Boots & Sabers

The blogging will continue until morale improves...


Everything but tech support.

2058, 24 Sep 19

Democrats Move to Impeach the President

They’re going to impeach him for Stormy Daniels… no, wait, RUSSIA… no, wait, travel ban… no, wait, the wall… no, wait, firing Comey… no, wait, Ukraine! That’s the ticket! This is going to be entertaining.

US Democrats have opened a formal impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump over allegations he sought help from a foreign power to damage a political rival.

Top Democrat Nancy Pelosi said the president “must be held accountable”.

Mr Trump has denied impropriety and called the efforts “garbage”.

While there is strong support from Democrats on impeachment, if the inquiry moves forward it is unlikely to pass the Republican-controlled Senate.

The row was sparked by reports an intelligence whistleblower lodged a formal complaint about a phone call President Trump made with Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelensky.

What exactly was said remains unclear but Democrats accuse Mr Trump of threatening to withhold military aid to force Ukraine to investigate corruption allegations against former Vice-President Joe Biden and his son Hunter.

Mr Trump has acknowledged discussing Joe Biden with Mr Zelensky but said he was only trying to get Europe to step up assistance by threatening to withhold military aid.


2058, 24 September 2019


  1. Kevin Scheunemann

    I am so sick of the liberal nonsense on this.

    It is so insane, and liberals have made me so tribal, I might not even listen if an actual criminal issue does come along.

    Liberals are tantrum children.

    We need to treat them as such.

  2. Le Roi du Nord


    “Liberals are tantrum children”.

    And this coming from the guy who had a hissy fit over a duly elected school board changing the name of the HS mascot.

  3. Kevin Scheunemann


    You will have to refresh my memory on that one.

  4. Le Roi du Nord

    Why, you will just deny it anyway?




    Hint:  Hurley

  5. Kevin Scheunemann


    You have yet to point to the quote.

    You are mischaracterizing/misrepresenting my comments as usual.

    It is your way of tantrum. Misrepresenting my comnents.

  6. jjf

    Wow, not even a tempered “let’s wait to see the evidence.”

    You think this should be dismissed out of hand because of Stormy Daniels?

    There’s always the possibility that they waited until they had a clear, indisputable case.  Or that they didn’t want to do it like the GOP did over Monica.

  7. Merlin

    This is nothing more than Russian Collusion Hoax v2.0.

    The Speaker doesn’t get to declare there’s an impeachment inquiry with just a wave of her wand, call it a formal inquiry by the same method, and invoke the investigative powers of Congress without at least one substantive matter to refer to for subpoenas and a scope of inquiry.

    The last thing Pelosi wants is a formal inquiry that will shine light on the matter of Hunter Biden profiting monetarily by the actions of state taken by his father (while Vice President) on behalf of a foreign company he was profiting through that was linked to the unaccounted-for disappearance of U.S. taxpayer funds in Ukraine. According to Joe Biden’s own words, he got the Ukrainian prosecutor who was investigating his son in 2016 fired and the investigation closed using the threat of withholding American foreign aid. In other words, Slow Joe actually did what Democrats are accusing Trump of doing.

    This tactic sound at all familiar?

  8. Merlin

    What’s likely driving the Justice Department’s renewed interest in Joe Biden’s activities in Ukraine during the 2014-2016 timeframe is information coming out of Dunham’s grand jury investigation in Connecticut dealing with the genesis of the Obama Administration counterintelligence coup that led to Mueller’s investigation. There haven’t been any indictments yet, but unlike Mueller’s investigation, there haven’t been any leaks either. None. Barr and Dunham are holding this particular investigation very close.  And so are the targets of the investigation who are free to speak publicly about their experience with Dunham’s investigation. We’re talking about folks at the highest levels of the last Obama Administration twisting silently in the wind. The fact that they’ve all halted their withering public criticism at the same time could, of course, just be coincidental.

    By the way, there is no statute or common practice that compels a President to recuse himself from his constitutional duties of law enforcement just because his political opponents might be involved. If Joe Biden is being tainted by information coming out of Dunham’s grand jury, it is happening by due process. If the taint never reaches the level of indictment, theoretically we’ll never know why or why not, but Slow Joe is not immune from legitimate criminal investigation just because he’s a candidate.


  9. Le Roi du Nord

    You lost 2018 election for governor, get over it!


  10. jjf

    Absence of evidence is evidence of absence?

    I’d be surprised if Pelosi would make a move if she didn’t think she was about to slam-dunk.

  11. Pat

    “It is so insane, and liberals have made me so tribal“

    No, you’ve always been that way. But I guess this is one way to rationalize (once again) your behavior.

  12. dad29

    I’d be surprised if Pelosi would make a move if she didn’t think she was about to slam-dunk.

    No.  Pelosi is fake-impeaching Trump because she knows there is no way to defeat him in the next election.  This is a hail mary.  And as you know, it’s not an “impeachment inquiry” without a vote of the House.

    It’s ALL fake, except trying to get Trump out of office.

  13. Kevin Scheunemann


    No one is calling for Evers to be impeached.

    That is a ridiculous comment.


    Usually no evidence means one is innocent.   Guess “innocent until proven guilty” is fantasy in your crazy fever swamp.   Stop complianing you libs and do it!   Bring on President Pence!


    Untrue!   I was close to being never Trump in primary.   I was anyone but Trump.  I barely choked a vote out for him in 2016.    I was worried he was a closet Democrat.   Democrats loved him in the past and liberal Daily Show hosts/Hollywood celebrities mocked Trump to run because they thought he couldn’t win!  They also thought he was still one of them.

    Trump has won me over with action.   I am also turned off by the constant vitriolic hate of liberals trying to undo an election.   It is destroying the very foundation of our country.   I have had enough of hateful liberals.   Time to stand up against their constant mob tyranny.     So, no, I have never been THIS tribal.    It is all thanks to liberals.

  14. Pat

    “ I am also turned off by the constant vitriolic hate of liberals trying to undo an election.”

    You’re regurgitating Trumps talking point.
    No one is trying to undo an election. More like patriots protecting the dignity of the Presidency from a tyrannical thug.

  15. Kevin Scheunemann


    “Patriots” wait for evidence before screaming “impeachment”.

    Let me know when you find a “Patriot” with evidence.

    Until then, all we have is tantrum children whining because they cannot get their way.


  16. Pat


    You weren’t born yet, but for those of us who are a bit older will remember the Nixon impeachment understand the process.

    First, the Congress investigates. This is the evidence gathering step in the process.

    Second, the House of Representatives must pass, by a simple majority of those present and voting, articles of impeachment, which constitute the formal allegation or allegations. Upon passage, the defendant has been “impeached”.

    Third, the Senate tries the accused. In the case of the impeachment of a president, the Chief Justice of the United States presides over the proceedings. For the impeachment of any other official, the Constitution is silent on who shall preside, suggesting that this role falls to the Senate’s usual presiding officer, the President of the Senate who is also the Vice President of the United States. Conviction in the Senate requires a two-thirds supermajority vote. The result of conviction is removal from office.

  17. Merlin

    This fabrication just keeps getting better and better. The whistleblower with third-hand information has been outed as a CIA employee detailed to the White House (and since recalled)… and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Schiff has had a copy of the original complaint since early August. So says the New York Times.


  18. Pat

    I’m still waiting for “all” the facts. But what so far has been frabricated?

  19. Merlin

    The root nugget here that has the Democrats incensed is the revelation that the Justice Department’s “Spygate” investigation has progressed as far as Ukraine and is being held as compartmented restricted access to prevent leaks. This is a legitimate concern since Zelensky also ran as a “drain the swamp” candidate bent on cleaning up Russia-influenced (mafia) public corruption in Ukraine. All the rest is theater.

    I’d like to have Guiliani’s involvement explained, but there’s nothing extraordinary in either the whistleblower’s complaint, (which is factually incorrect on each and every point other than that the Trump-Zelensky phone call really happened and reads more like a disagreement with foreign policy), or the transcript of the actual phone call.

    Truth can take a backseat to political grandstanding, congressional inquiries, and media ineptitude because there are no consequences whatsoever for lying to the public. The only folks that are going to have to tell the truth or incur legal jeopardy are those facing Dunham’s federal investigators and grand jury. And if that process is conducted correctly we won’t learn anything substantive until/unless indictments drop.

    Even knowing all of this doesn’t change the reality that our legal system can be subjugated by political expediency. Hillary Clinton is living proof.

  20. Merlin

    The U.S. Attorney for the District of Connecticut running the Spygate investigation is John Durham. Not sure why I keep using Dunham.

  21. Pat


    What is your source for what your saying?

  22. dad29

    I’d like to have Guiliani’s involvement explained

    Giuliani is Trump’s defense lawyer, which means he needs to find facts vitiating D-MSM claims about the Ukraine thing, OR about the original “Russia, Russia, Russia” claims.

    And he’s found plenty.

  23. Pat

    “And he’s found plenty.”

    I wish he would share that information. I’m sure Barr would like to start prosecuting those crimes.

  24. Pat

    Like I’ve said before, I’ll wait for all the complete facts before passing final judgment. But so far, no one in the WH is denying what’s in the complaint. WH talking points have been sent out on how to deflect to everything other than what’s what the complaint alleges.

    So far, on the surface, it sounds worse than jizz on a blue dress.

  25. Kevin Scheunemann


    At some point you have to ignore the constant Democrat crap against the wall.

    Do we accept false witness allegations against president in perpetuity simply because a bunch of spoiled brats are unhappy with election result?

    Has anyone apologized to Trump for Russia hoax?   It was Clinton taking money from Russians anyway.

    At some point you have to support civility Pat.

    You discipline the bratty children by not indulging them.


  26. Merlin


    What specifically? This mess is three plus years in the making. That Durham’s investigation exists and why it exists is public knowledge. The total scope of investigation Barr charged Durham with is not, at least wasn’t until the whistleblower’s mischaracterization of third-hand rumors caused Trump to order a compartmented, restricted access document (the transcript) to be declassified and released to the public. The whistleblower’s complaint is public access as well.

    It became known to the public only this week that the scope is authorized (by Trump himself) to go at least as far as Ukraine. By virtue of Chairman Schiff having gained back-channel access to the whistleblower’s complaint the first week of August (phone call was July 25th, I think) you know that the partial scope of investigation was revealed to Democrats at least six weeks ago.

  27. Pat

    Any conclusions made yet on Spygate?

  28. Pat


    You evidently didn’t read the Mueller Report.

  29. Pat


    What in the whistleblow complaint so far has been denied by the WH?

  30. Kevin Scheunemann


    It is not the job of WH to denyt every liberal fever swamp fantasy.

    That would be more than a full time job.   Liberals hate, A LOT.

  31. Pat


    Trumps never been one to shy away from directly calling something a lie.

  32. dad29

    Trump doesn’t choose to address every single lie.  There’s plenty of straight reporting demonstrating the falsity of most of this.  You can find it.  It’s on the “Internet.”

  33. Kevin Scheunemann


    It is a fullt ime, voluminous job now given the blinding, awful hatred of liberals on display.  Liberal jerk Chris Matthew said to just impeach now, don’t screw with process, testimony, evidence, or cross examination.   That would be a whole sale tyrannical position, which is what liberals excel at.

    Even I can’t keep track of all the crap they throw against the wall.

    I am just sick of liberal hate and smelling the crap.


  34. Pat

    Hah, hah, hah. Trump doesn’t choose to address every single lie. Since when? The truth is on the internet. That’s a good one. (Knee slap)

  35. Kevin Scheunemann


    He takes a swipe at a lot, but liberals continue to work overtime to smear because they cannot accept reality of the election result.

    Tantrum children.


  36. Pat

    Bwah, hah, hah, hah. You should be a standup comedian.

  37. Kevin Scheunemann


    Can’t do it… because it is too tough to balance my good looks and my overwhelming humility on stage.

    Thank you. I’ll be here all night.

  38. dad29

    Poor Patsy.  Losing another “Muh Russia!!!” game before it even gets started.

    Got any FIRST-hand “testimony” about what Trump said, Patsy?  And if 8 other people heard the convo and NONE reported it, …umnnnhhh…….

    How come is it that “whistleblower” rule changed only last month to allow hearsay “testimony”?  How many times did Trump actually say “Biden”?  Too bad Ukraine prexy didn’t even know about US aid, eh?

    Have you sent your contribution to the Go Fund Me account for the CIA turncoat yet?  And by the way,  Patsy, when did foreign policy become the concern of CIA?  (Hint: never.)

    The Hill noticed several hundred documents which confirm that the Ukraine company WAS being investigated for corruption–which is why Biden wanted that prosecutor fired.  You believe Biden’s bleating otherwise?  Why??

    Yes, it’s advisable to wait for the facts.  You’ll vote for Trump when they all come in, mostly because so damn many Democrats will be in Club Fed.

  39. Pat


    Looks like I really struck a nerve. As hard as it will be for fragile Tricky Trump comrades, try not to get to unglued.

  40. Pat

    Dud gets his information from reliable sources like, Ace of Spades HQ, and the Bwah, hah, hah, hah!

  41. Kevin Scheunemann


    I’m afraid to ask, but what the heck is “ace of spades HQ” and “Marketswork”?

    These are sites you frequent?

  42. Pat


    Those are tin foil hat sites Dud references on his blog.

  43. Kevin Scheunemann


    You are stalking his blog?

  44. Pat


    Reading a public blog is now known as, “Stalking”?

  45. Kevin Scheunemann


    When you dig for nuggets like that to attack messenger rather than sticking with merit of the issue…

  46. dad29

    Dear Patsy, I am not in the least ‘unglued,’ although it’s clear that you are an extremely sensitive sort.  Your little Democrat Drama will go on for 6 weeks and fizzle, just like all the other Dramas your Queens pushed across the table.

    America will be great again, and we’ll re-direct some Wall money to building new Federal prisons.  We will need the capacity, Patsy.

  47. dad29

    One more thing, sweet Patsy:  if you have FACTS, bring them out (as you have often said.)

    We’ll wait.

  48. Pat

    I’m Bwah, hah, hah, hah. “I am not in the least ‘unglued”. Says the guy that’s ready to blow an blood vessel. So precious!

  49. Pat


    When an unhinged blogger pretending to be an authority by presenting fake facts from some other unhinged group as truth, then yes, the messenger should get called out as being unhinged and spreading fake facts.

  50. Kevin Scheunemann


    You never hold Democrats to that kind of standard when say the latest liberal crap allegation against Trump, in that case, we must “wait” for all the evidence.

    Why don’t you wait for all the evidence for conservatives?

  51. Pat

    I’m waiting.

  52. Kevin Scheunemann


    You didn’t wait, you indicated Dad was unhinged. Liberals like Chris Matthew are saying impeach now, don’t wait for silly things like evidence, testimony, due process…have you denounced that?

  53. Pat

    “you indicated Dad was unhinged”

    That’s because he clearly is.

  54. Pat

    “Liberals like Chris Matthew are saying impeach now, don’t wait for silly things like evidence, testimony, due process”

    There should not be a vote for impeachment yet. There is reasonable concern to conduct an impeachment enquiry where evidence is gathered and, if substantiated, proceed to a vote for impeachment.

    So, if Chris Matthew is saying there should be an impeachment vote immediately, I would strongly disagree with him. Trump deserves a fair hearing. Hopefully the administration will be fully cooperative, and transparent, with the investigation.

  55. dad29

    Li’l Patsy knows well that impeachment votes are purely political, as “high crimes and misdemeanors” are vaguely defined depending on wind direction.

    So ‘evidence’ is largely rhetoric, not fact, (albeit it IS a fact that Clinton is a perjurer).

    I fully expect that the House will vote to impeach Trump based on a lot of speculation, hearsay, and manipulation.  That will pretty much ensure Trump’s re-election and make an (R) capture of the House a lot easier, but not a sure thing.

    The “trial” in the Senate will last about 1 minute if you don’t count the ceremonial bullshit.

  56. Pat

    “Li’l Patsy”. How Trumpian if you. Bwah, hah, hah, hah. You must think that kind of talk makes you a tough guy like Trump.

  57. Pat

    “Li’l Patsy knows well that impeachment votes are purely political“

    And not voting for impeachment, if allegations are found to be accurate and true, wouldn’t be political?

  58. Kevin Scheunemann


    Liberals are unhinged.

    Conservatives are nuanced.

    Happy to help with your vocabulary problem. I think there is medication for that.

  59. Le Roi du Nord

    “Liberals are unhinged”.     Really?  So how do you explain a guy, an alleged conservative and self-proclaimed stable genius, who thinks the British had airports here in the 1770’s?  Or the throngs of folks like you that believe him?

    “Conservatives are nuanced”.  You mean like “grab ’em by the p&%$@” nuanced?

    Pat has a fine vocabulary, you have other issues.

  60. Pat


    If by nuanced you mean they understand the fine-point details about what takes to redirect attention from the issue at hand, I would have to agree with you. They are masters of deflection and rationalization.


  61. Kevin Scheunemann


    Trump was a liberal when he made that crude locker room talk!

    ….and the fact you bring the airplane talk up shows how unhinged you are as a liberal.   He was not serious.

  62. dad29

    if allegations are found to be accurate and true,

    Nope, Patsy.  Schiff and the other mad dogs don’t care if the allegations are accurate and true.  And as you should know, Schiff and the other mad dogs will claim that Trump’s penchant for Burger King is an “impeachable offense.”

    I’m not a tough guy like Trump.  But your estrogen level is way too high.  See a doctor.

  63. dad29

    And, Patsy, we’re still waiting for your facts which disprove my contentions about 12 posts back.  Having trouble finding them?

  64. Pat

    No, Dud, I wasn’t paying attention to your nonsense. Wake me when you have facts.

  65. Le Roi du Nord


    But you still voted for him, right??

    And trump never said he was not serious, he said it was the fault of the teleprompter.

    You are trying to rationalize an irrational person.  Whet does that put you on the delusional scale?

  66. Kevin Scheunemann


    I voted for him because even reprehensible liberals can be repentant. He at least talked a good game to 2016 election…much better than that lying Hillary.

    His actions as president have been pretty good. Much better than I expected.

    As a liberal, I’m sure you deny repentance to everyone that sins against twisted liberal morality.

    I think your difficulty is: I practice forgiveness.

  67. Le Roi du Nord

    But you would never forgive folks like Hillary, or Obama, or me.


  68. Kevin Scheunemann


    I forgive them as well. However, I will point out their unrepentant sin, contrary to absolute truth of Gospel, like their continuing support of baby killing, marriage outside God’s design, and other awful, evil, positions.

  69. Pat

    Wow. Trumps totally gone unhinged this morning. Crying treason, locking up his opponents in Congress, and civil war. This guy is proving he’s totally unfit for the office.

  70. Kevin Scheunemann


    You act like the rhetoric is only being ratcheted by Trump, have you been listening to the unhinged left the last 36 months at all.

    We were facing a coup from these anti-Trump officials.

    It’s disgusting.


  71. Pat


    You evidently don’t have a problem with his statements.

  72. Pat

    And now allies of Trump have put a $50,000 bounty on the whistleblower.

  73. Kevin Scheunemann


    I have much less a problem with Trumps statements than liberals trying to conduct an open coup because they are tantrum children.

    Putting a bounty on a “whistleblower” is both awful and illegal, no one supports that.   It is as illegal as what the bidens did in the Ukraine.   It is clear radical liberal Marxist coup members are willing to through old Joe under the bus at this point in their insane coup attempt.  that is delicious to a big extent.

  74. Pat


    So you have no problem and support what the President is saying.

  75. dad29

    And now allies of Trump have put a $50,000 bounty on the whistleblower.

    I’m in for $10K, and have purchased a few thousand rounds of .30-06 for the upcoming war.  It was nice of Trump to lock Congress into their building–keeps our women and children safe.

  76. Merlin

    The whistleblower’s value to the WH comes when he/she sits before God and country admitting under oath that they know nothing more substantial than third-hand hearsay. It isn’t the WH that need fear the whistleblower’s testimony. It isn’t the WH that benefits if the whistleblower is unable to testify.

    Think things through just a little.

  77. Pat

    The WH hasn’t denied the third-hand hearsay. And, the transcripts verify the accuracy of what the complaint says. The only thing the WH has done is attempt to minimize it by saying it was hearsay.

    Someone needs to enlighten me as to what he, or she, did wrong by bringing attention to this in the appropriate manner.

  78. Kevin Scheunemann

    I was not aware third hand hearsay had to be denied.

    Sounds stupid to suggest idiotic gossip has to be denied, officially.

    This is the end of civilization ifthird hand hearsay is true until denied.

    The murky depths of liberal fever swamp get closer to normal people everyday….

  79. Le Roi du Nord

    According to numerous reports the whistleblower was obligated by federal law to report this type of activity.  In other words; they were following the law.  trump with all the bluster and threats isn’t doing himself any favors.  If he is so innocent, just shut up and let the process play out.

    Heard a great quip today; “Want to get impeached?  Hire Giuliani.”

  80. Pat


    The transcript confirms the complaint.

  81. Pat

    The WH confirmed by producing the transcript.

  82. Kevin Scheunemann

    The transcript proves complaint is crap.

    What are you looking at in your fever swamp?

  83. Merlin

    You can bet Giuliani has also talked to folks in Australia, Great Britain, Italy, and Turkey in addition to Ukraine.

    Trump was a private citizen until his inauguration. The bulk of spygate occurred prior to inauguration. Guiliani’s involvement as Trump’s private attorney would indicate Trump is at least considering civil action independent of Durham’s grand jury.

  84. Pat

    “The transcript proves complaint is crap.”

    You evidently didn’t read either.

  85. Kevin Scheunemann


    I read it. it was the president pushing Ukraine to investigate the underhanded dealings of Joe Biden and company.   there was no issue there.

    Investigating corrupt Democrats is a big job, and Trump was urging help with that big job.

    I don’t get this.  Hillary take millions from Russians through Clinton foundation during an election…liberals…crickets.

    Obama gives billions to Iran…a terrorist state…under cover of night in a treasonous attempt to undermine U.S…..liberals…crickets.

    Liberals advocate illegals to vote in U.S., which is very definition of interference in our election…liberals…crickets.

    Biden has corrupt family dealings with Ukraine…liberals…crickets.

    Trump tries to get to bottom of all this sick, filthy,liberal corruption…liberals…HE MUST BE IMPEACHED!

    This just makes me even more tribal given how filthy the hands are for liberals are on these subjects.

    Did you read the transcript, or did you “read into it” like most unhinged liberals do?   I have hope for you tht you are not unhinged.

  86. Pat

    But, but, what about Clinton. But, but, what about Obama. But, but, what about Biden.

    I’m sure there’ll be another name brought up for purposes of deflection.

  87. dad29

    Six or seven (or more) people tell the “whistleblower” that Trump said this, that, or another thing.

    Six or seven (or more) people were not concerned at all about what Trump said–or, at most, were unhappy with the fact that THIS President says what he thinks and is very clear about that.

    The Nattering Nancys wet their undies, wrote a legal brief, and suddenly it’s a national emergency.

    But it is NOT an emergency which requires alacrity.  Instead, it requires a three-week vacation for Congress.  Uh-huh.

    If GrannyPicklePelosi really expects that anybody cares (outside of the pervasive lying and truth-twisting coming from her caucus) she’s wrong.  Just ask Kasich, a known Trump-hater.


Pin It on Pinterest