Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
COUP REPORT: Pelosi's Impeachment Blunder
1 view
Skip to first unread message
Leroy N. Soetoro
Jan 14, 2020, 7:42:01 PM1/14/20
to
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/01/pelosis-impeachment-
blunder/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=blog-
post&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=more-in&utm_term=fourth
Her leverage play turns out to have been an embarrassing mistake.
We are in the midst of an imaginary impeachment standoff between House
speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell. “Both
have drawn firm lines in the sand. Someone’s got to give,” one reporter
recently declared.
There is, of course, nothing to “give.” Pelosi has no standing to dictate
the terms of a Senate trial; no constitutional right or political
leverage. Why she has put herself in a position that will ultimately end,
one way or another, with her surrendering to McConnell is perplexing.
A new piece in Time magazine does shed some light on the thought process
behind Pelosi’s decision to refuse to hand over articles of impeachment to
a Senate whose majority doesn’t want them. One of the most interesting
nuggets in the piece isn’t that Pelosi — portrayed as courageous risk-
taker — had gotten the bright idea from CNN; it’s that she specifically
got it from noted felon John Dean, Nixon’s former White House lawyer. Now,
Dean is often portrayed as a patriotic, whistleblowing impeachment expert
— which is true insofar as he planned the Watergate coverup, and then
informed on everyone whom he conspired with after they were caught. His
real expertise is cashing in on criminality for the past 50 years (I wrote
about Dean’s slimy past here).
Surely Pelosi, blessed with preternatural political instincts, wouldn’t
rely on Dean’s advice? Surely Pelosi wasn’t browbeaten into doing this by
podcast bros and talking heads on America’s least popular major cable-news
network?
Because whatever you make of the case against Donald Trump, it’s getting
increasingly difficult to argue that this amateurish, constantly shifting
effort by the House has been effective. After two dramatic emergency
impeachment hearings, a pretend standoff, and massive cooperative coverage
from the media, poll numbers haven’t budged. They may even have ticked
back toward Donald Trump.
Yet, to hear Time tell it, Pelosi has micromanaged every step of this
process, from signing off on every committee report and press release —
“aides say she caught typos in the Intelligence Committee’s final report
before it went out“ — to picking furniture that would make Adam Schiff and
the more diminutive Jerry Nadler look like equals.
My working theory is this: Pelosi realized that impeachment was a mistake.
She didn’t want the president to be able tell voters that he had been
exonerated by Senate. The only way to mitigate the damage was to undertake
a ham-fisted effort to attack the Senate trial and dampen, or perhaps
circumvent, that inevitable moment.
In the process, however, Pelosi destroyed the Democrats’ justification for
rushing impeachment in the first place. Nadler and Schiff both argued that
Trump’s tenure in office constituted a national emergency, and that the
only way to save the republic from another stolen election was to move
quickly.
McConnell, on the other hand, had to take only a short break from
confirming judges to inform the House that the Senate would treat the
impeachment of Donald Trump the same way it treated the impeachment of
Bill Clinton — with a rules package that passed 100–0 in 1998. Under the
Clinton precedent, the Senate would allow both the House impeachment
managers and Trump’s lawyers to make their case, with questions from the
Senate to follow.
Pelosi’s defenders are running out of arguments. Washington Post blogger
Jennifer Rubin now says that acting on the Clinton precedent means that
moderate Republican senators such as Susan Collins “will face the real
possibility that conclusive evidence of Trump’s wrongdoing will come to
light after a sham trial. That would make for a disastrous, humiliating
legacy.”
The gaping hole in this argument, and the reason Democrats are losing the
debate, is that they’ve already claimed to have conclusive evidence of
Trump’s wrongdoing. They claimed they had proof of bribery, but they
didn’t include it in the impeachment articles. They claimed to have proof
in the Mueller report that Trump obstructed justice, yet it’s not in the
article of impeachments either. Rubin herself has alleged, dozens of
times, that we already have definitive proof Trump has committed an
impeachable offense.
In truth, if the House had made a persuasive case, there would be public
pressure on Republicans to act in a different manner. That the House did
not is the only reason Pelosi embraced John Dean’s silly idea — which has
drastically backfired.
--
No collusion - Special Counsel Robert Swan Mueller III, March 2019.
Donald J. Trump, 304 electoral votes to 227, defeated compulsive liar in
denial Hillary Rodham Clinton on December 19th, 2016. The clown car
parade of the democrat party ran out of gas and got run over by a Trump
truck.
Congratulations President Trump. Thank you for cleaning up the disaster
of the Obama presidency.
Under Barack Obama's leadership, the United States of America became the
The World According To Garp.
Obama sold out heterosexuals for Hollywood queer liberal democrat donors.
President Trump has boosted the economy, reduced illegal immigration,
appointed dozens of judges and created jobs.
blunder/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=blog-
post&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=more-in&utm_term=fourth
Her leverage play turns out to have been an embarrassing mistake.
We are in the midst of an imaginary impeachment standoff between House
speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell. “Both
have drawn firm lines in the sand. Someone’s got to give,” one reporter
recently declared.
There is, of course, nothing to “give.” Pelosi has no standing to dictate
the terms of a Senate trial; no constitutional right or political
leverage. Why she has put herself in a position that will ultimately end,
one way or another, with her surrendering to McConnell is perplexing.
A new piece in Time magazine does shed some light on the thought process
behind Pelosi’s decision to refuse to hand over articles of impeachment to
a Senate whose majority doesn’t want them. One of the most interesting
nuggets in the piece isn’t that Pelosi — portrayed as courageous risk-
taker — had gotten the bright idea from CNN; it’s that she specifically
got it from noted felon John Dean, Nixon’s former White House lawyer. Now,
Dean is often portrayed as a patriotic, whistleblowing impeachment expert
— which is true insofar as he planned the Watergate coverup, and then
informed on everyone whom he conspired with after they were caught. His
real expertise is cashing in on criminality for the past 50 years (I wrote
about Dean’s slimy past here).
Surely Pelosi, blessed with preternatural political instincts, wouldn’t
rely on Dean’s advice? Surely Pelosi wasn’t browbeaten into doing this by
podcast bros and talking heads on America’s least popular major cable-news
network?
Because whatever you make of the case against Donald Trump, it’s getting
increasingly difficult to argue that this amateurish, constantly shifting
effort by the House has been effective. After two dramatic emergency
impeachment hearings, a pretend standoff, and massive cooperative coverage
from the media, poll numbers haven’t budged. They may even have ticked
back toward Donald Trump.
Yet, to hear Time tell it, Pelosi has micromanaged every step of this
process, from signing off on every committee report and press release —
“aides say she caught typos in the Intelligence Committee’s final report
before it went out“ — to picking furniture that would make Adam Schiff and
the more diminutive Jerry Nadler look like equals.
My working theory is this: Pelosi realized that impeachment was a mistake.
She didn’t want the president to be able tell voters that he had been
exonerated by Senate. The only way to mitigate the damage was to undertake
a ham-fisted effort to attack the Senate trial and dampen, or perhaps
circumvent, that inevitable moment.
In the process, however, Pelosi destroyed the Democrats’ justification for
rushing impeachment in the first place. Nadler and Schiff both argued that
Trump’s tenure in office constituted a national emergency, and that the
only way to save the republic from another stolen election was to move
quickly.
McConnell, on the other hand, had to take only a short break from
confirming judges to inform the House that the Senate would treat the
impeachment of Donald Trump the same way it treated the impeachment of
Bill Clinton — with a rules package that passed 100–0 in 1998. Under the
Clinton precedent, the Senate would allow both the House impeachment
managers and Trump’s lawyers to make their case, with questions from the
Senate to follow.
Pelosi’s defenders are running out of arguments. Washington Post blogger
Jennifer Rubin now says that acting on the Clinton precedent means that
moderate Republican senators such as Susan Collins “will face the real
possibility that conclusive evidence of Trump’s wrongdoing will come to
light after a sham trial. That would make for a disastrous, humiliating
legacy.”
The gaping hole in this argument, and the reason Democrats are losing the
debate, is that they’ve already claimed to have conclusive evidence of
Trump’s wrongdoing. They claimed they had proof of bribery, but they
didn’t include it in the impeachment articles. They claimed to have proof
in the Mueller report that Trump obstructed justice, yet it’s not in the
article of impeachments either. Rubin herself has alleged, dozens of
times, that we already have definitive proof Trump has committed an
impeachable offense.
In truth, if the House had made a persuasive case, there would be public
pressure on Republicans to act in a different manner. That the House did
not is the only reason Pelosi embraced John Dean’s silly idea — which has
drastically backfired.
--
No collusion - Special Counsel Robert Swan Mueller III, March 2019.
Donald J. Trump, 304 electoral votes to 227, defeated compulsive liar in
denial Hillary Rodham Clinton on December 19th, 2016. The clown car
parade of the democrat party ran out of gas and got run over by a Trump
truck.
Congratulations President Trump. Thank you for cleaning up the disaster
of the Obama presidency.
Under Barack Obama's leadership, the United States of America became the
The World According To Garp.
Obama sold out heterosexuals for Hollywood queer liberal democrat donors.
President Trump has boosted the economy, reduced illegal immigration,
appointed dozens of judges and created jobs.
Joe Cooper
Jan 15, 2020, 2:03:18 PM1/15/20
to
"Leroy N. Soetoro" <leroys...@kaga.com> wrote in
news:lnsAB44A9E4AF...@202.81.252.44:
> https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/01/pelosis-impeachment-
> blunder/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=blog-
> post&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=more-in&utm_term=fourth
Don't be knockin' poor Botox Barbie! After all, she did manage to turn San
Francisco into an utter shithole. Sure, KKKomrade KKKamala & Gruesome
helped, but without Tehran Nan's clacking dentures, San Francisco wouldn't
have become the glorious, shit-covered seweer it is today.
--
"Those on the left believe they are on the side of all that is right and
just. Therefore, anything they do, no matter how illegal, unjust, or just
wrong, in service of the goal of winning back their right to govern, is
justified. And if they can’t win elections by winning elections, they will
cheat, because only with absolute power can they save America from
Americans."--William L. Gensert
news:lnsAB44A9E4AF...@202.81.252.44:
> https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/01/pelosis-impeachment-
> blunder/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=blog-
> post&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=more-in&utm_term=fourth
Don't be knockin' poor Botox Barbie! After all, she did manage to turn San
Francisco into an utter shithole. Sure, KKKomrade KKKamala & Gruesome
helped, but without Tehran Nan's clacking dentures, San Francisco wouldn't
have become the glorious, shit-covered seweer it is today.
--
"Those on the left believe they are on the side of all that is right and
just. Therefore, anything they do, no matter how illegal, unjust, or just
wrong, in service of the goal of winning back their right to govern, is
justified. And if they can’t win elections by winning elections, they will
cheat, because only with absolute power can they save America from
Americans."--William L. Gensert
BeamMeUpScotty
Jan 15, 2020, 2:34:42 PM1/15/20
to
On 1/15/20 2:03 PM, Joe Cooper wrote:
> "Leroy N. Soetoro" <leroys...@kaga.com> wrote in
> news:lnsAB44A9E4AF...@202.81.252.44:
>
>> https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/01/pelosis-impeachment-
>> blunder/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=blog-
>> post&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=more-in&utm_term=fourth
>
> Don't be knockin' poor Botox Barbie! After all, she did manage to turn San
> Francisco into an utter shithole. Sure, KKKomrade KKKamala & Gruesome
> helped, but without Tehran Nan's clacking dentures, San Francisco wouldn't
> have become the glorious, shit-covered seweer it is today.
>
>
Pegging the truth meter....
> "Leroy N. Soetoro" <leroys...@kaga.com> wrote in
> news:lnsAB44A9E4AF...@202.81.252.44:
>
>> https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/01/pelosis-impeachment-
>> blunder/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=blog-
>> post&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=more-in&utm_term=fourth
>
> Don't be knockin' poor Botox Barbie! After all, she did manage to turn San
> Francisco into an utter shithole. Sure, KKKomrade KKKamala & Gruesome
> helped, but without Tehran Nan's clacking dentures, San Francisco wouldn't
> have become the glorious, shit-covered seweer it is today.
>
>
It's just who the Democrats are.
--
That's Karma
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQ6Tr_ySjcA
Why do we have an Admitted Mentally ill woman (Ilhan Omar) who is
probably admitting she should NOT legally be allowed to own or carry a
gun, vote on gun laws and laws pertaining to mental illness when she
herself is admittedly suffering a mental problem related to guns and war.
Sure I sympathize with her being in a war zone when she was young, if
that's what she is claiming but then I have to ask, if she is having
issues with her own psychological stability due to the specter of war,
is she really fit to be in the Congress where they're the people who
would vote to *DECLARE WAR* ?
0 new messages