Tag Archives: impeachment

national news, Uncategorized

Senate trial Q&A: exercise in efficiency

(AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

I want to say a word of praise for the way the Senate leadership has organized the Senate trial of Donald John Trump, the nation’s current president.

I am not thrilled that the Republican Senate leader, Mitch McConnell, has continued to resist the calling of witnesses to testify before the Senate.

However, today’s question-and-answer period has been scintillating, interesting and educational. What’s more, it has been done without allowing senators to bloviate, pontificate and make endless speeches.

Chief Justice John Roberts gets the questions in writing from senators. The questions are written on small cards, which cannot possibly contain too much text.

Moreover, the House managers who are prosecuting the case and the president’s lawyers who are defending him are given just five minutes to respond. Those who run over that time are shut down on the spot by the chief justice.

I also want to toss a bouquet to the House managers and to the president’s legal team for the direct answers they are giving in response to the questions.

I realize that the House managers are getting questions mostly from Democratic senators and that POTUS’s team is being quizzed mostly by Republican senators. However, at times they field tough queries from the “other side.”

I find this element of the Senate trial to be the most satisfying to date. My own mind hasn’t changed. I doubt others will change, either. All Americans who have an interest in watching the U.S. Constitution at work, though, should be pleased at what they are witnessing.

national news

Feeling oddly dirty backing Bolton these days

I am going to admit something of which I am not proud.

It is that I am feeling a bit dirty in backing the word of former national security adviser John Bolton, who suddenly has become the potentially star witness in the Senate impeachment trial of Donald John Trump, the nation’s current president.

Bolton was in the room when Trump made that infamous July 25 phone call to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zellenskiy, the one when he asked Zellenskiy for a personal political favor. He has plenty to tell the Senate in its trial to determine whether Trump should remain president.

Why the dirty feeling? I have long opposed Bolton’s uber-hawkish world view. He once served as United Nations ambassador and said one could knock the top 10 floors off the U.N. building and not miss a lick.

However, he is a man of principle. He said he heard something in that Trump-Zellenskiy phone call that disturbed him. He reportedly told Trump at the time of his concern. Bolton now has written a book in which he details his alarm that Trump sought a political favor in exchange for sending military aid to Ukraine, which is in the midst of an all-out war with Russia-back rebels.

You’ve heard the phrase that “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” I don’t consider Donald Trump to be my “enemy.” Yes, I believe he is unfit for the office he occupies. I believe the phone call he made to Zellenskiy is just one of many examples he has provided to demonstrate his unfitness.

Bolton, who’s been scorned by many of us over the years, now has become a friend, an ally, someone of historic value.

Weird, huh?

national news

Bring on John Bolton!

Here we are. The House of Representatives impeachment managers have made their case. Donald John Trump’s legal team has made its case.

Now come the questions and answers, the back and forth in Trump’s Senate impeachment trial.

I just want to make this request as clearly as I can: Senators need to summon former national security adviser John Bolton to tell them what he heard on July 25 when the president made that infamous phone call to the president of Ukraine.

And no, there need not be a sideshow witness called to counter Bolton’s appearance. Bolton is a material fact witness. He has first-hand knowledge of what transpired during that phone call. Republicans are making noises about summoning Hunter Biden, the son of the former vice president, who went to work for a Ukraine energy company. Yeah, he got a lot of money. Prosecutors have said, however, that there was no “corruption” involved.

Hunter Biden profited from being the son of a prominent U.S. politician. So … what? Does the GOP defense of Trump actually want to play that card, given the nepotism that runs rampant throughout the West Wing of the White House?

Bolton needs to be heard. So does White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney. If they are able to defend what Trump did, then let ’em do it! If they have something else to say, let ’em say that, too!

national news

Just not feelin’ ‘The Bern’

Allow me a moment or two to vent on what I see possibly transpiring within the fight for the Democratic Party presidential primary campaign.

It is that I am baffled at the support that Sen. Bernie Sanders continues to draw among those who want to defeat Donald John Trump, the nation’s current president.

Sanders is an independent from Vermont who is running in a party to which he does not belong. He is an avowed “democratic socialist,” a fellow who wants to redistribute the nation’s wealth. He wants to take money away from the “top 1 percent” who he says control everything in this great country.

He wants to make college education free for every American and favors something called “Medicare for All,” which in my mind is unaffordable.

He cannot campaign without lacing his rhetoric with the notes he pulls from that song sheet.

Sen. Sanders has lost me. I cannot back this guy. Yet he enjoys amazing support in Iowa, New Hampshire and possibly in Nevada … three of the early-primary states.

He is focusing more attention now on Texas, which has a March 3 primary on what is being billed as Super Tuesday.

Being more of a center-left kind of voter, I am inclined to look more seriously at candidates who seek to straddle the stripe that divides liberals and conservatives. I continue to long for a more compromising environment in the federal government.

It is clear to me that Donald John Trump isn’t the individual who can unite this country. He is campaigning to his base, firing ’em up at rallies and firing off epithets at his foes.

Bernie Sanders isn’t going to unite this country, either. He’s now making ad buys in Texas, seeking to elevate his profile here. Will the young folks who have glommed onto this fellow’s message now put him among the Democratic Party leaders in Texas?

I am among those voters who want to defeat Trump, who still appears all but certain to survive the impeachment trial under way in the U.S. Senate. I just cannot buy into the notion that Bernie Sanders is the guy who can do it.

national news

What do you mean, Mr. POTUS, about Schiff paying ‘a price’?

Donald John Trump’s Twitter digits are working overtime. Indeed, they have been doing so for, oh, the past three-plus years!

Now he says U.S. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, who is serving as lead manager in the Senate impeachment trial of Trump, will “pay a price” for damaging the country.

Many folks are concerned about the chilling implication. “Pay a price?” What does that mean, Mr. President?

I guess he means voters in Schiff’s California congressional district will boot him out of office later this year. But he didn’t say what he meant specifically.

Others have suggested a potential “death threat.” Trump’s allies are defending him, saying no one should ascribe such dire consequence in something the president fires off on Twitter.

I am just one American who wishes — but long ago quit expecting — Donald Trump to cease the Twitter tantrums/tirades/tempests.

He is on trial in the Senate on allegations that he abused his power and obstructed Congress’s effort to get to the bottom of his abuse of power. It’s all about the Ukraine thing, asking that government for a political favor and withholding military aid until it delivered on the favor, which was an investigation into Joe Biden, a potential 2020 foe of Trump.

Schiff’s committee took the lead in investigating the allegation. Now he is leading the House managers in prosecuting that case in the Senate.

It’s all being done constitutionally, legally, according to custom.

However, Donald Trump is issuing a veiled threat? Via Twitter?

Knock … it … off!

national news

Is this the ‘smoking gun’? Uhh, probably … not

Former national security adviser John Bolton has just tossed a proverbial live grenade into Donald John Trump’s defense team’s lap.

You see, he has this book coming out that alleges that the current president of the United States conditioned specifically the withholding of military aid to Ukraine on the launching of an investigation into Joe and Hunter Biden.

Bingo! Ba-da-boom! There’s your so-called “smoking gun.”

Democrats now are insisting in even more vigorous terms that Bolton be summoned to testify before the Senate trial that is underway to determine whether Trump should be kicked out of office. The House has impeached him on grounds of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.

If Bolton gets to talk openly and under oath to senators, then some folks believe this might be the testimony that could pry Republicans loose from their loyal support of Donald Trump. I wish I could join them in believing as much. I am afraid that Trump’s death grip on the GOP is as tight as ever.

It is an amazing transformation of a once-great political party.

If Bolton’s testimony is somehow kept out of the Senate record, then he will be able to publish his book, share to the world what he reportedly has written. Donald Trump will continue to deny that he said what Bolton has alleged … although I am unwilling to believe a single word that comes out of POTUS’s mouth.

I do agree, though, that Bolton has detonated a bomb.

It remains to be seen, though, whether it inflicts any serious damage to the man who is defending himself against those who have accused him of high crimes and misdemeanors.

national news

Trump is still a ‘phony’ and a ‘fraud’

I didn’t vote for Mitt Romney in 2012 when he ran for president against Barack H. Obama. I felt at the time — and I do at this moment — that the incumbent president was better for this country than his Republican opponent.

But then Mitt had to make a speech in 2016 that spoke for many millions of his fellow Americans. Here it is …

He called the then-prospective GOP nominee a “phony” and a “fraud.” He was right then. He would be right today — were he to muster the nerve to say it about the fraudulent politician who went on to be elected president of the United States.

I just want to share this video once again to offer a glimmer of hope that now Sen. Romney, of Utah, will muster up some guts to break ranks with his Republican Senate colleagues.

Sen. Romney says he wants former national security adviser John Bolton to testify in the ongoing Senate trial of Donald John Trump. Bolton heard Trump’s infamous phone call to Ukraine’s president in which he asked the foreign government for a political favor. Bolton reportedly was alarmed at what he heard.

The House has impeached Trump on abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. Trump’s legal team has begun its defense of the president. No one in the Senate or the House who purports to support Trump has stood up for the man’s character.

Sen. Romney damn sure isn’t.

The speech attached to this blog post speaks volumes — and it speaks them loudly — to the essence of the man who sought the presidency in 2016 and who has abused the power of his office ever since he swore an oath to defend the Constitution.

International news

Russia, Ukraine … which one attacked us in 2016?

1 Comment

Donald John Trump’s defense team today introduced, albeit gently, the notion that Ukraine might have joined its mortal enemy Russia in attacking our 2016 presidential election.

Trump is on trial for his job in the U.S. Senate. The House of Reps’ managers gave it their best shot in their opening argument. Now it’s Trump’s turn.

So what did the legal eagles representing the current president offer? They suggested that Ukraine might have attacked the U.S. election in 2016. But wait!

Russia and Ukraine are at war. Russia re-annexed Crimea, a part of Ukraine. Russia-backed rebels are fighting Ukraine government forces. Thousands of people have been killed.

An alleged Ukrainian attack on our election, of course, is a Russian propaganda talking point, which Republicans in the Senate and House have been parroting. Moreover, U.S. intelligence experts have concluded unanimously that Russia acted alone in attacking our system in 2016, even though Donald Trump keeps denying their findings and disparaging their expertise.

I have to ask: Does it make any semblance of sense for Ukraine and Russia to — and pardon the expression — “collude” to interfere together to influence the outcome of a U.S. presidential election?

My head is spinning.

national news

Should Democratic candidates recuse themselves?

My quest for fairness compels me to wonder aloud: Given that this blog — published by me — has insisted that U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is unfit to sit as a “juror” in the trial of Donald John Trump, might there be a case to be made against the four Democratic senators who are running for president?

McConnell has said he won’t be an “impartial” juror, even though he took an oath to deliver impartial justice in the Senate impeachment trial of the current president of the United States.

What about the individuals who are running for their party’s nomination to oppose Trump in the November election? Sens. Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Amy Klobuchar and Michael Bennett have made up their minds on how they intend to vote when they get the order to cast their vote. They will vote to convict Trump. Period.

I can think of a few other Republicans as well who’ve said they have made up their minds, that they don’t need no witness testimony or evidentiary documents. Lindsey Graham? Ted Cruz? John Kennedy? Give me a break.

However, this pre-judging disease spreads across the aisle.

The four Democrats have staked out their views already. Sure, they insist on witnesses and documents. It remains to be seen whether they’ll get ’em. It’s beginning to look to me as though the fix is in. Republicans who comprise most of the 100 Senate seats aren’t likely to admit witnesses, even though they have plenty to offer.

The four contenders for the Democratic Party presidential nomination, though, need to think long and hard whether they are any more qualified to serve with impartiality than the Senate majority leader who’s admitted he will do nothing of the sort.

Hey, fair is fair … right?

national news

Dershowitz needs to explain his change of mind on abuse of power

Alan Dershowitz has been recruited by Donald John Trump to join his defense team that will fight to stave off the current president’s potential conviction and removal from office.

The U.S. House of Representatives impeached Trump on two articles: abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. To my mind, the House impeachment managers have made the case. He abused his power by asking Ukraine to interfere in our 2020 presidential election and obstructed justice by blocking all White House officials from answering congressional subpoenas.

The president’s team will seek to rebut them.

Dershowitz, though, is going to argue — as I understand it — that the impeachment articles somehow violate constitutional precepts, that abuse of power is not an impeachable offense.

I hate to disagree with an esteemed law professor emeritus at Harvard University … but I think I will.

Moreover, Dershowitz said precisely the opposite in 1998 when the House was impeaching President Bill Clinton. Twenty-two years ago, Dershowitz said an abuse of power was impeachable, but now he says it isn’t? What’s changed between then and now?

We all know the answer. Nothing has changed!

It’s too bad senators are required to sit there silently in the Senate chamber. None of them is allowed to object to what they might hear.

Indeed, I would find it highly objectionable for esteemed professor Dershowitz to say out loud that a president cannot be impeached for abusing the power of his office when, truth be told, he most certainly can.

I am so-o-o-o-o looking forward to hearing how Donald Trump’s team seeks to defend him.