MAGAts In The House

Sure, whatever:

Raskin says he heard directly from Republicans on the House floor that the right-wing believes Kevin McCarthy set up today’s inquiry hearing to fail. 

Raskin: They couldn’t believe that such a disaster would just happen by accident

They don’t need evidence. They just need better…hearings?

Or maybe it is just a matter of evidence:

Dale: So the Congresswoman is right. Congressman Donalds did leave out critical context.. Donalds did not release the Hunter Biden text message that preceded his uncle's response so he didn't allow people to understand this was about alimony.

Context really is all.*

Buttigieg: Several of the house Republicans tried to attack the administration over the East Palestine derailment, making no mention of the fact that they are demanding cuts to railroad safety inspections. And are threatening the government shutdown in order to get their way.

But they just need 9 more months!

AOC on MSNBC: "It really cannot be understated how deceptive that was -- to take critical messages out of context, to tear apart the context that they're in, and then to photoshop a text message bubble ... and this is supposed to be the Republican case for impeachment?"

They’d have proved their case if not for meddling people like AOC.

The Republican impeachment hearing today was so bad I think they asked ChatGPT to write their questions with no fact checks.

Or maybe if not for the Republicans who kept leaving the room:

Raskin: We saw a meltdown on the Republican side of the aisle, where the Republican members were fleeing the committee room in droves, embarrassed and humiliated by what was going on.

In other news:

Trying to remove the Fulton County criminal case to federal court would require Trump to explain why his attempt to overturn the election was part of his official duties as president. 

That would not end well for Trump.

I just have a hard time believing Trump would make that rational an assessment. Or that his lawyers could convince Trump it was pointless (he could always try it without testifying. He’s forced his lawyers to take more frivolous actions.).

And now I’m wondering if Chris Kise’s question to the NY judge (basically, “Do we need a trial?”) wasn’t a question exploring just cutting their  losses in the case. Arguably, Kise was thinking about losses in terms of legal expenses. Trials are expensive, and Trump has lost this one in the worst way possible.. The only way out is to settle over the weekend (civil settlements are ALWAYS to cut losses and stop the legal bills.). But I don’t think Trump is constitutionally capable of that. So Kise was looking for another way out.

I continue to think Trump’s running out of money, and he knows it. If he can’t reverse the NY judgment, how can he fight the other cases? How can he afford his delaying tactics and frivolous arguments? How can he pay for all those trials and still maintain the lifestyle to which he’s become accustomed (i.e., known all his life)?

Pay attention. What seems impossible now, may soon seem inevitable.

*That context is here, btw.