When is this madness going to stop?

The Democrats planted the seeds of impeachment shortly after Trump was elected. These seeds have sprouted and grown into full blown weeds not unlike "The Thing."

The seeds are eating the lifeblood of the American people.

And yes, they've even reached Galveston County.

Have you heard one local Democrat dispute the attempt to impeach? Local Democrats are no less guilty of this than the nationals if they don't dispute these actions.

Erwin Wiley

Santa Fe


Recommended for you

(88) comments

Gary Miller

Be patient. Nov. 2020 Conservatives will get sweat revenge. Local Democrats will lose more than National Progressives. Without blind local support of nationals this farce couldn't have happened. Democrat will be a ugly word in America.

Mike Zeller

"When is this madness going to stop?" Trump WILL be Impeached in a couple of weeks, and then the Senate will let him off, "scot free". Simple question, simple answer. The 2018 Blue Wave, to be continued ..........

Carlos Ponce

No Blue Wave. Americans will see this as just a waste of time since even Mike Zeller realizes there is no way Trump will be removed from office. But the Senate trial would be interesting..... and revealing.

Carlos Ponce

Impeachment would be bad for the country but good for the Republican Party. There is no way Trump will be removed from office. I've been saying there will be no impeachment because I did not believe Democrats were that stupid because it would assure not only Trump's re-election but also return of the House to the Republicans. Maybe they are that stupid. Trump doesn't want impeachment because there are better pursuits for the House but he is now telling the Democrats to BRING IT ON! Why? If it reaches the Senate, look at the list of "witnesses" they will call: Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, Eric Ciaramella, Adam Schiff, Alexandra Chalupa to name a few. Even if they plead the Fifth it will make Democrats look bad. Add to that either a live or recorded message from the Ukrainian President saying there was no quid pro quo, no mention of the 2020 election, no pressure from the United States President. And they got their funding. Democrats will cry "foul" because it would put one of their leading candidates on the stand and derail any Democrat Senator from campaigning. Please look at the demographics of those "polls". When you overload Liberals and Democrats into the sampling the results are questionable. And these are the same polls that claimed Trump had no "Electoral Path to the Presidency". Old Earth saying: If they fool you once - shame on them. But if they fool you more than once that means you're stupid.

Robert Braeking

This whole process is exposing the deep state operatives, the fake news press, and the plutocracy and hypocrisy of the Democrat Party. Bring it on.

Patricia C Newsom

Trump has no named opponent at this time except the Democratic Party. When Trump made reference to Biden in the conversation, he was referring to the 2016 election interference not the 2020. Only when the Democrats elect Biden to be their candidate on the presidential ticket will Biden be Trump’s opponent and that has not happened as of today.

Emile Pope

Biden wasn’t running for President in 2016.

Carlos Ponce

Duh! He was a sitting VICE PRESIDENT! And his statement indicates he was getting a quid pro quo from the Ukrainians. You don't fire the man investigating my son's company or you don't get the money. Then he implicated President Obama in the quid pro quo.

Patricia C Newsom

Biden did not need to run for President to interfere with the elections. He was Vice President and was conducting US business with Ukraine.

Jim Forsythe

Dec. 06, 2019 ---Rudy is in the Ukrainian again.

Giuliani did meet with former Ukrainian prosecutor Yuriy Lutsenko, who pushed Giuliani and his associates Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman to push for the ouster of former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch. Giuliani also reportedly spoke with Andriy Derkach, a Ukrainian member of parliament who has publicly pushed for a probe into meddling by former President Petro Poroshenko in the U.S. 2016 elections. Derkach is also known for peddling allegations that Ukrainian government bodies misused U.S. taxpayer money.

On Thursday evening, Andrii Telizhenko, a former Ukrainian diplomat, posted on his Twitter account that he too had met with Giuliani to prepare for “another hard working day in meetings with Mr. Shokin and Mr. Lutcenko.”

Jim Forsythe

The FBI and federal prosecutors are examining Giuliani’s financial dealings with his two clients, Parnas and Fruman.

December 06, 2019 ----Rudi Giuliani's associates, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman are set to face additional charges after being indicted for making illegal campaign contributions, Lev Parnas has entered into the early stages of cutting a plea deal. Both Lev and Igor also helped Giuliani search for leverage to help convince Ukraine to look for dirt on Joe Biden.

Parnas and his lawyer have begun cooperating with the house impeachment inquiry and has allegedly turned over video graphics and audio evidence to the House Intelligence Committee. As detailed in the 300-page report released by the House Intelligence Committee Democrats, Parnas cooperated with Giuliani in efforts to boost Trump's political fortunes ahead of the 2020 elections.

The investigations have determined that Parnas and Fruman have been helping Trump since April 2018. During the Super PAC dinner which was hosted at Trumps DC Hotel, Trump met Parnas and Fruman for the first time and told Trump that Ambassador Yovanovitch was hostile to Trump's policies. Marie Yavanovitch was the US Ambassador to Ukraine from 2016 to May 2019.

Lev and Igor may turn out to be the key to what happens next.

Oct. 2019---The two arrested men (Lev and Igor) sent a letter to the House impeachment inquiry, “confirming that they assisted Mr. Giuliani in connection with his representation of President Trump.”

The campaign-finance charges involve Parnas and Fruman allegedly violating federal law by funneling several million dollars to Pete Sessions, a former House Republican from Texas. Sessions was valuable to their operation because he publicly demanded the firing of Marie Yovanovitch, the U.S. ambassador (who was subsequently fired.)

Carlos Ponce

Nobody cares, Jim.

Dave Andrisek

Name something the democrats have done to enhance the quality of life in America. Latest numbers show another 256,000 jobs have been created in the U.S. thanks to this president. You don't have to like him, but you can't argue with the numbers.

Emile Pope

Oh I don't know, Universal Health Insurance...Consumer Financial Protection Bureau...

Carlos Ponce

Your "universal Healthcare" was horrid. Healthcare prices increased. The only reason the number covered increased was because people were FORCED to enroll or face a penalty. Universal meant men had to pay for health conditions that only apply to women and women had to pay for health conditions not applicable to their anatomy.

Emile Pope

Kinda like social security....prices went up slower than in the past. Lives were saved. Now donald wants to take away healthcare and replace it with nothing...

Carlos Ponce

Emile, the "nothing" you post is a LIE.

Casey Alan

When a crime is committed the criminal must Suffer their consequences. Everyone yells for the constitution! Constitution ! constitution! It’s in the constitution prevent any president to do what this one did. No one told him to break the law as it applies to his position in government. Bravo for the Democrats for standing up to this criminal. It’s a shame nothing will come of it because some people cannot admit that their guy is a criminal. If the shoe was on the other foot those people will be demanding justice.

David Hardee

This SHOE has been on the foot of every president. Only when the opposition is demented is that there a hypocritical denunciation and the SHOE is considered fowl and impeachment pursued.

Politician's actions are always hypocritical and repugnant.

Trump is a HEATHEN to politicians and they are thanfully so demented they have exposed themselves as swamp creatures. We are blessed to have Trump. MAGA!

Emile Pope

"This SHOE has been on the foot of every president". Garbage. More "everybody does it" nonsense with nothing to back it up.

Carlos Ponce

Usually when there is executive privilege exercised it is left up to the third party - the Judiciary to arbitrate. Democrats did not pursue this course with Trump. They charged him with obstruction. You cite US v Nixon. In it the Supreme Court decided that Nixon had to turn over the tapes. Why did Democrats NOT pursue a solution through the courts? They knew they would lose.

Emile Pope

Apparently you are ignorant of the fact that the Democrats have been going to court over Donald's actions..

Carlos Ponce

Democrats subpoenaed Charles Kupperman, an aide to John Bolton. Trump told him not to appear. Kupperman then asked a Federal Judge to tell him whether he should or should not. Democrats then WITHDREW the subpoena. They knew they would LOSE in court.


Charles Douglas

Democratic Party is a fraud! They are highly skilled at making one think one thing when their intentions all along are to do another! They successfully convinced African-Americans to forget that it was the Democrats who championed SLAVERY in this country, and to forget that it was Republicans who championed the eradication of It! They then used their ingenuity to dream up SHARE-CROPPING, to take the place of slavery, in order to obtain the same results! Central part of that little plan was to keep UNEDUCATED BALCK people in debt, and the owner of the old plantation lands still had their "slave" labor. The intricate workings of SHARE-CROPPING, was very affective and did the job It was designed to do for decades in the South for the Democrats! People like Tina Turner, ( Anna Mae Bullock ) and Muddy Waters, Black performers, fled from the South to places like Detroit, and Chicago, in search of real freedom! Even today the Democratic Party, followed the mad exodus of African-Americans from the South into their northern habitats in order to RE-ENSLAVE them again, with poor education, food stamps, welfare, and unfair job opportunities! Granted there are many minorities who possess the eyesight of a prairie chicken, but more and more of them are developing, and possessing the eyesight of eagles. So, now they see, and recognized what the Democrats are doing, along with what they have done to African-Americans in the past! The Dems even tried to use the same plan on Hispanics which did not work to the degree it did on Blacks. They even tried it on Asians to no avail. Now they are terrorfied that Trump is looking like he will garner 20-30 percent of the African-American vote in the next election! I Know of which I speak! My father was an East Texas Share-Cropper in the forties and fifties before he and my mother paid off their chains and shackles of debts, pack up moved to this area to .....wait for it,...SEGREGATED EDUCATION, and job discrimination by Democrats. Lastly, I too use to be a Democrat, but as I sought to pay for a higher education than what was provided for me, I learned enough to become an Independent Voter! I went from there to where I am now! Al Sharpton, Reparations, free this, free that,...don't pay your debts, LET THE GOVERNMENT PAY THEM! WHY? It is obvious!!! The DEMS want your vote, then you will see them in four years singing the same old song! Free Stuff, and White People are RACISTS!! Trust me, I know their playbook and I've lived with their plays being deployed against me, until I got fed up! All I want and taught my Kids to EXPECT, is a fair opportunity to COMPETE in order to maximize their God given potential, gifts, and talents as others do! This world will give you nothing but tribulation! All good things come from God up above. My faith is in Him and no other!

Emile Pope

Interesting how some people can take all day to say nothing at all...

Jim Forsythe

Trump’s economy is not the best ever. In fact Obama added almost one million more jobs than Trump over the same timeframe.

Employers added more than 2 million jobs during 2017, making it a very good year for Donald Trump's first in office.

But it's not quite as good as Barack Obama's last year on the job.

Trump wasn't in office yet when the Labor Department collected the data used in January 2017 jobs report, so for the sake of comparison it makes sense to exclude the first month of the year. But in the remaining 11 monthly jobs reports, employers added 1.84 million jobs, according to the December jobs report released Friday. That compares to 2.09 million jobs added in Obama's last 11 months in office.

Even if you just look at full-year numbers, the 2.06 million jobs added in 2017 falls short of the 2.24 million jobs created in 2016, Obama's last full year in office.

Of course the jobs numbers during Obama's first year were particularly bad, since he took office in the midst of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression.

The economy lost 4.28 million jobs from February through December of 2009, as payrolls fell every month. Unemployment soared from 7.8% when in January 2009 to 10% in October of that year.

The jobs market was far healthier when Trump took office, with unemployment down to 4.8%. By the end of the year it fell to 4.1%, a 17-year low.

Gary Miller

Jim> You are way off. Most of the jobs During Obama's last years were part time 20 hours a week jobs resulting from the Obama Care forcing employers to cut full time workers. Most Trump jobs are full time 40 hours a week jobs. Many, due to labor market tightness, really became overtime jobs.

Carlos Ponce

"Obama added almost one million more jobs than Trump over the same timeframe." With Obamacare, jobs were split to avoid having to provide Obamacare. Take a job cut it in half and you do get double the jobs but the worker gets half the pay. Trump is using his "magic wand" to produce manufacturing jobs Obama said were GONE!

"Well, how exactly are you going to do that? What exactly are you going to do? There’s no answer to it. He just says, 'Well, I’m going to negotiate a better deal.' Well, what, how exactly are you going to negotiate that? What magic wand do you have? And usually the answer is, he doesn’t have an answer.” Looks like Trump found the answer that eluded you.

Jim Forsythe

Jul 5, 2019

Over 29 months Obama added almost 1 million more jobs than Trump

In January this year the total difference was only 194,000, which means over the past five months it has increased by 616,000. And looking at the next six months with Obama’s job numbers of 188,000 to 327,000 per month, the gap should only increase and cross 1 million.

Over 29 months Obama added almost 1 million more jobs than Trump--Jul 5, 2019-

Trump entered office on January 20, 2017, and starting with February 2017 he has been President for 29 months. Total job growth during that time has been 5.613 million or 194,000 per month with those results being helped by the tax cut.

Working back from January 2017, Obama’s last month in office, there had been 6.423 million jobs added or 221,000 per month. The difference for the 29 months is 810,000 more jobs or 27,000 more per month than Trump.

Job growth is slowing down

To help smooth out any one months result it is worthwhile to look at 3, 6 and 12-month trailing numbers. You can see the slowdown in the number of jobs being added when you look at these averages.

12 month per month average of 192,000 equals 2.3 million per year (and the second month in a row it has been under 200,000 per month)

6 month per month average of 172,000 equals 2.07 million per year

3 month per month average of 171,000 equals 2.05 million per year

Gary Miller

Jim> 266,000 new 40 hours a week jobs in November and a 41,000 upward adjustment of Oct. doesn't sound like "slowing" to most of us. 40 hour a week Trump jobs are twice as good as 20 hour a week Obama jobs.

Jim Forsythe

Carter cleaned up the corruption left behind by Nixon. He was more successful in foreign policy than Trump will ever be with the Camp David Accords, and he created more jobs than Trump has in the first two years of his term.

Trump says current economy is the greatest in American history. The Trump economy isn’t anything close to what Trump is hyping it up to be. Jimmy Carter was able to create more jobs with a smaller population. Republicans mock Jimmy Carter for his “failure,” but if the more successful Carter is a failure, what does that make Trump?

Total numbers do not tell the true story. To get a clear picture, one must look at the percentages. Trumps numbers and percentages have been less than most modern day presidents.

President Clinton added 18.6 million jobs. He was the top job creator in terms of total numbers. It was a 15.6 percent increase, the third-largest percentage increase ever.

President Jimmy Carter added 9.8 million, a 10.9 percent increase

President Reagan added 16.5 million jobs during his eight-year term, a 16.5 percent increase.

President Obama created 8.9 million jobs by the end of December 2016, a 6.2 percent increase.

President Nixon added 9.4 million jobs . That's a 12.2 percent increase.

President Trump created 4.7 million jobs in his first two years. That's a 3.1 percent increase . To get a true number, you cannot multiply by 2, because his growth is slowing down.

Carlos Ponce

Carter destroyed the economy. Have you forgotten the gas lines, the high rate of inflation. Gas lines did not begin during his administration but were more volatile. Under Trump, we are self sustaining, not relying on outside sources.

"President Trump created 4.7 million jobs in his first two years." Only using the first two years - that's misleading. Third quarter 2019 shows 6,027,000 jobs created. And why is it slowing down? Running out of available workers with the lowest unemployment rate in 50 years (3.5%) and higher job participation rates. What was the unemployment rate during the Carter years? Over 6%. It dipped slightly below that during the Obama years.

Remember when the Democrat Rally Cry was "Recession, Recession, Recession"? It was not that long ago. But we now hear: "Investors cheered November's blockbuster jobs report. The Dow rose more than 337 points on Friday, amid gains in payrolls and wages and an unemployment rate that remains at a half-century low." December 6, 2019 and "Donald Trump now has an obvious path to a second term - The latest economic numbers -- 266,000 jobs created in November, unemployment at a 50-year low -- make one thing very clear: President Donald Trump has a path to win a second term next year."

FOX News? Breitbart? Wall Street Journal? No, it's from Lefty CNN.



Jim asks, "what does that make Trump?" Answer RE-ELECTED!

Jim Forsythe

"what does that make Trump?"

In the context of my post, it was to compare Trump to Carter, and Trump came up short as far as jobs and other measures.

For trump to be re-elected he must win. The election has not even happened yet and a year is a long time, and you never know what may happen!

At this time 85 electoral votes are considered a tossup, and the other electoral votes can change by election time. Texas is considered as only as leaning for Trump or a tossup. We will know after the election, if Texas is moving toward the Democrat's.

If Bloomberg runs as a 3 party candidate, who knows how it will turn out. He has a unlimited bankroll that he is willing to use.

Carlos Ponce

In the context of HISTORY Carter is regarded as a good man but a lousy president. Jim is like the blind man and the elephant failing to see the entire picture because he cherry picks and disregards those facts that don't fit his narrative. But that's okay, Jim. Vote for your Liberal candidate. Trump will still win Galveston County and Texas' Electoral votes, and the presidency.

Jim Forsythe

"Trump will still win Galveston County and Texas' Electoral votes, and the presidency". If Trump wins Texas, it's only 38 electoral votes .

Most polls are calling it even in Texas,if you factor in the margin of error in Texas.

It takes 270 to win, and the Democrat's do not even have the person that will run against him selected.

Trump will be joining the club that has Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton as members.

Carlos Ponce

"Most polls are calling it even in Texas,if you factor in the margin of error in Texas," Jim posts.

Repeating: These are the same polls that said Trump had "no Electoral Path to the Presidency". Old Earth saying: If they fool you once - shame on them. If they fool you more than once that means you're stupid.[whistling]

Jim Forsythe

Political independents are the largest portion of American voters — a 43% plurality. Republican's nor Democrats' in Texas will not determine who gets the 38 EC votes in Texas.

Carlos Ponce

Since you believe in polls try the University of Texas/ Texas Tribune poll which shows: "Democrats don’t have a candidate who would beat Trump in Texas today"

Jim Forsythe

The polls were right about Trump vs Clinton.

The vote was Clinton 65,853,625 votes (48.0%) to Trump 62,985,106 votes (45.9%), which was almost exactly what the polls predicted.

Most polls do not predict EC votes. Again,the Independent voters will determine the winner in Texas in 2020.

Emerson College Poll---Biden 50.8% v. Trump 49.2% -------Sanders 50.6% v. Trump 49.4%

Carlos Ponce

"Most polls do not predict EC votes." They did and were WRONG!

Jim Forsythe

As late as November 8, 2016 polls showed that 171 EC votes were still a tossup. To close to call. Some examples of tossup states are below.

In Florida, a rich electoral vote prize state, the final average was Trump +0.2. Trump won by 1.3. This was a quite accurate prediction. In North Carolina, the final was Trump +1.0. Trump won by 3.8. Again, within the margin of error.

Trump was able to win some states by razor thin margins which resulted in EC votes not being able to be forecast but remained in the tossup category. You keep trying not to recognize the margin of error, that is a part of every poll.

Carlos Ponce

"Workers at the lower end of the pay scale finally are getting the most benefit from rising wages"


And the numbers indicate this continues through December 2019. And it's not due to the cities which have raised minimum wages. It's due to the shrinking number of job seekers with a lower unemployment rate.

Jim Forsythe

A3.4% increase in pay for someone working full-time making $10/hr (an average wage for hourly FT workers) equates to about $13 pre-tax per week. So yay! Now those folks can afford an extra 1/2 tank of gas each week. It is barely keeping up with the cost of inflation or the cost for GOP sabotaged health care that eats up the tiny wage amounts.

They are paying more for gas, housing, health care (if they can even AFFORD it), food, etc. Whenever American workers get increases in pay, corporate prices go up.

Carlos Ponce

Jim posts,"A3.4% increase in pay for someone working full-time making $10/hr (an average wage for hourly FT workers) equates to about $13 pre-tax per week. So yay! Now those folks can afford an extra 1/2 tank of gas each week. "

With a 3.4% increase in pay they're now making $10.34 an hour which in a 40 hour work week amounts to $413.60 a week compared to $400 they were making or $13.60 more per 40 hour week. At a previous pay of $10 an hour considering 52 weeks in a year at 40 hours per year they were netting $20,800 a year. With a 3.4% increase they are now netting $21,507.20 a year, or $707.20 more a year. SO YAY! They now have $707.20 more to spend! They still had to buy that gasoline before the 3.4% increase so buying gas is not an additional cost.

Gary Miller

In the Trump economy not many workers are left earning only $10 an hour. Medium US wage is just under $40K a year. 3.4% raise fills up the car every day of the week. Average wage of Nov's 266K new jobs was $16 an hour starting rate. A fill up every two hours, up from not having a car needing gas.

Emile Pope

The president is being impeached because of his criminal activity. He’s a crook. And the state of the economy is irrelevant.

Carlos Ponce

There is the legal definition of criminal activity and then there's Emile's definition of criminal activity. Using the legal definition Trump did not commit criminal activity. Using Emile's definition Trump committed a crime by being elected. HOW DARE HE !

"And the state of the economy is irrelevant." Looks like Emile admits this is a GREAT economy! [beam]

Emile Pope

Witness tampering? Obstruction? Bribery? And the list goes on...

Carlos Ponce

"Witness tampering?" FALSE. Some allege he tampered with "witness" Yovanovitch. Did he ever come in contact with her? No. Under the legal definition of witness tampering only Adam Schiff could be charged with witness tampering. "Obstruction?" Hardly. He's exercising executive privilege.

"Bribery?" Some allege he bribed the Ukrainian President. FALSE. Zelensky has said he felt no pressure from Trump, no quid pro quo, the transcript never mentions aid to the Ukraine. The argument is weaker than an unborn fetus.

Emile Pope

Made up garbage...again...

Jim Forsythe

"Did he ever come in contact with her?' If a mob boss tweets, “Bad things are gonna happen to anyone who testifies about my kid", he would be guilty of witness intimidation, just as Trump is.

Ciara Torres-Spelliscy, law professor, Stetson University ---Just as Trump cannot be indicted for campaign finance crimes while president such as those involving Michael Cohen, he similarly could not be indicted for witness intimidation including his tweets this morning either while he is still in office. But accountability can come in different forms. The House of Representatives could add witness intimidation as a separate article of impeachment. Also, once Trump is an ex-president, federal prosecutors could charge him with witness intimidation if they chose.

Peter Shane, law professor, Ohio State University-----If Trump were a criminal defendant charged with witness tampering, I assume his defenses would be: (1) he couldn’t have been intimidating Ambassador Yovanovitch because she was already testifying, and (2) his tweets were not directed specifically at any other witness.

Putting that aside, however, it must be said for the gazillionth time that impeachment is not a criminal process. For the president of the United States to seek to interfere by intimidation with testimony before a congressional hearing plainly falls within Alexander Hamilton’s understanding of an impeachable offense: “an abuse or violation of some public trust” that amounts to an injury “done immediately to the society itself.”

Carlos Ponce

Believe what you want but under the LEGAL definitions there was no witness tampering, no obstruction, no bribery. But Democrats believe you don't have to commit a crime to be impeached.

"You Don't Have to Commit a Crime to be Impeached"


"You don't have to break a law to be impeached."


"The president doesn’t need to commit a crime to be impeached"



Rep Al Green (D-TX) said, "The president does not have to commit a crime to be impeached."


"Trump can be impeached even if he didn't commit a crime"

Carlos Ponce

Peter Shane whom you cite was called by the Democrats to testify against Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh during the confirmation hearing. He also writes for numerous Liberal sources such as the Huffington Post. Clearly biased.

Emile Pope

What you wrote is totally false. Not a word of truth...garbage...

Gary Miller

Emile> Hollow charges. Please let us know which you can prove in court. Saying it doesn't prove anything except your hatred of Trump for winning the election. The Senate may dismiss all charges for lack of evidence.

Robert Braeking

What criminal activity, Emile. So far I have seen no charges. Until these knuckle-heads charge with a crime there is no crime. You complain that the President is not coming to the hearings to defend himself. Against what? Hearsay, conjecture, innuendo, and assumptions?

Emile Pope

Actually, ordering people not to testify and refusing to obey subpoenas is against the law.

Carlos Ponce

"Top Obama political aid refuses to testify before Congress "

"Obama’s top lawyer said that as a member of the executive branch the political director, David Simas, had immunity from being compelled to testify before Congress." Obama White House Counsel Neil Eggleston claimed Simas was “immune from congressional compulsion to testify on matters relating to his official duties” and thus would not appear before the committee.

"Obama Refuses to let the White House social secretary Desirée Rogers testify on party crashers scandal". Obama’s press secretary explained during a press briefing that “...based on separation of powers, staff here don't go to testify in front of Congress.”

"White House cites executive privilege, keeps Obama aide [Ben Rhodes] from testifying about Iran nuclear deal"


"Actually, ordering people not to testify and refusing to obey subpoenas is against the law." posted Emile......[rolleyes]

Emile Pope

Actually your argument is garbage. President Obama cited executive privilege, donald doesn’t. He just ordered his staff not to testify. That’s a crime.

Gary Miller

Emile> If really against the law why isn't Obama in jail?

Carlos Ponce

"Actually your argument is garbage. President Obama cited executive privilege, donald doesn’t." Ignorance must be bliss for Emile. Yes, President Trump has cited EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE.

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Like numerous U.S. presidents before him, Donald Trump has invoked the legal doctrine known as executive privilege to try to block congressional investigators from getting access to certain documents and witnesses they are seeking. "


Emile Pope

"The U.S. v. Nixon ruling is also widely understood to mean that executive privilege cannot be used to cover up wrongdoing. That view was endorsed by current U.S. Attorney General William Barr during his Senate confirmation hearing.

One lesson of U.S. v. Nixon is that an executive privilege claim is particularly weak when Congress has invoked its power to remove a president from office through impeachment, University of Missouri School of Law professor Frank Bowman said. In the impeachment context, “virtually no part of a president’s duties or behavior is exempt from scrutiny,” Bowman added.

Guess you forgot to included that. As usual your own sources betray you...

Carlos Ponce

Emile, US v Nixon was about the release of tapes. Trump released a transcript of his conversation with Zelensky. The Court ruled that the President has executive privilege in Military and DIPLOMATIC matters.

"Absent a claim of need to protect military, diplomatic, or sensitive national security secrets, the confidentiality of [418 U.S. 683, 685] Presidential communications is not significantly diminished by producing material for a criminal trial under the protected conditions of in camera inspection..."

Dealing with the Ukraine is a DIPLOMATIC matter. Or has Emile forgotten that? US v Nixon does not apply in DIPLOMATIC matters.

Emile Pope

Apparently you are ignorant of history. Nixon offered to submit a transcript and the court said NO. And executive privilege does not apply in an impeachment inquiry. Nixon and you both lose...

Carlos Ponce

The House Intelligence Committee agreed to accept a transcript of the telephone conversation.

Emile Pope

No they didn't. Another falsehood...

Carlos Ponce

Did the Schiff committee request the audio recordings of the Trump-Zelensky phone call? No, they made up their own which was orated by Schiff that went along with the "whistleblower"s statements which did not match the released transcript. Schiff did not expect Trump to release the transcript so one was made up.

Once released, the "witnesses" were questioned questioned by the Schiff committee to verify authenticity. Lt Col. Vindman thought certain words were omitted. All but two words were then edited into the released transcript. Did the two words make a difference? No.

Carlos Ponce

The House Intelligence Committee agreed to accept a transcript of the telephone conversation.

Emile Pope Dec 9, 2019 1:28pm "No they didn't. Another falsehood..."

Then why are they using it in today's hearing?

Emile Pope

Because that was all they could get...and it was enough...

Emile Pope

And threatening witnesses is also a crime...hush money? Tax fraud?

Carlos Ponce

Threatening Witnesses:

"People Are Absolutely Savaging Gordon Sondland’s Hotels on Yelp"


Yes, those Trump Haters are threatening one of the few witnesses.

Jim Forsythe

When you testify about Ukraine, expect this.

Fiona Hill , who served on Trump’s National Security Council said, "I received, I just have to tell you, death threats, calls at my home," and she was not the only one.

When you buy an ambassadorship, you buy all that comes with it.

Will K., wrote that the Sentinel Hotel in Portland, Oregon, was an “otherwise nice-enough” but noted that Provenance Hotels was “controlled” by Sondland—who he said was a “major Trump contributor and participant in the Ukraine scandal.” “Do you want to support him?” he asked.

“I used to be an infrequent customer here but I’m appalled to learn that the owner, Gordon Sondland… was heavily involved in the Trump Ukraine scandal,” Karin W. of Portland wrote on The Heathman Hotel’s Yelp page. “I won’t be patronizing this business anymore, nor the others that he owns.”

Gary Miller

Emile>Democrats make those claims but offer no proof or evidence. Your muddled mind seems to think proof is what any Democrats says.

Paul Hyatt

After reading many of these comments, I do believe that many need to put down the democrat Kool-Aid and stop drinking the lies from their fountain of lies and learn how to think on their own and not what the MSM (democrat press corporation ) tells them to think....

Emile Pope

Don't forget the spinelessness and blatant hypocrisy of the Republican party. And their Unchristian values and cruelty to others...

Carlos Ponce

As usual, Emile's contribution has no merit.

Gary Miller

Carlos> Emile is a valued contributor. Without him we might forget what Liberals/ Democrats/ progressives are like. He will never let us forget how mentally disturbed the greed for power can turn wrongly educated people into.

Carlos Ponce

Was President Trump wrong in asking Ukrainian President Zelensky to investigate? Read this letter from President Clinton:

"THE WHITE HOUSE, November 10, 1999.To the Senate of the United States: With a view to receiving the advice and consent of the Senate to ratification, I transmit herewith the Treaty Between the United States of America and Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters with Annex, signed at Kiev on July 22, 1998. I transmit also, for the information of the Senate, an exchange of notes which was signed on September 30, 1999, which provides for its provisional application, as well as the report of the Department of State with respect to the Treaty.

The Treaty is one of a series of modern mutual legal assistance treaties being negotiated by the United States in order to counter criminal activities more effectively. The Treaty should be an effective tool to assist in the prosecution of a wide variety of crimes, including drug trafficking offenses. The Treaty is self-executing. It provides for a broad range of cooperation in criminal matters. Mutual assistance available under the Treaty includes: taking of testimony or statements of persons; providing documents, records, and articles of evidence; serving documents; locating or identifying persons; transferring persons in custody for testimony or other purposes; executing requests for searches and seizures; assisting in proceedings related to restraint, confiscation, forfeiture of assets, restitution, and collection of fines; and any other form of assistance not prohibited by the laws of the requested state.

I recommend that the Senate give early and favorable consideration to the Treaty and give its advice and consent to ratification.

William J. Clinton"

The treaty was approved by the United States Senate October 18, 2000.

Read terms of treaty at


President Trump was following the terms of the treaty when asking President Zelensky.

Jim Forsythe

The Treaty does not say for a President to blackmail Ukrainian .

Carlos Ponce

Jim says the president BLACKMAILED the Ukraine. President Zelensky of the Ukraine says he was no pressured, nor blackmailed, there was no quid pro quo. BLACKMAIL is just coming from your mind and other Trump HATERS.

"Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky sat beside President Donald Trump on Wednesday as he denied that Trump pressured him to investigate former Vice President and current 2020 presidential candidate Joe Biden’s son for his work in the country."



Now unless you have PROOF of blackmail, your post lacks merit and is false. Opinions of people other than the two presidents on the conversation are merely that - just opinion - not facts.

Jim Forsythe

“The president’s scheme is actually quite simple. And the facts are not seriously in dispute,” Goldman said. He summarized it in the form of “four key takeaways”:

First, that President Trump directed a scheme to pressure Ukraine into opening two investigations that would benefit his 2020 reelection campaign, and not US national interests.

Second, President Trump used his official office and the official tools of US foreign policy, the withholding of an Oval Office meeting, and $391 million in security assistance, to pressure Ukraine into meeting his demands.

Third, everyone was in the loop. His chief of staff, the secretary of state, and vice president.

And fourth, despite the public discovery of this scheme which prompted the president to release the aid, he has not given up. He and his agents continue to solicit Ukrainian interference in our election, causing an imminent threat to our elections and our national security.

So long as Trump believes he can get away with trying to get the Ukrainian government to tar Joe Biden’s reputation, he’ll keep trying to get them to do that. And this is why impeachment seems so urgent to Democrats. Trump does not see inviting a foreign power to influence a US election as wrong and will not — unless there’s sufficient pressure put on him to stop it.

Ukraine-related corruption has played an outsized role in Trump scandals already — a major part of the Mueller probe was Paul Manafort’s prosecution for financial and lobbying crimes related to his work for a former Ukrainian regime. And back during summer of 2016, when Manafort was Trump’s campaign chair, he was plagued by reports that the Ukrainian government was looking into his payments. (Manafort was convicted and is serving a seven-and-a-half year prison sentence.)

Carlos Ponce

Jim still does not provide any PROOF of blackmail.

"Pressure the Ukraine" ?????? NO PROOF OF THAT - just opinion from prejudiced sources.

Money was withheld pending confirmation that the Ukrainian government was trying to circumvent corruption and also get European countries to help out. NO PROOF THAT IT WAS WITHHELD TO FORCE THE UKRAINE TO INVESTIGATE.

Jim, you just wasted your time offering no proof just Liberal talking points.

Jim Forsythe

This is what he is going to be impeached for.

They have enough proof to impeach.

Not the proof you demand, as no amount of proof is enough for you.

Carlos Ponce

In other words, Jim offers NOTHING !

Robert Braeking

I’m wondering if the whistleblower is not a fabrication and does not really exist. Schiffty just made it up.

Carlos Ponce

I hear the alleged "whistleblower" is going to be Time's Person of the Year. How appropriate if he does not even exist. But speculation is that it's Eric Ciaramella, an Obama holdover who was removed from his White House position after passing off fabrications as a "White House source". Looks like he got his information from Lt. Col. Vindman who should be up on an Article 32 hearing for his role in revealing information to Ciaramella.

Paula Flinn

I heard it is Greta!

Carlos Ponce

Greta Thunberg, the young lady with Asperger's syndrome. I suppose this will add to her 15 seconds of fame.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Thank you for Reading!

Please log in, or sign up for a new account and purchase a subscription to read or post comments.