Can you believe that Trump is merely 67 votes faraway from being an ex-President; therefore, it is freaking him from

Hillary Clinton’s nearly 66 million votes in the 2016 election weren’t enough to defeat Donald Trump. But just over 0.0001% of your could end Trump’s presidency. That’s the reality of what Trump faces if the man is formally impeached through House of Representatives later today, as is expected, prompting a removal trial inside the Senate.

Photo by Aaron Kittredge on Pexels.com

In such a trial, the Constitution simply requires two-thirds considering the Senate, in this case, 67 senators, to vote to convict and remove — then it’s goodbye Trump.

Trump’s fate lies in the hands of 20 GOP senators — the fictitious number necessary join the 45 Democratic senators and two independent senators, who typically side with Democrats, to vote to convict him and end his presidency, assuming they all vote to eliminate Trump.

Yes, this is a huge long shot that 20 Republican senators will vote to send Trump packing, especially given Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s statement a while back saying there’s “had no opportunity” that Trump will probably be removed. However, as an old trial lawyer, I can tell you with the jurors don’t always do for sure. And there’s still the opportunity that further incriminating evidence is revealed about Trump between now and the start of the trial.

Including the best of US, presidents would be unnerved at the prospect that their political demise is just 67 votes away. And even though Trump has been called a lot of things, “secure” is undoubtedly not one instance. Here is the same Trump who just days ago took to Twitter to despicably mock 16-year-old global climate warming activist Greta Thunberg, likely because she beat him out for the title of their time magazine’s “Person of the Year.”

Contributing to Trump’s stress level are comments such as the one made by former GOP Senator Jeff Flake, who recently declared that there would be “at least 35” Republican senators who would vote to eradicate Trump if ballots have been kept secret. That number could be considered a bit high. Still, Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy started several weeks ago, which he thinks there are at least five GOP senators already more likely to vote with Democrats.

Any doubt that Trump costs of this math through his head over and also over, aiming to work out if he mocked or angered enough Republican senators that would spell his political doom? Naturally, what gives Trump protection is that his GOP base backs him solidly, and all of the Republican senators who vote to eliminate Trump could expect to receive their wrath.

And even though the Trump campaign publicly claims that impeachment will help Trump win in 2020 by firing up his base, Trump’s own Twitter is a glimpse of a President entirely panic mode. On Thursday, Trump unleashed a barrage of 123 tweets in the course of the House Judiciary Committee debate toward the articles of impeachment, many commenting toward the hearings, including one instance where he accused two Democratic constituents of the property of lying.

That established a record regarding the most tweets by Trump in a single day, eclipsing his record of 105 tweets set just days before, on Sunday, where he also aimed along at the impeachment process numbers.

Just, for instance, one in all Trump’s tweets Sunday expressed his approval of a conservative activist who had written, “The Constitutional framers could well be appalled by the way impeachment continues to be wielded for being a political weapon against President Trump.”

From the following Friday, following the House Judiciary Committee voted to approve articles of impeachment, Trump again took to Twitter to formulate how upset he cannot be charged with illegal trespass: “It’s not fair that I’m being Impeached when I’ve not made any effort to improve your chances of finding a job wrong!”

Even President Bill Clinton was concerned at the chance being taken from office evidenced by his apology to the country shortly after being impeached through House in 1998, stating, “Exactly what I want The united states and its citizen to know, exactly what I want the Congress to learn, is that I appear to be profoundly sorry for all I have done wrong in words and deeds.”

Clinton offered those words despite having an approval rating that could reach over 60% when it occurs, which notably peaked at 73 percent just days after the House voted to question him.

Such a contrast to Trump, who per FiveThirtyEight.com, currently provides the lowest approval rating of almost any president these many days into his first term at 42%. Trump now even trails Presidents Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush concurrently point inside their respective first terms, and both of them lost re-election.

Trump should be worried. Anything can happen in an effort. All it is going to take is precisely 20 Republican senators to join the Democrats in saying they had an ample amount of his antics, and Trump can have earned himself a destination in historical event — and then in every school textbook — just like the first president in the history of the republic removed from the Senate. Understanding that thought is causing Trump to panic.

Author Resource Box:

Trump is just 67 votes away from being an ex-President and …. https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/12/15/opinions/trump-votes-impeachment-obeidallah/index.html

Do you believe there is independent support for an impeachment inquiry rises following public hearings: poll?

Impartial help for the impeachment inquiry rose after the public proceedings, based on a ballot announced Friday. The Politico/Morning Talk to poll confirmed 44 percent of independent voters polled backed the charge inquiry, a 4-point bounce from last week’s poll. Impartial contrast towards the inquiry also dropped (eight) 8 points to 39 per cents. This enhance proof comes after polls the past few days confirmed the decline of independent help to regard the examination. Polls showed that in fact Democrat party and Republicans stand their ground to back and fight the inquiry.

This week’s ballot showed 81 percent of Democrats the surveyed groups helping the House examination into President Trump, and 81 per cents of Republican the surveyed groups against it. The even split among party-aligned voters showed the intervention independents may have in the full opinion. Overall, registered voters within the poll endorsed the impeachment question rate as a week ago, at 48 percent.

The opposition to the investigation slipped by 2 shows forty-three per cents. The poll pooled 1,988 registered voters between Nov. 22-24. Within the days implementing the last public proceedings in the House, the amount of mistake is 2 percent points. The House launched a charge inquiry into the leader. This inquiry was after a whistleblower complained. Trump requested the Ukrainian leader to inquire former Vice President Joe Biden days after withholding military benefit beginning with the nation. Existing and former officers testified before the House Intelligence Committee on the White House’s partnership along with Ukraine.

Author Resource Box: https://thehill.com/homenews/house/472044-independent-support-for-impeachment-inquiry-rises-following-public-hearings

Live updates: House Democrats subpoena Giuliani associates; Trump to hold first campaign rally since the launch of the impeachment inquiry

House investigators issued subpoenas Thursday up to 2 associates of President Trump’s lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani following their arrest on campaign finance charges, seeking “key documents” which have not been produced along with impeachment inquiry.

Image result for Trump impeachment

The 2 guys are supposed to charge with scheming to funnel foreign money to U.S. politicians within a bid to affect U.S.-Ukraine relations. Both types have helped Giuliani investigate former vice president Joe Biden and his awesome son, although the indictment does not mention Giuliani or suggest that he cannot be charged with illegal trespass portion of alleged crimes. The developments played out as Trump ready to move to Minneapolis as a result of his first campaign rally since House Democrats launched the impeachment inquiry. Ahead of the trip, Trump lashed out at Fox News following its release of a new poll showing 51 percent of voters want to see him impeached and taken out of office. That is an uptick considering that the House launched an inquiry focused on Trump’s call wherein he pressed the president of Ukraine to look into the Bidens at a time when U.S. military aid to Ukraine was withheld.

Reference:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry-live-updates/2019/10/10/e46ddd94-eace-11e9-9c6d-436a0df4f31d_story.html

Can you believe the House panel subpoenaed Gates and Michael Flynn?

The House Intelligence Committee on Thursday sent a subpoenas to two pastTrump officials who pleaded guilty and cooperated concerning special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.

The intelligence panel reported it had subpoenaed past Trump campaign deputy Rick Gates and past national security adviser Michael Flynn. The two pleaded guilty in the special counsel’s investigation before cooperating when using the investigation, and their affidavit is documented in Mueller’s report.


House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff’s decision to subpoena overall the Mueller witnesses illustrate a new facet in the Democrats’ investigations into President Donald Trump, as it is the very first subpoenas issued to targets related to the Mueller probe.


Schiff threatens to subpoena FBI director. The House Judiciary and Intelligence committees are operating on dual tracks inside their examinations relating to the Mueller investigation: House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler has issued subpoenas to former White House officials who figured prominently inside the special counsel’s obstruction investigation, while Schiff is now subpoenaed officials cited within the special counsel’s investigation into Russian election interference.

“To be a part of our oversight work, the property Intelligence Committee is constant to evaluate the deep counterintelligence concerns raised in Special Counsel Mueller’s report, so that requires speaking directly with the fact witnesses,” Schiff, a Democrat from California, said in a statement. “Both Michael Flynn and Rick Gates were critical eyewitnesses for Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation, but until now have refused to cooperate fully with Congress.”


The subpoenas to Flynn and Gates request they can give documents later this month and appear just before the panel on July 10. The House Intelligence Committee had interviewed former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen when you prepared the motorcycle for winter its sweeping probe that Schiff launched not too long ago, that is examining Russian election interference along with Trump’s finances and possible foreign influence.

House approves a resolution to enforce McGahn, Barr subpoenas during the court proceeding. Schiff had put off other interviews, including with Trump business associate Felix Sater, as the committee dedicated to having the Mueller report. However, Thursday’s subpoenas undoubtedly are a sign of the fact that the committee is returning to its interviews as Democrats proceed to highlight and publicize what has been uncovered within the Mueller investigation.

Within the Judiciary Committee’s investigation, the White House has directed those subpoenaed do not provide documents regarding their time inside the Trump administration. The White House directed former White House counsel Don McGahn not to testify under subpoena, while former White House communications director Hope Hicks is appearing later this month behind closed doors but may not answer there will be instances when inquiries are asked that the court will not allow due to claims of executive privilege.

It is unclear how Flynn and Gates will respond to Schiff’s subpoenas. Both of them are still under cooperating agreements when using the Justice Department and also have still to be sentenced after their guilty pleas. Flynn retained a new lawyer now that promoted conspiracy theories about Mueller’s team.

The letter to Flynn includes a note about his cooperation when using the Justice Department, which prompted the special counsel to recommend very little jail time, arguing which the cooperation should consist of Congress.

“Even though the committee knows that your cooperation agreement having the Doj only demands that you testify for the department, the committee is disappointed which you do not view your cooperation more broadly as an obligation to assist us, not merely the Department of Justice,” Schiff wrote.

Reference
House Intelligence Committee urges no pardon for Edward …. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/house-intelligence-committe-urges-no-pardon-for-edward-snowden/2016/09/15/f647a6f4-7b86-11e6-beac-57a4a412e93a_story.html
Former White House Communications Director Hope Hicks …. https://www.westernjournal.com/former-white-house-communications-director-hope-hicks-lands-new-gig-fox/

President James Abram Garfield, the 20th President of the United States, 7th cousin 5x removed

President James Abram Garfield is my 7th cousin 5x removed. The ancestor who connects us as relatives is, Francis Newcombe, my 11th great grandfather.

Historical narrative. James Abram Garfield (November 19, 1831 – September 19, 1881) had been the 20th president of the United States. Garfield served from March 4, 1881, until their death by assassination, six and a half months. Garfield had been the initial sitting member of Congress to be elected towards the presidency and remains the just sitting House user to gain the White House.

Garfield joined politics as a Republican in 1857. He served as an associate of the Ohio State Senate from 1859 to 1861. Garfield opposed Confederate secession, served as a significant basic when looking at the Union Army through the American Civil War, and fought within the battles of Middle Creek, Shiloh, and Chickamauga. Garfield had been first elected to Congress in 1862 to represent Ohio’s 19th District. Throughout Garfield’s extensive congressional service following the Civil War, he securely supported the gold standard and gained a reputation as a talented orator. Garfield initially consented with Radical Republican views regarding Reconstruction, but later preferred a moderate approach for civil legal rights enforcement for freedmen.

At the 1880 Republican National Convention, Senator-elect Garfield went to as campaign manager for Secretary of the Treasury John Sherman and gave the presidential nomination speech for him. When neither Sherman nor their rivals – Ulysses S. Grant and James G. Blaine – could quickly get enough votes to secure the nomination, delegates opted for Garfield as a compromise from the 36th ballot. Into the 1880 presidential election, Garfield conducted a low-key front porch campaign and narrowly defeated Democrat Winfield Scott Hancock.

Garfield’s achievements as president incorporated a resurgence of presidential authority against senatorial courtesy in executive appointments, removing crime within the Post Office, and appointing a U.S. Supreme Court justice. He improved the powers of the presidency as he defied the influential New York senator Roscoe Conkling by hiring William H. Robertson to the lucrative post of Collector of the Port of New York, beginning a fracas that ended with Robertson’s verification and Conkling’s resignation through the Senate. Garfield advocated agricultural technology, an informed electorate, and civil liberties for African Americans. Garfield also proposed substantial civil service reforms; those reforms had been eventually passed away by Congress in 1883 and finalized into legislation by their successor, Chester A. Arthur, once the Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act.

On July 2, 1881, Garfield was shot during the Baltimore and Potomac Railroad facility in Washington D.C. by Charles J. Guiteau, a disappointed workplace seeker. The wound was not instantly fatal for Garfield, but he succumbed on September 19, 1881. Guiteau ended up being executed for the murder of Garfield in June 1882. Some historians elect to forgo listing Garfield in rankings of U.S. presidents because of the short timeframe of his presidency.

My genealogical chart that shows the ancestor who connects us as relatives:

President James Abram Garfield (1831 – 1881)
7th cousin 5x removed

Abram Garfield (1799 – 1833)
Father of President James Abram Garfield

Asenath Hill (1778 – 1851)
Mother of Abram Garfield

Ebenezer Hill (1744 – 1834)
Father of Asenath Hill

Ebenezer Hill (1716 – 1815)
Father of Ebenezer Hill

Rachel Adams (1680 – 1758)
Mother of Ebenezer Hill

Peter Adams (1652 – 1723)
Father of Rachel Adams

Rachel Newcomb (1632 – 1690)
Mother of Peter Adams

Francis Newcombe (1605 – 1692)
Father of Rachel Newcomb

Francis Newcombe II (1630 – 1716)
Son of Francis Newcombe

Reference
James A. Garfield – Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_A._Garfield

Misimpression of House Speaker Pelosi speaks volumes

It took Facebook more than on a daily basis to downgrade a doctored video making House Speaker Nancy Pelosi seem like she was slurring her words — therefore the video itself remains on the webpage, with copycats proliferating.

A group called Politics WatchDog posted the manipulated video of Pelosi — which was slowed up to give the misimpression she was speaking in an impaired fashion at a think-tank event — at 1:29 p.m.

Nonetheless it wasn’t until after 9 p.m. on May 23, some 32 hours later, that Facebook began suppressing the video after a fact-check from 1 Facebook partner, LeadStories, was published. Facebook partner Politifact didn’t post its very own fact-check through to the following morning on May 24.
One basis for the delay: The fact-checkers needed to do their own reporting — finding audio and digital forensics experts who could verify that the video had been manipulated.

The flap on the Pelosi video reveals the limits of Facebook’s third-party fact-checking system into the battle against misinformation heading into the 2020 election cycle — and also as the company faces increasing scrutiny in Washington, including calls for this to be split up from Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren and others.

The social networking giant has taken a hands-off way of policing the veracity of content on the webpage, instead partnering with independent organizations that have get to be the company’s first and main type of defense against misinformation.

But fact-checking a post or video takes precious time, during which rumors and misinformation can continue to spread at internet speeds.
Facebook works only with fact-checkers which are an element of the International Fact-Checking Network, a global coalition of vetted fact-checkers founded by the Poynter Institute, a number one journalism think tank situated in Florida. Other people in the network through the Washington Post’s fact-checking arm, as well as the Associated Press and Factcheck.org, IFCN director Baybars Orsek said in an interview.

Is Nancy Pelosi the master of shade?

President Donald Trump — so far — happens to be reluctant to provide Nancy Pelosi any nickname.

Five months after Pelosi got Trump to own the shutdown during an Oval Office conference, their communications along with his frustrations, led Trump to walk off of his job, in the middle of your day, on the White House Lawn.

She then agreed to pray for him. Ardently. Moreover, perhaps a family group involvement is in order? She mused that possibly the President, unlike her, maybe was not in control of his very own White House. She challenged his work moral principle. Pelosi waved off one of his top aides, requiring that she only deals with Trump.

For the reason that it is what Pelosi does, moreover, Trump, who respects (fears?) Pelosi because of her power, her wealth along with her family lineage, is her most reliable target.

She doles out shade, the kind which takes a while to show itself. Pelosi goes on detours and tangents — in some instances about Jefferson and Roosevelt and Eisenhower together with Erie Canal — after which it becomes apparent that the path leads right to Shadytown. All the while, there was a sort of detached bemusement — a businesslike aloofness towards the whole affair.

While Trump fumes, Pelosi gently waves an admirer. It is not that she is mad. Just disappointed.

These are classic Jedi-mind tricks, perfected by a woman who had five kids in six years and five kids in six years.

She has got a means of delivering her message towards the intended without rubbing their face inside it — without directly telling them why she is so disappointed. Moreover, for Trump, Pelosi, in most of her dispassionate, unemotional glory, eventually ends up being a giant warning sign, a perfect foil. Though, she embodies what he has got never had — a check up on his behavior.

Does the Presidents behavior gives reason to impeach?

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi stated on Thursday that she is convinced President Donald Trump every day presents reasons about impeachment meanwhile quarreling that she does not want to impeach, although she would not exclude the likelihood.

Pelosi thinks the President daily provides reasons meant for impeachment when it comes to his obstruction of justice. She by no means state, blanketly, she is not responding to any subpoenas Pelosi explained.

The comments were comparable to remarks Pelosi made recently recommending that the President, only by his conduct, is successfully creating an advantage of his impeachment.

Although Pelosi also stated at the function, “Now she no longer wants to impeach,” attaching, she wants the President to give them the facts before having to waste too much money on attorneys.

Trepidation among House Democrats and the Trump administration boomed to epic proportions furthermore this week when the White House declined demand for files from the House Judiciary Committee in its comprehensive investigation into conceivable impediment of justice.

House Democrats claim that they possess a constitutional obligation to practice oversight of the President, even though Trump and his allies dispute that the investigations motivated by Democrats are politically enthusiastic and engineered to focus on the President for partisan motives. However, Pelosi rejected to state if she supports imposing penalties on persons who ditch congressional subpoenas, on the other hand, reiterated that “absolutely nothing is off the table” when asked about this likelihood throughout the press meeting.

Does Trumps new immigration plan sway Republicans from not addressing DACA?

The White House is planning to discharge a broad outline of recommended immigration reforms targeted at unifying congressional Republicans about the concern, following weeks of conversations between senior adviser Jared Kushner and a lot of conservative teams.

However, the proposition is short of trustworthy information and omits discourse on the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program that Democrats have frequently stated they desire to solve.

President Donald Trump is scheduled to reveal the master plan Thursday. The White House is advertising the blueprint as responding to border protection and shifting toward a merit-based immigration structure, which provides personal preference to highly trained and educated persons.

However, the release of the innovative concepts comes among discord inside the Trump current administration over how to deal with immigration guidelines.

The discord led to the latest departure of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, who also was a part of primary interactions in the White House concerning an immigration strategy.

The White House approach to change the country’s immigration structure likewise comes up against the backdrop of the steep uptick of worries on the southern national boundaries. Additional individuals have been apprehended unlawfully crossing the US-Mexico boundary this fiscal year compared to any year since 2009, as outlined by Customs and Border Protection statistics.

The Plot thickens when White House asked McGahn to say Trump didn’t obstruct justice, but McGahn declined

The White House asked for that former White House counsel Don McGahn publicly state that President Donald Trump did not obstruct justice, but McGahn declined, an administration official told CNN on Friday.

The timing of the White House’s request — which was made to McGahn’s attorney William Burck through top White House lawyer Emmet Flood, according to the official — is unclear.

The official and a separate source familiar with the matter said that McGahn previously told special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigators he didn’t believe Trump obstructed justice.

The episode speaks to the White House’s efforts to portray the President as absolved by the redacted Mueller report since its release last month. The Wall Street Journal first reported the White House’s appeal to McGahn.

A source familiar with Flood’s call to Burck conveying the ask for said Trump was upset simply by McGahn’s refusal to convey publicly that the President didn’t obstruct justice.

The separate source acquainted with the issue said the problem was moot as soon as Trump directed a tweet at McGahn your day following the Mueller report premiered. The President tweeted a caution that day time against “individuals who take so-known as ‘notes,’ ” echoing his criticism of McGahn when planning on taking notes, that was referenced in the Mueller review.

The foundation added that McGahn and his attorney didn’t feel that this type of public statement was required because Attorney General Expenses Barr had already turned out and said Trump didn’t obstruct justice.

Flood’s ask for to McGahn had not been the initial overture by the management in search of such a declaration, according to The NY Times. The White House very first attained out to Burck after Trump’s attorneys reviewed the Mueller review before its public release and realized that McGahn’s testimony to investigators that he didn’t believe Trump obstructed justice did not appear in the report, the paper reported.

Administration officials thought that having McGahn make such a statement publicly would assuage Trump and buttress the White House’s narrative combating the Mueller report’s assessment of specific instances of potential obstruction; a person briefed on the White House’s requests to McGahn told the Times.

Barr told Congress before the report’s release that Mueller did not conclude whether Trump obstructed justice and that Barr and Rosenstein had concluded that “the evidence developed during the Special Counsel’s investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense.”

In the redacted statement released later, Mueller indicated that the investigation into possible obstruction of justice could not clear Trump. The White House complained to Barr that Mueller should have decided on whether Trump obstructed justice.