Impeachment: Schiff 1 to Trump’s 0 – what were Trump’s attorneys thinking?


 

No, they never wanted Donald J. Trump to be President.

We know that. No news there. It was a disappointing beginning regarding the impeachment hearing on Trump’s side. More than disappointing. It was a walk away for the Democrats. They were locked and loaded with a full blown Case in Chief with Trump’s  attorneys caught flat footed. Apparently they thought two hours of arguments for each witness amendment didn’t include them for the most part.

What did they think was going to happen when the Democrats were given this time? Wise old crusty McConnell had to know what the Dems would do with the time. Schiff came with the requisite audio-visuals straight from the House proceedings. Of course not the statements that had been disproven by Trump’s attorneys. The most Trump’s attorney could muster at times was “can’t we get the trial started?’ Hate to tell them but it was well underway. First impressions mean everything. Those who may not have followed the House hearing got the full bore evidence as they determined it to be.

Even stalwart conservative commenters last night had to ask how did the Lev Parnas and other information presented ever allowed that was not even in the House proceedings.

Where was the fire and brimstone? The righteous indignation?

No surprise here. I was no doubt one of about a dozen who managed to sit through the entire House hearing. I knew what was coming. I knew the counter arguments to these witnesses. Did not Trump’s attorneys listen as well?

No question there will be witnesses.

OK….that’s my opinion. What’s yours?

Here is something to help us buck up!

Everything swell in the swamp, Super swampy today.

 

31 Responses to “Impeachment: Schiff 1 to Trump’s 0 – what were Trump’s attorneys thinking?”

  1. Steve Dennis Says:

    I didn’t see any of it but it is depressing to hear it went this badly. The Dems are either miles ahead of the Republicans or the Republicans just don’t have the heart to defend Trump.

    Liked by 1 person

    • bunkerville Says:

      For some reason they apparently wanted to save their powder until the hearing per se..however, the Dems have 24 hours plus yesterday to set the stage without any form of rebuttal. I have checked out… I heard the House gavel to gavel and after Schiff today I am done with it until the GOP gets their time.

      Like

  2. markone1blog Says:

    On the other hand, why are the Democrats asking for any additional testimony? Didn’t they say that they had proven their case beyond a shadow of a doubt?

    Why does the Senate now have to come behind the children in the House and finish the job? Has the Senate become the helicopter parents of the House?

    Liked by 2 people

    • Mustang Says:

      The founders designed the two houses of congress to offset one another, hence the need to obtain approval in both houses before sending a bill to the President. The House was always the least intelligent, most emotional, no-one-ever-knows-what-those-morons-might-do-next platform of the national legislature. The Senate was always the more experienced, less emotional, more deliberate/thoughtful group —and, until the 17th Amendment, when senators were appointed by their state legislatures, the US Senate represented the interests of the states and the people (indirectly, of course). We mucked that up pretty good, which explains why in many respects, “federalism” no longer exists in the United States. Our states remain “sovereign” but the only thing that now makes that true is the US Supreme Court. We’ve been on this slippery slope for a very long time. BTW, the moron who came up with “popular election of senators” was a Republican.

      Liked by 2 people

      • bunkerville Says:

        Considering for all intents and purposes the State Reps set up the judgeship nominees including the Supreme courts…. I know we vote… but the deal is set regarding nominees. At least in my state.. Not sure if Legislators doing the picking would be too much better but I get the concept. They run on both sides of the ballot

        Liked by 1 person

    • Mustang Says:

      PS. Which is why I believe that the founding fathers intended “obstructionism” in federal government … to force everyone to stop.think.before doing. Although since I’m not old enough to remember the Constitutional Convention, I could be wrong.

      Liked by 3 people

  3. markone1blog Says:

    I suspected that the Republicans would roll over and play by the rules even though the Democrats have not accepted a loss since Bush versus Gore.

    Nonetheless, a level playing field would be nice. Do you think we will see one before a viable conservative third party rises out of the ashes?

    Liked by 2 people

    • Mustang Says:

      Whatever label one attaches to it, I fully understand the interest in a third political party. Their effect, however, is to guarantee a win for Democrats—at least, that’s the service provided by the Libertarian Party in national and statewide elections. Let’s pretend that voting is more or less balanced among competing parties. We’ll say 33, 33, 34% … not of population, but of voting public, which in total amounts to around 42% of voting population. That being the case, then we would have about 15% of voters deciding the presidency. Not exactly a mandate, is it? And the danger is that with three very active political parties, the work being done in our high schools and colleges to poison the minds of barely educated citizens would always work out to the advantage of neo-Marxists. Of course, they (the communists) would gleefully proclaim how well democracy works. As much as I distrust either political party (as they currently exist), I’m happy to stay with two parties and it would seem to me that we should be focusing on changing our conservative party so that they truly do represent the interests of American conservatives, as opposed to being “in name only.” Just my two cents …

      Liked by 2 people

      • geeez2014 Says:

        Mustang, I feel like you do about a third party….no way. But I’m even worried about a ‘changed’ conservative party because I believe that will SPLIT US. Splitting will kill us, you know? YOu go to one, I go to the other; Voila! Instead of one cons. party getting 2 votes…two parties get 1. The Left takes America down the rabbit hole. 😦

        Liked by 2 people

      • Mustang Says:

        You’re right, of course. And this is precisely why I want to avoid a “Constitutional Convention.” In today’s half-baked environment, there’s no telling what 34 states would come up with. Glad I’m old, Z.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Ed Bonderenka Says:

        And they get the last word.

        Like

      • Ed Bonderenka Says:

        I don’t know why that comment didn’t hit it’s intended mark.

        Like

      • markone1blog Says:

        Agreed. The affect of the Green party on the Democrats has been to give the Republicans an advantage. The affect of the Bull Moose party was to split the Republican vote.

        Like

  4. geeez2014 Says:

    I watched most of it…till the end, and felt DJT’s attorneys did a nice job…in spite of the fact that it’s VERY difficult to fight “But if you’re not worried, why NOT have witnesses?” All his attorneys really COULD do was hit on the legalities of exec priv, etc…..there’s very little argument for the question of the Left…”if you’re not worried…”?

    yes, there will be witnesses and I worry for DJT. And I wish he didn’t use terms like SLEAZE BALL on the international stage as he did today for Nadler, who I believe merits names FAR FAR worse than sleaze ball, but…

    Liked by 2 people

    • bunkerville Says:

      I am glad to hear positive opinions from my fellow bloggers. Agreed there is no there there. In the end, my hunch is to put strain on the Senators……I just don’t think it was a home run for our team…. three days of this and I will be taking the vapors !! As in passing out 🙂

      Liked by 2 people

      • geeez2014 Says:

        Listening to this Schi** now, I wonder how the lawyers will fight him…they just can’t come back with “YOu didn’t subpoena them THEN~!” That doesn’t work.
        There is NO Dem I’d vote for, I will vote for Trump again given the chance, but this is tough stuff…
        Don’t pass out! But hearing Schi** now, I feel that way and am getting out of my house for a couple of hours!

        Liked by 2 people

      • Ed Bonderenka Says:

        You saved me blogging about this.
        The President’s lawyers did well in a short amount of time, but the Dems kept repeating the same crap over and over as if it were true.
        Guess which the public will remember.

        Liked by 1 person

      • bunkerville Says:

        Ed… I do not understand why they can bring up so much stuff that was not covered in the House……Tell a lie often enough and some will believe it…. I just hope they start on Saturday and not allow these lies to jell over the weekend…. they apparently haven’t decided. I would think Saturday would be prime time.

        Liked by 1 person

  5. Mustang Says:

    There is nothing similar between Richard Nixon and Donald Trump. In those days, I vividly recall how sad I felt that Nixon, who was an extremely intelligent man, could stoop to such a low level to have known about, and approved a burglary of the campaign offices of his political appointment —and then lie about it. I recall my disappointment from learning that those who came up with the idea, who helped in the attempt to cover it up, later testified about their participation in a plea deal to save themselves. And then, afterwards, there was the revelation that Nixon authorized government surveillance of people whom he thought were his enemies. Nixon had taken a step down to the level of J. Edgar Hoover, who was a man who never had any character. Well, indeed Nixon did have enemies —but what we learned is that the President of the United States was suffering from a disturbing psychosis and was a man, in the final analysis, who had demonstrated by his behavior that he was unsuitable to serve as the nation’s chief executive.

    It was a wretched time.

    Owing to his lack of character, Nixon failed us, he failed his family, and he failed himself. No one worked harder to bring down Nixon than Hillary Clinton. No matter what Nixon did, it was never about his lack of character; it was always about politics. And this, I believe, defines the Democratic Party as much as it does the presidency of Richard Nixon. But worst of all, Richard Nixon opened the door to Jimmy Carter in the same way that George H. W. Bush opened the door to William J. Clinton

    At no time has the conduct of Donald J. Trump achieved the level of Nixon as a “wrong-doer.” At no time has Trump embarrassed himself, or the nation, with a tawdry affair with a young, intellectually deficient, intern. Yes, Trump can be profane, he is capable of irritating me with his pettiness and vindictiveness. He is clearly an imperfect man. But he is no Nixon, or Clinton, and he has never stooped to the level of Hoover or Lyndon Johnson.

    The Democrat’s efforts to impugn Trump tells us far more about Democrats than it does Trump. All of us should be paying attention to what the Democratic Party is all about, remember it, and let this knowledge guide us in future matters of politics. Nothing Trump has done is shameful, but I do feel shamed that our country’s politics has become so tawdry and so utterly unworthy of our America. The tragedy of it, however, is this: our politics have become entirely worthy of our people and this saddens me, and angers me, even more.

    Liked by 3 people

    • bunkerville Says:

      Beautifully stated…The news now that McConnell will allow an attack on Trump’s attorney this afternoon saddens me even more…. I questioned what McConnell was all about… no more… It will be a long painful trial and now I read that the Dems plan on continuing going after him until his death bed…The family will be haunted until the end of time for taking on the swamp and we???? Forget about it as they say.

      Liked by 1 person

    • geeez2014 Says:

      you listening to Schiff now, going over the Ukraine story, with video of witnesses, etc…..I don’t think they’re all lying and, if Bolton testifies, I’ll be watching through my two hands across my face….
      I don’t think it’s shameful, either…I don’t see how the Dems know Trump KNEW Biden would be his opponent! Nobody’s asked that.
      I am so so happy that I don’t have the ‘entirely unworthy’ opinion of my fellow Americans that you do, Mustang. Well, let me alter that statement. I do feel Democrats are entirely unworthy of our great country now because NONE of them can understand their vote for a Warren or Biden will bring socialism to this once great country and still vote for it.

      My ONLY SOLACE hearing the Left this morning is ..they got home after 2 am and have to have been up all night writing these scripts they’ll be reading all day.

      Liked by 1 person

  6. Linda Says:

    Umm…I beg to differ. Trumps attorneys were playing the long game and won–and Judge Roberts had had enough by 1 amish (stayed up to watch it)–he admonished both sides, more the dems than the Republicans/Trumps Attorneys. Word of the day is Pettifog. Judge Roberts certainty caught me snoozing, IT WAS PRICELESS to see the dems caught.

    Liked by 4 people

    • bunkerville Says:

      I think what is called a win was a temporary delay in the vote for witnesses. It will be brought up again. Meanwhile Schiff laid out the “facts” as he wanted them to be reflected.
      Keep in mimd we are political junkies… Many are newbies to the info and probably first timers in looking at the weeds.
      Most will not be interested in the long game IMO….How many will watch hours of this nonsense?
      Now today. McConnell is allowing an amendment that will allow attacks on Trump’s attorney. They will dirty him up as best then can..
      Now we know there will be witnesses… just my thoughts…. thats what makes the world go round.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Linda Says:

        Well, I can tell you, this household is watching and paying attention. Schiff and his minions won’t get far. JMO of course, s miles.

        Liked by 3 people

      • bunkerville Says:

        Fingers crossed Linda…..I am with you. So much depends on so much this time around… 🙂 . Yea, even some of my conservative friends don’t have the stomach for this.. takes true grit and we have it apparently . 🙂

        Liked by 1 person

  7. peter3 Says:

    I too was one of the dozen. I hate to say it but kudos to Schiff, nuff said.

    Liked by 1 person


Leave a Reply to Mustang Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: