Lamar Alexander, a Key GOP Senator, Says Trump's Delay of Ukraine Funds Was 'Inappropriate'—but Not Impeachable

Plus: Britain's last day in the European Union, political ads at the Super Bowl, John Delaney drops out of the presidential race, and more...


Impeachment endgame. It was probably inevitable, but now it looks certain: The Senate will not remove President Donald Trump from office. 

The Senate is set to debate whether or not to hear additional witnesses in Trump's impeachment trial today, following reports that former National Security Adviser John Bolton's forthcoming book will say that Trump withheld aid to Ukraine in an attempt to pressure the country into investigating former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter. 

But yesterday Sen. Lamar Alexander (R–Tenn.), the likely swing vote on the question, announced that he would not support hearing any additional witnesses. And with that, it looks all but certain that the trial will end and Republicans will vote to acquit the president. 

Trump won't get off without some scolding from his party. Alexander's announcement came in the form of a letter saying, essentially, that it was "inappropriate" to delay aid to Ukraine but it's not an impeachable offense. 

Here's the key passage from Alexander's letter

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

There is no need for more evidence to prove that the president asked Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden and his son, Hunter; he said this on television on October 3, 2019, and during his July 25, 2019, telephone call with the president of Ukraine. There is no need for more evidence to conclude that the president withheld United States aid, at least in part, to pressure Ukraine to investigate the Bidens; the House managers have proved this with what they call a "mountain of overwhelming evidence." There is no need to consider further the frivolous second article of impeachment that would remove the president for asserting his constitutional prerogative to protect confidential conversations with his close advisers.

It was inappropriate for the president to ask a foreign leader to investigate his political opponent and to withhold United States aid to encourage that investigation. When elected officials inappropriately interfere with such investigations, it undermines the principle of equal justice under the law. But the Constitution does not give the Senate the power to remove the president from office and ban him from this year's ballot simply for actions that are inappropriate.

The question then is not whether the president did it, but whether the United States Senate or the American people should decide what to do about what he did. I believe that the Constitution provides that the people should make that decision in the presidential election that begins in Iowa on Monday.

Rep. Justin Amash (I–Mich.) is disappointed:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D–Calif.), meanwhile, doesn't have nice things to say about Trump's defense, which argued against the notion that Trump did anything inappropriate at all. She said yesterday that Trump's lawyers have "disgraced" themselves, and she raised the possibility of disbarment. 

According to CNN, the Senate may hold the final vote to acquit Trump as early as today.


Brexit is finally happening. Today is Britain's last day as part of the European Union. The celebrations will be "muted," according to The New York Times:

Flags will line Parliament Square and The Mall, the ceremonial avenue leading to Buckingham Palace, and government buildings will be lit up in the red, white and blue of the Union Jack.

A countdown clock will be projected onto the front of 10 Downing Street, the prime minister's official residence, along with a commemorative light display to "symbolize the strength and unity" of the four nations of the United Kingdom, the government said.

But a campaign for a celebratory 11 p.m. chime from Big Ben—the great bell of Parliament's clock tower, which is currently silenced for restoration work—did not succeed.


President Trump and former New York Mayor (and Democratic presidential candidate) Michael Bloomberg will both be running campaign ads during the Super Bowl this weekend. Each ad cost $10 million


NEXT: Review: The Rhythm Section

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 or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. John Delaney is dropping out of the presidential race.

    Don’t you have to be in the race first?

    1. Hello.



      /continues grating parmigiano.

    2. “Don’t you have to be in the race first?”

      Sounds like today’s conservatives and the culture war.

      1. Crazy Old Man Socialist 2020!

        1. Failed ideology FTW!

      2. Or today’s liberals and the political war.

      3. Oh, man, Artie, today’s really gotta hurt for you.

        The UK, under Johnson, is throwing your globalist claptrap in your face while, back home, Trump’s surging on the day the Senate quashes what is possibly the final impeachment attempt and the death of #resist.

        I understand how you must feel. How you must be flailing out, in a mad tantrum of loss.

        And I just can’t help but laugh, uncontrollably, at you and yours.

        1. Uh, excuse me, but just like Charlie sheen, the rev is “winning”. Probably even has some of that “tiger blood”. I wouldn’t mess with him if I were you. He might decide to revoke your “permit” to have your own beliefs! He’s that important!


    3. Dang, I’ve seen Mulaney on Comedy Central before and he’s a pretty decent comedian but I had no idea he was running for president.

  2. California is looking into a state-based single-payer health care system, again.

    They’re not in the red enough. AND YES THAT RED HAS MULTIPLE MEANINGS, COMRADES.

    1. Is it Russian red or Chinese red?

      1. When it comes to healthcare, it could be blood or ink.

    2. Should be amusing if this actually goes through and doctors have their salaries and their services capped as a means of keeping costs under control.

  3. The postal workers union has endorsed Sen. Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.) for president…

    Once everyone is working for the state they want to be in a favored position.

    1. So, “postal is going Sanders”?

  4. “Lamar Alexander, a Key GOP Senator, Says Trump’s Delay of Ukraine Funds Was ‘Inappropriate’…”

    What was “withholding” has now become, in a fit of honesty, “delay”.

    1. And of course he got some scolding: If there’s one thing the uniparty agree on, it’s that it’s improper to investigate their own corruption.

    2. No, it was a withholding per the definition of the word. Just because it was released later does not mean it wasn’t previously withheld. Words have meanings. 2 + 2 = 5 only in 1984 and Trump town.

      1. No, it was delayed, not withheld, as normal review processes occurred. The same ones that occurred for other designated aid. It was a 5 year dispersment, it did not require immediate dispersal. Many laws on the books require review, especially for things such as military exports, see Export/Import laws that have to go through various executive agencies.

      2. “”Words have meanings. 2 + 2 = 5 only in 1984 and Trump town.””

        Not just Trump town. Liberal town too when they call the border detention centers “concentration camps”.

      3. De Oppresso Liber
        January.31.2020 at 12:08 pm
        “No, it was a withholding per the definition of the word….”

        Your pedantry is amusing…………..
        But stupid.

      1. You keep dodging… were you this upset at the 7 times GAO claimed Obama operated illegally?

        Do you realize the GAO is not a judicial agency, they are the Congressional lawyers basically. They are not non partisan. They are often at odds with other government legal groups such as the OLC and they are not always right in actual judicial cases.

        You seem to be willfully ignorant on this point.

        Likewise you will see their complaint is over 5 days of delay. EARTH SHATTERING.

        1. watabout obama duuuuuuurrrrr. Who gives a fuck about Obama? I didn’t vote for him and I’m not a fan.

          GAO is non partisan, and a much better authority on legality and ethics in government than a Trump supporter. The OLC is partisan, especially when they report to Barr, the ultimate partisan hack.

          And no one has placed any importance on the length of withholding, it is the reason and the cover up. Idiot.

      2. However, the OMB ruled it was completely legal. So you have competing agency rulings. Which means your citation is not proof, but an opinion.

      3. De Oppresso Liber
        January.31.2020 at 12:08 pm

        More stupidity.

  5. Pee-wee Herman is set to stage a dark-and-gritty comeback.

    He already did that in Buffy the Vampire Slayer.

    1. Ah, but this time it’s as a Presidential candidate.

      1. I’d watch Pee-wee Goes to Washington.

    2. Damn, didn’t he get in enough trouble for coming the first time?

    3. Pee-wee Herman is set to stage a dark-and-gritty comeback.

      He plays Adam Shiff in the upcoming “Ed Buck Rides Again”?

  6. Alphabet, Google’s parent company, is putting a lot of resources into quantum computing.

    Oh, boy.

  7. “House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D–Calif.),[…]said yesterday that Trump’s lawyers have “disgraced” themselves, and she raised the possibility of disbarment….”

    Ha and ha.
    She’s also threatened to hold her breath and stamp here feet!

    1. She’s also threatened to hold her breath and stamp her


      1. Today her and Shumer are saying if the Senate doesn’t vote, on witnesses, the way they want that they will not consider this a legitimate vote and will continue to press the issue. That seems like a winner.

        1. They’re going to open an investigation!

      2. Cloven hooves.

    2. Shit completely lost.

    3. “”She’s also threatened to hold her breath and stamp here feet!””

      She needs to learn how to say how dare you.

  8. Today is Britain’s last day as part of the European Union.

    London tomorrow.

    1. Let the rending of garments on British campuses, the art community, and all of Scotland commence.

      1. It’s not well known that the EU has an office for aid to ‘distressed areas’, which need not be, but can be countries. According to Judt in “Post War”, Scotland was receiving annual subsidies from that office, along with major support from England.
        It looks like Scotland may have to up its booze deliveries a bit.

        1. Scotland’s one of the biggest radical left-wing welfare states in Europe, which is why they overwhelmingly voted to stay in the EU.

          They’re making noises now about actually declaring independence so they can get back on the EU tit.

          1. There’s a rule in rock-climbing that you don’t let go of the one you’re hanging onto until you have a firm grasp of the next one.
            Bailing on the UK and hoping the EU (Germany) will be thrilled to support one more failed economy is a reach even for the brain-dead left.

    2. The ice age is coming, the sun is zooming in
      Engines stop running, the wheat is growin’ thin
      A nuclear era, but I have no fear
      ‘Cause London is drowning, and I, I live by the river

      1. All across the town, all across the night
        Everybody’s driving with full headlights
        Black or white, you turn it on, you face the new religion
        Everybody’s sitting ’round watching television

        London’s burning with boredom now
        London’s burning dial nine-nine-nine-nine-nine
        London’s burning with boredom now
        London’s burning dial nine-nine-nine-nine-nine

  9. After Pelosi got done saying the Impeachment wasn’t real, there was no real trial, and everyone who defended the president should be disbarred…

    Media quickly followed suit.

    “It’s not a real trial and it’s not a real exoneration,” @KirstenPowers says.

    “And it’s a cover-up,” @CarlBernstein adds. “That’s what the Senate has now done. They have covered up what the President of the United States has done.”

    In behaving as they have, Republicans are managing not only to deprive the president of a legitimate acquittal in the eyes of Americans (who overwhelmingly want a real trial), but also to convince voters that Republicans should not be entrusted with power. – Jennifer Rubin

    Remember… it’s only real if the liberals get their way.

    1. Nancy’s Craziness:

      “”He will not be acquitted. You cannot be acquitted if you don’t have a trial. You don’t have a trial if you don’t have witnesses and documentation and all of that. Does the president know right from wrong? I don’t think so.””

      “I don’t know how they can retain their lawyer status, in the comments that they’re making, I don’t think they made the case. I think they disgraced themselves terribly in terms of their violation of what our Constitution is about and what a president’s behavior should be.”

      1. The Democrats have shown themselves to be nothing more than Stalinist bastards that should never be near the levers of power again.

      2. I think Nancy has gone completely around the bend. She needs to be put on a no fly list and Airforce 3, or whatever it’s called, needs to be permanently grounded.
        She’s a disgrace.

      3. She doesn’t seem to understand that dismissed for lack of evidence is better than acquitted.

    2. No one other than the Democrats and a few “independents” who vote Democrat in every election give a shit if this is a “real” trial or not–because it’s been a cooked-up, ad hoc circus ever since Mueller Claus left lumps of coal and the Horowitz report showing that the FBI blatantly lied to get its FISA warrants approved. That blew up the carefully constructed “rUSsiaN CoLLuSioN!” angle they were hoping to use to actually get him, so they needed to come up with something fast before the 2020 campaigning season got into full swing.

      1. +100000

      2. The cooked up circus started the day after Hillary lost.

    3. Well yeah. you think you can have a show trial where all witnesses and material evidence isn’t allowed, and people are just going to sit back and applause? Mitch has stated from the beginning that he intended to make this impeachment a farce and that he wasn’t interested in finding the truth. You want people to say nice things about traitor’s party? Then let the truth out, compel Trump to testify under oath (incredible cowardice and shame that a president with so many associates in prison has avoided going under oath) and take the consequences that come with the truth. Or keep your fat demi god and let people call you the liars and cowards that you are. So what are you bitching about?

      1. Fuck off Jeff, you lost. Again.

        Sekulow: “After 31 or 32 times you said you proved every aspect of your case… [pauses for response] That’s what you said.”

        Schiff: “We did.”

        Sekulow: “Well then I don’t think we need any witnesses.”

      2. There were 25000 pages of evidence allowed into the Senate baby jeffery. Nice lies. Or is it ignorance. Probably the latter out of consistency.

        1. Yes, members of the senate or congress are known to read everything given to them. Totally normal for no witnesses at a trial.

          1. Whooooooooosh go the goalposts!

      3. “The Heritage Foundation’s Thomas Jipping points out there are plenty of documents and witnesses already on the record. At the beginning of the Senate trial, the entire House record, which runs more than 25,000 pages, was entered into evidence.

        Even if the Senate chooses not to call additional witnesses, senators have the option of combing through “the House’s 107-page trial brief and statement of material facts; Trump’s 110-page trial memorandum; 45 pages of opinions from the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel; nearly 40 hours of presentation by the House managers and Trump’s team; and the answers of both parties to senators’ questions,” Jipping says.”

        Baby Jefferey, once again proving his ignorance.

      4. So, the truth isn’t out yet? In that case, how are you so sure Trump is guilty? Shouldn’t you, um, look at the evidence before reaching a conclusion?

        1. “The prosecution in a murder case that was written about in a paper shouldn’t call witnesses. The info is already out!”

          1. Murder? Is Hillary getting charged after all?

      5. Mitch has stated from the beginning that he intended to make this impeachment a farce

        The impeachment became a farce the minute Mueller Claus blew up in their face.

      6. De Oppresso Liber
        January.31.2020 at 12:13 pm
        “[…]So what are you bitching about?”

        We’re not bitching, you pathetic piece of lefty shit. We’re laughing at you and all the rest of the TDS victims who are too immature to understand that YOU LOST! AGAIN!
        Now, fuck off and die. Let the adults go about their business absent your whining.

        1. Winning so hard you destroy the republic. Bravo!

          1. Stop being such a drama queen.

    4. Technically, I think the Senate voting down the articles of impeachment without any more deliberation is the correct legal and procedural move. The articles and evidence presented by the House simply don’t meet the threshold.
      The problem for Republicans is it makes them look weak and corrupt for not debating or allowing witnesses. Of course, if witnesses are allowed it probably hurts Democrats more.
      Regardless of how they play this, I think Democrats are going to claim victory with the help of the media.

      1. Genius. The Democrats are going to claim victory regardless of outcome.


        You are prescient, wise, and beyond peer.

        1. “The Democrats are going to claim victory regardless of outcome.”

          Fuck are you talking about? That is straight out of Trump’s playbook. Like when he lost all his daddy’s money and had to take a job as a clown on a reality TV show. Big Win!

          1. This meltdown of yours is even funnier than when Mueller Claus butt-fucked your hopes and dreams.

  10. Abuse of power is impeachable.

    Consistently applied, this might have gone a different way.

  11. Dershowitz is forced to write a follow up explainer stating what his position actually was after the media parsed and rewrote his statements (including reason) during the trial.

    1. The laughable straw man they constructed out of his argument was nuts. It wasn’t that difficult of an argument to understand, and their version bore little resemblance to the original. It makes one suspect that the folks stomping those straw men were not so much ignorant as mendacious.

      1. Bullshit. He clearly said what he said. It’s on video.

        Maybe it’s not what he meant to say, but it is what he said.

        1. But enough about Biden.

        2. That is idiotic. He didn’t clarify by saying “That isn’t what I meant to say”. Their interpretation is completely at odds with what he said. Even edited to take snippets out of context it clearly doesn’t mean what they are saying. In fact, it is fairly close to the opposite.

          Again, like a trolling sock puppet, it isn’t so much ignorant as it is mendacious.

          1. I’ll go with both and not bother to pick the predominant disability.

      2. He only gave clear examples. Not sure why journalists can’t figure it out… but then again i remember the types of people who became journalists in college, usually those who failed out of Communications or English degrees.

        1. Not like you, who is so perceptive and impartial. Barf.

          1. Cry more Tony

    2. It’s all really nice that he wrote this, and it is more reasonable than what he actually said out loud during the arguments. Because, make no mistake, he did say exactly what everyone in the press said he said. And, worse, morally-bankrupt Republican Senators ran with the fallacious argument and used it as justification for their kangaroo trial.

      1. No, he actually didn’t. He was responding to a question that was awkwardly worded that asked about, and implied, that any personal benefit was impeachable even if it was a shared benefit.

        Dershowitz offered up clear examples of what he was attempting to say. The other lawyer just before he spoke was also clear in the meaning, both were arguing the same points.

        You have to take the answer out of context and remove the provided examples to get to what Reason claimed Dershowitz said.

      2. how’s that Koolaid taste? Fucking loon, at least Jim Jones had the courtesy to kill himself, you’re too incompetent to even get that right.

    3. Jesse the pedo whisperer is here to tell us what another favorite pedo of his really meant to say. Take it away, Pedo Whisperer!

      1. You really should stay away from that moniker given your history of asking to import them Jeff.

        1. And considering his party. Epstein was a Democrat and best buddies with the Clintons up until his second arrest.

          1. I’m not a dem. Never voted for one for federal office. I was a republican party office holder for 8 years, though.

        2. I don’t know what you are referring to. And I’m not Jeff. You might be 1% less confused about reality if you would realize who you are speaking with.

        3. Tell us what the dersh REALLY meant, pedo whisperer!

      2. Well… He’s talking to you, so you’d be the pedo.

        Good one, you sure got him!

  12. There is no need to consider further the frivolous second article of impeachment that would remove the president for asserting his constitutional prerogative to protect confidential conversations with his close advisers.

    “Well, … since you put it *that* way.”

  13. a commemorative light display to “symbolize the strength and unity”

    Strength Through Unity
    Unity Through Faith
    And as always, England Prevails

  14. And finally… Stop quoting Amash. He is a nobody. He is not a libertarian, he sold his ideals out defending the outcome of a corrupt IC trying to take out someone he and they disagreed with.

    1. And what is quoted from Amash is not an argument. It is whinging.

    2. Amash is 100x more libertarian than Trump. Trump is the source of corruption. His whole career has been one long exercise in lying, being given every possible advantage, and avoiding responsibility. Please provide me one example in Trump’s long career in the public eye where he personally took responsibility and admitted fault. (Other than when he has his lawyers do it on his behalf when he has to settle yet another fraud or charity fraud suit.)

      1. Jeff, nobody cares for your opinion here because of how ignorant the base of that opinion is.

        And it is pretty funny you ask for one time he has admitted fault when he just admitted it for hiring Bolton yesterday. Ignorant baby Jeffery.

        1. Haha ok. Any patriotism from his past? Go on, he’s been in the public eye since the late 70’s. Surely at some point he did something selfless for America in all that time. Whats that? He robbed a veteran’s charity?! Huh, he dodged the draft by illegally providing false information to the draft board, sending other, poorer men to die in his place?

      2. whole career has been one long exercise in lying, being given every possible advantage, and avoiding responsibility. Please provide me one example in Trump’s long career in the public eye where he personally took responsibility and admitted fault. (Other than when he has his lawyers do it on his behalf when he has to settle yet another fraud or charity fraud

        Apply that to the woman you voted for.

        1. The hag could write a book blaming everyone else and not a single one of her fans would call her out for not accepting personal responsibility.

          1. Of course not. Nor will they accept responsibility for nominating possibly the only person in the world who could’ve lost to trump in 2016.

            And this year it won’t matter who they nominate. Haha.

            1. Whoever wins the nod for the dems is at risking of getting beat by a impeached president for the first time ever.

        2. Didn’t vote for her. I voted Johnson.

      3. Amash is 100x more libertarian than Trump.

        Ants are 100x more honest than goats.

        Seriously, Trump never claimed to be a libertarian. Not acting as a libertarian he’s effectively implemented more of the libertarian agenda than Amash could ever hope for. If Amash is 100x more libertarian than Trump, then libertarianism is ineffectual and its precepts and goals better served and met by libertarian-leaning Republicans and ‘outwardly motivated’ centrists.

        1. “…Not acting as a libertarian he’s effectively implemented more of the libertarian agenda than Amash could ever hope for…”

          Not least of which is his ability to keep lefty imbeciles steppin’ and fetchin’.

    3. He is not a libertarian

      Amash is Reason’s idea of a libertarian: A Trump-hating RINO. See also: Reason’s puff pieces on Weld, Alexander, et al.

  15. She said yesterday that Trump’s lawyers have “disgraced” themselves, and she raised the possibility of disbarment.

    And then Hillary becomes president?

    1. Actually, there’s a coronation involved.

      1. I thought the coronation wasn’t until Hillary’s “third” term for Life.

    2. We’ll see how Nancy really feels when she realizes her death is required for Hillary to become emperor.

      1. “We desire a sacrifice!” – Hillary Clinton, probably

  16. the Senate may hold the final vote to acquit Trump as early as today.

    Followed immediately by a scene like this.

    1. I’d pay good money to see Schiff get the modern version of the 1856 Sumner Caning. Hell, just to see them brawl period.

  17. I am no fan of Trump. Not by a long shot. That being said, if ordering the assassination of American citizens isn’t “impeachable,” well, do I need to explain further?

    1. Well, was this assassination done for *personal gain*?

      1. Or perhaps political “gain?”

        1. There you go! A *gain*!

    2. Of course it isn’t impeachable silly. Just like it isn’t an impeachable offense to sell an executive political commitment masked as a treaty while knowing that the Senate of which you’d need 2/3 support is harshly against it, along with all the experts and military leaders of your country. But who are they to decide, right? And of course it isn’t an impeachable offense to lie about an attack on your country’s embassy, along with your attempts to cover it all up, plus desecrating the memories of those citizens who’d been killed. Talk about 500+ drone attacks, which you are totally entitled to use, along with the USArmy which you can send away bombing a sovereign country without Congress’ approval of course, if you’d say this is an impeachable offense, then you are crazy! And who would be so heartless to try and stop Medicaid for All, the single best, fairest, normalest policy in the world, it is so moral and such a must have that you can surely ignore the Constitution and petty laws in order to be able to make it happen!

      1. What about using the DoJ to propose settlements that directs funds to favored interest/activist groups instead of the US Treasury?!? Surely that can’t be impeachable.

        1. Duh… But you know what’s the least impeachable offense of all? Using the FBI and DOJ to wiretap your political opponents, by using forged evidences, non-existent probable causes and hearsay as a basis for unconstitutional FISA warrants!

        2. Nevermind paying palletloads of un-marked bills as ransom to known terrorists. Totes allowed and definitely not impeachable.

          Nor is directing your AG to run untraceable guns to Mexico, then afterwards ignore Congressional subpoenas to answer for it.

          Speaking of running guns, it’s also not impeachable to conduct a gun running enterprise out of a US embassy with the goal of taking down another country’s leader.

          Also not impeachable to repeatedly lie to the American people. Nor to be caught on hot-mic. promising to another foreign leader that, when re-elected, he will hobble the US military’s ability to keep that foreign leader in check.

          1. Needs to be repeated.

            I just laugh at leftists who try to whine at me about the corruption and unconstitutionality of the Trump Administration. Were they asleep for the last 16 years!?

  18. Trump won’t get off without some scolding from his party.

    The scoldings will not be a one-way street, methinks.

  19. “Abuse of power is impeachable.
    Impeachment trials have witnesses.”

    Ukraine got the funds in time without any acquiescence to any investigation or even an announcement. The impeachment did have witnesses in the preliminary part and could had some in the trial if the Democrats didn’t put expediency over process. For Pete’s sake, the Democrats games have been so transparent yet Amash put his blinders on.

    1. Amash isn’t stupid–he knows full well what the game is.

      1. He needs to make himself cozy on that side since the other side is done with him.

    2. The willful ignorance. The only paying attention to parts of the story you want to pay attention to. It burns!

      1. Maybe if you did the Full Cobain you’d feel better.

        1. I’m jamming with him next Tuesday. And don’t make fun of the dude. Would you want to be married to Courtney?!

          1. Just remember to squeeze that trigger slowly.

      2. Are you Amash’s sister? or just a fanboy?

        1. That’s commie kid in his best effort at humor.

          1. Don’t think it’s Commie kid. More likely, Hihn. We’ll know for sure when the bold face ass-rape threats come out.

            1. Or Mary. Or one of the other trolls that have nothing better to do with their pathetic lives than post 10s of posts per article under different screen names.

              At least the Indian spammers presumably get paid for their efforts.

        2. LOL, you are arguing with a guy who calls himself “Ghost of Richard Nixon”. If your mom could see you…

          1. Mocking. They’re mocking you, not arguing.

  20. Not impeachable? NOT IMPEACHABLE???!!!!!

    #TrumpUkraine is literally the biggest scandal in world history. Yes, it surpassed even #TrumpRussia, which as we all know, concluded with Robert Mueller proving Putin’s Puppet has been a Russian intelligence asset since 1987.


    1. #Literally

  21. And yet, hasn’t Trump done more for Ukraine than the other guy before him? Wasshisname? Barry Alabama?

    1. Rufus, that’s irreverent, uhh…, irrelevant and you know it.

      1. Well, now that you mention it, it was an irrelevant argument.

        1. Which is why you jumped up to cry about it.

          Did you ever get around to paying your mortgage?

    2. weren’t the Dems jumping up and down, wringing their pearls over how we left our poor ally Ukraine to face the Russian hordes alone? Wasn’t aware they were an ally, but didn’t Obama refuse to give them military aid that had been voted on, including anti-missile systems?

  22. So do the Ds now open an investigation into Trump’s acquittal?
    That should be good for the rest of the time he’s in office, even assuming re-election.

    1. Graham is already opening a Senate investigation into the ICIG. Schiff still has refused to release the transcripts of that deposition.

  23. OMG! Major new Drumpf scandal!

    Coronavirus task force another example of Trump administration’s lack of diversity

    And some people are OK with leaving this absolute maniac in office?


    1. “And some people are OK with leaving this absolute maniac in office?”

      Yes. It appears to range between 38 and 44 percent, concentrated in the uneducated backwater jurisdictions where superstition, backwardness, ignorance, and bigotry are the principal influences.

      1. True, but this time you forgot to stress the economic aspect of the Drumpf phenomenon. I like your posts better when you mention the well-documented fact that Drumpf performed best in 2016 among voters in the lowest income brackets.


      2. Looks like you’re still smarting from getting your ass handed to you over the last ten years.

        1. In his case, you probably need to start in 1989; a bad year for ‘our betters’.

        1. Rev hardest hit, as he realizes that he’s the clinger who needs to open wider.

      3. Could you repeat that? I wasn’t listening.

      1. Didn’t the NYT have an op-ed last week claiming that a desire for a travel ban to and from China was proof of racism and xenophobia?

  24. So, once this impeachment distraction is over, we have the Super Bowl. The Olympics aren’t until the summer.

    What do the Democrats do to distract the American people from the shit pile of policies the Democrat presidential candidates are advocating?

    If Bernie Sanders wins in both Iowa and New Hampshire, people are going to start noticing that the best they’ve got going is a socialist shit stain.

    That can’t be good for business!

    1. I’d say they should try accusing Trump of some kind of sex scandal, but they’ve already thrown that shit up against the wall so many times—and none of it ever sticks.

      1. I just don’t get it. It really shouldn’t be this hard to make Trump look like the total narcissistic scumbag he is yet everytime they try to do it they remind people just how shameless and full of shit and hypocritical they themselves are. It’s almost like as a collective they are no better than him personally and he is just as bright as the lot of them. I can’t honestly believe I ever thought for a second any of these fuckers had an intelligent bone in their body.

        1. This is the correct answer.

        2. Hear, hear…

      2. Conservatives should be proud of their tenacity in clinging to a cheating, lying, scandal-saturated adulter (also known as “the Defendant”) such as Donald J. Trump.

        1. Considering liberals are backed by a mass media complex saturated with rapists and pedophiles, they’re hardly in a position to criticize.

        2. You really hate average people, don’t you?

          1. I think he just hates himself more than he hates everyone else.

          2. Average people are way more successful than him, so of course he hates them.

            1. Any way you slice it, plenty of hate there

        3. Leave Bill Clinton out of this.

        4. Meh.

        5. Democrats should be proud of their tenacity in clinging to a cheating, lying, scandal-saturated adulter (also known as “the Defendant”) such as Bill Clinton.

        6. “Adulter”?

          The brilliant rev, everyone, let’s give him a hand! Haha.

      3. One of the lefty trolls here tried to tie him to Epstein, for pete’s sake!

    2. “What do the Democrats do to distract the American people from the shit pile of policies the Democrat presidential candidates are advocating?”

      Bloomberg dropped 10 large for a SB commercial; I understand it’s to promote gun control.
      Pretty certain that’s NOT the audience for that message.

      1. The Super Bowl audience is a wide cross-section of Americana. Or at least, it used to be.

        Share’s been in the 60-70 from pretty much the beginning. Some of those people don’t like scary black rifles, and want someone who’s not a Marxist who says he’ll get rid of them.

        Bloomberg’s got to do something to bump up his ~5 percent in polls.

    3. hey what do you think about Ron Rivera?

      1. The white hispanic?

    4. The Olympics aren’t until the summer.

      What’s the over/under on how much anti-Trump bullshit we’ll see from medalists?

      1. i don’t think Lindsey “I’m supposed to ski all the way down?” Vonn is in this time

        1. How about the women’s soccer team.

          * For all of you from the shithole countries that Trump wants to keep out, “soccer” is our name for “football”

          1. begs for “there’s a women’s soccer team?” but i know Mike Rapinoe is on the team he’s in the news all the time with the purple hair and whatnot

            1. “Whatnot”
              Is that what they’re calling it now?

          2. In fairness, football is a better name for soccer. I wish American football had a better name that didn’t highlight the part that doesn’t even account for 1 minute per match.

    5. “What do the Democrats do to distract the American people from the shit pile of policies the Democrat presidential candidates are advocating?”

      My guess is next week is when the MSM starts realizing there’s an epidemic underway in China, and starts up the fearmongering. If they can drop consumer confidence—aided by probably disruptions in Chinese supply to US sellers—all the better.

      Probably a lot of criticizing Trump’s moves with public health. If he advocates a travel ban, he’s a racist; if he says continue to be cautious, but no ban, he’s a heartless bastard who puts profits ahead of people. So, the usual.

  25. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D–Calif.), meanwhile, doesn’t have nice things to say about Trump’s defense, which argued against the notion that Trump did anything inappropriate at all. She said yesterday that Trump’s lawyers have “disgraced” themselves, and she raised the possibility of disbarment.

    Jesus fucking christ on a stick. These people are so eyeroll inducing.

    1. If there’s this much room for disagreement, just disbar everyone and be done with it.

      1. I don’t think they would want to put that motion up for referendum I think they’d find a lot of popular support on that measure.

    1. Jesus christ that is quite possibly the most retarded take I’ve seen yet. And I’ve listened to Jerry Nadler make his case multiple times. Just when I think Schiff or Nunes are total mediocrities and hacks Swalwell and fucking Nadler open their goddamn mouths and remind me of how all you have to be is the tallest midget.

      1. His on air gas relief was more intelligent than this.

      2. whoever let Sylvia Martinez on tv that many times should be fired. from a cannon.

      3. there’s some pretty funny comments though. Woulda figured it would slant more liberal, pleasantly surprised it isn’t

  26. Good video on the truth behind Roe v. Wade.

    In 2005 there was an article in the LA Times that revisited it and the author essentially said it wasn’t supposed to go that far.

    But leftists lie. They ALWAYS LIE.

    They’re using the same tactics with the 2A.

    Over turn Roe v. Wade.

    60 million dead kids IS a form of genocide.

    And it’s from the ghoulish minds of the progressive left.

    1. Superstition-addled anti-abortion absolutists will be among my favorite casualties of the culture war.

      1. Oh shut up you bigoted retard.

        1. I’d actually like to see him explain this position

          1. Human life is a superstition I guess?

      2. Stooges like you who will end up against a wall, facing the rifles of your comrades are my favorite casualties.

        1. let’s be real, it’ll probably be a negligent discharge that gets him. It’s not like our “betters” know how to use guns, and he’s dumb enough to look down a barrel to see why the bullet no come out

      3. Haha. Somewhere over the rainbow, eh rev?

        Keep waiting.

  27. Goddamn it, I feel like a chump for resigning.

    Oh, well, off to a jam session with Mitch Miller, The Chairman of the Board, Tupac and Jimi.

    Oh, yeah, one more thing. I was pretty bad, butt fuck anyone who celebrates Trump’s acquittal. You are morally bankrupt.

    And I can say as a former lawyer that Dersh is full of shit, and said exactly what he said.

    1. Maybe if you paid your mortgage, you’d be better at doing satire, AmSoc.

      1. It’s just so bad

        1. The Left can’t meme.

          1. I’m Richard Fucking Nixon, idiot.

            1. No, you’re a sockpupppet who thought “The Ghost of Richard Nixon” was high comedy.

              Which is why you’re getting mocked and crying about it.

              1. “…No, you’re a sockpupppet who thought “The Ghost of Richard Nixon” was high comedy…”

                The French love Jerry Lewis, but I’m afraid even those folks, well….

    2. You lost again, loser. How does it feel to be such a pathetic piece of shit that your candidate lost to Trump?
      And now your attempt to turn a late library book return into an ‘impeachable offense’ got laughed out of the senate?
      Go whine someplace where they won’t laugh at you.
      Oh, and grow up.

      1. My candidate? Let me guess, you’re referring to Hillary Rodham Clinton? I’ve been dead since 1994. And last time I checked I had an R next to my name. Learn your history, son.

        1. Did you think that was clever? Or amusing?
          Grow up and pay your mortgage, you fucking scumbag. Quit whining; eve you should be embarrassed by it.

          1. LOK, now both you and Jesse are arguing with a guy who calls himself “Ghost of Richard Nixon”. If your moms could see you…

            1. Mocking. They’re mocking you.


            2. Mocking is correct. I argued with jeff though. You’re so terrible you dont even reach his pathetic level.

    3. So your definition of Morally Bankrupt is not going along with a banana republic like prosecution on vague arguments?

      1. Look, I’m fucking Tricky Dick. I know moral bankruptcy when I see it.

        1. But not execution of satire.

          Perhaps you’d be better at self-execution instead. It would be the first time in your life you were successful at anything.

          1. Just a complete lack of talent

          2. He’d fail at that too and leave taxpayers on the hook for his long term care.

          3. Umm, I’m already dead. Died in 1994. Google it (I just did).

            1. No, he meant you. The person behind the stupid screen name.

        2. “…know moral bankruptcy when I see it…”

          You should, scumbag. You’re well accomplished at it.

          1. Yeah, I just said that. Not too bright, are ya?

            1. No he meant you, the person behind the stupid screen name.

    4. “Goddamn it, I feel like a chump”

      You are Tony. And you’ve never been funny.

  28. “She said yesterday that Trump’s lawyers have “disgraced” themselves, and she raised the possibility of disbarment. ”

    So, Trump asking for an investigation into the firing of a prosecutor is impeachable? But Pelosi going after his defense lawyers for political reasons is totes ok?

    1. They aren’t consistent. Democrats literally argued yesterday that election interference by foreigners is just fine as long as you pay for it.

  29. I have to say the only person I actually have come to respect in his sheer ability as a tactician and politician in this congress is fucking Mitch McConnell he is quite possibly the only competent politician in this entire fiasco. Which is scary because I really really detest Mitch McConnell.

    1. “The adult in the room”, eh?

      1. I don’t know if he’s the adult so much as knowing when to keep his mouth shut and when he opens it just calmly speaking about the actual nuts and bolts of the politics about it. Of course he can only do this because he is in control of the process and doesn’t have to appeal to how unfair it all is.

    2. I suppose you are forgetting how Nancy rolled him and left him completely flummoxed when she held up the articles of impeachment for a month.

      I couldn’t keep from laughing at Mitch when I was reading all the articles about Pelosi’s master stroke and what a master tactician she was. Damn she’s good, he just has to tip his hat and realize he’s not in her league.

      But I guess I missed what happened next, is she still playing him or did she reel him in already?

      1. Too many Leftists still haven’t been fired

        1. Damn it.
          Wrong location

        2. nah, this can’t be said enough.

        3. +10000

        4. “Too many Leftists still haven’t been fired”

          I read that as “fried”; does that make me a bad person?

          1. I’m ok with either at this point honestly.

      2. I suppose you are forgetting how Nancy rolled him and left him completely flummoxed when she held up the articles of impeachment for a month.

        Which is going to end up with the same result, regardless. She sure showed him!

      3. imagine believing this. What advantage did she actually gain from this move?

        1. I’m really struggling here to see what objective advantage this impeachment process offers Democrats. If not for a corrupt media mischaracterizing the whole process it would be obvious for everyone how much of a sham it is. At best they will show that Trump will play dirty. At worst, they get absolutely exposed for corrupt behavior and lying with nothing of substance to tie it to reality

      4. That month when they were on break? Yeah, that will show ’em.

    3. +187 appointed Article III judges.

  30. I’m still laughing at the feeble 2.3% economic growth just finalized for 2019.

    Trump-Trash SWORE he would blow past Obama’s mid 2% GDP just because The Dotard IS A WHITE GOP TOP MAN! TRUMP GONNA BUILD A WALL AND HAVE 4-5 MAYBE !) PERCENT GDP!


    1. I’m sorry this is happening to you.

    2. Awesome! The real Palin’s Buttplug is back! I was getting tired of the impersonator.

      Yeah, this #DrumpfRecession is absolutely brutal, isn’t it? Like AOC explained, things are so bad everyone needs 2 or 3 jobs to survive.



        1. Turd, go whine where you’re not despised and a laughing-stock.
          IOWs, fuck off and die, loser.

          1. Oh, look. It’s Sevo. He is one of the morons who said a white GOP Top Man would guarantee 5% – maybe even 7-8% GDP growth.

            How is that labor-friendly country of origin 60% per cent trade “deal” looking from the GOP perspective?

            1. “Oh, look. It’s Sevo. He is one of the morons who said a white GOP Top Man would guarantee 5% – maybe even 7-8% GDP growth.”

              I’m dying to see a cite for your lies, turd.
              Fuck off and die, loser.

              1. I like his “Ghost of Richard Nixon” shtick a little better. The “pretending to know about economics” thing is how he lost the bet he never paid.

        2. It’s even worse than that though. Sam’s Club closed some stores, which is a leading indicator of economic ruin.

          Yup, we’re deep in the harsh recession you predicted.


          1. You’re not funny at all, but you’re great at kicking him so kudos.

      2. Awesome! The real Palin’s Buttplug is back! I was getting tired of the impersonator.
        I, for one, am looking forward to dueling Buttplugs.

        1. I think I’ve seen that porno

    3. First.. you seem to not know when growth estimates are finalized, it isn’t this quarter.

      Second, this was better than expected:
      “Economists had expected 2% growth in the fourth quarter.”

      Third, you were pushing the Krugman talking points of economic collapse. Yet you accuse others of being wrong? Hilarious.

      You also seem to be ignoring every other economic indicator like inflation, labor participation, etc. Why?

      1. I never predicted “economic collapse”, you liar.

        I said NO IMPROVEMENT outside the trend line. The economy has gotten gradually better each year (in terms of UE) since the Economic Collapse of 2008 and Trump has done NOTHING to improve things.

        The spending/deficits are moving in the wrong direction after Obama slowed both down though.

        1. Give yourself credit! You predicted a “harsh recession in 2020” — and you were right!


          1. That’s GREAT, including the prediction Trump would be gone! Instead, turd gets tossed for kiddie-porn.

            1. And then loses his screen name to me. What a year.

    4. Too many Leftists still haven’t been fired

    5. Funny thing about that, probably best case scenario for Trump, not that it’s something he could even control, nobody is that good.

      But think about it, with 3.5 percent unemployment, and if we had 4% growth then the FED would be freaking out, interest rates going sky high, the stock market freaking out about the fed, housing starts and auto sales would collapse with 5-6% mortgages and 8% auto loans and before you know it we would be in a recession.

      This is the classic soft landing, natural labor market growth can probably keep up with out jacking wage inflation too high, but it’s still high enough people are feeling flush. Especially with immigration under control now.

      I don’t know if that’s the way it’s going to work out but it looks promising. The idea it’s somehow a failure of economic policy that we can’t grow at 3-4% while we are already at full employment is economic ignorance. I hope Trump isn’t really serious about another tax cut, we don’t need it, it almost makes me happy the Democrats have the House.

    6. Meh.

      Since Trump’s election my net worth has gone up a third. No complaints here.

      1. Ugh. You sound like my conservative brother in law. Well I bet your net worth is still lower than $1,820,000,000. Which is the amount Charles Koch has lost already this year.

        According to Koch / Reason libertarianism, the economy can only be considered healthy if the richest couple dozen people on the planet are prospering.


        1. #DGAF

          My portfolio has gone up. Maybe Chuck should follow my strategy.

          1. wouldn’t mind learning your strategy, I could use the money :/

        2. Koch blew it all on the B-team at Reason.

    7. Go away, fake me. This is my screen name and you lost.

  31. So, Alexander simply came to the realization that the majority of people in this country knew many months ago.

    1. hey cut him some slack he’s still tired from fighting @Vicksburg

  32. I need to take a moment to compliment for using “Impeachment” as the main tag even though this is clearly today’s Reason Roundup. Well done Mr. Suderman.

    1. #ImpeachTheDotard

      1. Have you read your hero George Soros’ argument that Mark Zuckerberg Should Not Be in Control of Facebook?


        1. Soros is a great capitalist and I like his theory of Reflexivity.

          Trump Trash hates him and Buffett though just like they hate the brightest people in any field.

          1. Trump Trash hates him and Buffett though just like they hate the brightest people in any field.

            You aren’t even bright enough to pay your bets, hicklib.

            1. Sure he is. That’s how I got this name. He’s just a regular old thief, trying to take it back after he paid off.

          2. “Soros is a great capitalist and I like his theory of Reflexivity.”

            I’ll bet you like him for turning in Jews to the Nazis too, turd. You’re pathetic.

    2. Anal much?

      1. If only you were as obsessed with paying your mortgage on time as you are with colons.

        1. Seriously, can you explain the mortgage dig. Cause what the heck is that referencing?

          1. You know why everyone talks about your mortgage.

  33. >>>It was probably inevitable

    tears. delicious.

  34. Reading the article one can almost see the tears falling from Suderman’s cheeks.

    He was promised a pony! Where’s the goddammed pony!?

    1. In case you’ve been living in the Echo Chamber of your own making, here’s how Huffpo sees the day’s news. All the headlines from the top of the page:


      GOP Poised To Block Witnesses — Bolton Testimony All But Ruled Out

      Fox News Legal Analyst: GOP Senators Suppressing Truth If They Don’t Call Witnesses

      Warren Calls Out John Roberts With Impeachment Question That He Has To Read Out Loud

      Carl Bernstein Rips Senate Republicans: ‘This Is A Cover-Up, Plain and Simple’

      Trump’s Defense Lawyer Leads A Charity Barred From Engaging In Partisan Politics

      The Warren headline changed since this morning. It used to read “Warren brilliantly Trolls Roberts with Question”.

      1. The “cover up” narrative is even funnier considering Roberts literally suppressed information by refusing to read a question because it included the name of an alleged “whistleblower”

      2. “Trump’s Defense Lawyer Leads A Charity Barred From Engaging In Partisan Politics”

        Does it take tiny hands to grasp at straws that small?

        1. The article is worth a read. Several news organizations and at least one Democrat AG have been trying to pin some sort of violation on this guy because he appears to run a tax-exempt conservative Christian organization and his law practice out of the same office.

          How that nexus turns in to “therefore representing a politician is a crime” is beyond me. But there ya go.

          Really instructive to watch how much effort the press puts in to various things.

          NBC put enough effort in to “exposing” Trump’s decision to take out Suliamani that they interviewed at least a dozen different military officials, plus many other “experts” to try to get to the bottom of it. What they “exposed” was that Trump also approved plans to take out the Iranian Navy.

          Now… exactly how many people did NBC interview in 2017 to find out about the wiretapping at Trump tower? Just Comey? Nobody had that story. They just ran with “Trump is insane to believe he was wiretapped!!” You know, a-priori.

          What about the Covington school? They spent a good month scouring back issues of the yearbook, local papers, social media…. looking for anything they could use to paint them as racists. The best they came up with was a bunch of kids (including a couple of black kids) with black face paint at a sportsball game. ‘Cause, you know… their team colors…

          Now, how much effort did they put in to tracking down the source of the infamous dossier? It was pretty easy. Yet nobody bothered. And the “source” disavowed the whole thing…. we learn years later.

          Some lawyer takes Trump’s side and suddenly there’s budget for looking in to all of his business dealings, his tax returns (they actually combed through a couple of decades of returns… that’s nuts!)…. to what end? Attacking the lawyer? That reflects on the guy who hires him exactly how? It is dumb… when was the last time you thoroughly investigated the business dealings of a lawyer or doctor you hire? Yet this is a story to chase down.

          But Burisma isn’t. How the CIA and the FBI colluded to spy on the GOP presidential candidate and President-elect isn’t. Why Obama was given a 60 million dollar deal by the main benefactor of his Net Neutrality policy isn’t.

          Or the story of the media… that’s a really juicy story that nobody has bothered to pursue (outside of fringe ideological web sites). There are plenty of crumbs to go combing through…. the NYT editor saying they spent 2.5 years trying to get Trump with Russia and failed, so they had to find another way. The CNN tapes about top-down directives about how they were to get Trump. And most of all…. the continual habit of the press to almost magically begin using the same phrase at the same time….. as if there is some sort of back-channel coordination and communication going on. Some sort of journalist list…. a journolist, if you will.

          But nobody has dared to dig out that story, even though it has had a massive impact on the health of the polity in the US.

          1. “…How that nexus turns in to “therefore representing a politician is a crime” is beyond me. But there ya go…”

            See below regarding the fishing expedition and the minnow; if that’s all you catch, lie about it.

  35. “There is no need for more evidence to conclude that the president withheld United States aid, at least in part, to pressure Ukraine to investigate the Bidens; the House managers have proved this with what they call a “mountain of overwhelming evidence.”

    Key about to get primaried. Can’t believe he drank the kool-aid on this one.

    1. That’s Lamar Alexander, he is retiring, so has no worries. Plus he’s been a fusion ruling class party member for decades.

  36. Why doesn’t the congress just censure Trump for his misbehavior? At least it would be something they might get a majority to agree with. An impeachment aquittal is hardly a deterrent to anything else Trump wants to do like take funds appropriated for Army Corps of Eng for approved projects and divert it to climbable and useless border barriers.

    1. Why don’t you go whine where you won’t get laughed at?

    2. Why doesn’t the congress just censure Trump for his misbehavior?

      Because the Dems promised their constiuents that they would impeach him. Unfortunately, impeachment only plays well in solidly blue districts.

    3. Why doesn’t the congress just censure Trump for his misbehavior?

      They had their chance. In fact, I hope they do. It will look like sour grapes…and voters will express their displeasure in November.

      1. “It will look like sour grapes…and voters will express their displeasure in November.”

        On that, polls for each major Democrat primary candidate V. Trump came out for Delaware the other day. Biden was a runaway—duh—but each of the others was only +1 to +5 over Trump. In a state Hillary won by 11, Obama by +18 and +25, and Kerry by 8.

        If the situation holds, when Biden drops out, the stage will be set for an ass-kicking we haven’t seen since maybe 2008.

        1. Delaware and Minnesota are the states I figure Trump might actually have a chance to flip, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see him hold on to the former “blue wall” states in the Upper Midwest. We’ll see if he holds on to Arizona, Florida, and North Carolina, however.

          1. I am currently deep in the heart of the solidly blue south Florida metropolis. Broward county is progressive central. There are no republicans.

            And yet… I’m seeing Trump flags and bumper stickers. Already. Far more than I saw HRC paraphanalia in late 2016.

            Just a couple of weeks ago there was some dude in a grass skirt with pink shoes and pink wristbands (and no shirt) dancing with a huge Trump flag… on the busiest corner in Wilton Manors – the very cool local LGBTQAI+ stronghold. He appeared to be there on his own initiative – by himself and with no security.

            That’s a big danger sign for team D. That never would have happened the last go-around.

            1. Wrote about a similar circumstance a couple of days ago:
              Dinner party of 8, SF, good conversations, no awkward silences, just folks enjoying a good dinner and good company. I know at least 4 are ardent SF liberals, maybe one more.
              Not ONE WORD about impeachment. What’s more, it was a crowded dining room, and we could easily overhear other conversations; nothing there, either.
              Pelosi isn’t gonna get voted out, but her support isn’t what she’s seeing in Pacific Heights.

              1. I remember your story, and thinking it was surprising that your liberals could shut up about politics over dinner. The ones I talk to seemingly can’t. At dinner, while getting a hair cut, buying groceries.

                Even they realized the impeachment story was a non-starter.

                As to Cyto and RR, I think Florida goes for Trump, just judging by Scott beating Nelson, even if by only 10,000 votes. I’d think the hurricane Puerto Rican vote would have shown up there, if it was going to flip the state.

                NC and AZ I think will be serious problems in 2024 for the GOP—just too many central and south american new voters—but I think their margins will still be enough for Trump to win. Albeit it will be a long night waiting for those races to be called. Like Georgia’s was.

                The funny thing, I can totally see DE, CT, and NJ being too close to call for a little bit on election night, which will be hilarious.

  37. Abuse of power is impeachable.
    Impeachment trials have witnesses.
    By rejecting these principles, the Senate does lasting harm to our constitutional republic.

    Looks like Amash was trying to write a haiku, and went off the rails on the 3rd line.

    1. asshole president.
      I used to have a career.
      lasting harm sounds deep.

      1. So long, my voters.
        Resistance makes me edgy.
        Must stay relevant.

  38. Can’t wait til President Sanders invites all of Europe to target Republicans. It would be justly deserved.

    1. The crying towels are off to the left. Far left, shitstain.

    2. He’d have to get a new heart first.

    3. Isn’t that par for the course with communists?

      1. Uh…. we don’t exactly have to wait. The DNC/HRC campaign paid millions to get a British spy to dig up dirt from Russian agents.

        But beyond that – Obama’s CIA and FBI and State Department used foreign spies to …you know.. spy on Trump. Literally. Operatives from multiple countries not only spied on the Trump campaign, they actively set up Trump staffers for process crimes and faked up information to make it look like they were in cahoots with Russia and Wikileaks.

        That’s right…. Democrat presidents have already used the power of their office to damage political opponents… and they have used that power to get foreign governments to aid in that effort.

        This isn’t a secret. We just had a giant report that cost some $30 million to generate that gives us the outline of that effort. This wasn’t a phone call asking to look in to a corrupt official. This was a long-term, multi-agency effort to spy on a campaign and manufacture evidence used to put people in jail – for the express purpose of twisting arms to get them to testify against Trump.

        What people have chosen to get outraged by is very instructive.

  39. You know what real trials also include, Nancy? Actual criminal charges. The House consciously chose to make this whole thing a political farce that would end in the acquittal of Trump when it refused to include any crimes in its bill of impeachment. The only way you were going to convince a large enough proportion of the American public Trump needed to be removed in order to get the Senate to convict was to charge actual crimes.

    Now, personally, the Republicans are making what I believe to be a mistake here. They should actually allow witnesses — under one simple condition. The House should be allowed only to call witnesses that already testified before the House. This is because it has claimed both implicitly by impeaching and explicitly in its arguments it has sufficient evidence to convict Trump, and therefore has claimed the only witnesses it needs to make its case are those who have already testified before the House.

    Trump’s defense, on the other hand, should be allowed to call any witnesses they think will aid the defense, since they did not have previous opportunity to call witnesses. This would include, if the Trump team wished it, Hunter Biden, Joe Biden, everyone involved in the decision to hire Hunter Biden, everybody in the Obama Administration involved in the decision to have Joe Biden pressure Ukraine, every member of the House who voted for impeachment that has ever received anything of value from either Biden, and Eric Ciaramella.

    1. The entire process began a day or two after he bested that hag in November 2016.
      At that time, the Ds (and a good portion of the legacy press) decided impeachment was the proper punishment for such a transgression, but they understood that was not gonna fly with the public.
      So, instead, we got a 3-year fishing expedition which finally netted a minnow, but the Ds had hopes if they waved that little thing around enough, some might see it as a trophy Bass and they’d have their man.
      Sorry; enough people are tired of such shenanigans. No sale.

    2. Not the standard for impeachment trials, but you already know that.

      1. Lolol there is no standard for impeachment Ahahahahahahahahah

      2. Since there has been only three impeachment trials, there is hardly any standard. Nor does the Constitution give a standard.

      3. “Not the standard for impeachment trials, but you already know that.”

        Whine some more, scumbag. And pay your mortgage.

      4. I did not lay out a standard for impeachment trials. All I did was point out that if they actually wanted a removal, as a political matter, they would have charged an actual crime.

        Whatever the merits of “abuse of power” and “obstruction of Congress” as a legal/constitutional matter, as a political matter, actually charging Trump with a “real” crime was the only way they’d ever manage to win enough popular support to win the Senate vote. And Nancy Pelosi is sharp enough a politician to know that.

        Since they didn’t, it is clear the House Democrats never actually intended to try to remove Trump, they just wanted political theater to influence the November election. Accordingly, it is entirely proper, because it is entirely in accord with reality, that the Republicans dismiss the whole impeachment as nothing but political theater.

        However, it would have been politically sharper for the Republicans to turn it into political theater on the other side by spending weeks dragging witnesses out to be interrogated about the Hunter Biden matter.

    3. I’m curious how these cases work when they involve foreign officials. Of course I see no reason why Zelensky could or would testify, but why would the Democrats not seek a statement or comment from him? Why didn’t they produce any correspondence between our state department and Ukraine’s counterparts on this issue?
      It seems to me that they know even their weak accusations wouldn’t be supported by those involved. Schiff had to cherry pick partisan actors with a grudge against Trump to even get to this point. Allowing more witnesses besides specific partisans is more likely to backfire.
      I argued with my democrat aunt about this. Her claim is that Republicans hate facts. I asked a number of relevant questions (some we have answers to already and others haven’t been made public.) These were ignored as she asserted Trump pressured Ukraine to dig up dirt and that it was corruption proving that the Russian collusion was just part of Trump’s broader corruption. What becomes absolutely clear is that when they talk about “truth” and “facts” it just means whatever information they can use to forward their agenda. I’m curious where most lefties get the notion that these narratives are sane. Is it NYT and WaPo selling this stuff? Or do they dig further into DU, Vox, and Maddow to believe such insanity?

  40. “Brexit celebrations will be muted” – NY Times

    So to translate that into real person speak, there’s probably gonna be parties galore in the streets.

    On another note, didn’t Schiff make a comment during the proceedings that any investigation of a political opponent was highly improper and a crime? Any reason why none of the Republicans took the opportunity to ask why the hell was ok then for Obama to do it 4 years ago? Especially when said investigation is kicked off by self-made propaganda? Seems like they missed an opportunity there. Hell, I kinda wish they had brought witnesses up, sure Trump might take some mud, but the prospect of having Biden, Biden Jr., Schiff, and Carmiello (or whatever the guy’s name is) in the hot seat would have been worth it. Trust me, the democrats didn’t want witnesses any more than the Republicans, they just couldn’t show it

    1. Didn’t Schiff ask who he thought was a real Russian about dirt on Trump?

      1. He believed he was speaking not just to a Russian, but to a Russian FSB agent who was close to Putin and could get all kinds of dirt on Trump, particularly naked pictures. Schiff repeatedly said he was very interested in seeing it all.

        Of course, it was a radio personality yanking his chain. Oops.

        1. so, when’s Schiff getting arrested for attempting to work with foreign agents against the American government? I’m fairly certain that’s treason on some level

    2. “…“Brexit celebrations will be muted” – NY Times…”

      They will be.
      At the NYT…

      1. the NYT is and always has been a “globalist” paper given it’s owners background. They are socialist, secularist, and statist to the core. Their behavior regarding the mass killings of Troysky, Lenin, and Stalin was one of denial. They brutal attacks on Italian Americans during the lynching in New Orleans was pathetic. They pushed US war in Iraq, attacked traditional Americans, are anti-Christian, and push identity politics..they are perhaps the worst type of “old world” immigrants who have used the great advantages of America to amass power and wealth and get young American kids killed to settle “old world” scores. The NYT represents a fifth column to our liberty.

  41. I guess being a Democrat all those years made him deceive himself but someone should have told Trump that a Republican simply can never do this to a Democrat just because its been done to you. It doesn’t work that way.

    Silly him for thinking this B.S cuts both ways.

  42. So I saw a number of newspapers that usually slant left talk about how the Dems could lose the coming election, or how it’s a possibility that things won’t go well. Guess they got their new marching orders from the DNC, and are trying to prepare their base for the inevitable

    1. +1000

  43. I watched Farage’s last speech at the EU…it was glorious and the bitterness, immature response by some EU woke exposed the elites for what they are…godless, immoral, butchers…

    Italy will go next followed by Denmark and then the end of the EU “project” in statism will end as it should. Customers union yes…supernational state run by unelected elites…no

  44. Does Alexander realize there were two articles of impeachment?

  45. I am making 7 to 6 dollar par hour at home on laptop ,, This is make happy But now i am Working 4 hour Dailly and make 40 dollar Easily .. This is enough for me to happy my ?? i am making this so u can do it Easily…. Read more  

  46. Chief Justice John Roberts says he won’t break tie votes in Senate impeachment trial

    WASHINGTON — Chief Justice John Roberts said Friday it would be “inappropriate” for him to break any 50-50 tie votes during the Trump impeachment trial.
    Senate rules are silent on the issue, and the strongest evidence that he had such a power was the fact that the chief justice did so twice during the impeachment trial of Andrew Johnson in 1868.

    The MSM is full of very stupid people.

    Article I, Section 3:
    The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no vote, unless they be equally divided.

    1. Not a surprise that unreason would not want a good article on Brexit that happened yesterday.

  47. Trump extends travel ban to 6 countries — but is OK with selling arms to those same places

    Poor Lefties don’t like that we can restrict immigration AND sell Arms.

  48. Senate Rejects Witnesses in Trump Impeachment Trial

    unreason hardest hit!

    HAHA. A political process by Democrats backfires…again.

  49. Global digital tax talks to move forward

    Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).

  50. I ᴊᴜsᴛ ɢᴏᴛ ᴀ ɢʀᴇᴀᴛ Jᴀɢᴜᴀʀ XJ ᴀғᴛᴇʀ ʜᴀᴠɪɴɢ ᴍᴀᴅᴇ $9180 ᴛʜɪs-ᴘᴀsᴛ/ᴍᴏɴᴛʜ ᴀɴᴅ-ᴇᴠᴇɴ ᴍᴏʀᴇ ᴛʜᴀɴ, 10/ᴋ ᴛʜɪs ᴘᴀsᴛ-ᴍᴜɴᴛʜ . ᴛʜɪs ɪs ᴄᴇʀᴛᴀɪɴʟʏ ᴛʜᴇ ᴍᴏsᴛ-ᴄᴏᴍғᴏʀᴛᴀʙʟᴇ ᴡᴏʀᴋ Iᴠᴇ ʜᴀᴅ . I ʙᴇɢᴀɴ ᴛʜɪs 5 ᴍᴏɴᴛʜs ᴀɢᴏ ᴀɴᴅ ᴘʀᴀᴄᴛɪᴄᴀʟʟʏ sᴛʀᴀɪɢʜᴛ ᴀᴡᴀʏ ʙᴇɢᴀɴ ᴛᴏ ʙʀɪɴɢ ʜᴏᴍᴇ ᴍɪɴɪᴍᴜᴍ $83 ᴘ/ʜ .M#4. >>>>>> Read more

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.