Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Susan Collins (R-ME) pitched President Donald Trump’s lawyers a curve ball Wednesday, asking a question that underscored the political motive behind Trump’s sudden interest in Ukrainian corruption.
Confab around the WH defense table: “Why are we taking incoming from our side of the aisle? That wasn’t in the playbook McTurtle gave us.”
I love it that the Trump lawyer blamed the House for the total lack of any documentation that Trump ever gave a rat’s ass about purported Ukranian corruption at any time in the past.
And of course the corollary question: Are there any other people in who the president has pursued corruption investigations?
I think they’ve given the game away. Yes votes from Murkowski, Collins, and Romney for calling witnesses - still not enough for a majority, so prepare for acquittal on Friday. In the meantime, watch the GOP and Trump’s lawyers continue their “red meat” attacks on the Bidens, Obama, and the “Democrat” party. That’ll be followed by the Super Bowl interview and a completely over-the-top and unhinged SOTU.
But as more info trickles out, I think we’ll find that the GOP greatly overplayed its hand in the impeachment trial and will be made to pay in November.
Yes, however, I’ll bet you a grand that they will vote in lockstep with the rest of the traitors.
The senators asked if Trump ever mentioned the Bidens in connection to corruption in Ukraine before the former Vice President announced his candidacy for president in April 2019
hmmm
.
And surely the President has indicated an interest in rooting out corruption in…say…Turkey, right? And Saudi Arabia and Russia, am I correct? And of course, he’s expressed an interest in curtailing corruption in Israel who, after all, receives in foreign aid many times what Ukraine receives and whose Prime Minister is currently under indictment for…wait for it…corruption. Am I right?.
Besides HRC and Obama
Don’t forget, and this is important, Trump wanted Zelensky to publicly announce there was an investigation of the Bidens.
Is there a benefit to publicizing the investigations other than impugning Joe Biden? Trump could have asked the investigation be kept classified until it was finished, but he specifically wanted a public announcement.
Love you Ladies at least for now.
You may have made Moscow Mitch cry.
As we know the announcement was everything. No actual investigation follow up was intended.
My first thought was, “They’re giving themselves cover. ‘We asked the hard question and determined it didn’t require witnesses to render our sound judgement.’”
And you think I’m taking that wager? Son, I did not rise this high in SOROS GROUP International by taking a bite out of every sweet cinnamon roll waved under my nose! LOL
Pre Biden announcement: Rudy and Bongino tweeted about Biden, but Trump concentrated on HRC and Manafort.
Or that they were apparently unprepared to answer an obvious follow up question to their arguments.
If I was the client, I would have fired that lawyer for incompetence.
This isn’t talked about enough. Someone well versed in Ukraine corruption should come up with the 5 or 6 biggest corruption threats to the Ukraine and ask if the president has ever mentioned them. Then it is a simple pivot to “What made his theories about the Bidens outweigh these other issues?”
The other question that should be asked: “If an American citizen has been involved in corruption, why would this be something we would ask a foreign power to pursue rather than our own DOJ? Is it normal to ask a foreign country to investigate if a US politician abused the power of his office? If the Ukraine is corrupt, why would we trust that they would act fairly to our citizens?”
The 2 of them probably know that MM has enough votes to prevent witnesses. They can act like this for re-election purposes. Textbook GOP Senate tactic.
If I were the lawyer, I would have fired the client.