Trump wants the GOP to be tougher defending him

This is what I am saying. You keep trying to boil things down to ten words or less. It is never that simple.

There are some who argue that, if the circumstances and evidence warrants it, it is the Constitutional duty of the House to impeach the President.

That is true. If the situation calls for it, it is the Constitutional duty of the House of Representatives to impeach the President. However, according to our Constitution, Congress has many Constitutional duties and sometimes they conflict with one another.

That is the case here. The ultimate purpose of impeaching the President is his removal from office. Impeachment is merely an indictment against the President. The trial to determine his removal from office takes place in the Senate with the chief justice presiding.

Therein lies the problem. As matters stand now, the 67 votes needed to remove Trump from office simply won't happen.

Indeed, the very opposite is likely to happen. When the Senate exonerates Trump, the sympathy vote could easily propel Trump toward another four years in office.

In terms of the purpose of impeachment, the very opposite result could happen, and it is extremely likely, as matters stand now, that Trump would not be removed from office.

Congress has another Constitutional duty. Through its oversight responsibilities, Congress has the Constitutional duty to keep Americans informed of the very bad judgments and the false statements of a very bad President to enable Americans to remove the very bad President from office in the next election.

In the opinion of many, including the leadership in the House, the Constitutional duty to keep Americans informed has a higher calling than the Constitutional duty to impeach. Why? Because the former will achieve the desired result while the latter is likely to cause unwelcome, unintended consequences.

 

Agreed. But you know that a majority of Americans prefer that.

 

GOP senators who could be vulnerable in next year's elections, including some who have declined to say whether it would be appropriate for a president to use U.S. aid to get political favors from a foreign leader, have signed on to a measure condemning the House impeachment process.

This is a stunt, a really stupid stunt as I showed in my report. It is hard to believe that this moronic resolution condemning the House for its impeachment inquiry procedures will come to a vote in the Senate. It is a diversion away from the mounting evidence against Trump, evidence neither Trump nor his GOP defenders can challenge.

So, they try this ridiculous stunt. Republicans would be smarter if they stopped trying to defend Trump.

Trump and the White House can't defend Trump. Their entire focus is on various diversions.

 

What a diversion from the impeachment inquiry, occurring over the weekend, and the photo op on Sunday when members of the House are at home. This is a common tactic, used by Trump many times when he is in serious trouble.

Surrounded by his yes men, Trump announced the demise of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.

If true, and there are serious doubts because the only source of Baghdadi's demise has come from Trump and his yes men in the Pentagon, Esper and Milley..

The Daily Mail reports, "Russia has mocked America's claim that ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi died during a raid at the weekend, calling it the 'umpteenth' report of the cleric's death.

"Moscow's Defence Ministry said it 'does not have reliable information about the actions of the US army' while suggesting that the terrorist leader may still be alive.

"Baghdadi has been reported dead several times since he rose to prominence as ISIS's leader in 2014, most recently by Russia - which claimed to have killed him in an airstrike in Raqqa in June 2017."

On the other hand, Russia is just as capable of lying as is Trump and the White House, so, who knows?

I guess the real question is, noting that Baghdadi is merely a figurehead -- he has been seen and heard from once in five years -- he is hardly an inspirational leader. So, what good is it to have killed a mute figurehead of a terrorist organization? Did this weaken ISIS one little bit? I doubt it.

Trump did the damage when his retreat caused hundreds of ISIS terrorists to escape.

Somebody has been buried at sea already. What was the rush? Considering the doubts arising from the operation, the quick burial is suspicious. In fact, why bury him at sea? Bring him to the U.S. for unquestioned verification.

But Trump didn't do that. Why?

 

Wasn't the same thing done with Osama Bin Laden? No one questions if he was killed or not nowadays.

 

Here's an interesting timeline for Trumpette's to consider.

June 7, 1972........the Watergate break in.

May 17, 1973.........Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities began holding public hearings.

Oct. 30.........House Judiciary Committee adopted resolutions authorizing the issuance of subpoenas without the consent of the full committee.

Nov. 11.......House approves funding for impeachment inquiry.

Jan. 30, 1974.........Judiciary Committee approved H. Res 803, giving committee power to conduct an impeachment inquiry.

Feb. 6........Full House debated and adopted H. Res. 803, which authorized the committee to subpoena witnesses, testimony, and documents as part of a possible impeachment of Nixon.
.........................................................................................
Since then, committee chairmen have been given the authority to issue subpoenas without a vote of the committee.

 

You left out.

Nov. 1972-President Nixon reelected in a staggering 49 state landslide.

 

Prior to Oct. 6, American commanders had assured their Kurdish counterparts that they would be able to keep the peace in northern Syria for the foreseeable future. Then Trump suddenly changed his mind, and on Oct. 6, after a phone call with President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey, he ordered American troops to leave the border area.

He betrayed the Kurds who had destroyed the caliphate in Syria and Iraq, and marginalize the ISIS guerilla army, imprisoning close to 10,000 terrorists.

There has been a great amount deal-making over Syria, culminating in a triumphant summit between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Sochi. Turkey agreed to halt its invasion into Syrian territory, and it will seize less Kurdish-held territory than the 20-mile-deep “safe zone.” Russia will work with Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad’s forces to push the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) from the Turkish-Syrian border. Russia and Turkey will then conduct joint military patrols within Syrian territory along a substantial chunk of the border. The deal will strengthen the Assad government and diminish the power of the YPG, Turkey’s main concern.

The rape of the Kurdish people was complete.

Now we are being told that the Kurds helped Trump eliminate Baghdadi.

NBC news reports, "Kurdish-led forces allied with the United States provided information that was key to the operation that killed the Islamic State group's leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of the Kurdish forces in Syria said Monday.

"In an exclusive interview with NBC News, Gen. Mazloum Abdi of the Syrian Democratic Forces said his intelligence service had a source deep in al-Baghdadi's inner circle who described a room-by-room layout of the terror leader's compound on the Turkish border, including the number of guards, floor plan and tunnels.

"Abdi said the unidentified source was on location during the raid and left with the attacking U.S. forces."

Since this began, some wondered how the Delta force came up with a sample of Baghdadi's DNA to compare with the body of the ISIS leader.

Well, that came from the Kurds, too. NBC continued, "The source, whom Abdi described as one of al-Baghdadi's security advisers, proved to U.S. intelligence that he had direct access to al-Baghdadi this summer by turning over the ISIS leader's used underwear and later a sample of his blood.

"U.S. intelligence tested those samples and got positive DNA matches for al-Baghdadi."

So, the Kurds, who Trump betrayed which led to the loss of their homes, provided both the informant and the DNA sample.

Suspicions abound.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/...tel-operation-killed-isis-leader-abu-n1072921

https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/10/28/putin-erdogan-deal-syria-kurds-agreement-war-continues/

 

It didn't work. Pelosi and the impeachment inquiry are right back in the news, upstaging Trump with a blockbuster of an announcement.



Politico reports, "House Democrats are moving into a new phase of their impeachment inquiry, with plans to vote this week on a resolution to formalize the next steps of the investigation into President Donald Trump.

"The House vote signals Democrats are preparing to take the probe public, and Democratic leaders say it should neutralize GOP attacks on their process — though Republicans quickly pivoted toward new angles to blast the legitimacy of the probe."

“This resolution gives us more opportunity in the committee, spells out protection of the rights for the president and his counsel. They should welcome this,” Speaker Nancy Pelosi said

The full House is expected to vote on the resolution Thursday.

What a beautiful maneuver. I wonder what Trump and his small number of Republican defenders will say now. Are they still going persist in the process rather then the mounting evidence?

Pelosi outmaneuvered Trump again. Of course, that is a given when one is guilty as hell.