President Donald Trump - Formal Impeachment Inquiry Announced

SJW Lover

mcmoustache wrote: »

jesus. You'd swear this was a forum for yanks with the way that some go on.

Good response to getting your ass handed to you :pac:

SJW Lover

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Show me where Trump admitted to looking for an "electoral favour" from a foreign government?

If this were Obama, after having taken over in office from Trump, and Trump was seen bragging in public about using $1bln in US funds to strong arm a foreign country into firing a prosecutor, and there was evidence the firing benefited Don Jnr, there is no way you would be whinging about Obama daring to ask the Ukraine to cooperate with an investigation, let alone saying he should be impeached.

This is all because you don't like Trump or his politics, not because you genuinely feel what he said warrants impeachment. Who do you think you're kidding.

Pretty much this. These guys made fools of themselves before and after election night on the politics forum. Then they made complete fools of themselves salivating over Mueller when there was no evidence of collusion. And here we go again.

Billy Mays

JohnMc1 wrote: »

Its amazing how Obama had the support he had.

Oh, it's the great replacement guy

Any sign of the white race disappearing yet mate?

reg114

Obama was a feel good media dream but his 8 year presidency laid the foundations of a Trump presidency. Obama's intentions were good, I feel he was a much more honest politician and man than Trump will ever be but Obama achieved very little. Indeed Obama's greatest achievement was becoming the first African American president. Yes he was very much stymied by partisan politics but he marginalised huge swathes of the American electorate. I admired him as a man but politically I believe he was found wanting . I felt his awarding of Biden the presidential medal of honour in his final days in office was very self-indulgent to the point of being nauseating. If Trump did the same with Pence today The democrats would have a seizure.

Looking to impeach Trump at this stage will I fear play into the hands of the republicans. There have been literally thousands of missteps by Trump offering opportunities to invoke article 25 of the constitution but not a single chance has been seized upon. There is nothing especially outstanding about Trumps entreaties to Ukraine regarding Biden to merit impeachment proceedings that would stick. In fact all the impeachment talk will do will reinvigorate the Right in the run up to 2020. Biden is a weak opponent anyway and this Ukraine story wont help him.

I believe the democrats should roll in behind another candidate as soon as possible and beat Trump at the ballot box. If they dont get their act together very quickly , we are looking at another Trump term.

Water John

Obama was never a radical changing President. Any chance of achieving a volume of work was stymied by Mitch McConnell rejecting everything. The GOP preferring to freeze Govn't rather than give the POTUS any credence.

The Phantom Jipper

mickdw wrote: »

Whats the real story here. I cannot get a feel for what is actually going on as news channels are very much on one side or the other.
Has biden really questions to answer?

Biden doesn't have any questions to answer. Trump believes Biden is his most likely opponent and was looking for something scandalous he could use against him to smear him. He's now been caught doing that, and seemingly using taxpayer dollars as leverage in the process. This whole charade from the Trump fans is an attempt to deflect from that.

The hope is that people who don't really follow the news will hear vague murmuring about Biden and think that they're all the same, when in reality that Trump has done is beyond the pale and worthy of impeachment.

Overheal

US’ Ukraine envoy resigns after being named in Guliani texts and whistleblower complaint

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/u-s-special-envoy-to-ukraine-resigns-in-aftermath-of-whistleblower-complaint/

(But there’s no there there)

mcmoustache

Overheal wrote: »

US’ Ukraine envoy resigns after being named in Guliani texts and whistleblower complaint

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/u-s-special-envoy-to-ukraine-resigns-in-aftermath-of-whistleblower-complaint/

(But there’s no there there)

But why would he resign when the letter was so perfect? And why was Barr shocked and angry when he heard about it? Did he too fail to see that it was such a perfect letter?

Overheal

mcmoustache wrote: »

But why would he resign when the letter was so perfect? And why was Barr shocked and angry when he heard about it? Did he too fail to see that it was such a perfect letter?

I think, because it was so perfect, just the most perfect thing ever, he said it was his time and that it was all down hill from here so he’s just going to go retire on some island nation without an extradition treaty and drown himself in Bahamas mamas

notobtuse

mcmoustache wrote: »

Wasn't it Mitch who told Don to release the transcript? I wonder what he was playing at if so?

It was an interesting decision whoever was behind it. In what was basically a self-inflicted wound, Trump has managed to finally move a majority of the public to support impeachment. Unless he's still playing that 12d chess or whatever, I don't see how this is a good thing for him.

It had him tweeting like a lunatic last night about spies and traitors. I know that his audience for that were the people who prefer sloganeering over thinking but all he's managed to do is threaten witnesses and annoy senators - they don't like having to defend him because it makes them look like tits on TV.

The weird thing is, if he was a smart man with some self discipline, he could easily have avoided all this. Pelosi didn't want impeachment and frustrated her colleagues because of it but he left her no choice here.

EDIT:
Mitch has just said just that if the house impeaches, the senate would have no choice but to take it up. He said the same back in March but has now just said it again to the world and to Trump who watches a lot of TV. Whatever one thinks about Mitch, he's a very shrewd politician and very effective. Again, what might he be playing at here?

DON'T TOUCH THAT DIAL!

So far the Democrats and their media handmaidens have controlled the news on the Trump impeachment ‘inquiry.’ So what happens if the House passes articles of impeachment and it is referred to the Senate for trial? IMO, Democrats are secretly hoping Mitch would entertain a motion to dismiss the charges at the outset of a trial on the grounds that the allegations did not meet the constitutional standard of impeachable offenses. Because the Democrats will be TOTALLY SCREWED if the Senate actually conducts a trial. In the end Republicans will vote unanimously with a small number of Democrats not the convict the President. But during the trial Trump’s attorneys will have the right to subpoena and question ANYONE THEY WANT. So during the impeachment trial we will be hearing testimony, under oath, from Brennan Clapper, Comey, Strzok, Page, Ohr, Glenn Simpson, Donna Brazile, Holder, Lynch. Christopher Steele, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden and other key players including perhaps Barack Obama regarding their apparent illegal activities to take out a candidate, then take out a duly elected president, and the ensuing cover up activities. Unless they all ‘take the fifth’ there will be a lot of finger pointing and deals will start to be made by Democrats to avoid charges and going to prison (they are already starting to turn on each other). EVERYTHING in testimony will be allowed in the trial including DNC collusion with the Clinton campaign to fix the election for Hillary, the creation of the Trump dossier, the cover up and destruction of emails that probably included the incriminating information. The trial will expose Democrats colluding with foreign politicians and agents, George Soros underhanded dealings, lying to the FISA court, and spying and wiretapping on the Trump campaign. Everything has been one sided against Trump so far including the Muller investigation while the real crimes committed were ignored. But the shoe will be on the other foot in a Trump impeachment trial. And if it looks like Mitch will take it to a full trial it might actually be beneficial for the DNC to make an agreement with the GOP to throw the election to Trump, and not provide much support for Democrats running in close election markets, for Mitch not to take the impeachment to full trial. Interesting times ahead. I'm secretly hoping it does go to full trial so the American people see who the Democrats really are and the lies they've been fed by their minions in the media.

Overheal

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Wrong again ..

https://twitter.com/kenvogel/status/1176882766597767168

You're doing a good job here tonight of making a case for why Pelosi should not have launched a formal impeachment inquiry.

Evidence?

Zelensky: I will personally tell you that one of my assistants spoke with Mr. Giuliani just recently and we are hoping very much that Mr. Giuliani will be able to travel to Ukraine and we will meet once he comes to Ukraine.

Overheal

notobtuse wrote: »

DON'T TOUCH THAT DIAL!

So far the Democrats and their media handmaidens have controlled the news on the Trump impeachment ‘inquiry.’ So what happens if the House passes articles of impeachment and it is referred to the Senate for trial? IMO, Democrats are secretly hoping Mitch would entertain a motion to dismiss the charges at the outset of a trial on the grounds that the allegations did not meet the constitutional standard of impeachable offenses. Because the Democrats will be TOTALLY SCREWED if the Senate actually conducts a trial. In the end Republicans will vote unanimously with a small number of Democrats not the convict the President. But during the trial Trump’s attorneys will have the right to subpoena and question ANYONE THEY WANT. So during the impeachment trial we will be hearing testimony, under oath, from Brennan Clapper, Comey, Strzok, Page, Ohr, Glenn Simpson, Donna Brazile, Holder, Lynch. Christopher Steele, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden and other key players including perhaps Barack Obama regarding their apparent illegal activities to take out a candidate, then take out a duly elected president, and the ensuing cover up activities. Unless they all ‘take the fifth’ there will be a lot of finger pointing and deals will start to be made by Democrats to avoid charges and going to prison (they are already starting to turn on each other). EVERYTHING in testimony will be allowed in the trial including DNC collusion with the Clinton campaign to fix the election for Hillary, the creation of the Trump dossier, the cover up and destruction of emails that probably included the incriminating information. The trial will expose Democrats colluding with foreign politicians and agents, George Soros underhanded dealings, lying to the FISA court, and spying and wiretapping on the Trump campaign. Everything has been one sided against Trump so far including the Muller investigation while the real crimes committed were ignored. But the shoe will be on the other foot in a Trump impeachment trial. And if it looks like Mitch will take it to a full trial it might actually be beneficial for the DNC to make an agreement with the GOP to throw the election to Trump, and not provide much support for Democrats running in close election markets, for Mitch not to take the impeachment to full trial. Interesting times ahead. I'm secretly hoping it does go to full trial so the American people see who the Democrats really are and the lies they've been fed by their minions in the media.

Paragraphs?

notobtuse

Boggles wrote: »

He is golfing again.

The 235th time since he took office.

Flat out all right.

I used to think all the golfing presidents did was not advantageous to running the country. But the successes Trump has had to improve the economy, increase jobs, decrease taxes, getting rid of ridiculous regulations, and getting better trade deals I’m changed my mind and now think golfing should become a mandatory requirement for presidents.

Overheal

notobtuse wrote: »

I used to think all the golfing presidents did was not advantageous to running the country. But the successes Trump has had to improve the economy, increase jobs, decrease taxes, getting rid of ridiculous regulations, and getting better trade deals I’m changed my mind and now think golfing should become a mandatory requirement for presidents.

"U.S. GDP growth will slow to 2.1% in 2019 from 3% in 2018. It will be 2% in 2020 and 1.8% in 2021"

https://www.thebalance.com/us-economic-outlook-3305669

#Winning

Overheal

notobtuse wrote: »

IMO, Democrats are secretly hoping Mitch would entertain a motion to dismiss the charges at the outset of a trial on the grounds that the allegations did not meet the constitutional standard of impeachable offenses.

A motion to dismiss at the outset of trial is not likely. 4 Republican senators is all it takes to keep the process moving, and to prevent such a motion from carrying:

"But senior party officials have also raised the prospect that Senate Republicans could simply move to dismiss any articles of impeachment — a maneuver that failed during Clinton’s impeachment trial in January 1999 but would have a far likelier chance of succeeding with GOP control of the Senate.

Back then, former senator Robert C. Byrd (D-W.Va.) offered the dismissal motion that would have effectively ended Clinton’s Senate trial. But Republicans who controlled the chamber, as well as then-Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.), voted to sustain the proceedings, denying Democrats the simple majority needed to dismiss the trial on a 56-to-44 vote.

Should Republicans try this tactic now, at least four GOP senators would have to align with all 47 senators in the Democratic caucus to keep the impeachment trial alive. Democrats are sure to target Senate Republicans such as Susan Collins (Maine), Cory Gardner (Colo.), Mitt Romney (Utah) and Ben Sasse (Neb.) — senators who are either facing competitive reelection campaigns next November or those who have publicly voiced discomfort with Trump’s behavior as he urged Ukraine to investigate former vice president Joe Biden and his family.

[Trump lashes out again at whistleblower, questions whether Schiff should be arrested for ‘treason’]

If he were to take this route, McConnell would most likely let the proceedings play out for some period of time to give the trial an air of legitimacy. Clinton’s impeachment trial opened Jan. 8, 1999; the vote to dismiss the charges came Jan. 27. "

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/mcconnell-says-if-house-impeaches-trump-senate-rules-would-force-him-to-start-a-trial/2019/09/30/4d58c2d6-e3b5-11e9-b7da-053c79b03db8_story.html

In the end Republicans will vote unanimously with a small number of Democrats not the convict the President.

Depends on the articles. It also greatly depends on public opinion. They won't dismiss charges of a President that shoots someone on 5th Ave - the country wouldn't survive, tbh.

But during the trial Trump’s attorneys will have the right to subpoena and question ANYONE THEY WANT. So during the impeachment trial we will be hearing testimony, under oath, from Brennan Clapper, Comey, Strzok, Page, Ohr, Glenn Simpson, Donna Brazile, Holder, Lynch. Christopher Steele, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden and other key players including perhaps Barack Obama regarding their apparent illegal activities to take out a candidate, then take out a duly elected president, and the ensuing cover up activities.

That'd be fun to see, just bring out all the GOP boogeyman. I'm surprised you don't think he will subpoena Soros?

Unless they all ‘take the fifth’ there will be a lot of finger pointing and deals will start to be made by Democrats to avoid charges and going to prison (they are already starting to turn on each other). EVERYTHING in testimony will be allowed in the trial including DNC collusion with the Clinton campaign to fix the election for Hillary, the creation of the Trump dossier, the cover up and destruction of emails that probably included the incriminating information. The trial will expose Democrats colluding with foreign politicians and agents, George Soros underhanded dealings,

Oh there he is!

lying to the FISA court, and spying and wiretapping on the Trump campaign. Everything has been one sided against Trump so far including the Muller investigation while the real crimes committed were ignored. But the shoe will be on the other foot in a Trump impeachment trial. And if it looks like Mitch will take it to a full trial it might actually be beneficial for the DNC to make an agreement with the GOP to throw the election to Trump, and not provide much support for Democrats running in close election markets, for Mitch not to take the impeachment to full trial. Interesting times ahead. I'm secretly hoping it does go to full trial so the American people see who the Democrats really are and the lies they've been fed by their minions in the media.

So your fantasy is, because there are too many skeletons in the DNC, that the DNC will 'throw the impeachment,' and 'throw the election' and just give up in politics? I want what you're having, must be some loud sh!t.

Poor Fella. Just work a bit harder, pro Trump boardsies! Good on yee!

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/10/01/politics/donald-trump-impeachment-democrats-rudy-giuliani/index.html

begsbyOnaTrain

Overheal wrote: »

"U.S. GDP growth will slow to 2.1% in 2019 from 3% in 2018. It will be 2% in 2020 and 1.8% in 2021"

https://www.thebalance.com/us-economic-outlook-3305669

#Winning

Did you actually read the link? Doesn't sad bad at all.

Overheal

begsbyOnaTrain wrote: »

Did you actually read the link? Doesn't sad bad at all.

Did you?

Overview
U.S. GDP growth will slow to 2.1% in 2019 from 3% in 2018. It will be 2% in 2020 and 1.8% in 2021. That's according to the most recent forecast released at the Federal Open Market Committee meeting on June 19, 2019. The projected slowdown in 2019 and beyond is a side effect of the trade war, a key component of Trump's economic policies.

begsbyOnaTrain

Overheal wrote: »

Did you?

Yeah I did. As said, not bad.

he U.S. economic outlook is healthy according to the key economic indicators. The most critical indicator is the gross domestic product, which measures the nation's production output. The GDP growth rate is expected to remain between the 2% to 3% ideal range. Unemployment is forecast to continue at the natural rate. There isn't too much inflation or deflation. That's a Goldilocks economy.

President Trump promised to increase economic growth to 4%. That's faster than is healthy.

As said, not bad. Yeah would be much better if not for the stpuidness of the trade war.

But I'm not going to die on this hill. Just laughing at someone using that report as some damning indictment on the economy!

Overheal

begsbyOnaTrain wrote: »

Yeah I did. As said, not bad.



As said, not bad. Yeah would be much better if not for the stpuidness of the trade war.

But I'm not going to die on this hill. Just laughing at someone using that report as some damning indictment on the economy!

Why not? GDP was the swan song of the GOP trying to attack Obama while they ran the Congress. Up until almost a year ago when it became evident that 2018 would not exceed 3% GDP that Politicians for Trump finally stopped beating their chest about the number. To his voters though, that number matters, because they made it matter. Just like Fox can't call the code-word compartmentalized server a 'server' they have to call it a super gizmo computer, because calling it a server carries negative connotations with their base that they themselves impregnated.

Pa ElGrande

Rudy Giuliani reacts to congressional subpoena issued against him, Biden family dealings in Ukraine.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKafw3LxQ8E

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) is a United States law passed in 1977 that prohibits US firms and individuals from paying bribes to foreign officials in furtherance of a business deal. The FCPA places no minimum amount for a punishment of a bribery payment.

The 2020 American presidential campaign is going to be an absolute drag-out fight to the bitter end. Where is the popcorn icon?

dinorebel

notobtuse wrote: »

DON'T TOUCH THAT DIAL!

So far the Democrats and their media handmaidens have controlled the news on the Trump impeachment ‘inquiry.’ So what happens if the House passes articles of impeachment and it is referred to the Senate for trial? IMO, Democrats are secretly hoping Mitch would entertain a motion to dismiss the charges at the outset of a trial on the grounds that the allegations did not meet the constitutional standard of impeachable offenses. Because the Democrats will be TOTALLY SCREWED if the Senate actually conducts a trial. In the end Republicans will vote unanimously with a small number of Democrats not the convict the President. But during the trial Trump’s attorneys will have the right to subpoena and question ANYONE THEY WANT. So during the impeachment trial we will be hearing testimony, under oath, from Brennan Clapper, Comey, Strzok, Page, Ohr, Glenn Simpson, Donna Brazile, Holder, Lynch. Christopher Steele, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden and other key players including perhaps Barack Obama regarding their apparent illegal activities to take out a candidate, then take out a duly elected president, and the ensuing cover up activities. Unless they all ‘take the fifth’ there will be a lot of finger pointing and deals will start to be made by Democrats to avoid charges and going to prison (they are already starting to turn on each other). EVERYTHING in testimony will be allowed in the trial including DNC collusion with the Clinton campaign to fix the election for Hillary, the creation of the Trump dossier, the cover up and destruction of emails that probably included the incriminating information. The trial will expose Democrats colluding with foreign politicians and agents, George Soros underhanded dealings, lying to the FISA court, and spying and wiretapping on the Trump campaign. Everything has been one sided against Trump so far including the Muller investigation while the real crimes committed were ignored. But the shoe will be on the other foot in a Trump impeachment trial. And if it looks like Mitch will take it to a full trial it might actually be beneficial for the DNC to make an agreement with the GOP to throw the election to Trump, and not provide much support for Democrats running in close election markets, for Mitch not to take the impeachment to full trial. Interesting times ahead. I'm secretly hoping it does go to full trial so the American people see who the Democrats really are and the lies they've been fed by their minions in the media.

Overheal wrote: »

Paragraphs?

And maybe even a smidgen of reality

mcmoustache

It's just a transcript of an Alex Jones rant. At least that's how I read it.

notobtuse

mcmoustache wrote: »

It's just a transcript of an Alex Jones rant. At least that's how I read it.

Scared are we? I know... reality sometimes sucks. Is there anything in my post on how the proceeding will most probably go regarding Trumps defense in a trial that isn't correct?

Should I cue up the crickets icon now or later?

mcmoustache

It's an unreadable and incoherent ramble indistinguishable from Alex Jones when he's forty minutes into his show and turning red.

If you clean it up a bit, add some paragraphs and maybe make a point, i'll take a look.

Overheal

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/10/01/four-simple-reasons-that-trumps-impeach-this-map-doesnt-make-any-sense/

I know I'm posting a lot of WaPo lately but since Impeachment I've found a paid sub to be useful; and I'll try to share full articles.

Happily for President Trump, he has found a new use for his obsession with the results of the 2016 presidential election.

On Tuesday morning, Trump tweeted the following image, apparently cribbed from his daughter-in-law.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1178989254309011456

You can almost feel the energy with which he pressed the button to bring this tweet into the world. Boom. Impeach this, libs.

Unfortunately for Trump, though, the argument doesn’t make any sense.

1. For the 100th time, land isn’t alive and doesn’t vote.

By now, this criticism of electoral maps is taught in elementary schools. Or, at least, it should be. Those red counties in Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming, for example, are home to 1.6 million 2016 voters — fewer than half of the number of voters in Los Angeles County. Trump won 1 million votes in those states, beating Hillary Clinton by a 580,000-vote margin. In Los Angeles, Clinton beat Trump by 1.7 million votes.

Yet those four states are 83 times the size of Los Angeles County in area. And, therefore, they occupy 83 times as much space on the map as L.A., despite being the home of one-half as many voters.

Trump has done this before, so we’ve written about it before. In August 2017, I made this graphic, showing how the votes in Washington, D.C., compared to votes in Roberts County, Tex., where Trump saw his largest percentage-point margin of victory.



On Trump’s map, Roberts County is a larger red block and Washington a smaller blue one.

The best map to illustrate the distinction here comes from XKCD.

https://twitter.com/xkcdComic/status/950409908301676544

All that red in the middle is better represented by a few scattered people.

Trump presumably knows this by now. He’s just making a broader point (while trolling his opponents): Look how much support I have!

2. Maybe Trump doesn’t want to go by actual votes for some reason.

This is the point: The map doesn’t show how much support Trump has. In fact, it obscures how much support he had, which is why Trump uses it.

Trump received nearly 3 million fewer votes than Clinton did. The margin was only slightly smaller than George W. Bush’s victory in 2004 — and nearly six times Al Gore’s margin against Bush in 2000, when Bush similarly went on to win the electoral vote.

At no point in time was Trump above 50 percent in 2016 presidential election polling. He received less than 50 percent of the vote. As president, he’s never been above 50 percent in RealClearPolitics’ average of approval polling. Somewhat ironically, he has consistently represented the minority in national polling.

3. Have you seen Richard Nixon’s map in 1972?

Compare that with Richard Nixon. In 1972, Nixon won reelection by 18 million votes. His electoral map looked fairly similar to Trump’s in the middle of the country because, as in 2016, there still weren’t a lot of people living there.



The difference between Nixon’s landslide and Trump’s good luck is in how red the coasts are on Nixon’s map. He won Los Angeles and even parts of New York City. His was an overwhelming victory, and, in his case, the dearth of blue is actually somewhat revelatory.

And guess what happened to Nixon.

That’s right: Faced with imminent impeachment and probable removal from office, Nixon resigned from office in the summer of 1974. What’s more, the cascade of events that led to his downfall actually stemmed from the 1972 election. The break-in at the Watergate was part of an effort to spy on the Democratic Party, an effort that was obviously unnecessary given how broad his victory was.

There’s some poetry in it, really. Nixon’s 1972 electoral map represents the mistakes he made that led to his ouster. America was all set to try to impeach, but ended up not needing to.

4. Trump’s map isn’t even accurate.

It appears that Trump’s map captured the results of the 2016 race at some point before vote totals were finalized. There are a number of counties — including some with a lot of land area! — that are red on the map but should be blue. For example:



We didn’t highlight Alaska because, well, look at Alaska.

Again, though, the point is that this doesn’t matter: These places are mostly places where not many people live. Like that county in Minnesota — it was home to about 6,500 voters. If we’re playing this game, though, let’s at least play it properly.

In summary, then, we have this: Trump shared a map meant to show how his support would preempt any impeachment effort, except that it instead obscured how little support he has, was incorrect and is quickly undercut by considering what happened to Nixon 50 years ago.

Other than that, great tweet.

notobtuse

mcmoustache wrote: »

If you clean it up a bit, add some paragraphs and maybe make a point, i'll take a look.

I wouldn't want you to knock yourself out.

notobtuse

Democrats are embracing the ancient art of “making sh*t up.” Witnesses before congressional committees must be sworn in and must swear to tell the truth under penalty of perjury. Members of Congress who ask the questions take no such oath and they’re freely lie in their endeavor to ask no questions and simply make sh*t speeches.

Democrats are going to drag anyone they can think of in front of nearly every committee in the House in this impeachment ‘inquiry. Perhaps the Senate should involve itself in the supposed hunt for truth. There’s nothing stopping Republicans in the Senate from calling people like Congressman Adam Schiff and have him testify UNDER OATH before the Judiciary Committee regarding all his lies.

Overheal

notobtuse wrote: »

Democrats are embracing the ancient art of “making sh*t up.” Witnesses before congressional committees must be sworn in and must swear to tell the truth under penalty of perjury. Members of Congress who ask the questions take no such oath and they’re freely lie in their endeavor to ask no questions and simply make sh*t speeches.

Democrats are going to drag anyone they can think of in front of nearly every committee in the House in this impeachment ‘inquiry. Perhaps the Senate should involve itself in the supposed hunt for truth. There’s nothing stopping Republicans in the Senate from calling people like Congressman Adam Schiff and have him testify UNDER OATH before the Judiciary Committee regarding all his lies.

Nothing in your post supports this claim

Overheal

Somewhat surprisingly, Pompeo is fighting back against demands for state department depositions by the impeachment inquiry.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2019/10/01/pompeo-says-state-dept-officials-wont-show-up-for-scheduled-impeachment-depositions-this-week/

Don’t think that will work well for them. This comes after Pompeo did a media circuit claiming he had no knowledge of the July 25th call and hadn't read the telcon - in reality, it was later reported, he was on the call.

Pompeo left the country yesterday for a week long trip in Europe.