Archive for the ‘Impeachment’ Category

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell took time in this article to compliment Sen. Tom Cotton, (R-AR), for spotting the first case of COVID-19. Later in the article, they highlight a tweet by John Ashbrook, who is described as a “former McConnell aide.” Specifically, the article said “Former McConnell aide John Ashbrook also pointed this out Tuesday, stating that the pandemic is believed to have hit the United States the same day that House Democrats marched articles of impeachment to the Senate after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi held off on moving forward on impeachment for weeks.”

Whether Democrats like it or not, the truth is that the Democrats’ impeachment march happened on January 15,2020, the same date as the CDC’s confirmation of the first case of COVID-19 in the US. The truth is that Democrats were focused on impeaching President Trump from the middle of November, 2019, through early February, 2020. That’s harsh but that’s reality.

That isn’t the harshest news, though. I wrote in this post that the House Homeland Security Committee held 3 hearings on the COVID-19 virus. The first hearing was on March 4, 2020. The third hearing was held on March 11. That means the committee of jurisdiction waited almost 2 months to hold a hearing on a deadly virus. It isn’t entirely the committee chairman’s fault.

The House and Senate stop in their tracks while trying a president for impeachment. That means we can only blame Chairman Thompson for wasting the second month to hold a hearing. Imagine what could’ve happened if we had serious people running the House and Senate. First, we wouldn’t have seen a tweet like this:

It’s time to return serious people to chairing committees. We can’t handle the partisan political hacks chairing House committees any longer. By comparison, Sen. Tom Cotton spoke out about the COVID-19 virus early:

On January 22, one day before the Chinese government began a quarantine of Wuhan to contain the spread of the virus, the Arkansas senator sent a letter to Secretary of Health and Human Services Alex Azar encouraging the Trump administration to consider banning travel between China and the United States and warning that the Communist regime could be covering up how dangerous the disease really was. That same day, he amplified his warnings on Twitter and in an appearance on the radio program of Fox & Friends host Brian Kilmeade.

Not every politician was distracted. Sen. Cotton paid attention. Meanwhile, idiots like Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler battled to see who got more time in front of the camera.

It’s time to run both of these idiots out of Congress. They’re a total waste of time.

Ed Morrissey’s post about Nancy Pelosi’s statements on CNN’s State of the Union is, as always, spot on. Predictably, Pelosi’s statements ignore reality. She’s totally oblivious to reality with regard to the coronavirus. I wrote in this post about what House Democrats didn’t do when the virus was first taking off. Specifically, I focused on the House Homeland Security Committee’s activities.

According to their website, House Democrats held 12 hearings after President Trump’s two-way travel ban with China. Of those 12 hearings, 4 were on the subject of the coronavirus. If Ms. Pelosi wants to talk about people fiddling and people dying, she should look into the mirror.

House Democrats’ first hearing on the coronavirus was on March 4, over a month after President Trump’s China travel ban. Why didn’t House Democrats pay attention sooner? In my opinion, it’s because they were focused on impeaching President Trump. Let the record show that the Democrats’ impeachment didn’t include an article that mentioned a crime, much less a high crime, which is constitutionally required for impeachment.

All that Democrats have to offer is panic itself. Ed opened his post with this paragraph:

Say what? Isn’t this the same woman who held up the coronavirus relief package for days to get Green New Deal funding as part of the rescue? Nancy Pelosi told Jake Tapper yesterday morning that Donald Trump still isn’t taking the COVID-19 pandemic seriously enough, just a few days after Pelosi spent a week back home rather than in Washington dealing with the crisis, only to fly back and derail Senate negotiations for several days in providing a response to it.

It’s impossible to take Pelosi seriously when she’s vacationing in her million-dollar San Francisco mansion for a week while bipartisan Senate working groups are putting things together. At the last minute, Pelosi flew back from vacation and nixed the entire deal, insisting that major parts of AOC’s Green New Deal be included in the emergency coronavirus relief bill. Pelosi also wanted additional protections for sanctuary cities, same-day voting registration and millions of dollars for the arts and the Kennedy Center.

Pelosi fiddled while first responders needed PPEs, ventilators and other life-saving medical equipment. What’s required is a voice of sanity. That voice belongs to Dr. Drew Pinsky. Check it out, then implement his wisdom into your life:

Last week, Nancy Pelosi got caught lying. If you’re saying to yourself ‘I didn’t see anything in the NY Times or on CNN, ask yourself when the last time was that you saw a negative headline against a Democrat legislator. Notice that I didn’t say a Democrat. The NY Times and CNN run negative headlines all the time against Democrat candidates. That’s entirely different. But I digress.

Pelosi got caught trying to put Democrat policy initiatives into the coronavirus bill. This happened while doctors and other medical personnel didn’t have enough ventilators or personal protective equipment, aka PPE. This is how Pelosi defended herself:

It wasn’t pretty. Johnny ‘Joey’ Jones laid it out perfectly. Nothing in the article above helps Pelosi, either:

“His denial at the beginning was deadly, his delaying of getting equipment … to where it is needed is deadly, and now the best thing would be to do is to prevent more loss of life, rather than open things up so that, because we just don’t know,” Pelosi said during an interview on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

Pelosi held up the relief bill and she’s got the chutzpah to insist that President Trump’s delays, whatever they are, have killed people? She can’t be serious. Pelosi insisted on changes to election laws as part of this emergency bill. We have federal elections, not national elections. The elections are for federal positions but they’re administered by state and local governments.

President Clinton frequently said that states were the laboratories of democracy. He’s right about that. Apparently, Pelosi isn’t interested in perfecting democracies. She simply wants total control. This November, thoughtful people should throw her out of her position of prominence. Kevin McCarthy is the right fit for Speaker because he actually listens to his constituents. The last time Pelosi listened to her constituents happened when dinosaurs roamed the earth.

Pelosi’s agenda isn’t America’s agenda. In 2009-10, Pelosi’s agenda included 2 things: first, passing the ACA, next, passing Cap & Trade. Democrats lost 63 seats in the House that year. This time as Speaker-in-name-only, Pelosi’s agenda has been impeachment and resistance. The odds of her holding the Speaker’s Gavel are between slim and none and slim just left town. Rather than pushing a positive agenda that the American people approve of, Pelosi has pushed one anti-Trump initiative after another.

She hasn’t done a thing to fix the health care system. She’s pushed impeachment while the coronavirus pandemic broke out. Then, she tried playing chicken with Mitch McConnell while the COVID-19 pandemic spread. After the Senate acquitted President Trump, Pelosi, AOC and the rest of the Democrats did nothing to prepare us for COVID-19. The first hearing Democrats held on the COVID-19 virus was on March 4 in the Homeland Security Committee:

That’s over a month after President Trump issued his travel ban with China. Pelosi’s Democrats have been asleep at the switch when it comes to protecting us from pandemics. That’s because they’ve focused their time on frivolous impeachment hearings. PS- The House Homeland Security Committee has held 3 hearings on COVID-19. The last hearing was March 11. That’s pathetic.

While people die in New York, California, Illinois and Louisiana, Homeland Security did virtually nothing. I won’t say that the blood of the victims is on their hands. That’s clearly on China’s hands. What I’m totally confident in saying, though, is that House Democrats didn’t pay attention to COVID-19. They spent their attention on impeaching President Trump without mentioning a crime.

If that isn’t the definition of do-nothing Democrats, then it doesn’t exist.

Ever since Impeachment Committee Chairman Adam Schiff impeached President Trump without citing a crime, we’ve known that it was just a matter of time until some lame-brained leftist Democrat would redeploy the Schiff Standard. That day arrived. The sad part is that it didn’t take long to arrive:

Professor Chris Edelson, assistant professor of government at American University, has penned an opinion column calling for President Trump to resign or be impeachment for his handling of the coronavirus crisis. It is just the latest in a long line of such impeachment theories that reflect a fundamental misconception of the function and standard for the removal of an American President.

Since Chairman Schiff has essentially instituted a whatever-a-majority-of-Congress-says-is-impeachable impeachment standard, it isn’t surprising that people are making up new impeachment charges. As Democrats become more desperate, we should expect these types of frivolous charges to come more often against Republicans. Democrats have shown that they’re a vindictive lot of sore losers. This treachery will become the new normal for Democrats.

If this becomes the Democrats’ new normal, then I pray that voters punish Democrats for being sore losers. Shame on them for not accepting the outcome of legitimate elections. You lost in 2016. A 4-year hissy fit just proves that you’re whiny little children. Whiny little children aren’t fit to govern. That privilege is reserved for adults.

Schiff’s problem isn’t that he’s a whiny little child. Schiff’s problem, along with every other Democrat that voted to impeach or convict President Trump, is that he’s a dishonest SOB. Trusting him is as stupid as trusting this professor. Then again, trusting any Democrat that voted to impeach or convict President Trump on the basis of hearsay testimony is stupid.

Schiff is an annoying SOB. He’s proven that by this:

President Trump said he is seriously considering a pardon for former White House national security adviser Michael Flynn. “So now it is reported that, after destroying his life & the life of his wonderful family (and many others also), the FBI, working in conjunction with the Justice Department, has ‘lost’ the records of General Michael Flynn. How convenient. I am strongly considering a Full Pardon!” Trump tweeted on Sunday.


House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff quickly tweeted that Trump should keep his “focus on the current crisis” surrounding the COVID-19 outbreak, adding that “the delay in testing and your failure to lead are already costing us dearly.” “Your attacks on the independence of the justice system and rewarding of cronies who lied for you can wait,” the California Democrat said. “Incompetence kills.”

My message to Professor Edelson is the same as my message to Chairman Schiff. Shut up and go away. Your warped thinking is hurting civilized society. Please stop wasting my time with your stupidity.

Democrats used to attribute acts of violence to President Trump’s rhetoric or conservative talk radio. When Gabby Giffords was shot, Sarah Palin was blamed. When the facts were known, we found out that the gunman was a deranged leftist with a history of mental illness. It had nothing to do with the Democrats’ conventional wisdom.

This past week, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer joined a group of leftists on the steps of the US Supreme Court to specifically threaten Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. In his threatening diatribe, Sen. Schumer said “I want to tell you, Gorsuch. I want to tell you, Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.” That caused Chief Justice John Roberts to publicly rebuke Sen. Schumer for threatening his justices.

In this post, I highlighted Maxine Waters exhortation to violence against members of President Trump’s staff and cabinet:

Now that we’ve established that Democrats are the instigators of violence, let’s highlight yesterday’s threat against Elise Stefanik:

Stefanik wrote Saturday on Twitter that when she returned to her car earlier in the day after grocery shopping with her husband, she found what she described as a “vile anonymous note.”

“Rot in Hell FASCIST PIG,” the hand-scrawled note said.

Later, she took to Twitter:


This article highlights other acts of violence against Republicans:

Other incidents this year involving incivility – or even violence – against conservatives and Republicans have included a vehicle smashing a GOP voter-registration table in Florida, an alleged assault of a 15-year-old Trump supporter in New Hampshire, the smashing of a College Republicans information table in California, an individual’s threat, caught on video, to “slash Republicans’ throats” in Arizona, an alleged assault of a retired police officer wearing a Trump-style hat and shirt in Tennessee and a suspect being sentenced to 90 days in jail for slapping and spitting on a Trump supporter in Florida.

It used to be said that Democrats were the evil party and that Republicans were the stupid party. These days, thanks to Antifa, Black Lives Matter and other domestic terrorist organizations, Democrats are the violent party.

Democrats haven’t had a worthwhile new thought in years. It’s time they started thinking logically again rather than lashing out with violence. Leaders like Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters and Adam Schiff need to be thrown to the curb in the next leadership elections. They aren’t inspiring leaders. They’re backstabbing lowlifes who never will be leaders.

It would be a mistake for voters to give Democrats the White House or a majority in the House or Senate. Democrats first need to fix their anger management problems before they’re worthy of leadership positions.

Mollie Hemingway’s article highlights the threat posed by Chuck Schumer’s statement poses to the justices. First, it’s worth noting something that former US Attorney Guy Lewis told Harris Faulkner shortly after Schumer’s threats. Lewis said that US marshals were likely called into action minutes after Schumer’s threats. When Ms. Faulkner asked if this was speculation or whether it was fact, Lewis replied that that’s the procedure that’s been used in the past. He said that a dozen US marshals would be detailed to the justices, their wives and their kids for the next 6 months to protect them from violence.

Sol Wisenberg, a former assistant independent counsel on the Whitewater investigation, insists that Schumer’s statements are protected by the First Amendment. I disagree. What Schumer did was the equivalent of yelling fire in a crowded theater. This is what Schumer said, along with a discussion on Schumer’s threat:

With the things that Antifa and other thugs have done, with the exhortations made by Maxine Waters, with the Bernie Bro who shot Steve Scalise, why wouldn’t Sen. Schumer’s statement be treated as a threat?

These statements can’t be taken as idle chatter. That might’ve been fine 20 years ago but that isn’t the world we’re living in today. Sen. Schumer’s statement was a threat and he knows it. Since Ted Kennedy’s hate-filled diatribe against Judge Robert Bork, Democrats have thoroughly politicized the judicial confirmation process.

The justices that were nominated by Republican presidents got confirmed since then but they’ve been scrutinized unlike any justices in history. Democrats have made these confirmation hearings like Armageddon. Democrats understand that their ideas aren’t popular enough to win passage through the legislative process. That’s why they need an outcomes-based judiciary to implement their social agenda.

Justices that interpret laws through a constitutional lens won’t give Democrats the legislative victories that they’re looking for. More than any other reason, that’s why Sen. Schumer got the activists riled up with his threats.

Democrats love saying that their House majority is built by moderates. That’s insulting to thinking individuals. There aren’t any moderate Democrats left in the House. At least, there won’t be if Collin Peterson retires. Last week, I wrote this post to highlight the fact that the Democrats who are relatively moderate really aren’t moderates.

In that article, I quoted Newt Gingrich, who said “that he’s writing a book about House Democrats that he calls ‘the radical 200.'” Newt then continues, saying that “the entire Democratic Party is marching off a left-wing cliff. There’s a bill, for example, that would raise the FICA Tax, your Social Security tax, by 19% and they had 206 Democrats signed onto it.”

Of the 233 Democrats in the House, 230 voted to impeach President on both articles. That’s stunning considering the fact that the only testimony that the Democrats had was hearsay testimony. Impeaching a president based on hearsay testimony isn’t what a moderate would do. That’s what a hardcore partisan does.

Quite a few so-called moderates joined the Problem Solvers Caucus. It sounds great. Everyone wants to see Congress solve problems that make people’s lives better. The problem is that the people in this caucus haven’t solved anything. It’s difficult for the minority party to get things done in the partisan House, especially when it’s ruled with an iron first by someone as partisan as Speaker Pelosi. That brings me to my next point.

A so-called ‘moderate’ like Collin Peterson votes against President Trump 85% of the time. He voted against the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which has helped ignite the Trump economy. He voted against eliminating the regulations that essentially killed the fossil fuel industry and hurt small town communities. Does that sound like the reasonable thing to do?

What problems have Democrats solved? Did Democrats fix health care? Did Democrats lower prescription drug prices? Did Democrats make us energy independent? What exactly did Democrats do the past 18 months? Anything worthwhile?

Many Democrats told voters that they’d never vote for Pelosi as speaker. Some Democrats kept their promise. Many Democrats didn’t keep their promise. Democrats haven’t had an original thought since the Clinton administration. What they have is an ideological checklist that they’re determined to pass. It doesn’t matter that it doesn’t make people’s lives better. What matters to Democrats is that it’s on the checklist. Remember this?

Byron York’s article should bother everyone from across the political spectrum. It isn’t just about Russian interference. As Byron puts it, “On Feb. 13, the House Intelligence Committee held a meeting at which intelligence officials briefed lawmakers on foreign efforts to influence U.S. elections. By several accounts, the officials told the committee that Russia is working to reelect President Trump.”

Later, Byron added “The Republicans’ objection was not to the idea that Russia is trying to interfere in a U.S. election. That is an accepted fact. The problem was the assessment that Russia is specifically trying to help reelect Trump. That claim, so incendiary in the 2016 election, was unsupported by the evidence, they said.”

This throws the entire briefing into question:

“How should reporting take place?” one member said later. “You would say, ‘We believe X is true based on A, B, C, and D.’ When that doesn’t happen, it’s very suspect.”

“If you’re going to make an accusation like that, you darn well better be ready to answer questions and have evidence to support it,” said another member. When pressed, the member added that officials gave “very vague and unsatisfying answers.”

If the Intel Community can’t tell Congress what they’ve learned with specificity, then that’s questioning the briefing’s credibility. As the one unidentified member said, the IC “darn well better be ready to answer questions and have evidence to support it” if they’re making such accusations.

As they left the meeting, Republicans agreed that the news would leak soon. It almost seemed to be why Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff, the committee chairman and impeachment leader, called the meeting in the first place.

This is the committee that shouldn’t be partisan. That’s why Adam Schiff is the worst choice to be a member of it, much less chairman of it. That’s why it isn’t just important to clean out the Intel Community. That’s why it’s essential.

Adam Schiff isn’t the only Democrat that shouldn’t be trusted. Jim Himes is another Democrat that shouldn’t be trusted. Here’s why:

For example, not long after the story broke, Democratic Rep. Jim Himes, an intelligence committee member, appeared on CNN. “I can’t talk about what happened in a classified setting,” Himes said. “But … you don’t need an intelligence briefing to think about what Vladimir Putin might want. Would he want a return to sort of conventional, much more confrontational policy with respect to Russia? Or might he want a president who will criticize everybody on the planet except Vladimir Putin?”

Himes’s point was clear: I can’t talk about it, but of course Putin is working to reelect Trump.

Again, assumptions without proof. If you’re making the assertion that the Russians are interfering in the election, that’s one thing. If you’re claiming that they’re interfering with the purpose of helping a presidential candidate, you’d better have tons of rock solid proof to verify that. This sounds like Schiff’s handiwork.

During the impeachment hearings and in the impeachment trial, Adam Schiff made wild accusations that he didn’t support with verifiable facts. He’d make these allegations, then say that they’re supported by hearsay testimony. That isn’t proof. That’s an unsubstantiated allegation. It’s the equivalent of saying ‘I know he’s guilty because I have a vendetta against him. He’s evil.’ That isn’t proof of anything except that the person making the statement has a vendetta against the accused.

Apparently, the question isn’t whether the IC will interfere in this election. The question apparently is whether Ric Grenell can start cleaning out the nasties in the IC before the election.

While that question seems a little far-fetched initially, let’s look at what’s known thus far. It’s known that:

  1. Democrats have wanted to undermine the legitimacy of the Trump administration since before President Trump’s inauguration.
  2. Adam Schiff has leaked more classified information than any other Democrat in Congress.
  3. As chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Adam Schiff saw more classified information than any Democrat in Congress.
  4. Adam Schiff has ignored tons of exculpatory evidence that would’ve prevented President Trump’s impeachment.
  5. Adam Schiff looked at the same intelligence that Trey Gowdy and John Ratcliffe looked at about the FISA warrant application. He said the FBI did everything right. Ratcliffe and Gowdy raised red flags about the FBI. The Horowitz Report vindicated Ratcliffe and Gowdy. It didn’t vindicate Schiff and the Democrats.
  6. After a recent intel briefing on potential Russian interference in the 2020 presidential election, classified information was leaked to the NYTimes and the Washington Post.
  7. The information that was leaked isn’t accurate.

Thanks to John Ratcliffe’s interview this morning, we know with certainty that the information leaked isn’t accurate. It isn’t just thanks to Rep. Ratcliffe’s interview that we know that it isn’t accurate. It’s because another leak from the intel briefing that said that Russia was interfering with the election to help Bernie Sanders. The initial briefing leak said that Russia is interfering to help President Trump.

It’s impossible for both statements to be true. The Russians aren’t interfering to exclusively help President Trump. The Russians aren’t interfering to exclusively help Sen. Sanders. The only thing that’s certain is that the Russians are attempting to interfere in the election. Who they’re trying to help is unknown. Whether they’re trying to help either side is unknown and unknowable.

Adam Schiff insisted that Republicans have denied the fact that Russians interfered with the 2016 election. That’s BS. Ratcliffe addressed that BS during this interview:

He then went on to explain that “the narrative often from Democrats and the media is that Republicans don’t think the Russians have meddled in our election. They did. They meddled in 2016, they are going to meddle in 2020,” he continued. “That’s not the issue. The issue is why Russia is being so successful in shaking American confidence in the integrity of our elections. And the reason is, it’s because Democrats keep perpetuating and accentuating and proliferating Russian propaganda for their political gain and for their political motivation against Donald Trump.”

The House GOP majority of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence issued a comprehensive report detailing the ways that Russia interfered with the US Election. Devin Nunes criticized Adam Schiff on that during the impeachment hearings.

Here’s the transcript of the key part of Ratcliffe’s interview:

“The issue is why Russia is being so successful in shaking American confidence in the integrity of our elections. And the reason is, it’s because Democrats keep perpetuating and accentuating and proliferating Russian propaganda for their political gain and for their political motivation against Donald Trump.”

It isn’t a stretch to think that Adam Schiff has told some whoppers. In fact, that’s been proven. While I won’t say that Schiff is a Russian agent, I won’t hesitate in saying that Schiff has helped Russians spread confusion by spreading the Russians’ disinformation. It’s my opinion that the Russians’ primary goal is to spread disinformation. Further, I think it’s the Russians’ goal to help get Bernie elected. That’s my opinion because his policies best fit with their goals.

Generally speaking, movie sequels are never as good as the originals. While the Democrats’ sequel to Trump Impeachment 1.0 hasn’t played out yet, it’s difficult to picture it being as good as the original. The only chance Trump Impeachment 2.0 has of being better than the original is because the original was a dismal failure.

Let me qualify that quickly. The Trump Impeachment 1.0 was a disaster for Democrats. Since the start of the trial, President Trump’s job approval rating has hit its high. The economy keeps creating jobs at a brisk clip. The Democrats celebrated by giving us the Iowa Caucuses. President Trump’s State of the Union Address was a hit with independents. At the end, Pelosi was so happy with the speech that she ripped her copy of the speech in half. Technically speaking, President Trump’s acquittal didn’t come until the day after the State of the Union Address.

Despite all that, impeachment-crazed Democrats intend on investigating President Trump over Russia again. Again, Democrats insist that Putin wants to help re-elect President Trump. Andy McCarthy’s article shows why that doesn’t make any sense:

In the sequel, you’re asked to believe that Putin is manipulating the chess pieces to steal a second term for President Trump – somehow preferring an incumbent who beefs up the U.S. armed forces, pressures NATO allies to beef up theirs, imposes painful sanctions on Moscow, provides lethal aid to Ukraine, ramps up U.S. energy production, and seeks to thwart the Kremlin’s coveted natural-gas partnership with Germany, over an unabashed socialist who honeymooned in the Soviet Union and whose policies would wreck the American economy, end the resurgence of American energy production, and hollow out the American armed forces.

That might make sense to Adam Schiff but it doesn’t to anyone with a brain. On last night’s Greg Gutfeld Show, comedian Walter Kirn mocks this theory with a little humor, saying “If I had known that Russia wanted America to have low unemployment, to bring the troops home and to have the strongest stock market in history, I would’ve voted for Dukakis when they were backing him.” Schiff’s thinking (that’s who’s behind this, right?) must be even more warped than we’d thought. After hearing in the morning that Putin wants to help re-elect President Trump, we’re told in the evening that Putin wants to actually help Bernie. It doesn’t matter to the MSM. They keep spinning wild conspiracy theories:

Lawrence O’Donnell saying that President Trump is “a Russian operative” is utterly ridiculous. He should’ve been fired mid-show for saying something that stupid. Only Adam Schiff thinks that that’s plausible. And who know when the last time was that Schiff was competent? For that matter, do we know if he’s ever been competent?

The only way to fix this problem is by firing Schiff entirely. Returning him to the chairmanship of that committee is dangerous.