News radio said it this morning and yesterday evening. Y’all are being fed pure lies. You should ask yourself why you’re being lied to. If it takes getting Biden there to flush out that lie then good will come of it. Y’all may stop believing a lie. It’s amazing how many lies y’all are told. I feel bad for you.

            1. The video of Biden saying he stopped the investigation into Burisma is all over the internet. You should learn how to use Google sometime.

              Biden admitted it. And it is also public record that his dead beat son was paid $80,000 a month to sit on the board of Burisma for reasons no one can seem to explain and that Hunter Biden was given billions of dollars to manage by the Chinese also for reasons no one seems to be able to articulate.

              1. You really are a brainwashed sob John. Biden was bragging about getting the prosecutor fired. He mentioned “stopping an investigation of Burisma”. You’re just so fucking stupid.

                1. The two being linked is what Trump wanted to investigate. Was there evidence that Biden used his authority to get a prosecutor fired to block an investigation into his son. Rather or not that is true, we only have Biden’s word for it.

                  1. Trump is accused of launching an investigation for purely personal reasons, if his defense can establish he had probable cause to ask for an investigation, then it established it wasn’t for personal reason (or at least creates great doubt about it being purely for personal reasons). I am neither saying he was or wasn’t right, I cannot know what is in his mind, but the case hinges on the Democrats proving that his motives were impure. It is perfectly acceptable for the accused to demonstrate that his motives were innocent. To deny him the right to call witnesses he believes are crucial to establishing his motives (and remember even if Biden did not do what Trump believes he did, it doesn’t establish the fact that Trump couldn’t reasonably believe he did, but that is another discussion) then you are running a kangaroo court just to justify a predetermined outcome.

            2. Have I claimed Biden stopped the investigation of his son, I have stated it is alleged he has, which is worth reporting. And thus his testimony is pertinent to the charges of abuse of power lodged against Trump. See the difference?

              1. It’s not alleged any longer. That Shorkin guy came clean and admitted he made it up. You’re being lied to. You sound like a guy interested in the truth well it’s not true that Biden bragged about stopping a prosecution.

                And look at John right above you claiming “Biden said he stopped the investigation into Burisma”.

                1. They can’t even get on the same page. Not surprising, since team Trump’s narratives usually go through 3 or 4 iterations before they firm up.
                  I can’t even remember where team Trump ended with the Trump Tower meeting. Was it “it didn’t happen” or “it happened but it was a deep state conspiracy to make the Trumps look bad”?

                  1. That is how defenses work. There job isn’t to prove innocence it is to cast doubt on the defenses case. However, read my most recent response. I am not stating biden is or is not guilty. I am saying there is some circumstantial evidence that may warrant an investigation. The question is, in the impeachment was the investigation warranted or not. Without going into the propriety of Biden’s actions (which may be perfectly legitimate or may not) we cannot judge how proper Trump’s actions were. It is simple logic. To rule this line of questioning off limits, can only be to achieve a pre-conceived outcome.
                    It would be like trying someone for murder, when they claim self defense, without questioning if they were in danger. What were their motives? The whole impeachment procedure hinges on what the Senators believe Trump’s motives were. He (and by extension his defense attorneys) has every right to present there defense of his motives. Why do you want to deny him that right by ruling the question of Biden’s actions off limits?

                    1. *cast doubt on the prosecution case.

                    2. So what happened at Trump Tower, again? The story Trump and Jr. were selling was quite different depending on which time frame I limit my searches to.

                  2. “”They can’t even get on the same page. Not surprising, since team Trump’s narratives usually go through 3 or 4 iterations before they firm up.””

                    Sounds like the Trump haters going after Trump.

                2. “ I said, I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars. I said, you’re not getting the billion. I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money. Well, son of a bitch. (Laughter.) He got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time.”

                  Getting a prosecutor fired kinda stops an investigation. Maybe.

                3. Biden claimed he got a prosecutor fired, he states his motives are because the prosecutor was corrupt but the prosecutor also happened to be investigating his son’s company. That is, arguably, worth looking into. I am not stating it is a smoking gun, but it does warrant an investigation. Do you understand this?

  34. Will Bolton Get To Testify Against Trump? All Signs Point to Yes.

    Concentrate and ask again.

    1. I will be very surprised if he does. The Republicans just want this over and the Democrats don’t want him to testify. They just want to pretend they do. If Bolton testifies, his testimony will never meet the expectations being placed on it and will almost certainly be a bust. If he doesn’t, then Democrats can forever imagine Bolton’s testimony to be how they want it to be and claim they would have had Trump if only those evil Republicans had called Bolton.

      The Democrats don’t have anything and will choose fantasy Bolton over real Bolton. You watch.

      1. The American people by huge margins would like witnesses and documents. See you in Nov asshole.

        1. Strong the butthurt is with this one.

          1. Big deal, I called him an asshole. He is an asshole.

            1. How would you know anything about John since you’re new? Unless you’re a new sock which seems more likely than John’s an asshole.

              I find John perfectly pleasant to discuss topics.

        2. See you in Nov asshole.

          That’s what you said in 2015

          1. Yeah it’s a divided country. I’m under no illusions. You’ll never hear me saying “everybody knows”.

            1. Trump is almost certain to be re-elected. The impeachment stunt and the economy have sealed it for him.

        3. “”The American people by huge margins would like witnesses and documents.””

          To what end? Even if it proves guilt, guilt did not matter in the last impeachment.

      2. fantasy Bolton

        Nice band name.

        1. “There was nothing wrong with my name until I was about 12 years old. And then that no-talent ass clown got famous and began winning Grammys.”

  35. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R–Ky.) says Republicans don’t have enough votes to block witnesses from testifying in the impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump, which means we could soon see John Bolton, Trump’s former national security adviser, giving us a personal preview of his new book from the Senate floor.

    The linked article is from last night. The MSMs were already walking it back this morning on the drive-time radio updates.

    The current Pravda is that McConnell may not have the votes.

    When CBS, CNN, N/MSNBC et all are forced to publicly admit that they’re unsure of something that would be good for them and bad for the GOP, it’s probably 60/40 that it’s gonna wind up being good for the GOP

    1. +1000

      The MSM Propagandists are liars so 90%+ of what they opinion are lies.

      1. Someone pointed out something interesting above.

        The Dems are taking it for granted that all the red state Dems are going to vote in lockstep. The impeachment shows that this might not be the case.

    2. Update: Drive time radio news blurbs(NBC? CBS?) have walked it back to Schumer saying that the Dems probably don’t have the votes.

  36. Dems have to weigh whether Bolton’s testimony is worth the House document on Michael Atkinson’s testimony and the sordid tale of how the so called whistleblower launched this farce.

    The Dems oft repeated “no one is above the law” will not sound so lofty when the prosecutors are called out for hiding exculpatory evidence.

  37. I’m legitimately curious at this point, as to what act the Islamofascist caliphate of Iran could possibly commit that would be so extreme and unpardonable that the Useful Idiots on the Reason staff would not hurl themselves on their swords to blame away.

    Because shooting down commercial airliners, routinely attacking shipping vessels in international waters, marching their armies into neighboring countries to kidnap and ransom tourists, issuing fatwahs on authors, funding most of the world’s terrorism and threatening to nuke the planet to bring about the 12th Imam isn’t enough.

Please to post comments