Editor’s Note:  Feinstein is half right here.  We are a Republic, but we are not based on the will of the people.  We are based on the rule of law.  The will of the people fluctuates in and out of law, but the law is supposed to stand regardless of emotions and other whimsical, fleeting moments of men.  She knows they pushed to far in all of this and now, she’s turning it to politics and an election to save face. Additionally, it is the Senate’s job to judge in impeachment on behalf of the people. Senator Feinstein, like it or not, you are to judge.

At one point on Tuesday Senator Dianne Feinstein was surprisingly open-minded and fair.

She was leaning toward acquittal and deferring to her constituents to pass judgment in 2020 elections.

That sounds too logical for Feinstein, but that was indeed her take.

By the end of the day her tune had, not surprisingly, changed.

Here’s more from Gateway Pundit:

The Democrats sure didn’t expect this!

Following the Trump attorneys’ closing statements on Tuesday Senator Feinstein told reporters she was leaning toward President Trump’s acquittal.

Feinstein suggest she is leaning towards acquitting Trump in the impeachment trial. https://t.co/RDcapUkXse

— John Solomon (@jsolomonReports) January 28, 2020

Feinstein told reporters, “Nine months left to go, the people should judge. We are a republic, we are based on the will of the people — the people should judge.”

The LA Times reported:

Just after President Trump’s defense lawyers ended arguments in their Senate trial Tuesday, Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California became the first Democrat to suggest that she could vote to acquit him, despite serious concerns about his character.

“Nine months left to go, the people should judge. We are a republic, we are based on the will of the people — the people should judge,” Feinstein said Tuesday, after the president’s team finished a three-day presentation in his defense. “That was my view and it still is my view.”

UPDATE — That didn’t take long — the Mob got to DiFi.

The LA Times misunderstood what I said today. Before the trial I said I'd keep an open mind. Now that both sides made their cases, it’s clear the president’s actions were wrong. He withheld vital foreign assistance for personal political gain. That can’t be allowed to stand.

— Senator Dianne Feinstein (@SenFeinstein) January 28, 2020

That was predictable.

#####

Yes, it was predictable.

The beginning wasn’t but the ending was.

Dianne Feinstein is a tool who has, allegedly, put our national security at risk many times.

So why wouldn’t she turn against Trump?

• Feinstein Tries to Destroy Nunes FISA Memo and Soon Regrets it After Horowitz Report Confirms Almost All of It
• BUSTED: Feinstein Caught In Treasonous Lie About Secret Iran Meeting — It Was NOT Sanctioned
• LOCK HER UP: Did Dianne Feinstein just violate The Logan Act while Conversing with Iran’s Foreign Minister?
• AOC & Feinstein calling for New Zealand-style nationwide gun confiscation and mass criminalization of gun owners across America
• Senator Dianne Feinstein’s Ties To George Soros Organizations
• Espionage by China exploited Hillary Clinton and Dianne Feinstein security lapses to identify and murder of 20 CIA operatives
• President Trump Asks if Dianne Feinstein will “Investigate Herself” over Chinese Spy that she Employed for 20 Years

Feinstein has proven once again what she is made of.

As one of the richest people in the Senate it is doubtful that her change in tune came without a high price.

Oh wait, she says The Los Angeles Times misunderstood her.

I’m not one to defend The L.A. Times, but does anyone really believe that?

Article posted with permission from Dean Garrison