So before politics gets you too worked up, let us know if this helps:
Now back to trying to understand —
Our dlh has warned repeatedly of the risk of putting too much faith in the Republican Senate as a whole protecting Trump from the House impeachment sham. This article at the Daily Caller reports on concerns of Senator Rand Paul. While witness game-playing by Trump’s detractors (Democrat and Republican) may not stop his exoneration it could be an attempt to inflict as much unrequited damage as possible.
The pound of flesh people have already had their turn, the defense ought to have any and all witnesses it wants to call. Deals ought not be between senators when someone else’s honor is at stake.
V’PAC encourages readers to assume nothing and go beyond your state’s U.S. Senators and contact others as well, particularly the usual suspects, telling them to protect the presidency from political witch hunts, protect the separation of powers, stop the good-old-boy politics and allow Trump’s defense it’s fullest desired hearing. (excerpt below, bold our emphasis)
Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul said he’s worried that his fellow Republican senators will block testimonies from the witnesses President Donald Trump wants called in his impeachment trial, Paul told Fox News host Sean Hannity on Thursday.
Trump previously said he wants Hunter Biden, Democratic California Rep. Adam Schiff, and the whistleblower to testify if the Senate allows witnesses during the impeachment trial.
“Here’s the thing is, fair is fair, and if they’re going to put the president through this, they’re going to have to have witnesses on both sides,” Paul told Hannity.
“But I’ll tell you what my fear is, is that some Republicans are going to vote for witnesses, we’ll get those — the ones the Democrats want — and then when we have the votes on bringing witnesses or letting the president choose his witnesses, I think those will fail — not only because of those Republicans, but because a whole variety of Republicans may not allow the whistleblower, may not allow Biden for one reason or another, because they served with him,” Paul continued.
“But if it turns out, and the Republican base sees that this looks like only Democrat witnesses, and no presidential witnesses, I guarantee that the Republican base will punish those people who set up that scenario,” the Kentucky senator added. . . .
And from the facepalm/what-the-heck-is-going-on department (also via the Daily Caller):
Reading the article :
After interning for several Democrats, graduating Hofstra University in 2014, and contemplating art school, Sarah Sicard wrote for a marijuana publication called the “Bluntness,” served as communications director for a New York city council member, and worked in corporate PR, according to her resume and online bios.
As of Jan. 10, she occupies the top editorial position of the Army Times, which has been published since 1940 and is one of the preeminent publications for military men and veterans. . . .
Included in the report by Luke Rosiak were some of her ignorant tweets demonstrating her lack of qualifications. Nevertheless the publisher defended the choice ~~ because of her years of experience ~~ (she apparently wrote for 2 years for a different publication dealing with military matters). But seriously, she is 28. We have shoes older than her. Doesn’t Army Times have some writers that have been on board for a couple of years? A graduate of notorious liberal schools, a Trump hating Democrat, illogical in her Twitter analysis of events . The report mentions her expressed SADness because she lost Twitter followers after her tirades. The same sadness should befall Army Times for this move. Any current subscribers out there? What say you?