dChan
Anonymous ID: 755b31 Jan. 30, 2020, 10:06 p.m. No.7975067   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>5411 >>5418 >>5604

Alexander to vote no on witnesses, bringing trial close to end

 

Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) announced Thursday night that he will vote against a motion to consider subpoenas for additional witnesses and documents at the impeachment trial, putting the chamber on track to acquit President Trump on Friday or Saturday. “There is no need for more evidence to prove that the president asked Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden and his son, Hunter; he said this on television on October 3, 2019, and during his July 25, 2019, telephone call with the president of Ukraine," Alexander said in a statement released shortly after the Senate ended 16 hours of questions to the impeachment managers and lawyers for Trump's defense. "There is no need for more evidence to conclude that the president withheld United States aid, at least in part, to pressure Ukraine to investigate the Bidens; the House managers have proved this with what they call a ‘mountain of overwhelming evidence.’ There is no need to consider further the frivolous second article of impeachment that would remove the president for asserting his constitutional prerogative to protect confidential conversations with his close advisers,'' his statement said.

 

Alexander, however, admonished Trump for “inappropriate” conduct. “It was inappropriate for the president to ask a foreign leader to investigate his political opponent and to withhold United States aid to encourage that investigation. When elected officials inappropriately interfere with such investigations, it undermines the principle of equal justice under the law,” he warned. But the senior lawmaker argued that the Constitution does not give the Senate the power to remove the president from office and ban him from the ballot merely for inappropriate actions. But the senior lawmaker argued that the Constitution does not give the Senate the power to remove the president from office and ban him from the ballot merely for inappropriate actions. “Our founding documents provide for duly elected presidents who serve with ‘the consent of the governed,’ not at the pleasure of the United States Congress. Let the people decide,” he said. Alexander's decision makes it significantly less likely that Democrats will have enough votes to call former national security adviser John Bolton and other witnesses to testify, which would have extended the trial past the weekend and perhaps much longer. With Alexander joining the overwhelming majority of the Senate GOP conference, it now appears there are no more than three Republican votes for witnesses, which means the question would deadlock in a 50-50 tie or fail 49 to 51.

 

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) announced Thursday evening she would vote to subpoena witnesses and documents and Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) is expected to announce the same decision Friday. “I believe hearing from certain witnesses would give each side the opportunity to more fully and fairly make their case, resolve any ambiguities, and provide additional clarity,” Collins said in a statement.

 

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) remains the sole undecided vote on the crucial procedural question. She told reporters Thursday that she would announce her position Friday. “I got two — you can actually take pictures of my two volumes here,” Murkowski told a crowd of reporters pointing to her voluminous notes from trial. “I’m going to go back to my office [and] put some eye drops in so I can keep reading. And I’ve been forming a lot of thoughts.”

 

Republicans control 53 seats and at this point the best Democrats can hope for is a 50-50 tie.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/480822-alexander-to-vote-no-on-witnesses-bringing-trial-close-to-end

Anonymous ID: 755b31 Jan. 30, 2020, 10:09 p.m. No.7975081   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>5157 >>5302 >>5553 >>5604

New clean water rule is a big win for farmers and for everyone else

 

I’m sure that many missed the important news, but, last week, amid the impeachment trial, a water management policy reform was announced that will bring a huge positive impact for farmers like me. My husband and I have run our family farm for nearly 13 years now. Our farm is close to Chesapeake Bay and less than a mile from the Patuxent River. These are important places to us because our four children play in these waters. We enjoy seafood harvested from the watershed, and our local economy depends on the businesses, industry, and tourism that surround Chesapeake Bay.

 

But, for the last four years, the agriculture industry has had to deal with a painful, overreaching federal water and land management policy. In 2015, the Obama administration’s Environmental Protection Agency implemented its Waters of the United States rule, which allowed federal agencies to regulate small land features across America that only sometimes contained water. These areas had been already successfully managed by local and state governments, but the Obama administration changed the rules to give the federal government control of all of them. The 1972 Clean Water Act, a law governing pollution control and water quality of America’s waterways, established a regulatory partnership between the federal and state governments. It was originally intended to protect navigable waterways such as lakes, streams, and rivers, but the Obama administration’s rule went much further. The Waters of the U.S. rule was extremely problematic for farmers like me because it created ambiguity and confusion about what we were allowed to do with our land. Rolling hills make our farm picturesque, but they also contain marshlands and ditches that are sometimes dry and sometimes filled with water after a rainfall. Under the Waters of the U.S. rule, the EPA could take years to investigate us over a small rain ditch or pond on my farm. In the meantime, we wouldn’t be able to make changes to that area of the farm. In some cases, we might have been prevented from grazing animals nearby. The rule complicated the business and legacy that thousands of small farmers have mindfully built and preserved. Even more worrisome, I believe that complicated federal regulations such as the Waters of the U.S. rule discourage younger generations from continuing in the family farm business.

 

The Trump administration finally and officially changed Obama's defunct regulation last week by implementing its own, the Navigable Waters Protection Rule. Specifically, it clarifies that the federal government should oversee actual bodies of water, like bays and lakes. It leaves it to state and local governments to regulate features that only contain water in direct response to rainfall, groundwater, many ditches, including most farm and roadside ditches, prior converted cropland, and farm and stock watering ponds. This is a big win for farmers and ranchers, providing them clarity and leaving local and state governments with the flexibility to regulate in ways that make sense in the context of the local community.

 

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/new-clean-water-rule-is-a-big-win-for-farmers-and-for-everyone-else

Anonymous ID: 755b31 Jan. 30, 2020, 10:18 p.m. No.7975142   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>7975076

 

Oliver Stone did excellent investigative work in this documentary..I encourage all who have not watched to check it out, no disappointments in it and a few unknown surprises.

Anonymous ID: 755b31 Jan. 30, 2020, 11:57 p.m. No.7975652   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>7975633

Not sure if dropbox works here, hadn't thought to try it. That said, I don't think it's the pdf format itself, I think it has more to do with the limitations on this board, it seems like its been more difficult over the last few weeks.