THEY'RE CALLING WITNESSES, including McCarthy or his notes! (Edit, Buetler's notes about McCarthy)

[George II]

[Kid Berwyn]

1. Yee-haw!

Under oath, puh—leez.

[mobeau69]

2. There's no option.

[BumRushDaShow]

3. Apparently in reference to Congresswoman Beutler (that is who Raskin mentioned along with her notes)

Link to tweet

TEXT

MSNBC
@MSNBC
JUST IN: In a new statement, Rep. Herrera Beutler confirms conversation between House Minority Leader McCarthy and fmr. President Trump on January 6; calls out other officials who were present to speak out
11:06 PM · Feb 12, 2021

[Demsrule86]

24. This is a clever way to delay the Covid Bill until after people fall off of unemployment.

There will be no conviction.

[BumRushDaShow]

26. Not necessarily

because I would think they would have to make sure that the witnesses are germane. Also remember that BOTH chambers are still working on the COVID bill. The House is not involved in this trial outside of the Impeachment Managers and as I recall reading last week, the House had "a dozen Committees" working on it just from their side.

The host on CSPAN just said that they may end up forming a small Committee to decide how to proceed with the witness portion.

[Demsrule86]

30. I hope so...but since I still view conviction as unlikely, the longer this goes on I think it is

not good for us in 22 and 24.

[BumRushDaShow]

33. If one stipulates that a conviction won't happen

(which would be irrelevant since he is not in office anyway) the bigger issue is for HISTORY. This cannot be allowed to be pooh-poohed "for the record". It has to be shown, without a shadow of a doubt, what happened. And IMHO, this might eventually result in future hearings and legislation on how to handle something like this going forward.

And 2022 is a ways off and by that time, this would be forgotten except for the key elements that can be extracted to use for ads tying any GOP members running in state races, to "insurrection" if they support what happened January 6.

[pandr32]

38. Well said!

[BumRushDaShow]

42. For the last Impeachment trial a year ago this month, Turtle "controlled the Rules"

and refused to allow witnesses. Now WE "control the Rules" and what happened January 6 is many times worse than the Ukraine "shake down", and the depth of the criminality needs to come out. Of course it puts McCarthy on the hook regarding whether to try to refute it and then be faced with perjury for "lying under oath" or face the wrath of the monster he helped to create if he doesn't lie.

I know somewhere in the hinterlands, Cheeto Boner is -



and

[pandr32]

67. Looks like the MaCarthy issue is decided

I would love to see charges.

[BumRushDaShow]

68. Or so we thought

we are getting "illegal" (un-allowed by the Rules) "objections" by the defense regarding the House Manager's closing arguments.

Lee is back to complaining about what the Managers have indicated what he supposedly "said".

[pandr32]

84. I just saw it dissolve like wet tissue.

Crap!
There is no way to make this stick because most RepubliQans are complicit. It is like trying to nail jello to the wall.

[BumRushDaShow]

87. I think he was basically dismissed

and is being seen as a big baby.

[CaptainTruth]

65. I can't agree conviction is irrelevant because the bigger issue is barring from office.

Without conviction there can be no vote to bar him from future office.

I don't believe it will happen, but to me that's the main relevance of a conviction at this point.

[BumRushDaShow]

66. The argument that Democrats had originally considered

and I'm not sure where they are with this, was to utilize the 14th Amendment for the "bar from office". I.e, -

14th Amendment

Amendment XIV

(snip)

Section 3.

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv

[Demsrule86]

71. I still say if the Covid bill is delayed further, we will pay price in 22...most Americans are not

even watching the trial.

[BarackTheVote]

35. So you're saying the Republicans fooled the House Managers

and all of the Democratic Senators + Romney, Collins, and Murkaowski to do this because of some 4th dimensional chess move that none of the other Republican Senators backed except Graham who changed his vote only after it passed?

[Demsrule86]

70. If we are tied up with witnesses and since we called witnesses, the GOP will too...it delays the

Covid bill which is what the GOP including Romney wants. Yeah, I think we are being played. I highly doubt most Americans will care about this...but they will care if no help is sent to them.

[BarackTheVote]

76. Well, you got your way

and Trump is reportedly ecstatic. Guess you and Trump can go be happy together 🤷?♂️

[Demsrule86]

79. Trump might be happy or faking it...but the GOP didn't get to waste our time so they are not happy.

Ask yourself why Graham voted for witnesses...the would have dragged this out and called all sorts of bullshit witnesses.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

41. The more evidence, the more conviction in the minds of people and in historical analysis.

This impeachment trial is NOT just for the moment.

This is for the ages. This is to set an example of how dangerous demagogues are, especially Right Wing Authoritarian demagogues.

[KPN]

58. Exactly. Well put!

[Demsrule86]

72. You assume people are watching this trial...Look at the ratings...they are not watching for the most

part. Never mind the ages if the GOP uses this to delay the Covid relief package, we could lose in 22 and 24.

[Dark n Stormy Knight]

85. Just because people aren't watching the trial doesn't mean they

aren't Interested. I'm very interested, but am not watching. I do follow up by reading & watching reports on the trial, including excerpts.

Many others will do the same. RWers won't get accurate info from their sources--the actual fake news-- but they were never going to hear the truth anyway. Like the RWers at the trial who refuse to look or listen.

However, many who aren't watching the trial will get the facts that emerge from the trial. And the official historical record is important.

I truly get your concern about COVID relief. It is super important, of course, but unless it's long delayed or derailed entirely, people will get the help Dems are determined to provide.

[PatrickforO]

62. Maybe not - in the Senate. BUT, I'm thinking we have to look at the effect this will have

moving forward toward the 2022 mid-term election.

I'm thinking this move to strengthen the case is ultimately meant to 1) say hold the phone to Mitch's email this morning saying he was going to vote to acquit, and b) refute the allegation that 'Antifa was the group that led the mob, and c) make the case of Trump's treason even more rock solid to the American people.

While many Americans are not even aware this is going on, this will give Democrats all over the US the ability to challenge their Republican opponents. Because look how few Republicans actually have had the courage to uphold their oaths of office.

Oh, I know I might be wrong. God knows, the stupidity of the American populace can never be underestimated, but my fervent hope is that people are waking up and realizing what we almost lost. I mean, I'm 62 years old, and I wept on January 6, because I realized how deeply ingrained faith in this republic is, at least in me. I realized that I have taken for granted that this kind of thing could NEVER happen here in the USA, and it did. It did.

It cannot ever be allowed to happen again.

[Demsrule86]

69. Most won't watch it nor will they care...now if they don't get their money...that will be what they

remember and we will be blamed.

[PatrickforO]

78. Well, I cannot criticize you or accuse you of cynicism. Because you are right.

Still, do you remember those old black and white Perry Mason shows with Raymond Burr? That is still one of my alltime favorites, because when I turn one on (I have the whole DVD collection), I can sit back, comfortable in the assurance that truth will ultimately prevail, that justice will untimately be done.

I'm also mindful (and yes, I know I'm a serious idealist) of what Tolkien said in the Fellowship of the Ring, which cannot quote without looking up, but will paraphrase: There are other powers at work besides those we exercise that have their own ends and (implied) work toward good.

That said, I'm not going to even offer a friendly wager with you, because I know you are likely right. But I cannot let go of my hope, optimism and idealism. I just can't.

[Demsrule86]

80. I would never want to be responsible for you or anyone losing their sense of optimism...

I hope you are right...that SOB should be convicted. I just don't want the GOP to use this to win in 22 and 24. I fear what would happen if they manage to get back in power.

[PatrickforO]

83. Yeah I'll say. You and me both.

[triron]

4. For real?

[triron]

5. knr

[Liberal In Texas]

6. The vote to call witnesses will fail.

This was a way to get the story out there by the House Managers.

[uncle ray]

8. ketchup. enough repups already are in favor.

[Liberal In Texas]

10. I stand corrected. I didn't realize it was a simple majority.

[uncle ray]

17. it's all good, things are happening fast.

this just blew up.

[George II]

9. Reading down the list, Collins, Romney and Murkowsky voted for witnesses. That makes 53....

Manchin and Sinema voted for witnesses, too.

[True Blue American]

28. Lindsey just changed his mind, voted yes!:)

[llmart]

60. Lindsay changes his mind more often than I change my underwear.

[StarfishSaver]

14. It just passed 55-45

[KewlKat]

7. Collins, murkowsli and Romney say YES

[BumRushDaShow]

11. Witnesses approved - heard 54 yays - now added Graham as 55.

Fucking Toomey said - "nay" - that's why I say, don't trust him.

Lindsey just changed to "yay".

[StarfishSaver]

15. I got Collins, Murkowski, Romney, and Graham - who was the 5th Republican?

[BumRushDaShow]

16. Sasse I think?

[Demsrule86]

73. Now ask yourself why are they voting for witnesses?

Do you really believe anything they heard had any effect...so what is their motivation?

[BumRushDaShow]

75. The only oddball GOP one - after the fact - was Graham

the others will probably vote to convict.

What they were able to do was to get the stuff that broke on CNN last night, into the record and stipulated to.

The issue here is the country. Sometimes people have to think "for the future". When you look at history, it is debated over and over and over about how a Mussolini happened or even how a Putin happened - it was by "doing nothing" or "pooh-poohing" what just happened last month, which was the first time in this nation's history that something like that happened. It didn't even happen during the Civil War and the last time the Capitol was sacked, it was not by the locals but by the British in the War of 1812.

[RVN VET71]

77. I think his first name is spelled with an ' instead of the final "g"

Fuckin’ Toomey

Also Lyin’ Toomey

[BumRushDaShow]

81. I call him

"Teabagger Toomey".

And hopefully THIS GUY will replace him in 2022!

Link to tweet

TEXT

John Fetterman
@JohnFetterman
Just so grateful. Thank you.

🚨
No really, thank you.
🚨


In a few hours today, we’ve blown past 40,000 small dollar donors.

Could you join our team and donate today?
Become a founding donor to John Fetterman's campaign
We need to build as much early momentum as possible to kick our campaign off strong.
secure.actblue.com
4:12 PM · Feb 8, 2021 from Pennsylvania, USA

Link to tweet

TEXT

John Fetterman
@JohnFetterman
·
Feb 8, 2021
Replying to @JohnFetterman
If my children were welcome to swim here, every child must be.

In fact, I insisted the state divest itself of it and it has, to the benefit of Pennsylvania’s National Guard.
Image
Image
Image
Image

John Fetterman
@JohnFetterman
SOLD
❗️


Always said the people of Pennsylvania *never* owed me a mansion with a chef.

Proud to live and raise our family right here in Braddock where it all started 20 years ago.
To sell or not sell? Pa.’s taxpayer-funded lieutenant governor’s mansion could hit the market
Pennsylvania is the only state that owns and maintains a residence for its second-in-command.
inquirer.com
8:34 AM · Feb 8, 2021

[RVN VET71]

86. Thanks for the info. I just sent him a contribution

I don’t live in PA, but I’ll send a contrib to anyone trying to unseat a Republican. Don’t have much to send as a retiree, but I’ll do what I can to knock the plutocrat fascists out of government.

[BumRushDaShow]

88. For that seat

Toomey is not running again so it will be an open seat and I am hoping this truly "populist Democrat" (currently PA's Lt. Governor) will kick the crap out of any Republican who tries to run!

[George II]

12. Now Graham has changed to aye.

[KayF]

13. witnesses at a trial?

well I never! -- Lindsey Graham

[StarfishSaver]

18. They requested Herrerra Butler and her notes, not McCarthy.

[George II]

21. Oh, I thought I heard Raskin say McCarthy's notes, too. It happened so fast.

[StarfishSaver]

23. I replayed it to be sure. He was referring to Herrera-Butler

I still feel that it would be a huge mistake to call McCarthy. He would be a hostile witness and they won't know what he would say. He can only hurt them, not help.

[BobTheSubgenius]

51. That hostility might work in the managers' favour, at least in a PR way.

Winning a very unlikely conviction is not the only goal. The GOP could very easily win the battle and lose the war.

At least, that's what I'm hoping for as a Second-Best Case.

[StarfishSaver]

52. "Hostile witness" does mean they show hostility in the traditional sense

It means they aren't there to cooperate with them.

And McCarthy is not the target of the impeachment so they don't need to make a big deal of trying to make him look bad - that doesn't help their case. What they need is to get the information in the record, which they can do without him.

[George II]

54. Thanks. I just saw it on C-Span too while they were getting ready to call to order again.

[wnylib]

45. I just heard an NPR interview with

Adam Schiff. When asked about McCarthy as a witness, Schiff said that McCarthy is not a reliable witness because he waffles (my word, not Schiff's but same meaning). He pointed out that McCarthy was one ofcthe group who met with Trump at Mar a Lago and therefore has reason to cover for Trump.

Schiff also said that Buetler is acceptable as a witness because hearsay is permitted in a Senate Trial.

Regarding the threat from Trump's attorney to flood the procedure with 100s of their own witnesses, Schiff said that they can't do that. The managers can prevent abuse of the process by stipulating no frivolous witnesses and determining the relevance of proposed witnesses.

[ancianita]

27. Yes. And the defense doesn't want McCarthy cross examined.

[UpInArms]

19. That was amazing

Lindsey Graham changed his vote?

[George II]

20. He said in a tweet this morning (or late last night) that if they allow witnesses he'll tie it up...

....forever, calling hundreds of witnesses. The vote was already 54-46 so he changed in order to be involved in calling them.

[UpInArms]

39. Should have known

He would never do the right thing for the right reasons.

[wnylib]

55. Schiff says the managers can and will

prevent the calling of frivolous witnesses and will determine the relevance of witnesses called for deposition. Per NPR interview with Schff.

[George II]

22. Here's why Graham changed his vote. He did so only AFTER it was already 54-46...

Link to tweet

[StarfishSaver]

25. Yes - they're going to try to turn it into a circus

That's why the House managers are smart to keep it as narrow as possible and not try to bring in a lot of witnesses, especially hostile ones.

[Ligyron]

43. Can the D's successfully do that, limit or control who's called?

I ask only because I do not know the rules, if they even exit. Impeachment is so rare an event IDK what's precedent or if that matters,

[StarfishSaver]

48. I think so

The witnesses would have to be voted on. If they can keep at least one Republican senator voting with them, they can prevent the defense counsel from calling extraneous witnesses.

[Ligyron]

56. Thank you for your reply, which does make sense.

[True Blue American]

29. I also heard the expert say, " It is a bluff!"

[bucolic_frolic]

31. McQARTHY is a great and unexpected bonus

epic takedown hopefully

[George II]

34. I don't think they're calling him, I misheard, they meant Beutler's notes about McCarthy.

[bucolic_frolic]

36. Even better

He can't lie his way out of it. All Malarkey All McCarthy you know.

[Duppers]

32. ... 😅

Finally! And under oath!

[George II]

37. For the record, Congresswoman Beutler is a REPUBLICAN!

[Bmoboy]

40. sounds like Herrara Beutler's testimony may be hearsay

McCarthy talked to the republican caucus about the conversation after Jan 6 and Herrara Beutler was there in the caucus.

As were all of the republican reps. They all knew.

She cited this when she voted to impeach Trump.

She wasn't on a conference call with Trump and McCarthy and now McCarthy is walking back his story.

[Politicub]

47. Do you have insider information or something?

What a treat to have a new DUer with the inside track. I hope you enjoy your stay in our community.

[Bmoboy]

53. No, I just read her multiple statements

posted on her website, Facebook, and Twitter accounts.

[StarfishSaver]

50. It doesn't matter here

The rules of evidence don't apply to an impeachment trial.

[Bmoboy]

57. True, and ...

Direct evidence is generally more powerful than hearsay.

Unfortunately, those who were there (in the Oval Office) are not likely to "recall" what happened.

Maybe the folks who quit the next day, but they were drinking the Kool-Aid for a long time.

The feeling that your life is in jeopardy if you speak again Trump is too real for most of these folks to ignore.

Respect to Herrara-Beutler, even if I disagree with many of her positions. She has guts.

[SheltieLover]

44. Good!!!

Ty, George!

[Politicub]

46. They are taking their duty seriously and solemnly.

If the republicans don’t vote to convict, the blood will be on their hands.

The mantra is: this could happen again.

[jalan48]

49. Great! Throw it in these fucker's faces. Use our power as the majority to determine who should be

called. If it's one sided in our favor too bad. That's the way McConnell would handle it if the Republicans were in charge. Let's not play nice this time.

[gab13by13]

59. It looks to me like Democrats have changed their minds

about witnesses, per cable news reports. After winning a vote on witnesses they are maybe going to just put Buetler's testimony into the record. This is getting nothing IMO. The information is already public knowledge. Democrats are more concerned with a speedy trial, which is a valid concern, than with hearing a witness who proves that Trump ignored the riot.

Sorry but I am going to be disappointed if this is all we get, a written testimony in the record.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

61. CNN just said that maybe they'll use CNN reporting in lieu of witness

[gab13by13]

63. They changed their mind on witnesses.

They only entered into the record Buetner's notes of the McCarthy phone call. According to Andrew Weissman her actual testimony would have been much more powerful. Her testimony is already out in the public record. I understand the need for getting the trial over but this insures an acquittal.

[BeerBarrelPolka]

64. My gut feeling is

I truly feel there's more going on than meets the eye. And not in a good way.

[Demsrule86]

74. There was never going to be a conviction.

[ismnotwasm]

82. Exactly.