flyangler

Does Schumer Think He Is Majority Leader and Controls the Senate Trial?

Rate this topic

48 posts in this topic

Does Schumer think he is the majority leader? 

 

Is it now becoming clearer why a protracted trial might not be the best idea for the GOP?

Schumer's opening pitch for the Senate impeachment trial

On Sunday night, Chuck Schumer made his opening bid to Mitch McConnell in the two leaders' negotiations over the Senate impeachment trial.

 

Driving the news: Schumer has sent a letter to McConnell in which he asks the Republican leader to call four witnesses who refused to testify before the House impeachment committees.

  • The witnesses Schumer has asked for all have direct knowledge of Trump administration decisions concerning the holdup of aid to Ukraine and the requests for investigations of the Bidens and of the origins of the Russia investigation.

  • They are: Mick Mulvaney, acting White House chief of staff; John Bolton, former national security adviser; Michael Duffey, associate director for national security, Office of Management and Budget; and Robert Blair, senior adviser to Mulvaney.

  • Schumer also proposes that the Senate issue subpoenas "for a limited set of documents that we believe will shed additional light on the administration's decision-making regarding the delay in security assistance funding to Ukraine and its requests for certain investigations to be announced by the government of Ukraine," per the letter obtained by Axios.

  •  

Why it matters: The Senate Democratic leader's request — particularly his call for additional impeachment witnesses — may appeal to some moderate Republicans but is sure to meet forceful resistance from President Trump and McConnell.

 

Between the lines: Schumer offers other suggestions to McConnell, such as the amount of time he believes should be allocated for arguments and counter-arguments. But it's his requests for witnesses that will be most controversial.

  • By tailoring the description of the kind of witnesses Democrats think should be called — those with "direct knowledge" of the administration's decisions related to delaying the military aid and seeking investigations — Schumer may be drawing a distinction between witnesses Trump has sought to shield and the sort of Democrats that Trump wanted to drag into the Senate, including the Bidens.

  • Schumer appears to be trying to drive a wedge into the Republican Senate conference. The bet would be that even as McConnell defends Trump, some swing state Republicans who are no fans of the president may want to at least make it seem like they're seriously examining Trump's actions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mitch should tell him they, the Democrats,  will get as much input in the Senate as the Republicans got in the House. Pretty much just sit down and shut up,  you people had your say in the House.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, PCstriper said:

Mitch should tell him they, the Democrats,  will get as much input in the Senate as the Republicans got in the House. Pretty much just sit down and shut up,  you people had your say in the House.

Exactly.

 

Then sit back and watch the left cry foul, just as the R's did when the dems controlled the circus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, tomkaz said:

Does Schumer think he is the majority leader? 

 

Is it now becoming clearer why a protracted trial might not be the best idea for the GOP?

Schumer's opening pitch for the Senate impeachment trial

On Sunday night, Chuck Schumer made his opening bid to Mitch McConnell in the two leaders' negotiations over the Senate impeachment trial.

 

Driving the news: Schumer has sent a letter to McConnell in which he asks the Republican leader to call four witnesses who refused to testify before the House impeachment committees.

  • The witnesses Schumer has asked for all have direct knowledge of Trump administration decisions concerning the holdup of aid to Ukraine and the requests for investigations of the Bidens and of the origins of the Russia investigation.

  • They are: Mick Mulvaney, acting White House chief of staff; John Bolton, former national security adviser; Michael Duffey, associate director for national security, Office of Management and Budget; and Robert Blair, senior adviser to Mulvaney.

  • Schumer also proposes that the Senate issue subpoenas "for a limited set of documents that we believe will shed additional light on the administration's decision-making regarding the delay in security assistance funding to Ukraine and its requests for certain investigations to be announced by the government of Ukraine," per the letter obtained by Axios.

  •  

Why it matters: The Senate Democratic leader's request — particularly his call for additional impeachment witnesses — may appeal to some moderate Republicans but is sure to meet forceful resistance from President Trump and McConnell.

 

Between the lines: Schumer offers other suggestions to McConnell, such as the amount of time he believes should be allocated for arguments and counter-arguments. But it's his requests for witnesses that will be most controversial.

  • By tailoring the description of the kind of witnesses Democrats think should be called — those with "direct knowledge" of the administration's decisions related to delaying the military aid and seeking investigations — Schumer may be drawing a distinction between witnesses Trump has sought to shield and the sort of Democrats that Trump wanted to drag into the Senate, including the Bidens.

  • Schumer appears to be trying to drive a wedge into the Republican Senate conference. The bet would be that even as McConnell defends Trump, some swing state Republicans who are no fans of the president may want to at least make it seem like they're seriously examining Trump's actions.

Since the house articles of impeachment no longer concern a bribe or QPQ why are these witnesses needed at all?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that the shoe is on the Democratic foot they want to change the rules to suit their needs. This is why the whole thing is 

a Sham . Trump will get acquitted and get elected. Then what do the Dems do? Start the whole process over again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 mins ago, Steve_in_PA said:

Since the house articles of impeachment no longer concern a bribe or QPQ why are these witnesses needed at all?

Obstruction 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/1/2019 at 11:29 AM, DoOver said:

The FIRST time in recorded history the retort of "GO POUND SALT" was employed was by a Police Chief in Port Washington Long Island New York.

 

The Police Department had written numerous traffic tickets to the Russians whom have a Consolidate there in Oyster Bay.

 

The Police, after exploring many avenues including calling the Federal Government to have the Commies pay their tickets, finally just had their limousine impounded.

 

The Russkies where so pissed that the local Police Chief would not give their limo back until the commies paid up THEY called the Federal Government to get their limo back.

 

The Police Chief told them ALL to "GO POUND SALT"

 

 

President Donald J. Trump told Lil Kim to "go pound salt".

 

It's a New York thing.

 

 

Hell we kill babies here.

 

 

Capish?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump will be not be found guilty of anything and the Dim's attempts to rig another election with this impeachment farce is so thin, transparent, and partisan that even Schiffty's own constituents were yelling at him when he recently went home.

 

The Dims want to impeach the most successful President in the last 50 years because he is a danger to their election chances. That is basically the entire premise of their impeachment articles. Pelosi has been cannibalized and hijacked by the Left Wing of her party and it is going to cost the Dims big time. The Dims are already losing their moderates and when their impeachment fails to remove Trump they will lose the angry Left Wingnuts.

 

The Dims lose lose strategy is a big win for the USA, its citizens and their families. 

 

The Dims have totally ignore the lessons of the UK election, or any other lesson for that matter like why the lost the last Presidential election with all their scheming and fixing. Their playbook never changes and it is just more of the same old failed strategies and policies.

 

Trump had the most successful week of his Presidency last week and the Dims and MSM totally ignored it like it never happened.  It looks like the Dims and MSM will continue to circle around and down in their own echo chamber until they get finally get flushed down the political toilet in next election.

Edited by Jay Blair

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.