Archive for the ‘Democrats’ Category

The Democrats’ impeachment fever has turned into the Democrats’ impeachment disease. Rep. Karen Bass, a California Democrat, told TMZ’s Harvey Levin that she’s willing to impeach President Trump again if he’s re-elected:

Rep. Karen Bass, D-Calif., said Tuesday she’s willing to impeach President Trump again if he wins reelection in 2020. TMZ founder Harvey Levin presented Bass with a scenario in which Trump wins a second term but Democrats take over the Senate from the Republicans.

“There’s no such thing, really, as double jeopardy in an impeachment trial because it’s political,” Levin said. “Suppose he gets reelected… and you win back the Senate in a big way. If you did that, would you be inclined to take a second bite at the apple and reintroduce the exact same impeachment articles and then send it through again a second if you have a Democratic Senate on your side?”

“So, you know, yes, but I don’t think it would be exactly the same and here’s why,” Bass responded, “because even though we are impeaching him now, there’s still a number of court cases, there’s a ton of information that could come forward. For example, we could get his bank records and find out that he’s owned 100 percent by the Russians.”

She continued, “You are absolutely right in your scenario, but the only thing I would say slightly different is, it might not be the same articles of impeachment because the odds are we would have a ton more information, and then the odds of that, sadly enough, is that, you know, he probably has other examples of criminal behavior.”

It’s frightening to think that there’s someone in the House who’s crazier than Al Green, Maxine Waters or Adam Schiff. If that’s possible, though, Ms. Bass is a contender.


Check this out:

For example, we could get his bank records and find out that he’s owned 100 percent by the Russians.”

That’s frightening. What other fantasies has she concocted in her head?

Earlier in the day, Bass spoke with Fox News’ Neil Cavuto and expressed her “rock-solid” confidence that House Democrats had enough votes to pass articles of impeachment. The Democrats unveiled two impeachment articles earlier in the day: one for abuse of power and one for obstruction of Congress.

Bass isn’t the only warped Democrat. Check this out from Leslie Marshall:

President Trump and his defenders claim the decision by House Democratic leaders Tuesday to propose two articles of impeachment against him is all about politics. They say the misconduct he is accused of is a hoax and that he is the victim of a witch hunt. Don’t believe them. Democrats are acting in spite of politics. They know impeachment could hurt them politically and perhaps even give Republicans a House majority in elections next year.

And Democrats are acting even though they know the Republican-controlled Senate will acquit Trump in a trial and not throw him out of office. That’s because removing the president in a Senate trial takes 67 votes, and there are only 47 Democrats and allied independents in the Senate.

Sadly, Republicans are putting party loyalty over patriotism and circling the wagons around Trump to support him no matter what, closing their eyes to the overwhelming evidence of his impeachable conduct. There is no way 20 Republican senators will vote to remove Trump from office.

Republicans aren’t putting party loyalty ahead of patriotism. The Constitution requires that impeachment only be done if 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.” The 2 articles of impeachment don’t even identify a crime, much less a high crime.

Contrary to Ms. Pelosi’s statements, Democrats don’t respect the Constitution. They talk about their love of the Constitution, then display their ignorance of it. The thought of impeaching a president for abuse of office is frightening. That’s the type of subjectivity that James Madison didn’t want. Using that type of criteria, every president would’ve been subject to impeachment.

Democrats need to regain their faculties. Their thinking is beyond the pale.

Isn’t it amazing that Speaker Pelosi announced that they’d reached agreement with Richard Trumka on the USMCA trade deal that President Trump negotiated minutes after House Democrats announced 2 articles of impeachment? Speaker Pelosi did her best to pretend that Trumka and House Democrats did the heavy lifting when, in fact, President Trump and U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer did the heavy lifting. Sen. Grassley got it right when he said this:

Renegotiating NAFTA was a central campaign promise made by President Trump. He kept his word and Americans will enjoy the many benefits of this upgraded trade deal as a result.

This is a huge deal for industrial and agricultural states. Think Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. While only bitter partisan Democrats care about impeachment, literally millions of Americans living in Rust Belt states care about USMCA.

While Democrats take the blame for the most bitterly partisan impeachment process in US history, President Trump gets the credit for pushing the USMCA. At the time, Democrats expressed skepticism that President Trump would be able to renegotiate NAFTA. President Trump isn’t just on the verge of replacing NAFTA with USMCA. President Trump is on the verge of finalizing a major trade deal with China, too. If those trade agreements are finalized, ratified and officially signed in the next 3-6 months, the economy will take off. On the strength of that red-hot economy, President Trump will cruise to victory in November.

Despite Ms. Pelosi’s pro-Democrat spin, the American people know that Democrats didn’t influence the main agreement. Despite Pelosi’s statements at the press conference that Richard Trumka and Richard Neal played major rolls in a major recrafting the USMCA agreement, Democrats won a few concessions, which is typical on trade agreements.

Tonight, President Trump will hold another campaign rally, this time in Hershey, PA. Rest assured that President Trump will trumpet the victory on USMCA. Rest assured that he’ll spend time criticizing Democrats, especially the Schiff-Nadler-Pelosi partisan articles of impeachment. Tonight’s rally figures to be highly animated.

Last week, the nation found out that Jonathan Turley a) voted for Hillary Clinton and b) is a man of integrity. This morning, it’s worth examining Prof. Turley’s op-ed about the Horowitz Report.

For instance, Prof. Turley wrote “Justice Department officials insisted to Horowitz that they choose not to interview campaign officials because they were unsure if the campaign was compromised and did not want to tip off the Russians. However, the inspector general report says the Russians were directly told about the allegations repeatedly by then CIA Director John Brennan and, ultimately, President Obama.”

Prof. Turley continued, saying “In the meantime, the allegations quickly fell apart. Horowitz details how all of the evidence proved exculpatory of any collusion or conspiracy with the Russians.” How can that be? Jim Comey insists that the FBI did nothing wrong. Comey saying that the FBI did nothing wrong ranks right up there with Adam Schiff saying that he’d seen evidence that was “stronger than circumstantial.”

Then there’s this:

Horowitz also finds no sharing of information with FISA judges that undermined the credibility of the dossier or Christopher Steele himself.

This won’t turn out well for Adam Schiff, who put out a report in February, 2018. In that report, which was published after Devin Nunes published “a memo with these explosive revelations that the FBI had targeted [former Trump campaign adviser] Carter Page with surveillance warrants that the dossier from a rival campaign had been the basis for that, and that the FBI had not been straight up with the FISA court.”

While Jim Comey takes a victory lap of sorts, the truth isn’t on Mr. Comey’s side. In his op-ed, Comey said “For two years, the president of the United States and his followers have loudly declared that the FBI acted unlawfully in conducting a counterintelligence investigation of Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential campaign. They repeatedly told the American people that the FBI had done all sorts of bad things, such as tapping Donald Trump’s wires during the campaign, opening an investigation without adequate cause, with the intent to damage Trump, and inserting secret informants into the Trump campaign.”

Kim Strassel, though, sticks with the facts in a series of tweets that are best titled “Horowitz findings of facts.” In the first tweet, she wrote “Yup, IG said FBI hit threshold for opening an investigation. But also goes out of its way to note what a “low threshold” this is. Durham’s statement made clear he will provide more info for Americans to make a judgment on reasonableness.”


Ms. Strassel’s third tweet is especially sweet:

4)In fact, IG report says dossier played “central and essential role” in getting FISA warrants. Schiff had access to same documents as Nunes, yet chose to misinform the public. This is the guy who just ran impeachment proceedings.

In other words, Schiff lied while Devin Nunes got it right. That’s the inescapable truth.

Yes, Mr. Holier-Than-Thou (Mr. Comey, not Schiff), President Trump’s well-informed followers have said “that the FBI acted unlawfully in conducting a counterintelligence investigation of Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential campaign.” Let’s talk about that a little. The Horowitz Report emphatically stated that “6)IG finds 17 separate problems with FISA court submissions, including FBI’s overstatement of Steele’s credentials. Also the failure to provide court with exculpatory evidence and issues with Steele’s sources and additional info it got about Steele’s credibility.”

Mr. Comey, if you think that vindicates the FBI, then you’re as delusional as Adam Schiff. In fact, it’s difficult determining who looks worse after reading the report’s findings. Let’s just call it a tie — for last place in the gutter.

10)Overall, IG was so concerned by these “extensive compliance failures” that is has now initiated additional “oversight” to assess how FBI in general complies with “policies that seek to protect the civil liberties of U.S. persons.”

Does Mr. Comey think that the inspector general adding additional oversight “to assess how FBI in general complies with ‘policies that seek to protect the civil liberties of U.S. persons'” is vindication for the FBI?

When the dust finally settles, the FISA warrant application process will be significantly changed to protect against the FBI’s abuses of the system. Those abuses started happening on Mr. Comey’s watch. Whether Mr. Comey or others in the upper echelons of the FBI committed crimes hasn’t been determined. That’s for Mr. Durham to determine. What’s been determined, though, is that Mr. Comey’s FBI made a series of mistakes (is it a mistake if it’s intentional?) that kept the surveillance on Carter Page intact.

What’s been determined is that the Horowitz Report vindicates Devin Nunes, the man that Democrats and Mr. Comey criticized from pillar to post. Unlike Mr. Schiff, Mr. Nunes didn’t just see what he wanted to see. Mr. Nunes saw what was actually there.

Apparently, Chairman Nadler thinks he’s Nostradamus now. In his own words, Chairman Nadler said “The integrity of our next election is at stake. Nothing could be more urgent.” Then he continued, saying “The president, based on his past performance, will do everything he can to make it not a fair election, and that is part of what gives us the urgency to proceed with this impeachment.”

What’s amazing is that Chairman Nadler never cites proof for these aspersions. What’s even more disgusting is that Chairman Nadler isn’t the only Democrat spouting this nonsense. It isn’t surprising that Speaker Pelosi said “The president leaves us no choice but to act because he is trying to corrupt, once again, the election for his own benefit.”

That’s an amazing statement considering the fact that Democrats still haven’t introduced evidence that President Trump corrupted the 2016 election. We have allegations that Hillary Clinton hired people to corrupt the 2016 presidential election. We know that the Obama FBI did its best to corrupt the 2016 election. We know that because the Obama administration didn’t do anything when Ukraine’s Ambassador to the US wrote an op-ed criticizing then-Candidate Trump, saying he was unfit for office.

Honest people would declare that interfering in a US presidential election. Of course, Democrats don’t think that’s interference, thereby failing Prof. Dershowitz’s shoe-on-the-other-foot test. Thus far, Prof. Turley is the only law school professor, other than Prof. Dershowitz, who’s passed that test.

The Democrats’ dishonesty shines through in this Washington Post article:

At the heart of the Democrats’ case is the allegation that Trump tried to leverage a White House meeting and military aid, sought by Ukraine to combat Russian military aggression, to pressure President Volodymyr Zelensky to launch an investigation of former vice president Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden, as well as a probe of an unfounded theory that Kyiv conspired with Democrats to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.

Democrats keep insisting that Ukraine and Russia couldn’t both interfere in the 2016 US presidential election. My question to Democrats is simple. Why can’t both interfere in our elections? Why can’t they have different motivations for their interference? Is there a law that prohibits Russia and Ukraine from both interfering in US elections?

Chairman Nadler isn’t basing his statements on verified information. It’s based on Democrats’ daily talking points. What’s most disappointing is that Democrats aren’t just suffering from TDS, aka Trump Derangement Syndrome. They’re suffering from UDS, aka Ukrainian Derangement Syndrome, too.

Finally, Chairman Nadler looked rather confused in this fight with Louie Gohmert:

It’s easy to see why Speaker Pelosi didn’t want to deal with impeachment. Chairman Schiff is disgustingly dishonest. Chairman Nadler is dumber than Chairman Schiff is dishonest.

Last week, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell delivered this speech on the Senate floor. In his speech, as he’s done frequently, Sen. McConnell highlighted Speaker Pelosi’s obsession with impeachment:

For weeks now, Republicans have been asking Democrats to take off their impeachment blinders and let Congress legislate for the American people. We’ve argued that American families deserve better than this partisan paralysis where Democrats obsess over impeachment and obstruct everything else.

This very morning, Speaker Pelosi gave a speech on national television to push forward her rushed and partisan impeachment process. Not one word on the outstanding legislation the American people actually need. Nothing on the USMCA, or the NDAA, or funding for our armed forces. It’s all impeachment, all the time.

Only in this town, only in Washington D.C., does anybody think it’s okay for our armed forces to go unfunded… and a major trade deal to go unpassed… because Democrats are too busy hosting a panel of law professors to criticize President Trump on television.

Here’s the video of Sen. McConnell’s speech:

Why haven’t Democrats from the Problem Solvers Caucus publicly push passage of USMCA? These Democrats want to be known as solving problems. Thus far, it’s more accurate to call them Do-Nothing Democrats than Problem Solvers. They’re a bunch of wimps who haven’t gotten a thing done. If these so-called moderates won’t stand up to Queen Nancy, then they’re essentially worthless. We The People need doers, not talkers.

The good news is that the policies implemented by President Trump and Republicans are paying dividends to the people President Trump promised to never forget. It can’t be happy times for Mike Bloomberg. This article from Bloomberg BusinessWeek contains good news for the American people:

The economy appears to be in a much better place than experts feared: good news for an incumbent president heading into an election year. In its analysis of the November jobs report, Bloomberg Economics lowered its projection of 2020 year-end unemployment to an astounding 3.3 percent and forecast “U.S. Election Day Unemployment to Be Lowest Since ’52.”

Back when we last had unified GOP government, important things actually got done. Republicans didn’t fix the mess that Democrats created with health care but they got rid of tons of counterproductive anti-energy industry regulations.

The Trump administration’s deregulation policies have made the US energy dominant. We’re now exporting more oil than we’re importing. Further on the regulations front, President Trump issued this executive order, which says in part:

Section 1. Purpose. It is the policy of the executive branch to be prudent and financially responsible in the expenditure of funds, from both public and private sources. In addition to the management of the direct expenditure of taxpayer dollars through the budgeting process, it is essential to manage the costs associated with the governmental imposition of private expenditures required to comply with Federal regulations. Toward that end, it is important that for every one new regulation issued, at least two prior regulations be identified for elimination, and that the cost of planned regulations be prudently managed and controlled through a budgeting process.

The latest report reported that 7.5 old regulations were eliminated for each new regulation created. That’s the biggest reason why the economy is strong and getting better. It’s time to get rid of this Do-Nothing Democrats majority in the House so we can return to doing the people’s business.

Something that’s gotten lost in the impeachment fight is how Speaker Pelosi was intimidated into impeachment by AOC + 3 versus how she’s essentially ignored ratifying the USMCA treaty that the Problem Solvers Caucus. Speaker Pelosi knows that she can intimidate the so-called moderates. That’s what she’s done the last 15 years. When they were debating Cap & Trade, she needed Collin Peterson to vote for it. At the time, I wrote that Collin was a Blue Dog Democrat … until Nancy needed his vote.

Pelosi can’t intimidate AOC + 3. In fact, they’ve intimidated Pelosi into supporting impeachment. Pelosi’s majority isn’t possible without moderates. Still, there’s no enthusiasm without AOC + 3. It’s a Catch 22 situation.

What isn’t a difficult thing to figure out is what will happen to Democrats running for re-election. Appearing on Sunday Morning Futures With Maria Bartiromo, Kevin McCarthy said “Well, Nancy Pelosi, if you’re one of those 31 Democrats running for re-election — well, you’re a little afraid with hearing what Nancy Pelosi just did putting out this timeline for articles of impeachment. She just gave up your job. If you look at some new polling from American Action Network in these Democrat districts, 54% of their district is more likely to vote against you if you vote for impeachment — and they already have.”

That’s the news from the 31 districts that we’ve heard about since seemingly forever ago. If 54% of voters are voting against you if you vote for impeachment, that isn’t good news for those Democrats who Nancy Pelosi is forcing into voting for impeachment. Couple that information with the increasingly prevalent opinion that Democrats should be called the Do-Nothing Democrats and you’ve got the starting foundation for a wave election that will sweep Ms. Pelosi out of office.

This won’t end well for Democrats because people across the nation have turned on them. Democrats have peddled one impeachment story after another for the past 3 years. First, they peddled the Russia collusion story. When that went bust, they shifted to obstruction of justice. When that wasn’t taken seriously, they pounced on the whistleblower’s report. When that wasn’t taken seriously, Democrats impaneled some focus groups to come up with words that provided greater impact. That’s when they settled for bribery.

Of course, the story hasn’t changed. The transcript is still the transcript. The witnesses against President Trump are limited. It isn’t surprising that people have tuned out. The boy cried wolf a dozen times too often. The boy’s credibility doesn’t exist anymore. (In this story, the boy is played by Adam Schiff. Go figure, right?)

If Adam Schiff isn’t worried, he isn’t getting good legal advice. Kim Strassel’s article highlights a multitude of crimes that Mr. Schiff might be prosecuted for. That’s the subject for others, though, so let’s unpack Ms. Strassel’s article.

In her article, she wrote “Mr. Schiff divulged the phone logs this week in his Ukraine report, thereby revealing details about the communications of Trump attorneys Jay Sekulow and Mr. Giuliani, ranking Intelligence Committee member Devin Nunes, reporter John Solomon and others.” A paragraph later, she continued, saying “If we’ve never had a scandal like this before, it’s in part because it is legally dubious. Federal law bars phone carriers from handing over records without an individual’s agreement. The statute makes some exceptions, including for federal and state law-enforcement agencies. But not for lawmakers. ‘There does not appear to be any basis to believe that a congressional committee is authorized to subpoena telephone records directly from a provider—as opposed to an individual,’ former Attorney General Michael Mukasey tells me.”

Members of Congress can’t access these phone logs because they fall outside the purview of their legislative responsibilities. For those saying that Schiff had additional authority thanks to impeachment, the reality is that Schiff requested these records a month before the House voted to initiate the impeachment inquiry. It was after Nancy Pelosi declared that they were starting the inquiry but that’s insignificant in the court’s eyes.

That’s because the Constitution gives the authority to “the House of Representatives.” Literally for decades, courts have ruled that the House hasn’t acted until it votes. Though Ms. Pelosi has frequently acted like a queen, it isn’t likely that a court will grant her queen status. It isn’t likely that a court will rule that a legislator, even a Speaker of the House, can unilaterally declare the start of impeachment.

The question is whether Mr. Schiff, in his zeal to bring down Mr. Trump, has made himself legally vulnerable. In Kilbourn v. Thompson (1881), the U.S. Supreme Court held that “a congressional investigation into individual affairs is invalid if unrelated to any legislative purpose.” Mr. Schiff might argue he has wider powers in an impeachment inquiry. But the House didn’t approve the inquiry until Oct. 31, a month after he issued his main AT&T subpoena.

Rep. Jim Banks wrote “It doesn’t take a constitutional lawyer to recognize that subpoenaing these call records violates the spirit of the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unlawful searches and seizures.”

Schiff didn’t go to court to get these records. He submitted the request directly to AT&T. The reason why legitimate requests go through the courts is to have the courts supervise the process.

“The subpoenas aren’t related to legitimate congressional oversight,” says constitutional lawyer David Rivkin. Because there’s “no conceivable legislative purpose to obtaining these call logs and publicly disclosing this information, Mr. Schiff would not be able to benefit from the Speech and Debate Clause immunity that otherwise protects members of Congress from civil and criminal liability.” Mr. Rivkin adds that any of the targets could sue Mr. Schiff under state law for invasion of privacy or intentional infliction of emotional distress, and potentially even compel Mr. Schiff to turn over documents in discovery.

The other thing that should be considered is throwing Schiff out of the House for violating another congressman’s Fourth Amendment rights. Nobody is above the law, especially the chairmen of powerful committees.

Schiff’s actions are reprehensible. Ethics charges should be filed with the House Ethics Committee immediately against Chairman Schiff. If Democrats protect him against those charges, highlight which Democrats protected Schiff for his disgusting behavior in campaign ads. Let Democrats know that they’ll pay a steep price for protecting corrupt members of their party.

Adam Schiff hasn’t displayed the proper caution for his high-ranking position. He hasn’t been accurate with his statements or findings of facts. His accusations aren’t based on verified information. Simply put, he’s been reckless. That’s why he needs to be stopped permanently.

If these were normal times, Democrats would’ve already been laughed off the planet for attempting to impeach President Trump. Initially, they pinned their hopes on the Mueller investigation. The Mueller investigation was a historic failure. Mueller’s team of partisan lawyers didn’t find a crime during their investigation. They cited 10 instances that might’ve been categorized as obstruction of justice but they didn’t make a determination.

Next, Democrats pinned their hopes on Mueller testifying before Chairman Nadler’s committee. That was such a failure that it caused Speaker Pelosi to shift impeachment hearings to Adam Schiff’s committee. Had Democrats been smart, they simply would’ve dropped the investigation then. Democrats aren’t smart. Instead of dropping their investigation, they plowed ahead.

Ignore the media’s reporting. Schiff’s hearings were a disaster for Democrats. The testifiers couldn’t identify a single crime, much less an impeachable crime. That isn’t the Democrats’ biggest problem, though. The Democrats’ biggest problem, which will be highlighted during the Senate trial, is that they don’t have any evidence of a crime. The night before each hearing, the testifiers’ opening statements were leaked to the MSM. Immediately, the MSM declared the next day’s witnesses would deliver “bombshell” testimony.

What we quickly learned is that anyone could make provocative accusations in their opening statements. Sustaining those provocative statements through disciplined, hard-hitting cross-examination is a quite different thing. It didn’t help that the majority of testifiers didn’t witness anything. George Kent didn’t have first-hand knowledge of the Trump-Zelenskiy phone call. Bill Taylor didn’t either. Jim Jordan jumped all over Bill Taylor’s understanding of things:

Marie Yovanovitch, another of the Democrats’ “star witnesses”, was fired from her ambassador’s job in April, 2019, 3 months before the Trump-Zelenskiy phone call. At the time of the call, she was teaching in the United States. At one point, Devin Nunes commented that he didn’t know why Yovanovitch was testifying. Considering the fact that she didn’t have any first-hand information of anything, that’s a fair point.

Last Wednesday, George Washington University’s Jonathan Turley stated “this is certainly the thinnest of the modern record. If you take a look at the size of the record of Clinton and Nixon, they were massive in comparison to this, which is almost wafer thin in comparison. There’s a difference between requesting investigations and a quid pro quo. You need to stick the landing on the quid pro quo. You need to get the evidence to support it. It might be out there, I don’t know. But it’s not in this record.

None of this matters to the Democrats, though. When third-hand hearsay is considered “bombshell testimony”, the fix is in. When people who had nothing to do with the phone call are called witnesses, the fix is definitely in. When a crime can’t be identified and evidence is nowhere to be found, it’s best to just skip the illegitimate hearings in House and skip to the Senate’s legitimate hearings where you can call witnesses and offer exculpatory evidence.

I wrote awhile back that anyone that thought that Democrats would stop investigating President Trump after he’s acquitted by the Senate were kidding themselves. This article is proof that I was right. The only way to stop the Do-Nothing Democrats is to defeat 40-50 of them next November. The only way to get important legislative and judicial things done is to increase the GOP majority in the Senate. But I digress.

“If the Senate doesn’t vote to convict Trump, or tries to monkey w his trial, he could of course be retried in the new Senate should he win re-election,” tweeted Neal Katyal, who served as acting solicitor general under former President Obama. “Double jeopardy protections do not apply,” he added, referring to the principle that suspects can’t be tried twice for the same crime. “And Senators voting on impeachment in the next months know this.”

That’s a blueprint for nonstop Democrat-led investigations. It’s also a threat against the GOP majority in the Senate. Katyal implies that Republicans voting not to convict will be targeted.

The important part that Katyal isn’t talking about is that Democrats haven’t found a crime, an impeachable offense or any evidence of wrong-doing after 3 years of investigations. These rabies-infested Democrats hate President Trump. They’ve literally wanted to impeach him since before President Trump’s inauguration. That isn’t hyperbole. That’s historical fact.

The 2020 House election comes down to something simple. Do the American people want a Congress that puts America’s priorities first or do the American people want a Congress that’s all-investigations-all-the-time? Unlike the Democrats’ impeachment investigations, there’s proof of what the Democrats’ intentions are. The Democrats’ priorities are investigate, investigate and investigate.

Speaker Pelosi has yipped a little about the bills sitting on Mitch McConnell’s desk. What Ms. Pelosi won’t talk about is the list of high priority items sitting on her desk. Pelosi won’t talk about ratifying USMCA except to momentarily say that they’re “working their way to yes.” She hasn’t said that they’ve been on that road since last year or that they expected it to be easy.

This week, Ms. Pelosi told a CNN audience that “civilization as we know it today is at stake”:

Watch Ms. Pelosi’s gyrations as she’s speaking. She doesn’t look like a healthy person. I don’t say this to mock her. I say it because it looks like she’s out of control.

Republicans, it’s imperative to retake the House majority. This investigative abuse can’t continue. The president needs to have time to do his job. Democrats have done their utmost to deprive him of that ability. Thank God we’ve had a president powerful enough to power his way through the Democrats’ BS.

Democrats will keep pushing for investigations even if the Republicans have the majority. The good news is that, this time, Bill Barr won’t wimp out and appoint a special counsel. The better news is that Congress would start doing its job. The best news is that the economy will take off the minute USMCA is ratified and the US-China Phase One deal is reached.