A response to an orchestrated Republican attack that every American should watch....:

(Commentary, including reposted material. Temporarily posted.)

A couple points to bear in mind when listening to Chairman Schiff:

1) NO one -- outside of a very few select individuals -- has yet to see the complete Mueller report. ..What Congress and the public have so far is the Barr letter. Even the increasingly suspect Barr summary explicitly does not "vindicate" Trump re obstruction of justice..Also (per Chairman Schiff (and others)): It's clear from U.S. intelligence agency findings, the Mueller investigation plus various convictions of Trump cronies, that Russia meddled (in favor of Trump) in the 2016 presidential election. 

2) Multiple investigations into the President, his campaign, his associates, his organizations, his inauguration, and MORE....continue. Nothing is "over"..

(↓Copy, reposted video:)  Update: A 'Cliff (..'Schiff's') Notes' annotated-with-links transcript of the speech. (Off-site link:) https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2019/03/29/schiff-notes-adam-schiff-speech-was-primer-troubling-questions-raised-trump-russia-scandal/xLHAuXVYW2QH58qUcZSaFN/story.html



YT video link. No copyright claimed or assumed.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

BTW, some currently available YT links perhaps indicating Republican coordination (with Fox 'News' "state media") on Adam Schiff attack(s):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IobpzMWLeIE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9tOHDZGkdE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bg95Xl_jeqY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NkGIUMdI0E0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILkttZs-VKo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNz7IvxIupk

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Partial screen captured image. Aggregate poll data (interpreted) as of 3/28/19: (Source link)

(Updated:) A brief, early comment on the William Barr summary of the Mueller Special Counsel report:

(Commentary, including reposted material. Temporarily posted.)

Inexpert but pretty-much sane initial commentary:

1. Speaking as one citizen, I'm inclined to respect the findings of the Mueller special counsel investigation. (Those revealed thus far..) (Pls. read on..)

More information and greater detail about the Mueller report are required, PUBLICLY. (...As much as is reasonably possible, given certain, possible 'top secret' or grand jury-related material, etc.)

I believe that a majority in at least one house of Congress, plus a likely majority of the American people are (or will soon be) in general agreement about this

2. When in doubt, always look back to point #1.

3. The headline (below) widely available (3/24/19) via Foxnews.com is misleading, incorrectly paraphrasing a quotation from Vice President Mike Pence. The headline can give the impression that Pence is encouraging 'every American' to 'welcome' the complete findings solely of the (entire) Mueller investigation:

(3/24/19 partial screen-captured image:)

(3/24/19 source link. Inaccessible via this blog page as of 3/25/19. The original link (here) has not been altered.)

...In fact, the quotation is both truncated and appears to be taken out of context. When I read Pence's entire quotation on the matter (below), I derive a different intent, and a different message. (Emphasis is added:)

“...The Attorney General also confirmed that there was no obstruction of justice,” Pence added. “This total vindication of the President of the United States and our campaign should be welcomed by every American who cherishes the truth and the integrity of our elections.”

(Source link)

Insert: FWIW, here is the statement in more detail via Pence's Twitter account. (Copy:)

Today is a great day for America, @POTUS Trump and our entire administration. My statement: pic.twitter.com/Rl9H160ZKD

— Vice President Mike Pence (@VP) March 24, 2019

>>>3/25/19 update: ↓Current message received when attempting to follow the foxnews.com article link posted above (i.e., on this tiny-blog page). (Screen-captured image:)

Readers will (apparently) have to take my word for this, but the foxnews.com article discussed above still exists (as of 3/25/19).  You (or some of us, apparently) just can't (presently) access it from my tiny-blog page!

I was able to successfully follow the story's published web link via a search page outside of my blog this morning. (3/25/19)

There could be other explanations for why access is currently denied from here. But I prefer the one that goes: Any dissent or criticism involving 'State Media' Fox News published material, (especially) that which involves the Trump regime.... is suppressed, discredited or similar.

At least it's (oddly) good to know that I may have at least one (possibly somewhat influential) reader either from Fox and/or the Trump regime..

.............................................................................................................................................................................................

Concluding commentary for now:

...Given Donald Trump's long, continuing career of skirting -- if not outright violating -- the law, the legal issues of/for Donald Trump (and at least some of his remaining, not-yet-charged cohorts) are likely about as "OVER" as (..say) ↓this (was/is):

(6/13/18 copy:)

Just landed - a long trip, but everybody can now feel much safer than the day I took office. There is no longer a Nuclear Threat from North Korea. Meeting with Kim Jong Un was an interesting and very positive experience. North Korea has great potential for the future!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 13, 2018

..................................................................................................................................................................




YT video link. No copyright claimed, assumed. No affiliation.
.......................................................



YT video link. No copyright claimed or assumed.

(Quick post, 3/24/19:) (Rhetorical:) Pls. explain how Sen. Gillibrand is wrong with her description? In what real way is Donald Trump "brave", "forthright" etc.?

(Commentary, including reposted material . Temporarily posted.)

3/24/19 news article (link): "In speech at Trump hotel, Gillibrand to call Trump a coward"


..From the 3/24 speech:

..."Brave doesn't cower behind lies and walls..."

 “...He is tearing apart the moral fabric of our country...He demonizes the vulnerable and he punches down. He puts his name in bold on every building. He does all of this because he wants you to believe he is strong. He is not. Our president is a coward.”

(Source link)
 ........................................................................................................................................................................

(For reference:)....Just a few pertinent articles, sites, recent commentary pieces, etc. (Links, no affiliation):

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump

"Insult after insult...."

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/01/28/upshot/donald-trump-twitter-insults.html


"Trump’s McCain Insults Stir Republicans’ Better Angels"


"....Trump’s petty fights and insults will make us all less safe"


"Is Donald Trump starting to drive away even his base?"

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/16/opinions/donald-trump-profile-cowardice-russia-dantonio/index.html

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/09/the-cowardice-of-donald-trump/498704/

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/03/21/ana_navarro_blasts_pathological_president_over_latest_mccain_comments_republicans_are_too_damn_cowardly_to_call_trump_out.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump#Early_life_and_education

(↓Parental guidance suggested:)



YT video link. No copyright claimed.

......................................................................................................................................................................


via GIPHY




via GIPHY





via GIPHY

Remember it: These 41 Republican senators aligned with a Donald Trump 'temper tantrum' scorning power set forth by the U.S. Constitution:

(Commentary, including reposted material. Temporarily posted.)

(↓Copy, reposted. 3/14/19 source article link: https://www.politico.com/interactives/2019/national-emergency-senate-vote-count/. Additional information follows, below.)

John Barrasso, Wyo.
N

Marsha Blackburn, Tenn.
N

John Boozman, Ark.
N

Mike Braun, Ind.
N

Richard Burr, N.C.
N

Shelley Moore Capito, W.Va.
N

Bill Cassidy, La.
N

John Cornyn, Texas
N

Tom Cotton, Ark.
N

Kevin Cramer, N.D.
N

Mike Crapo, Idaho
N

Ted Cruz, Texas
N

Steve Daines, Mont.
N

Mike Enzi, Wyo.
N

Joni Ernst, Iowa
N

Deb Fischer, Neb.
N

Cory Gardner, Colo.
N

Lindsey Graham, S.C.
N

Chuck Grassley, Iowa
N

Josh Hawley, Mo.
N

John Hoeven, N.D.
N

Cindy Hyde-Smith, Miss.
N

Jim Inhofe, Okla.
N

Johnny Isakson, Ga.
N

Ron Johnson, Wis.
N

John Neely Kennedy, La.
N

James Lankford, Okla.
N

Mitch McConnell, Ky.
N

Martha McSally, Ariz.
N

David Perdue, Ga.
N

Jim Risch, Idaho
N

Pat Roberts, Kan.
N

Mike Rounds, S.D.
N

Ben Sasse, Neb.
N

Rick Scott, Fla.
N

Tim Scott, S.C.
N

Richard Shelby, Ala.
N

Dan Sullivan, Alaska
N

John Thune, S.D.
N

Thom Tillis, N.C.
N

Todd Young, Ind.
N

...................................................................................................................................................................

A 3/14/19 news analysis article for some context. (Link:)

http://time.com/5551963/senate-emergency-declaration-vote-mike-lee/

Two brief excerpts. Emphasis is added:

"...“That’s not governing. That’s ruling,” [Senator Mike] Lee said Thursday as he cast what he said he was a reluctant vote against the President. “The Constitution is all process. That’s the whole point.”"

"...Lee had worked for weeks to head off the fight, doing everything he could think of to alert the White House that a clash was inevitable if Trump continued to pursue a border wall with Mexico by subverting congressional powers. After all, the framers of the Constitution explicitly gave Congress the power to set budgets in order to constrain executive power, and this Congress had declined to give Trump the money for his wall...."

More: 

“...Never before has a president asked for funding, Congress has not provided it, and the president then has used the National Emergencies Act of 1976 to spend the money anyway,” said Senator Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee. “Our nation’s founders gave to Congress the power to approve all spending so that the president would not have too much power. This check on the executive is a crucial source of our freedom.”

3/14/19 source article link: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/14/us/politics/senate-vote-trump-national-emergency.html

(Also ref. (link): https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-temper-tantrums-border-wall-shutdown-2019-1)
...............................................................................................................................................................

via GIPHY

TRUMP: Your accomplices are going down, one by one...: (Updated)

(Commentary, including reposted material. Temporarily posted.)

Reference: "Mueller's scorecard: Who's been convicted, sentenced"

3/13/19 updates: "Paul Manafort gets (an) additional 43 months in second Mueller sentence...."

"Manafort to serve total of 7.5 years between two cases"

"Manhattan DA announces state fraud charges against Manafort"
..........................

From the sentencing judge, today: 

"No collusion" is "simply a non-sequitur."'

Update: More context and analysis for the quotation above, provided via this 3/13/19 off-site article: (link) https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/03/13/paul-manaforts-judge-strongly-rebukes-manaforts-trumps-no-collusion-refrain/

An excerpt. Emphasis is added:

"...Manafort’s legal team had suggested repeatedly in its sentencing memo that the fact that he hadn’t been found to have colluded with Russia should be a mitigating factor when it came to how much time he would serve in prison. But Jackson not only rejected that argument in sentencing him to 43 additional months in prison, she also rejected the entire argument behind it.

“The ‘no collusion’ refrain that runs through the entire defense memorandum is unrelated to matters at hand,” she said. “The ‘no collusion’ mantra is simply a non sequitur.”

Then she added: “The ‘no collusion’ mantra is also not accurate, because the investigation is still ongoing.”

Claiming something like there was “no collusion” as a defense is within any defendant’s right. It’s basically saying, “There was no crime.” The problem with Trump and his allies — and Manafort’s legal team, in this case — was that they have tried to stretch it much further. They have argued that the lack of proof of collusion thus far is somehow dispositive. They are suggesting that, because it hasn’t been proved, it never happened..."

(Continuing:)

...."Saying 'I'm sorry I got caught' is not an inspiring plea for leniency." 

>>>> Another more in-depth, thought-out analysis of today's sentencing. (Link):
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/03/paul-manafort-washington-sentence-jackson/584785/
..................................................................................................................................................................




YT video link. No copyright claimed or assumed. No affiliation.

(Quick post, updated:) Trump: "I am an innocent man being persecuted...." 🙄 🤨 🤦

(Commentary, including reposted material. Temporarily posted.)

(3/3/19 copy:)

...said was a total lie, but Fake Media won’t show it. I am an innocent man being persecuted by some very bad, conflicted & corrupt people in a Witch Hunt that is illegal & should never have been allowed to start - And only because I won the Election! Despite this, great success!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 3, 2019

***************************************************************************************************

(A public service:) ...Providing proper reference/realistic context for the post's headline, above:
A definition of the word "absurd", reposted:

"absurd adjective

ab·​surd | \ əb-ˈsərd  , -ˈzərd  \
Definition of absurd (Entry 1 of 2)

1 : ridiculously unreasonable, unsound, or incongruous
an absurd argument
: extremely silly or ridiculous
absurd humor..."

(Source link)

Update: Per a current poll, the large majority of respondents essentially agree about the absurdity of any claim of "innocence" by Donald Trump. (Off-site 3/5/19 article link:)

"Almost two-thirds think Trump committed crimes before taking office"

...........................................................................................................................................................................
(Reposted, for reference:) ↓The table of contents for the current Wikipedia article, "Legal Affairs of Donald Trump": (Note: Some (below) refer to allegations or settled cases.)

"Contents
1 Lawsuits 1973–1999
1.1 1980s
1.2 1990s
1.2.1 Business
1.2.2 Personal and sexual
2 Lawsuits 2000–2009
3 Lawsuits 2010–present
3.1 Construction and property law matters
3.2 Defamation matters
3.3 Financial matters
3.4 Trump University litigation
3.5 Breach of contract matters
3.5.1 2013
3.5.2 2014
3.5.3 2015
3.5.4 2018
3.6 Assault claims
3.7 Poll watching controversy
3.8 Nevada early voting Latino turnout controversy
3.9 Lawsuit for inciting violence at March 2016 campaign rally
3.10 Payments related to alleged affairs
4 Special Counsel investigation
5 Allegations of business links to organized crime
6 Use of bankruptcy laws
6.1 1991
6.2 1992
6.3 1994
6.4 2004
6.5 2009
7 Campaign contributions
8 Inaugural committee
9 Donald J. Trump Foundation
10 Controversy over tax returns
11 Destruction of documents
12 See also
13 References"

(Source article link)
.....................................................

(..Just a couple recent, additional articles on the overall subject (links):)

"Trump Russia: Seven legal headaches for the president"

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/01/politics/jared-kushner-donald-trump-security-clearance/index.html

***************************************************************************************************************

Yes, "Mr. Innocent":  ....That will be starting......when....?

..............................................................................................................................................................

(↓Screen-captured image. No copyright claimed or assumed. No affiliation. Source article link.)

............................................