Nancy Pelosi and the House reveal how they’re going to fight back against the sham acquittal vote

| 8:44 pm EST February 3, 2020
Dear Palmer Report readers, we all understand the difficult era we're heading into. Major media outlets are caving to Trump already. Even the internet itself and publishing platforms may be at risk. But Palmer Report is nonetheless going to lead the fight. We're funding our 2025 operating expenses now, so we can keep publishing no matter what happens. I'm asking you to contribute if you can, because the stakes are just so high. You can donate here.

On Wednesday the Republican Senate will corruptly vote to acquit Donald Trump in his impeachment trial, without having even called a single witness, despite Trump’s obvious guilt. There Republicans have the majority, so there’s nothing any Democrat can do to stop this vote from going the way it’s going to go. But this evening Nancy Pelosi and the House Democrats revealed the first portion of their plan to fight back against this vote.

Right now it’s all about perception. Donald Trump is hoping that his acquittal will make him look innocent in the eyes of the average American. That’s not going to happen, because everyone knows this is a sham trial, and everyone outside his crazed base has a problem with that. The House has decided to make sure the public is reminded that he’s guilty.

To that end, the House Judiciary Committee is bringing in FBI Director Christopher Wray to publicly testify this Wednesday. The hearing will take place at the exact same time that the Senate impeachment acquittal vote is expected to take place. This will force the mainstream media (Fox News doesn’t count) to split its coverage by reporting on the FBI Director’s answers about Trump’s criminal scandals, even while reporting that Senate Republicans are giving Trump a free pass.

Some of you are probably asking why Pelosi and the House are calling FBI Director Christopher Wray, as opposed to a witness who’s more directly involved in the Ukraine scandal. The answer is that in his job position, Wray has to show up and testify whenever the House asks – as opposed to someone like Mick Mulvaney, who would simply refuse to show up. The timing of the Wray hearing is a strong indicator that it’s just a first step, and that the House can be expected to call other willing witnesses like John Bolton and perhaps Lev Parnas thereafter.