Does a target of an investigation have the right to smear a witness who might or who did testify against him, and then claim he has free speech right to so engage? Does he have the right to threaten removal from employment or position to limit any future witness from providing testimony when subpoenaed by Congress?
Trump tweeted this weekend slamming Jennifer Williams, calling her a Never Trumper. Williams testifies today. So the most powerful man in the world claims he has the right to tweet and disparage to tens of millions of people, intimidating that or any future witness who is compelled to testify against him? He is asserting that anybody who agrees to a subpoena should now be labelled “Never Trumpers” without providing one iota bit of evidence.
The Louisiana elections are now history. Governor John Bel Edwards bested businessman Eddie Rispone and indirectly President Donald Trump who campaigned heavily for the Republican candidate.
The day after the election political analyst and pollster John Couvillon of JMC Analytics and Polling published the following:
As both the decade and the 2019 election cycle comes to a close, JMC would like to analyze the results through the prism of the December 2002 runoff that saw Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu re-elected, as there are similarities between that race and Governor John Bel Edwards’ successful re-election race (that comparison was also made in this prior article).
It's time to talk Turkey.
With Thanksgiving now roughly ten days away, it is almost winter holiday-time when we spend quality moments with our friends, relatives and loved-ones. And to prepare everyone with the right spirit, on Thursday November 21, we're serving up some of the most recognized political-turkey-talk with punch.
Today, Roger Stone, a political operative who had worked with Presidents Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and Donald Trump, was convicted on seven counts ranging from lying to Congress to witness tampering. His sentencing will take place on February 6, 2020. Stone could face up to 50 years in prison.
Prosecutors argued that Stone lied about his efforts to gather information for the Trump campaign from WikiLeaks about the hacking of Democratic National Committee computers.
I am convinced. It is a fact. For those who I call ardent pro-Trumpers, the national GOP and the Republican Congress, facts don't matter in the Donald Trump impeachment probe. It is all about politics.
No matter what the House of Representatives do, no matter what evidence has been or will be uncovered, the probe is not about facts. It is about emotions and partisanship.
The inquiry is not for truth. Truth is irrelevant.
This does not mean that I believe that the Democrats have proven their case. However, I do believe they could and would if Donald Trump allowed the witnesses to testify and the documents to be released.
But, that won't happen. Regardless how we have heard the Fox News bunch call for transparency for the FISA probe, let all the facts come out, that type of talk is all talk when push comes to shove and the probe is on their own.
The Trump impeachment inquiry day one is now history. The hysteria mounts. Tomorrow, part two.
This week, I posted the below items on my Facebook page. The first written Tuesday deals with what I consider to be the real evidence developing in the proceedings that could possibly result in impeachment of President Donald J. Trump, although, obviously, bets are off when it goes to the US Senate. The second post was written minutes after the first impeachment hearing yesterday.