Dec 052019
 


Pablo Picasso Couple on a bench 1943

 

No no no, I want to do something else, but they won’t let me. There are just too many assumptions, opinions, interpretations and hearsay that linger on in what I see, and I can’t let that just go now that we’ve come so far. Nancy Pelosi just now:

The California congresswoman told Thursday morning’s news conference: “The facts are uncontested. The president abused his power for his own political benefit at the expense of our national security , by withholding military aid and a crucial Oval Office meeting in exchange for an announcement for an investigation into his political rival.”

No, “the facts are NOT uncontested”. The one Constitutional judge the Dems allowed yesterday that they did not pick, Jonathan Turley, made that abundantly clear. Why “allow” him to speak at all if you’re going to drown him out anyway? Turley also made it very clear that he voted for Obama and Clinton, not the GOP that invited him. He simply doesn’t approve of the process that’s taking place. But he did “contest” the “facts”.

Meanwhile, Jerry Nadler, tag teaming from Adam Schiff as head of the Judiciary Committee said:

The committee chairman, Jerry Nadler, said that Trump was the first president to engage in conduct that met all three criteria for impeachment contemplated by the framers of the constitution: abuse of power, betrayal of national security, and interference in the conduct of elections. “Never before has a president engaged in a course of conduct that included all the acts that most concerned the framers,” Nadler said. Nadler was echoed by witnesses including Gerhardt. “If Congress fails to impeach here, then the impeachment process has lost all meaning, and, along with that, our constitution’s carefully crafted safeguards against the establishment of a king on American soil,” Gerhardt said.

Okidoki, let’s take a look. “Abuse of Power”. That’s a very broad stroke, it could mean anything really. What they mean is Trump asked Zelensky to look into – Hillary-linked- Crowdstrike and Joe Biden. And their interpretation of that is that this constitutes asking a foreign government to look into not a past, but a future election. Thing is, where’s the proof? I’ve seen the tape, read the relevant part of the transcript, and it’s not there. One may think or feel it is, but that’s not the same thing.

“Betrayal of National Security”. What they mean here is Trump delaying military aid to Ukraine. But there is no evidence he did that to get Zelensky to start probing Biden. That’s just a story. Moreover, Obama withheld “lethal aid” to Ukraine for a very long time. Where were the Dems shrieking about national security back then? Trump was the one to reverse that policy. It’s upside down world.

“Interference in the conduct of elections”. Really? After Crowdstrike and Fusion GPS and Christopher Steele, you sure you want to make this point?

 

More from yesterdays’ “Law experts”:

Prof Feldman testified that the “evidence clearly constitutes” an impeachable offence because Mr Trump’s interactions with Ukraine show him “corruptly using the powers of the presidency for personal political gain”.

Eh, no, they don’t. That’s opinion, not fact. Trump, again, asked Zelensky to look into Crowdstrike and Burisma, because the White House had a hard time figuring out what went on with both. Impeachable? Personal political gain? Both are very much up in the air. Nothing that “clearly constitutes” anything.

Mr Trump has attacked the “safeguards against establishing a monarchy in this country”, Prof Gerhardt stated. “The president’s serious misconduct, including bribery, soliciting a personal favour from a foreign leader in exchange for his exercise of power, and obstructing justice and Congress are worse than the misconduct of any prior president, including what previous presidents who faced impeachment have done or been accused of doing,” he said in his opening remarks. “If what we’re talking about here is not impeachable, nothing is impeachable,” he added.

Gerhardt introduces, and I betcha he didn’t think of this himself, if only because Pelosi used the same meme today, the idea that Trump wants to be a monarch. They do this because the Framers in 1776 had such worries vis a vis the British crown. In 2019, though, it’s a ridiculous notion. But they use it because Trump may one day want to crown himself. No kidding.

Prof Turley, who was chosen as a witness by Republicans, said he disagreed with Mr Trump’s conduct but “this is not how an American president should be impeached”. He also warned that Democrats are setting a dangerous precedent. “I get it. You are mad. The President is mad. My Democratic friends are mad. My Republican friends are mad….” he said. “We are all mad and where has it taken us? Will a slipshod impeachment make us less mad or will it only give an invitation for the madness to follow in every future administration?”


[..] Jonathan Turley, picked by the Republicans, acknowledged that the president’s actions were far from “perfect,” but lamented the anger in American politics and warned that action in this case would dangerously lower the bar for impeachable conduct for future presidents.

There’s your contest to what Pelosi said is “uncontested”. The sole voice of reason, outnumbered 3 to 1, by design. Designed so that Pelosi can claim something is “uncontested”. And there’s still more Pelosi, and lo and behold, it involved Putin:

Pelosi Says Impeachment Inquiry Is About Russia, Not Ukraine

Asked by a reporter whether there was an “aha” moment when she decided to back impeachment, Nancy Pelosi said the decision has been slowly building for more than two years — since the start of the Russia investigation. This is a noteworthy comment because some Republicans have argued the inquiry is moving far too quickly, an opinion echoed yesterday by a legal witness called by the House minority yesterday. “This isn’t about Ukraine; this is about Russia, who benefitted from the withholding of that military assistance,” Pelosi said. She then added her oft-repeated line about the investigation, “All roads lead to Putin.”

I was going to get into the insane RussiaRussia rant by Democrat donor “law expert” Pamela Karlan, but let it go, it’s plenty obvious by now who these people are.

Matt Taibbi: “We laughed at this logic when George W. Bush used it to justify his Mideast wars: “We will fight them over there so we do not have to face them in the United States of America.”

Michael Tracey: “This woman was ostensibly called to testify about the legal and Constitutional questions around impeachment and instead ends up going on a bizarre Cold Warrior rant implying that Russia plans to invade the United States”

 

Just one last thing, the final nail in Joe Biden’s coffin, who I never thought Trump was worried about in the least, but that’s the Ukraine story don’t you know, is John Kerry now endorses him. Please John, don’t, you’re going to kill me! There’s not enough people who like ketchup that much! Let alone Hillary!

“I’m not endorsing Joe because I’ve known him a long time. I’m endorsing him because I know him so well,” Kerry told the Washington Post. “The world is broken. Our politics are broken. The country faces extraordinary challenges. “And I believe very deeply that Joe Biden’s character, his ability to persevere, his decency and the experiences that he brings to the table are critical to the moment. The world has to be put back together, the world that Donald Trump has smashed apart.”


Kerry specifically cited Trump’s performance this week at the Nato summit in London as a reason why the country needed Biden. “The petulance and smallness and ridicule that he invited is very dangerous for all of us,” Kerry said. “And that just underscores the urgency of people recognizing the assets that Joe Biden brings to the table.”

There’s so much more I could write here about the “experts” paraded in front of a TV audience yesterday -and last week-, and about all the things they said that were not legal facts but their personal opinions, but I’m not trying to write a book here, just an essay, and I should be able to trust people’s intelligence on this, right? And I can be skeptical of anything and everything without being painted into a corner, right? Turley is not alone?!

 

 

Include the Automatic Earth on your Christmas Donations list on Paypal and Patreon for 2020. We literally can’t do it without you.

Top of the page, left and right sidebars. Thank you.

 

 

 

Home Forums The Value of Legal Experts

This topic contains 11 replies, has 7 voices, and was last updated by  V. Arnold 8 months ago.

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #51960

    Pablo Picasso Couple on a bench 1943   No no no, I want to do something else, but they won’t let me. There are just too many assumptions, opinion
    [See the full post at: The Value of Legal Experts]

    #51961

    Dr. D
    Participant

    “The facts are uncontested.”

    Similar to what Biden just said in Iowa when challenged on Hunter. “That’s not true. And no one has ever said that.” “Number two, no one has said my son has done anything wrong and I did not on any occasion, and no one has ever said it…”

    That’s stupefying to me, because it’s not that they didn’t SAY it. It’s not saying it is even the problem: the question is whether it’s TRUE. Which IS contested by the way, but not by many signed affidavits and the entire Ukrainian government. That’s why we look into things.

    So what is this with “Nobody SAID”, “Without evidence” “Unfounded allegations” etc. The allegations ARE founded, like the recent one on Ilan Omar, they’re in the legal record. Just say they’re false, like we usually do, and fight them. I’m sure after a cursory investigation you’ll be fine. So strange.

    So in an investigation about INVESTIGATING your political rivals for political gain, then leaking it, they investigated the press and their fellow Congressmen…and leaked it. …To throw an election. A matter of national security, both in election tampering and violation of the 4A. Stellar. You can’t plan this stuff. Do they check with anyone before they act?

    …Naturally that’s beyond the FIRST time they investigated Trump, wiretapped his phones and planted evidence in widespread coordinated election meddling, and coordinated with Ukraine and MI6 as a national security risk on several levels.

    ““If what we’re talking about here is not impeachable, nothing is impeachable,”

    I know, right?! But I thought we were talking about Obama, who authorized it all.

    Hey, wouldn’t reversing the election and removing the President weaken the U.S. and help Russia? Maybe that. RussiaRussiaRussia. No? Why not? Russia is trying to divide us and undermine our institutions I hear; is removing the elected President going to bring us together? Maybe THEY love and help Russia now? Confused.

    “this is about Russia, who benefitted from the withholding of that military assistance,”

    You mean the assistance that wasn’t withheld? So weird.

    John Kerry now endorses Joe Biden.”

    You do know Kerry’s son worked partners and best friends with Joe Biden’s son, right, both being investigated for getting multi-millions to Rosemont Co. – the name of Kerry’s personal estate — in Burisma, while partnered with the CIA and admitted by the President of Poland yesterday? I mean, trivia, unrelated to anything here. I’m sure Kerry is just suddenly is overwhelmed with love for the DNC although they ran against each other and called each other WWE names many times.

    “There’s so much more I could write here about the “experts”

    As could I. That they’re not “experts.” The experts are almost always, always, dead wrong and are trying to kill every one of us to a man with their self-dealing mischief.

    With the government unhinged, bombing the world, with 4/5 of Congress raging “blood and guts and veins in their teeth”, some U.S. sub captain will surface on rogue orders from Brennan, and Russia, China, and no doubt France, will nuke us just to shut us up and send us back home. That’s the kind of thing that happens if you don’t calm down and respect the rule of law, but apparently nothing else will do. When you love death and war and lies this much, somebody has to give you a dose of it so you can remember why they’re considered “Bad Dog.” “Lie down.” “Stay.”

    You do know we’re not going to get out of this, right? A nation like ours cannot become this corrupt and walk away free. We won’t either.

    #51962

    Dr. D
    Participant

    And neither will you.

    #51963

    Dr D Rich
    Participant

    Trump issued the order by which U.S. special forces carried out Obama’s Tuesday morning execution panel authorized murder of an 8yo U.S. citizen, Nawar al-Awlaki, the third member of the al-Awlaki family targeted for killing by Obama. So, no matter how they impeach him, they should do it. Remove him then move onto the prosecution of Obama and his cohort. As William Barr stated, y’all will find your community without protection unless you demonstrate more respect for law and order personnel.

    #51964

    zerosum
    Participant

    “…. calm down and respect the rule of law, ….”
    wait a minute
    The title of this blog is
    The Value of Legal Experts
    There are multiple opinions that determines what is “the rule of law”

    I’m sure that all of those lawmakers, on both side of the ilse, are smarter than me, have studied the inuendoes of the vocabulary used in the law, have debated each and every point of contention, have set precedence, and can spell more quaint words than me.

    Geee! I should keep my worthless opinion to myself. I’m only an uneducated rif-raf.(Uncle Tom story demonstrated what to do to survive)

    #51965

    WES
    Participant

    The crooks are out to convict the only honest person in town.

    #51966

    zerosum
    Participant

    The Value of Legal Experts

    Ukraine Fires Prosecutor Investigating Burisma And Hunter Biden, Transfers Cases To Soros-Controlled NABU For Closure

    “Soros and the Democrats appointed their agents of influence to the General Prosecutor’s Office (Kasko and Trepak). They put Sytnyk in NABU and Kholodnitsky in SAP (Special Prosecutor) in order to destroy the evidence of corruption of the Democrats in Ukraine and to continue the process of the country’s rape with impunity. They are corruption. If they put Trepak, the author of the ‘black ledger’, as the head of the State Bureau of Investigation, then the process of covering up their crimes will be completed,” declared a confidential intelligence source in Ukraine.

    #51967

    zerosum
    Participant

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/473226-biden-gets-in-testy-exchange-in-iowa-youre-a-damn-liar

    The tense exchange at the event Thursday comes as Biden has pushed back against claims promoted by Trump and his allies that the former vice president acted inappropriately by pressing Ukraine to fire a top prosecutor in 2015 while his son served on the board of Burisma, a Kyiv-based oil holdings company that had been investigated by Ukrainian officials.

    #51970

    Isometrist
    Participant

    Former CIA boss William Casey infamously said, ““We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.”

    But then a year or two ago, the Agency reformulated the prescription. It now reads,”“We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything in the media is about “President” Trump.”

    “President” Trump is a Tar Baby for our times. Let’s not get stuck in the Langley rut…

    #51971

    V. Arnold
    Participant

    “President” Trump is a Tar Baby for our times. Let’s not get stuck in the Langley rut…

    I think/hope you’ll find we’re a wee bit more informed and diverse than that scenario…
    Cheers
    😉

    #51987

    Isometrist
    Participant

    I think/hope you’ll find we’re a wee bit more informed and diverse than that scenario…
    Cheers

    That’s really great V, I love learning from the horse’s mouth. So being a wee bit more informed, can you please share your educated judgement of DJ Trump with us less-enlightened folk.

    Also, tell me more about how diverse you are.

    Then I’ll share how long I’ve been visiting this site, and what I think about your comments this past year.

    DEAL?

    #51988

    V. Arnold
    Participant

    Then I’ll share how long I’ve been visiting this site, and what I think about your comments this past year.

    DEAL?

    I don’t think so; mine was a welcoming comment, not a challenge.
    Your reply felt more like an ambush…

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.