Don't buy the hype. The Democrats did more than fine today

[StarfishSaver]

They got Lewandowski to admit on the record that he told Mueller everything Mueller says he told him. In other words, Mueller didn't make any of that ish up.

And then they got him to admit that Donald Trump asked him, a private citizen, to communicate to the attorney general that he should unrefuse himself from an investigation of the president and lie to the American public about it.

All the other stuff people are obsessing about - including the Republicans and Lewandowski songs and dances - is just noise.

The Democrats did a good job today.

[BumRushDaShow]

1. Lieu discovered there are other notes that Lewandowski has

that may still exist (in contrast to his Mueller testimony) and Deguse just followed up on that.

I.e., he was the "message boy" to take dictation and deliver the threats to the others from the Don.

[riversedge]

52. umm.. interesting to say the least.

[BumRushDaShow]

57. If you had seen the look on Lieu's face

(it was brief but he was like WHOA!!!! and then quickly stifled it)

And a couple others did follow-ups on that line of questioning.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

2. Those are *central* facts. That's why they called his mangy ass before them

in the first place. The rest is just noise.

[mcar]

3. Thank you

[MontanaMama]

4. These are big words coming from you SfS.

I'm trying to tune out the noise.

[FakeNoose]

5. I couldn't see it today, so I'm happy to read your run-down

Thanks Starfish!

[elleng]

31. Ditto; been away.

[kentuck]

6. There was a sense of panic in the air as all the cable networks stopped showing the hearing.

They heard the direct evidence of obstruction of justice?

It seemed their first impulse was to attack the Democrats?

They seem a little confused.

[DENVERPOPS]

18. Im not surprised

It never ceases to amaze me just how much the Republican owner/owned Media censures what is aired on their TV/Radio/Print Media.
Fox is just the major one, someone once reported that 80% of all media in the U.S. is owned by Republicans........

[Caliman73]

22. True. People forget that what Fox calls "liberal media" is actually corporate.

CNN, MSNBC, Headline News, Even the Legacy Broadcasters are all owned by major corporations who, while they allow a certain amount of journalistic freedom in some of their on-air personalities, are interested primarily in money, ratings, and in advancing the agenda of their shareholders.

The actual "Liberal Media" or left media is very very small and mostly independent, people like Sam Seder and ROF, David Packman, Randi Rhodes, Stephanie Miller, Free Speech TV, and others who aren't supported by large money donors.

[SCVDem]

58. Where would you put

Thom Hartmann?

[Caliman73]

87. Thom is left leaning media.

His association with RT was somewhat problematic, but he has typically been consistently on independent media and his politics are clearly within the realm of the Democratic Party or to the left of the mainstream DP.

[robbob]

80. I would put advancing the interests of the shareholders

at the top of the list. In fact, if Warren or Bernie get the nomination prepare for an onslaught of anti-socialism reporting from all the major networks. They would rather stick with a disaster like tRump then provide even neutral coverage to a candidate who might affect their bottom line.

[DENVERPOPS]

96. We need more

We need more Rachel Maddow such a serious profit maker that they can't not shove her aside

[Hortensis]

7. Yes. Get the lies and facts on everyone's record.

But, also, knowledge is power and weapon. We CAN'T know everything those running this show do, they simply can't tell us. Which means we don't know what all the items on their to-do list are and which are being checked off.

I have read that a great deal of this is intended for the courts, for when the Republicans try to stop us through legal challenges, or judges look for excuses to block us, and we'll be able to blast them by presenting the court with steps already taken.

[pangaia]

13. I pretty much no longer trust the courts, at least some of them.

And I suspect by the time this gets to 'the courts,' they will be bought..

[Hortensis]

15. THAT's for sure. We have a lot of work to do before we get

these corrupt political operatives off the bench, or at least balanced with people of good judicial temperament.

Itm, poor minorities and women are running into some major persecution from hard-core RW appointments at lower levels. There's no end of horror stories now.

Just maybe not voting for Democrats in 2016 wasn't such a good idea.

[AnotherMother4Peace]

8. K&R

[spanone]

9. if the media were honest, it would wonder why republicans don't care about the country anymore

[Ohioboy]

10. I agree!

Put the jerks on the record. And let them show how slippery they are right out in front of the nation.

[kentuck]

11. I think you are absolutely right.

They lifted up a rock, and Voila!, there it was!

First direct evidence of obstruction of justice and further justification to continue with an official Impeachment Investigation.

[BigmanPigman]

12. Yup, Jeffries just said they got the answers that they wanted

from him. The Dems are "satisfied that they gave the facts to the people" and there are many more days of testimony coming.

[diva77]

14. Thanks for this summary. Very helpful. I found it impossible to listen once Collins had the floor.

[Atticus]

16. I agree that those admissions were eventually made. But, if the average viewer was asked what

most impressed them about today's hearing it would be how Lewandowski defied the Democrats and all they did was sputter. If specifically asked about your points, I think the attitude of most would be "Whatever".

I wish that was not true, but I believe it is where we're at. We can't win simply by being right. We have to persuade the marginally interested that we are strong. Having the facts on our side is essential, yes, but if we are not willing and able to use them to---when pushed---bludgeon the other side into submission, we are conceding that we'd rather be seen as "nice" and "reasonable" than win.

[StarfishSaver]

17. "Bludgeoning witnesses into submission" isn't going to happen in real time on television

We also can't expect each day to produce a Perry Mason moment that will grab the attention of an audience and change their minds. This is a slow slog it has to be built up over time. It's not very sexy and it's not very entertaining but it's the only way to make it whack job Republicans in a hearing and will just add more crazy to the proceedings and obscure the facts even more.

[Atticus]

27. First, I said nothing to indicate that the submission be in "real time on television". Second, I

agree this is a "slow slog". The first one or two contemnors who are arrested by the he Sergeant At Arms and brought before the House likely won't change any minds. But, after 5 or 6 have spent a few days in th he Capitol basement lock-up and been fined $10,000 or so, folks will notice and attitudes will "evolve".

[StarfishSaver]

34. A few problems with your scenario

First, inherent contempt is not something that's done on the spot. There's a process for it and it takes to even get to the point where Congress could order someone arrested. Not only that, if they tried, there would be a court battle over it with the witness very likely to get an injunction preventing their arrest unless Congress first jumps through some complex and extended due process hoops. In addition, a Lewandowski hasn't committed contempt. He answered the subpoena, he showed up he answered every question except those over which the White House has invoked executive. Of course, we all know the executive privilege claim is bogus, but Lewandowski is not in a position to wave itvon behalf of the that has to be handled.

The notion of Congress hauling in recalcitrant witnesses under it's inherent and tempting sounds good, but in practice it's not feasible

[Atticus]

44. The scenario with which you find fault is yours, not mine. Once again, I have not suggested any "on

the spot" remedies.

Further, your characterization that the courts would "likely" enjoin Congress is convenient, but not at all certain. I think it more likely that a court would be reluctant to interfere in a dispute between the executive and legislative branches.

Still further, I believe Lewandowski's repeated, rude and transparent obstruction of the orderly conduct of the hearing is more than sufficient to support a contempt finding.

Finally, "difficult and extraordinary" are often dismissed as "not feasible".

Though we have different views, I appreciate the tenor of your responses and know that we agree on most of what is important. Thanks.

[BumRushDaShow]

55. "court would be reluctant to interfere in a dispute between the executive and legislative branches"

But that is part of their role in the in this system of government. E.g., the Executive might make some rule that goes against a law that the Legislative Branch has duly enacted, and in comes the courts to settle the dispute if the Legislative Branch sues. I.e., this is not John Yoo's "Unitary Executive". However the Legislative Branch would need to show that what the Executive has done is unconstitutional.

What the courts are often reluctant to do is interfere in how the a Branch might conduct it's own internal business (including if a 3rd party objects). E.g., the whole idea of a "Recess Appointment" was one such case where the SCOTUS deemed that if the Senate stated that "Pro-Forma Sessions" meant they were "in session", then that meant that no "Recess Appointments" could be made during that time because they were not "in recess". I.e., that was a Senate rule and so be it (even if they only had 1 person come in every 3 days to gavel them into "session" and no one else in the Senate was present).

[Laura PourMeADrink]

66. Sorry. You must have really said something wrong!!!

[Evolve Dammit]

24. That resonates with me. I watched a couple hours on a Fox link (Ack) and the comments were so

lockstep with 45 and Corey being strong and the Dems a circus court. Of course you expect it from that demographic, but it's 30-40 million who won't waver even if he "kills someone on Fifth Avenue." I smell civil war and hope to hell I'm wrong.

[kentuck]

26. What we need is for our free press to report the facts.

That is what the average viewer will believe.

[StarfishSaver]

35. So, true!

Instead of treating this as a sports match and obsessing over who got in the most shots.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

63. even PBS ...

I watched a bit of the PBS Newshour this evening. Their "report" about the hearing started with Lewandowski in the campaign, Lewandowski on tv, Trump about Lewandowski, then about 15 or 20 seconds about what Democrats wanted and what "sounds" they got from Lewandowski. It was disgusting.

[mcar]

62. This!

[bucolic_frolic]

19. Agree. Rome wasn't built in a day

Let the case build, today is not the money shot.

[Sunsky]

20. I am impressed nt

[Mr.Bill]

21. The republicans probably think they won today

because they yelled louder than the Democrats.

[CaptainTruth]

25. Republican messaging seems to be based on 2 main techniques...

1) Yell louder

2) Lie more

[avebury]

23. The Contract lawyer is doing a great job?

Immunity demand?

Taking the 5th?

He is getting under Corey's skin.

[Kurt V.]

28. I. Will. Not. Be. Gaslit.

[gldstwmn]

91. Don't believe your lying eyes!

[TryLogic]

29. I watched briefly. It was obvious that Republicans were obstructing an honest inquiry.

Very close cousin to obstructing justice.

Surely members of the public could see that. It was even more obvious than Trump being an obvious con man right from the start.

[Mr.Bill]

32. If Lewandowski is running for the Senate

today was not a good kickoff for his campaign.

[happy feet]

30. Thank-you your assessment

The little bits I've heard would say the Democrats were incompetent, ill-prepared and a disaster needing to get their act together. So tired of media narratives...

[jiminvegas]

33. Democrats did not do fine today

They brought a pea shooter to a gun fight.

As a retired lawyer, I can assure you that in any other setting, the witness would be in jail tonight. He lied, evaded and used laws that don't exist to make the Democrats look pathetic. The fact that they did not hold him in contempt of congress shows they are out of their league. They are playing by the old rules.

If they do not get tougher on these witnesses, they will continue to look weak and powerless.

[StarfishSaver]

38. As a retired lawyer, you surely know that a congressional hearing is not a courtroom

But if you want to look at this like a trial, you probably also know that the primary goal in a trial is to get evidence into the record.


The Democrats are doing an excellent job.

[kentuck]

41. The Democrats did great today.

They got the first direct evidence from a witness in the Mueller investigation.

And, the witness verified that Trump dictated a message to him to give to Jeff Sessions. He said he had it locked in a private safe at his home. First direct evidence of obstruction of justice.

[calimary]

68. Not being a lawyer myself I appreciate your perspective.

I wasn’t feeling so upbeat earlier today, before everything else played out.

[uponit7771]

39. This was not for looks today. Dems need to control the process of impeachment during the election

... year to get Red Don's numbers in the 20s low 30s and make it harder for congress to certify his cheating with Russia which we both know is going to happen.

It will be hard for Red Don to control the narrative next year with constant breaking news about his working along side of Trump, its one the elements of failed presidential campaigns.

[uponit7771]

36. K&R, I saw similar to what you claim here on Ari ... Red Don didn't have a good day

[yaesu]

37. maybe ok but not fine, every time fascists wouldn't take no for an answer their mic should be cut

off, they did that to us all the time. But, Leader Nadler just put up with the constant whining and interruptions. We need to be as mean and nasty as the enemy if we plan on getting anywhere.

[StarfishSaver]

40. Nadler didn't "put up" with anything. He enforced parliamentary procedures of the committee

And under those rules, members have a right to speak for a set period. You can't cut them off just because what they're saying is stupid.

Being mean and nasty won't get one additional shred of necessary evidence on the record, which is the point of this process.

[defacto7]

45. I agree to a point, but when they continue

after being called out of order or calling for points of procedure and then continue their out of order comments... their mics should be cut. When a lawyer takes a seat at the witness table to comment out of order he should be hauled out, fined and barred from the proceeding.

[SCVDem]

42. The Democrats did a good job today?

While I realize Democrats doing good is an upside,

Why are we so narrow in our outlook?

America (remember that concept?) did good today!

Making everything partisan feeds the viewpoint of the (Russians, et al.)

[barbtries]

43. i'm just now watching it.

republicans and lewandowski clearly obstructing.

motherfuckers i hate them so much. lewandowski at the moment is repeating this one response as if he's basing his non response on the 5th, but there's no precedent, no legal excuse for what he's doing!

aargh

[Hermit-The-Prog]

70. why did he keep saying, "I have asked and answered that question."?

He must've heard that phrase on Law and Order or something and thought it sounded tough.

[barbtries]

71. no shit.

then he went to great pains to be sure they all knew he's not a lawyer, he didn't have the advantage of a harvard law school education. then he pushes his book to distract from the fact that he already put in print a lot of the facts that he spent all day making sure he did not say out loud to the committee.
kavanaugh was just as bad. blubbery and yelling and crying. actually blaming his predicament on Democrats! i forgot yesterday about him, this dude pissed me off so much.

[SWBTATTReg]

88. Yeah, I heard his blurb about not going to Harvard, etc. What does this have to do w/ anything?...

He had a lawyer (I am assuming) sitting right next to him...

[pnwmom]

46. Thank you for the reality check, StarfishSaver!

[barbtries]

48. they did a stellar job as far as i can tell

lewandowski is an obnoxious, rude, lying motherfucker who is PISSING ME OFF and the democrats are being civil. i don't think i could.

[soldierant]

49. Thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you.

I understand people are impatient. I get impatient too. But I'm so tired of the narrative that every morning we wake up and he's still there, it's our fault because we (a) weren't strong enough (b) didn't do enough (c) I suppose, don't have powerful enough magic.

[madamesilverspurs]

50. Yep.

It wasn't about Lewandowski. It was about what trump tried to get him to do. And they got him to repeat, several times, that the sitting president did try to get him to obstruct justice.

Nadler ended by saying that they are considering bringing him up on contempt charges. Good.

We also got to see Doug Collins (R GA) issue numerous invitations for someone to punch him (Collins) in the throat.

.

[Kali]

56. LOL

We also got to see Doug Collins (R GA) issue numerous invitations for someone to punch him (Collins) in the throat.

[Chalfont]

51. 01010

Gbgfjfvcgvfbgffgdshfgggg

[lunatica]

54. Are you just adding to your post count?

[lunatica]

53. I'm glad you weighed in

Thanks! You’re one of my go to people here.

[JustAnotherGen]

59. I agree

They are moving towards obstruction of Congress

[wasupaloopa]

60. We already knew all that. We already knew the witness talked to Mueller.

There is nothing we can do to or about today’s witness.

[spanone]

61. K&R...

[Miles Archer]

64. Barry Berke tears Corey Lewandowski a new one

Aaron Rupar
@atrupar

In which @BarryBerke tears Corey Lewandowski a new one

Link to tweet

[Catch2.2]

65. Only if...

It's followed by action.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

67. Exactly.

[Hortensis]

69. Judiciary's Swalwell says there's going to be a cascade of

court decisions in our favor eventually. Not tomorrow.

Meanwhile, the Republicans are doing their best to obstruct and delay and filling all these long, very desperate months with pictures of a corrupt Democratic attempt to unseat a legitimate president. Okay. We can't prevent those who want from believing that, but we can refuse to be affected by their lies.

Who here doesn't know we're the good guys?

[Iliyah]

77. With thhe help of corporate media.

[orangecrush]

72. CNN is full of shit on this

And the way the corporate poodles jumped through the hoops to call the hearings "a fiasco" is telling and even laughable.

[brooklynite]

73. I don't need "hype" to disagree with you...

The Democrats didn't need to validate Mueller's report. And they didn't need to establish that Trump tried to get Session to un-recuse himself. They needed something that would sway public support for Impeachment. Nothing close to that happened.

The only good outcome was that it increases the likelihood that Lewandowski will win the NH-SEN-R nomination, which increases the chances that Senator Shaheen will be re-elected.

[StarfishSaver]

74. What do you think the Demacrats could have done yesterday to sway public opinion?.

Please be specific.

Among other things, please detail what questions they should have asked, whom should they have asked them of, what responses those questions would have elicited, and how exactly would those questions and answers have swayed public support for imoeachment yesterday?

[brooklynite]

76. They could have not held the Hearing if it wasn't going to produce anything useful.

[StarfishSaver]

78. Ok. So please tell us what hearing WOULD have been useful?

And be specific.

Among other things, please detail who they SHOULD have called, what questions they should have asked, what responses those questions would have elicited, and how exactly those questions and answers would have swayed public support for impeachment yesterday?

[brooklynite]

79. I don't have an answer, but I'm not advocating for advancing Impeachment...

I look to Leadership to make thoughtful use of their time and legislative power on matters that are important to the electorate and will benefit us in the 2020 Election. This was not beneficial.

[StarfishSaver]

83. You don't have the answer

Thank you.

I wish more people would acknowledge that when telling leadership what they're doing wrong.

[cwydro]

75. Spot on.

Thank you.

[Catch2.2]

82. Agree 100%

What the Dems don't understand is that they need to sway the public. If they did a better job, they would've had the people screaming for impeachment by this point. The republicans are great at this, the Dems...not so much.

[StarfishSaver]

84. I have a feeling the Dems understand what they need to do just as well as anyone here

[Pisces]

81. I have eyes and ears. We did terrible. If we had a spine Lewandowski would have been dragged

Away in handcuffs in front of the camera. We allowed that POS to to be rude and talk over all the DEMS. Trump was laughing it up yesterday. We are the Charlie Brown party. We keep expecting Trump admin to hold the ball so we can kick it and they keep moving it at the last second. We keep trying even though they have proven themselves time and time again to go against all standard norms. When will we learn and have some kind of back up plan for when they don’t follow protocol????? Tired of us getting played. I don’t need CNN to tell me what happened before my very eyes.

[StarfishSaver]

85. "dragged away in handcuffs"

That might have made you happy, but fortunately, that's not the way we do things in this country.

[gldstwmn]

92. Bravo.

[Catch2.2]

94. Yup...

I saw the same thing, and I wonder the same thing.

[dlk]

86. The Dems Also Were Able to Show Lewandowski Committed Perjury

He either lied under oath to Mueller or he lied under oath to Congress. Lock him up! Kudos to the Dems in the House for a job well done!

[copperearth]

89. I agree with Rachel Maddo that they need he lawyers to start te hearings

but I still think that the Democrats got the ball rolling and that is the most importan thing. That was how how they got the Watergate hearings going.

[StarfishSaver]

93. These ARE the hearings

I'm not sure what people think impeachment hearings actually are. But this is what they are, just like they were during Watergate.

[gldstwmn]

90. Sorry but no. Lewandowski should have

been drug out of that hearing in handcuffs. Allowing people to defy subpoenas and obstruct justice is a bad look.

[Pisces]

95. +1