We can’t trust Trump on Iran without a real impeachment trial
Impeachment Trials and the Senator’s Oath of Impartial Justice
Honig: We’re just now seeing how big Ukraine cover-up is
C-SPAN: Senator McConnell Speaks About Air Strike and Impeachment Impasse
“This morning Iran’s master terrorist is dead. The architect and chief engineer of the world’s most active state sponsor of terrorism has been removed from the battlefield at the hand of the united states military.”
He speaks more on this, but I want to address the impeachment. Here are my Iran thoughts:
https://limbaugh2020.com/iran-and-peace-in-middle-east-it-was-job-1-for-jared-kushner/
https://limbaugh2020.com/old-donald-trump-tweets-are-the-nostradamus-of-irony/
and
Escalating U.S.-Iran tensions scramble the politics of Trump’s impeachment
“Now, Mr. President, on an entirely different matter, of course we also anticipate that another totally different, very serious item will be heading the senate’s way soon. The senate will have to address some of the deepest institutional questions contemplated by our constitution. We’ll have to decide whether we’re going to safeguard core governing traditions or let short-term partisan rage overcome them.”
I am not a Democrat. It is not a partisan matter to me. Rage is a strong word for someone doing their Constitutional DUTY.
“Back in December i explained how house Democrats’ splint into the most rushed — sprint into the most rushed, least fair and least thorough impeachment inquiry in American history has jeopardized the foundations of our system of government.”
Yes, you did: McConnell hits House Democrats, says they are rushing impeachment
The only thing jeopardizing the foundations of our system of government is President Trump by blocking witnesses and documents and you by not calling him out on that.
Checks and Balances
“Last spring Speaker Pelosi told the country, quote, impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path. That was the speaker less than a year ago.”
That was before Trump would thumbs his nose at Congress and the Pentagon to try to get Ukraine to help him with the 2020 Election.
https://limbaugh2020.com/how-to-win-an-argument-with-maga-bidens/
https://limbaugh2020.com/who-had-ukraine-in-the-reason-trump-will-be-impeached-pool-i-didnt/
“Back in 1998 when Democrats were busy defending President Clinton, Congressman Jerry Nadler said, there must never be a narrowly voted impeachment or an impeachment substantially supported bid one of our major political parties and largely opposed by the other. Such an impeachment would lack legitimacy, said Congressman Jerry Nadler 20 years ago. That was obviously the standard when a Democrat was in the White House.”
This was pre-Citizens United v FEC. Back when the GOP cared about issues like National Debt and Free Trade.
https://limbaugh2020.com/how-to-win-an-argument-with-maga-trade-deals/
“But ultimately house Democrats cared more about attacking President Trump than keeping their promises.”
Unlike Trump and the GOP, Democrats KEPT their 2018 campaign promises, passing over 400 bills YOU refused to look at.
https://www.congress.gov/search?pageSort=documentNumber%3Adesc&q=%7B%22congress%22%3A%22116%22%2C%22chamber%22%3A%22House%22%2C%22type%22%3A%22bills%22%2C%22bill-status%22%3A%22passed-one%22%7D
The House-passed bills that have ended up in the Senate ‘graveyard’
The GOP Promised a Balanced Budget in their 2016 Platform
https://www.gop.com/the-2016-republican-party-platform
https://limbaugh2020.com/white-houses-kudlow-22-5-trillion-debt-is-not-a-huge-problem/
“So, they rushed through a slapdash investigation. They decided not to bother with the standard legal processes for pursuing witnesses and evidence. They don’t have time to do that. Chairman Adam Schiff told the entire country on national television that getting a court decision takes a long time. He didn’t want to wait. Takes a long time to go to court. So they just plowed ahead, plowed right ahead, with an historically weak case and impeached a duly elected president with votes from just one — just one — political party.”
You do understand Andrew Johnson, Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton provided witnesses and documentation when asked? The courts would not be needed if the GOP cared as much about the rule of law and Checks and Balances as they do keeping their seats in office. It is one party doing the work because the other has splintered into two camps, Trump sycophants,
or quitters,
“The Democrats have left Trump derangement syndrome directly for a kind of partisan fever had that our founding fathers were afraid of.”
Our forefathers were afraid of a POTUS like Trump!
“And then, Mr. President, just before the holidays, this sad spectacle took another unusual turn. As soon as the partisan impeachment votes had finished, the prosecutors began to develop cold feet. Instead of sending the articles to the senate, they flinched. They flinched. That’s right. The same people who just spent weeks screaming that impeachment was so serious and so urgent that it couldn’t wait for due process now decided it would wait indefinitely while they checked the political whims and looked for new talking points.”
No one is FLINCHING. They ARE waiting until YOU decide to not make a mockery of the US Senate. NOT “new talking points”. They are wanting witnesses and documentation being blocked by Trump. They must not exonerate him? Did you know every time the word ‘exonerate’ appeared in the Mueller report it was preceded by “Not”?
https://limbaugh2020.com/you-can-read-the-mueller-report-for-free/
“looked for new talking points.”
And they found more facts!
This is the bombshell Trump’s team didn’t want revealed
New Ukraine revelations turn up heat on Senate trial showdown
Behind the Ukraine Aid Freeze: 84 Days of Conflict and Confusion
Explosive new documents reveal the lengths to which the Justice Department went to conceal the Pentagon’s concerns about Trump’s Ukraine aid freeze
“This is another situation where house Democrats have blown right past the specific warnings of our founding fathers. Alexander Hamilton specifically warned about the dangers of a, quote, procrastinated determination of the charges. In an impeachment. He explained it would not be fair to the accused and it would be dangerous for the country.”
Fractured Into Factions? What The Founders Feared About Impeachment
In Federalist No. 69, Alexander Hamilton described impeachment essentially as a release valve from another “crisis of a national revolution.” He and other Founders grappled with how best to execute such a check, and eventually they settled on the system we have today.
Why was impeachment so important to the Founders
To understand the Founders’ rationale for impeachment first requires an examination of their feelings about the presidency. Hamilton (yes, that one) actually wanted a more robust chief executive, but he did realize there needed to be some check on their power. That’s why he would argue in The Federalist Papers for why impeachment should be included in the Constitution.
According to preeminent Hamilton biographer Ron Chernow, Hamilton was trying to protect the country from someone with demagogic tendencies. “From the outset, Hamilton feared an unholy trinity of traits in a future president — ambition, avarice and vanity,” Chernow wrote last month in The Washington Post.
https://www.npr.org/2019/11/18/779938819/fractured-into-factions-what-the-founders-feared-about-impeachment
“procrastinated determination of the charges.“
This is from Federalist 65, NOT 69
The Powers of the Senate Continued
From the New York Packet.
Friday, March 7, 1788.
Hamilton was writing about YOU, Not Trump!
Would it have been desirable to have composed the court for the trial of impeachments, of persons wholly distinct from the other departments of the government? There are weighty arguments, as well against, as in favor of, such a plan. To some minds it will not appear a trivial objection, that it could tend to increase the complexity of the political machine, and to add a new spring to the government, the utility of which would at best be questionable. But an objection which will not be thought by any unworthy of attention, is this: a court formed upon such a plan, would either be attended with a heavy expense, or might in practice be subject to a variety of casualties and inconveniences. It must either consist of permanent officers, stationary at the seat of government, and of course entitled to fixed and regular stipends, or of certain officers of the State governments to be called upon whenever an impeachment was actually depending. It will not be easy to imagine any third mode materially different, which could rationally be proposed. As the court, for reasons already given, ought to be numerous, the first scheme will be reprobated by every man who can compare the extent of the public wants with the means of supplying them. The second will be espoused with caution by those who will seriously consider the difficulty of collecting men dispersed over the whole Union; the injury to the innocent, from the procrastinated determination of the charges which might be brought against them; the advantage to the guilty, from the opportunities which delay would afford to intrigue and corruption; and in some cases the detriment to the State, from the prolonged inaction of men whose firm and faithful execution of their duty might have exposed them to the persecution of an intemperate or designing majority in the House of Representatives. Though this latter supposition may seem harsh, and might not be likely often to be verified, yet it ought not to be forgotten that the demon of faction will, at certain seasons, extend his sceptre over all numerous bodies of men.
You procrastinating from seeking the truth!
“Speaker Pelosi apparently does not care. Her congress is behaving exactly like the, quote, in temperament or designing majority in the house of representatives that Hamilton warned might abuse the impeachment power. So, as House Democrats continue their political delay, they’re searching desperately for some new talking points to help them deflect blame for what they’ve done. We’ve heard it claimed that the same house Democrats who botched their own process should get to reach over here into the senate and dictate our process.”
Pelosi CARES. I don’t think you have studied Hamilton? He was PRO Impeachment. He was not warning about abuse of Pelosi or Your power, he was lamenting how you might not do your job because HE was VERY concerned about the abuses OF (not to) President. READ Federalist 69!
The Real Character of the Executive
From the New York Packet.
Friday, March 14, 1788.
The delay is caused by your non-committal to witnesses and documentation. We know your history, can we say Obama’s Federal Judges and Merrick Garland appointments?
https://limbaugh2020.com/trumps-judges-are-white-male-incompetent-bigots/
“Democrats who botched their own process should get to reach over here into the senate and dictate our process. “
Nothing was botched. Gaetz and others put their idiocy on display. It is not a reach to ask for witness. It never occured to Madison and Hamilton that a Senate Leader would ever have a problem with witnesses.
“We’ve heard claims that it’s a problem that I’ve discussed trial mechanics with the white house. Even as my counterpart, the democratic leader, is openly coordinating political strategy with the speaker who some might call the prosecution. So. it’s okay to have consultation with the prosecution but not apparently with the defendant.”
This is NOT a Criminal Trial. There are not prosecutors and defendants. This is Checks and Balances. One branch versus another.
SEPARATION OF POWERS AND CHECKS AND BALANCES
Pelosi, Schumer and YOU are all in the LEGISLATIVE Branch. Trump is in the Executive Branch. The blue arrow going from Congress to the White House says “Can impeach president”, NOT “Can be a help to the president during impeachment.”
“Oh, and we’ve heard claims that any senators who have formed opinions about house Democrats’ irresponsible and unprecedented actions as they played out in the view of the entire nation should be disqualified from the next phase. Obviously, Mr. President, this is nonsense, nonsense.”
Oath of Office
“Let me clarify senate rules and senate history for those who may be confused. First, about this fantasy that the Speaker of the House will get to hand-design the trial proceedings in the Senate, that’s obviously a nonstarter. What I’ve consistently said is pretty simple. The structure for this impeachment trial should track with the structure of the Clinton trial.”
Pelosi has no design to ‘hand-design’ the proceedings in the Senate. She DOES want to make sure it is a proceeding and not a SHAM. Comparing this impeachment and Clinton’s is like comparing Washington and Trump when it comes to telling the truth. Can we say Starr Report? Witnesses? Clinton TESTIFYING UNDER OATH?
The Starr Report
When the President Testified: People in the Room Recall Clinton’s 1998 Interrogation
You know you can not allow Trump anywhere near a microphone under oath!
“We have a precedent here. That means two phases. First, back in 1999, the senate passed a unanimous bipartisan resolution 100-0 that set up the initial logistics like briefs, opening arguments, and senator questions. It stayed silent on mid trial questions such as witnesses until the trial was actually under way. That was approved 100-0.”
There is NO precedent here. Clinton Impeachment had Clinton Grand Jury Testimony. It had the Starr report.
“Somewhat predictably, things started to diverge along party lines when we considered those later procedural questions, but the initial resolution, laying out the first half of the trial, was approved 100-0. I believe we should simply repeat that unanimous bipartisan precedent at this time as well. That’s my position.”
Easy! State that the proceedings will have witnesses testifying under oath and you will demand documentation from the White House, OMB, State Department and the Pentagon. Do that and I am pretty sure you get the 100-0 vote you are asking for,
“President Trump should get the same treatment that every single senator thought was fair with President Clinton. Just like 20 years ago. We should address mid trial questions such as witnesses after briefs, opening arguments, senator questions, and other relevant motions.”
The AFTER is the problem. We know YOUR track record. We know you can not be trusted. We know YOU have NO Shame or Ethics or Principles or Love of Country over Party. How do we know that?
How McConnell and the Senate Helped Trump Set Records in Appointing Judges
Did Mitch McConnell Say One of His Proudest Moments Was Telling Obama ‘You Will Not Fill This Supreme Court Vacancy’?
Donald Trump has done less to destroy democratic norms than Mitch McConnell
“Fair is fair. Now, let’s discuss these lectures about how senators should do our jobs. The oath that senators take in impeachment trials to, quote, do impartial justice according to the constitution and laws, end quote, has never meant that senators should wall themselves off from the biggest news story in the nation and completely ignore what the house has been doing. The oath has never meant that senators check all of their political judgment at the door and strip away all of our independent judgment about what is best for the nation.”
It has never meant that, and it never could. The framers debated whether to give the power to try impeachments to a court or to the senate. And decided on the senate precisely because impeachment is not a narrow legal question. Impeachment is not a narrow legal question. But a deeply political one as well. Hamilton said this explicitly in Federalist 65.
Again, you don’t seem to understand what Hamilton was saying in The Federalist Papers : No. 65
” Where else than in the Senate could have been found a tribunal sufficiently dignified, or sufficiently independent? What other body would be likely to feel CONFIDENCE ENOUGH IN ITS OWN SITUATION, to preserve, unawed and uninfluenced, the necessary impartiality between an INDIVIDUAL accused, and the REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PEOPLE, HIS ACCUSERS? “
Hamilton was PRO-Impeachment (Federalist 69) and is imploring YOU to have the high standard he envisioned a US Senator would have. ‘sufficiently independent’. Keep in mind this was pre-17th Amendment, when Hamilton held the belief that each state would appointment their brightest and best.
“Impeachment requires the senate to address both legal questions about what has been proved and political questions about what the common good of our nation requires. Senators do not cease to be senators just because the house sends us Articles of Impeachment. Our job remains the same — to represent our states, our constituents, and our nation’s best interests in the great matters of our time. That is our obligation, whether we are voting on legislation, nominations, or the verdict in an impeachment.”
Where was this conviction to duty when you were blocking Obama’s judicial appointments? Not acting on the 426 bills the House passed in 2019? Where is this concern when it comes to Gun Safety?
Mitch McConnell: The Man Who Sold America
“20 years ago, I would add, Democrats understood all this very well. President Clinton had obviously committed an actual felony. President Clinton had actually committed a felony. If Democrats actually believed in the narrow sense of impartiality that they have now adopted as a talking point, then every single one of them would have voted to remove President Clinton from office. Oh, no, but instead, a majority of the senate decided that removing President Clinton, despite his proven and actual crimes, would not best serve the nation. Mr. President, they made a political judgment. And by the way, back then, leading Democrats had zero, zero objections to senators speaking out before the trial.
Speaking out before the trial is one thing (I don’t like it!) but YOU are WORKING with the WHITE HOUSE. You have been reported as being in ‘lock-step’ with Trump.
McConnell Vows ‘Total Coordination’ with White House during Senate Impeachment Trial
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell promised Thursday night that Republicans will remain in lockstep with the White House on messaging strategy once impeachment proceedings reach the senate.
“Everything I do during this I’m coordinating with the White House counsel. There will be no difference between the president’s position and our position as to how to handle this,” the Kentucky Republican said.
McConnell met privately with White House counsel Pat Cipollone on Thursday to discuss the next phase of the impeachment process.
“The current democratic leader, Senator Schumer, was running for the senate during the house impeachment process back in 1998. He voted against the articles both in the house judiciary committee and on the house floor , and a major part of his senate campaign that year — listen to this — has literally promising New Yorkers in advance , in advance that he would vote to acquit President Clinton. People asked if it was appropriate to him to prejudge like that. He dismissed the question, saying, quote, this is not a criminal trial.”
This is one of the major reasons I left the GOP (Trump being reason Number 1, the acceptance of the party to the TPUSAs and Dinesh D’Souzas and Charlie Kirks is another one) Two wrongs do not make a right. Your actions should be driven by principles, not by ‘what someone else did’. This sounds familiar:
” When I look at where we’re headed here, I think there are sort of three levels of argument. The level we addressed yesterday was dispositive for me and for some of us, and that is, that even if you assume all of Mr. Starr’s facts to be true and that the president did wrong, however one would define that wrong, it does not rise to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors and doesn’t merit impeachment. I think that case was made very well yesterday by the first panel.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/4thpaneltext120998.htm
Who said that? Jim Jordan? Matt Gaetz? No, REP. CHARLES SCHUMER (D-NY) Dec. 9: Fourth Panel of White House Witnesses THIS is what Hamilton was lamenting about in Federalist 65. Not unwarranted and partisan ATTACKS on POTUS via Impeachment but the LACK of courage and principles by legislators during the process. Schumer was wrong then and you are wrong now.
“But something the founding fathers decided to put in a body that was susceptible to the whims of politics. That was the democratic leader in the 1998 senate campaign. That was a newly sworn in Senator Schumer in 1999. A few weeks later, during the trial itself, Democratic senator Tom Harkin successfully objected to the use of the word jurors to describe senators because the analogy to a narrow legal proceeding was so inappropriate, according to Senator Harkin.”
Sen. Harkin’s closed-door impeachment statement
“Again, the conduct, I want to point out, of Ken Starr does not excuse the behavior of the President but has everything to do with our perspective on the case and how we approach it, how we weigh our decision. We are not jurors, we are judges and the supreme Court of Impeachment, which has some of the elements of a court of equity. If somebody approaches this court, they better do it with clean hands.”
How was Harkin wrong?
“So, look, Mr. President, I respect our friends across the aisle, but it appears that one symptom of trump derangement syndrome is also a bad case of amnesia. A bad case of amnesia. And no member of this body needs condescending lectures on fairness from house Democrats who just rushed through the most unfair impeachment in modern history or lectures on impartiality from senators who happily prejudged the case with President Clinton and simply changed their standards to suit the political whims.”
Now do Lindsey Graham! You! (See Above) I have TDS and I have no problem with my memory. I also there is nothing unfair about this impeachment except the 100% LACK of Cooperation by Donald Trump.
“Look, anyone who knows American history or understands the Constitution knows that a senator’s role in an impeachment trial is nothing, nothing like the job of jurors in the legal system. The very things that make the senate the right forum to settle impeachment would disqualify all of us in an ordinary trial. All of us would be disqualified in an ordinary trial. Like many Americans, senators have paid great attention to the facts and the arguments that house Democrats have rolled out publicly before the nation. Many of us personally know the parties involved on both sides. Look, this is a political body. We do not stand apart from the issues of the day. It is our job to be deeply engaged in those issues. But — and this is critical — the senate is unique by design.
I am well-versed in US History and US Civics. I wish Donald Trump and the GOP were . The Matt Gaetz and Jim Jordans would not be screaming “Due Process” because I know, and have explained three times, that “Due Process” does not occur in the Federalist Papers, US Constitution, US House or US Senate rules for impeachment. (You ripped Jerry Nalder earlier for saying you are not jurors but you are now confirming you are not a juror).
https://limbaugh2020.com/december-1-2019-trumps-lawyer-writes-another-letter-i-respond-again/
https://limbaugh2020.com/december-1-2019-trumps-lawyer-writes-another-letter-i-respond-again/
“The framers built the senate to provide a check against short-termism, the runaway passions, and he demon of factions that Hamilton warned would extend this scepter over the house of representatives at certain seasons. We exist because the founders wanted an institution that could stop momentary hysterias and partisan passions from damaging our republic. An institution that could be thoughtful, be sober, and take the long view, and that is why the constitution puts the impeachment trial in this place. Not because senators should pretend, they are uninformed, unopinionated, or disinterested in the long-term political questions that an impeachment of the president poses, but precisely because we are informed, we are opinionated, and we can take up these weighty questions.”
Again, I don’t think you understand your Hamilton?
“A well-constituted court for the trial of impeachments is an object not more to be desired than difficult to be obtained in a government wholly elective. The subjects of its jurisdiction are those offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated POLITICAL, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself. The prosecution of them, for this reason, will seldom fail to agitate the passions of the whole community, and to divide it into parties more or less friendly or inimical to the accused. In many cases it will connect itself with the pre-existing factions, and will enlist all their animosities, partialities, influence, and interest on one side or on the other; and in such cases there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.”
Opinionated is NOT the problem. Stonewalling the process (can we say Merrick Garland?) by denying witnesses and documents being used IS the problem!
“That is the meaning of the oath we take. That is the task that lies before us. Impartial justice means making up our minds on the right basis. It means putting aside purely reflexive partisanship and putting aside personal relationships and animosities. It means coolly considering the facts the house has presented and then rendering the verdict that we believe is best for our states, our constitution, and our way of life.”
I bolded the last sentence because YOU seem to have an issue with the word FACTS. Witnesses? Documentation? Everyone knows what the verdict will be. We need the votes as a Primary Source for future generations once all of the facts (new ones seem to come out every day!) on Donald Trump are known. History books are not going to be kind to you or the GOP.
“It means seeing clearly not what some might wish the House of Representatives had proven, but what they actually have or have not proven. It means looking past a single news cycle to see how overturning an election would reverberate for generations. So, look, you better believe senators have started forming opinions about these critical questions over the last weeks and months. We sure have. Especially in light of the precedent-breaking theatrics that house Democrats chose to engage in.”
“overturning an election” You do understand Pence, NOT Hillary, becomes president? “Especially in light of the precedent-breaking theatrics that house Democrats chose to engage in.” How did you say that with a straight face? Theatrics? You mean the rush to the SCIF?
Rep. Alex Mooney makes call from SCIF
Republicans tried to bring phones into the SCIF room. Here’s why they can’t
GOP “Storming” of Secure Facility for Impeachment Proceedings: An Explainer
Theatrics? Representative Mark Meadows LIED on the Floor Of House!
“But here’s where we are, Mr. President. Their turn is over. They’ve done enough damage. It’s the Senate’s turn now to render sober judgment as the framers envisioned. But we can’t hold a trial without the articles. The senate’s own rules don’t provide for that. So, for now, we are content to continue the ordinary business of the Senate while House Democrats continue to flounder. For now. But if they ever muster the courage to stand behind their slapdash work product and transmit their articles to the senate, it will then be time for the united states senate to fulfill our founding purpose.”
Agree to witnesses. YOU said the word FACTS. Agree to documentation. YOU said the word FACTS.
White House Withholds 20 Emails Between Two Trump Aides on Ukraine Aid
DO YOUR JOB! Hold another branch of our Federal Government accountable because YOU are answerable to US, your BOSS!
