Archive for the ‘Elise Stefanik’ Category

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.

Back during the House’s impeachment inquiry, the conventional wisdom was that President Trump had to beef up his communications team. Rather than hiring a bunch of consultants to help with that, President Trump beefed up his legal team, hiring people like Alan Dershowitz, Robert Ray and Ken Starr. President Trump wasn’t finished, though. Later, he “announced eight House Republicans will join his legal defense team.”

Joining the team were Jim Jordan, John Ratcliffe, Elise Stefanik, Doug Collins, Lee Zeldin, Mike Johnson, Debbie Lesko and Mark Meadows. These aren’t the only reinforcements, though. Since the trial started, senators like Lindsey Graham, Josh Hawley, John Kennedy and Tom Cotton have played a more prominent role in defending President Trump against the House Democrats’ impeachment accusations.

This morning, for instance, Sen. Cotton was interviewed by FNC’s Sandra Smith:

Sen. Cotton is right. If Democrats had compelling evidence, they’d present it and “let it speak for itself.” They don’t have compelling evidence, which is why they’ve repeated the same things over and over again.

Since beefing up their legal team, these attorneys have applied a full-court press. Dershowitz has appeared on ABC’s This Week, CNN’s State of the Union and on FNC’s Hannity and Ingraham Angle shows. Robert Ray has been on multiple shows, as has Elise Stefanik, Doug Collins, John Ratcliffe, Jim Jordan, Josh Hawley and Tom Cotton. They’ve taken turns highlighting Adam Schiff’s dishonest statements. When Trump’s legal team makes their presentation, expect them to include many of Schiff’s dishonesties in that presentation.

If witnesses are called, expect Hunter Biden to be called. If he’s called, here’s why:

Talk about opening a door of opportunity for Republicans. BTW, this is what a confident, polished attorney looks like:

President Trump’s legal team and communications team are fitting together perfectly. They’re confident and well-prepared for each contingency. That’s what a team of professionals looks like.

The NYTimes published this op-ed yesterday. Apparently, their editors weren’t working. Either that or their editors are just worthless. The op-ed states incorrectly that “G.O.P. women, at both the national and state levels, are on the brink of extinction.”

That’s either sloppy or intentionally dishonest. It’s most likely intentional dishonesty because it didn’t require any research to find facts that refute the statement. Elise Stefanik saw the op-ed and replied with a series of fact-based tweets. Here’s one of Ms. Stefanik’s fact-based tweets:

If that isn’t enough, check out this Stefanik tweet:

This one is my personal favorite:

I love reading about a freshman Democrat heading for defeat first thing in the morning. The only thing that’s better is hearing that 2 freshman Democrats are heading for defeat. The point is that the NYTimes’ op-ed isn’t accurate. (That’s a shock, right?) The other point is that Elise Stefanik is definitely a rising star in the GOP. She’s tough as nails and she doesn’t back down. Finally, let’s end with this Stefanik tweet:

It’s time to step away from last week’s impeachment hearings to examine something significant. It’s apparent that Adam Schiff’s Democrats specialize in partisanship. It’s apparent because the supposed high crimes and misdemeanors President Trump was accused of committing kept changing.

In her article, Mollie Hemingway wrote “Before we get to the politics and how they were played by Republicans and Democrats, it should be noted that President Donald Trump has not been credibly accused of committing any crime, much less a high crime or misdemeanor. It’s almost shocking that Trump, of all people, keeps managing to do well on this score. Yet, as with the Russia collusion hoax, in which he was accused of being a traitor to his country, the lack of evidence for the charges against him is his ultimate saving grace.”

She continued with this:

What the charge is keeps changing, of course. The whistleblower initially suggested a campaign finance violation arising from a call Trump had with the president of Ukraine. That morphed into a quid pro quo for military aid to Ukraine, then extortion, then bribery, then obstruction of justice, then back to a quid pro quo, but this time only a quid pro quo for a White House meeting. The lack of certainty among even Trump’s critics certainly worked in his favor.

Let’s get this straight. Each of these charges is laughable. They’re laughable to the extent that extortion and bribery were suggested by focus groups commissioned by the DCCC, the Democrats’ campaign committee commissioned with losing the Democrats’ House majority in 2020. (That wasn’t what they were hired to do. That’s what will happen. It’s like the old Shakey’s Pizza saying — ‘We’re a non-profit. It wasn’t planned that way. That’s just how things worked out.’)

Seriously, though, Democrats kept switching from one ridiculous accusation to the next. They didn’t have proof for their accusations. Democrats simply relied on the MSM to sell the charges. That’s what happens when muscles atrophy. They relied more on the media, less on legitimate, well-researched arguments. The Democrats’ eutrophication was best displayed by Ms. Pelosi’s choice between Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler to spearhead the Democrats’ Impeachment Committee. Schiff is terrible but he’s significantly better than Nadler.

To impeach a president, you need evidence of a major offense that everyone looks at, then says ‘Yep, that’s an impeachable offense.’ The Democrats don’t have that. It’s like the football team with 3 QBs. That team really doesn’t have any. When you have 3-5 impeachable offense theories, you’re really not in the ballpark. You might not even be in the parking lot outside the ballpark.

Meanwhile, Republicans on the Impeachment Committee took apart the Democrats’ ridiculous accusations with ease. Jim Jordan demolished Bill Taylor. Mike Taylor demolished Gordon Sondland. Elise Stefanik took apart Ambassador Yovanovitch:

John Ratcliffe demolished Lt. Col. Vindman:

The MSM won’t admit that they’re propping up House Democrats but that’s what’s happening. Republicans don’t need propping up because they’re taking the Democrats’ testifiers apart with precision and discipline. It helps that the facts are on the Republicans’ side. It helps that the Democrats’ testifiers have relied on weasel-word testimony.

Most people understood that it wasn’t likely that Nancy Pelosi would put the USMCA trade negotiation up for a vote before the end of the year. This article seems to confirm that suspicion. The article opens by saying “House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday that she doubts Congress has enough time left to pass the USMCA this year, but Democrats and the Trump administration will continue talks next week to work out a compromise on remaining issues.”

The latest DC rumor is that Pelosi is holding that vote up to pressure reluctant Democrats to vote for impeachment. In this scenario, Ms. Pelosi will withhold the USMCA vote until after they vote on impeachment. Ms. Pelosi knows that Schiff’s impeachment case was weak going in. Further, she knows that impeachment got beaten up quite a bit during the public hearings.

When Democrats voted to authorize the impeachment inquiry, 232 Democrats voted for it. When the entire House votes on Articles of Impeachment, there won’t be 232 Democrat votes. If I was scoring the hearings the way I used to score baseball games, I’d score it this way: Democrats pretty much won each day’s opening statements, especially the witnesses’ opening statements. I think that was intentional.

Think of the witnesses’ opening statements as political clickbait. Their job was to feed the MSM. It was then up to the MSM to plaster that day’s “bombshell” into that day’s chyrons to pound the message home. That message was simple — Testifier A, B or C delivered a “bombshell” testimony. The case against Trump is insurmountable. He’ll be impeached and removed. Pay no attention to what Fox says. Don’t pay attention to what Townhall or the Federalist says, either.

What Democrats wanted people to ignore was the cross-examinations, especially this one:

Mike Turner’s cross-examination of Ambassador Sondland all but officially finished the Democrats’ impeachment inquiry. That’s the most powerful cross-examination of the 5 days of hearings. All of the other gossip from the other testifiers is worthless. Sondland spoke directly with President Trump and President Zelenskiy. He’s the only one with firsthand knowledge of the central characters in these hearings.

Turner, BTW, is just one of the new GOP heroes coming out of these hearings. For those of us who’ve followed this Russia Ukrainian Hoax, we already knew that Devin Nunes, Jim Jordan and John Ratcliffe were heavyweights. During the 5 public hearings, Elise Stefanik, Mike Turner and Chris Stewart turned in their finest performances.

Holding up the USMCA is further proof that Ms. Pelosi is the nastiest partisan this century. She’d rather hurt President Trump than do what’s right for the nation. The US needs selfless leaders who put the nation’s needs ahead of partisanship. That isn’t what we’re getting right now. Right now, we’re getting overdoses of partisanship from Pelosi and Schiff.

Speaker Pelosi’s Dear Colleague letter is filled with more s–t than a Thanksgiving turkey. The first pile of BS in Ms. Pelosi’s letter is “Last week, the country was impressed by the valor and patriotism of the dedicated public servants and career diplomats, appointed by the President, in speaking truth to power.”

That’s utter BS. Wednesday’s snooze fest attracted 13,800,000 viewers. By comparison, Jim Comey’s testimony attracted 19,500,000 viewers. Further, Friday’s made-for-TV episode attracted 12,700,000 viewers. If “the country was impressed”, wouldn’t interest be building, not shrinking?

Then there’s this BS:

The facts are uncontested: that the President abused his power for his own personal, political benefit, at the expense of our national security interests.

Actually, those facts were contested yesterday afternoon by Tim Morrison and Special Envoy Volker. Each of the testifiers from last week and this, by the way, have agreed that President Trump has done more to help Ukraine militarily than President Obama did. President Trump is 7-for-7 amongst the testifiers. Further, one of the testifiers said that it was appropriate for President Trump to hold the aid until they were certain Ukraine had dealt with their corruption issues. In fact, there’s a provision in the NDAA that requires that determination before the aid is released.

The most telling part of Ms. Pelosi’s letter is this part:

The weak response to these hearings has been, “Let the election decide.” That dangerous position only adds to the urgency of our action, because the President is jeopardizing the integrity of the 2020 elections.

The next bit of proof that President Trump committed an impeachable offense will be the first bit of proof that he’s committed an impeachable offense. Last week’s testifiers weren’t even witnesses because they didn’t witness anything. They testified about their thoughts, feelings and impressions of what they’d heard the President had done. Yesterday was the first time we had legitimate witnesses who had a firsthand understanding of what President Trump had done with Ukraine policy.

Why should We The People trust a bunch of corrupt Democrats who’ve wanted to impeach President Trump since the day after his election? That’s foolishness. That’s like trusting an arsonist with some unstable chemicals and some detonators. What could possibly go wrong? This cross-examination pretty much sums things up:

So many words, such a BS blizzard from House Democrats.

Ever since President Trump tweeted about Ambassador Yovanovitch during Friday’s hearing, the MSM have been obsessed with the tweet as their latest shiny object. It’s time that the MSM that still are interested in things like credibility to stop obsessing over that shiny object. In the grand scheme of things, the tweet, which was ill-advised, is a major ‘so what’.

It doesn’t change the fundamentals of the Democrats case. That’s because the Democrats still haven’t presented anything resembling a piece of evidence of an impeachable offense. That’s because last week’s testifiers (they weren’t witnesses because they didn’t witness anything) took turns either admitting that they couldn’t identify an impeachable offense (John Ratcliffe asking Kent and Taylor) or Yovanovitch telling Chris Stewart that she wasn’t in Ukraine for President Trump’s phone call with President Zelenskiy in late July.

Why isn’t the MSM talking about Devin Nunes’ questioning of Ms. Yovanovitch at the start of the hearing? Right at the start, Ms. Yovanovitch admitted that she isn’t a fact witness:

The most memorable line in the hearings was Jim Jordan’s exchange with Ambassador Taylor:

What information does Ambassador Taylor have that’s important? It’s apparent that he isn’t a central figure in Kiev. Shouldn’t we insist that the MSM report things that are important to the impeachment case?

There’s a novel approach to evaluating whether Impeachment Democrats have made a legal case for impeachment. What information have George Kent, William Taylor or Marie Yovanovitch supplied that’s proof of an impeachable offense? There’s another test to this. The Impeachment Democrats’ theory on why President Trump should be impeached is because he withheld lethal military aid from Ukraine unless Ukraine investigated the Bidens. What proof have they offered that President Trump did that? Remember that second- and third-hand stories aren’t proof. They’re uncorroborated stories, even if other diplomats with other second- and third-hand stories agree with the original story.

This isn’t a shiny object but it’s important to the Democrats’ carefully-crafted impeachment story. Why isn’t there any reporting on why the Democrats set up the rules the way they did? Were they written that way because Impeachment Democrats didn’t want to give skilled people like John Ratcliffe, Elise Stefanik and Jim Jordan the opportunity to make Swiss Cheese out of the Democrats’ case?

Thus far, Democrats haven’t gotten questioned whether they’ve established a single important fact. That’s intentional. The MSM was the driving force behind impeachment. The MSM wanted impeachment far more than Ms. Pelosi wanted it.

When impeachment backfires on Democrats, Ms. Pelosi will wash her hands of the mess and say I-told-you-so. That’s true but she’s the one that caved. She’s the Democrat that didn’t fight for her position until the bitter end. In the end, Pelosi is just as guilty of dragging the nation through this divisive fight for no legitimate reason.

Democrats, Ms. Pelosi included, are the political definition of losers. All the shiny objects in the world won’t change that.

Nancy Pelosi’s 3 faces are showing. It isn’t a flattering look. When Ms. Pelosi declared this impeachment inquiry in the House, Ms. Pelosi worked hard to leave the impression that Democrats saw this as a somber undertaking. Ms. Pelosi talked about the importance of prayer in a time like that. When she declared the impeachment inquiry into existence, Ms. Pelosi said “If we have to honor our oath of office to support and defend the Constitution of the United States from all enemies, foreign and domestic, that’s what we’ll have to do. But we have to have the facts. That’s why I’ve said, soon as we have the facts, we’re ready.”

That sounds so dramatic. Then Pelosi made an additional demand. According to the article, “Pelosi said Trump making the transcript of his call with the president of Ukraine public is not enough. She said the whistleblower complaint is what is important and is what the Trump administration has been withholding.” The last thing Pelosi and the Democrats expected was for President Trump to make those documents available. When the documents were made public, the gossip that Democrats in the media had peddled was pretty much discredited.

Let’s call that Pelosi ‘Discredited Nancy’ because that’s who she is.

Yesterday, another of Ms. Pelosi’s faces was displayed. In an interview with CBS’s Face the Nation, Ms. Pelosi’s bitter partisan face came out:

This is what Ms. Pelosi said:

I think part of it is his own insecurity as an imposter. I think he knows full well that he’s in that office way over his head. And so he has to diminish everyone else.

Let’s be clear about this. Nancy Pelosi knows that Adam Schiff’s gaveling down of Elise Stefanik was a terrible look for Impeachment Committee Democrats:

Further, Ms. Pelosi knows that it wasn’t a good week for Impeachment Committee Democrats from the standpoint of the information that came out. Just 4 minutes into John Ratcliffe’s cross-examination of Bill Taylor and George Kent, they sat silent when Mr. Ratcliffe asked if either had seen an impeachable offense:

Ms. Pelosi’s hyperpartisan statement about President Trump being in over his head was intentional. Ms. Pelosi was forced into that statement to change what people were talking about. Ms. Pelosi doesn’t think for a split-second that President Trump is in over his head. Ms. Pelosi hasn’t thought for a split-second that President Trump thinks of himself as an imposter. Ms. Pelosi thinks that Impeachment Committee Democrats didn’t have a good week so she stepped in to change the subject.

Let’s call this Pelosi ‘Calculating Nancy.’

Actually, Ms. Pelosi’s third face isn’t a public face. It’s the face she must wear when she thinks of how she didn’t want to start impeachment. It’s the face of disgust. It’s the face of I-told-you-so.’ It’s the face of her vitriol. That’s her worst face. That’s why it isn’t seen in public. Twice, Ms. Pelosi has been Speaker. The first time, she was speaker for 2 terms. In those 2 terms, she shoved Obamacare down America’s throats. This time, her final time, she’ll be Speaker for just one term. During this term, her ‘noteworthy’ accomplishment will be hyperpartisan impeachment. Adam Schiff’s and Jerry Nadler’s handling of impeachment is historic only in the sense that they compare unfavorably to Peter Rodino and Henry Hyde.

Let’s call this final face of Ms. Pelosi ‘Vitriolic Nancy.’ Think of Vitriolic Nancy as the real Nancy.

Despite Ms. Pelosi’s calculated hateful statement, the facts haven’t changed:

  1. Impeachment Committee Democrats still haven’t come close to identifying an impeachable offense.
  2. Impeachment Committee Democrats still haven’t called a witness who has witnessed anything firsthand.
  3. Impeachment Committee Democrats, especially Adam Schiff, have looked mean-spirited and hyperpartisan.
  4. Adam Schiff has behaved terribly towards Elise Stefanik. Ms. Stefanik is a big girl and can take it. The point is that she shouldn’t have to deal with the Democrats’ vitriol and chauvinism.

Finally, it’s apparent that, to the Democrats, the #MeToo Movement is just a political weapon. Adam Schiff’s facial expressions when dealing with Ms. Stefanik said everything.

This morning, Adam Schiff, the Democrat chair of the House Impeachment Committee, did his best tyrant impersonation after Devin Nunes tried yielding time to New York Congresswoman Elise Stefanik. Upon yielding time to Rep. Stefanik, Schiff gaveled in, repeatedly saying “The gentlewoman will suspend.” Ms. Stefanik replied “What is the interruption for this time? It’s our time.” Schiff replied “The gentlewoman will suspend. You are not recognized.”

Next, Devin Nunes tried intervening, saying “I just recognized her.” Schiff, acting like a petty tyrant, replied “Under House Res. 660, you are not allowed to yield except to Minority Counsel.” Technically, he’s right but the bigger point is that Schiff isn’t interested in working cooperatively with Rep. Nunes. Chairman Schiff isn’t behaving like Peter Rodino with Nixon or Henry Hyde with Clinton. Schiff hasn’t hesitated in acting like a world-class jerk.

In terms of acting like the chairman of an impeachment investigation, Schiff has hit a new low that Hyde and Rodino never came close to hitting. Hyde and Rodino cared most about doing what’s best for America. They were fair-minded. They gave the defense wide latitude. By contrast, Schiff lied about what President Trump said during President Trump’s phone call with President Zelensky. After he lied while putting the faux transcript into the Congressional Record, the other Democrats just sat there like potted plants. Those Democrats apparently didn’t see anything wrong with Schiff’s actions.

After Schiff’s sexist behavior towards Ms. Stefanik, Schiff’s Democrats sat silent just like they did when he lied about President Trump’s conversation. Schiff’s Democrats aren’t profiles in character. Schiff’s Democrats aren’t profiles in integrity.

It’s painfully obvious that the Democrats set up the rules to restrict the Republicans’ cross-examination of witnesses. Schiff’s interested in running a tightly scripted production. Pelosi knows that Nadler wasn’t up to the job of running impeachment hearings. That’s why Pelosi shifted that responsibility to Schiff. That’s why Pelosi tightened up the rules for Schiff’s hearings. Pelosi isn’t totally stupid. She’s aware of Adam Schiff’s ability to screw things up.

Another thing that’s becoming obvious as the hearings progress is that Adam Schiff is exceptionally thin-skinned. Prior to this heated exchange, Devin Nunes read the transcript from President Trump’s first phone call with President Zelenskiy into the record. He didn’t ask that it be admitted into the Congressional Record. Nunes literally read the entire transcript into the record so it couldn’t be turned into another Schiff parody. Here’s that tweet:

Rep. Stefanik needled Schiff by reading Schiff’s tweets into the record:

“The chairman refused to allow us to put these into the record with unanimous consent,” Stefanik, R-N.Y., said. “As we know, it is important to protect whistleblowers from retaliation and firing…but in this case, the fact that we are getting criticized for statements he, himself, made earlier in the process shows the duplicity and abuse of power we see.”

Chairman Schiff’s actions were disgusting. As I said earlier, Schiff’s performance isn’t worthy of the People’s House. In Schiff’s mind, this is Pelosi’s House or the Democrats’ House. If Democrats had any respect for We The People, they’d have greater respect for the people’s elected officials.

Unfortunately for America, these Democrats only respect themselves.