After the announcement by Pelosi this morning, Fox News asked Judge Napolitano who he thought the Republicans would call as witnesses. He said "President Trump". When asked if he thought the President would do it, he said "Yes" and that it would be a real eye-opener.

(Mind you, I don't put much stock in anything the Judge says, but he may have a point here.)

flashguy

quote:

Originally posted by erj_pilot:
That stuff is SO outside my circle of influence, that it’s not worth it. Can’t change or do a damned thing about it...

I figure it's still worth letting the Congress members know we're all pretty p*ssed about it.

Holy smokes, the amount of time and money these people have wasted, whining and complaining, ignoring the jobs We the People sent them to do. All because Orange Man Bad.

quote:

Originally posted by Jimineer:
Nope. Stanford U is in Stanford, CA and Palo Alto Univ. is in Palo Alto according to Wikipedia. But apparently Ford also does research at Stanford as well.

Maybe they are beach friends.

Stanford has its own P.O. It has a lot of housing for students, but not lot for professors. Palo Alto is literally across the street (El Camino Real). A lot of professors teach at Stanford and live in Palo Alto.

Guys

I noticed today that the President went back to the "Drain the Swamp" narrative; which I think is a good one for him to revive.

This is exactly the crap that people don't like. Partisan BS. I'll be curious what the report dropping on the 9th will say about the DoJ, but I'm expecting some pretty "swampy" stuff to be in there.

The Dem's have provided a perfect backdrop to relaunch the swamp issue and I think it will be effective again.

NBC, not known to be a friend of the president's has an article, Flashback: What Nadler said about impeaching a president in 1998.

Back then (another reason to vote these cretins out. 21 years in office is way too long!) Gonad-less was a rank-and-file member of the House Judiciary Committee. And Bill Clintoon was facing impeachment.

"There must never be a narrowly voted impeachment or an impeachment substantially supported by one of our major political parties and largely opposed by the other,” he said then.

“Such an impeachment would lack legitimacy, would produce divisiveness and bitterness in our politics for years to come and will call into question the very legitimacy of our political institutions," he added.

Hypocrite much, Gonad-less?

Dan Bongino has launched an aggregate news website to replace Drudge, which has become an anti-Trump, leftist heap of garbage. Bongino's site launched yesterday, and the layout is clean, so far there are no ads-- it looks really good. See for yourself:

https://bonginoreport.com

Not through the first one yet,and calling for continuous impeachments.

‘We can impeach again’: Democratic congressman suggests continuous impeachment effort

https://www.washingtonexaminer...s-impeachment-effort

Texas Rep. Al Green advocated that Democrats continue to pursue impeachment several times if the Senate does not vote to convict President Trump.

On Thursday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced that the House Judiciary Committee would be drafting articles of impeachment as one of the final steps before a full House vote. If the House votes to impeach the president, the process moves over to the Republican-controlled Senate, where there is little support to convict Trump.

Green claimed that shouldn’t dissuade Democrats from moving rapidly toward impeachment. During a speech on the House floor on Thursday, Green reminded his colleagues that there is “no limit” to the number of times they can impeach the president.

“The Constitution allows a president to be impeached more than once,” Green explained. “If we impeach now, or at some time in the near future, for one issue that we dearly should, then we find later that the president has other issues that merit impeachment, we can impeach again. There is no limit on the number of times.”

Green noted that he doesn’t believe Trump should be impeached “needlessly,” despite having forced a vote on impeachment three times before the current effort to remove Trump following his controversial phone call with Ukrainian leaders.

“Every time I call it to the attention of this House, there was purpose and reason behind it, and I believe that we can do it more than once if it becomes necessary,” Green said.

He called on the Senate to vote to remove Trump if the House impeachment is successful but said he would not let the upper chamber’s decision slow down his efforts to end Trump’s presidency.

“I think the Senate ought to act. I think the Senate ought to convict. But if the Senate does not convict, it does not mean that the House is now hamstrung and cannot move forward again with impeachment,” Green said.

California Rep. Adam Schiff has made similar points while leading the House Intelligence Committee. He claimed that his committee will continue to investigate Trump despite turning over its impeachment report earlier this week.

Green, 73, had criticized the House Judiciary Committee’s handling of the impeachment so far because the committee only invited white Constitutional scholars to testify on the legal merits of Trump’s impeachment.

quote:

Originally posted by justjoe:
Dan Bongino has launched an aggregate news website to replace Drudge, which has become an anti-Trump, leftist heap of garbage. Bongino's site launched yesterday, and the layout is clean, so far there are no ads-- it looks really good. See for yourself:

https://bonginoreport.com

Cool. Thanks! Screw Matt Drudge. Gave up on him this past year after following that site daily for 20+ years. Sour grapes loser, he must have been promised something that fell through.

She is losing it.

quote:

Originally posted by wcb6092:
During a speech on the House floor on Thursday, Green reminded his colleagues that there is “no limit” to the number of times they can impeach the president.

Pity, then, that scoundrels can be hung only once.

She went babbling for a minute about random shit, while making a flourish of showing her watch and invoking her “Catholicism”....she is losing it.

quote:

Originally posted by wcb6092:
She is losing it.

The truth hurts, eh, vampiric one?

quote:

Originally posted by justjoe:
Dan Bongino has launched an aggregate news website to replace Drudge, which has become an anti-Trump, leftist heap of garbage. Bongino's site launched yesterday, and the layout is clean, so far there are no ads-- it looks really good. See for yourself:

https://bonginoreport.com

Excellent. I was waiting for this announcement.

650-723-2481

That's the phone number for Stanford's Office of the President. Give them a call and tell them what you think of this gutter trash Pamela Karlan.

The phone is answered by a human being, not a recording.

https://www.breitbart.com/tech...ook-oversight-board/

Democrat Impeachment Witness Noah Feldman Behind Idea for Facebook ‘Oversight Board’

Harvard Law School professor Noah Feldman, one of the anti-Trump witnesses at yesterday’s impeachment inquiry, is reportedly playing a critical role in Facebook’s establishment of its content oversight board, colloquially dubbed the “Facebook Supreme Court.”

The oversight board will, among other things, review cases from banned Facebook users who argue that the termination of their accounts was unwarranted. It is meant to give banned users the right to appeal — but this is corporate due process, not state due process. The “Facebook Supreme Court” will be set up by Facebook and could be shut down at any time by Facebook.

According to a report by Harvard Law Today, Feldman was the one who first proposed the idea of a “Facebook Supreme Court” in January 2018. The purpose, according to the report, is to help Facebook “balance competing values that range from supporting free expression to combating hate speech.”

Matt Gaetz then pointed out that witness Noah Feldman, professor at Harvard Law School, had written articles entitled: “Trump’s Wiretap Tweets Raise Risk of Impeachment” and “Mar-a-Lago Ad Belongs in Impeachment File.” Gaetz also noted that Feldman was the subject of an article that said, “A Harvard law professor thinks Trump could be impeached over fake news accusations.”

Gaetz also got Feldman to admit that he once wrote an article entitled, “It’s Hard to Take Impeachment Seriously Now.”

Feldman has also suggested that Democrats and liberals should lie about their distaste for Trump voters, by pretending to think Trump voters are rational.

Speaking to Harvard Law Today, Feldman said he was excited about his role in shaping the policy of a social network with “more than 2.3 billion users.”

I wonder if Nancy would have passed a breathalyzer test this morning? She sounded like she was still drunk from last night!

Trump Mocks Nancy Pelosi’s ‘Nervous Fit’ After She Snaps at Reporter

https://www.breitbart.com/poli...e-snaps-at-reporter/

President Donald Trump reacted to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) angrily denying that she hates the president on Thursday, saying he doesn’t believe her claims of innocence.

“Nancy Pelosi just had a nervous fit. She hates that we will soon have 182 great new judges and sooo much more. Stock Market and employment records. She says she ‘prays for the President.’ I don’t believe her, not even close. Help the homeless in your district Nancy. USMCA?” the president wrote on Twitter.

That's not booze talking, that's the real Pelosi. Its not just the President either, its a woman beyond her useful years in a Government position which requires what she is no longer capable of. We have several in 2 branches who are to this point in life. It should be enough to disqualify them from Governing.

She has lost the ability to speak clearly without a telprompter. Her hand and arm gestures were out of synch. She seemed to be unable to smile and walk away from a challenging remark. John Kennedy and Reagan were both good at that sort of thing.

She was really trying hard to keep her dentures from falling out.

Oh Nancy...