The Briefing Room
General Category => Politics/Government => Topic started by: mystery-ak on December 04, 2019, 02:00:05 pm
-
...and so it begins..
READ: Jonathan Turley testimony
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/472947-read-jonathan-turley-testimony
READ: Harvard law professor's opening statement in Trump impeachment hearing
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/472956-read-harvard-law-professors-opening-statement-in-trump-impeachment
READ: Law professor Michael Gerhardt testifies on impeachment
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/472955-read-law-professor-gerhardt-testifies-on-impeachment
READ: Pamela Karlan testimony
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/472954-read-pamela-karlan-testimony
-
Democrat ‘Expert’ Impeachment Witness: Trump Attacked ‘Safeguards’ Against ‘Monarchy’
Joel B. Pollak 4 Dec 2019
University of North Carolina Law School professor Michael Gerhardt will testify Wednesday at the House Judiciary Committee that President Donald Trump is guilty of impeachable offenses, according to a prepared version of his opening statement published by PBS.
Gerhardt is one of three Democrat “expert†witnesses invited to testify on the first day of impeachment inquiry hearings in the committee. Republicans were allowed to invite one.
In his statement, Gerhardt will claim that “the record compiled thus far shows that the president has committed several impeachable offenses, including bribery, abuse of power in soliciting a personal favor from a foreign leader to benefit his political campaign, obstructing Congress, and obstructing justice.â€
more
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/12/04/democrat-expert-impeachment-witness-trump-attacked-safeguards-against-monarchy/ (https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/12/04/democrat-expert-impeachment-witness-trump-attacked-safeguards-against-monarchy/)
-
Paul Sperry
@paulsperry_
BREAKING:Dems r encouraging GOP Never-Trumpers to exploit "loophole" in Senate impeachment clause whereby they wouldnt need 67 votes to remove but only 2/3 of "members present." If enuf Never-Trumpers sit out trial,pretending to boycott it,they cd remove Trump w/o actually voting
12:20 AM · Dec 4, 2019
-
Paul Sperry
@paulsperry_
BREAKING:Dems r encouraging GOP Never-Trumpers to exploit "loophole" in Senate impeachment clause whereby they wouldnt need 67 votes to remove but only 2/3 of "members present." If enuf Never-Trumpers sit out trial,pretending to boycott it,they cd remove Trump w/o actually voting
12:20 AM · Dec 4, 2019
That POS Romney is out there right now promoting rat talking points. Does Utah really hate POTUS enough to keep this clown as their representative?
-
Elizabeth Harrington
@LizRNC
·
3m
The Democrats' witnesses are "very active liberal folks," Democrat donors who have been calling for impeachment since 2017
-
Tom T. ن‎®
🇺🇸
@VRWCTexan
·
4m
Constitutional Law expert Turley
“One can oppose Pres.Trump’s policies or actions but still conclude that the current legal case for impeachment is not just woefully inadequate, but in some respects, dangerous, as the basis for the impeachment of an American president,â€
-
Joe Walsh
@WalshFreedom
·
7m
Our Founders feared and rebelled against a ruler who was above the law. Donald Trump believes he’s above the law and behaves like he’s above the law. Donald Trump is the very thing our Founders feared.
-
RNC Research
@RNCResearch
·
9m
Rep. Collins: new day but “same old sad problem,†Democrats “have no factsâ€
-
@CahnEmily
·
1m
"President Trump welcomed foreign interference in the 2016 election, he demanded it in the 2020 election, and in both cases he got caught," Nadler says
-
Mollie
@MZHemingway
·
Dec 3
Fun reminder that Jerry Nadler revealed his impeachment plans (for both Kavanaugh and Trump!) in my presence on the Amtrak from NY to DC the morning after Election Day in 2018. For those who think this is about a 2019 phone call w/ Ukraine or something....
-
Steve Schmidt
@SteveSchmidtSES
·
36m
When the hour comes, as it does for us all, who would have ever imagined that Rudy Giuliani’s leadership after 9/11 wouldn’t be the opening paragraph of his obituary. Instead, it will be his starring role as the kooky ringmaster of Trumps corruption circus.
-
Charlie Kirk
@charliekirk11
·
4m
Facts:
Democrats’ three “star witnesses†for Jerry Nadler’s impeachment sham have donated $18,000 to Democrats—including ones currently running for president
How is this not a partisan witch hunt?
-
Tim Carney
@TPCarney
·
4m
Nadler was wrong when he said impeaching a President is overturning an election, but his harping on Russia and 2016 sure makes it sound like what he's objecting to is Trump's victory.
-
Ronna McDaniel
@GOPChairwoman
·
2m
Jerry Nadler is a disgrace.
He has repeatedly called for impeachment, has called POTUS illegitimate, a fascist, and even one of the biggest threats to Democracy since the Civil War.
@realDonaldTrump
is right – these people are sick!
-
Sean Davis
@seanmdav
· 12h
Nader was an FBI asset deployed against Erik Prince in 2016/17. Mueller's agents found child porn on his phone, but refused to arrest him. Previous pedophilia charges against him magically disappeared. DOJ indicted him today for pro-Hillary campaign fraud.
-
Mark Meadows
@RepMarkMeadows
Keep this in mind when Democrats inevitably pivot to obstruction for this case.
“Obstruction†= “We didn’t get the result we wantedâ€
Quote Tweet
Mark Meadows
@RepMarkMeadows
· 9m
The President provided Mueller millions of pages in documents, hundreds of witnesses for interviews, and Mueller HIMSELF testified the 2 year investigation was never hindered.
And yet, Chairman Nadler still repeats the talking point that Mueller was “obstructed.â€
Ridiculous.
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/1202222122380091392/mHgjbBmD?format=jpg&name=small)
Donald Trump Jr.
@DonaldJTrumpJr
·
1h
Shocked to see this.
🙄
Democrat 'Expert' Impeachment Witness Gave $1000 Donation to Elizabeth Warren
-
Kyle Griffin
@kylegriffin1
·
3m
Chairman Nadler: "Ladies and gentlemen, the storm in which we find ourselves today was set in motion by President Trump. I do not wish this moment on the country. But we have each taken an oath to protect the Constitution, and the facts before us are clear."
-
(https://i.ibb.co/9c9ZjHQ/Screen-Shot-2019-12-04-at-10-13-53-AM.png)
-
Jake Sherman
@JakeSherman
·
3m
>@RepDougCollins
: “The American people will see why most people dont go to law schoolâ€
-
Chad Pergram
@ChadPergram
·
4m
Nadler: In a few days, we will reconvene and hear from the cmtes that worked to uncover the facts before us..when we apply the Constitution..if it is true that President Trump has committed an impeachable offense..then we must move swiftly to do our duty & charge him accordingly
-
This Week
@ThisWeekABC
·
48s
GOP Rep. Doug Collins criticizes the impeachment process, saying the Founding Fathers were also "really, really concerned about political impeachment because you just don't like the guy."
-
Buck Sexton
@BuckSexton
·
1m
Democrats were unable to sway the American people by trotting out a series of State Department bureaucrats to attack Trump,
So now they’ve pulled out the big guns-
Obscure Constitutional Law Professors!
-
David Axelrod
@davidaxelrod
·
1m
Collins says this entire exercise is about a “checkbook and a calendar.â€
And he’s right.
The president had the nation’s checkbook and used it to leverage Ukraine to launch a probe against the Bidens before 2020.
-
Anonymous
@YourAnonNews
·
1m
Doug Collins @RepDougCollins
(R) is a complete idiot who thinks the American public is extremely stupid. All he’s spouting is propaganda nonsense. People of the USA, when will you vote the idiots (including liberal centrists) out so your society can progress?
-
Aaron Blake
@AaronBlake
·
1m
GOP is very clearly trying to ruffle Nadler, who was criticized for his handling of the Lewandowski hearing and was bypassed in favor of Schiff's committee prior to today.
-
PBS NewsHour Retweeted
Lisa Desjardins
@LisaDNews
·
2m
WHAT WAS THAT?
Democrats voted to table GOP motion demanding that Intel Chairman Schiff testify. It was tabled on party-line vote. 24-17.
GOP is also using this as a way to add time/obstacles to a hearing they object to... and want to undermine.
-
(https://scontent-mia3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/s960x960/78347361_2479230795687048_6137936792050991104_o.jpg?_nc_cat=111&_nc_ohc=Gc00-HnzdhsAQnA1uh4tQPoCi3ZXFBrSxkI6wfDJx2JcwzBQw-sPSIvng&_nc_ht=scontent-mia3-2.xx&oh=0ed654e34cc16ba111270f63eb284269&oe=5E7C5D79)
-
Diamond and Silk®
@DiamondandSilk
·
56s
Nadler has already started this clown show off with a lie. He must've forgotten that there was no Russia collusion!
-
Nikki Haley
@NikkiHaley
·
4m
I don’t believe the Dems are pushing these impeachment hearings because they believe they can defeat the Pres.I believe this is a political game to win senate seats of those senators in vulnerable http://elections.It (http://elections.It) is one of the biggest political campaigns we have ever seen
-
Charlie Kirk
@charliekirk11
·
28m
Facts:
Democrats’ three “star witnesses†for Jerry Nadler’s impeachment sham have donated $18,000 to Democrats—including ones currently running for president
How is this not a partisan witch hunt?
-
Jon Ward
@jonward11
·
5m
Judiciary just voted down motion to call Schiff to testify. A month ago, Dems running impeachment didn't reject idea. To be fair it was a new thought to them at the time when I asked about it. Over the past month, whatever openness there was disappeared.
-
Daily Caller
@DailyCaller
·
55s
Harvard Law Professor Noah Feldman says that "on the basis of the testimony before the House, President Trump has committed impeachable high crimes and misdemeanors by corruptly abusing the office of the presidency."
-
Bo Snerdley
@BoSnerdley
·
1m
This Judiciary Committee hearing on "impeachment" is total BS. This Harvard professor now, comes off to me as just another anti-Trump liberals, hiding behind his Ivy League title. Jerry Nadler is... well... never mind. Want to keep it civil.
-
Good God Almighty. This is, to put it bluntly.... f'ing ridiculous.
A Trump-hating Harvard professor pontificating and lecturing... ad nauseam.... on the merits of "Impeachment".
What the bloody hell does this have to do with ANYTHING?
Just when I start to think things in this country can't possibly get any more surreal....
the Democrats prove me wrong.
The Democrats, American's enemy within, are dragging this nation through the proverbial mud. Only.... that stuff isn't "mud".
-
Doug Heye
@DougHeye
·
2m
I can't recall a time when a panel of law professors swayed voter opinion.
-
Buck Sexton
@BuckSexton
·
5m
It’s hard to overstate how petulant, pathetic, deranged, and childish Congressional Democrats and prestige media outlets have become in their desperation to impeach President Trump
It’s both hilarious and deeply troubling
-
Steve Scalise
@SteveScalise
·
34m
Jerry Nadler’s record:
– Campaigned for Judiciary chairman saying he's best for impeachment
– Voted to impeach the President back in July
– Told CNN the evidence is "damning" before hearings began
This isn't about the truth. He's wanted to impeach @realDonaldTrump
for months.
-
Washington Examiner
@dcexaminer
·
4m
.@RepDougCollins
The Democrats are already drafting articles of impeachment, don't be fooled.
-
Andrew Desiderio
@AndrewDesiderio
·
36s
House Judiciary is now voting on a motion to table a GOP motion to delay the hearing for one week. It will pass on party lines — and the hearing will resume.
-
Andrew Desiderio
@AndrewDesiderio
·
36s
House Judiciary is now voting on a motion to table a GOP motion to delay the hearing for one week. It will pass on party lines — and the hearing will resume.
-
David Axelrod
@davidaxelrod
·
1m
Collins says this entire exercise is about a “checkbook and a calendar.â€
And he’s right.
The president had the nation’s checkbook and used it to leverage Ukraine to launch a probe against the Bidens before 2020.
Embarrassingly childish tweet.
-
Jonathan Allen
@jonallendc
·
1m
Harvard's Noah Feldman: The phone call is evidence of an impeachable offense. "On its own soliciting the leader of a foreign government [to announce probes] would constitute a high crime and misdemeanor." Separately, he says, freezing aid & WH meeting and conditionality are h/c&m
-
Jack Posobiec
🇺🇸
@JackPosobiec
·
2m
Democrat Witness: Evidence Of Crime Not Needed To Impeach Trump
-
CBS News
@CBSNews
·
2m
Harvard Law School Professor Noah Feldman: "President Trump's conduct, as described in the testimony and evidence, clearly constitutes impeachable high crimes and misdemeanors under the Constitution." https://
-
Buck Sexton
@BuckSexton
·
2m
If there’s one thing that’s finally going to convince rust belt voters and independents in purple states to turn against Trump, it’s having some pompous tenured professor from Harvard Law School give America a boring lecture on “the constitutional origins of orange man badâ€
-
Bo Snerdley
@BoSnerdley
·
2m
The facts that this outraged professor - Pamela Karlan - is citing were not ALLOWED by Adam Schiff and his bogus committee to be disputed. So spare us the outrage that you are so insulted. This entire process is INSULTING to the American people.
Jonathan Allen
@jonallendc
·
2m
Stanford Law professor Pamela Karlan scolds Collins, says she's "insulted" by his suggestion that she would testify without reading the evidence. Says she read every transcript of witness testimony. There's your first "moment."
-
Rebecca Kaplan
@RebeccaRKaplan
·
3m
Second Democratic witness is equally forceful on whether Trump has committed impeachable offenses. Stanford Prof. Pamela Karlan: "Drawing a foreign government into our election process is an
especially serious abuse of power because it undermines democracy itself."
-
Bo Snerdley
@BoSnerdley
·
2m
The facts that this outraged professor - Pamela Karlan - is citing were not ALLOWED by Adam Schiff and his bogus committee to be disputed. So spare us the outrage that you are so insulted. This entire process is INSULTING to the American people.
Jonathan Allen
@jonallendc
·
2m
Stanford Law professor Pamela Karlan scolds Collins, says she's "insulted" by his suggestion that she would testify without reading the evidence. Says she read every transcript of witness testimony. There's your first "moment."
Just because she read it.... doesn't mean she comprehended and understood what she read. She is, after all, a typical leftist.
-
Katie Pavlich
@KatiePavlich
·
1m
So we've gone from bribery to treason. Okay.
-
Jon Zal
@OfficialJonZal
·
2m
I'm unfamiliar with House rules, so can someone please answer this for me: When Professor Karlan's testimony is over, is she required to return Doug Collins's balls, or does he have to make a motion for that?
-
Rebecca Kaplan
@RebeccaRKaplan
·
3m
Second Democratic witness is equally forceful on whether Trump has committed impeachable offenses. Stanford Prof. Pamela Karlan: "Drawing a foreign government into our election process is an
especially serious abuse of power because it undermines democracy itself."
Which the Democrats would know all about... since they have been doing what they're accusing Trump of doing... for decades.
-
Jack Posobiec
🇺🇸
@JackPosobiec
·
40s
Is this an Impeachment hearing or a DNC rally?
-
Ana Navarro-Cárdenas
@ananavarro
·
1m
Apropos of nothing in particular...the women -Amb. Yavanovich, Fiona Hill and now, Prof. Pamela Karlan- who have testified in front of these Impeachment Hearings are amazing and no-nonsense. They make me feel like standing up in my living room, amd shouting, “Yes, girl. Yes!â€
-
Kayleigh McEnany
@kayleighmcenany
·
48s
Second Democrat impeachment witness is just as biased as the first!
Liberal professor Pamela Karlan:
âŒ
2016: began discussing @realDonaldTrump
impeachment (long before Ukraine call!)
âŒ
2017: said election could be “illegitimate because it was stolen by the Russians.â€
-
Paul Sperry
@paulsperry_
·
6m
these liberal constitutional-scholar witnesses advocating impeachment are coming off as angry and shrill
-
Ellen Carmichael
@ellencarmichael
·
1m
This hearing is an absolute zoo.
Richard Baris
@Peoples_Pundit
·
8m
These do not sound like reason-driven legal scholars. They sound like rabid ideologues.
-
Ana Navarro-Cárdenas
@ananavarro
·
1m
Apropos of nothing in particular...the women -Amb. Yavanovich, Fiona Hill and now, Prof. Pamela Karlan- who have testified in front of these Impeachment Hearings are amazing and no-nonsense. They make me feel like standing up in my living room, amd shouting, “Yes, girl. Yes!â€
Navarro is correct: It's apropos of nothing.
-
Jack Posobiec
🇺🇸
@JackPosobiec
·
2m
PosoCheck: There is no evidence of either
Quote Tweet
CBS Evening News
@CBSEveningNews
· 15m
Harvard Law Prof. Noah Feldman: "There's no mystery about the words 'high crimes and misdemeanors.' The word high modifies both crimes and misdemeanors, so they're both high. And high means connected to the office of the presidency -- connected to office." https://
-
Kevin McCarthy
@GOPLeader
·
1h
"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.â€
"Such an impeachment would lack legitimacy."
Good point, Chairman Nadler.
-
Navarro is correct: It's apropos of nothing.
Its appropriate for an irrational person.
-
Mark Meadows
@RepMarkMeadows
In case you were inclined to believe the Democrats' suggestion that their witnesses are unbiased, here's one of them—Noah Feldman—building the case for impeaching President Trump in April, 2017. Not even 3 months after inauguration.
Quote Tweet
Slate's Trumpcast
@realTrumpcast
· Apr 10, 2017
Today: @jacobwe and @NoahRFeldman begin to build the case for the impeachment of Donald Trump: https://megaphone.link/PPY7763026733
-
Alex Moe
@AlexNBCNews
·
2m
Dem Rep Al Green comes to tell press that he is disappointed there is not a person of color testifying before the Judiciary Committee impeachment inquiry hearing
-
Caleb Howe
@CalebHowe
·
1m
Stanford Law Professor Pamela Karlan did less an "opening statement" and more a "loudening rant-ment"
-
Raheem Kassam
@RaheemKassam
·
18m
Dem Witness Noah Feldman Penned Fawning Defense of Islamic Shariah Law
(https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/1202253965116747777/SbCSUcG5?format=jpg&name=small)
-
Kimberly Guilfoyle
@kimguilfoyle
Today’s hearing in a nutshell:
House Dems are having leftist attorneys share partisan opinions on the hearsay of a few people who had no firsthand knowledge.
No facts. No new information. Just a partisan Trump-hating sham. But this is the only thing the Dems have to offer.
-
Josh Holmes
@HolmesJosh
·
5m
My god this hearing boring.
-
Lee Zeldin
@RepLeeZeldin
·
1m
Congrats to the professors who won the Dems’ nationwide talent search for the most elitist, unhinged anti-Trump professors in America. These meltdowns based on triggered emotions, 3% of the facts & ignoring the other 97% of the story is a permanent stain on US history. Good work.
-
Paul Sperry
@paulsperry_
·
2m
BREAKING: Constitutional-scholar witness Jonathan Turley will argue that the Democrats' impeachment crusade is essentially a Constitution-abusing partisan stunt that dangerously lowers "impeachment standards to fit a paucity of evidence and an abundance of anger [against Trump]."
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EK9IZFaWkAASGuU?format=jpg&name=small)
Laura Ingraham
@IngrahamAngle
·
2m
She seemed upset. She donated $1,000 to Elizabeth Warren in July.
-
Steve Guest
@SteveGuest
·
3m
Pamela Karlan was also floated as an Obama Supreme Court nominee because she is an “unapologetic liberal†and she was named as a potential Supreme Court pick of Hillary Clinton.
-
Buck Sexton
@BuckSexton
·
50s
My favorite part of Democrats impeachment theater is when these petty demagogues pretend they really don’t want this, it just pains them to impeach Trump, it makes them sorrowful and prayerful (lol!) for the nation-
Only a moron believes this, and only a fraud would say it
-
Elizabeth Harrington
@LizRNC
·
53s
Agreed, Professor Karlan!
"Elections matter"
@realDonaldTrump
won. It's time for you and your fellow Democrats to accept that fact!
-
RepScottPerry
@RepScottPerry
·
3m
Before his testimony today, Jonathan Turley - Democrat - noted that Schiff’s public hearings failed to provide a complete picture and “conflicted on critical points.†Do you wonder why Democrats didn’t call HIM as their own witness?
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EK9JBAKWsAA5Iu3?format=png&name=small)(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EK9JBALXYAAd4Ct?format=png&name=900x900)
-
Lee Zeldin
@RepLeeZeldin
·
1m
Congrats to the professors who won the Dems’ nationwide talent search for the most elitist, unhinged anti-Trump professors in America. These meltdowns based on triggered emotions, 3% of the facts & ignoring the other 97% of the story is a permanent stain on US history. Good work.
:yowsa: 888high58888
-
RepScottPerry
@RepScottPerry
·
5m
Before his testimony today, Jonathan Turley - Democrat - noted that Schiff’s public hearings failed to provide a complete picture and “conflicted on critical points.†Do you wonder why Democrats didn’t call HIM as their own witness?
-
Joel B. Pollak
@joelpollak
·
2m
Sole Republican witness Jonathan Turley warns that this would be "the first impeachment in history where there would be considerable debate -- and, in my view, not compelling evidence -- of the commission of a crime."
-
Eddie Zipperer
@EddieZipperer
·
2m
Turley: "This is not how you impeach an American President"
-
Cheri Jacobus
@CheriJacobus
·
2m
Turley is helping Trump and the GOP 0%.
-
Amanda Marcotte
@AmandaMarcotte
·
2m
So Turley's argument is that if you’re angry, then your points are inherently invalid? Huh, I guess that means no crime victim ever has a right to justice.
-
Doug Heye
@DougHeye
·
12m
DC Twitter already confirming tribalism throughout the country. Dems see strong witness "speaking truth to power" and devastating Trump. GOP sees people being put to sleep.
So how will these hearings change how voters view impeachment?
-
Kristina Wong
🎄
🇺🇸
@kristina_wong
·
5m
.@JonathanTurley
, who starts by saying he’s not a Trump supporter: “I’m concerned abt lowering impeachment standards to fit a paucity of evidence and an abundance of anger...this impeachment not only fails the standard of past impeachments but would create a dangerous precedent.â€
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EK9JBAKWsAA5Iu3?format=png&name=small)(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EK9JBALXYAAd4Ct?format=png&name=900x900)
LOL! Well at least Karlan has standing to whine to the cosmos. Trump's election win screwed her out of a USSC gig.
-
Hillary Clinton
@HillaryClinton
·
35s
Every American should read the evidence for themselves in the House’s impeachment inquiry report.
It catalogues “a months-long effort by President Trump to use the powers of his office to solicit foreign interference on his behalf in the 2020 election.†https://intelligence.house.gov/report/
-
Fred Fleitz
@FredFleitz
·
1m
You know @JonathanTurley
's testimony was effective since the usual leftwing suspects are attacking him on Twitter. He was especially effective since he noted he voted against @realDonaldTrump
-
Laura Ingraham
@IngrahamAngle
·
2m
Who Is Michael J. Gerhardt? “He served as deputy media director for former VP Al Gore’s first Senate campaign, and was involved in Mr. Clinton’s transition to the White House in the early 1990s.â€
-
Rep Andy Biggs
@RepAndyBiggsAZ
· 46m
🚨
Democrats just tabled a motion to require Adam Schiff to appear before the House Judiciary Committee & testify about the impeachment report he wrote.
🚨
What do these Judiciary Democrats fear from Chairman Schiff's appearance?
Why won't Chairman Schiff answer our questions?
-
Dem Counsel not asking Turley a question..only the 3 rapid Dem Profs
-
Alex Moe
@AlexNBCNews
·
3m
Counsel Norm Eisen is now asking questions of the constitutional scholars for the democratic side for the next 40 minutes
-
Peter Baker
@peterbakernyt
·
4m
Norm Eisen, who is now questioning the witnesses for the Democrats, was White House ethics counsel for Obama and then his ambassador to the Czech Republic.
-
John Cardillo
@johncardillo
·
4m
These "professors" should give their students a refund
-
Mark Meadows
@RepMarkMeadows
·
22s
Democrats are holding a national T.V. hearing to ask three liberal law professors why President Trump should be impeached.
Really something.
-
Oliver Darcy
@oliverdarcy
Some headlines from the web...
NYT: "Trump Committed Impeachable Offenses, Scholars Tell Judiciary Committee"
WaPo: "Professors testify that Trump’s conduct is grounds for removal"
Fox: "Legal scholar says even his ‘dog is mad,’ but partisanship not basis for impeachment"
-
RBe
@RBPundit
·
1m
Democrats actually thought having a bunch of bleep nerds who are obviously far left moonbats testify was a good idea.
That's how out of touch they are.
-
Team Trump
@TeamTrump
·
3m
Meet Norm Eisen, the lawyer hired by Jerry Nadler:
✖ï¸
Tweeted support for an anti-Trump movement, writing “Vive le resistance!â€
✖ï¸
Tweeted about impeachment in Dec. 2016, before Trump took office
✖ï¸
On Inauguration Day, he tweeted “let the battle begin!â€
-
Pamela Geller
@PamelaGeller
·
3m
SCHIFF SHOW: Phone Records Show SCHIFF SPIED on Giuliani, Rep. Devin Nunes, and a ‘Hill’ Reporter: Who watches the watchmen? When are they held accountable for their Stalinesque crimes? http://
-
Michael Isikoff
@Isikoff
· 4m
Nadler and @NormEisen are oddly restricting their questioning to the Dem witnesses-- not the way it usually works.
-
Josh Holmes
@HolmesJosh
·
2m
What in sam hell so Democrats think they are accomplishing by soliciting three left-wing professors to conclude Trump should be impeached?
-
witnessfacts
@witnessfacts
·
19s
Prof. Pamela S. Karlan teaching a class . #ImpeachmentHearing #comical Counsel for #Dems wants to win. Did not let Prof Turly continue. #moderndaylynching this is a corrupt abuse of power from the elite dems. @POTUS
We will have to wait to hear from Turley until the Repubs turn at questioning
-
Buck Sexton
@BuckSexton
·
9m
Today is a good reminder for all Americans: law schools now overwhelmingly reflect the absurd, left wing dominance of undergraduate colleges-
And professors at Harvard Law School usually have the same politics as gender studies and diversity teaching assistants at Woke U.
-
Jeff Greenfield
@greenfield64
·
4m
Might be a good idea for the Democrats’ lawyer to ask a question or two of the one scholar opposed to impeachment.
-
Josh Holmes
@HolmesJosh
·
4m
If I were the cable stations I would’ve bailed out of these hearings after the “witness†list was released. You can hear this same discussion over a chilled Chablis anywhere on the upper west side tonight.
-
Adam Baldwin
@AdamBaldwin
·
9m
#ItsOver
She’s got him now!
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EK9QH3xU4AYnRH4?format=jpg&name=small)
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EK9QTKFX0AEkRW4?format=jpg&name=small)
-
Kyle Griffin
@kylegriffin1
·
3m
Prof. Pamela Karlan: "If you conclude that [Trump] asked for the investigation of Vice President Biden and his son for political reasons, that is to aid his re-election, then yes, you have bribery here."
-
Aaron Blake
@AaronBlake
·
9m
My early thoughts:
1) Nadler signals impeachment articles may include Mueller
2) A combative Pamela Karlan takes center stage
3) GOP is trying to get Nadler to screw up
4) Turley is a strong GOP witness -- and brings something the others don't
(https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/1202267254307672064/1DeClN43?format=jpg&name=small)
-
John Cardillo
@johncardillo
·
5m
What normal Americans see is a bunch of Dem elitists with whom they have nothing in common trying to coup a POTUS who resonates with them.
Politically speaking, this is a disaster for the Dems.
-
Kyle Griffin
@kylegriffin1
·
56s
Prof. Feldman: "If the president of the U.S. attempts to abuse his office, that is a complete impeachable offense. The possibility that the president might get caught in the process ... and then not able to pull it off does not undercut in any way the impeachability of the act."
-
Katie Pavlich
@KatiePavlich
·
26m
The refusal of Democrat counsel to ask Professor Turley questions, keeping him silent and only allowing three far left professors to answer questions about impeachment is a perfect example of academic group think and quashing discussion of different ideas.
-
Elizabeth Harrington
@LizRNC
·
1m
Why are Democrats afraid to ask Professor Turley a question?
If their case is so "iron-clad," certainly it should be able to withstand scrutiny of a legal professor who is not a supporter of President Trump
Yet they only are questioning their liberal professors
🤔
-
Alan Dershowitz
@AlanDersh
·
1m
Professor Gerhardt says that if President Trump’s actions are not impeachable, then nothing is impeachable. Wrong. What Nixon was accused of were real high crimes.
-
CNN Politics
@CNNPolitics
·
13m
Law professor Noah Feldman: If we cannot impeach a president who abuses his office then "we live in a monarchy or we live under a dictatorship"
-
Liz Cheney
@Liz_Cheney
·
11m
These self-righteous liberal law professors (two of whom are Clinton/Obama donors) are a great reminder why the American people elected @realDonaldTrump
in 2016.
-
Kyle Griffin
@kylegriffin1
·
2m
EISEN: "What's the danger if Congress does not respond to [Trump's] attempt?"
KARLAN: "Well, we've already seen a little bit of it, which is he gets out on the White House lawn and says, 'China, I think you should investigate Joe Biden'."
-
Elizabeth Harrington
@LizRNC
·
1m
Why are Democrats afraid to ask Professor Turley a question?
If their case is so "iron-clad," certainly it should be able to withstand scrutiny of a legal professor who is not a supporter of President Trump
Yet they only are questioning their liberal professors
🤔
The whole point of today's "hearing" is to put forth the leftist arguments to impeach. Asking questions of Jonathon Turley would be counterproductive to that goal.
-
Rebecca Kaplan
@RebeccaRKaplan
·
12m
Impeachment hearing color: Prof. Karlan says she had a turkey delivered in the mail for Thanksgiving because she was reading the transcripts from the @HouseIntel
investigation.
:03: "tgiving2:
-
Ann Coulter
@AnnCoulter
·
1m
The great thing about these preening partisan professors is that they will not only cause Americans of good conscience to turn on the Dems, but on all law schools everywhere for all of time.
-
Washington Examiner
@dcexaminer
·
2m
The average person would need 40mg of Adderall injected directly into their veins just to sit long enough for processing who all was involved and what Ukraine has to do with any of it.
-
10mmin break
next up Repubs get to question
-
Noah Feldman is a complete fool. A first year law student has a better understanding of law than does Feldman. His 'bank robber' analogy was beyond idiotic. He characterized Trump's actions as someone walking into a bank and brandishing a weapon as they demand money. The bank teller complies and hands the robber a sack of cash. But when the police show up, the robber drops the bag, leaving it on the bank floor. The problem with the analogy is that Trump never brandished a weapon, and Trump was never handed a sack of cash. Idiot.
-
10mmin break
next up Repubs get to question
About time. Maybe it's worth tuning in now?
-
The whole point of today's "hearing" is to put forth the leftist arguments to impeach. Asking questions of Jonathon Turley would be counterproductive to that goal.
It's also to give the rats pro-impeachment sound bytes to play over the next year for their campaign against Trump in 2020.
-
Elizabeth Harrington
@LizRNC
·
1m
Why are Democrats afraid to ask Professor Turley a question?
If their case is so "iron-clad," certainly it should be able to withstand scrutiny of a legal professor who is not a supporter of President Trump
Yet they only are questioning their liberal professors
🤔
Only the most fanatical anti trump dead ender would not consider Turley’s statement the last word on this farce.
-
Josh Holmes
@HolmesJosh
·
4m
If I were the cable stations I would’ve bailed out of these hearings after the “witness†list was released. You can hear this same discussion over a chilled Chablis anywhere on the upper west side tonight.
Priceless.
-
Jack Posobiec
🇺🇸
@JackPosobiec
·
1m
Professor Karlan just went full neocon and said we need to arm Ukraine to fight the Russians there so we don’t have to fight them here. Yes, really.
-
Steve Scalise
@SteveScalise
·
1m
🚨
Every Judiciary Committee Democrat voted to prevent the whistleblower from testifying.
The whistleblower started this charade. Dems said the whistleblower would testify—until Schiff's staff was caught colluding with him.
We deserve answers. The whistleblower should testify.
-
Oliver Darcy
@oliverdarcy
·
2m
Notable that Judge Napolitano is part of Fox's impeachment team coverage as a legal analyst today. Previously, he was absent and Fox just used Ken Starr and Andrew McCarthy as legal analysts, both of whom are more sympathetic to Trump's case.
-
VK Retweeted
Jack Posobiec
🇺🇸
@JackPosobiec
·
4m
Karlan is now spreading wild speculations that the integrity of our elections is at stake because Trump asked for an investigation of Ukrainian corruption
-
Lis Power
@LisPower1
·
1m
Fox contributor Andy McCarthy on why 'abuse of power' shouldn't be used in impeachment: "At some point or another, all presidents abuse their power."
-
Oliver Darcy
@oliverdarcy
·
2m
Notable that Judge Napolitano is part of Fox's impeachment team coverage as a legal analyst today. Previously, he was absent and Fox just used Ken Starr and Andrew McCarthy as legal analysts, both of whom are more sympathetic to Trump's case.
I find it colorful that Fox is having a slobbering pro-impeach loser talking. Boy, is Nappy pissed he didn't get a gig with Trump's Administration.
-
Kayleigh McEnany
@kayleighmcenany
·
2m
The 3 liberal Democrat impeachment witnesses love to cite the framers...
BUT the framers would be appalled at this despicable coup against @realDonaldTrump
, attempting to overturn the will of the American people because they so disdain the decision America made on Nov. 8, 2016!
-
X Strategies
@XStrategiesDC
·
11m
BREAKING NEWS: Leftist College Professors think Donald Trump should be impeached!
SHOCKING.
😱
-
RepScottPerry
@RepScottPerry
·
1h
Prior to his testimony today, Michael Gerhardt worked for Senator Feinstein in an effort to smear Justice Kavanaugh. Do you believe he is an impartial observer in this process?
-
Peter Baker
@peterbakernyt
·
23m
Eisen’s questioning suggests that House Democrats are considering an article of impeachment alleging objection of justice stemming from the Mueller investigation.
-
Rep. Matt Gaetz
@RepMattGaetz
·
1m
Our troops are waiting for a raise.
Our farmers and manufacturers are waiting for a vote on the USMCA.
Our seniors hope we would address the cost of prescription drugs.
This is the opportunity cost of impeachment.
-
Charlie Kirk
@charliekirk11
·
1m
What have we learned today:
Liberal professors from ivy-league universities don't like President Trump.
Is anyone surprised?
I would be more concerned with a president who is loved by the coastal, liberal elite than one who is hated by them
-
Harvard law professor Noah Feldman is on record calling for Trump's impeachment less than three months after he took office.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/trumpcast/2017/04/corruption_abuse_of_power_and_undermining_the_rule_of_law_the_case_for_impeaching.html (http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/trumpcast/2017/04/corruption_abuse_of_power_and_undermining_the_rule_of_law_the_case_for_impeaching.html)
-
Mark Meadows
@RepMarkMeadows
·
1m
By my count, Prof. Jonathan Turley (who voted against Trump, but opposes impeachment) got 1 question from Democrats in an hour, and they cut him off during his answer
Democrats used virtually all their time to let 3 liberal law professors opine on why Trump should be impeached
-
Kimberley Strassel
@KimStrassel
·
2m
1) Still waiting for my fellow members of the media to express their deep outrage and alarm that Intelligence Chair Schiff snooped thru and published phone records of member of the free press. The silence is deafening.
-
Peter Baker
@peterbakernyt
·
23m
Eisen’s questioning suggests that House Democrats are considering an article of impeachment alleging objection of justice stemming from the Mueller investigation.
I would be surprised if they do not include the portion of Mueller's report that he deliberately left an open question.
-
Washington Examiner
@dcexaminer
·
3m
“It hurts my heart, Mr. Speaker, to see the Judiciary Committee hearing experts on the topic of impeachment...and not one person of color among the experts."
@RepAlGreen
scolds Congress over lack of diversity of impeachment witnesses.
-
Seth Mandel
@SethAMandel
·
2m
Karlan's audition for SCOTUS if a Dem wins in 2020 went much better today than during the Obama admin
-
Jason Miller
@JasonMillerinDC
·
1m
Turley crushing Dems' so-called "bribery" allegations.
-
Rebecca Kaplan
@RebeccaRKaplan
·
1m
Turley giving extended testimony now as GOP gets their 45 minutes for Collins and staff counsel to ask questions. If you're going to accuse the president of bribery, you've got to make it stick because you're trying to remove a duly elected president of the United States he says.
-
Jonathan Allen
@jonallendc
·
2m
Turley's basic argument is that only criminal acts can be impeachable offenses.
-
Jason Miller
@JasonMillerinDC
·
1m
Turley now throwing cold water on obstruction as well.
-
Jack Posobiec
🇺🇸
@JackPosobiec
·
1m
Professor Karlan just went full neocon and said we need to arm Ukraine to fight the Russians there so we don’t have to fight them here. Yes, really.
Yet Karlan supported the President who refused to arm Ukraine and opposes the President who did arm them. Go figure.
-
Jonathan Allen
@jonallendc
·
18s
Turley: "President Trump has gone to the courts. He's allowed to do that."
-
Rebecca Kaplan
@RebeccaRKaplan
·
55s
Turley also argues the Democrats haven't established obstruction of Congress because they aren't waiting for courts to rule. Chides them for trying to set the record for the fastest impeachment.
-
Washington Examiner
@dcexaminer
·
3m
“It hurts my heart, Mr. Speaker, to see the Judiciary Committee hearing experts on the topic of impeachment...and not one person of color among the experts."
@RepAlGreen
scolds Congress over lack of diversity of impeachment witnesses.
Democrats. Go figure.
-
Mark Meadows
@RepMarkMeadows
·
43s
Since it was brought up again today, and Democrats are still evidently trying to argue @realDonaldTrump
obstructed Bob Mueller...
Here's @RepDougCollins
asking Mueller if his 2 year investigation was ever stopped, curtailed, or hindered.
Mueller: "No"
-
Stacey
@ScotsFyre
·
1m
Turley smacking the Dems around right now...
John Cardillo
@johncardillo
·
1m
Turley is doing an absolutely brilliant job
-
Alan Dershowitz
@AlanDersh
·
18m
Why didn’t the my friend and former student Norm Eisen cross examine Turley instead of throwing softballs at the Democratic witnesses?
-
Joel B. Pollak
@joelpollak
·
4m
If Congress repeated the third article of the Nixon impeachment, i.e. obstruction of Congress, "you would be replicating one of the worst articles written on impeachment ... President Trump has gone to the courts. He's allowed to do that." Jonathan Turley,
-
Cari Kelemen
@KelemenCari
·
1m
If you impeach a president, if you make a high crime and misdemeanor out of going to the courts, you have an abuse of power- it's YOUR abuse of power.
- Jonathan Turley
-
Stuart Rothenberg
@StuPolitics
·
1m
I know people are making fun of Turley, but I think he is quite effective.
-
Katie Pavlich
@KatiePavlich
·
2m
Turley brings up Operation Fast and Furious as a moronic program. Correct.
-
Stuart Rothenberg
@StuPolitics
·
1m
I know people are making fun of Turley, but I think he is quite effective.
The only ones making fun of Turley.... are the Alinskyites that fear him and his "testimony".
-
Rachael Bade
@rachaelmbade
· 3m
Turley turns the finger at the Dems -> "It's YOUR abuse of power." Rs will use that quote in campaign clip. watch.
-
Ashley Moir
@ashleymoirDC
·
4m
I’ve always said this about @JonathanTurley
. His calm delivery and use of historical context make his arguments compelling and his legal analysis non-partisan
-
Rep. Matt Gaetz
@RepMattGaetz
·
1m
"If you accept all of their presumptions, it would be obstruction. But impeachments have to be based on proof, not presumptions.†-Professor Jonathan Turley
-
Andrew Surabian
@Surabees
·
4m
"Impeachments have to be based on proof, not presumption."
Jonathan Turley is absolutely lighting up the Dems entire case for impeaching a duly elected President.
He's clearly the most effective and least partisan witness at this hearing.
-
Chad Pergram
@ChadPergram
·
2m
Republicans are now using their 45 minute wedge of time to pose questions in impeachment hrng. We expect this to run until about 1:15 pm et. Next up is the round of 5 minute questions for each mbr. But Hse could hold vote series. So, cmte may have to recess again
-
RNC Research
@RNCResearch
·
3m
CBS News' Garrett: Dems' selective questioning reinforces Dems don’t even have a “minimum standard of fairnessâ€
-
Rick Hasen
@rickhasen
·
6m
Kind of telling that Republicans called Turley and not another constitutional scholar who would say that Trump's conduct, if proven, was "perfect."
I wonder if there is such a reputable scholar out there.
Turley not really contesting facts, but fighting process and standard.
-
Daniel Baranowski
@DFBHarvard
·
14m
After 30 years of walking the Halls of Academia, I have never witnessed such academic dishonesty & malpractice as I've watched in today's hearings.
These 3 Democrat "scholars" are total partisan hacks today!
-
Kayleigh McEnany
@kayleighmcenany
·
1m
These #ImpeachmentHoax hearings make me eternally grateful that the American People decide who is President not America's faculty lounges!
-
Dinesh D'Souza
@DineshDSouza
·
2m
Contrast the measured intelligence of @JonathanTurley
with the molten fury of Karlan. One is a legal scholar expounding the Constitution; the other is a woman who is mighty pissed off at Trump
-
Rep. Doug Lamborn
@RepDLamborn
·
9m
Prof. Karlan donated to Dem Pres candidate Warren.
Prof. Feldman called for impeachment within 3 months of @POTUS
's inauguration.
Prof. Gerhardt was a media director for Al Gore's Senate campaign.
We have 3 liberals who hate @realDonaldTrump
calling for impeachment. Shocker!
-
That POS Romney is out there right now promoting rat talking points. Does Utah really hate POTUS enough to keep this clown as their representative?
@skeeter
Can you say "Religious brotherhood"? Romney could support eating children and the "True Believers" would still support him.
-
Mark Meadows
@RepMarkMeadows
·
3m
Jonathan Turley, not a Trump supporter, looks at Democrats and delivers one of the most powerful quotes of the hearing so far:
"If you make a high crime and misdemeanor out of going to the courts, it is an abuse of power. It's YOUR abuse of power."
-
Maybe I am just more confused than usual today,but I honestly can't see how the Dims can seriously think this farce makes them look good,never mine more electable. The ONLY thing they have going for them is the typical "undecided voter" that wins Presidential elections wouldn't watch this crap if you pointed a gun at them.
IF we had an impartial media that reported the news with no spin,it would be like a dagger to the heart for the DNC.
-
John Cardillo
@johncardillo
·
34s
The Dems' 'experts' aren't countering Turley with facts.
They're opining and speculating.
-
Joel B. Pollak
@joelpollak
·
4m
Jonathan Turley is the reason most students go to law school.
The others are the reason many students regret the experience.
-
Joel B. Pollak
@joelpollak
·
4m
Jonathan Turley is the reason most students go to law school.
The others are the reason many students regret the experience.
!!!
Exactly!
-
David Brody
@DavidBrodyCBN
·
22s
The Democrats are really botching this hearing. They couldn’t find one law professor who voted for Trump but now says he should be impeached? They would be much better served that way but instead it’s the, “Ruth Bader Ginsburg Trio.â€
-
Jake Sherman
@JakeSherman
·
4m
get comfortable, there are 39 members lef, who each have 5 minutes
-
taking a break
-
Jason Miller
@JasonMillerinDC
·
1m
“Impeachable offenses don’t have to be criminal offenses†seems to be a pretty weak hill for Dems to die on here.
I wonder what the 31 Democratic freshmen from Trump districts think.
-
Mike Memoli
@mikememoli
·
1m
Sensenbrenner says GOP didn’t investigate Biden over Ukraine when he was VP and they were majority, but focused on doing work of country.
Biden, as many have testified, carried out U.S. policy in Ukraine. And GOP formed select Benghazi probe with an eye on Clinton as nominee
-
Chad Pergram
@ChadPergram
·
1m
At impeachment hrng, Stanford law professor Pamela Karlan notes the Constitution bars titles of nobility and that the Founders wanted to avoid the absolute rights of monarchs: "While the President can name his son Barron, he can't make him a baron." This drew applause
-
Sean Davis
@seanmdav
·
47m
“I want to know all the people Adam Schiff is spying on,†Scalise said. “Are there other members of Congress that he is spying on, and what justification does he have? He needs to be held accountable and explain what he’s doing[.]"
-
Chad Pergram
@ChadPergram
·
2m
Now up at impeachment hearing, GOP OH Rep Steve Chabot. He served as an impeachment manager for the Hse, presenting the Hse's case to the Senate in Clinton's '99 trial
-
Charlie Kirk
@charliekirk11
·
37m
This is all you need to know about Democrats' "Star Witness" Pamela Karlan
She hates Trump so much that she has to cross the street to avoid walking by any of his hotels
This is the "fair, unbiased" expert making the case for impeaching Trump?
-
Mike Cernovich
@Cernovich
·
2m
I tend to be one of the more objective voices, in fact I found Christine Blasey Ford's testimony compelling.
These three professors look angry and unhinged.
Want to know how to "check my work"?
See how many clips show up on DNC media.
It won't be many.
-
Taegan Goddard
@politicalwire
·
5m
Well, it seems GOP lawmakers on House Judiciary are ceding most of their question time to make statements — and ask no questions.
-
Sean Davis
@seanmdav
·
47m
“I want to know all the people Adam Schiff is spying on,†Scalise said. “Are there other members of Congress that he is spying on, and what justification does he have? He needs to be held accountable and explain what he’s doing[.]"
There is arrogance and irony, that Schiff finds it to be okday to spy on his political rivals, while criticising Trump for lesser acts.
-
Sara A. Carter Retweeted
Mollie
@MZHemingway
·
4m
One of Democrats' impeachment witnesses, the one who says she can't walk on the sidewalk in front of Trump hotel because of her hatred for Bad Orange Man, just went after Barron Trump, if you're wondering how things are going.
-
Matt Batzel
@MattBatzel
·
14m
Not a good look for Angry Professor Karlan- she is attacking Barron Trump - I thought kids were off limits?
-
Chad Pergram
@ChadPergram
·
1m
At impeachment hrng, Stanford law professor Pamela Karlan notes the Constitution bars titles of nobility and that the Founders wanted to avoid the absolute rights of monarchs: "While the President can name his son Barron, he can't make him a baron." This drew applause
Democrats had to find a way to drag Trump's 13 year old son into this fiasco. Shame. We all know that Democrats have no honor, or common decency, but this is a low blow even for them. They are without any shred of normal human civility.
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EK9-6zXWwAApZUC?format=jpg&name=small)
-
Democrats had to find a way to drag Trump's 13 year old son into this fiasco. Shame. We all know that Democrats have no honor, or common decency, but this is a low blow even for them. They are without any shred of normal human civility.
I found this disgusting..the audience laughed and applauded....she had this little quip at the ready...bitch!
-
Joel B. Pollak
@joelpollak
·
9m
Rep. Gohmert rips Nadler's claim in the opening that the facts are "undisputed."
"They are absolutely disputed, and the evidence is a bunch of hearsay on hearsay."
-
I found this disgusting..the audience laughed and applauded....she had this little quip at the ready...bitch!
@mystery-ak
You don't seriously believe all the questions and answers between Nadler and the law professors wasn't rehearsed,to you? No way in HELL is Nadler going to ask a question he doesn't already know the answer to,so that he can have the perfect response ready.
Hell,they even have Sheila Jackson Lee sounding like a rational person with a double-digit IQ. Who knows how many rehearsal hours went into that? That woman is D..U...M dumb.
-
Ryan Saavedra
@RealSaavedra
·
49s
Even major Trump critics disapprove of Pamela Karlan's shot at 13-year-old Barron Trump:
-
Alex Moe
@AlexNBCNews
·
2m
GOP Rep Jordan says this is “a pre determined impeachmentâ€
-
I found this disgusting..the audience laughed and applauded....she had this little quip at the ready...bitch!
It is hard to believe how many Americans vote for the unmannered boorish pigs.
Liberals are the most uncivilised vulgar barbaric group of people in the U.S.
And they call us 'deplorable'. That is nothing but projection.
-
Lindsey Graham
@LindseyGrahamSC
·
12m
If We Get to This:
I fully expect Democrats will draft and vote on multiple Articles of Impeachment.
This will be designed to allow Dem House members to vote FOR some Articles and AGAINST others.
They will “try†to give the appearance of fairness.
-
So far NO Repub has condemned Karlan for her remarks re Barron...shame
-
Paul Sperry
@paulsperry_
·
1m
BREAKING: CIA analyst Eric Ciaramella & Schiff staffers Sean Misko & Abby Grace,who worked w Ciaramella as Obama holdovers in Trump WH, are "3 people who are at the bottom of every aspect of this[impeachment] investigation," Rep Gohmert of Judiciary said in demanding they testify
-
Diamond and Silk®
@DiamondandSilk
·
1m
Why in the hell do the Democrats keep bringing up the word King when they are the ones sitting up there acting like Dictators!
-
Mike Memoli
@mikememoli
·
1m
Sensenbrenner says GOP didn’t investigate Biden over Ukraine when he was VP and they were majority, but focused on doing work of country.
Biden, as many have testified, carried out U.S. policy in Ukraine. And GOP formed select Benghazi probe with an eye on Clinton as nominee
No, the GOP formed a Benghazi probe because it was clear Clinton and Obama left 4 Americans to die. But it's typical for a rat to see everything as a contest for political advantage.
-
Chad Pergram
@ChadPergram
·
4m
McConnell releases 2020 Senate schedule. But leaves January off the calendar because the schedule is in flux. Lots of questions about a potential Senate impeachment trial.
-
Diamond and Silk®
@DiamondandSilk
·
1m
Why in the hell do the Democrats keep bringing up the word King when they are the ones sitting up there acting like Dictators!
... or hold forth on how in our system the PEOPLE are in charge while they attempt to unseat a duly elected president. Beneath contempt.
-
John Noonan
@noonanjo
·
6m
hard not to be cynical about the process here.
Majority calls 3 witnesses to agree with their impeachment take. Minority calls 1 witness to agree with their impeachment take.
Not sure what's accomplished w/o new evidence? May as well send to senate for trial/motion to dismiss
-
It is hard to believe how many Americans vote for the unmannered boorish pigs.
Liberals are the most uncivilised vulgar barbaric group of people in the U.S.
And they call us 'deplorable'. That is nothing but projection.
@240B
You have to understand that the self-styled "intellectual leadership" in the Dim Party,and their staff members,are Marxists at heart. They see the name "Baron" in the same light Superman would see the word "Kryptonite". If Trump had named his son "Comrade" or "Serf",they would have applauded the name. It is a conditioned knee-jerk thing. Any that DIDN'T laugh at the "Baron" line would never again get invited to any of the "cool people parties",and if there is one thing Marxists believe in,it is being a part of the Borg.
-
ForAmerica
@ForAmerica
·
14s
This lady clearly hates President Trump. How the hell was she allowed to be a witness to this?
-
Doug Powers
@ThePowersThatBe
·
2m
Call me crazy but I'm starting to think the Dems called Prof. Karlan to testify only because she hates Trump.
-
@240B
You have to understand that the self-styled "intellectual leadership" in the Dim Party,and their staff members,are Marxists at heart. They see the name "Baron" in the same light Superman would see the word "Kryptonite". If Trump had named his son "Comrade" or "Serf",they would have applauded the name. It is a conditioned knee-jerk thing. Any that DIDN'T laugh at the "Baron" line would never again get invited to any of the "cool people parties",and if there is one thing Marxists believe in,it is being a part of the Borg.
They MUST laugh and applaud. Anyone with any common sense at all knew immediately that what she said was awful, and stupid.
The Left always covers each other. Their only strength is the way they all coalesce over every issue and cover every faux pas. They had to laugh and applaud to soften what she said, otherwise she would have been twisting in the wind. Now they will all say, 'So What? It was only a joke.'
-
Jim Hoft
@gatewaypundit
·
4h
Boy, Prof. Karlan is a real bundle of joy! Democrats obviously believe Americans need a lecture from a stern liberal prof on her hatred of @RealDonaldTrump
. This ought to move the needle... NOT!
-
Ronna McDaniel
@GOPChairwoman
·
1m
Talk about distasteful and unprofessional.
One of Democrats’ liberal professors just mocked @realDonaldTrump
’s son’s name to make a political point about impeachment.
Professor Karlan should be ashamed of herself.
-
Scott Wong
@scottwongDC
.@RepMattGaetz
aggressively going after Prof. Karlan for cracking a joke that invoked the president's 13-year-old son, Barron Trump.
GOP seizing on Karlan's joke, saying Trump's son is off limits
-
Dr Gina
@RealDrGina
· 40m
The Trump family apparently inadvertently embodies everything Pam Karlan wishes she were.
Her seething jealously is palpable for all to see on national TV.
It’s hard to watch.
Why did she drag 13 year old Barron Trump into this?
The woman is deeply troubled.
-
Trump War Room (Text TRUMP to 88022)
@TrumpWarRoom
Democrats chose liberal professor Pam Karlan as their star impeachment witness.
She just went out of her way to mock and attack Barron Trump, the President's 13-year-old child.
Democrats have disgraced themselves by giving a platform to this unhinged, petty kook.
-
Scott Wong
@scottwongDC
.@RepMattGaetz
aggressively going after Prof. Karlan for cracking a joke that invoked the president's 13-year-old son, Barron Trump.
GOP seizing on Karlan's joke, saying Trump's son is off limits
I'm counting the minutes until they call Melania a whore, and start ridiculing Trump's grandchildren.
-
Katie Pavlich
@KatiePavlich
· 1h
Karlan takes a swipe at President Trump’s child. We’re done here.
-
Oversight Committee Republicans
@GOPoversight
·
3m
.@RepMattGaetz
just brought the house down.
When will Democrats bring in witnesses with actual first-hand knowledge of @RepAdamSchiff
's sham #impeachment report?
We'll be waiting.
-
BlazeTV
@BlazeTV
.@RepMattGaetz
confronts Prof. Karlan for invoking 13-year-old Barron Trump in her attack on @realDonaldTrump
.
He then says to all witnesses: "If you have personal knowledge of a single material fact in the Schiff Report, please raise your hand."
*silence*
-
Sergio Gor
@SergioGor
·
5m
Wow! @RepMattGaetz
on fire!!
💯
🔥
Demolished Pro-impeachment witness professor Pamela Karlon. Pointed out her involvement with anti-Trump podcasts, her donations to Obama, Hillary and others! Her credibility is now gone as a witness... another partisan hack on full display.
-
🔥
Demolished Pro-impeachment witness professor Pamela Karlon. Pointed out her involvement with anti-Trump podcasts, her donations to Obama, Hillary and others! Her credibility is now gone as a witness... another partisan hack on full display.
Less than four months into Trump's Presidency, Karlan was saying how Comey's firing veered into impeachment territory.
https://law.stanford.edu/2017/05/10/pamela-karlan-on-the-legal-implications-of-the-comey-firing/
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EK-QuKCW4AEJQz-?format=jpg&name=small)
-
GregGutfeld
@greggutfeld
·
32m
Would have been good if the republicans had left after that Barron joke. also cable news too.
-
Buck Sexton
@BuckSexton
·
1m
I like Judge Napolitano. He’s a gentleman, always polite and friendly-
But everything I’ve heard him say on tv for the last year or so is just wrong. I don’t know what happened to him.
-
Kellyanne Conway
@KellyannePolls
·
6m
Hunter Biden is off-limits but Barron Trump is not?
-
Buck Sexton
@BuckSexton
·
1m
I like Judge Napolitano. He’s a gentleman, always polite and friendly-
But everything I’ve heard him say on tv for the last year or so is just wrong. I don’t know what happened to him.
Uh, Buck....if they had pics of you with a goat wearing fishnet stockings, you might start singing a different tune, too!
-
Steve Scalise
@SteveScalise
·
4m
🚨
BREAKING: @RepMattGaetz
asked the witnesses in today's sham hearing to raise their hands if they have personal knowledge of a single fact in Schiff's report.
No one raised their hand.
Why are we wasting time on liberal professors who have no firsthand knowledge of this case?
-
Rep. Mike Johnson
@RepMikeJohnson
·
20m
Democrats are pursuing their hatred for @realDonaldTrump
atop the ruins of our public liberty. That is the greatest danger of this foolish, short-sighted #impeachment; the damage it is doing to our 243-year experiment in self-governance.
God help us
-
Uh, Buck....if they had pics of you with a goat wearing fishnet stockings, you might start singing a different tune, too!
Just trying to picture this correctly. Is it Napolitano wearing the fishnets, or the goat?
-
Just trying to picture this correctly. Is it Napolitano wearing the fishnets, or the goat?
Yes.
-
Buck Sexton
@BuckSexton
·
1m
I like Judge Napolitano. He’s a gentleman, always polite and friendly-
But everything I’ve heard him say on tv for the last year or so is just wrong. I don’t know what happened to him.
Somebody got dirt on him. Whatever it is, it must be something devastating.
-
Somebody got dirt on him. Whatever it is, it must be something devastating.
That could explain why Trump refused to hire him. And why Dems are pissed he didn't.
-
That could explain why Trump refused to hire him. And why Dems are pissed he didn't.
The same thing with Judge Roberts. It is just so crystal clear obvious to everyone that he is being blackmailed.
There is no other Judge in the history of America who would rewrite a Congressional program to make it at least superficially "legal" as Roberts did with Obamacare. His sharp turn to the Left is inexplicable, unless blackmail is considered. Many people believe it has something to do with his adopted children. Apparently, someone or some group has the ability to call his adopted children into question, and that is what he is fighting for.
-
Oversight Committee Republicans
@GOPoversight
·
3m
.@RepMattGaetz
just brought the house down.
When will Democrats bring in witnesses with actual first-hand knowledge of @RepAdamSchiff
's sham #impeachment report?
We'll be waiting.
@RepMattGaetz
On the 35th of February,2999.
-
Kellyanne Conway
@KellyannePolls
·
6m
Hunter Biden is off-limits but Barron Trump is not?
@mystery-ak
Well,to be fair,Hunter is 31 or so physically,but 9 mentally. On top of being a retard,he is a drug addict and alcoholic. My retarded cat is smarter than he is.
-
The same thing with Judge Roberts. It is just so crystal clear obvious to everyone that he is being blackmailed.
There is no other Judge in the history of America who would rewrite a Congressional program to make it at least superficially "legal" as Roberts did with Obamacare. His sharp turn to the Left is inexplicable, unless blackmail is considered. Many people believe it has something to do with his adopted children. Apparently, someone or some group has the ability to call his adopted children into question, and that is what he is fighting for.
@240B
Well,that and the fact that he is a homosexual.
As for the children,they are blonde-haired and blue-eyed,and both were adopted from Argentina. WHERE do most of the people with blonde hair and blue eyes come from that are living in Argentina? Or more correctly,where did their grandfathers and great-grandfathers come from?
We are playing "Guess the Reich"!
-
John Solomon
@jsolomonReports
·
20m
Adam Schiff arbitrarily releases my phone records as a 1st Amendment protected reporter. State Department bureaucrats reportedly monitored my social media. A witness gratuitously drags a 13-year-old boy into impeachment. Whatever happened to civil liberties, privacy and decency?
-
Jamie Dupree
@jamiedupree
·
37s
After this tweet and criticism from GOP lawmakers, Stanford law professor Pamela Karlan apologizes for using the name of the Trumps' son during testimony today.
"I do regret that I did that."
Melania Trump
@FLOTUS
· 1h
A minor child deserves privacy and should be kept out of politics. Pamela Karlan, you should be ashamed of your very angry and obviously biased public pandering, and using a child to do it.
-
After this tweet and criticism from GOP lawmakers, Stanford law professor Pamela Karlan apologizes for using the name of the Trumps' son during testimony today.
"I do regret that I did that."
That isn't an apology. An apology is when you acknowledge that something you did was wrong.
-
Here is her full *apology*
Jack Posobiec
🇺🇸
@JackPosobiec
·
2m
Pamela Karlan's response: "It was wrong of me to do that. I wish the president would apologize for the things he's said wrong, but I do regret having said that."
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EK9p-lGWkAEyc3n.jpg)
Prof. Karlan and her buddy.
-
Here is her full *apology*
Jack Posobiec
🇺🇸
@JackPosobiec
·
2m
Pamela Karlan's response: "It was wrong of me to do that. I wish the president would apologize for the things he's said wrong, but I do regret having said that."
That works for me. Good luck on the Trump part, but she did without condition acknowledge that what she did was wrong. None of that "If you were offended" nonsense.
-
Donald Trump Jr.
@DonaldJTrumpJr
· 36m
Remember only children of Liberals (even the 50 year old children) are off limits. That a 13 year old is fair game for partisan hacks on a national platform shows you all you need to know about the new left and who is now running the ship. https://twitter.com/flotus/status/
-
That works for me. Good luck on the Trump part, but she did without condition acknowledge that what she did was wrong. None of that "If you were offended" nonsense.
You would be correct, had she left out the snark at the father of the minor child. I call it an insincere apology.
-
Pamela Karlan said the child's name since it is close to "Baron" in royalty name/status,
but the point was Trump is not a King who can raise any person to royalty status by giving said person a title, such as Baron, or Duke or Count, or Earl, etc. Trump is not a King but thinks he is; he thinks he owns the United States.
-
Pamela Karlan said the child's name since it is close to "Baron" in royalty name/status,
but the point was Trump is not a King
Nor does he act like one.
Trump is not a King but thinks he is; he thinks he owns the United States.
Your basis?
-
Pamela Karlan said the child's name since it is close to "Baron" in royalty name/status,
but the point was Trump is not a King who can raise any person to royalty status by giving said person a title, such as Baron, or Duke or Count, or Earl, etc. Trump is not a King but thinks he is; he thinks he owns the United States.
I thought you were better than that. I see I was wrong.
-
Pamela Karlan said the child's name since it is close to "Baron" in royalty name/status,
but the point was Trump is not a King who can raise any person to royalty status by giving said person a title, such as Baron, or Duke or Count, or Earl, etc. Trump is not a King but thinks he is; he thinks he owns the United States.
She knew what she was saying..there are other titles she could have used other than Baron....she has since apologized but the damage is done and has exposed herself as a political hack willing to make fun of a 13yo child.
-
Pamela Karlan said the child's name since it is close to "Baron" in royalty name/status,
but the point was Trump is not a King who can raise any person to royalty status by giving said person a title, such as Baron, or Duke or Count, or Earl, etc. Trump is not a King but thinks he is; he thinks he owns the United States.
What she did was use the name and she knew what she was doing when she said it. Secondly, it has absolutely nothing to do with impeachment, nothing more than opinion and jockeying to throw a jab while she's at it.
Saying that Trump thinks that he is 'King' and thinks that he owns the United States is nothing more than opinion. Even IF that opinion were true, explain the impeachable offense.
Since when do we remove the President of the United States of America who rightfully won an election, but the other side who lost doesn't want him in office??
That's all that this is and those who go along with it ought to be ashamed.
This 'kangaroo court' should have never been allowed. Last time I checked we are a democracy within a Republic and not a Banana republic.
Quite frankly, with all that has gone on since his inauguration, the Russian collusion and now this circus of impeachment I think we all should be afraid. Afraid of what the leftists, RINO's and globalist are capable of.
-
Pamela Karlan said the child's name since it is close to "Baron" in royalty name/status,
but the point was Trump is not a King who can raise any person to royalty status by giving said person a title, such as Baron, or Duke or Count, or Earl, etc. Trump is not a King but thinks he is; he thinks he owns the United States.
@Victoria33
You just can't help yourself, can you? **nononono*
-
Pamela Karlan said the child's name since it is close to "Baron" in royalty name/status,
but the point was Trump is not a King who can raise any person to royalty status by giving said person a title, such as Baron, or Duke or Count, or Earl, etc. Trump is not a King but thinks he is; he thinks he owns the United States.
Trump named his child "Barron" because he thinks he's a King. Check.
**nononono*
-
Pamela Karlan said the child's name since it is close to "Baron" in royalty name/status,
but the point was Trump is not a King who can raise any person to royalty status by giving said person a title, such as Baron, or Duke or Count, or Earl, etc. Trump is not a King but thinks he is; he thinks he owns the United States.
Pamela Karlan needlessly and shamefully made the conscious decision to drag an innocent 13 year old boy through the mud of her sad TDS world.
Ther is no justification at all anywhere for that.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/ovvNXG7.jpg)
-
Pamela Karlan said the child's name since it is close to "Baron" in royalty name/status,
but the point was Trump is not a King who can raise any person to royalty status by giving said person a title, such as Baron, or Duke or Count, or Earl, etc. Trump is not a King but thinks he is; he thinks he owns the United States.
No Bueno, Victoria.
-
She knew what she was saying..there are other titles she could have used other than Baron....she has since apologized but the damage is done and has exposed herself as a political hack willing to make fun of a 13yo child.
@mystery-ak
Yes, Karlan knew she was using the child's name as the name fit her point, that point being Trump does not have the power of King. It was brought up in testimony Trump's words when speaking as the President, "I can do anything I want". That is what caused Karlan to speak as she did to point out, Trump cannot do anything he wants, he does not have the power of a King.
-
Trump named his child "Barron" because he thinks he's a King. Check.
**nononono*
Don't tell @Victoria33 but the child was named Barron 13 years ago. Well before any notion from anyone on Earth that Trump would wind up as President of the United States. But as always, Liberals do not care about reality. And they do not care about facts.
-
You would be correct, had she left out the snark at the father of the minor child. I call it an insincere apology.
Of course it is insincere. I never expect sincerity from anyone on the Left. Just getting an acknowledgment that the deed itself was wrong is way beyond my expectation. Sure, I have set a very low bar. But even so, surpassing it is a rarity for a Dem.
-
@mystery-ak
Yes, Karlan knew she was using the child's name as the name fit her point, that point being Trump does not have the power of King. It was brought up in testimony Trump's words when speaking as the President, "I can do anything I want". That is what caused Karlan to speak as she did to point out, Trump cannot do anything he wants, he does not have the power of a King.
Nice try to deflect on this, but "Using" the child, period was unacceptable. Even IF he did say that, what does that have to do with anything?? Ok, he has a high opinion of himself, so what? Is that an impeachable offense? She flapped her lips with a lot of fluff ... she needs to lay out the evidence/facts of what impeachable offense Trump committed. If she can't then she needs to shut up.
-
@mystery-ak
Yes, Karlan knew she was using the child's name as the name fit her point, that point being Trump does not have the power of King. It was brought up in testimony Trump's words when speaking as the President, "I can do anything I want". That is what caused Karlan to speak as she did to point out, Trump cannot do anything he wants, he does not have the power of a King.
When you hit bottom. Stop digging.
-
Don't tell @Victoria33 but the child was named Barron 13 years ago. Well before any notion from anyone on Earth that Trump would wind up as President of the United States. But as always, Liberals do not care about reality. And they do not care about facts.
Hey, it could have happened. Just like Hillary Clinton being named after Sir Edmund Hillary. Right?
-
@mystery-ak
Trump named his child a fake name he used in the 1980s.
"A former reporter at Forbes says that now-President Donald Trump used his “John Barron†fake name to lie about his wealth in an attempt to get on the Forbes 400 list in the 1980s."
-
@mystery-ak
Trump named his child a fake name he used in the 1980s.
"A former reporter at Forbes says that now-President Donald Trump used his “John Barron†fake name to lie about his wealth in an attempt to get on the Forbes 400 list in the 1980s."
:nono: Just stop.
-
Stop this, Victoria33 is a respected member here and entitled to her own opinion.
-
@mystery-ak
Trump named his child a fake name he used in the 1980s.
"A former reporter at Forbes says that now-President Donald Trump used his “John Barron†fake name to lie about his wealth in an attempt to get on the Forbes 400 list in the 1980s."
Ah, so it had nothing at all to do with royalty. Glad to see you unintentionally discredit your previous post.
Now, back to that statement about Trump thinking himself to be a king who owns the United States. Do you have any basis for that?
-
Stop this, Victoria33 is a respected member here and entitled to her own opinion.
No matter how factually incorrect it may be.
-
Stop this, Victoria33 is a respected member here and entitled to her own opinion.
True. As am I.
What she is saying is ridiculous and is insulting to any intelligent person.
-
Saying that Trump thinks that he is 'King' and thinks that he owns the United States is nothing more than opinion. Even IF that opinion were true, explain the impeachable offense.
@libertybele
That's easy. He "took the presidency away" from some much-loved RINO. PLUS,he is a divorced Billionaire that dumped his wife for a younger model. The FACT that the wife he dumped has yet to make one complaint about him is irrelevant. The divorce part drives the elderly RINO biddies out of their minds because they still have fantasies of marrying someone rich and powerful. Oh yeah,and because Jesus doesn't like it. Nothing personal,you understand,
-
@Victoria33
You just can't help yourself, can you? **nononono*
@DCPatriot @Victoria33
That kind of hatred knows no limits.
-
I'm only asking you gentlemen to debate her point(s), (or lack thereof) without the use of words like idiot and sick.
-
Here is a clip of Karlan saying that she crossed the street just so she wouldn't have to walk by the Trump hotel. Gee, no bias here.
https://twitter.com/jason_howerton/status/1202300394300465154
-
FFS
The things you see when you are fresh out of dead albatross.
-
I'm only asking you gentlemen to debate her point(s), (or lack thereof) without the use of words like idiot and sick.
I am making a serious attempt to debate her point. She said:
Trump is not a King but thinks he is; he thinks he owns the United States.
I would like to know the factual basis she has for making such a claim. Nothing uncouth about it, Mr. Mod-4 sir.
-
Donald Trump Jr.
@DonaldJTrumpJr
· 36m
Remember only children of Liberals (even the 50 year old children) are off limits. That a 13 year old is fair game for partisan hacks on a national platform shows you all you need to know about the new left and who is now running the ship. https://twitter.com/flotus/status/
The new left are the same commies they've always been. It's just that Trump's election has forced them out of the closet. It should be glaringly apparent, even to the stuckonstupid Democrat constituents, what enemies of our nation they truly are.
-
Now, back to that statement about Trump thinking himself to be a king who owns the United States. Do you have any basis for that?
@Hoodat
The basis for that is what Trump said about himself and this is why Karlan said what she did: It was brought up in testimony Trump's words when speaking as the President, "I can do anything I want".
That is what caused Karlan to speak as she did to point out, Trump cannot do anything he wants, he does not have the power of a King.
-
@Hoodat
The basis for that is what Trump said about himself and this is why Karlan said what she did: It was brought up in testimony Trump's words when speaking as the President, "I can do anything I want".
That is what caused Karlan to speak as she did to point out, Trump cannot do anything he wants, he does not have the power of a King.
Spinning it. You screwed up. Now you are ducking for cover. Stop digging and say: Sorry. I F'd up.
-
This is what @Victoria33 was trying to relay.
“Contrary to what President Trump has said, Article 2 [of the Constitution] does not give him the power to do anything he wants,†testified Pamela Karlan, a professor at Stanford Law School. “The Constitution says there can be no titles of nobility, so while the president can name his son Barron, he can’t make him a baron.â€
-
@Hoodat
The basis for that is what Trump said about himself and this is why Karlan said what she did: It was brought up in testimony Trump's words when speaking as the President, "I can do anything I want".
That is what caused Karlan to speak as she did to point out, Trump cannot do anything he wants, he does not have the power of a King.
Error 404 (Not Found)!!1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hGv0wBhtw8Q#)
-
This is what @Victoria33 was trying to relay.
“Contrary to what President Trump has said, Article 2 [of the Constitution] does not give him the power to do anything he wants
The President never made the argument that Article 2 gave him the power to do anything he wants.
-
What she did was use the name and she knew what she was doing when she said it. Secondly, it has absolutely nothing to do with impeachment, nothing more than opinion and jockeying to throw a jab while she's at it.
Saying that Trump thinks that he is 'King' and thinks that he owns the United States is nothing more than opinion. Even IF that opinion were true, explain the impeachable offense.
Since when do we remove the President of the United States of America who rightfully won an election, but the other side who lost doesn't want him in office??
That's all that this is and those who go along with it ought to be ashamed.
This 'kangaroo court' should have never been allowed. Last time I checked we are a democracy within a Republic and not a Banana republic.
Quite frankly, with all that has gone on since his inauguration, the Russian collusion and now this circus of impeachment I think we all should be afraid. Afraid of what the leftists, RINO's and globalist are capable of.
I'm thinking maybe they should be afraid of what We, the People are capable of.
-
I'm only asking you gentlemen to debate her point(s), (or lack thereof) without the use of words like idiot and sick.
Thank you, for repeating what you deleted. It needed to be said. And you, said it better than me.
-
The President never made the argument that Article 2 gave him the power to do anything he wants.
Then take it up with Pamela Karlan who said it today.
-
This is what @Victoria33 was trying to relay.
@Elderberry
Thanks for the below exact quote from the hearing today. When Trump said that a while ago, that as President he can do anything he wants, I heard him say that and knew he meant it, that he does think he can do anything he wants - that means he thinks he can do anything to this country - like, he owns it and us who live in it.
Karlan said:
“Contrary to what President Trump has said, Article 2 [of the Constitution] does not give him the power to do anything he wants,†testified Pamela Karlan, a professor at Stanford Law School. “The Constitution says there can be no titles of nobility, so while the president can name his son Barron, he can’t make him a baron.â€
-
The President never made the argument that Article 2 gave him the power to do anything he wants.
Exactly. Still waiting on the proof that he committed an impeachment offense. Not opinion, but proof. Even IF the President said "I can do what I want; that comment in itself is NOT an impeachable offense.
-
:nono: Just stop.
No. Hell no.
-
@Elderberry
Thanks for the below exact quote from the hearing today. When Trump said that a while ago, that as President he can do anything he wants, I heard him say that and knew he meant it, that he does think he can do anything he wants - that means he thinks he can do anything to this country - like, he owns it and us who live in it.
Karlan said:
“Contrary to what President Trump has said, Article 2 [of the Constitution] does not give him the power to do anything he wants,†testified Pamela Karlan, a professor at Stanford Law School. “The Constitution says there can be no titles of nobility, so while the president can name his son Barron, he can’t make him a baron.â€
You suck
-
@Elderberry
Thanks for the below exact quote from the hearing today. When Trump said that a while ago, that as President he can do anything he wants, I heard him say that and knew he meant it, that he does think he can do anything he wants - that means he thinks he can do anything to this country - like, he owns it and us who live in it.
Karlan said:
“Contrary to what President Trump has said, Article 2 [of the Constitution] does not give him the power to do anything he wants,†testified Pamela Karlan, a professor at Stanford Law School. “The Constitution says there can be no titles of nobility, so while the president can name his son Barron, he can’t make him a baron.â€
So what?
As far as the Constitution says there can be no titles of nobility, then I guess we can no longer call the President, "President"?
Seriously. Anyway you cut it, she used his child. She knew what she was doing. Her comment had no place. It was nothing more than an assassination attempt on his character.
I again ask, where is the proof of an impeachable offense @Victoria33 ? Trump handed over the transcript and pretty much everything else has been nothing but opinion, hearsay and a lot of nothing to do with an actual offense.
-
My take on the thing is that the manner in witch Karlan made her point that Trump cannot be a king made her a king.
-
President Trump has a Phone and a Pen, so screw what Congress or the American People think!
Oh...Oh...wait. That was what Obama said, to absolutely no objection from anyone.
-
The new left are the same commies they've always been. It's just that Trump's election has forced them out of the closet. It should be glaringly apparent, even to the stuckonstupid Democrat constituents, what enemies of our nation they truly are.
@XenaLee
The left is upset and jealous because 13 year old Baron Trump is BOTH smarter AND more mature than 30-something Hunter Biden.
-
@Elderberry
Thanks for the below exact quote from the hearing today. When Trump said that a while ago, that as President he can do anything he wants, I heard him say that and knew he meant it, that he does think he can do anything he wants - that means he thinks he can do anything to this country - like, he owns it and us who live in it.
Karlan said:
“Contrary to what President Trump has said, Article 2 [of the Constitution] does not give him the power to do anything he wants,†testified Pamela Karlan, a professor at Stanford Law School. “The Constitution says there can be no titles of nobility, so while the president can name his son Barron, he can’t make him a baron.â€
Karlan also said this:
When the President said, "Do us a favor", he was using the royal "we" there. It wasn't a favor for the United States; he should have said 'Do me a favor'. Because only kings say 'us' when they mean 'me'.
The logical disconnect here boggles the mind. Trump thinks himself a king because he used the word "us". It is a word that anyone else normally would have used. Except when Trump used the word "us", he really meant the word "me". For anyone else, 'us' means 'us'. But for Trump, 'us' means 'me'. And this proves that Trump thinks he is a king.
BWAAAAAHAAAAHAAAAHAAAAHAAAA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSQ6iStwJUM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSQ6iStwJUM)
-
President Trump has a Phone and a Pen, so screw what Congress or the American People think!
Oh...Oh...wait. That was what Obama said, to absolutely no objection from anyone.
Noblesse oblige is dead. And that obama guy had nobility to be president.
-
The new left are the same commies they've always been. It's just that Trump's election has forced them out of the closet. It should be glaringly apparent, even to the stuckonstupid Democrat constituents, what enemies of our nation they truly are.
@XenaLee
It's worse than that to the left. They KNOW that if they lose this time,it's over for them. The Dim Party will have self-destructed,and they will have to start all over again from scratch.
When you consider they have been working towards controlling the US government since the 1920's,and then come THIS close and blow it,you can see why they are so hysterical.
-
I'm thinking maybe they should be afraid of what We, the People are capable of.
Except, the right wing of this country tends to do things by using the appropriate channels whereas the loonies on the left are the ones that rise up. This is a huge concern. I don't see this impeachment process ending well either way.
-
@XenaLee
It's worse than that to the left. They KNOW that if they lose this time,it's over for them. The Dim Party will have self-destructed,and they will have to start all over again from scratch.
When you consider they have been working towards controlling the US government since the 1920's,and then come THIS close and blow it,you can see why they are so hysterical.
Well, that's one way to look at things.
-
Then take it up with Pamela Karlan who said it today.
I am intimately aware of the Left's propensity for utilizing non-rational persuasion. But when it is repeated here, it will be challenged. Capisce?
Trump is being attacked for holding the position that Article II of the Constitution allows him to do anything he wants. Yet Trump does not hold that position. It is a complete fabrication. And when tripe like that gets posted here, expect a response from me.
-
True. As am I.
What she is saying is ridiculous and is insulting to any intelligent person.
:thumbsup: :thumbsup:
-
The only thing that "caused" Karlan to make her snarky, vile comment was the much-rehearsed leading question from Sheila JACKson Lee.
-
I certainly expect you and others to respond @Hoodat my admonishment was not meant towards you as you are a gentleman and have refuted her points without relying on personal insults. Thank you.
-
Hitlery was going to put Pammy on the SC, imagine that!
-
Hitlery was going to put Pammy on the SC, imagine that!
Not for a mere $2,000 campaign contribution. She would have had to pony up six figures to the Clinton Foundation as well.
-
Not for a mere $2,000 campaign contribution. She would have had to pony up six figures to the Clinton Foundation as well.
If HItlery had won, maybe she would have.
-
Isn't there a personal limit on contributions?
-
I am intimately aware of the Left's propensity for utilizing non-rational persuasion. But when it is repeated here, it will be challenged. Capisce?
Trump is being attacked for holding the position that Article II of the Constitution allows him to do anything he wants. Yet Trump does not hold that position. It is a complete fabrication. And when tripe like that gets posted here, expect a response from me.
:yowsa: And I, for one appreciate that about you @Hoodat
-
Isn't there a personal limit on contributions?
Thus the need for a Clinton Foundation. It allows unlimited donations that are tax deductible and can be channeled into Hillary's personal bank account.
-
Isn't there a personal limit on contributions?
Not for a D.
There might be a limit on personal contributions. If I were a mod I would know.
Hey! You ever seen the movie with Al Pacino, ...And Justice for All?
-
Not for a D.
There might be a limit on personal contributions. If I were a mod I would know.
Hey! You ever seen the movie with Al Pacino, ...And Justice for All?
We're all out of Order!
Actually, there is no limit on contributions for TBR. We are not IRS deductible.
-
We're all out of Order!
Actually, there is no limit on contributions for TBR. We are not IRS deductible.
This impeachment thing, these threads, remind me of that movie.
Be nice to make the IRS deductible.
-
Not for a mere $2,000 campaign contribution. She would have had to pony up six figures to the Clinton Foundation as well.
Regarding her $$$ contributions to Democrat candidates...
If you listened to her responses to those 'trifecta', she NEVER said "yes" as to the amount...instead, she used, "If you say so...", or "That sounds about right..."
-
Be nice to make the IRS deductible.
Not gonna happen. Too many Lois Lerner types still at the IRS.
-
Regarding her $$$ contributions to Democrat candidates...
If you listened to her responses to those 'trifecta', she NEVER said "yes" as to the amount...instead, she used, "If you say so...", or "That sounds about right..."
She was surprised at the question, it appears. Can't answer a surprise question with a non-lawyerly response.
-
Not gonna happen. Too many Lois Lerner types still at the IRS.
And boondoggles like the Schitt Show wouldn't get the funding required to get past the opening act.
-
Trump did nothing to stop the Mueller Show and it went on nearly three years.
King Trump could have stopped it, no? There were numerous outs available to him along the way, yet he cooperated with the investigation—even though he was the one man who knew it was a lie.
Ever notice all the court decisions that go against Trump? That’s because the administration follows legal process. Hardly actions of a king (or if you prefer tyrant, dictator, despot, Hitler—what ever floats your boat).
-
The Democrats have gone beyond the point where they can 'turn around'.
They don't care!
And you know why?? 7-2 Conservative SCOTUS.
-
Trump did nothing to stop the Mueller Show and it went on nearly three years.
King Trump could have stopped it, no? There were numerous outs available to him along the way, yet he cooperated with the investigation—even though he was the one man who knew it was a lie.
Ever notice all the court decisions that go against Trump? That’s because the administration follows legal process. Hardly actions of a king (or if you prefer tyrant, dictator, despot, Hitler—what ever floats your boat).
That... plus the fact.... that for a so-called "dictator".... wannabe or otherwise.....
that these leftist idiots are trying to make him out to be.... he has had remarkable restraint for going on four years now. The kind of restraint that few of us, if any, would have had.
-
The Democrats have gone beyond the point where they can 'turn around'.
They don't care!
And you know why?? 7-2 Conservative SCOTUS.
No worries. They still have Roberts on their side.
-
President Trump is certainly the very worst Hitler/Dictator ever.
If he is a KING, then he is not very good at it.
Otherwise he would have had all these Leftist traitors executed by now.
-
Louie Gohmert tells it like it is after the hearing:
Error 404 (Not Found)!!1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EC6es1yUGUA#)
-
Louie Gohmert tells it like it is after the hearing:
Error 404 (Not Found)!!1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EC6es1yUGUA#)
Louie generally does that!