Archive for the ‘Jerry Nadler’ Category

In her interview with CBS’s Face the Nation, Speaker Pelosi said that President Trump “could come right before the committee and talk, speak all the truth that he wants if he wants. He has every opportunity to present his case.”

Technically, she’s right that he could do that. She’s being more than a little deceitful in that House Impeachment Committee Democrats wouldn’t believe anything he said. Let’s remember how this phase of the coup started. A CIA snitch, allegedly named Eric Ciaramella, met with Adam Schiff’s staff. One of the things that was initially reported about the CIA snitch’s complaint was that President Trump pressured Ukraine President Zelenskiy up to 8 times to investigate the Bidens. That turned not to be true.

Since then, President Zelenskiy has repeatedly denied, in multiple settings, these accusations. He even took the extraordinary step of holding a day-long press conference attended by 300+ legitimate, truth-seeking journalists and told the same thing. Further, Ukraine Foreign Minister Vadym Prystaiko, who has first-hand knowledge of the US military aid negotiations, said “Ambassador Sondland did not tell us, and did not tell me exactly, about the relation between the [military] assistance and the investigations. I have never seen a direct link between investigations and security assistance. Yes, investigations were mentioned, you know, in a presidential conversation. But there was no clear connection between these events.”

Despite all of this first-hand information from Ukraine’s President and Foreign Minister, Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi still trust the CIA snitch more than they trust Ukraine’s highest-ranking leaders. Considering the fact that House Impeachment Democrats trust snitches who don’t have first-hand information on the negotiations and considering the fact that House Impeachment Democrats, why would President Trump think that he’d get a fair hearing? Considering the fact that Adam Schiff has insisted since March, 2017 that he’s seen proof that’s “more than circumstantial” that President Trump colluded with Russia to steal the 2016 presidential election, proof that’s never surfaced, why would President Trump think that he’d get a fair hearing?

Ms. Pelosi knows that the final decision has been made. House Impeachment Committee Democrats will send a report to Jerry Nadler’s Judiciary Committee, where they will write articles of impeachment. From there, House Democrats will vote on a straight party line vote to impeach President Trump.

If House Impeachment Committee Democrats were interested in the truth, Chairman Schiff wouldn’t have stopped one Republican after another from introducing points of order or points of parliamentary procedure. Schiff isn’t interested in the truth. He’s hell-bent on impeachment whether the proof is there or not.

Pelosi isn’t interested in the Constitution, prayer or patriotism, as she frequently insists. She’s a partisan hack. Trusting her is like trusting foxes guarding hen houses. Trusting Democrats is like trusting a cobra not to strike when you make a sudden motion towards it.

President Trump won’t trust Pelosi’s ‘invitation’, though he’ll mess with her mind a little:


I don’t take this seriously, though it’s fun watching President Trump mess with Pelosi’s little mind.

This summer, impeachment Democrats tried stirring up passion for impeachment by having Robert Mueller testify. That was a historic failure, with Mueller essentially admitting that he didn’t write the report with his name on it. The Democrats’ next failure was with the Lewandowski hearing. At that hearing, Lewandowski toyed with Chairman Nadler to such an extent that it cost Nadler his opportunity to shine as chairman of the impeachment hearings.

This NY Post editorial proves that practice doesn’t always make perfect:

Democrats must have learned from the disastrous public hearings they’ve held in their attempt to impeach President Trump: Now, apparently, their witnesses must audition first behind closed doors before they go live before the TV cameras.

That was the case with the Dems’ “star” witnesses, US Chargé d’affaires for Ukraine Bill Taylor and Deputy Assistant Secretary of State George Kent, who testified behind closed doors before appearing for Wednesday’s televised impeachment show. And for former US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, who debuts on the small screen Friday.

Kent, Taylor and Yovanovitch are leading off the Democrats’ case for impeachment. The thing that they’ve got in common is that none of them have firsthand knowledge of what happened. They can offer opinions on what US foreign policy should be but that’s it. Policy differences between the President and career bureaucrats doesn’t amount to an impeachable offense. In fact, it isn’t close to that threshold.

The lesson to be learned is that this is the wimpiest set of facts ever to be considered for impeachment. Last night, it was reported that Ukrainian Foreign Minister Vadym Prystaiko told reporters that “Ambassador Sondland did not tell us, and did not tell me exactly, about the relation between the [military] assistance and the investigations. I have never seen a direct link between investigations and security assistance. Yes, investigations were mentioned, you know, in a presidential conversation. But there was no clear connection between these events.”

That’s firsthand information on the central issue of the Democrats’ case. It utterly demolishes the Democrats’ theory that President Trump tried extorting or bribing President Zelenskiy into investigating Joe and Hunter Biden. This Trump-hater should ride off into the sunset because she’s a bitter partisan:

The truth is that Democrats simply don’t have evidence to support their impeachment theory. Though they won’t admit it, it’s getting close to the time when the jury cries out ‘Game. Set. Match.’ Get out the jelly, folks. These Democrats are toast.

If Speaker Pelosi sincerely believed in the Constitution’s protections, she wouldn’t have published this set of impeachment rules. Every ‘right’ granted to President Trump and/or Republicans, Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler are allowed to take away. It isn’t that President Trump and Republicans weren’t ‘given’ some rights. It’s that the rights that they were given can also be taken away.

Unless the House makes the Republicans’ rights ironclad, Senate Republicans should publish a statement5 minutes after the House votes on Ms. Pelosi’s rules. The Senate’s statement should state without hesitation that the Senate won’t recognize the House’s articles of impeachment until a) all hearings from this point forward must be public, b) all GOP witness requests must be granted, c) all transcripts from previous witnesses must immediately be made available to the members of the Intel, Foreign Affairs, Oversight & Reform and Judiciary Committee members.

Without those rights guaranteed, the Senate should emphatically state that the House’s witch hunt won’t be taken as a legitimate investigation. Further, the Senate should emphatically make known that, because the House investigation wasn’t legitimate, the impeachment will be considered invalidated upon arrival to the Senate. That would send the signal to Ms. Pelosi and the freshmen Democrats that they’ll be taking a vote that’s meaningless. The message to the House would be that these vulnerable freshmen Democrats would cast a provocative, meaningless vote that immediately endangers Ms. Pelosi’s freshmen. Ms. Pelosi is lots of things but being an incompetent bean-counter isn’t one of those things. She’s very good at what she does, especially counting noses.

The minute the testimony transcripts are made public, including the cross-examinations of each witness, Republicans should examine the contents of those transcripts. The minute Republicans find testimony that doesn’t match Schiff’s spin, Republicans should highlight the discrepancy between Schiff spin and the transcript.

This hearing explains why Ms. Pelosi didn’t pick Jerry Nadler to be the public face of the Democrats’ impeachment investigation:

Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler have repeatedly told us that the Mueller Report would provide the proof to impeach President Trump. It didn’t. Next, Schiff and Nadler insisted that having Mueller testify would breath life into their witch hunt. This cross-examination by John Ratcliffe ended that pipe dream:

That’s why Pelosi wouldn’t let Nadler or Schiff conduct their hearings in public. These aren’t talented people. They’re idiots that got embarrassed in public. That’s why President Trump’s rights were violated. The dominant denigrating description for Schiff’s proceedings was that of a kangaroo court. I’d argue that the better fit is that of the Three Stooges, although I’m open to the argument that the Three Stooges were way funnier than Schiff and Nadler.

It isn’t that Republicans are afraid of fighting this faux impeachment on the merits. It’s that the argument over constitutional principles was easier. If Democrats think that John Ratcliffe, Devin Nunes, Jim Jordan and Mark Meadows aren’t confident in their ability to utterly dismantle the Democrats’ case, they’re foolish.

It’s time for Republicans to fight for these foundational constitutional principles. The Democrats’ frequent violations of President Trump’s rights aren’t just a threat to President Trump. They’re a threat to future presidents, too.

Last week, Adam Schiff opened the Joseph Maguire hearing by telling a fictional story that Schiff said was a realistic version of President Trump’s conversation with Ukraine’s President Zelensky. This is what Schiff read:

In essence, what the President Trump communicates is this: We’ve been very good to your country. Very good. No other country has done as much as we have. But you know what, I don’t see much reciprocity here. You know what I mean? I hear what you want. I have a favor I want from you through. And I’m going to say this only seven times, so you better listen good. I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent, understand? And don’t call me again. I’ll call you when you’ve done what I asked.

Later, Schiff insisted that it was a parody. To all who watched, that wasn’t clear. Then again, that’s what the man who said he had proof that President Trump had colluded with Russia.

Schiff told that fiction in 2017. We still haven’t seen that proof, probably because it doesn’t exist. Lee Zeldin reminded everyone that 3/22/2019 was the 2-year anniversary of Schiff’s dishonest statement:


But I digress. Rep. Andy Biggs has introduced a motion to censure Mr. Schiff. In addition to that motion, Rep. Biggs stated this:

During yesterday’s hearing, Chairman Schiff’s opening statement included a blatantly false retelling of President Trump’s conversation with the Ukrainian president. Democrats previously initiated an impeachment inquiry, which leads to one of the most serious constitutional duties of Members of Congress: removal of the President of the United States.

Through this process, if the President has committed high crimes or misdemeanors, Congress may overturn the election of the President and the will of the American people. It is therefore inexcusable to toy with the process and mislead the American public with such a statement.

Let’s compare Schiff’s fictional reading of President Trump’s statement with what President Trump actually said:

The President: I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike … I guess you have one of your weal thy people… The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation .. I think you’re surrounding yourself with some of the same people.

At no point in the ‘favor’ portion of the call did President Trump talk about the Biden family. Pelosi named Schiff to chair the impeachment hearings. Nadler is incompetent but he isn’t dishonest, at least to the extent that Schiff has proven himself to be.

This speaks for itself:

What’s important is that nothing in the transcript approaches “treason, bribery, high crimes or misdemeanors.” In fact, there isn’t a crime to be found anywhere in the transcript, the snitch’s complaint or the OLC ruling. This weekend, Ms. Pelosi said that impeachment was the biggest vote Congress can take other than a vote to authorize going to war. She’s right about that.

Impeachment should only be used when there’s clear evidence that the President has a) committed a felony, b) has betrayed the country to another country or c) intentionally put our nation’s people in harm’s way. None of those things happened here. Democrats simply hate President Trump. Democrats want him removed from office. It’s time to tell Pelosi’s Democrats to shut up and get lost.

PS- it’s time to censure Adam Schiff and label him the most dishonest Democrat in the nation.

When Nancy Pelosi hands the Speaker’s gavel to Kevin McCarthy, this epitaph should be attached to Ms. Pelosi and all of her Do-Nothing Democrats. (Jerry Nadler, Adam Schiff and Maxine Waters should get specially engraved millstones.) But I digress.

This morning’s headlines aren’t shy in declaring the Do-Nothing Democrats’ accomplishments and failures. House Judiciary Committee Democrats got their butts whipped by Corey Lewandowski yesterday. Jerry Nadler got twisted into a pretzel, first by Mr. Lewandowski, then by Ranking Member Doug Collins, then by John Ratcliffe. By the end of the day, Nadler was a pathetic puddle of a man. He clearly isn’t fit to be a committee chairman, especially chairman of an historic committee like the House Judiciary Committee.

The resolution would allow House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., to designate hearings from the committee and subcommittees into an impeachment investigation. Trump’s former campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, is scheduled to testify next week.

Armstrong, who voted against the measure along with all other Republicans on the Judiciary Committee, said the inquiry is taking up time and House Democrats “cannot get their act together on it.”

The Armstrong mentioned is North Dakota Representative Kelly Armstrong.

Unlike the Do-Nothing Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee, he’d like to get things done:

He introduced the Justice Reinvestment Initiative Act earlier this year which he said is a bipartisan issue that aims to reduce recidivism, curb addiction and reduce taxpayer spending on criminal justice. Armstrong said the act would focus on nonviolent and drug-related offenses.

Armstrong said he will prioritize the trade agreement, which he believes will pass soon. “It’s tough in ag country right now, and this will do a lot to help,” he said. “It’s a better deal for farmers, and it’s a better deal for the United States.”

Armstrong said his attention this session is also turned to prescription drug package bills that could reduce costs for lifesaving medicines and farm worker immigration reform.

Now that sounds like a positive, pro-growth agenda. I believe that there are some Democrats who would like to be productive. I just don’t see many of them in House leadership positions. This is a great sample of what happened during yesterday’s House Judiciary Committee hearing:

Pop the popcorn and sit back in your recliner. The Do-Nothing Democrats might be unproductive but they’re fun to ridicule. That’s the Do-Nothing Democrats’ legacy.

Anyone that watched this afternoon’s House Judiciary Committee hearing that featured former Trump Campaign Manager Corey Lewandowski as the Committee’s star witness saw Democrats that were frustrated. Those same Democrats were mockingly called “the Party of Impeachment” by Congressman Ratcliffe, (R-TX). By any stretch of the imagination, today’s hearing was a wretched sight.

If I was running the NRCC’s campaign, and I’m not (Tom Emmer is running things), I’d simply have candidates watch Jerry Nadler’s questioning of Mr. Lewandowski. Either that I’d have them watch the 3 Stooges, although the 3 Stooges weren’t as discombobulated as Chairman Nadler. Chairman Nadler wasn’t just bewildered during his questioning of Mr. Lewandowski. He was frustrated, too. Watch this videoclip and ask yourself if Chairman Nadler looks composed or agitated:

To me, Chairman Nadler looked extremely frustrated. He didn’t look composed whatsoever. Then compare that with how composed Rep. John Ratcliffe looks while questioning Mr. Lewandowski:

Doug Collins’ needling of Chairman Nadler might be my favorite part of the hearing:

The best part came when Collins said “I’ve never seen a majority so interested in packaging in all my life. You know why? Because they can’t sell what’s inside. They can’t sell the product so they just keep packaging it differently. You like having the press here. You like having the cameras because it makes it look like something’s happening but it’s not.”

Collins continued, saying “The American people are starting to get it. They’re starting to get it that if you’re just howling at the wind, you’re not doing anything.”

Later, Lewandowski got under Hakeem Jeffries’ skin:

Lewandowski later declined to play along with certain questions. New York Democratic Rep. Hakeem Jeffries asked Lewandowski if he was Trump’s “hitman, the bag man, the lookout, or all of the above?” “I think I’m the good looking man, actually,” Lewandowski replied.

Honestly, today’s House Judiciary Committee hearing exposed how incompetent Democrats are. If a back-bencher like Jerry Nadler is a committee chairman, that’s proof positive that Democrats aren’t worthy of holding gavels. Democrats were so bad that MSNBC and CNN criticized Committee Democrats:

NBC News correspondent Ken Dilanian suggested to MSNBC’s Ali Velshi that Democratic lawmakers were primarily focused on “getting their moment on television” than getting the facts from their witness.

Then there’s this:

Politico reporter and MSNBC analyst Jake Sherman questioned why Lewandowski’s involvement in the Mueller report “wasn’t the focus” of the hearing. “At the end of the day, Democrats are going to have to leave this hearing and say, ‘What did we accomplish today and did it bring us closer to X?’ They don’t know what ‘X’ is,” Sherman told the panel.

“They don’t know what they’re doing and at the end of this hearing, I suspect… that they feel like Trump has changed the rules so much that he’s impervious to all of this. He’s not afraid of impeachment… so they’re just kind of coasting along and doing their thing.”

Holding a gavel is a prestigious accomplishment. I didn’t see a single Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee that I thought was qualified to chair a committee. Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee got trolled. These Democrats sit on one of the most prestigious, historic committees in history. This is the committee that started the impeachment proceedings against Richard Nixon. Rather than looking the part, Corey Lewandowski trolled Eric Swalwell:

Lewandowski appeared to mock California Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell’s unsuccessful bid for the White House earlier this year, calling him “President Swalwell” at one point during questioning.

These Democrats aren’t ready for primetime. I’m not certain that they’re up to a part on Keystone Cops. I am certain that they’re best suited to back-benchers in the minority party in the House.

Isn’t it a coincidence that this article just happened to pop up right after Jerry Nadler’s impeachment inquiry fizzled, again. It seems like the fiftieth time on that. It feels like the fiftieth time that Democrats have brought forth unsubstantiated accusations against Brett Kavanaugh.

Democrats have put together another ‘scandal’ involving Justice Brett Kavanaugh. This time, a significant portion of the Democrats’ presidential candidates insist that Justice Kavanaugh be impeached. According to this article, “Top 2020 Democratic contenders Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Beto O’Rourke, Cory Booker and Julian Castro announced on Sunday that Supreme Court Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh ‘must be impeached,’ after a new, uncorroborated and disputed allegation of sexual misconduct against Kavanaugh surfaced in a weekend New York Times piece.”

Apparently, Democrats don’t care if they destroy Justice Kavanaugh’s family, including his beautiful daughters. Remember this moment from Justice Kavanaugh’s hearing?

That’s a moment I’ll never forget. Conversely, I wish I could forget the torture that Democrats inflicted on Justice Kavanaugh’s family. I wish I didn’t have to know this BS:

The Times piece by Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly, adapted from their forthcoming book, asserted that a Kavanaugh classmate, Clinton-connected nonprofit CEO Max Stier, “saw Mr. Kavanaugh with his pants down at a different drunken dorm party, where friends pushed his penis into the hand of a female student.”

The Times did not mention Stier’s work as a Clinton defense attorney, or Stier’s legal battles with Kavanaugh during the Whitewater investigation, and simply called him a “respected thought leader.”

Then there’s this:

But, the Times’ article also conspicuously did not mention that Pogrebin and Kelly’s book found that the female student in question had denied any knowledge of the alleged episode. “The book notes, quietly, that the woman Max Stier named as having been supposedly victimized by Kavanaugh and friends denies any memory of the alleged event,” observed The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway. “Seems, I don’t know, significant.”

The book reads: “[Tracy] Harmon, whose surname is now Harmon Joyce, has also refused to discuss the incident, though several of her friends said she does not recall it.”

It isn’t a coincidence that Ms. Blasey-Ford’s attorney, Debra Katz, just admitted in a speech that Dr. Blasey-Ford had political motivations for testifying:

This is frightening:

The Times went on to note in the article that it had “corroborated the story with two officials who have communicated with Mr. Stier,” but the article apparently meant only that the Times had corroborated that Stier made his claim to the FBI. No first-hand corroboration of the alleged episode was apparently obtained.

In other words, the NYTimes’ article is just about worthless. This story is just as corroborate as Ms. Blasey-Ford’s initial accusation. This is just as frightening:

Nevertheless, Democrats announced a new effort to topple Kavanaugh. Hawaii Democratic Sen. Mazie Hirono, who infamously said last year that Kavanaugh did not deserve a fair hearing because he might be pro-life, said the Senate Judiciary Committee should begin an impeachment inquiry to determine whether Kavanaugh lied to Congress.

Sen. Hirono should take a civics class from Dean Urdahl. Impeachment doesn’t start in the Senate. Impeachment investigations start in the House because the House is the only body authorized by the Constitution to start articles of Impeachment.

These Do-Nothing Democrats haven’t contributed a thing to make the United States better. That’s why Democrats should be run out of Dodge, proverbially speaking.

For months, Democrats insisted that they “could walk and chew gum at the same time.” Democrats insisted that they could investigate the Trump administration while legislating. The facts speak for themselves. The Democrats haven’t gotten a single major bill passed since taking control of the House. That’s because they’ve expended their energy investigating the Trump administration since getting their gavels.

There’s been a crisis at the US’s southern border. Do-Nothing Democrats haven’t lifted a finger to fix that crisis. Vice President Pence stayed at a Trump hotel in Doonbeg. Jerry Nadler and his gang of Do-Nothing Democrats initiate an investigation within hours. There’s an opioid crisis that’s killing people throughout the Rust Belt. Do-Nothing Democrats haven’t written legislation to fix this crisis. William Barr published Robert Mueller’s summary without immediately publishing the Mueller Report. Do-Nothing Democrats call Barr up to Capitol Hill the next week to get to the bottom of this crisis.

The highest-profile investigation is being conducted by the House Judiciary Committee. Chairman Jerrold Nadler says it has reached a key phase in building an impeachment case against the president, but Speaker Nancy Pelosi has yet to give a green light to a formal inquiry. The Judiciary panel plans to vote Thursday on procedures for conducting hearings that could lead to an impeachment resolution.

The Do-Nothing Democrats’ blood-lust for President Trump is getting exposed:

Pivotal hearings are set for this month and into the fall, to follow up on former Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s findings and build a case on whether Trump tried to obstruct the probe of Russian interference in the 2016 election. Other potential presidential abuses of power or corruption also will be under scrutiny.

Let’s get serious here. When the Watergate investigation started, there were a series of identifiable crimes that they were investigating. With this witch hunt, Democrats can’t identify a crime that’s been committed. It’s just that they’re certain that President Trump is evil personified. That’s why the Do-No Democrats keep drilling down into a dry well.

It’s time PETA started investigating Chairman Nadler for beating a dead horse. Do-Nothing Democrats have led that dead horse to water but it’s painfully obvious that it can’t swim.

If this article doesn’t give you a headache, then you’re better than me. Jerry Nadler, one of the biggest phonies ever to wander the halls of congress, is a man on a mission. Nadler thinks that it’s the Democrats sole mission to impeach President Trump.

The Democrats’ latest fishing expedition/waste of time ‘investigation’ into impeachment involves Vice President Pence’s “decision to stay at President Trump’s golf resort in Doonbeg, Ireland.” Said nattering Nadler in a letter “to White House Counsel Pat Cipollone and Secret Service Director James Murray late Thursday”, Nattering Nadler is “seeking information about Trump’s ‘apparent promotion and solicitation of foreign and U.S. government business at Trump Organization owned or affiliated properties.'”

Seriously? That’s what he’s spending the taxpayers’ money on? Perhaps people should chip in and buy Nadler, and the other Democrats’ on the House Judiciary Committee, their own copies of the Constitution. They should especially highlight Article II, Section 4, which says “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors. Staying at the President’s golf resort doesn’t come close to rising to the level of treason, bribery or other high crimes. Then again, Negative Nadler plans on digging into the Stormy Daniels scandal even though Robert Mueller has already looked into it and decided there’s nothing there:

Nadler is leading Democrats right off a cliff. Instead of working to fix the crisis at the border or rewriting immigration and asylum laws, Nadler and other Democrats are pretending that they’re working on serious impeachment investigation. It’s anything except serious.

This is yet another example of Pelosi’s Do-Nothing Democrats wasting the taxpayers’ money on an unserious investigation. Just so people can see how unserious Democrats are, the definition of treason is “the crime of betraying one’s country, especially by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government.” Staying at a friend’s hotel just doesn’t rise to the level of treason.

That doesn’t matter to Nattering Nadler because he knows Donald Trump is evil and it’s just a matter of time until President Trump is impeached. What a nincompoop.

Andy McCarthy’s op-ed unintentionally highlights the difference between Lindsey Graham and Jerry Nadler. They chair the Judiciary committees in the Senate and the House, respectively.

Here’s what Nadler is doing:

Elections have consequences. This was a point we tried to make many times in the run-up to the 2018 midterm elections. The Democrats won control of the House fair and square. That means they get to drive the agenda.

Their agenda, kinda sorta, is the impeachment of President Trump — which is to say, the quixotic quest to build political support for it. According to the Washington Post, that effort is about to sink deeper into farce: Hearings on Stormy Daniels and the hush-money payments to conceal trysts that Donald Trump had — allegedly, of course — a decade before he ran for president.

Here’s what the Constitution says about impeachment:

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Simply put, campaign finance transactions from before a candidate is elected doesn’t rise to the level of treason, bribery or other high crimes or misdemeanors. In fact, it isn’t even close. Nadler knows this. Still, he insists on wasting the people’s time on this charade.

While Nadler wastes time and money on this charade, Lindsey Graham is working on something substantive that would make people safer and improve their lives:

Co-host Steve Doocy asked Graham, R-S.C., why the Flores agreement has been politicized. Graham repeated “they hate Trump” in response, arguing Washington needs people who don’t share such hatred of the president. “I have been working on immigration for 10 years. I’m willing to deal with a DACA population… I’m willing to spend money in Central America to make life better. I’ve done everything I know to do… I can’t get one Democrat to agree with me that you should apply for asylum in Central America, or Mexico, not the United States.”

Sen. Graham’s bill would address the Flores Agreement, which essentially is where the practice of catch and release starts. That’s the cornerstone of the Democrats’ open borders policies.

Graham’s bill would also change the US’s asylum laws. The biggest change would be to force asylum seekers to apply in their country of origin at a US embassy or consulate. It would also increase the burden for getting an asylum hearing. Most people seeking asylum (upwards of 90%) pass the initial test. Few pass the court test. (That’s in the 10-15% range.) Those that pass the first test get assigned a court date that’s often 2 years off.

The comparison couldn’t be clearer. Jerry Nadler hasn’t worked on a single substantive piece of legislation since becoming the Chair of the House Judiciary Committee. Instead, he’s pushed an impeachment charade to appease the Democrats’ looney tune base.

Sen. Graham has spent time confirming judges to district and appellate courts. He’s written legislation to reform out-of-date immigration laws intended to keep Americans safe. He’s worked hard on building bipartisan agreement to fix our broken immigration laws.

Sen. Graham’s legislation should gain bipartisan support because protecting our citizens shouldn’t be a partisan issue. Rep. Nadler’s investigation shouldn’t get bipartisan support because he’s conducting a purely partisan investigation into something that doesn’t rise to an impeachable offense.

In 2020, the American people need to decide whether they want to vote for Republicans who are trying to get things done or whether they want to vote for Democrats who have spent their time conducting sham investigations that do nothing except employ lots of lawyers. I’ll vote for Republicans who want to get important things done. I won’t vote for Do-Nothing Democrats. I won’t vote for Do-Nothing Democrats who’ve voted for extremist health care legislation that’s expensive and that would eliminate private health insurance. Pelosi keeps asking for a Senate vote on the bills her House has passed. Sen. McConnell is right in not giving these bills a vote because they aren’t bills that would fix anything.