Chaos in the Senate: Democrat Impeachment Managers Withdraw Statements

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: Boadicea
Yet in exploring the claim above, I found this.
"The impeachment manager correctly and accurately quoted a newspaper account," Raskin said of the comments and CNN article in question. "We're happy to withdraw it on the grounds that it is not true."
www.nbcnews.com...

That isn't quite the whole truth. The OP link itself goes into a little more specifics:

Moments later, they came back into action and Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD)–the House Democrats’ lead impeachment manager–admitted that Cicilline’s characterization of Lee as it related to the Trump-Tuberville phone call, while based on news reports, was inaccurate, and then he withdrew the matter from the record himself without a Senate vote.

“The impeachment manager Mr. Cicilline correctly and accurately quoted a newspaper account which the distinguished senator has taken objection to, so we’re happy to withdraw it,” Raskin said.

“It’s not true,” Lee shouted, speaking over Raskin.

Raskin continued explaining why the House impeachment managers were willing to withdraw the comments attributed to Lee. a withdrawal he said was “on the grounds it is not true.”

“We’re going to withdraw it this evening without any prejudice about the ability to resubmit it if possible and then we can debate it if needed,” Raskin continued, adding as Lee shouted over him: “This is much ado about nothing because it is not in any way critical to our case.”

So perhaps it would be more accurate for me to say that they are refusing to completely withdraw the evidence, and apparently do intend to resubmit the rebuked evidence "if possible."

edit on 11-2-2021 by Boadicea because: formatting

a reply to: Boadicea

Yes, much more accurate, thanks. I wonder if that news outlet that Lee is reported delivering his account of the moment to has recordings of his interview with them. If so and they reported accurately, that would be a black eye for Lee. So maybe the Dem's will go to those lengths or maybe not.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: Boadicea

Yes, much more accurate, thanks. I wonder if that news outlet that Lee is reported delivering his account of the moment to has recordings of his interview with them. If so and they reported accurately, that would be a black eye for Lee. So maybe the Dem's will go to those lengths or maybe not.

It does make one wonder what exactly was "inaccurate."

I also wonder if perhaps the staff member from Lee's office who "confirmed" it is the weak link so to speak. What exactly was confirmed by the employee? Perhaps that's where the "inaccuracy" is.

Like so many news reports these days, important information to get the complete picture is always lacking.

a reply to: Boadicea
Also, these days more folk are not so willing to just take any report at face value yet even among them, or rather us, the willingness or ability to trace down what is really true gets lost in the mire of opinion.

originally posted by: Edumakated
a reply to: Snarl

John Robert's wants nothing to do with the clown show as he knows it is unconstitutional to impeach a former president.

Then why doesn’t the court say so?

They are just as guilty in the kangeroo court through their inaction and silence.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: Boadicea
Also, these days more folk are not so willing to just take any report at face value yet even among them, or rather us, the willingness or ability to trace down what is really true gets lost in the mire of opinion.

Very true. And other times distinct things become conflated. I confess I've done that myself -- especially when I'm focused on something else, and just kind of picking things up.

But these days, it's difficult to take anything at face value. Even websites that I once thought did their best to separate the wheat from the chaff seem to be taking liberties with the facts. I'm really tired of reading "so-and-so reported," only to track it down and find that it was anonymous or dubious sources. I don't want to read who reported it... I want to read who said it!

originally posted by: Boadicea
It seems to me that the takeaway here is that the Democrats have introduced false "evidence" into the trial, refused to withdraw that false "evidence," and are fighting efforts to have the false "evidence" withdrawn. And this is after failing to admit exculpatory evidence, in a trial of dubious legitimacy.

It's your basic Star Chamber.

And everyone knows it. Some like it.

Almost all the evidence they have presented has been twisted into falsity. I suppose they got away with it all along so figured they would create completely false evidence.

a reply to: rickymouse

Almost all the evidence they have presented has been twisted into falsity. I suppose they got away with it all along so figured they would create completely false evidence.

I can't argue with any of that. It's all just trumped up charges -- no pun intended, but that's what they are. The video of "evidence" wouldn't be allowed in any criminal court of law. And all the pompous grandstanding is barf worthy. It was disgusting and intended to inflame the haters.

It's a Star Chamber. A kangaroo court. It's shameful. What they're doing and what they have done.

originally posted by: xuenchen
The whole thing will end up null and void 🤣

After millions wasted and more time with no stimulus money to the people. We the people need to do a little some something about these MORONS we let in DC.

Hardly chaos.
Sounds like a trial.

Chaos would be an attack on a separate branch of government by a lame duck instigator
There is video of that if you need to see some chaos.
If you need to see even more chaos as an example, Play any video of the ex president speaking, about any or most things.

originally posted by: rickymouse

originally posted by: Boadicea
It seems to me that the takeaway here is that the Democrats have introduced false "evidence" into the trial, refused to withdraw that false "evidence," and are fighting efforts to have the false "evidence" withdrawn. And this is after failing to admit exculpatory evidence, in a trial of dubious legitimacy.

It's your basic Star Chamber.

And everyone knows it. Some like it.

Almost all the evidence they have presented has been twisted into falsity. I suppose they got away with it all along so figured they would create completely false evidence.

The evidence was mostly videos. Shot by 45s own minions.
You know the ones that want to kill Pelosi, and hang Pence.

I’ll submit Lee is lying, because he knows it isn’t recorded.

This is NOT the Mud Pit!!!

All rules for POLITE political debate will be enforced.
Members must also Stay on Topic!!!
Trolling, And What To Do About It


Terms And Conditions Of Use




You are responsible for your own posts.....those who ignore that responsibility will face mod actions.


and, as always:

Do NOT reply to this post!!

a reply to: Boadicea

I want to read who said it!

And exactly WHAT was said without the preachers interpretations.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

And exactly WHAT was said without the preachers interpretations.

Yes!

Shame on me for not saying it myself. That's pretty darn important too.

Wait! So a guy wants the record to show that his name is being used falsely, and the presiding official says that it doesn't matter?

And this event causes the whole event to get removed from the public eye?

This really is worse than the first impeachment hearing. This isn't making up rules as you go along, this is making up evidence as the case proceeds then ignoring any challenges to it.


This isn't a kangaroo court, this is a burnt drop-bear court. kangaroos are healthy animals, burnt drop-bears are near death smelly and just need to be put out of their misery.

a reply to: Snarl

“We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the Courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who would pervert the Constitution” - Abraham Lincoln

This quote sums up the situation in Congress. They have no regard for the Constitution, have perverted it and destroyed any sense of civility or law. The problem is Congress and our Politicians, not Trump or his voters. It's our "system" which has been corrupted beyond anything I could imagine. It's unable to function as it was designed to do - because of the Politicians and those in power at the highest levels.

a reply to: Snarl

I watched some of that and Sen leahy is even more senile than biden. His aid had to keep telling him what to say, and he gets to vote on the shame impeachment of Trump? If the dems weren't trying to destroy Trump it might be funny.

originally posted by: Edumakated
a reply to: Snarl

John Robert's wants nothing to do with the clown show as he knows it is unconstitutional to impeach a former president.

For a change Roberts did the right thing but only to help himself I’m afraid but nevertheless right action for the wrong reason.

originally posted by: KansasGirl
a reply to: DAVID64

I’ve been wondering as well what they are so afraid of. We know they have wanted Trump gone before he even took office, because they (the uni-party which pretends to be “Democrats” and “Republicans”) didn’t want him coming in and changing the way they do business. But it seems that there is something else about which they are all deathly afraid, as this is just over the top, trying to make it so that Trump can’t ever again come near DC.

What is it? What has them so terrified?

It's not that they are afraid of any particular thing, hell, they already know they are above the law. They are afraid of Trump getting back in and cutting off their pipeline of laundered billions to foreign countries.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: Boadicea

Yes, much more accurate, thanks. I wonder if that news outlet that Lee is reported delivering his account of the moment to has recordings of his interview with them. If so and they reported accurately, that would be a black eye for Lee. So maybe the Dem's will go to those lengths or maybe not.

Sounds more like some wishful thinking on your part.