PLEASE CALM DOWN! Raskin's move was absolutely perfect. This was a win

[StarfishSaver]

Last edited Sat Feb 13, 2021, 03:56 PM - Edit history (1)

Last night and this morning, many people demanded that McCarthy be called as a witness to force him to admit that he had the conversation with Trump on January 6 as described by Rep. Herrera Butler. They insisted that this information needed to be put in the record.

This morning, Rep. Raskin paved the way for Herrera Butler to testify. Trump's attorneys freaked out. Now, a few minutes ago, Schumer announced that Herrera-Butler's previous statements would be put into the record. And Trump's attorneys stipulated that he would not object to it going into the record.

This is a big deal. If the point of bringing in Herrera-Butler was to get her statement on record and the point of bringing in McCarthy was to get hm to admit to the conversation, then putting her statement in the record and having Trump, the other person in the conversation, essentially admit that the conversation happened achieves the goal of any testimony. And it does so without a lot of delays, distractions, drama, extraneous defense witnesses and other circus-like shenanigans.

I understand why some people may think this was a cave at first blush. But if you wanted McCarthy to testify to prove that this conversation occurred, Trump admitting that the conversation occurred takes care of that.

Now, if you were looking for some other kind of drama to come out of that, that's another thing. But the purpose most people claimed they wanted from McCarthy's testimony has been satisfied beautifully.

[sfstaxprep]

1. Bottom Line Is Now Or In 2 Weeks, No Additional Votes Will Be Gained

The game was over before it started. We got some of it on the record. Democracy marches on.

[StarfishSaver]

3. And got Trump to admit something - and showed McCarthy to be a craven liar at the same time

[sfstaxprep]

7. The Whole Fucking Country Is A Scam And A Joke

It goes in the record. How exciting.

The bottom line is that we no longer have a Democracy. Those talking about saving it, better look in the rear view mirror.

[LSparkle]

14. My sentiments exactly nt

[Turin_C3PO]

16. We control

the executive and legislature. I don't know why you're so pessimistic. Democracy is messy and is always close to extinction. It's up to good people in every generation to stop that from happening.

[Stuart G]

25. Yes, that is all of it, "Democracy is messy and always close to extinction"

...So many examples of..."..close to extinction." Look at United States History & a long way back..
So many were sure that it was..."over." It ain't over till it's over......& IT AIN'T OVER

[dameatball]

64. I concur. Also, there is always some faction that finds Democracy inconvenient for their agenda.

When those factions gain power things get worrisome at best and horrific at worst. Being a lifelong Democrat, I remember having periods of near panic/outrage under most of our Republican administrations. This Trump/Republican monstrosity takes the cake and most anything else they can lay their hands on. The country is a mess. White nationalism, bigotry, unfair economic system, and so on. But democracy is not at fault for those things, evil and/or ignorant people are. We can regain a semblance of order as we move forward. The demographics are changing. There is just a lot of work ahead of us.

[angrychair]

110. I disagree

This is different. Trumpism is not like the tea party or Bush Republicans.

Proof?

None of those groups ever invaded the Capitol and tried to actively harm the VP and Speaker of the House and other people in Congress.

Economic disparity is as significant as its been since the 1930s.
Racial extremism is greater than its been since the 50s.

This is different. I genuinely worry about this country. On our current trajectory the nation is headed for collapse. There is zero doubt in my mind.

We ignore the rise of fascism and totalitarianism at our own peril.

[dameatball]

118. I'm not sure we are disagreeing actually. I am saying that I don't blame "Democracy" for the things

you are mentioning. I blame people, racism, greed, evildoers, lazy, misinformed population....you name it. Not Democracy. If you are, then yes, we disagree.

[angrychair]

154. No, democracy isn't the issue at all

I genuinely blame all the things you mentioned. We are in agreement

[dameatball]

166. Yep, thought so. Just wanted to clarify. Thanks.

[bcbink]

147. Agree

We do not look strong.
We do wring our hands very well.

[soldierant]

179. What exactly does strong look like?

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

89. Thank you for that comment!

It captures exactly how I feel.

[Javaman]

17. +1 nt

[StarfishSaver]

18. You think Herrera Butler testifying live in two or three weeks would have saved our Democracy?

Sounds like nothing the Democrats could have done would have satisfied your sense of doom ...

[triron]

105. I fear you are correct.

[Evolve Dammit]

137. That's about where I'm at right now.

[mdbl]

144. Agreed. Major evil won today

the implications are endless.

[Javaman]

174. +1000 nt

[COL Mustard]

35. Tie Every Republican Senator To This

Remember their names...every stinking one of them. Never let them forget or escape their actions.

[Bmoboy]

50. Just like the last times?

The ones who voted to acquit Trump the first time?

The ones who voted to convict Clinton?

The ones who cried "Benghazi!" for years?

The ones who voted to confirm Kavanaugh and Barrett?

[mjvpi]

134. My list...

Nixon, Liddy, Agnew, McCarthy, North, Bush 1, Bush2, Star, Rumsfeld, Scooter Libby, Chaney, .....


Getting old is a bitch.

[Evolve Dammit]

138. A good list nonetheless. And yes, it is.

[yardwork]

80. That's my opinion as well.

I don't think that weeks of Republican witnesses lying their asses off would have served our democracy.

[barbtries]

96. we'll never know.

watergate went on for weeks and many people changed their minds when presented with the evidence. we'll never know if that would be true in this case.

[onlyadream]

120. But it's so much worse now

Right wing media has its grip and many of us have tried to sway friends and family members without getting anywhere. I realized that it’s a cult at this point and if minds could be swayed then I feel it would be done by now. Otherwise, their minds are set.

[barbtries]

122. at some point, somehow,

their minds must be unset. we must get back to a place where we interact based on a shared set of facts. we cannot go on like this.

[onlyadream]

123. I'm hoping they bring back, and revamp the fairness doctrine

If they don’t, then the lies keep going and they keep believing.

[rockfordfile]

183. That doesn't work because these fascist aren't paying a heavy price

Maybe this time they will.

[Evolve Dammit]

139. Exactly!

[Hermit-The-Prog]

143. Watergate is a good example. The 'buzz' snowballed out on the street as hearings went on and on.

[yellowdogintexas]

156. there were weeks of hearings which were broadcast live

This was before cable. There were 3 networks and at least one of them showed it.

The fact that the committee meetings were live on the air played a big part in changing minds
The buzz definitely snowballed

[Hermit-The-Prog]

157. Also, there was no pandemic forcing people to stay in, so they tuned in after work, on hearsay.

[barbtries]

158. exactly.

and the witnesses brought more and more evidence to light. before it started, republicans were NOT going to impeach. by the time it was over, his presidency was too.

[DonaldsRump]

184. Watergate went on for more than 2 years before Nixon resigned

And for nearly 5 years with all the trial court litigation.

That's the point: what exactly was the rush in closing this so early? CNN is reporting that the Ds "blinked." I have HUGE kudos for the House Managers, who were simply excellent.

CNN is trying to say that President Biden didn't want witnesses, and I had previously read that Chuck Schumer did not want witnesses. I am confused, and I have to say what happened this morning confused me. This should have been better choreographed among House, Senate, and White House Dems.

Remember what the Rs did to HRC regarding Benghazi. Does trump not deserve, at the very least, the same treatment?

I am so very glad about 57 conviction votes. That is impressive. We now have to move on.

[barbtries]

193. move on?

i'm not so sure. committee hearings, special prosecutor, criminal cases galore. it will be some time before we move on. needless to say i personally need to move on from my vision of what the impeachment should have been, as it never will.

the managers were brilliant imo. republicans are feckless, craven traitors. i hope at least a few more people have come to that realization behind this travesty.

[IggleDuer]

107. Because the impeachment vote was "rigged"?

N/T

[Warpy]

111. He forced the Republicans to stick their wattled necks out farther

and vote against witnesses, facts, fairness, transparency, and every other thing they pretend to hold dear. The final vote will be in favor of a fascist dictatorship and against democracy, which is what this has been about all along.

We;re forcing them to expose themselves so completely that no amount of propaganda on Facebook can provide cover.

[bcbink]

145. Why??

Why can't Democrats play to win?
Why should we ever accept defeat at the start?
Why can't we swing for the fences??

Why do we always say thank you for the crumbs?

[appmanga]

180. Exactly...

...and despite the lies of Trump's ambulance chasing lawyer, they stipulated that what the Congresswoman said was a fact that would not be challenged or refuted. Also known as "what actually happened". Anyone who saw Lindsey Graham's overwrought performance at the Kavanaugh hearing knew how having additional witnesses was going to go. Trump's Call-All-Nines lawyer probably had his script written be Graham and Cruz because he didn't seen familiar with it, and couldn't pronounce many of the words in it.

Anyone shitting on the House managers needs to stop. To have gotten seven Republicans to vote "guilty" is a testament to their case and those lawmaker's courage. The failure sits at the feet of Mitch McConnell and his band of cowards and seditionists. Never get that twisted.

[Tree-Hugger]

2. Thank you

Thank you for this explanation. Raskin and the house impeachment managers are masters at this.

[blm]

4. Seriously well done.

[MontanaMama]

5. Very well stated.

Thank you for your voice of reason. SfS.

[Walleye]

6. In this business you got to have finesse.-paraphrasing the movie-Chinatown

[CatWoman]

8. don't you get tired of having to repeat this

over

and over

and over

and over again?

Some people are and choose to remain stuck on stupid

[malaise]

13. THIS

[StarfishSaver]

23. It does get tiresome

But for some people, I don't think it's so much stuck on stupid as stuck on other motives. I know I'm not going to change their minds, but I don't want other people to be misinformed.

[KPN]

30. Lol. No kidding. There's good reason though. All of this really was a surprise to

everyone this morning. The House Managers' call for and Senate vote for witnesses, then the deal struck for one written testimony only. What's next? I'm putting my money on at least one more explanation being needed! I know I need them!

[servermsh]

40. No, no, no. That is not good enough. Please explain why they called for witnesses, THEN...

...did not call a witness? Why that process? Why not just read the public statement into the record?

Go ahead. Explain it!

[StarfishSaver]

49. The point of calling a witness - the ONLY point - is to get their testimony into the record

Raskin asked to call Herrera-Butler as a witness. And within two hours, her uncontested testimony was put into the record - with Trump essentially admitting that everything she said was true by not offering any objection to it.

And there you have your explanation.

[Amaryllis]

68. I missed the part about T essentially admitting everything was true?

But I do believe that Raskin et all know a whole lot better than all of us the best way to proceed. He is one brilliant person. All of them are, actually, and they would have discussed this and agreed on the best course of action.

[StarfishSaver]

71. By not objecting to the admission of the comments and not offering any evidence countering them

Trump essentially admitted to them.

[bcbink]

148. Publicly heard is necessary

[CatWoman]

57. all I know is I woke up to the news that Trump conceded that the conversation with McCarthy

took place, followed by the witnesses' statement verifying and detailing the details and it being read into the record.

So you're only satisfied if only McCarthy or Trump took the stand to independently verify?

[Laura PourMeADrink]

45. Omg. How rude

[CatWoman]

61. well, that's me in a nutshell

and????

[Laura PourMeADrink]

108. LoL.. good one:)

[mvd]

9. I think we have great Managers. I didn't like it at first..

but am willing to let this play out as is.

[bigtree]

24. if managers had their way we'd have real witnesses

...they brought this to the leadership which whittled it away.

[mvd]

31. I mean listening to the closing argument, the Managers couldn't do better

Where did you see the leadership rebuffed the Managers? I still do prefer witnesses but maybe I don’t know everything involved.

[ancianita]

55. The managers get the last word on all they do. No leadership through this whole thing. THIS,

what you are seeing, is EXACTLY what they want, and you'll just have to trust them that this is the best outcome we can expect. Anything else would have ruined the next three weeks by producing nothing for the House.

No body whittled any thing away.

[bigtree]

90. it was the House managers who brought the proposal for witnesses

...we all saw the huddle where it transformed into paper.

Republicans' threat to stretch it out was a bluff which they couldn't sustain, especially since any witness they called would be subject to cross.

[ancianita]

136. House managers were

following the trial schedule, used it by wanting witness documentation on the news made the night before by Representative Jaime Herrera Beutler, a highly credible witness to the McCarthy-Trump phone call at 2:26 pm. They decided she would be their only relevant connect-the-dots witness to answer the senators' repeated questions about when and what Trump knew about Pence.

There was no "huddling." After weighing the relative time the subpoena/deposition process would take, they decided to accept an affidavit for the Congressional Record.

The bluff by Republicans was one they themselves could not sustain, because,
first, an injury lawyer would fail any cross examination of Representative Herrera Beutler, and
second, would make the defense team look worse. Not to mention their silly "big list." House managers could have called their bluff but decided their trial interests had been served, along with the interests of the Executive branch, would be served by stopping while they were already ahead.

So the win was the House managers' win -- to get the best, most relevant trial witness on the trial record, and Congressional Record, and to finish the trial at a point timely enough for both houses to get on with legislative business.

Unlike what you're implying, the only side who came out best were the House managers.
Not one ding in their performance.

[bigtree]

94. it's moot

...but the impeachment managers didn't have the ability to call witnesses without the votes. That's where their request was compromised, when the leadership got principles together and negotiated the stipulation.

[niyad]

10. Thank you for this.

[roamer65]

11. The Repuke party is hours away from breakup.

I expect after the vote that acquits, the announcements of center right Repukes leaving the party will commence. Possibly the announcement of the formation of a center right party.

The Repuke party is fucked either way this goes.

[bdamomma]

173. Very

good conclusion. They are finished. I heard that Graham will be visiting Mar A Lago. Enough to make me do this

[spooky3]

12. His closing statement (?) is fabulously well done. Nt

[coti]

15. The goal is publicity, not establishing facts.

"Stipulated facts" don't matter for shit in this political environment. What matters is coverage, drama, and running these motherfuckers over with a freight train of shame.

This stipulation just buried those facts and totally missed the whole point of the trial.

[StarfishSaver]

27. Actually, that's not the goal

You don't seem to understand the point of the trial, so no wonder you're unhappy - the trial would never have satisfied you.

[coti]

34. What, a conviction? Does that "stipulation" get us more conviction votes?

Or would public pressure be the only thing that could possibly force Repub senators to convict?

The publicity was the only way. There's a reason they so easily agreed to the stipulation- it doesn't put pressure on anyone.

[StarfishSaver]

69. Testimony wasn't going to get any more votes, either.

The Republican votes are where they are and where they're going to stay, no matter what.

[ShazzieB]

168. Sad but true. 😢

[KPN]

39. True, but I must admit, publicity helps. If it weren't for the need to get moving on our

legislative agenda and the likelihood that this won't be over after it's over, i.e., the likelihood of DOJ investigations, I'd probably rank publicity via dominating the news media right up there at the top myself.

[paleotn]

121. Oh, we'll get publicity.

You don't think this starts and ends with the 2nd impeachment, do you? This is just the opening act.

[bcbink]

150. Yes Yes Yes

[liberalmuse]

19. The Republicans would likely make it a witness shit show.

I'd love to see witnesses for Impeachment, but the Republicans would use witnesses to throw a large wrench into getting Biden's agenda passed. I am hoping the DOJ investigates this further (and I believe they will). I'd like to see a conviction in a real court of law. Trump has been Impeached twice and that, along with the very dismal record of the Impeachment proceedings will make him the worst US President in history.

[servermsh]

32. You realize Democrats could have voted down particular witnesses, right?

Or is your argument that Republicans can always make a "shit show" in the Senate, so we can't pass anything we want?

[liberalmuse]

51. No argument.

You're right about the Republicans making everything a shit show and we should pass everything we possibly can, regardless. I'm hovering between anger, disappointment and realizing that calling witnesses will not change a single Republican vote. It would add to the already damning record of guilt. I am hopeful Trump and all those who conspired with him over the years will face their day in a real court of law. I hope for prison time for Trump, members of his family and hundreds of Trump officials and Congressional enablers.

[bigtree]

20. acquittal isn't a win

...and they did less than they had the ability to.

That's going to be the only lesson here. The consequence is much worse. Knowing that, I don't know why they don't work as hard as all of us out here work to defend what they say they believe in.

No, this is less than what they were able to do, and that's a shame, in my view.

[StarfishSaver]

36. There was never going to be a conviction

Herrera- Butler could have been flown into the chamber on the wings of angels vouching for the truth of every word out of her mouth and the outcome wasn't going to change.

It's interesting that some people seemed to get so excited this morning thinking that live witnesses would be a game changer when that was never going to change the outcome. The managers' point was to get the evidence in the record. They did that. It's not less than they were able to do - it's actually much more than they had just yesterday.

That said, did you REALLY just accuse Jamie Raskin of not "working as hard as all of us out here work to defend what they say you believe in"? Did you REALLY just write that? Seriously?

What are YOU doing to "defend what you say you believe in" besides complain that a man who is busting his ass a month after his son's death and he was almost assassinated doing his job isn't working as hard as you are?

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

41. Exactly right. Nothing is going to change the outcome,

but Raskin played chicken with Trump and won - he got what he wanted on the record.

[coti]

59. That's what makes the point of this publicizing what happened,

not stipulations.

[bigtree]

48. no real fight, just pro forma expediency

...no wonder people are cynical.

Most of us can't do our jobs this incompletely and keep them.

Enough with the morality comparisons. You know absolutely nothing about me of any substance. I don't have to justify my life to anyone to expect Congress to exhaust every avenue in pursuit of justice. Ridiculous supposing their lives are paramount to our own life experiences. What nonsense, throwing up his tragedy to make your point, as if the nation isn't locked in a fight for our very lives. Goddamn internet.

[Lulu KC]

82. Excellent

[KPN]

47. No it doesn't. But the fact is we are dealing with GOP Senators who are traitors to our

Constitution themselves. As Hillary said just yesterday, they are co-conspirators serving on the jury. Regarding the consequence of acquittal, hopefully, the DOJ and a broader House investigation will mitigate that. Making sure those things happen is part of our job.

[LiberalLovinLug]

21. True, but I think the point of live witnesses is for the camera, ie. for the publc

As far as being good for bolstering the legal arguments, great. But we all know that Republicans are cowards and will vote to acquit no matter what. And this "win" won't shift any votes, nor will it sway any of the public, more than each side already is.
I think the point of that exercise for such a nationally important case , is to take the charges off of type on a page, and into a living breathing human witness. That would have more an impact on the general public.

[StarfishSaver]

129. Showing a deposition of a congresswoman no one heard of in 2 or 3 weeks to talk about a phone call

she heard about between Trump and McCarthy that everyone already knows about wasn't going to make a bit of difference to the general public or have any impact on this impeachment trial.

The impeachment trial is not the end all and be all. There will be hearings and investigations and trials coming up and plenty of opportunities to continue to publicly expose Trump. An impeachment is a very limited avenue with, in this case, a foregone conclusion that no amount of witnesses will change.

[ShazzieB]

171. Agreed, 1000%.

People really do need to calm down. The Dems weren't going to get a conviction no matter what. Not with a "jury" that was already heavily biased in favor of aquittal.

There's a reason why jurors in criminal trials are carefully screened to weed out people who already have their minds made up or who have a personal vested interest in the outcome. This isn't possible in a presidential impeachment trial.

The deck was stacked against the impeachment managers from the beginning, and they knew it. The acquittal was nit their fault, and it didn't happen because of anything Raskin and the others did or did not do. It happened because most of the GOP Senators are spineless jellyfish, more concerned about their own self-interest than the future of this nation.

Fortunately, this trial is, indeed, just the beginning. I firmly believe that we ain't seen nothin' yet.

[fishwax]

22. the managers have done a great job

[Bettie]

26. I think a lot of us are just

stuck in an endless loop of just feeling like this needs to fucking be over.

Personally, I've been stuck in this house for nearly a year. I don't get to go anywhere or do anything more exciting than occasional forays to the grocery store.

And through the whole thing, there has been this horrible fuckery going on, not just as usual but in overdrive due to the realization that our system is utterly broken since there is NO WAY for this creature to receive any consequences for any of his behavior. And it is infuriating past the point of reason.

NONE of them ever face consequences for anything, but let someone from our side of the aisle even be accused of stepping one toe over some imaginary line and they are gone at the speed of light.

I wish I could move elsewhere, because anywhere has to be better than here. I wish I could stop caring about this stuff, but I have kids.

So, it's just an endless loop of hope followed by it being torn away because nothing ever changes.

I may be close to acceptance that there is no hope.

[Chemisse]

159. We don't need a conviction to have hope.

Trump has been impeached twice. Nothing can ever change that. And criminal charges loom for many involved in the Trump family crimes. We can sit back and enjoy the prospect of those proceedings in the future.

We have a fully Dem Congress and a Dem administration going full steam ahead.

The right-wing terrorist faction is a wild card. Will it wither now or grow stronger? I hope that many arrests and the loss of their figurehead will sap the energy, but I don't want to underestimate the groups who would do what we saw on Jan. 6.

[servermsh]

28. They asked for witnessses, forced a vote, won a vote, THEN caved!

There was no need for any of that! Raskin could have just entered the public statement into the record!

It LOOKS like, to everyone in the world, that they caved to Republican threats.

Republicans are SMILING BIG NOW!

[StarfishSaver]

42. They asked for witnsses and got it and got the witnesses statement into the record

What do you think the point of calling a witness is? It's not to have some dramatic appearance. It's to get their testimony into the record. And that's just what they did. In less than two hours. And with a stipulation by Trump that he would not object to anything she said.

[BleedsBlue]

62. Since we know frumpy won't be convicted, but

What about the 14th Amendment. How does that work? How many votes are needed to pass it barring frumpy from ever serving in office again. Thanks.

[StarfishSaver]

67. The 14th Amendment can't be invoked unilaterally by Congress without a court finding of guilt

[Hekate]

29. Kick

[LizBeth]

33. +1

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

37. Thank you! I've been ranting about this on other threads

and just getting slagged for it. I think (hope) more people will listen to you. I've been trying to explain that Raskin was playing chicken and he won; he got just what he wanted without having to take the risk of Trump's lawyers turning witness testimony into a circus of lies and bullshit for Trump's and the MAGAts' benefit. It was a very smart move, but the armchair quarterbacks don't seem to want to recognize that we are watching some of the best lawyers and legislators on the planet. It's just more waaah, waahh, the Democrats are weak. Drives me nuts.

[CatWoman]

72. i've noticed and i think it's a damned shame

[CaptainTruth]

93. Some people will spend an hour complaining about something...

...that they won't even spend 30 seconds trying to understand.

[druidity33]

127. Captain...

that is the TRUTH!

K&R, nt.

[flibbitygiblets]

155. Which is why the DU gods invented the "full ignore" feature

how I do adore it!

[PutGramaOnThePhone]

167. Puhleeese....

with respect...I’m grateful for every single person participating here at DU...now we have complaining about complaining, and then the counter complaint complainers will add their complaints.

The the definition of “understand”, that I just looked up is:

1. perceive the intended meaning of (words, a language, or a speaker).
2. interpret or view (something) in a particular way.

I may not understand, but I don’t think “understand” = “agree”. However, I just might not understand. 😊

[dsc]

38. I think the managers have been great

but that isn't what Trump's lawyers stipulated. They stipulated that if the congresswomen were to testify under oath she would say that the conversation took place and that it included what was said. That isn't the same thing.

[StarfishSaver]

77. They also stipulated, without objection, to the admission of the statements

which means they are admitting to the truth of them.

[dsc]

79. the truth of what she said, or the truth that she said it

I think it was the second thing.

[StarfishSaver]

88. His failure to object to her statement is a tacit admission that her statement is true

legally, politically and practically.

[ancianita]

43. It was, indeed. He knows exactly what's important to do. We're having the best outcome we can expect

[ismnotwasm]

44. THANK YOU

[Takket]

46. can't understate the presence of Covid in all this..........

I think Dems would have accepted letting drumpf's lawyers continue to make fools of themselves but seeing as it won't change any minds in the senate and probably almost no minds in the general public, let's get this done and move on to the Covid relief bill, which the public is far more concerned with.

We've proven the point and the POD (party of drumpf) can continue to cling to the man that left the white house with one of the lowest approval ratings of all time, lost the election by 7 million some odd votes, and lost them the white house, House and Senate if they really think that's a winning strategy for them.

[BobTheSubgenius]

52. I think everything you say is completely true, but I would take one aspect a little further.

Having Drumpf stipulate to it is way better than what we might have thought was the goal here - getting McCarthy on the stand and hoping he would testify to it. Something Il Douche could deny and deny, no matter how obvious.

Even in the face of overwhelming evidence, his denials give the Moron Nation something to cling to, as well as being enough cover for the GOP to stay with their vote for acquittal...at least in their minds.

This admission might be the biggest piece of evidence of all.

[betsuni]

53. K&R

[BumRushDaShow]

54. Cicicilline is reading the McCarthy quote into the record as part of the closing arguments

right now.

[FoxNewsSucks]

56. Thank you for the explanation.

It makes perfect sense, and to those who can't devote full-time attention to following things it is greatly appreciated.

In defense of many here, over the last 20 years, we have seen democrats repeatedly roll over for republiqons. Often enough that it's hard not to jump to that conclusion.

I'm very happy to see that this was a case of an expert on our side getting a win for us.

[greatauntoftriplets]

58. Thanks for the great explanation.

I'd had to leave the TV for a few minutes and came back to closing arguments. Have to admit that I was confused at first, knew something had happened while I was gone.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

60. As you said..YOU calm down!!!! We don't need a boss here! Not adding

witnesses IS an inexplicable cave. Despite what the lobby says. That is my opinion and don't appreciate your telling people how they should think.

[Wawannabe]

81. Thank you!

I am with you 100%

It’s hard to disagree and not get alerted tho. Good on ya!

[Laura PourMeADrink]

99. Agree!!!

[Evolve Dammit]

142. Agreed

[Laura PourMeADrink]

149. +1

[SunSeeker]

164. Exactly.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

170. We don't need no stinkin thought police. Lol

[SunSeeker]

172. Or to be lectured to calm down by someone posting in all caps. LOL

[Laura PourMeADrink]

192. DUzy!!!!!

[58Sunliner]

189. Thank you. All the brow beating and intimidation is just nauseating.

[coti]

63. Stipulations matter in a court of law, not a political

process like this one.

[StarfishSaver]

84. You could say the same thing about testimony

The only point of having her testify would be to get this conversation into the record.

They got the conversation into the record.

They did what they needed to do.

Now, if anyone wants to now argue that the point isn't REALLY to get the testimony into the record but to have some dramatic moment, etc., that's different. But that means their fussing about getting witnesses on the record really was smoke and mirrors.

[coti]

101. The dramatic moment/publicity is what I've been arguing here. nt

[StarfishSaver]

104. Why do you think Jaime Herrera Butler was going to produce a "dramatic moment" in two weeks?

And this "publicity" argument makes no sense to me. Trump, the insurrection and the impeachment trial have been getting massive and endless publicity. A congresswoman testifying in a few weeks about a conversation she overheard - a conversation that has already been reported - isn't going to provoke any game-changing publicity that will produce an outcome any different than will occur in the next day or so.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

152. You are spot on. Like one of the hundreds of tweets from

Last edited Sat Feb 13, 2021, 11:52 PM - Edit history (1)

pissed off Dems said, perfectly, "That a clip of her live deposition would've been played over and over again a weekend."

[CaptainTruth]

65. To me Trump's "confession" (confirmation) is far more valuable than...

...McCarthy's testimony.

Trump could have & probably would have said McCarthy lied in his testimony & Republicans would have believed him. But now it's come straight from Trump's own mouth. Much better IMHO.

[Mersky]

66. Let republicon senators mark themselves with protecting the seditionists

And steep in their complicity.

The House Managers know what was achieved today. Soon, it will become more clear to the rest of us.

[dlk]

70. McCarthy would have been anything but a cooperative witness

I trust the House Managers & the outstanding case they’re making

[Ford_Prefect]

73. Trump's stipulation to the accuracy of Herrera Butler paves the way for some very damaging publicity

in the future. We aren't done with this yet. Even after the vote there will be more take away from this, which I believe is the point of getting it right and accurate. Consequences matter, punishment matters, and a full disclosure of all involved matters too.

This is still the beginning of the fight. Call it round One, or maybe round 3. There will be revelations pouring out from the investigations of how the Oath Keepers were organized prior to and coordinated on the day as well as the pattern of preparation by Trump's staff and Campaign committee. Key communications will be tracked down and cross referenced, and payments from the committee and other groups checked and cross-referenced. These leads will be pursued by the agencies and federal prosecutors best suited to bring legal penalties to bear. Those are the kind meant to keep criminals off the street, off the TV and off of twitter.

Meanwhile there is much to be said and the Lincoln Project has shown us the way to do it. The thugs want us looking the other way so they can change the agenda. I think the next step is campaign style publicity focused on placing blame exactly where it belongs in the public consciousness. The GOP tried to underwrite Trump's Coup. I think NOW is the time to call them traitors to their faces. And I think we keep doing that from now until 2022.

[Lulu KC]

74. Well said

I'm keeping my eye on Twitter and people are freaking out. I trust the House Managers to know what they are doing. There are also confirmations hanging out here. We must think of Joe!

[crickets]

75. This is a good outcome.

By putting Rep. Herrera Butler's statement into the record, important facts are now part of the case against trump. This is a good thing. Witnesses do need to be called eventually. There's no doubt about that, but the timing is important. The FBI, General Honore at the behest of Nancy Pelosi, and others are still investigating the events leading up to and including the insurrection on January 6. There is going to be a commission, hearings are very likely, and there will be public testimony. Not calling the witnesses now avoids stepping on any current investigations.

Now if the hearings and/or commission never materialize, then I would get extremely upset that witnesses were not called. I don't think that's going to happen. We're going to hear testimony eventually, it just may take a while to get there.

[Kitchari]

76. Appreciate your explanation

Super helpful - thank you!

[hurple]

78. The real win would have been

McCarthy on the stand admitting the call took place as described, there by offering proof he knew trump was responsible for the insurrection and that the terrorists were responding to him... and then voting for acquittal anyway.

THAT would have been a damacles sword over the Republican party in 2022.

[ms liberty]

83. K&R. n/t

[onecaliberal]

85. Her statement was already in the record.

The point would be to put timber on record even after in her own words she tells Americans how Trump did nothing to protect even his own Vice President from the trump mob.

[Lars39]

86. Leahy just spoke...

iiuc, the new evidence cannot be used in closing arguments

[BumRushDaShow]

92. It already went out on "live TV"...

[lindalou65]

95. WTF? I don't understand

the reasoning behind this. I had a hard time understanding Leahy's comment.

While I think of it, I want to thank whoever gave me the hearts! I love them!

[drray23]

132. its standard trial procedure.

You can not use in closing arguments stuff that you have not presented in the trial and put in as part of the record. This is so that the other side has a chance to refute it.

[marmar]

87. The drama queeniness reminds me of election night....

.... in which countless posters had already determined Trump won a second term.

[Hekate]

112. Oh gods, yes

[JohnnyRingo]

91. It could open a floodgate of witnesses.

the defense, and Lindsey Graham in particular, warned that if democrats dare go down that road, that they too have hundreds of people they can call to exonerate the ex-president. They're bluffing, and that's why the defense ruffled their feathers.

Are they going to call up all those ANTFAs that stormed the Capitol at the tip of the spear? Will they find rioters who claim they only busted up the Capitol because they were bored that day? Maybe they can get that dumbass Louis Gohmert or Devon Nunes and his cow to claim the whole thing is a hoax and there was no riot, but they will all be under oath.

I doubt it changes even one republican vote, but testimony will filter down to the American people. Even the ones with their fingers in their ears.

[DIVINEprividence]

97. Nope, this was a cave. It looks weak

Democrats need to stop bringing a pillow to a knife fight

[qazplm135]

114. the best thing about this site

is the real time information it brings, and of course some very knowledgeable people here.

The worst thing about this site is the constant "Dems were perfect, Dems suck" paradigm where you either have to say everything was perfect, no wrong can be done, or get alerted on, or you have the opposite where people come in and freak out about nothing or very little.

Was it perfect? No. Perfect would be her testifying. Testimony is always more compelling than reading a statement. That's trial 101.
Was it a cave/weak? No. None of this will be remembered by next Wednesday. We will have moved on to other stuff. More than enough evidence has been put forward. It was never going to result in a conviction. The real impact of this was going to be on how many voters saw this and decided, no more Donald Trump?

There's no way to know the answer to that now. We will see in the months and years ahead. I'm hopeful that enough decided that to give Dems some wiggle room for the next 6-8 years. But I'm also enough of a realist to know that it only took two years after the biggest economic collapse in modern times for voters to send the perpetrators right back into control of the Senate. It's a never-ending war against ignorance, and the impeachment of Trump, even a conviction of him, isn't going to be the final battle in that war.

So no, it wasn't "perfect." And no, it wasn't a "cave." It was a compromise to move on to other stuff. There's only so much juice to be squeezed here anyways, and we are probably at the end of that squeeze. Let's get a COVID bill passed, and hopefully, a minimum wage increase too. That alone will speak to why our being in power is better than the alternative.

[DeminPennswoods]

98. It will be very interesting to see what DoJ does with this

once the trial is over. Merrick Garland, even if he is not inclined, is going to be hard-pressed not to open an investigation of the events surrounding Jan 6th.

Raskin and company did a great job with their presentation, but there is still much evidence to be uncovered that only a GJ can get at now. They can supoena records and testimony. There is no executive privilege to be invoked for former Trump staff and cabinet members. The Biden WH won't object to finding and turning over records from the previous administration. I suspect Bruce Castor's statement in his opening remarks about prosecuting people after they leave office will prove prescient.

[Brogrizzly]

100. I don't believe in being negative towards Democrats.

Right, generally, don’t be aggressively attacking democrats in the sense of giving republicans room. Talking “policy, strategy.” That’s one thing, I think it was a mistake not to have evidentiary testimony, from first hand witnesses. My hope is that this sterns people to pursuing criminal charges. These people must be held to account.

[TeamProg]

102. Trump may still see prison. Perhaps this year!

- and his little dog, Lindsay, too!

[sarchasm]

103. Spot on!

It seems to me this supports the idea that Trump may have had some kind of martial law plan in place if someone had actually been captured or harmed.

[electric_blue68]

106. Well, ok. Between yours and ...

and crickets post #75 I guess Ican be more ok with this than not.

I wanted witnesses, but i see about the potential for too much messiness from the Rethugs esp without
VP Kamala's tie-breaking vote being available along with SS's comments about getting Herrara's statement on record, and no contesting from trump's team... alright, then.

All this can be used in 2022 ads, I hope and pray there will be a 9-11 style commission, or something as effective, and now our Dems can just about do the first thing - which is -
get Covid Relief to so many of our people struggling, and suffering mightly(!) .

[True Blue American]

200. McConnell's speech

Throwing Trump into the Justice system can be used. He declared Trump guilty.

Jamie did a great job. Considering what he has been through he is a Miracle worker. Laid out a perfect case. Brought 7 Republicans along!

[electric_blue68]

202. Agreed for future ads. Jamie & team were amazing!!!

[H2O Man]

109. 1,000,000 % Recommended.

Raskin's move was genius.

[bigtree]

113. love the condensension about 'drama'

...as if we're just here to be entertained.

[StarfishSaver]

115. If you aren't one of those looking for drama, then I wasn't talking about you

But it's interesting that you took personal offense.

[Demsrule86]

116. You are absolutely correct...win win.

[Roisin Ni Fiachra]

117. Personally, I would have made them sweat and holler

for an hour or two more.

[mcar]

119. I've stayed away from here for the last few hours

knowing there would be hair on fire arguments and slamming of Democrats.

I also needed time to absorb what happened, as a non-lawyer.

I came to these conclusions as well.

Thanks SS

[PatrickforO]

125. I don't think this is a 'cave' at all. Not a bit. I think the Democrats are playing hardball.

This is a cut and dried case. Trump is clearly guilty as sin. They have now added new evidence to the official record that even further strengthens an already rock-solid case.

They know that this isn't just a trial in the Senate - Trump will probably be acquitted. We all know this.

But it is ALSO a trial before the American people, and by introducing this evidence, they are looking ahead to the midterm elections, where this is sure to be used by Democratic candidates at the local, state and federal levels. These are talking points every single candidate can pound on - the Republicans are the party of sedition, of - dare we say - treason.

They do not represent democracy but dictatorship. They are the anti-democracy party.

No, you're right Starfish. This whole thing could not have gone much better for our party.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

140. I don't think Raskin actually even wanted witnesses. He won at playing chicken,

figuring the Trump team would rather accept Herrera's statement than have to deal with witnesses for whom they were clearly as unprepared as they were for all other aspects of this trial. But at the same time, I doubt that Raskin would have wanted to give them the opportunity to magnify Trump's lies any further through cross-examination, which they would have done since they haven't got anything else. And all trial lawyers know that it's risky to call witnesses who don't want to cooperate. He got what he wanted without risking letting the Trump lawyers make even more of a circus of the proceedings for the benefit of Trump and the MAGAt audience.

[TuxedoKat]

165. I agree

He knew what he was doing and got what he wanted in the record. Ari Melber was just on criticizing the dems for not having live witnesses but I think Rep. Raskin and the others knew they would never get a conviction even with witnesses so why cause further delay

[JHB]

126. If I underrstand correctly, extending the trial with witnesses also had the possibility...

...of delaying the COVID relief package past the by-March 14 target, when key unemployment programs expire.

[StarfishSaver]

128. Yes. It could have

[bigtree]

131. no, they would have/could have suspended the hearings

...to take depositions, allowing COVID relief to proceed.

[msfiddlestix]

130. I agree this was definitely a Win for our side

This is a Very Big Deal... Totally. Full. Stop.

[Historic NY]

133. I'm waiting for the poor fucks who listened to Trump to get

their lawyers to subpoena him as a witness in their criminal trial and proceedings.

[MoonlitKnight]

135. No point in prolonging the inevitable.

He has been convicted in the court of public opinion. The House upheld its Constitutional duty. Senate Republicans will forever be on record as complicit to an attack on our democracy.

[rainin]

141. If it's not on video, it didn't happen.

Republicans will never read the record nor believe when we say it's there. Dems are living in an alternate reality thinking that the written record matters anymore to the general public. Republicans believed when Barr said the Mueller Report exonerated trump and half the country believed it. Then, Mueller was so reserved (weak) when he testified, we didn't have video evidence to contradict the lies. This is tragic.

[Evolve Dammit]

146. I agree with your post, and await rebuttals. Still waiting for the un-redacted report as well....

Like most people could care less at this point. It became a joke and will be "old news, yawn" if it is finally released. Short Attention Span Theatre. Tax returns anybody??

[StarfishSaver]

153. What impact do you think a video of an unknown congresswoman

testifying about what McCarthy told her about a conversation with Trump (and being subjected to a hostile cross-examination) would have on these people you think believe only what they see on video that the hundreds of hours of video of Trump over the years and the hours and hours and hours and hours of impeachment arguments and video over the past week didn't?

Nope - I just don't believe that seeing this woman testify about a phone call was going to change a thing - either in the minds of any senator, any constituent who sees it or in the annals of history.

"I didn't think Trump should be convicted on insurrection, but I saw a video of a congresswoman from Washington state testify that Kevin McCarthy told her about a conversation he had with Trump during the insurrection and it changed my mind completely - and I emailed my Senator Portman and he changed his mind, too and voted to convict" would say no one ever.

[rainin]

160. Said the "quit while you're behind" crowd

Why would we stop when we know we're going to lose? If elections matter, then we need to act like we won!

[StarfishSaver]

161. How ridiculous.

But I guess that's easier than just admitting you can't answer my question.

[rainin]

176. I was incomplete in my answer...sort of.

She's unknown now, but her words could make her instantly KNOWN. So, that wasn't really a question worth answering, was it? The important point, is you don't quit while you're behind. You peel back a layer, then another, then another, then another. You get the story out, who knew what and when they knew it. You give it the Bill Clinton Senate Trial treatment, complete with video depositions that are part of the record. This unknown congresswoman could introduce testimony that leads to the issuance of a subpoena for Kevin McCarthy, etc, etc.

I don't have to do all the imagining here. I think my point that we don't quit while we're behind is sufficient.

Look at how the other side thinks! Why do dems just fold up and go home? It isn't right for the capitol staff, the capitol police, the House who did their job and delivered an impeachment. We have only ourselves to blame that trump can announce his 2024 run immediately. He can be do worse than the Jan 6th riot, because you know he is worse when he is proven to be protected and invincible. Other wannabe dictators can learn from this. The Senate didn't deliver and they had more they COULD have done.

:

Link to tweet

Senator Ron Johnson
@SenRonJohnson
There is much to be investigated + many questions remain unanswered regarding Capitol Hill security on 1/6. What did Speaker Pelosi know about security preparations? Why have the @HouseSAA
and @SenateSAA
not responded to my letters? The public deserves full transparency.

[BumRushDaShow]

169. Here is why they stipulated to Buetler's statements

https://www.wthr.com/embeds/video/507-477fa84f-1277-444a-aad6-716c5ec9f66f/iframe

(the clip was from one of her telephone town halls)

So it was apparently "public knowledge" (at least in her District in WA state), but at the time the statement was lost in the carnage that was still being shown. I do know I heard multiple reports of "people trying to get a hold of 45" and the only one who managed to do it was McCarthy. In her case, she said she texted Mark Meadows asking why Biden was out there on TV and 45 wasn't.

[orangecrush]

151. Oh, yeah, justice was TOTALLY served.

I'm so calm I could just shit my pants and not even notice.

[Blue Owl]

162. K&R

[Peacetrain]

163. K&R!!!!!!

Yes..

[grantcart]

175. Couldn't agree more

Next up is a vote on the most popular legislation in 50 years.

When Covid 19 relief passes great momentum will be on our side

[SleeplessinSoCal]

177. I hate hearing the language that it was a "fumble" without...

... context. The fact that is it wouldn't change the vote.

I'm more upset that there wasn't a way to establish that the impeachment was constitutional, and that saying it wasn't should have prevented that person/Senator/Juror from voting one way or the other.

[Meowmee]

178. No it was not a win

America voted for fascism today again. In time we will sadly see more ramifications.
Days of infamy: Nov ‘16 election day, Jan 6 ‘21, and today. And many more I am sure.

[StarfishSaver]

181. I didn't say the trial resulted in a win

I said the Dems won the battle over Herrara-Butler's testimony.

[lordsummerisle]

182. k&r n/t

[MerryBlooms]

185. Congresswoman Plaskett masterfully, explained to Joy Reid

how getting Herrera-Butler's testimony into the record was the point. Herrera-Butler didn't need to be there in person. Plus, defense did not object and allowed the testimony in,as truth, as stated. Defense later, then tried to stipulate they didn't do what they did, Ha! That was a big deal. There was never going to be a conviction, the republicans stated that fact from the beginning. I'm very proud of our House Managers. I would love to see President Plaskett some day, she's magnificent.

[DonaldsRump]

186. Can I beg to disagree?

Dear SS:

We had a "heart-felt" conversation earlier today ( ) , which was great!

But, I do think that the Senate could have let this run longer. There was no particular reason to end this today. Getting the statement into the record was good, but there was MUCH, MUCH more that could have been done.

I go back to Watergate and Benghazi. In the latter, the Rs helped to destroy HRC with the "death by a thousand cuts" theory of going after her for years on this, as well as the emails. It then became a common belief among many that there was something amiss about either or both. Watergate went on FOR YEARS until Nixon resigned. It took multiple parallel proceedings in the House, Senate, and judiciary to finally bring Nixon to resign. Remember that Nixon was supported by MANY House and Senate Republicans for more than 2 years, until the totality of Nixon's actions after the burglary and his actions in relation to the Watergate investigation itself (e.g., the Saturday Night Massacre) caught up with him and caused those sycophantic Rs to dump him. This didn't happen in 5 days; rather, it took more than 2 years. And in 1974, the Rs were destroyed in the mid-term elections for their blind allegiance to Nixon (except for those Rs like William Cohen, who were far more principled).

Here, after 5 weeks after the insurrection and a 5 day trial, a Democratically-controlled Congress let a chance slip by to nail trump on forever foreclosing him from holding federal office. Does anyone really think that trump would have benefited from an elongated impeachment conviction trial? I don't. Rather, he would have sunk lower and lower. Remember Benghazi and Watergate and what prolonged investigations did to both HRC (unfairly) and Nixon (completely fairly).

The Senate, controlled by the Ds, could have adjourned the proceedings to allow the House Managers to conduct further investigation. The immediate threat of trump was gone, so there was no need to rush this. This would have allowed the Senate to conduct all the other business of the Senate while the House Managers conducted a full-blown investigation via the Senate proceeding. I am no expert in Congressional procedure, but the Ds could have done the normal work of the Senate and still run the impeachment conviction trial over several months.

I know there is the possibility of other action against trump for the insurrection. But, IMHO, you run all actions parallely to exert the maximum pressure. One pressure point has essentially let trump off the hook. I am very happy with the House Managers, but this should have been the long game to keep exerting all pressure a la Watergate.

DR

[StarfishSaver]

188. Neither Watergate nor Benghazi proceedings you're referring to were an impeachment trial

What you are talking about was done by House and Senate committees.

Impeachment trials aren't intended and shouldn't stretch out indefinitely to conduct investigations.

Everything you're talking about can - and should - be done in more in-depth hearings in several different committees in both the House and Senate and cover much broader ground and issues than simply whether Trump incited an insurrection. An impeachment trial is not the appropriate or most effective venue for this.

It would be very difficult, if not impossible, for the Democratic House Managers to conduct such an investigation in that role. Not only aren't they associated with any committees in these roles and therefore don't have the necessary resources and support, but the scope of their work is limited by Senate rules and rules of impeachment. For example, every witness would have to be voted on by the Senate - an absolutely impossible and cumbersome process. The House Managers are not Senators, so any act they do pretty much has to be approved by the Senate. They could not operate independently.

I understand your frustration and share your desire to investigate this fully. But the way to do that is through the House and Senate committees, not through an impeachment trial.

[DonaldsRump]

190. We seem to agree to get at the same point

However, as has been suggested before, why can't the Senate suspend the trial and create a Select Committee to investigate and, hopefully, the DoJ/US Attorneys conduct parallel criminal proceedings?

The impeachment being approved prior to trump's departure is essentially the same as filing a complaint a few days before the statute of limitations run. AFAIK, nothing required the Senate trial to be completed in X days (perhaps I am wrong. It wouldn't be the first time).

Unless I am missing something, all of this was in the hands of the Ds? If I am wrong, I am totally willing to stand corrected.

[StarfishSaver]

194. Suspending an impeachment indefinitely would create a mess

Among other things, it would be an admission that the impeachment was premature and not based on solid ground - an impeachment should not require this kind of investigation in order to get to a vote.

And we know that no matter what, the Senate was not going to vote to disqualify him. So holding off on the vote is just a waste of time.

The Senate can create a Select Committee to investigate. But suspending the trial indefinitely in order to conduct such an investigation is not the way to go.

But frankly, I'm exhausted discussing this so I'll just agree that we disagree and wish you a good night.

[DonaldsRump]

195. Nite! It's early still in the West Coast, so I will keep it going from my side

Remember, as Speaker Pelosi pointed out, the Ds had no choice: (1) they impeached before trump left office (i.e, a lawful impeachment); and (2) the then-Senate Majority Leader McConnell refused to cause the Senate to accept the impeachment. I am taking Speaker Pelosi for her word. That doesn't mean the impeachment was premature; instead, it means that the trump mal-adminstration would have refused to cooperate as it always has done and there was no other way to hold him accountable. trump would never have allowed any one of his people to testify, much less the Secret Service etc. That changed at 12 noon on January 20, 2021 and, most especially, the moment the Ds became the Senate's majority party.

I do not believe, under the peculiar circumstances of the way trump operated as ersatz-POTUS, that the impeachment was premature. Indeed, if you analogize impeachment to a grand jury indictment, impeachment simply means that an offense is chargeable, not that it is convictable. The conviction phase is where the real evidence comes in (in other words, during trial).

In other words, there was no other way for the Ds to do this. They impeached the monster while he was still (allegedly) POTUS, tried to get the Senate to act on it, which it refused, and then started this trial at the earliest possible opportunity. Under these circumstances, a Senate Select Committee, suspending the hearing indefinitely, would, IMHO, be exactly what McConnell would have done had the tables been turned.

The Ds have to fight fire with fire. Watergate and Benghazi are perfect examples of how effective elongated proceedings can be used (1) in the former, to find the truth; and (2) in the latter, destroy a dangerous opponent.

Here, we had both. CNN said we "blinked". Did we? I really am not sure.

[58Sunliner]

191. "Trump admitting that the conversation occurred takes care of that."

Did Trump make an actual statement? No? His lawyers didn't object is not the same thing. And no it's not a win.

[SledDriver]

197. Agreed

Legal machinations are not going to matter in the court of public opinion.

The big takeaway from this is that Trump is effectively above the law. He has not been, nor will he ever be, punished for any of his actions. FFS he was going to let the mob kill them, GQP too, McCarthy's call proves that, and they *still* closed ranks to acquit him.

Not calling witnesses made sense before the news about the Trump-McCarthy call. It revealed that Trump was actively rooting for the rioters! Witness testimony, despite the ensuing drama, was necessary to get that out and make the public aware of the extent of that.

The blue wave that inspired many with the hope that there would be some accountability is now lost. I'm sure there are many, myself included, who find themselves this morning disheartened with the realization that our laws and institutions do not provide any kind of meaningful check on those who just openly oppose them.

[58Sunliner]

198. I agree completely.

[Prof.Higgins]

196. Cogently and lucidly expressed. Let's not gift many dozens of lazy MSM journalists their catnip

of "Democrats in Disarray" by bellyaching about the witnesses. For a change, we Progressives need to accept that the Good is NOT the enemy of the perfect.

Thousands are still dying of Coronavirus each day, and millions are desperately awaiting financial rescue from Congress, so this would be the worst possible time to indulge our internal disputations and snatch defeat from the House Managers and Representative Raksin's Homeric victory over the powerful forces of Republicans' and Murdoch's iniquitous propaganda machines.

[Hortensis]

199. Agree this was a win, and so in the end was the vote of 57-43 to convict.

It's the biggest win we could get and also the biggest conviction majority in history.

The win doesn't stop here either. We'll swing it like a bat at Republican heads from here on in.

[True Blue American]

201. Agree! 100%!