Image 01 Image 03

Trump ‘Too Busy to Watch’ Impeachment Hearing, But Retweeting Critiques

Trump ‘Too Busy to Watch’ Impeachment Hearing, But Retweeting Critiques


President Donald Trump has only tweeted out two original comments about the impeachment hearing. He claimed he is “too busy to watch it,” but has retweeted sharp criticisms of the impeachment inquiry.

Trump has a point. I don’t know what the Democrats have read, but the transcript of the phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky shows no pressure or threats.

Trump also tweeted out quotes from Fox & Friends this morning.

Trump made a remark outside of the Oval Office:

Trump noted how the Intelligence Committee is “using lawyers that are television lawyers.” This move did not shock him “because Schiff can’t do his own questions.”

A few retweets from Trump:

White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham confirmed Trump is not watching the hearing. Trump and his wife Melania recently greeted Turkish dictator President Recep Erdogan and his wife to the White House.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


legacyrepublican | November 13, 2019 at 2:37 pm

Dear me, I think the ultimate political win is not schiffting under the Democrat’s direction!

I certainly hope he’s not watching the hearings.

If the Democrats could get the President to stop working just by holding hearings, the hearings would never end.

Dems are giving the American people a fine holiday send off. If ANYONE at my Thanksgiving table voices support for this impeachment sham, I will PERSONALLY beat hell out of them with a DRUMSTICK!

What I have seen so far is that Democrats are trying to build a non-case out of thin air.
They are presenting hearsay and opinions as if they were facts, and they are trying to pretend that deep state bureaucrats have the right to make Foreign Policy decisions above the President.

Jim Jordan was stellar in totally destroying their whole case.

    DuxRedux in reply to Exiliado. | November 13, 2019 at 4:58 pm

    Excellent assessment of today’s performances which were based on
    hearsay, impressions, opinions, and remote sources – making this
    a very sad day for America.

This is the kind of stuff that makes me cast write-in votes rather than vote for Trump. The guy has no self control. He’s an exposed nerve ending. The Ds are even worse, but that’s no endorsement of the current president.

    Valerie in reply to RandomCrank. | November 13, 2019 at 6:31 pm

    Instead of repeating the ignorant rantings from the Atlantic, you might try referring to the original speech or documents. You’ll be deeply surprised.

      RandomCrank in reply to Valerie. | November 14, 2019 at 1:01 pm

      I agree with most of Trump’s domestic policies. In fact, since he was elected I changed my mind from skepticism toward building a wall on the southern border to agreement with it. The jury is out in my mind about various foreign policy issues, but I agree with a lot of his criticisms of what has come before.

      I’m hardly alone in my criticism of his deportment. It’s not just the tweeting, but the purposeful and needless divisiveness. A good example was when he went out of his way to trash Baltimore. It wasn’t that he was wrong about Baltimore, but being right wasn’t enough. That whole dust-up was the outgrowth of a spat with Elijah Cummings, and Trump should have ignored the idiot.

      I double-majored in American history and journalism at the University of Wisconsin, at a time when both of those departments were ranked in the top 5 in the country. I had a journalism career and have retained a lifelong love of history, especially this country’s.

      Trump is very much in the mold of Andrew Jackson, who was screwed out of the presidency in 1824 and came roaring back in 1828 and 1832. He represented the settlers in the West (meaning, at the time, mostly the Ohio, Tennessee, Illinois, and Mississippi River drainages), and the South, against the more settled and Northeast and coastal mid-Atlantic region and its prosperous aristocrats.

      There’s a lot to love about the man on the $20 bill, and his attack on the financial system created by the man on the $10 bill, but there were some real downsides, and not just the five civilized tribes that he caused to be marched to the Oklahoma territory.

      Jackson was a highly divisive character whose confrontational tone made it much harder, and ultimately impossible, for the Democratic Party to reach a solution that could have dissolves chattel slavery without the trauma of the 1850s and 1860s.

      I think Trump will be re-elected. I think he goes into 2020 with a 4-point margin, but I see more upside than downside given just how badly the Democrats are playing their hand. I live in a state (WA) that won’t be competitive; the “progressives” of the Puget Sound are like laboratory rats punching the bar for a pellet of food, and any Democrat will carry the state.

      This makes it possible for me to register my dissatisfaction with both parties. Given that I left the Ds during Obama’s second term, the last straw being the way he and Holder handled Baltimore and Ferguson riots, Trump could have drawn me into his orbit after “winning ugly” against the execrable Hildebeast.

      What he had to do to gain my allegiance was to be “presidential.” This doesn’t mean abandoning his goals, but rather displaying steadiness, and trying to reach out to those who had opposed him. He did do some of the latter, and the way that Democrats treated his overtures sealed my departure from them. But he has been abysmal on the steadiness front.

      Trump has also been deficient with respect to the basics of governmental administration. Most of his cabinet secretaries are “acting,” and I think he’s missed many opportunities to really nail in policy changes. Probably his brightest spot has been the relentless restocking of federal court vacancies with conservatives. I was skeptical of that, but have been won over by the behavior of left-wing federal judges during Trump’s term.

      So there you have it. Most of the comment section here consists of knee-jerk, fire-breathing wingnuts, the opposite of the TDS-suffering snowflakes of, say, Vox or Daily Beast. It’s alternately amusing, dismaying, and interesting to get downvotes and negative reactions both there and here. It tells me I must be doing something right.

    This is the kind of stuff that makes me realize your a prog dope. The guy has no intelligence. He’s an exposed nerve ending. RandomCrank is just another RandomProg.

I think I’ve come up with a theme song for the the impeachment farce other than “Send in the Clowns”. “Heard it from a friend” with appropriately changed lyrics.
” Heard it from an aide who, heard it from an adviser who, heard it from Schiff that Trump was messing around.”

The gist of what I heard, which thankfully wasn’t the full Schiff Bag, was they didn’t like that Trump went through “irregular” channels rather than them.
Given the leaks, the lies, the distortions, why would Trump or any President trust these state weenies to do their bidding instead of pushing their own agenda?
I couldn’t listen to more than a few words from Schiff-Face before I was ready to rip my radio out of the dashboard.
The swamp is truly a disgusting thing that needs to be destroyed. It is my fervent hope that Schiff ends up suffering for his evil and ends up broke – living in the sewer as he deserves.

    Valerie in reply to oldgoat36. | November 13, 2019 at 6:36 pm

    I started to watch, heard three lies in a row out of Schiff, and quit.

    I’ve already read the transcript, and I know that there was a discussion behind the scenes that the Ukrainians were unaware. The Ukrainians got their aid, and their arms, in good time.

    Taylor was trying to “create facts on the ground” by putting his suppositions in writing, and had to be corrected. Water-cooler gossip is not evidence of anything.

      But if we can’t impeach and remove from office a orange man on the basis of testimony from somebody who heard from somebody who may have told somebody who said something to somebody else, the whole fabric of civilization will wrinkle, and thousands of perfectly good reporters will have to go out and get real jobs!

      RandomCrank in reply to Valerie. | November 14, 2019 at 1:08 pm

      I’m only watching snippets of news reports. It’s been abundantly clear to me that, a) Impeachment is a joke, much as the one in 1998 was a joke, but this being even worse, and b) It’s changing no minds anywhere, but is beginning to seriously piss off independent voters for its time-wasting character.

      All the Rs need to do is hold their ground. They shouldn’t give a millimeter while the Democrats continue to dig the hole deeper. Impeachment is a sickness.

    Sanddog in reply to oldgoat36. | November 14, 2019 at 2:58 am

    The State Department has been undermining Presidents, particularly Republican Presidents, for decades. I know someone who worked for them years ago who said, entrenched bureaucrats really didn’t care who was President because they had their own agenda and while the President might be in for 4-8 years, they’d outlast them. It’s time to burn that organization to the ground and replace it.

      RandomCrank in reply to Sanddog. | November 14, 2019 at 7:24 pm

      This is an example of why I oppose term limits for members of Congress. The bureaucrats and lobbyists are forever, but if there’s an enforced revolving door in Congress, all term limits do is hand over more power to the unelected.

      I realize that the issue runs deeper with the State Dept., and that you mentioned the president rather than Congress, but the issue still holds. Term limits for members of Congress is a perennial for small government advocates, but I say be careful what you wish for.

      In the end, there’s no substitute for paying attention, which is a lot harder than imposing a mechanical “solution,” yet much more effective if actually done.

Be happy: ignore the whole thing, and otherwise enjoy the Trump achievements!

An absolutely unbelievable lie from schiff today. He doesn’t know who the whistlespyleaker is?

The whistlespyleaker gave schiff a very bad interpretation of the actual phone call (READ THE TRANSCRIPT). If schiff does not know who the whistlespyleaker is, then how does he know this person is not a PDJT insider/loyalist, and gave schiff the phony interpretation to:

1. Send the democrats down the impeachment rabbit hole on an indefensible transcript readout.
2: Make sure the democrat led House does nothing for the American people for several years.
3: Tie up the Senate democrat candidates during a critical time-frame for the 2020 election.
4: Get all the Spygate coup plotters subpoenaed to testify under oath in a Senate removal trial.
5: Destroy democrat credibility for generations, thereby destroying the democrat party.

If I’m going to go to war with information provided by someone, I GD 100% will know who that person is, if the information is reliable, and both are vetted and beyond reproach.

If this were a Chess game, adam schiff appears to be at least 5 moves behind.

There are days when I think the progs are really trying to prove their own stupidity.

Today is one of those days.