Sen. Rand Paul lets loose

Senator makes public the question Chief Justice wouldn’t read
in impeachment hearing

Wants to know if man identified by others as Biden-connected whistle blower conspired with Democrats to find grounds for impeachment.

Rand Paul:

“My exact question was: Are you aware that House intelligence committee staffer Shawn Misko had a close relationship with Eric Ciaramella while at the National Security Council together. And are you aware and how do you respond to reports that Ciaramella and Misko may have worked together to plot impeaching the President before there were formal house impeachment proceedings.

“My question today is about whether or not individuals who were holdovers from the Obama National Security Council and Democrat partisans conspired with Schiff staffers to plot impeaching the President before there were formal House impeachment proceedings,” Paul tweeted. “My question is not about a ‘whistleblower’ as I have no independent information on his identity.”

What do YOU think?

About David Blaska

Madison WI
This entry was posted in Impeachment, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Sen. Rand Paul lets loose

  1. Mark Porter says:

    Kudos to John Roberts.


  2. Butch says:

    If you’d rather stand with Randy Paul than the chief justice, then your status as a never Trumper is in doubt. You side with Trump over the republic.


    • madisonexpat says:

      No one who applauds this strictly partisan lynching with zero evidence of wrong doing can be for the republic.


  3. dad29 says:

    Roberts remains a Tool of the State. Or just a tool.


  4. Cornelius Gotchberg says:

    From the Outer Reaches of the Stupidity Spectrum; Elizabeth “Lieawatha-Fuaxchahontas” Warren hilariously asks:

    “Does the fact that the Chief Justice is presiding over an impeachment trial in which GOP Senators have thus far refused to allow witnesses or evidence contribute to the loss of legitimacy of the Chief Justice, the Supreme Court, and the Constitution?”

    The ensuing That OBLITERATES, by a TOWERING margin, any heretofore accepted standard of crippling imbecility look from Justice Roberts?


    The Gotch


    • Gary L. Kriewald says:

      On the other hand EW has promised to include a “non-binary” person in her Cabinet and to allow a transgendered nine-year-old to vet her nominee for Secretary of Education. Leading once again to that age-old question: How do you parody something (or someone) that’s already a parody of itself? If nothing else, it illustrates just how far down the garden path you can go when you’ve sold your soul to identity politics, political correctness, and the full array of lefty nonsense.


    • Sprocket says:

      As Warren and other dirt bags bolivate about the Senate blocking witnesses and the death of the republic, it’s worthwhile to remember a few things. The House (Democrat controlled) is granted the sole power, in the Constitution, to bring articles of impeachment. The House has the same power to subpoena and call witnesses as the Senate. The House sat on the articles of impeachment for three weeks. We’ve been assured that the impeachment is a slam dunk.

      I think one of two things are true. Maybe both, depending on who you’re talking about. The Democrats perhaps thought they could gain more political advantage in a Senate trial and that they could flip enough anti-Trump Republicans to keep the dumpster fire burning. In which case, they played themselves.

      It’s also possible they knew impeachment didn’t have legs. Because, let’s face it, the House hearings were nothing but a fishing expedition where they hoped to find something actually impeachment worthy. They realized, at the end, they had produced, not articles of impeachment, but a political Rorschach blot test. However they had painted themselves into a corner with their base.Their fall back position was milking it for all it was worth, letting it die in the Senate, claim Republican perfidy and riding off into the sunset.

      Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.