The Hill: "GOP senators believe they have the votes to block witnesses."
Hot Air: "Schumer: It Looks Unlikely That We’ll Have Enough Republican Votes To Call Witnesses."
The other day I wasn't sure if there would be witnesses but I was quite sure that - if there were - the Republicans would insist on their own list. That might have been enough to torpedo Democrats' enthusiasm.
On the other side, the Republicans surely realize that it would never be enough. There was always going to be another shoe to drop or new outrage or whining about a "fair trial" after the House ran that sham kangaroo court. This was shaping up to be Kavanaugh 2.0 but the Republicans are wise to that ploy now.
2 comments:
Kangaroo courts and Kavanaugh grudges and "ooga booga, we'll call Biden"? Again with these stale, reheated leftovers of pabulum? This is what you're going with?
If you're determined to remain in the Trump Human Centipede, at least call shotgun. You want to be closer to the front of the line.
https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/c_fill,f_auto,fl_progressive,g_center,h_675,pg_1,q_80,w_1200/yjoebtkfad8ywihg3vvf.png
The Democrats' enthusiasm for witnesses is so torpedoed, they're introducing a motion for John Roberts to rule on allowing witnesses, and evidence, and executive privilege, while waiving their option to dispute Roberts' decisions.
If Justice Roberts rules yes, or if Roberts rules no, or if the motion is blocked and fails to pass, the result will be good for 2020 Democrats.
Bold move, making a motion that Roberts will decline to rule on.
I guess the Democrats win in that scenario, also.
Post a Comment