Chris Wallace: If I'm Trump, 'I would not be especially pleased' with White House defense
https://thehill.com/homenews/media/479327-chris-wallace-if-im-trump-i-would-not-be-especially-pleased-with-white-house
I was watching when Wallace said that. Fortunately, the President's legal team doesn't have Chris Wallace on it.
I was watching when Wallace said that. Fortunately, the President's legal team doesn't have Chris Wallace on it.
:2popcorn:
I think it's genius to have Chris Wallace do this on FOX.
What better way to prove to people that "FAIR & BALANCED" is much better for them than 100% U.S.A. Certified Bullshit they're getting everywhere else?
. . .
The 6th Sense. happy77
I think it's genius to have Chris Wallace do this on FOX.
What better way to prove to people that "FAIR & BALANCED" is much better for them than 100% U.S.A. Certified Bullshit they're getting everywhere else?
When I 'see' Chris Wallace, I see Bill Kristol.....I see @roamer_1 ...I see @Chosen Daughter
The 6th Sense. happy77
Erik Wasson
@elwasson
·
52s
Republicans today are seizing on Nadler remarks saying GOP senators are engaged in cover up. Hawley says House severely alienated the jury. Murkowksi says she was offended. Schiff defends Nadler and blames long day
When I 'see' Chris Wallace, I see Bill Kristol.....I see @roamer_1 ...I see @Chosen Daughter
The 6th Sense. happy77
Senator Ted Cruz
@SenTedCruz
There’s an old saying:
If you have the facts, you bang the facts.
If you have the law, you bang the law.
If you don't have either, you bang the table.
Yesterday we saw a whole lot of table banging from Schiff, Schumer, et al. Unfortunately I expect to see the same today.
w/video: https://twitter.com/SenTedCruz/status/1220017763625984000
Jennifer Rubin
@JRubinBlogger
·
5m
Cotton, Cruz and other faux hawks dont give a damn that Trump threw Ukraine to the Russian bear.
Mark R. Levin
@marklevinshow
·
5m
1. Schiff is NOT arguing actual facts and evidence in the House record based on testimony or documents. He’s substituting his own narrative as the basis for his “case.†There’s no smoking gun. There’s no killer witness.
Mark R. Levin
@marklevinshow
·
5m
2. So they’ve insisted that there’s a coverup because they can’t use the Senate to call witnesses or present evidence that would prove what they cannot prove in support of their bogus impeachment, none of which was the basis for the House vote.
ABC News Politics
@ABCPolitics
·
6m
Rep. Adam Schiff: "We are here" because President Trump has abused "the power of his office to seek help from abroad to improve his re-election prospects," and "when he was caught, he used the powers of that office to obstruct" the investigation
Jennifer Rubin
@JRubinBlogger
·
5m
Cotton, Cruz and other faux hawks dont give a damn that Trump threw Ukraine to the Russian bear.
I keep waiting for a giant bolt of lighting to shoot down from the sky and strike Schiff dead. 'Liar' is the only way to describe him. The only ones interfering with the 2020 elections are Schiff et al.:silly:
Rush is pissed because, unlike the overwhelming majority of Americans, he's actually watching it. And the structure of these things always favors the prosecution at the start simply because they go first.
He shouldn't forget that the defense is going to have the same 24 hours to tear the Democrats a new one when the prosecution is done.
Dan Bongino
@dbongino
Think he'll take Sen. Paul up on his offer?
Rand Paul Invites Trump to Senate to Watch "Partisan Charade"
A front row seat to the witch hunt
bongino.com
I think he should go...
By the way, in a real trial, half of the "evidence" #Schiff is talking about would be inadmissible, because it is either clear hearsay or is someone's subjective perception of someone else's intent. That evidence is inadmissible in court because of how untrustworthy it is.
(https://a57.foxnews.com/media2.foxnews.com/BrightCove/694940094001/2017/07/26/896/504/694940094001_5522504601001_5522502653001-vs.jpg?ve=1&tl=1)
I'd love to see the Reps get ahold of this one.
Schiff has no shame.
He has utterly no conscience about lying, to everyone, to the Senate, and to America as a whole.
He has no credibility at all. He 'makes-up' his so called 'facts' as he goes.
And in his twisted mind, this is perfectly OK. He thinks it is Great.
Is all of this just about protecting biden? The chosen one?
Yep. It’s natural to him; he lies effortlessly.Look. We all know that Trump colluded with Putin to win the election.
(http://www.grubgrade.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Taco-Bell-Bacon-Club-Chalupa.jpg)
How odd. When I see Wallace, I see you. @roamer_1 is miles to the right of both.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EO6akzEW4AMrtJn?format=jpg&name=small)
Jenna Ellis
@JennaEllisEsq
Opening statements are NOT evidence and can’t go beyond what the evidence itself will show.
Correctamundo! Yet the media pundits went on and on yesterday praising the Dems for their brilliance in submitting evidence through their opening statements. Idiots.
(https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/villains/images/6/6b/Colonel_Sam_Flagg.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20150801202843)
I see it now.
This is bigger than all of you.
This is a major conspiracy, and I'll get to the bottom of this even if I have to go right to the top.
(Schiff even looks like Colonel Flagg)
They know they can make any shit up and the media will proclaim it as gospel.
When I 'see' Chris Wallace, I see Bill Kristol.....I see @roamer_1 ...I see @Chosen Daughter
How odd. When I see Wallace, I see you. @roamer_1 is miles to the right of both.
Robert BarnesI believed that Trump discovered that the Foreign Intelligence Services were feeding him disinformation in the Intel Brief to further their own agendas. He then discarded the Intel Brief and gathered intelligence on his own by direct contact with foreign officials, bypassing the DeepState spin factory. This pissed them off to no end. That is why they are so angry at Trump. Because he exposed what they were up to.
@Barnes_Law
·
3m
Little secret about embassies: they are just a place to hide our spies & pay off donors. #DeepState is used to running the actual policies of our government overseas, and is still shocked Trump planned on being his own man.
Washington Post Opinions
@PostOpinions
·
19m
The Democrats are winning the argument even though they’ll lose the Senate trial
Jon WardCalling the 2020 election into question before it has even begun is as clear an admission as it gets by the Democrats that they are absolutely certain they are going to lose, no matter who the Dem candidate is.
@jonward11
·
40s
Schiff made a pretty remarkable statement in favor of impeachment today, asserting that Trump's pressure campaign on Ukraine has called the legitimacy of the 2020 election into question
Calling the 2020 election into question before it has even begun is as clear an admission as it gets by the Democrats that they are absolutely certain they are going to lose, no matter who the Dem candidate is.
Right. But it's Republicans who are imperiling the faith of the American people in democracy....I agree. This is why the Dems have recently started vociferously calling for an end to public elections...
This is basically the same schtick they've been pulling since 2000. Any Republican election victory isn't legitimate..
Washington Post Opinions
@PostOpinions
·
19m
The Democrats are winning the argument . . . .
Rich Lowry
@RichLowry
·
3m
I don’t get how people who didn’t balk at Obama’s refusal to give Ukraine lethal aid can as *as a policy mattter* object to a brief delay in military aid by Trump as a horrendous blow to Ukraine’s defense
Kimberley Strassel@mystery-ak
@KimStrassel
1) Why is it that nobody in MSM calls out @RepAdamSchiff for a basic and repeated falsehood in this trial? To wit, that Russia helped Trump win an election... Where is there any evidence for this outrageous Russia claim?
@mystery-ak
@Cyber Liberty
@corbe
Here is the answer why Schiff was right that Putin wanted Trump to win and helped him:
Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State and Putin was running for re-election. She knew what he had done in his past in the KGB (killed people), and the people he was still killing with poison, etc. and every move he was presently taking to hurt the Russian people and used her power as Secretary of State to inform the Russian people to vote him out. She was Putin's nemesis, his personal sworn enemy. He actually said in public she caused him trouble in his re-election. This is the reason he needed Trump as President, not Clinton.
Video: Schiff Blocks Reporters From Questioning Nadler About His Meltdown in the Senate Last Night At a press conference held before the start of Wednesday’s impeachment trial session in the Senate, lead House Manager Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA)@mystery-ak
@mystery-ak
@Cyber Liberty
@corbe
Here is the answer why Schiff was right that Putin wanted Trump to win and helped him:
Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State and Putin was running for re-election. She knew what he had done in his past in the KGB (killed people), and the people he was still killing with poison, etc. and every move he was presently taking to hurt the Russian people and used her power as Secretary of State to inform the Russian people to vote him out. She was Putin's nemesis, his personal sworn enemy. He actually said in public she caused him trouble in his re-election. This is the reason he needed Trump as President, not Clinton.
@mystery-ak
I just heard/saw Nadler give his comments last night and he was reading from a script. There was no melt-down, he spoke in a calm voice with feeling that he meant his words.
@Victoria33@sneakypete
Good to see you come out of the closet as a Bubbette! supporter.
Well, he certainly didn't need her anymore,after she and her boss saw to it Putin got all the Uranium he wanted. Putin understands the first rule of bribery: People you bribe don't stay bribed. Actually, the only place I've read that says Putin wanted Trump over Hillary was the now thoroughly discredited Steele "dossier." Every story I saw since that declares Trump to be "Putin's choice" eventually sourced to that phony document. Everything else is just opinion.@Cyber Liberty
Here is the answer why Schiff was right that Putin wanted Trump to win and helped him:OMG. This has to be one of the most STUPID, or maybe the most STUPID, posts I have seen on this site.
Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State and Putin was running for re-election. She knew what he had done in his past in the KGB (killed people), and the people he was still killing with poison, etc. and every move he was presently taking to hurt the Russian people and used her power as Secretary of State to inform the Russian people to vote him out. She was Putin's nemesis, his personal sworn enemy. He actually said in public she caused him trouble in his re-election. This is the reason he needed Trump as President, not Clinton.
@Cyber Liberty
Here is one summation about Clinton/Putin. Consider the rest in "quotes":
2016
Why Putin hates Hillary
Behind the allegations of a Russian hack of the DNC is the Kremlin leader's fury at Clinton for challenging the fairness of Russian elections. When mass protests against Russian President Vladimir Putin erupted in Moscow in December 2011, Putin made clear who he thought was really behind them: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
With the protesters accusing Putin of having rigged recent elections, the Russian leader pointed an angry finger at Clinton, who had issued a statement sharply critical of the voting results. “She said they were dishonest and unfair,†Putin fumed in public remarks, saying that Clinton gave “a signal†to demonstrators working “with the support of the U.S. State Department†to undermine his power. “We need to safeguard ourselves from this interference in our internal affairs,†Putin declared.
Five years later, Putin may be seeking revenge against Clinton. At least that’s the implication of the view among some cybersecurity experts that Russia was behind the recent hack of the Democratic National Committee’s email server, which has sowed confusion and dissent at the Democratic National Convention and undercut Clinton’s goal of party unity.
While Donald Trump’s budding bromance with Vladimir Putin is well known — the two men have exchanged admiring words about each other and called for improved relations between Washington and Moscow — Putin’s hostility towards Clinton draws less attention.
Former U.S. officials who worked on Russia policy with Clinton say that Putin was personally stung by Clinton’s December 2011 condemnation of Russia’s parliamentary elections, and had his anger communicated directly to President Barack Obama. They say Putin and his advisers are also keenly aware that, even as she executed Obama’s “reset†policy with Russia, Clinton took a harder line toward Moscow than others in the administration. And they say Putin sees Clinton as a forceful proponent of “regime change†policies that the Russian leader considers a grave threat to his own survival.
“He was very upset [with Clinton] and continued to be for the rest of the time that I was in government,†said Michael McFaul, who served as the top Russia official in Obama’s national security council from 2009 to December 2011 and then was U.S. ambassador to Moscow until early 2014. “One could speculate that this is his moment for payback.â€
The notion of payback remains speculation. Some experts are unconvinced that Putin’s government engineered the DNC email hack or that it was meant to influence the election in Trump’s favor as opposed to embarrassing DNC officials for any number of reasons.
Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State and Putin was running for re-election. She knew what he had done in his past in the KGB (killed people), and the people he was still killing with poison, etc. and every move he was presently taking to hurt the Russian people and used her power as Secretary of State to inform the Russian people to vote him out. She was Putin's nemesis, his personal sworn enemy.
@Hoodat
Another subject: The Uranium One deal took six (I think it was six, have to look it up again) departments of our government to approve that deal. She was one vote of the group so she could not do it alone.
@Hoodat
Read my post 144 for further information about the relationship between Putin and Clinton. That post spells out why Putin hated Clinton and did not want her to be President.
Another subject: The Uranium One deal took six (I think it was six, have to look it up again) departments of our government to approve that deal. She was one vote of the group so she could not do it alone.
The very idea that Putin would favor a business tycoon billionaire capitalist, over declared communist sycophants who literally adored him, is nonsensical in the extreme.
I don't agree. Trump was actually very open in wanting to cooperate more with Russia to defeat ISIS, which I believe was the right course. Hillary and Obama weren't nearly as keen on that. Russia may have believed that Trump would be more open to putting other issues on the back burner to concentrate on defeating ISIS.Sure. All that is true. But a Hillary/Kerry administration would have pulled all troops out of the M.E., essentially giving Putin a 'free hand' to do whatever he wanted to do. Would Putin prefer to cooperate with Trump, or would they prefer to have everything, including all the oil fields, to themselves? It is hard for me to grasp the idea that Putin would prefer to deal with a savvy sober strategist, rather than a group of idealist ideologues who would give him everything.
So sure, I think Putin preferring Trump is plausible, and I also think Trump's policy of prioritizing defeating ISIS was the correct one, even if it meant a short-term accommodation with Russia.
QuoteTrump was actually very open in wanting to cooperate more with Russia to defeat ISIS, which I believe was the right course. Hillary and Obama weren't nearly as keen on that.
@Maj. Bill Martin
Of course they weren't. They are both 60's Communist sympathizers/wannabes,and international chaos is the Mothers Milk of Revolution to them. The LAST thing they wanted was world peace because people at peace NEVER want communism.
QuoteRussia may have believed that Trump would be more open to putting other issues on the back burner to concentrate on defeating ISIS.
I can see where the would believe that. Trump is a businessman,and businessmen focus on "the deal of the day",and in this case it was "the deal of the day" for both Russia and the US.
I'm amazed at how folks give that much of a crap about who Putin liked and wanted to be President. So. What? All that does is make one wonder about Putin's motive, and whatever it might turn out be, it's to bring down the US. Why is it important to know who he favored for President, anyway?
Sure. All that is true. But a Hillary/Kerry administration would have pulled all troops out of the M.E., essentially giving Putin a 'free hand' to do whatever he wanted to do. Would Putin prefer to cooperate with Trump, or would they prefer to have everything, including all the oil fields, to themselves? It is hard for me to grasp the idea that Putin would prefer to deal with a savvy sober strategist, rather than a group of idealist ideologues who would give him everything.
@240B@sneakypete
Russia is big,but that does not mean they have a population large enough to make her profitable. This is ESPECIALLY true when it comes to facing down Islam by herself. Don't forget,she has Islamic Republics within her borders,and still has flare up fights with them. Who better to try to gain for an ally than the US?
Putin is many things,but "fool" isn't one of them. He already has a plateful,and doesn't need to add to it.
@sneakypeteQuoteOK.
Russia, China, and Iran, recently conducted joint ops in the Persian Gulf.
My opinion is that Putin would get along just fine in the M.E. without U.S. involvement,
@240B I see their voluntary involvement in the Muddle East as a defensive move,not an aggressive one. MUCH cheaper and easier to keep a potential enemy as a semi-ally than an actual enemy.
Russia's prime concern with Muslims are those inside Russia herself. For this reason they want to have their own contacts with the fundie Muslim leadership in the Muddle East,and maybe try to influence the non-Russian Muslims their time would be better spent in Africa,for example.Quoteespecially with Turkey leading the way.
Well,they do have more than a little history with Turkey.QuoteSyria is a Russian ally and is armed with Chinese missiles.
Really man, if Russia was serious about ending ISIS, they could make all the disputed areas a parking lot if they wanted to.
So could we. We don't for the same reasons the Russians don't.
@Hoodat
Read my post 144 for further information about the relationship between Putin and Clinton. That post spells out why Putin hated Clinton and did not want her to be President.
And while Clintonites realize that few Americans typically pay close attention to the state of U.S.-Russia relations, there are two important caveats. One is the presence of large Polish, Ukrainian and other eastern European populations in Rust Belt states like Pennsylvania, Ohio and Wisconsin, where the Clinton campaign plans to flag stories about Trump and Putin for ethnic media outlets. The other is that voters of all stripes will surely pay attention to serious talk of foreign influence in the election.
I think it's genius to have Chris Wallace do this on FOX.
What better way to prove to people that "FAIR & BALANCED" is much better for them than 100% U.S.A. Certified Bullshit they're getting everywhere else?
When I 'see' Chris Wallace, I see Bill Kristol.....I see @roamer_1 ...I see @Chosen Daughter
The 6th Sense. happy77
I am saying to you: No, I am not a Clinton person - someone on this thread brought up Uranium One as though she did it by herself and I stated what the process is. Since it takes a number of federal departments to approve such a deal, and Clinton had one vote, the others could have kept the deal from happening.
I am saying to you: No, I am not a Clinton person - someone on this thread brought up Uranium One as though she did it by herself and I stated what the process is. Since it takes a number of federal departments to approve such a deal, and Clinton had one vote, the others could have kept the deal from happening.
'Good job’: Lindsey Graham congratulates Adam Schiff on impeachment trial performanceWell, Graham is a gentleman and that is what you do.Schiff worked hard and did a good job... I just happen to disagree 100%.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/good-job-lindsey-graham-congratulates-adam-schiff-on-impeachment-trial-performance (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/good-job-lindsey-graham-congratulates-adam-schiff-on-impeachment-trial-performance)
@Maj. Bill Martin
@mystery-ak
Martin, you said: "Here's what's going on: you simply are not applying the same level of scrutiny/skepticism to the things Democrats are doing as you apply to Trump. You are accepting their explanations/excuses at face value without any real skepticism or analysis, while doing the exact opposite with anything Trump does. That's why people are calling you out on that apparent bias."
You are incorrect. I accept nothing at face value; I study what is going on in politics every single day, my TV stays on constantly on Fox and CNN, and I research everyday. I do that because I worked in Republican politics for over 10 years. I have a framed Certificate of Appreciation from the National Republican Committee for the work I did.
My opposition to Trump is ONE REASON - In my professional opinion he has a severe Personality Disorder and should not be president.
None of the Democrats running should be President, however I have studied each one's behavior, Biden, Bernie, Warren, from their childhood up just as I did with Trump, and none of them have behavior suggesting a dangerous Personality Disorder as Trump's behavior does every single day.
Ranking Democrat Senator Dianne Feinstein Left Senate During Schiff Testimony – Said “Goodnight†and Went Home…
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/01/22/ranking-democrat-senator-dianne-feinstein-left-senate-during-schiff-testimony-said-goodnight-and-went-home/
Ranking Democrat Senator Dianne Feinstein Left Senate During Schiff Testimony – Said “Goodnight†and Went Home…
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/01/22/ranking-democrat-senator-dianne-feinstein-left-senate-during-schiff-testimony-said-goodnight-and-went-home/
@Victoria33@Maj. Bill Martin
And yet, for all the scrutiny you supposedly apply to Democrats...you still didn't address the point about why "six other departments had to sign off" didn't matter when it came to the Clintons and Uranium One.
Someone should make a Motion to dismiss Feinswine from the jury.
@Maj. Bill Martin
I wrote the process - I was not there and neither were you, to know what was said and how they came to an agreement about the uranium. Maybe they had orders from Obama to accept the uranium sell - I do not know and neither do you.