thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-04--GOP Sen. Susan Collins: It 'Would Be Helpful' If Trump Apologized

Sen. Susan Collins ( R-Maine ) said she thinks it “ would be helpful ” if President Donald Trump apologized for the actions that led to his impeachment trial , shortly after announcing she would vote to acquit him on both articles of impeachment against him .
The senator appeared on CBS News on Tuesday to explain her decision in an interview with Norah O ’ Donnell .
O ’ Donnell noted that Collins had previously said Trump ’ s July 25 phone call with Ukraine was “ wrong ” and that his decision to ask a foreign country for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ improper.
” She asked Collins if she believed the president — who was impeached in the House for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress — should apologize for his actions , or at least acknowledge they were wrong .
“ I think that would be helpful .
President Clinton did that in 1999 .
It took him a while .
But finally , he did apologize for his actions , ” Collins answered , although she did not seem to have an appetite for a proposed vote to censure the president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ past that point , ” she said .
“ I do not believe the House has met its burden of showing that the president ’ s conduct , however flawed , warrants the extreme step of immediate removal from office , ” she said .
On CBS , Collins reiterated this take , adding that she believed the president would be “ much more cautious in the future ” after his impeachment by the House .
Collins , a Senate veteran , was present during former President Bill Clinton ’ s impeachment trial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ acquit Clinton on two articles of impeachment .
In a national address following the trial ’ s conclusion , Clinton said he was “ profoundly sorry ” for the burden his actions had placed on Congress and the nation .
Trump continues to maintain he did nothing wrong and that the call that led to his impeachment was “ perfect.
” When asked by the anchors of Tuesday ’ s State of the Union address about Collins ’ assertion that he ’ d learned his lesson , Trump again declared he ’ d @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a perfect call.
” The Senate will vote on Trump ’ s removal from office on Wednesday and is expected to acquit the president , with almost all Republicans set to vote in Trump ’ s favor .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) said she thinks it “would be helpful” if President Donald Trump apologized for the actions that led to his impeachment trial, shortly after announcing she would vote to acquit him on both articles of impeachment against him.
The senator appeared on CBS News on Tuesday to explain her decision in an interview with Norah O’Donnell.
Advertisement
O’Donnell noted that Collins had previously said Trump’s July 25 phone call with Ukraine was “wrong” and that his decision to ask a foreign country for assistance to investigate a political rival was “improper.” She asked Collins if she believed the president — who was impeached in the House for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress — should apologize for his actions, or at least acknowledge they were wrong.
“I think that would be helpful. President Clinton did that in 1999. It took him a while. But finally, he did apologize for his actions,” Collins answered, although she did not seem to have an appetite for a proposed vote to censure the president. “I think we’re past that point,” she said.
CBS NEWS EXCLUSIVE: Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) tells @NorahODonnell she will vote to acquit Pres. Trump in the Senate impeachment trial, adding that she believes "the president has learned from this case."
Watch more tonight at 6:30 p.m. ET. https://t.co/oxGYtYgjBw pic.twitter.com/Wv4PmGINZk — CBS Evening News (@CBSEveningNews) February 4, 2020
In a Senate floor speech earlier Tuesday, Collins announced she would vote to acquit.
“I do not believe the House has met its burden of showing that the president’s conduct, however flawed, warrants the extreme step of immediate removal from office,” she said.
Advertisement
On CBS, Collins reiterated this take, adding that she believed the president would be “much more cautious in the future” after his impeachment by the House.
Collins, a Senate veteran, was present during former President Bill Clinton’s impeachment trial in 1999. She voted then to acquit Clinton on two articles of impeachment.
In a national address following the trial’s conclusion, Clinton said he was “profoundly sorry” for the burden his actions had placed on Congress and the nation.
Trump continues to maintain he did nothing wrong and that the call that led to his impeachment was “perfect.” When asked by the anchors of Tuesday’s State of the Union address about Collins’ assertion that he’d learned his lesson, Trump again declared he’d done nothing wrong: “It was a perfect call.”
The Senate will vote on Trump’s removal from office on Wednesday and is expected to acquit the president, with almost all Republicans set to vote in Trump’s favor.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-04--Twitter Users Mock Iowa's Decision To Release Just 62% Of Caucus Results

It looks like 62 is the “ new 100 ” ― at least where the Iowa Democratic Party is concerned .
In the wake of its Iowa caucus debacle , the state party announced on Tuesday that it would release 62 % of the results from Iowa ’ s 99 counties .
It didn ’ t give a timeline for when the rest of the vote totals would be released .
Many Twitter users , led off by Capitol Hill Books in Washington , D.C. , made the best of the situation by enjoying their favorite pieces of pop culture @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Just finished 62 % of this novel and we ’ re so excited for Gatsby and Daisy .
— Capitol Hill Books ( @ chbooksdc ) February 4 , 2020 I 'm 62 % through Easy Rider , and this is an absolutely joyful celebration of the American Dream .
— Kūʻē ( @ KueKueKue2 ) February 4 , 2020 Just finished 62 % of The Empire Strikes Back and wow that Vader guy is pure evil .
So sad he killed Luke 's dad R.I.P .
— Joshua Ray ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ m 62 % of the way through War and Peace and man , this Napoleon character is unbeatable !
https : //t.co/nznwGuAhMB — Michael Rowand ( @ mrowand ) February 5 , 2020 62 % of the way through 'revenge of the sith ' and i love how good of a mentor anakin is for all the younglings # IowaCaucas # IowaCaucusDisaster — Jacob ( @ jkatesrose99 ) February 5 , 2020 62 % through 1984 and it feels like Winston and Julia and O'Brien could change the world !
— Deep @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Grave_Savings ) February 4 , 2020 Just finished 62 % of Of Mice and Men and am really happy things worked out well for Lenny and George — Eric Barbera ( @ EricSaysRelax ) February 4 , 2020 I just watched 62 percent of Old Yeller this is the happiest movie ever !
I think this ole dogs gon na make it .
# IACaucus — Jessica ( @ jessmastero ) February 5 , 2020 I ’ ve gotten through 62 percent of The Irishman .
That Jimmy Hoffa is unstoppable !
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) February 5 , 2020 62 % finished with `` The Sixth Sense '' movie and I LOVE how the therapist established a rapport with a little kid !
Very heartwarming !
— Geralt of Trivia ( @ XxiBorza ) February 4 , 2020

LOADING ERROR LOADING
It looks like 62 is the “new 100” ― at least where the Iowa Democratic Party is concerned.
In the wake of its Iowa caucus debacle, the state party announced on Tuesday that it would release 62% of the results from Iowa’s 99 counties. It didn’t give a timeline for when the rest of the vote totals would be released.
Many Twitter users, led off by Capitol Hill Books in Washington, D.C., made the best of the situation by enjoying their favorite pieces of pop culture. Well, 62% of them.
Advertisement
The result? Comedy gold.
Just finished 62% of this novel and we’re so excited for Gatsby and Daisy. — Capitol Hill Books (@chbooksdc) February 4, 2020
I'm 62% through Easy Rider, and this is an absolutely joyful celebration of the American Dream. — Kūʻē (@KueKueKue2) February 4, 2020
Just finished 62% of The Empire Strikes Back and wow that Vader guy is pure evil. So sad he killed Luke's dad R.I.P. — Joshua Ray (@joshuaray) February 5, 2020
I’m 62% of the way through War and Peace and man, this Napoleon character is unbeatable! https://t.co/nznwGuAhMB — Michael Rowand (@mrowand) February 5, 2020
Advertisement
62% of the way through 'revenge of the sith' and i love how good of a mentor anakin is for all the younglings #IowaCaucas #IowaCaucusDisaster — Jacob (@jkatesrose99) February 5, 2020
62% through 1984 and it feels like Winston and Julia and O'Brien could change the world! — Deep in the Hart of the Rockies (@Grave_Savings) February 4, 2020
Just finished 62% of Of Mice and Men and am really happy things worked out well for Lenny and George — Eric Barbera (@EricSaysRelax) February 4, 2020
I just watched 62 percent of Old Yeller this is the happiest movie ever! I think this ole dogs gonna make it. #IACaucus — Jessica (@jessmastero) February 5, 2020
I’ve gotten through 62 percent of The Irishman. That Jimmy Hoffa is unstoppable! — Marc R. Masferrer (@MRMasferrer) February 5, 2020
Advertisement
62% finished with "The Sixth Sense" movie and I LOVE how the therapist established a rapport with a little kid!
Very heartwarming! — Geralt of Trivia (@XxiBorza) February 4, 2020


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-05--Ivanka Trump Shares 'Genuinely Nightmarish’ Video About Dad’s State Of The Union

There is something genuinely nightmarish about this .
As if you heard a noise in your bedroom in the dead @ @ @ @ @ to the closet door and opened it — AND THIS WAS INSIDE , TALKING AND @ @ @ @ @ : //t.co/mtw8WR7olk

There is something genuinely nightmarish about this. As if you heard a noise in your bedroom in the dead of night and crept over to the closet door and opened it — AND THIS WAS INSIDE, TALKING AND TALKING AND TALKING. https://t.co/mtw8WR7olk


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-05--Team Trump's Red-Hat Filled 'Hostage' Plane Gets The Treatment On Twitter

Members of President Donald Trump ’ s cabinet and his reelection team posed for a photo on a flight from Iowa to Washington while wearing red hats with “ Keep Iowa Great ” written on them .
And Twitter users tried to wrap their heads around some of the oddities in the image , from the less-than-thrilled expression on the face of acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney to the unusually gleeful one on Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross .
Several people , including Mulvaney and Trump ’ s eldest sons ― Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump ― moved from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ back to be in the photo .
Housing Secretary Ben Carson also moved from the front to be in the photo , but not to a seat .
Rather , he perched on an armrest and appeared mostly in the center aisle of the plane and in the middle of the image .
Twitter users tried to take some guesses as to what was going on in the awkward photo : The government officials in this photo have spent *a lot* of time at properties Trump owns and profits from .
Here ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ visited : Wilbur Ross-17 Mick Mulvaney-13 Kevin McCarthy-13 Mark Meadows-10 Ben Carson-8 Jim Jordan-7 Matt Gaetz-7 David Bernhardt-4 pic.twitter.com/6Jk0CQVLUa — Citizens for Ethics ( @ CREWcrew ) February 4 , 2020 I fixed it so that Ben Carson looks just like every other Republican .
# IowaCaucas pic.twitter.com/FDjDKw6ngl — Paul Lidicul ( @ PaulLidicul ) February 4 , 2020 There is a lot happening in this picture , but also only one thing happening pic.twitter.com/Pn247J83LA — Shane Goldmacher ( @ ShaneGoldmacher ) February 4 , 2020 The last thing you see before you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mikey B .
🕺 ( @ MeMikeyB ) February 4 , 2020 Everyone ’ s smiling except Mulvaney .
Even Wilbur Ross looks happy .
Mick ’ s face tells you who in that sea of red hats has the worst job .
https : //t.co/zEA4jziQUp — Lawrence O'Donnell ( @ Lawrence ) February 4 , 2020 A few observations : 1 ) Why is Ben Carson the only one not seated ?
2 ) Mick Mulvaney looks like he 's filming a hostage video .
3 ) The diversity is really reflective @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ... for white people.
# NotMyPresident # ImpeachedForLife # AnyoneButTrump2020 https : //t.co/9qLwEasCg6 — Alan Ashby ( @ ashby112 ) February 4 , 2020 “ If we make BEN CARSON awkwardly stand squat in the aisle , it will make it less obvious that everyone on this bus is white.
” pic.twitter.com/GCPgZFNl8e — Kristina Wong ❄ ( @ mskristinawong ) February 4 , 2020

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Members of President Donald Trump’s Cabinet and his reelection team posed for a photo on a flight from Iowa to Washington while wearing red hats with “Keep Iowa Great” written on them.
And Twitter users tried to wrap their heads around some of the oddities in the image, from the less-than-thrilled expression on the face of acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney to the unusually gleeful one on Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross.
Advertisement
Several people, including Mulvaney and Trump’s eldest sons ― Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump ― moved from seats in the front cabin to the back to be in the photo. Housing Secretary Ben Carson also moved from the front to be in the photo, but not to a seat. Rather, he perched on an armrest and appeared mostly in the center aisle of the plane and in the middle of the image.
Twitter users tried to take some guesses as to what was going on in the awkward photo:
When the Sunken Place doesn't even have a seat for you.😳 pic.twitter.com/03hyjox5H5 — W. Kamau Bell (@wkamaubell) February 4, 2020
This is definitely a Mick Mulvaney hostage video... https://t.co/CwuQ1QV9R3 pic.twitter.com/eY75fifBSW — Kevin Walling (@KevinPWalling) February 4, 2020
The government officials in this photo have spent *a lot* of time at properties Trump owns and profits from. Here’s how many times they’ve visited:
Wilbur Ross-17
Mick Mulvaney-13
Kevin McCarthy-13
Mark Meadows-10
Ben Carson-8
Jim Jordan-7
Matt Gaetz-7
David Bernhardt-4 pic.twitter.com/6Jk0CQVLUa — Citizens for Ethics (@CREWcrew) February 4, 2020
Advertisement
Did they kidnap Mulvaney and hold him hostage? https://t.co/07PWkzSPWb — Witch, Hunting🦸🏻♀ (@JustAGirl515) February 4, 2020
wow an entire plane full of people who use the recliner https://t.co/w2gyVF2lPT — Rob Flaherty (@Rob_Flaherty) February 4, 2020
Weird I wonder why Ben Carson was awkwardly shoehorned into the center of this photo. pic.twitter.com/GKZnTBPzWR — Brian Tyler Cohen (@briantylercohen) February 4, 2020
* record scratch *
* freeze frame *
Yup, that's me. You're probably wondering how I ended up in this situation. pic.twitter.com/CsDHmQlJnE — Morten Øverbye (@morten) February 4, 2020
I fixed it so that Ben Carson looks just like every other Republican.
#IowaCaucas pic.twitter.com/FDjDKw6ngl — Paul Lidicul (@PaulLidicul) February 4, 2020
Advertisement
There is a lot happening in this picture, but also only one thing happening pic.twitter.com/Pn247J83LA — Shane Goldmacher (@ShaneGoldmacher) February 4, 2020
The last thing you see before you fall into the Sunken Place pic.twitter.com/p9ZSELOMTB — Mikey B. 🕺 (@MeMikeyB) February 4, 2020
Everyone’s smiling except Mulvaney. Even Wilbur Ross looks happy. Mick’s face tells you who in that sea of red hats has the worst job. https://t.co/zEA4jziQUp — Lawrence O'Donnell (@Lawrence) February 4, 2020
How did they get Wilbur Ross to fly commercial?! https://t.co/N8AjcOgfkX — thirst bandit (@pdxrivers) February 5, 2020
The GOP sure looks like a cult to me. pic.twitter.com/DaKBCfqpgF — Ryan Knight 🏳🌈 🗽 (@ProudResister) February 4, 2020
Advertisement
A few observations:
1) Why is Ben Carson the only one not seated?
2) Mick Mulvaney looks like he's filming a hostage video.
3) The diversity is really reflective of what truly makes this country great...for white people.#NotMyPresident #ImpeachedForLife #AnyoneButTrump2020 https://t.co/9qLwEasCg6 — Alan Ashby (@ashby112) February 4, 2020
“If we make BEN CARSON awkwardly stand squat in the aisle, it will make it less obvious that everyone on this bus is white.” pic.twitter.com/GCPgZFNl8e — Kristina Wong ❄ (@mskristinawong) February 4, 2020
[Record scratch] You’re probably wondering how I ended up on this plane with nowhere to sit and surrounded by white people. pic.twitter.com/bGt6fwu2uP — darren, a dog liker (@tai_nugget) February 4, 2020


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-05--Trump’s Senate Supporters Get A Stark Reminder Just Before Impeachment Vote

“ If you find that the House has proved its case and still vote to acquit , your name will @ @ @ @ @ a cord of steel and for all of history , ” Schiff warns in the @ @

“If you find that the House has proved its case and still vote to acquit, your name will be tied to his with a cord of steel and for all of history,” Schiff warns in the footage.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-04--Iowa Democrats Resist Calls For Dramatic Change After Caucus Mess

When the Iowa Democratic Party ’ s app for reporting caucus results crashed , it took Charlie Wishman , a labor union official and Des Moines precinct chairman , an hour to report his results to the state party by phone .
He couldn ’ t get much sleep afterward as he thought about the hardworking volunteers who might be “ maligned ” for the evening ’ s “ system failure.
” Wapello County Democratic Party Chairman Zach Simonson , who helped lead a rural caucus and was responsible for reporting the whole county ’ s results , had an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hours on the phone trying to report the county ’ s numbers to the state party , he headed to bed , only to be awoken by calls from an angry volunteer in the middle of the night .
But of the trio of caucus administrators who spoke to HuffPost , only Sebastian , who recently returned from an activist life in New York City to agitate for progressive causes in his Iowa hometown , was willing to join the chorus of out-of-staters calling for an end to the rural state ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ caucus .
Even Sebastian was defensive , though , not wanting his criticisms of the caucus system ’ s administrative complexity and barriers to participation , as well as Iowa ’ s lack of racial diversity , to cast aspersions on the integrity of the process .
He was especially critical of Republican officials and former Vice President Joe Biden for calling the results into question .
“ A lot of people put in a lot of hard work , despite the structural flaws of the caucus system , to make a statement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country should go in , ” he said .
“ There still was an election that happened .
The only thing that did not go according to plan was the rollout of results.
” The reluctance of many Iowa Democrats to turn on the caucus and even to call for the ouster of Iowa Democratic Party Chairman Troy Price illustrated the disconnect between the skewering that Iowa Democrats have suffered at the hands of national party operatives and journalists , and the relative patience with which it has been received inside the state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s been the same chaos on caucus night for probably as long as they ’ ve been having them , ” he said .
“ You ’ ll see corporate media trying to delegitimize them if one of their favorite candidates doesn ’ t have good results there , or someone like Bernie does have good results there.
” After the 2016 presidential primary , when Hillary Clinton defeated Sanders in the state ’ s arcane delegate allotment system , his supporters clamored for the party to reveal the raw totals of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nationally driven reforms that prompted the Iowa Democratic Party to , among other things , report out three sets of numbers : the number of caucus-goers who aligned initially behind a candidate in each precinct ; the final alignment for each candidate after supporters of non-viable candidates switched to another candidate ; and the state delegate equivalents earned by each candidate .
The party also set up 87 satellite caucus sites to increase access to people who otherwise have had trouble participating .
Then , as the caucus date approached , other criticisms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s lack of racial diversity erupted into the public debate .
This past November , former Housing Secretary Julián Castro , in particular , lambasted the outsize power granted to predominantly white Iowa , which he noted does not reflect the racial diversity of the contemporary Democratic Party .
( He dropped out of the race in December and endorsed Warren . )
But Jim Zogby , an ally of Kleeb ’ s who is backing Sanders a second time this cycle , is a defender of the caucus system and Iowa @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the need for “ face-to-face politicking ” and questioned the idea that the political tradition embedded in Iowa could so easily be transferred to another small state .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
DES MOINES, Iowa ― The day after a glitch in a dysfunctional digital app turned the Iowa Democratic caucuses into a results-free fiasco, the horror stories were still trickling in.
When the Iowa Democratic Party’s app for reporting caucus results crashed, it took Charlie Wishman, a labor union official and Des Moines precinct chairman, an hour to report his results to the state party by phone. He couldn’t get much sleep afterward as he thought about the hardworking volunteers who might be “maligned” for the evening’s “system failure.”
Advertisement
Wapello County Democratic Party Chairman Zach Simonson, who helped lead a rural caucus and was responsible for reporting the whole county’s results, had an even more aggravating experience. After spending hours on the phone trying to report the county’s numbers to the state party, he headed to bed, only to be awoken by calls from an angry volunteer in the middle of the night.
And Shawn Sebastian, a progressive activist and caucus secretary in Ames, Iowa, spent so long on hold with the state Democratic Party reporting the results that he had time to call into CNN to complain about it, only to find that he had missed the party’s call back during the interview.
But of the trio of caucus administrators who spoke to HuffPost, only Sebastian, who recently returned from an activist life in New York City to agitate for progressive causes in his Iowa hometown, was willing to join the chorus of out-of-staters calling for an end to the rural state’s status as home to the hallowed first-in-the-nation caucus.
Even Sebastian was defensive, though, not wanting his criticisms of the caucus system’s administrative complexity and barriers to participation, as well as Iowa’s lack of racial diversity, to cast aspersions on the integrity of the process. He was especially critical of Republican officials and former Vice President Joe Biden for calling the results into question.
Advertisement
“A lot of people put in a lot of hard work, despite the structural flaws of the caucus system, to make a statement about the direction that they think the country should go in,” he said. “There still was an election that happened. The only thing that did not go according to plan was the rollout of results.”
Iowa Democratic Party Chairman Troy Price addresses reporters in Des Moines on Tuesday. He is under pressure to account for the party's failure to report results Monday night. Scott Olson/Getty Images
The reluctance of many Iowa Democrats to turn on the caucus and even to call for the ouster of Iowa Democratic Party Chairman Troy Price illustrated the disconnect between the skewering that Iowa Democrats have suffered at the hands of national party operatives and journalists, and the relative patience with which it has been received inside the state’s Democratic ranks.
Nearly all of the Democrats with whom HuffPost spoke said that the caucuses had gone smoothly in their precincts until it came time to report the results.
Why then, they seemed to wonder, was everyone so keen to throw the baby out with the bathwater?
“It’s not chaos,” said state Sen. Claire Celsi, a supporter of Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who represents the Des Moines suburbs. “It’s a reporting glitch, which sometimes happens.”
Advertisement
Andrea Philips, a former vice chair of the state party who is running for state representative in the Des Moines suburb of Ankeny, pointed the finger at national media outlets apparently frustrated by their inability to report results immediately.
“It’s a shame that the media … spent their time discussing conspiracy theories and indicting the party as a whole,” said Philips, who caucused for former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg. “I like the caucuses and I like Iowa going first because it’s a place where retail politics is still king.”
Chris Laursen, the president of the United Auto Workers local 74 in Ottumwa and a supporter of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), expressed a similar critique of the media coverage of the event, albeit through a more left-wing lens.
“It’s been the same chaos on caucus night for probably as long as they’ve been having them,” he said. “You’ll see corporate media trying to delegitimize them if one of their favorite candidates doesn’t have good results there, or someone like Bernie does have good results there.”
And for all the tales of first-time caucus-goers scratching their head at the caucus system’s arcane rules, there were plenty of other first-timers reporting positive experiences.
Advertisement
Julie Robison, a university administrator who is new to the state, was delighted with her first-time caucusing experience in Ames.
“You can’t hide in a caucus. You’re there. You have to stand up for what you believe in,” said Robison, who caucused for Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.). “And personally, I think the caucus is precious, and I would hate to see it go away.”
Robison lamented the technological failure but added, “Fundamentally, democracy can be messy.”
Supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) wait at their caucus site in Des Moines on Monday. Iowans are defensive of the caucuses, which they consider a unique tradition. Brian Snyder / Reuters
The Iowa Democratic caucuses have been playing an influential role in selecting the party’s presidential nominee since 1972. The caucus system’s defenders argue that it promotes a healthy form of civic engagement by encouraging neighbors to debate their political views with one another.
Proponents of Iowa’s special role maintain that the state’s smaller, more rural population gives political newcomers with more limited resources the opportunity to shine in smaller settings. Some Iowa Democrats even note that Democratic presidential nominees must still win on the existing Electoral College map, making Iowa a good test of their rural strength.
Advertisement
“The reason Democrats lost rural America in 2016 is because we were condescending ― condescending toward a rural lifestyle and rural values,” veteran Iowa Democratic strategist Jeff Link told HuffPost in mid-January. “That’s a dangerous place to go in 2020.”
But the caucus system, and Iowa’s cherished role as the first-in-the-nation caucus state, has been under increasing scrutiny in the past few years.
Critics of the caucus, which, unlike a traditional primary, takes place at a set time in a set place, have argued that it disenfranchises shift workers, people with family responsibilities and other folks who simply can’t spend hours at a caucus site on a weeknight.
After the 2016 presidential primary, when Hillary Clinton defeated Sanders in the state’s arcane delegate allotment system, his supporters clamored for the party to reveal the raw totals of how participants caucused. That led to nationally driven reforms that prompted the Iowa Democratic Party to, among other things, report out three sets of numbers: the number of caucus-goers who aligned initially behind a candidate in each precinct; the final alignment for each candidate after supporters of non-viable candidates switched to another candidate; and the state delegate equivalents earned by each candidate. The party also set up 87 satellite caucus sites to increase access to people who otherwise have had trouble participating.
Then, as the caucus date approached, other criticisms of the process that centered on Iowa’s lack of racial diversity erupted into the public debate. This past November, former Housing Secretary Julián Castro, in particular, lambasted the outsize power granted to predominantly white Iowa, which he noted does not reflect the racial diversity of the contemporary Democratic Party. (He dropped out of the race in December and endorsed Warren.)
Advertisement
“We shouldn’t be doing party-run primaries or caucuses.” - Jane Kleeb, Nebraska Democratic Party chairwoman
Even the caucus’s defenders understand that the flaws in the reporting of the results Monday night are almost certain to add pressure to end the system.
Simonson, the Wapello County party chair, thanked Castro for being “brave” and drawing attention to the diversity issue during his campaign. He sees the criticism the state has endured as impetus to improve the caucuses.
“We can’t change the demographics, but if we’re also using a system that makes it harder to participate if you’re a shift worker or if English is your second language, it’s going to be that much harder to argue in favor of keeping it,” he said.
In the end, the future of the Iowa caucuses is liable to be outside of Iowa Democrats’ hands.
Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez hinted in a Tuesday statement that there might be consequences for the state party’s errors.
Advertisement
“What happened last night should never happen again,” Perez said.
If he decides to redraw the map of states with an early say in the presidential primary, Perez may find less resistance from the generally progressive, reform-minded state party leaders and DNC members with whom he often tangles.
Nebraska Democratic Party Chairwoman Jane Kleeb, a supporter of Sanders’s 2016 bid and a frequent Perez critic, backed ending her state’s caucuses in the wake of the 2016 elections and replacing them with open primaries run by the state government.
“We shouldn’t be doing party-run primaries or caucuses,” said Kleeb. “We should use caucuses for organizing, which is what they are meant for and where they shine.”
Kleeb cited the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party’s caucus system, which is used to determine official party endorsements and policy positions, as a model.
But Jim Zogby, an ally of Kleeb’s who is backing Sanders a second time this cycle, is a defender of the caucus system and Iowa’s first-in-the-nation status. He cited the need for “face-to-face politicking” and questioned the idea that the political tradition embedded in Iowa could so easily be transferred to another small state.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-04--Rudy Giuliani Wants Trump To Investigate Joe Biden After Senate Impeachment Vote

Rudy Giuliani said his client President Donald Trump should continue trying to investigate Joe Biden after his impeachment trial , even if the Senate acquits him Wednesday , as expected , on charges related to such behavior .
The former New York City mayor sat with NPR ’ s Steve Inskeep for an interview that aired Tuesday .
Giuliani spoke about the Senate trial regarding the president ’ s attempts to withhold military aid to Ukraine in exchange for the country ’ s announcement of an investigation into the former vice president and his son Hunter Biden .
“ Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ends , “ 100 % , ” Giuliani told Inskeep .
“ I would have no problem with him doing it .
In fact , I would have a problem with him not doing it .
I think he would be saying that Joe Biden can get away with selling out the United States , making us a fool in the Ukraine.
” '' Absolutely ; 100 % , '' Giuliani told @ NPRinskeep .
“ I would have no problem with [ Trump ] doing it .
In fact , I 'd @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it .
I think he would be saying that Joe Biden can get away with selling out the United States , making us a fool in the Ukraine . ''
— Katherine Faulders ( @ KFaulders ) February 4 , 2020 Giuliani was central in the events that led up to the House conducting an inquiry that resulted in Trump ’ s impeachment in December .
The president ’ s personal attorney conducted shadow diplomacy for Trump with Ukrainian officials to get them to announce an investigation into the Bidens , the younger @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gas company Burisma while his father ― who is now one of Trump ’ s 2020 rivals ― served as vice president of the United States .
Trump is accused of withholding congressionally approved U.S. military aid to Ukraine while pushing for the country ’ s president to announce the investigation .
“ He ’ s the chief law enforcement officer of the United States .
He certainly shouldn ’ t back away from it , ” Giuliani said of Trump investigating Biden .
Technically , the U.S. attorney general is the chief @ @ @ @ @ @ @ executive branch under the president .
Giuliani told Inskeep that he ’ s still looking into the Bidens ’ relationship with Ukraine , despite there being no evidence of wrongdoing by the Bidens .
Asked if he ’ s investigating Biden on the president ’ s orders , Giuliani said , “ He hasn ’ t told me not to do it.
” The attorney ’ s comments to NPR come as the Senate prepares for a vote in the impeachment trial Wednesday that will likely end in the president ’ s acquittal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to vote against convicting Trump on the charges ― abuse of power and obstruction of Congress ― after almost all refused to allow witnesses in the trial .
Some senators , such as Lamar Alexander ( R-Tenn. ) and Susan Collins ( R-Maine ) , expressed disappointment with Trump ’ s actions and said it was inappropriate to ask a foreign leader to investigate a political opponent .
But both lawmakers still plan to acquit the president , with Collins saying Tuesday that she believes Trump “ has learned from this case ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the future.
” But Giuliani ’ s remarks Tuesday signify otherwise : “ I believe that it would be one of the great corrupt events in American history if this case is not investigated at the highest levels of two governments .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The former New York City mayor sat with NPR’s Steve Inskeep for an interview that aired Tuesday. Giuliani spoke about the Senate trial regarding the president’s attempts to withhold military aid to Ukraine in exchange for the country’s announcement of an investigation into the former vice president and his son Hunter Biden.
Advertisement
“Biden should be investigated” after the trial ends, “100%,” Giuliani told Inskeep. “I would have no problem with him doing it. In fact, I would have a problem with him not doing it. I think he would be saying that Joe Biden can get away with selling out the United States, making us a fool in the Ukraine.”
"Absolutely; 100%," Giuliani told @NPRinskeep. “I would have no problem with [Trump] doing it. In fact, I'd have a problem with him not doing it. I think he would be saying that Joe Biden can get away with selling out the United States, making us a fool in the Ukraine." — Katherine Faulders (@KFaulders) February 4, 2020
Giuliani was central in the events that led up to the House conducting an inquiry that resulted in Trump’s impeachment in December. The president’s personal attorney conducted shadow diplomacy for Trump with Ukrainian officials to get them to announce an investigation into the Bidens, the younger who served on the board of Ukrainian gas company Burisma while his father ― who is now one of Trump’s 2020 rivals ― served as vice president of the United States. Trump is accused of withholding congressionally approved U.S. military aid to Ukraine while pushing for the country’s president to announce the investigation.
“He’s the chief law enforcement officer of the United States. He certainly shouldn’t back away from it,” Giuliani said of Trump investigating Biden. Technically, the U.S. attorney general is the chief law enforcement officer, serving in the executive branch under the president.
Advertisement
Giuliani told Inskeep that he’s still looking into the Bidens’ relationship with Ukraine, despite there being no evidence of wrongdoing by the Bidens. Asked if he’s investigating Biden on the president’s orders, Giuliani said, “He hasn’t told me not to do it.”
The attorney’s comments to NPR come as the Senate prepares for a vote in the impeachment trial Wednesday that will likely end in the president’s acquittal. All 53 Republican senators are expected to vote against convicting Trump on the charges ― abuse of power and obstruction of Congress ― after almost all refused to allow witnesses in the trial.
Some senators, such as Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine), expressed disappointment with Trump’s actions and said it was inappropriate to ask a foreign leader to investigate a political opponent. But both lawmakers still plan to acquit the president, with Collins saying Tuesday that she believes Trump “has learned from this case” and “will be much more cautious in the future.”
Susan Collins, in saying she won’t vote to remove Trump, says he learned a lesson. Trump has repeatedly said he behaved perfectly and did nothing wrong. — Josh Dawsey (@jdawsey1) February 4, 2020
But Giuliani’s remarks Tuesday signify otherwise: “I believe that it would be one of the great corrupt events in American history if this case is not investigated at the highest levels of two governments.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-05--Rick Santorum Fawns Over Trump's State Of The Union: His 'Most Presidential Speech'

Former Sen. Rick Santorum ( R-Pa. ) described President Donald Trump ’ s State of the Union address on Tuesday , which contained multiple misleading statements , as “ the best delivered speech that I ’ ve seen the president give.
” “ I mean , this was the most presidential speech Donald Trump has ever given , ” the twice-failed GOP presidential candidate told CNN ’ s Anderson Cooper , citing the president ’ s “ solemn ” tone .
Santorum , a frequent defender of Trump , also rejected CNN ’ s chief White House correspondent Jim Acosta @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was actually a State of the Base ― in other words , a direct message to his key supporters rather than the country as a whole .
Acosta acknowledged the “ heartwarming moments ” during the speech but noted Trump ’ s “ deeply divisive rhetoric aimed at immigrants , aimed at Latinos.
” “ I mean the idea that this was a base speech , as if this was some sort of rally speech , it was not a base speech , ” argued Santorum .
“ I mean , yeah , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doing and wants to do , just like every president does , and you don ’ t go out and say , ‘ well that ’ s a base speech .
’ ”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Former Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) described President Donald Trump’s State of the Union address on Tuesday, which contained multiple misleading statements, as “the best delivered speech that I’ve seen the president give.”
“I mean, this was the most presidential speech Donald Trump has ever given,” the twice-failed GOP presidential candidate told CNN’s Anderson Cooper, citing the president’s “solemn” tone.
Advertisement
Santorum, a frequent defender of Trump, also rejected CNN’s chief White House correspondent Jim Acosta’s earlier assertion that the speech was actually a State of the Base ― in other words, a direct message to Trump’s supporters rather than the country as a whole.
Acosta acknowledged the “heartwarming moments” during the speech, but noted Trump’s “deeply divisive rhetoric aimed at immigrants, aimed at Latinos.”
“I mean the idea that this was a base speech, as if this was some sort of rally speech, it was not a base speech,” argued Santorum. “I mean, yeah, he talked about things his administration is doing and wants to do, just like every president does, and you don’t go out and say, ‘Well that’s a base speech.’”
Check out the clip here:


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-05--Mitt Romney Votes To Convict Donald Trump For Abuse Of Power, In Split With GOP

The Senate voted to acquit Trump for pressuring the government of Ukraine to open an investigation that could benefit him politically , using congressionally approved foreign aid and a potential White House meeting .
Along with abuse of power , the House also impeached Trump for obstruction of Congress for trying to block the chamber ’ s probe into the matter .
“ The president is guilty of an appalling abuse of public trust , ” Romney said on the Senate floor ahead of the vote .
“ What he did was not perfect .
No , it was a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our national security , and our fundamental values.
” During the impeachment trial , most Republicans have come to the president ’ s defense .
Some agree with Trump himself that he did nothing wrong at all ; others say that while he behaved inappropriately , removal from office is not the proper response .
Nearly all GOP senators voted against hearing from witnesses or examining additional documents as part of the trial , even after bombshell reports emerged confirming that former Trump national security adviser John Bolton had firsthand knowledge of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Collins ( R-Maine ) supported hearing from witnesses .
Collins ultimately decided to acquit Trump on both charges , however .
She announced Tuesday that she did “ not believe the House has met its burden of showing that the president ’ s conduct , however flawed , warrants the extreme step of immediate removal from office.
” Corrupting an election process in a democratic republic is about as abusive and egregious an act against the Constitution — and one ’ s oath — that I can imagine .
It ’ s what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Senate floor that he ’ d hoped to hear from Bolton in part because he “ hoped that what he might say could raise reasonable doubt and thus remove from me the awful obligation to vote for impeachment.
” “ The president did in fact pressure a foreign government to corrupt our election process , ” Romney told The Atlantic before he announced his vote on the floor .
“ And really , corrupting an election process in a democratic republic is about as abusive and egregious an act against the Constitution — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I can imagine .
It ’ s what autocrats do.
” Romney , who was the GOP presidential nominee in 2012 , has been more outspoken against Trump than many other Republican senators have been .
He said in October that Trump ’ s “ brazen and unprecedented appeal to China and to Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden is wrong and appalling.
” Since then , he has continued to express concerns about the allegations against the president .
Romney acknowledged that he ’ s “ sure to hear abuse from the president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been told he would be unwelcome at this year ’ s Conservative Political Action Conference over his vote to hear from witnesses .
But he has less reason to fear ire from the right than some other Republicans : He is not up for reelection until 2024 .
“ Were I to ignore the evidence that has been presented and disregard what I believe my oath and the Constitution demands of me for the sake of a partisan end , it would , I fear , expose my character to history ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conscience , ” Romney said on the Senate floor .
“ He ’ s been pretty clear all along that he ’ s had a different view of all this , ” Sen. John Thune ( R-S.D . )
, a member of Senate GOP leadership , said shortly after Romney ’ s speech .
“ He ’ s someone that we all know is a very independent person .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah on Wednesday was the sole Republican to vote to convict President Donald Trump in the Senate impeachment trial over abuse of power.
The Senate voted to acquit Trump for pressuring the government of Ukraine to open an investigation that could benefit him politically, using congressionally approved foreign aid and a potential White House meeting. Along with abuse of power, the House also impeached Trump for obstruction of Congress for trying to block the chamber’s probe into the matter.
Advertisement
“The president is guilty of an appalling abuse of public trust,” Romney said on the Senate floor ahead of the vote. “What he did was not perfect. No, it was a flagrant assault on our electoral rights, our national security, and our fundamental values.”
During the impeachment trial, most Republicans have come to the president’s defense. Some agree with Trump himself that he did nothing wrong at all; others say that while he behaved inappropriately, removal from office is not the proper response.
Nearly all GOP senators voted against hearing from witnesses or examining additional documents as part of the trial, even after bombshell reports emerged confirming that former Trump national security adviser John Bolton had firsthand knowledge of the matter. Only Romney and Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) supported hearing from witnesses.
Collins ultimately decided to acquit Trump on both charges, however. She announced Tuesday that she did “not believe the House has met its burden of showing that the president’s conduct, however flawed, warrants the extreme step of immediate removal from office.”
Advertisement
“Corrupting an election process in a democratic republic is about as abusive and egregious an act against the Constitution — and one’s oath — that I can imagine. It’s what autocrats do.” - Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah)
Romney said on the Senate floor that he’d hoped to hear from Bolton in part because he “hoped that what he might say could raise reasonable doubt and thus remove from me the awful obligation to vote for impeachment.”
In explaining his vote to convict, Romney compared the president’s actions to autocracy.
“The president did in fact pressure a foreign government to corrupt our election process,” Romney told The Atlantic before he announced his vote on the floor. “And really, corrupting an election process in a democratic republic is about as abusive and egregious an act against the Constitution — and one’s oath — that I can imagine. It’s what autocrats do.”
Romney, who was the GOP presidential nominee in 2012, has been more outspoken against Trump than many other Republican senators have been. He said in October that Trump’s “brazen and unprecedented appeal to China and to Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden is wrong and appalling.” Since then, he has continued to express concerns about the allegations against the president.
Romney acknowledged that he’s “sure to hear abuse from the president and his supporters.” He had already been told he would be unwelcome at this year’s Conservative Political Action Conference over his vote to hear from witnesses.
Advertisement
But he has less reason to fear ire from the right than some other Republicans: He is not up for reelection until 2024.
“Were I to ignore the evidence that has been presented and disregard what I believe my oath and the Constitution demands of me for the sake of a partisan end, it would, I fear, expose my character to history’s rebuke and the censure of my own conscience,” Romney said on the Senate floor.
Other Republicans shrugged off Romney’s speech.
“He’s been pretty clear all along that he’s had a different view of all this,” Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), a member of Senate GOP leadership, said shortly after Romney’s speech. “He’s someone that we all know is a very independent person.”
Thune noted that Trump and Romney already had a pretty complicated relationship, and said members of the Republican Senate caucus would continue to work alongside Romney.
After the vote, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said he was “surprised and disappointed” by Romney’s vote but noted the senator almost always votes with the party.
Advertisement
“We don’t have any doghouses here,” McConnell said when a reporter asked how long Romney would be in the doghouse. “The most important vote is the next vote.”
Read Romney’s prepared remarks here:


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-05--Senate Rips Up Articles Of Impeachment In Donald Trump Trial

He becomes the third president in U.S. history to be acquitted after being impeached in the House .
But Trump has his own distinction : He is the only president to go through a Senate impeachment trial that heard from no witnesses .
Throughout the trial , which began in earnest on Jan. 21 , Republicans shifted their messages .
First , many said Trump hadn ’ t done what he was accused of : hold up congressionally approved security aid for Ukraine in order to push for an investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new evidence of the president ’ s misconduct came to light in the media , Republican senators began to argue that Trump was right to pressure the Ukrainians to launch such an investigation ― that there was a quid pro quo , but it was justified .
On Friday last week , after arguments from both sides and the answering of senators ’ questions were over , the Senate refused again to hear from witnesses in a 51-49 vote .
Two Republicans , Romney and Sen. Susan Collins of Maine , joined Democrats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an unprecedented decision in a presidential impeachment trial ― senators heard from witnesses in the proceedings against Presidents Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton .
Democrats repeatedly urged their colleagues to call witnesses , arguing they could do so quickly so the Senate could get back to other work .
They hoped to hear from people who may have firsthand accounts of Trump ’ s deeds but were barred by the White House from testifying before the House , such as former national security adviser John Bolton .
Bolton reportedly wrote in an upcoming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ withheld Ukraine aid to the launch of an investigation into the Bidens .
Even without those new witnesses , House impeachment managers presented a slew of evidence that Trump did what they had alleged .
They noted , for example , that Gordon Sondland , U.S. ambassador to the European Union , had testified before the House Intelligence Committee that he told the Ukrainian foreign minister that Ukraine would need to announce an investigation into the Bidens in order to receive the withheld aid .
Some Republicans acknowledged that it was clear he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ R-Tenn. ) , who some hoped would break with his party to vote for witnesses , said last week that there was “ no need for more evidence to prove ” Trump demanded a Biden investigation , but that however inappropriate Trump ’ s actions , removing him from office was not the right approach .
Collins and Sen. Lisa Murkowski ( R-Alaska ) also decided to acquit Trump even though they said he behaved inappropriately .
“ Hate is a destructive sentiment and right now it seems that congressional Democrats are consumed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expense of everything else , ” Sen. Ted Cruz ( R-Texas ) told HuffPost on Wednesday before the vote .
“ It in effect came to a culmination when Nancy Pelosi stood up and ripped the State of the Union speech into pieces.
” Many Republican senators said they were letting the voters decide what should happen next ― something Trump ’ s defense attorneys repeatedly suggested was the right approach .
White House Counsel Pat Cipollone accused Democrats of trying “ to perpetrate the most massive interference in an election in American @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s ouster from office would mean removing him from the ballot in November as well .
( This isn ’ t necessarily true .
The Senate could have convicted the president and held a separate vote on whether he should be disqualified from the next election . )
“ What are the odds if left in office that he will continue trying to cheat ?
” lead impeachment manager Adam Schiff ( D-Calif. ) said during closing arguments on Monday .
“ I will tell you : 100 % .
Not 5 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 100 % .
If you have found him guilty and you do not remove him from office , he will continue trying to cheat in the election until he succeeds.
” “ The eyes of the nation are upon this Senate , and what they see would strike doubt in the heart of even the most ardent patriot , ” Schumer said .
“ The House managers established that the president abused the great power of his office to try to cheat in an election , and the Senate majority is poised to @ @ @ @ @ @

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON ― Senators voted on Wednesday to acquit President Donald Trump of abuse of power ― without first hearing from witnesses or examining new documents in his impeachment trial, and even though some Republicans agreed the president had done exactly what he was accused of.
The final vote on the first article of impeachment was 48-52, far short of the supermajority needed to convict.
Advertisement
Democrats remained unified in voting to convict. Only one Republican, Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah, wanted to convict the president for abuse of power.
On the second article of impeachment, obstruction of Congress, the Senate acquitted Trump by a vote of 47-53. (Romney voted to acquit this time.)
The two votes proceeded solemnly, with senators doing much less fidgeting than they’d displayed during the previous two weeks of the trial. As the clerk called their name, each senator rose, buttoned their jacket, and then said either “guilty” or “not guilty.”
In the end, Trump pressured the president of Ukraine to investigate a political rival ahead of the 2020 election, blocked Congress in its efforts to investigate his actions and was still given the OK by the Senate.
Advertisement
He becomes the third president in U.S. history to be acquitted after being impeached in the House. But Trump has his own distinction: He is the only president to go through a Senate impeachment trial that heard from no witnesses.
Democrats have said that his acquittal will always have an asterisk: He is staying in office, but only because the process was rigged in his favor from the start.
The vote was not surprising. Most GOP senators had indicated before the trial even began that they planned to let Trump off the hook. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said in December that he was “not an impartial juror.”
Ahead of the vote on Wednesday, McConnell said the impeachment case was “incoherent” and reduced it to a “conspiracy theory.” And he complained about House Speaker Nancy Pelosi questioning the legitimacy of the Senate trial due to its lack of witnesses.
“Perhaps she will tear up the verdict like she tore up the State of the Union address,” McConnell said.
Advertisement
By acquitting the president, the Senate would fulfill its constitutional obligation to serve as the more stable counterbalance to the House of Representatives, the majority leader argued.
“The framers built the Senate to keep temporary rage from doing permanent damage to our republic,” McConnell said.
Throughout the trial, which began in earnest on Jan. 21, Republicans shifted their messages. First, many said Trump hadn’t done what he was accused of: hold up congressionally approved security aid for Ukraine in order to push for an investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter. But as the trial continued and new evidence of the president’s misconduct came to light in the media, Republican senators began to argue that Trump was right to pressure the Ukrainians to launch such an investigation ― that there was a quid pro quo, but it was justified.
The president, for his part, continued to insist he did nothing wrong. He plans to make a public statement at noon on Thursday to discuss, as he described it on Twitter, “our Country’s VICTORY on the Impeachment Hoax!”
White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham said that the trial “ended in the full vindication and exoneration” of Trump and that only his opponents, including “one failed Republican presidential candidate,” voted to convict him on the articles of impeachment.
Advertisement
“In what has now become a consistent tradition for Democrats, this was yet another witch-hunt that deprived the President of his due process rights and was based on a series of lies,” Grisham said in a statement.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said last year that he was “not an impartial juror" in President Donald Trump's impeachment trial. Susan Walsh/Associated Press
Ahead of arguments in the trial, Republicans blocked Democrats’ efforts to call witnesses and request documents ― and then complained that the House impeachment managers’ presentations contained nothing new. They immediately shot down a last-minute plea from Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) for a censure vote against the president.
On Friday last week, after arguments from both sides and the answering of senators’ questions were over, the Senate refused again to hear from witnesses in a 51-49 vote. Two Republicans, Romney and Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, joined Democrats in that losing effort. It was an unprecedented decision in a presidential impeachment trial ― senators heard from witnesses in the proceedings against Presidents Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton.
Democrats repeatedly urged their colleagues to call witnesses, arguing they could do so quickly so the Senate could get back to other work. They hoped to hear from people who may have firsthand accounts of Trump’s deeds but were barred by the White House from testifying before the House, such as former national security adviser John Bolton. Bolton reportedly wrote in an upcoming book that he recalls Trump tying the withheld Ukraine aid to the launch of an investigation into the Bidens.
Advertisement
Even without those new witnesses, House impeachment managers presented a slew of evidence that Trump did what they had alleged. They noted, for example, that Gordon Sondland, U.S. ambassador to the European Union, had testified before the House Intelligence Committee that he told the Ukrainian foreign minister that Ukraine would need to announce an investigation into the Bidens in order to receive the withheld aid.
Plus, Trump himself admitted to it. He told reporters in October that he’d wanted Ukraine to “start a major investigation into the Bidens.”
Some Republicans acknowledged that it was clear he did it. Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), who some hoped would break with his party to vote for witnesses, said last week that there was “no need for more evidence to prove” Trump demanded a Biden investigation, but that however inappropriate Trump’s actions, removing him from office was not the right approach. Collins and Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) also decided to acquit Trump even though they said he behaved inappropriately.
Republicans also had another excuse: They argued that the impeachment resulted from blind partisanship and even hatred of the president.
“Hate is a destructive sentiment and right now it seems that congressional Democrats are consumed with hatred for Donald Trump at the expense of everything else,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) told HuffPost on Wednesday before the vote. “It in effect came to a culmination when Nancy Pelosi stood up and ripped the State of the Union speech into pieces.”
Advertisement
The president himself spent the morning tweeting criticism of the House speaker for tearing up the text of his remarks, which were full of anti-immigrant demagoguery, half-truths about his economic policies and outright lies about health care.
“What are the odds if left in office that he will continue trying to cheat? I will tell you: 100%. Not 5, not 10, not 50, but 100%.” - Rep. Adam Schiff, lead impeachment manager
Many Republican senators said they were letting the voters decide what should happen next ― something Trump’s defense attorneys repeatedly suggested was the right approach. White House Counsel Pat Cipollone accused Democrats of trying “to perpetrate the most massive interference in an election in American history” and claimed that Trump’s ouster from office would mean removing him from the ballot in November as well. (This isn’t necessarily true. The Senate could have convicted the president and held a separate vote on whether he should be disqualified from the next election.)
Plus, the impeachment itself was over alleged attempts by Trump to push for interference into an election.
“What are the odds if left in office that he will continue trying to cheat?” lead impeachment manager Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said during closing arguments on Monday. “I will tell you: 100%. Not 5, not 10, not 50, but 100%. If you have found him guilty and you do not remove him from office, he will continue trying to cheat in the election until he succeeds.”
Advertisement
Now that Senate Republicans have rubber-stamped Trump’s actions, Democrats warned that he’ll only feel more emboldened.
“I believe the precedent being set by acquittal will mean that presidents can operate above the law,” said Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who is running for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination.
It was unclear until shortly before the vote whether Democrats would stay united in voting for conviction. But all three of the Democrats considered possible votes for acquittal ― Sens. Manchin, Doug Jones of Alabama and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona ― voted to convict Trump on both articles of impeachment.
Manchin said that his decision was not political and that he wanted to uphold his oath and to face his family and friends afterward.
“If I couldn’t explain it, I would be worried. If I did a political vote, I would be worried,” the West Virginia senator said.
Advertisement
In a speech just before the vote, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) lamented his Republican colleagues’ decision to side with the president.
“The eyes of the nation are upon this Senate, and what they see would strike doubt in the heart of even the most ardent patriot,” Schumer said. “The House managers established that the president abused the great power of his office to try to cheat in an election, and the Senate majority is poised to look the other way.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-05--Donald Trump, Famous Birther, Frames Himself As Hero To People Of Color

WASHINGTON — On the fourth day of Black History Month , President Donald Trump attempted to frame himself as a savior to people of color , especially Black people , during his State of the Union address .
Trump , whose real estate company was sued twice for not renting to Black people in the past , took the spotlight Tuesday night and claimed credit for the country ’ s historically low unemployment rate among Blacks , Latinos , and Asian-Americans , and the declining rates of Black poverty .
“ Wealthy people and companies are pouring money into poor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seen investment in many decades , creating jobs , energy , and excitement , ” Trump said .
“ This is the first time that these deserving communities have seen anything like this .
It ’ s all working.
” The president was referring to tax breaks passed by Republicans in 2017 that created so-called opportunity zones that were supposed to encourage investment in poor areas .
The New York Times recently reported that the program had instead created a “ wave of developments financed by and built for the wealthiest Americans , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ untaxed profits .
Despite what Trump thinks , he remains unpopular with Black voters .
The president is considered to be a racist by more than 80 % of Black Americans , according to a Washington Post/Ipsos poll last month .
Trump recognized several Black people in attendance at his speech : Sen. Tim Scott ( R-S.C. ) , Army veteran Tony Raskins , retired Tuskegee Airman Charles McGee and his great-grandson , and fourth-grader Janiyah Davis and her single mother .
Trump used their stories to promote policies he sees as appealing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ school choice and opportunity zones .
After the speech , the president was quickly condemned by Democratic members of Congress for exploiting these people and using them as political props for the country to see .
“ Totally insulting , ” Rep. Barbara Lee ( D-Calif. ) told HuffPost in a call after the speech .
She pointed out the applause that Sen. Scott received during the address for his work on opportunity zones .
“ All of these people are to be respected , but when he touts them like that to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ credit for something he has not really done , it ’ s just as low as you can go , ” she continued .
Trump was “ talking about he had gotten that child an opportunity to go to a better school and the mother is smiling because I think she honestly believed that he ’ s working on behalf of our children and that he had done a wonderful thing for her , but she was simply used and misused this evening , ” said Waters , who has spectacularly clashed with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are the kind of tactics and antics of a president who has no respect.
” Trump also used his speech to lionize right-wing radio host Rush Limbaugh , a longtime Trump supporter with a history of racist remarks who announced this week he has advanced lung cancer .
Trump awarded the broadcaster the Presidential Medal of Freedom .
Earlier in the address , the president lauded Gen. Charles McGee , one of the last surviving Tuskegee Airmen , the legendary group of Black military pilots who served in World War II .
Later @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about undocumented immigrants , describing them as “ criminal aliens ” running loose in sanctuary cities .
The speech , like his reelection campaign ’ s Super Bowl ad touting his commutation of a life sentence for nonviolent offender Alice Marie Johnson , and his supporters ’ cash giveaways in Black communities , show how Trump plans to court Black voters in 2020 — sleight-of-hand appeals , self-aggrandizing claims of success and hollow promises .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON — On the fourth day of Black History Month, President Donald Trump attempted to frame himself as a savior to people of color, especially Black people, during his State of the Union address.
Trump, whose real estate company was sued twice for not renting to Black people in the past, took the spotlight Tuesday night and claimed credit for the country’s historically low unemployment rate among Blacks, Latinos, and Asian-Americans, and the declining rates of Black poverty.
Advertisement
“Wealthy people and companies are pouring money into poor neighborhoods or areas that haven’t seen investment in many decades, creating jobs, energy, and excitement,” Trump said. “This is the first time that these deserving communities have seen anything like this. It’s all working.”
The president was referring to tax breaks passed by Republicans in 2017 that created so-called opportunity zones that were supposed to encourage investment in poor areas. The New York Times recently reported that the program had instead created a “wave of developments financed by and built for the wealthiest Americans,” including high-end apartment buildings built with untaxed profits.
Despite what Trump thinks, he remains unpopular with Black voters. The president is considered to be a racist by more than 80% of Black Americans, according to a Washington Post/Ipsos poll last month.
Trump recognized several Black people in attendance at his speech: Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.), Army veteran Tony Raskins, retired Tuskegee Airman Charles McGee and his great-grandson, and fourth-grader Janiyah Davis and her single mother. Trump used their stories to promote policies he sees as appealing to voters of color, such as school choice and opportunity zones.
Advertisement
Trump delivers his State of the Union address in front of Vice President Mike Pence and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to members of Congress. The Washington Post via Getty Images
After the speech, the president was quickly condemned by Democratic members of Congress for exploiting these people and using them as political props for the country to see.
“Totally insulting,” Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) told HuffPost in a call after the speech. She pointed out the applause that Sen. Scott received during the address for his work on opportunity zones.
“Using African-Americans tonight as props … this was just surreal to me, like a Hollywood show,” Lee said.
“All of these people are to be respected, but when he touts them like that to make a point and to give himself credit for something he has not really done, it’s just as low as you can go,” she continued.
Advertisement
Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) said Trump “exploited the most vulnerable people” in his speech. “He has exploited people of color.”
Trump was “talking about he had gotten that child an opportunity to go to a better school and the mother is smiling because I think she honestly believed that he’s working on behalf of our children and that he had done a wonderful thing for her, but she was simply used and misused this evening,” said Waters, who has spectacularly clashed with Trump in the past. “Those are the kind of tactics and antics of a president who has no respect.”
Trump also used his speech to lionize right-wing radio host Rush Limbaugh, a longtime Trump supporter with a history of racist remarks who announced this week he has advanced lung cancer. Trump awarded the broadcaster the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
Like Trump, Limbaugh has pushed the lie that former President Barack Obama was not born in the United States.
Earlier in the address, the president lauded Gen. Charles McGee, one of the last surviving Tuskegee Airmen, the legendary group of Black military pilots who served in World War II. Later, he launched into a xenophobic tirade about undocumented immigrants, describing them as “criminal aliens” running loose in sanctuary cities.
Advertisement
The speech, like his reelection campaign’s Super Bowl ad touting his commutation of a life sentence for nonviolent offender Alice Marie Johnson, and his supporters’ cash giveaways in Black communities, show how Trump plans to court Black voters in 2020 — sleight-of-hand appeals, self-aggrandizing claims of success and hollow promises.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-05--Mike Pompeo Spectacularly Self-Owns With Attempted 'Simpsons' Troll Of Nancy Pelosi

Did you know you ’ re using the image from the episode where Lisa writes a speech about how great @ @ @ @ @ corporatized and evil it is ?
Catching a glimpse of how it is behind the @ @ @ @ @ up her speech because she loses all faith in the country ?

Did you know you’re using the image from the episode where Lisa writes a speech about how great America is before seeing how corporatized and evil it is? Catching a glimpse of how it is behind the curtain? So she rips up her speech because she loses all faith in the country?


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-05--'Appalling Abuse Of Public Trust': Read Mitt Romney’s Case To Convict Donald Trump

The Constitution is at the foundation of our Republic ’ s success , and we each strive not to lose sight of our promise to defend it .
The Constitution established the vehicle of impeachment that has occupied both houses of Congress for these many days .
We have labored to faithfully execute our responsibilities to it .
We have arrived at different judgments , but I hope we respect each other ’ s good faith .
The allegations made in the articles of impeachment are very serious .
As a Senator-juror , I swore an oath , before God @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I am a profoundly religious person .
I take an oath before God as enormously consequential .
I knew from the outset that being tasked with judging the President , the leader of my own party , would be the most difficult decision I have ever faced .
I was not wrong .
The House Managers presented evidence supporting their case ; the White House counsel disputed that case .
In addition , the President ’ s team presented three defenses : first , that there can be no impeachment without a statutory @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ conduct justified the President ’ s actions ; and third that the judgement of the President ’ s actions should be left to the voters .
Let me first address each of those defenses .
The historic meaning of the words “ high crimes and misdemeanors , ” the writings of the Founders and my own reasoned judgement convince me that a president can indeed commit acts against the public trust that are so egregious that while they are not statutory crimes , they would demand removal from office .
To maintain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comprehensive list of all the outrageous acts that a president might conceivably commit renders Congress powerless to remove a president defies reason .
The President ’ s counsel noted that Vice President Biden appeared to have a conflict of interest when he undertook an effort to remove the Ukrainian Prosecutor General .
If he knew of the exorbitant compensation his son was receiving from a company actually under investigation , the Vice President should have recused himself .
While ignoring a conflict of interest is not a crime , it is surely very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , taking excessive advantage of his father ’ s name is unsavory but also not a crime .
Given that in neither the case of the father nor the son was any evidence presented by the President ’ s counsel that a crime had been committed , the President ’ s insistence that they be investigated by the Ukrainians is hard to explain other than as a political pursuit .
There is no question in my mind that were their names not Biden , the President would never have done what he did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should leave the impeachment decision to the voters .
While that logic is appealing to our democratic instincts , it is inconsistent with the Constitution ’ s requirement that the Senate , not the voters , try the president .
Hamilton explained that the Founders ’ decision to invest senators with this obligation rather than leave it to voters was intended to minimize—to the extent possible—the partisan sentiments of the public .
This verdict is ours to render .
The people will judge us for how well and faithfully we fulfilled our duty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ senators to answer is whether the President committed an act so extreme and egregious that it rises to the level of a “ high crime and misdemeanor.
” What he did was not “ perfect ” — No , it was a flagrant assault on our electoral rights , our national security interests , and our fundamental values .
Corrupting an election to keep oneself in office is perhaps the most abusive and destructive violation of one ’ s oath of office that I can imagine .
In the last several weeks , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Many demand that , in their words , “ I stand with the team.
” I can assure you that that thought has been very much on my mind .
I support a great deal of what the President has done .
I have voted with him 80 % of the time .
But my promise before God to apply impartial justice required that I put my personal feelings and biases aside .
Were I to ignore the evidence that has been presented , and disregard what I believe my oath and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sake of a partisan end , it would , I fear , expose my character to history ’ s rebuke and the censure of my own conscience .
I am aware that there are people in my party and in my state who will strenuously disapprove of my decision , and in some quarters , I will be vehemently denounced .
I am sure to hear abuse from the President and his supporters .
Does anyone seriously believe I would consent to these consequences other than from an inescapable conviction that my oath @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Like each member of this deliberative body , I love our country .
I believe that our Constitution was inspired by Providence .
I am convinced that freedom itself is dependent on the strength and vitality of our national character .
As it is with each senator , my vote is an act of conviction .
We have come to different conclusions , fellow senators , but I trust we have all followed the dictates of our conscience .
I acknowledge that my verdict will not remove the President from office .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fact be appealed to a higher court : the judgement of the American people .
Voters will make the final decision , just as the President ’ s lawyers have implored .
My vote will likely be in the minority in the Senate .
But irrespective of these things , with my vote , I will tell my children and their children that I did my duty to the best of my ability , believing that my country expected it of me .
I will only be one name among many , no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Americans who look at the record of this trial .
They will note merely that I was among the senators who determined that what the President did was wrong , grievously wrong .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) voted to convict President Donald Trump in the Senate impeachment trial over abuse of power, becoming the first U.S. senator in history to vote for removing a president from his own party.
Romney spoke from the Senate floor Wednesday, explaining his decision and criticizing Trump’s actions as “a flagrant assault on our electoral rights, our national security, and our fundamental values.”
Advertisement
Read the text of Romney’s speech below:
The Constitution is at the foundation of our Republic’s success, and we each strive not to lose sight of our promise to defend it. The Constitution established the vehicle of impeachment that has occupied both houses of Congress for these many days. We have labored to faithfully execute our responsibilities to it. We have arrived at different judgments, but I hope we respect each other’s good faith.
The allegations made in the articles of impeachment are very serious. As a Senator-juror, I swore an oath, before God, to exercise “impartial justice.” I am a profoundly religious person. I take an oath before God as enormously consequential. I knew from the outset that being tasked with judging the President, the leader of my own party, would be the most difficult decision I have ever faced. I was not wrong.
The House Managers presented evidence supporting their case; the White House counsel disputed that case. In addition, the President’s team presented three defenses: first, that there can be no impeachment without a statutory crime; second, that the Bidens’ conduct justified the President’s actions; and third that the judgement of the President’s actions should be left to the voters. Let me first address each of those defenses.
The historic meaning of the words “high crimes and misdemeanors,” the writings of the Founders and my own reasoned judgement convince me that a president can indeed commit acts against the public trust that are so egregious that while they are not statutory crimes, they would demand removal from office. To maintain that the lack of a codified and comprehensive list of all the outrageous acts that a president might conceivably commit renders Congress powerless to remove a president defies reason.
Advertisement
The President’s counsel noted that Vice President Biden appeared to have a conflict of interest when he undertook an effort to remove the Ukrainian Prosecutor General. If he knew of the exorbitant compensation his son was receiving from a company actually under investigation, the Vice President should have recused himself. While ignoring a conflict of interest is not a crime, it is surely very wrong.
With regards to Hunter Biden, taking excessive advantage of his father’s name is unsavory but also not a crime. Given that in neither the case of the father nor the son was any evidence presented by the President’s counsel that a crime had been committed, the President’s insistence that they be investigated by the Ukrainians is hard to explain other than as a political pursuit. There is no question in my mind that were their names not Biden, the President would never have done what he did.
The defense argues that the Senate should leave the impeachment decision to the voters. While that logic is appealing to our democratic instincts, it is inconsistent with the Constitution’s requirement that the Senate, not the voters, try the president. Hamilton explained that the Founders’ decision to invest senators with this obligation rather than leave it to voters was intended to minimize—to the extent possible—the partisan sentiments of the public.
This verdict is ours to render. The people will judge us for how well and faithfully we fulfilled our duty. The grave question the Constitution tasks senators to answer is whether the President committed an act so extreme and egregious that it rises to the level of a “high crime and misdemeanor.”
Yes, he did.
The President asked a foreign government to investigate his political rival.
The President withheld vital military funds from that government to press it to do so.
The President delayed funds for an American ally at war with Russian invaders.
The President’s purpose was personal and political.
Accordingly, the President is guilty of an appalling abuse of the public trust.
What he did was not “perfect”— No, it was a flagrant assault on our electoral rights, our national security interests, and our fundamental values. Corrupting an election to keep oneself in office is perhaps the most abusive and destructive violation of one’s oath of office that I can imagine.
Advertisement
In the last several weeks, I have received numerous calls and texts. Many demand that, in their words, “I stand with the team.” I can assure you that that thought has been very much on my mind. I support a great deal of what the President has done. I have voted with him 80% of the time. But my promise before God to apply impartial justice required that I put my personal feelings and biases aside. Were I to ignore the evidence that has been presented, and disregard what I believe my oath and the Constitution demands of me for the sake of a partisan end, it would, I fear, expose my character to history’s rebuke and the censure of my own conscience.
I am aware that there are people in my party and in my state who will strenuously disapprove of my decision, and in some quarters, I will be vehemently denounced. I am sure to hear abuse from the President and his supporters. Does anyone seriously believe I would consent to these consequences other than from an inescapable conviction that my oath before God demanded it of me?
I sought to hear testimony from John Bolton not only because I believed he could add context to the charges, but also because I hoped that what he said might raise reasonable doubt and thus remove from me the awful obligation to vote for impeachment.
Like each member of this deliberative body, I love our country. I believe that our Constitution was inspired by Providence. I am convinced that freedom itself is dependent on the strength and vitality of our national character. As it is with each senator, my vote is an act of conviction. We have come to different conclusions, fellow senators, but I trust we have all followed the dictates of our conscience.
I acknowledge that my verdict will not remove the President from office. The results of this Senate Court will in fact be appealed to a higher court: the judgement of the American people. Voters will make the final decision, just as the President’s lawyers have implored. My vote will likely be in the minority in the Senate. But irrespective of these things, with my vote, I will tell my children and their children that I did my duty to the best of my ability, believing that my country expected it of me. I will only be one name among many, no more or less, to future generations of Americans who look at the record of this trial. They will note merely that I was among the senators who determined that what the President did was wrong, grievously wrong.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-05--Kamala Harris On Trump's Expected Acquittal: 'When You're A Star, They Let You Do It'

Sen. Kamala Harris ( D-Calif. ) summed up the Senate ’ s expected acquittal of President Donald Trump Wednesday by quoting the man himself from the infamous “ Access Hollywood ” recording in which the then-reality TV host bragged about sexually assaulting women .
“ We must recognize that still in America , there are two systems of justice : one for the powerful and another for everyone else , ” Harris said on the Senate floor , decrying the lack of transparency in the Senate impeachment trial , in which Republicans voted down Democrats ’ efforts to demand witness @ @ @ @ @ @ @ White House , which has repeatedly refused to provide them .
“ Donald Trump knows all this better than anybody .
He may not acknowledge that we have two systems of justice , but he knows the institutions in this country , be it courts or the Senate , are set up to protect powerful people like him , ” she continued .
“ He told us as much .
When regarding the sexual assault of women , he said , quote , ‘ When you ’ re a star , they let @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anything.
’ ” That line came from the 2005 recording , leaked to The Washington Post in the final weeks of the 2016 presidential campaign .
On the tape , Trump and Billy Bush , then-host of “ Access Hollywood , ” can be heard mocking and making vulgar comments about women , with Trump bragging that he could “ grab ’ em by the pussy.
” “ I just start kissing them .
It ’ s like a magnet .
Just kiss .
I don ’ t even wait .
And when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you do it , ” Trump says on the tape .
“ You can do anything.
” Later Wednesday , the Senate will vote whether to convict and remove Trump on two articles of impeachment .
The GOP majority is expected to acquit him on a party-line vote .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) summed up the Senate’s expected acquittal of President Donald Trump Wednesday by quoting the man himself from the infamous “Access Hollywood” recording in which the then-reality TV host bragged about sexually assaulting women.
“We must recognize that still in America, there are two systems of justice: one for the powerful and another for everyone else,” Harris said on the Senate floor, decrying the lack of transparency in the Senate impeachment trial, in which Republicans voted down Democrats’ efforts to demand witness testimony and documents from Trump and the White House, which has repeatedly refused to provide them.
Advertisement
“Donald Trump knows all this better than anybody. He may not acknowledge that we have two systems of justice, but he knows the institutions in this country, be it courts or the Senate, are set up to protect powerful people like him,” she continued. “He told us as much. When regarding the sexual assault of women, he said, quote, ‘When you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything.’”
That line came from the 2005 recording, leaked to The Washington Post in the final weeks of the 2016 presidential campaign. On the tape, Trump and Billy Bush, then-host of “Access Hollywood,” can be heard mocking and making vulgar comments about women, with Trump bragging that he could “grab ’em by the pussy.”
“I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star they let you do it,” Trump says on the tape. “You can do anything.”
At least 20 women have accused Trump of sexual misconduct.
Later Wednesday, the Senate will vote whether to convict and remove Trump on two articles of impeachment. The GOP majority is expected to acquit him on a party-line vote.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-05--Whoopi Goldberg Winces At Meghan McCain's Defense Of Rush Limbaugh

And she wasn ’ t impressed by her co-host Meghan McCain ’ s rationale for why the president would give the controversial talk show host the award .
On Wednesday ’ s episode of “ The View , ” Goldberg started things off by referencing Limbaugh ’ s recent announcement that he has advanced lung cancer before admitting she didn ’ t think he deserved the nation ’ s highest civilian honor .
“ You know , I am very sorry that Rush is ill , because you never want to wish bad stuff on people , ” Goldberg said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But I ’ m sorry , I thought that the Medal of Freedom was supposed to go to people who actually did stuff.
” Goldberg named a few people she thought were more deserving of the award , including Rep. Elijah Cummings ( D-Md . )
, who died last October .
“ I didn ’ t understand , ” she said .
“ You ’ ve got a Tuskegee Airman sitting there , and if you ’ re going to give the Medal of Freedom to someone who actually has made @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all kinds of stuff , how about giving it to Elijah Cummings ’ wife as a thank you to all of his service ?
” McCain attempted to explain the decision as Trump “ playing to his base ” and Limbaugh ’ s influence with conservatives .
“ [ Limbaugh ] has 30 million listeners a day , ” she said .
“ To put it in perspective , this show averages around 3 [ million ] .
” Goldberg winced slightly at that comment , though McCain later agreed that Limbaugh has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Co-host Joy Behar noted that it was especially tone-deaf to give Limbaugh the award during Black History Month since the radio host “ spent a lot of Obama ’ s tenure singing — what did he call him now ?
— ‘ Barack the Magic Negro.
’ ” “ I don ’ t think it was lost on the Black community that he gave that honor to Rush Limbaugh during Black History Month , sitting next to a Tuskegee Airman , on Rosa Parks Day , ” Hostin said .
“ Rush @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Obama administration .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
And she wasn’t impressed by her co-host Meghan McCain’s rationale for why the president would give the controversial talk show host the award.
Advertisement
On Wednesday’s episode of “The View,” Goldberg started things off by referencing Limbaugh’s recent announcement that he has advanced lung cancer before admitting she didn’t think he deserved the nation’s highest civilian honor.
“You know, I am very sorry that Rush is ill, because you never want to wish bad stuff on people,” Goldberg said. “He has stage 4 cancer. But I’m sorry, I thought that the Medal of Freedom was supposed to go to people who actually did stuff.”
Goldberg named a few people she thought were more deserving of the award, including Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), who died last October.
“I didn’t understand,” she said. “You’ve got a Tuskegee Airman sitting there, and if you’re going to give the Medal of Freedom to someone who actually has made differences in the country and has done all kinds of stuff, how about giving it to Elijah Cummings’ wife as a thank you to all of his service?”
Advertisement
McCain attempted to explain the decision as Trump “playing to his base” and Limbaugh’s influence with conservatives.
“[Limbaugh] has 30 million listeners a day,” she said. “To put it in perspective, this show averages around 3 [million].”
“What has he done that merits the—” Goldberg started to ask.
“He completely changed the paradigm of radio,” McCain jumped in.
Goldberg winced slightly at that comment, though McCain later agreed that Limbaugh has “said a lot of awful things.”
Co-host Joy Behar noted that it was especially tone-deaf to give Limbaugh the award during Black History Month since the radio host “spent a lot of Obama’s tenure singing — what did he call him now? — ‘Barack the Magic Negro.’”
Sunny Hostin also explained why many Black Americans might find Limbaugh’s medal insulting.
“I don’t think it was lost on the Black community that he gave that honor to Rush Limbaugh during Black History Month, sitting next to a Tuskegee Airman, on Rosa Parks Day,” Hostin said. “Rush Limbaugh was a longtime birther during the Obama administration.”
Advertisement
Behar added:
“And Melania, the other birther, put the [medal] on him.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-05--Susan Collins Regrets Saying She Believed Trump Has Learned Lesson

Just spoke with Sen. Collins She now says she probably should n't have said that she `` believes '' Pres @ @ @ @ @ lessons from the fallout from his dealings with Ukraine and # Impeachment She now says @ @ @ @ @ been `` hopes '' # mepolitics pic.twitter.com/k5pC3nrVsc

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Hindsight is 20/20 for Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine).
Collins said Tuesday that she would vote to acquit President Donald Trump and that he had learned a lesson from the Ukraine scandal and his impeachment.
However, that doesn’t appear to be the case.
When Trump was asked to comment on Collins’ assertion, he once again declared he’d done nothing wrong: “It was a perfect call,” he said of his conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
Advertisement
On Wednesday, Collins told a reporter from Maine outlet WGME-TV that she used the wrong verb when discussing the potential impact of impeachment on the president.
A better word, she decided, would have been “hopes.”
Just spoke with Sen. Collins
She now says she probably shouldn't have said that she "believes" Pres. Trump has learned his lessons from the fallout from his dealings with Ukraine and #Impeachment
She now says a better word would have been "hopes"#mepolitics pic.twitter.com/k5pC3nrVsc — Gregg Lagerquist (@GreggWGME) February 5, 2020
The reflection didn’t impress very many people.
weak, weak, weak..... — Jennifer Rubin (@JRubinBlogger) February 5, 2020
This woman helps make the laws of this nation? Gimme a break. https://t.co/FZzRINMjoT — David Corn (@DavidCornDC) February 5, 2020
Advertisement
I would argue she thinks we are gullible, not the other way around. https://t.co/Bs88sXnJmq — Tiffany Bond (I) 🎱🦞🇺🇸 (@TiffanyBond) February 5, 2020
The point of the #impeachment process and the #SenateTrial of a sitting president is not to determine whether the executive office-holder has learned a lesson, @SenatorCollins. The point is to determine guilt. And @POTUS is #guilty. #ConvictAndRemove. @dscc — #NeverForget (@TipmanBrady) February 5, 2020
Hope springs eternal for the 73-year-old president who has literally never admitted fault for anything or acted in anything but his own self-interest. https://t.co/z5uDHVOwgI — Robert Maguire (@RobertMaguire_) February 5, 2020
I cannot believe how pathetic you are, @SenatorCollins
If I ever have a friend charged with wrongdoing, I hope you are on the jury. The defense lawyer will say "Let's hope he never does it again!" And you'll vote to acquit. https://t.co/U8NmKdPR5F — Kurt Eichenwald (@kurteichenwald) February 5, 2020


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-05--Donald Trump Jr. Repeatedly Calls For Mitt Romney To Be 'Expelled' From GOP

Donald Trump Jr. is calling for Sen. Mitt Romney ( R-Utah ) to be expelled from the Republican Party after @ @ @ @ @ vote to convict Trump Jr. ’ s father , President Donald Trump , in the @ @ @ @ @ of power .
On Wednesday , Romney made history with a powerful speech calling the @ @ @ @ @ grievously wrong ” and “ a flagrant assault on our electoral rights , our national @ @ @ @ @ values.
” Romney will be the first U.S. senator to vote for removing a president @ @ @ @ @ Shortly after the speech , Twitter users went into a frenzy both in support of @ @ @ @ @ ’ s decision .
For the latter , Trump Jr. began tweeting a flurry of @ @ @ @ @ Republican presidential nominee , calling him “ too weak to beat the Democrats ” and @ @ @ @ @ s now officially a member of the resistance & should be expelled from the [ @ @ @ @

Donald Trump Jr. is calling for Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) to be expelled from the Republican Party after the senator said he would vote to convict Trump Jr.’s father, President Donald Trump, in the Senate impeachment trial over abuse of power.
On Wednesday, Romney made history with a powerful speech calling the president’s actions “grievously wrong” and “a flagrant assault on our electoral rights, our national security, and our fundamental values.” Romney will be the first U.S. senator to vote for removing a president from his own party.
Shortly after the speech, Twitter users went into a frenzy both in support of and in opposition to Romney’s decision.
For the latter, Trump Jr. began tweeting a flurry of disparaging comments about the 2012 Republican presidential nominee, calling him “too weak to beat the Democrats” and writing, “He’s now officially a member of the resistance & should be expelled from the [GOP].”