Archive for the ‘Impeachment’ Category

Nancy Pelosi’s double-down bet is rich with irony. Pelosi, one of the biggest liars this side of Adam Schiff, is instructing Joe Biden not to debate President Trump because Pelosi said that President Trump “and his ‘henchmen’ have no ‘fidelity’ to facts or the truth.”

This is a time-tested tactic of Ms. Pelosi’s. By saying this, she’s taking media attention away from her willingness to shaft blue collar employees and small business owners. President Trump wants a 4.0 version of COVID. Pelosi insists that President Trump spend $1,000,000,000,000 (that’s one trillion dollars) on bailing out public employee pension funds. These PEU pension funds have been virtually bankrupt for a generation.

The Pelosi faux diatribe also washes away (she hopes) the stories about Jerry Nadler packing the Supreme Court, AOC pushing for abolishing ICE and Chuck Schumer advocating for eliminating the legislative filibuster. Each of these initiatives would have difficulty hitting 20% approval with the public.

Then there’s Incoherent Joe’s difficulties:

Regardless of Pelosi’s tactics, Joe Biden is still Joe Biden. It’s possible that Biden doesn’t suffer any cognitive difficulties Tuesday night. Whether he does or doesn’t isn’t the important thing. The important thing for President Trump to do is remind all the different groups he’s helped of the things he’s helped with. With African-Americans, remind them of the First Step Act, funding for HBCUs, the Opportunity Zones tax cuts that are revitalizing blighted urban areas. Then highlight the Platinum Plan.

Democrats are worried that Ruth Bader-Ginsburg’s spot on the Supreme Court is about to be filled by a conservative jurist like Amy Coney Barrett. Democrats are worried because they’re making wild threats to pack the courts, to impeach President Trump for exercising his constitutional responsibility of appointing judges and for having the audacity of standing up to the Democrats’ bullying tactics.

This article outlines the Democrats’ plan of attack to thwart President Trump and Sen. Mitch McConnell:

Democrats began discussing their options on Saturday, with senators all vowing a furious fight to keep the seat vacant until next year when a new Senate convenes and when Joe Biden may occupy the White House. And while no specific course of action was detailed, Democrats said they were united on this: They planned to engage in an all-out battle to stop the nomination in its tracks by pressuring four Republicans to break ranks.

Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski have already said that they don’t want to vote before the election so the Democrats are halfways there. While they might pick off Romney, that’s pretty much the end of the line. Republican senators in tight races don’t dare cross President Trump. If they abandon President Trump, their political careers are finished. If senators like Thom Tillis, Joni Ernst and Martha McSally stick with President Trump, they’ll likely win reelection and Republicans will hold onto the Senate majority.

As President Trump moves to nominate a candidate to fill the seat of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died Friday, there are a growing number of Democrats threatening to implement a radical strategy and pack the Supreme Court if they take control of the White House and the Senate.

“If he holds a vote in 2020, we pack the court in 2021,” Rep. Joe Kennedy III, D-Mass., tweeted on Saturday. “It’s that simple.”

Kennedy isn’t the only Democrat who thinks that packing the court is the right thing to do:

“If Sen. McConnell and @SenateGOP were to force through a nominee during the lame-duck session — before a new Senate and President can take office — then the incoming Senate should immediately move to expand the Supreme Court,” House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler wrote on Twitter.

“Filling the SCOTUS vacancy during a lame-duck session, after the American people have voted for new leadership, is undemocratic and a clear violation of the public trust in elected officials. Congress would have to act and expanding the court would be the right place to start,” the New York Democrat continued.

If the Democrats held the Senate majority in 2016, there’s no doubt about whether they would’ve confirmed President Obama’s nominee to replace Justice Scalia. In fact, there’s no doubt that President Obama wouldn’t have nominated Merrick Garland. He would’ve picked someone far to the left of Garland.

Kevin Clinesmith, a former FBI lawyer, “will plead guilty to making a false statement in the first criminal case arising from U.S. Attorney John Durham’s review of the investigation into links between Russia and the 2016 Trump campaign.”

Clinesmith is being charged in federal court in Washington and is expected to plead guilty to one count of making a false statement, his attorney Justin Shur told 360aproko news. “Kevin deeply regrets having altered the email. It was never his intent to mislead the court or his colleagues as he believed the information he relayed was accurate. But Kevin understands what he did was wrong and accepts responsibility,” Shur later said in a statement.

That’s lawyerspeak for saying ‘My client is guilty as sin’ without admitting he’s guilty as sin. Sean Davis of the Federalist wrote this article on the expected Clinesmith guilty plea. In that article, Davis wrote this:

Horowitz and his team wrote in a 434-page report that Clinesmith, identified in the report as “OGC Attorney”, altered an email from a separate U.S. federal agency, believed to be the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), to falsely state that Page had never worked with the CIA to investigate suspected Russia agents operating within the U.S. In fact, as Clinesmith was told by the operative, Page had worked with the CIA previously, as well as with the FBI.

It’s difficult to picture a more corrupt action. This is a severe violation of Carter Page’s civil rights, starting with the Fourth Amendment. The text of the Fourth Amendment:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

It’s difficult to picture how a search could be determined to be reasonable if it’s based on a lie. Further, how could misrepresenting the facts satisfy the legal standard of probable cause? Clinesmith allegedly changed the email used in the FISA warrant application from saying that that Carter Page was a CIA asset to saying Page had never been a CIA asset. Further, the Fourth Amendment requires that someone affirm the accuracy of the application.

This is the first investigation into the Russia Collusion hoax that’s actually presented evidence of a crime. Adam Schiff’s faux impeachment investigation presented hearsay testimony but it didn’t present evidence that a crime had been committed. Schiff played fast and loose with the rules of evidence. Durham is a legitimate investigator who found the original email, then found the doctored email.

This is just the first shoe to drop. Clinesmith didn’t have the authority to sign off on the warrant application. He was just one piece of this puzzle.

It’s apparent that Democrats are attempting to provide a contrast between their law enforcement ideas and the Republicans’ plans for restoring safety to America’s streets. The comparison couldn’t be more unmistakable. The choice facing the American people is between Democrats defending riots in Portland, Seattle and Minneapolis vs. the Trump administration’s sending in federal law enforcement officers to protect neighborhoods and federal buildings.

Andy Ngo is providing incredible images from Portland. Check this out:


Next, check this out:


This is the definition of disgusting behavior:


Portland media is pretty much leftist fringe. They’d get along great with AOC, Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar. But I digress.

Before the hearing, Chairman Nadler was in a car accident. That was just the start of Nadler’s terrible day. He should’ve seen it as an omen of things to come. Not surprisingly, Axios published a partial transcript of Nadler’s accusations:

  1. First, under your leadership, the Department has endangered Americans and violated their constitutional rights by flooding federal law enforcement into the streets of American cities, against the wishes of the state and local leaders of those cities, to forcefully and unconstitutionally suppress dissent.
  2. Second, at your direction, Department officials have downplayed the effects of systemic racism and abandoned the victims of police brutality; refused to hold abusive police departments accountable for their actions; and expressed open hostility to the Black Lives Matter movement.
  3. Third, in coordination with the White House, the Department has spread disinformation about voter fraud, failed to enforce voting rights laws, and attempted to change the census rules to flaunt the plain text of the Constitution—all in the apparent attempt to assist the President’s reelection.
  4. Fourth, at the President’s request, the Department has amplified the President’s conspiracy theories and shielded him from responsibility by blatantly misrepresenting the Mueller Report and failing to hold foreign actors accountable for their attacks on our elections—undermining both national security and the Department’s professional staff in the process.
  5. Fifth, again and again, you personally have interfered with ongoing criminal investigations to protect the President and his allies from the consequences of their actions.
  6. Finally, and perhaps most perniciously, the Department has placed the President’s political needs over the public health by challenging stay-at-home orders in the states hit hardest by the pandemic. The Department’s persistent efforts to gut the Affordable Care Act will make recovery that much harder.

Expressing open hostility towards the Black Lives Matter movement isn’t a disgrace. It’s sound judgment. Further, I’d argue that Democrats have turned a blind eye towards black-on-black crime. Republicans have expressed hostility towards the BLM movement because BLM’s founders are admitted “trained Marxists.” That isn’t racist. The rest of Nadler’s accusations plus a dollar are worth less than a dollar. The accusations are typical ‘throw everything at the wall and hope that something sticks’ Democrat special.

Michael Goodwin’s column feasts on what’s left of Nadler’s carcass:

He came, he saw, he ate their lunch. Bill Barr, denied a meal break, feasted instead on a gaggle of Democratic amateurs.

Another congressional hearing, another Dem disaster. They planned a public hanging of the attorney general and spent weeks constructing their scaffold. He is corrupt, a liar, a toady, they and their media handmaidens assured us, and the House Judiciary Committee will reveal all.

Two obstacles quickly became apparent. The first is that the Dems were led by Rep. Jerry Nadler, whose rabidness is exceeded only by his haplessness.

When it comes to train wrecks, nobody does it better than Nadler. What he’s missing in intellectual heft, he makes up for with oversized ego. It’s why Pelosi demoted him during the Democrats’ failed impeachment attempt. It isn’t a stretch to say that Nadler is the worst chairman in the history of the House Judiciary Committee.

Yesterday’s fiasco in the House Judiciary Committee was both frightening and embarrassing. Back when Republicans ran the House, committee hearings had plenty of grandstanding but they broke plenty of news, too. Tuesday’s hearing of the House Impeachment Rubberstamp Committee (that’s what it’s famous for these days) got off to a terrible start when Chairman Jerry Nadler got into a car accident on his way to the hearing. It isn’t a stretch to say that it went downhill after that. Perhaps, the accident should be viewed as an omen.

Two things became immediately clear the minute the hearing got started. First, Democrats weren’t going to let William Barr answer their questions. Next, these Democrats were going to pound home the theme that Portland’s riots were “mostly peaceful protests.” At one point, Barr interrupted the Democrats and said (I’m paraphrasing here) “This is a hearing. Shouldn’t I be heard?”

The ‘Wall of Moms’ aren’t female patriots. Reporting from Portland indicates that they’re human shields used to protect weapons-carrying Antifa/BLM rioters. That isn’t what patriots do.

The Democrats’ storyline was demolished during Steve Chabot’s questioning of AG Barr:

It was demolished when AG Barr asked the rhetorical question “The courts are under attack. Since when is it ok to try to burn down a federal court? If someone went down the street to the Prettyman Court, that beautiful courthouse we have right at the bottom of the hill, and started breaking windows and firing industrial grade fireworks to start a fire and threw in kerosene balloons and start fires in the court, is that ok? Is that ok now?”

When AG Barr tried answering the Democrats’ questions in ways that didn’t advance the Democrats’ storyline, they’d cut AG Barr off, saying that their time was limited and that they were reclaiming their time. I didn’t keep count of how often Democrats pulled that stunt but it was easily a dozen times. Barr would then politely stop his reply and let Democrats make asses of themselves:

Democrats looked like jerks and idiots throughout. When Democrats didn’t get the answer they wanted, the frequent reply was “I’m reclaiming my time.” Democrats had a storyline that they’d established and they weren’t deviating from it.

What’s disgusting is that Nadler, Lofgren and the other Democrat idiots didn’t do is propose a solution to the anarchists torching once-beautiful cities like Seattle, Portland and Chicago. Democrats spent the day insisting that federal law enforcement officers were the bad guys and that Antifa-BLM rioters were the good guys.

If you want to live with a Democrat majority that thinks that burning down “the system” is the right thing to do, just vote Democrat. If you’re a thoughtful person who cherishes peaceful streets where riots are stopped quickly, you must vote for Republicans. It’s that simple.

Bill Barr’s opening statement in his testimony to the House Judiciary Committee won’t be received well by Democrats. Hopefully, though, we won’t be treated to another stunt like Steve Cohen’s chicken stunt, a stunt so stupid that even CNN criticized him. But I digress.

Early in his opening statement, AG Barr will attack Democrats over “the bogus ‘Russiagate’ scandal.” The full context of that collision is found in this paragraph, which says “Ever since I made it clear that I was going to do everything I could to get to the bottom of the grave abuses involved in the bogus ‘Russiagate’ scandal, many of the Democrats on this Committee have attempted to discredit me by conjuring up a narrative that I am simply the President’s factotum who disposes of criminal cases according to his instructions. Judging from the letter inviting me to this hearing, that appears to be your agenda today. So let me turn to that first.”

Later, AG Barr states “The President has not attempted to interfere in these decisions. On the contrary, he has told me from the start that he expects me to exercise my independent judgment to make whatever call I think is right. That is precisely what I have done.”

This hearing will be contentious, filled with lots of fireworks. Because Jerry Nadler isn’t the brightest bulb in the Democrats’ chandelier, it isn’t likely that Democrats will lay a glove on Barr, metaphorically speaking.

It got attention — of course it did. Political stunts in Washington usually do. Videos and photos of Cohen devouring fried chicken ran everywhere, a sign that perhaps the hearing was designed to be more of a farce than a serious inquiry.

The House Judiciary Committee used to be a serious committee. With idiots like Nadler chairing the committee and Cohen acting like a clown, it’s impossible to take these Democrats seriously. That being said, it’s clear that the MSM will do its utmost to prop up these clowns. Here’s the infamous chicken scene:

Republicans, starting with Ranking Member Jim Jordan, former Ranking Member Doug Collins, former Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner and former US Attorney Ken Buck, won’t need propping up. That’s before talking about Louie Gohmert, a former Texas state judge. These are serious people.

Also noteworthy is the fact that Val Demings and Karen Bass are auditioning to be Joe Biden’s running mate. They’ll likely use this opportunity to make their case for the job.

Anyone that hasn’t noticed the Democrats’ culture war for the past 3+ years isn’t paying attention. It started before Trump was elected, when they started illegally surveilling Trump’s campaign. That surveillance continued during the transition, with Jim Comey signing FISA warrant applications that weren’t properly predicated. After ‘St. Jim of the FBI’ was fired, the Deep State hired Robert Mueller to prove that President Trump colluded with Russia. That improper investigation ended with a gigantic thud.

When Devin Nunes reported that the FBI had abused the FISA warrant application process, Democrats insisted that the FBI had done everything by the book. Since then, there’s been impeachment based on what wasn’t in the Mueller Report, Democrats criticizing President Trump for doing nothing about COVID, which is BS. He bailed out NYC, Bill de Blasio and Andrew Cuomo, built a new testing regime because the existing one was ancient and deficient, opened up new factories that built PPE, N95 masks and ventilators.

Then George Floyd was killed by a white police officer in a city that’s been run by Democrats since the 1970s. Democrats blamed President Trump for that, too. Now Democrats are tearing down statues, letting Antifa and Black Lives Matter riot, destroy and loot major cities, then criticizing President Trump for being divisive.

While Democrats aren’t excited in the least about Dementia Joe Biden, they’re jazzed at the thought of using him as a trojan horse to retake the White House and the Senate. Democrats are excited to tear down everything that the United States stands for. That’s because the leading ideological driver for Democrats is BLM, a self-admitted Marxist organization.

The Declaration specifically cites “Nature’s God.” The Declaration emphatically states that “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” Marxists think that people are servants of the government and have no rights.

BLM shouts down people with opposing points of view. The First Amendment insists that people have the right to say what’s on their mind without worrying that the government will oppress them for their beliefs. The Declaration emphatically states that “all men are created equal.” BLM insists that government is more equal than the people.

The next time you hear that there isn’t a major ideological divide between Democrats and the vast majority of people, ask yourself this question: would you rather live in a nation where you’re shouted down because people disagree with you? Or would you rather live in a nation that lets you speak your mind without punishment?

That’s the difference between BLM Democrats and the rest of this incredible nation. That’s literally what’s at stake in this election. If you aren’t willing to fight, bite, scratch and claw your way to victory, prepare to wake up to President-Elect Joe Biden. It’s just that simple.

After impeachment failed, COVID took our mind off of Adam Schiff’s dishonesty. Thanks to Schiff’s op-ed, published by USA Today, we’re reminded that Schiff is still a world-class liar. Liar might be too harsh a word, though. It’s entirely possible that Schiff actually thinks that he’s telling the truth.

That would make him delusional or psychotic, not dishonest. That would mean that he needs to be put in a padded room, not a prison cell. That’s certainly a possibility. But I digress. Let’s examine the depths of Schiff’s potential psychosis.

The opening paragraph is fairly mundane, stating “Last week, we witnessed the reemergence of John Bolton, the president’s former national security adviser, and the release of his book. In it, Bolton describes his personal experiences with Donald Trump and his great alarm at Trump’s incompetence, his dangerous subordination of our national security to his own personal interests, and his fundamental indecency.”

Schiff’s psychosis isn’t exposed until the second and third paragraphs:

In short, Bolton is telling Americans what we already know. That the president is exactly what he appears to be: petty, self-serving, ignorant and utterly supplicant to autocrats in China, Turkey, North Korea and Russia.

We proved during the impeachment trial that Trump withheld hundreds of millions in military aid to Ukraine to coerce that country into announcing a sham investigation of his political rival. Bolton confirms our case and provides additional evidence of that flagrant abuse of power by providing a firsthand account of how Trump confirmed this illicit quid pro quo during a conversation they had. Moreover, Bolton also corroborates the testimony of Gordon Sondland, the former U.S. ambassador to the European Union who testified that “everyone was in the loop.” Indeed they were, including the secretary of State, the Defense secretary and Attorney General Bill Barr.

Saying that President Trump is “utterly supplicant” to China is beyond delusional. It’s totally unhinged with reality. Saying that President Trump is utterly supplicant to Russia is psychotic, too. President Trump sent Javelin anti-tank missiles to Ukraine, something that the Obama-Biden administration never did. If sending anti-tank missiles to Ukraine makes Trump utterly supplicant, does that make the Obama-Biden administration traitors or, at minimum, Russian assets? Remember this?

That’s what being utterly supplicant to Russia looks like. Sending anti-tank missiles to Ukraine, Russia’s neighbor, isn’t being supplicant, utterly or otherwise. That being said, Schiff was is lying when he said that Democrats “proved during the impeachment trial that Trump withheld hundreds of millions in military aid to Ukraine to coerce that country into announcing a sham investigation of his political rival.”

What was proven was that military aid was delayed until the Trump administration figured out whether the Zelenskiy administration was corrupt. The minute the Trump administration knew that President Zelenskiy could be trusted, the military aid was released. Mike Taylor proved that in this cross-examination of Gordon Sondland, the US Ambassador to the EU:

KABOOM!!! Sondland’s testimony during Michael Turner’s cross-examination is proof that the Democrats didn’t prove that military aid wasn’t withheld from Ukraine to coerce Ukraine “into announcing a shame investigation” into Joe Biden. That’s irrefutable proof that didn’t happen. That’s the opposite of what Schiff said.

The rest of Schiff’s op-ed consists of Schiff quoting discredited Bolton quotes. While I won’t state that Schiff and Bolton are world-class liars, I wouldn’t hesitate in saying that Schiff is discredited Ambassador Joe Wilson’s equal in terms of lying. (The old joke about Wilson was ‘How can you tell Wilson is lying? A: If his lips are moving.’ That fits Mr. Schiff perfectly.)

Good for the Supreme Court for telling Jerry Nadler to pound sand over their motion to get Mueller grand jury testimony declassified. The Supreme Court hasn’t issued a final ruling on the lawsuit but that’s likely heading the Democrats’ direction.

The Supreme Court temporarily denied a motion Wednesday from House Democrats to obtain grand-jury testimony and other documents from former Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation as they conduct what they’ve referred to as an “ongoing presidential impeachment investigation” into President Trump.

House Democrats are obsessed with finding something that will help them throw President Trump out of office. The Democrats’ hatred of President Trump is so strong that they’ve said no to multiple proposals that would’ve helped Hispanics and other blue collar workers. Impeachment isn’t going anywhere. The Democrats know this.

Rather than putting together ideas that appeal to all Americans, Pelosi’s Democrats have voted for things that excite their base. Despite that appeal to their base, Democrats trail badly in the enthusiasm gap, both in terms of the presidential election and in House races.

There’s a reason why grand jury testimony is kept confidential. If testimony taken during a grand jury isn’t enough to indict a person, that information shouldn’t be used as a political weapon. Democrats have seen tons of information. It didn’t lead to a conviction of President Trump. He’s now exonerated. Getting a second or third or fourth bite at the apple won’t convict President Trump. No amount of wishing will change that. It’s time that Democrats accept that.

Let’s hope that this is just part of a bigger movement. House Democrats want to investigate a law-abiding president. Whether you agree with his policies or not, there’s no denying that President Trump has obeyed each court order. That can’t be said about his predecessor. Gun-grabbing Democrats want to take away the rights of law-abiding gun owners. Each time they threaten a gun grab, the rank-and-file NRA strengthens and gets more motivated.

By comparison, the previous (Democrat) administration unmasked law-abiding citizens that they thought were conspiring with Russians. They didn’t unmask these law-abiding citizens because they had proof of illegal activity. They unmasked these citizens because they’d advised a candidate, aka Donald Trump. Time after time after time, these Democrats have let their hatred of Trump get the better of them. This isn’t normal. It’s proof of derangement.

People have started protesting against Democrat governors like Tim Walz, Gretchen Whitmer, J.B. Pritzker and Tom Wolf. The protests have focused on these governors’ illogical, unconstitutional and overreaching executive orders. If they keep this up, they’ll increase President Trump’s odds for re-election.

Tuesday night, Mike Garcia was predicted to lose the special election in California’s 25th District. Mollie Hemingway’s article tells a different story. Mike Garcia didn’t just win the special election. He won by a lopsided margin.

This isn’t good news for Democrats. First, let’s stipulate that special elections often have weird turnouts. With that stipulated, though, let’s get to the important part. Kevin McCarthy is smiling because, as he told Sean Hannity tonight, there are 42 seats that are rated better than the seat Garcia just re-flipped. Republicans only need to flip 17 more seats in 2020 to retake the majority.

Earlier this week, I wrote that the massive Trump army didn’t disappear during the pandemic. Let’s be clear about something. Leader McCarthy spoke about the robust ballot-harvesting operation that happened in this special election — on the GOP side. If that muscle shows up in November, which I predict is likely, then it’s virtually certain that Queen Pelosi will have to relinquish her Speaker’s Gavel for a second time. This time, it will have been after just a single term as Speaker.

There’s another thing we should be clear about. If we don’t make retaking the House a high priority, then tyrants will have chairmen’s gavels. Think about how devastating it’d be with Nadler, Schiff, AOC and Maxine Waters with gavels. But I digress. Here’s what Ms. Hemingway wrote:

The case made by Geoffrey Skelley and Nathaniel Rakich was simple: Supposedly Americans strongly prefer Biden and Democrats over Trump and Republicans, and they are particularly upset with Trump and other Republicans’ attempts to reopen the country as the global Coronavirus pandemic rages.

“On Tuesday, we’ll get a taste of whether Democrats’ electoral advantage on paper will hold up in practice, as California and Wisconsin hold special elections for two vacant congressional seats. The main event is in the California 25th Congressional District, a bellwether seat in the north Los Angeles suburbs, where both parties see a chance to add to their ranks in the House. But if Democrats are also competitive in the quickly reddening, rural Wisconsin 7th Congressional District, it could signal another blue wave in the fall,” they argued.

That “blue wave” crashed in Wisconsin:

Trump won Wisconsin by less than a point, but carried the district by 20 points, in 2016. Tiffany’s win over Zunker was about 6 points less than that, based on preliminary results. Tiffany rejected Democrats’ argument that the smaller margin was a sign that Trump’s support was waning. “Any time you lose by 14 points, I don’t think that’s a moral victory,” Tiffany said. “This is a decisive victory here.”

I’d totally agree with both points. I think Democrats are misreading things. While President Trump is working with any governor that asks for the federal government’s help, Queen Pelosi keeps delaying bills that’ve put small businesses out of businesses. Democrats apparently haven’t noticed that people don’t like the draconian measures put in place by tyrants like Illinois’s J.B. Pritzker, Michigan’s Gretchen Whitmer and Pennsylvania’s Tom Wolf. If that trio of Democrat governors were up for re-election this fall, I’d bet heavily that, at minimum, 2 of the 3 would lose.

This is funny:


To steal a line from the original A-Team, “God, I love it when a plan comes together.”