How Political Is the Democrat’s Impeachment: Their actions and media campaign is so blatant, it’s hard to ignore. Just out, the Democrats are switching “language” from “quid pro quo” to embrace the term “bribery” after DCCC polling showed it would be more effective with voters?!
Then Speaker Pelosi says “If the president has something that is exculpatory – Mr. President, that means do you have anything that shows your innocence – then he should make that known.” Really, maybe the actual transcript of the call?!? The Democratic Speaker of the House is turning the Constitution on its head by telling the President he is presumed guilty until proven innocent???
Before this latest effort, House Democrats had already tried to impeach the President THREE times.
2017, H.RES. 646 – with 58 Dems
2018, H.RES. 705 – with 66 Dems
2019, H.RES. 498 – with 95 Dems
…and now! Don’t let Nancy Pelosi and Democrats tell you they’re doing this reluctantly.
The Facts:
1. Contents of the transcript were not disputed.
2. No evidence emerged to show pressure on Ukraine.
3. Ukraine did not know about the unreleased aid at time of call.
4. The aid was released.
Calls & meetings between U.S. officials and Ukrainians:
7/25—Call between POTUS and Zelensky
7/26—Volker & Taylor meet Zelensky
8/27—John Bolton meets Zelensky
9/1—VP Pence meets Zelensky
9/5—Sens. Johnson & Murphy meet Zelensky
Not one mention of linking dollars to investigation of the Bidens.
9/11—Aid released Nothing close to impeachable here. Move on.
Democrats Key “Claim”: Both the Democrats and mainstream media are hanging their entire case for impeachment that somehow the investigation on Russian and Ukraine’s involvement in the last election, including any role the Bidens may have played, that it was for “personal benefit” or “political benefit” of President Trump. Nothing more than claims, opinions and implications…BUT NO PROOF. Just an opinion Democrats and the mainstream media trying to make a fact. Our government has spent around 3 years on this “Russian hoax” conspiracy and getting to the bottom of it is key. It should NEVER be allowed to happen again.
A Difference of Opinion An Impeachment Does NOT Make: All the “testimony” the Democrats have gathered still amounts to little less than some policy makers having a difference of opinion as to how foreign policy should be made! Read the testimony.
Ultimately, the President gets to make that call. He is the Commander and Chief. Just because you disagree with how he does things, what he does and under what circumstances doesn’t make it an impeachable offense.
Asking a foreign government to investigate potential corruption is NOT an impeachable offense. The fact the Biden’s could be part of the bigger “Russia hoax” investigation that has created so much bad will in this country is a legitimate ask. And just because Biden is a potential political rival doesn’t give him immunity from being investigated…nor does that make it an impeachable offense.
So you see, much like the policy community, I am not president. Donald Trump is.
It is the president, not the bureaucracy, who was elected by the American people. That puts him — not the National Security Council, the State Department, the intelligence community, the military, and their assorted subject-matter experts — in charge of making policy. If we’re to remain a constitutional republic, that’s how it has to stay.
Democrats to Democrats – Lying OK: First we had Congressman Schiff lie to the American people saying he had “proof” of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians. Tens of millions of taxpayer’s dollars later, the Mueller report concluded there was no proof of collusion. Next we have the Ukrainian hoax…more nothing out of nothing.
Then comes the mainstream media’s liberal TV hosts, led by Joy Behar, who on national TV tells Democrats to lie about their “gun control” efforts to first get elected and then and only then start implementing their radical policies.
Be it on gun control, taxes, open borders or a whole slow of wacky left wing policies we can’t afford, let alone need, the Democrats are pretending to be “one kind of party” while pushing policies few would remember as their father’s Democratic party. Pay attention America. The Democrats are more than happy to tell a “little lie” for the good of their politics…Alynsky is alive and well amongst their ranks.
Amazon will help US if you say yes: At NO cost to you, you can help the 60 Plus Foundation in its efforts to support conservative policies to protect senior citizens, get rid of the death tax and defend social security and medicare using sound fiscal policies.
Sign up…and Amazon will donate 0.5% of what you spend to the Foundation! Please help us out by signing up here…at NO cost to you!
Sign Up Link
Weekly News Review Summary:
Medicare-for-all is unpopular with voters in these key states
A majority of voters in states that could determine the outcome of the 2020 presidential election believe Medicare-for-all is a bad idea, according to a new survey.
A dose of reality on Medicare for All’s cost
Doubling Americans’ tax burden, or borrowing two times the total capacity of the U.S. economy, are recipes for economic catastrophe.
Trump crows after hearing, says diplomats stumped by ‘impeachable’ offense question President Trump highlighted a key moment during Wednesday’s impeachment hearing to suggest the case against him was decidedly undercut by the witnesses.
Watch Our Weekly News Summary Video Here
-Saul Anuzis
Click Here for Past Commentary from Saul
Trump vs. the ‘Policy Community’
We resolve policy disputes by elections, not impeachments.
When it comes to Russia, I am with what Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman calls the American “policy community.”
Vindman, of course, is one of the House Democrats’ star impeachment witnesses. His haughtiness in proclaiming the policy community and his membership in it grates, throughout his 340-page House deposition transcript. I couldn’t agree more, though, with our experts’ apparent consensus that Moscow is bad, should be challenged on various fronts, and would best be seen as the incorrigible rival it is, not the potential strategic partner some wish it to be — the “some” here known to include the president. Ukraine, for all its deep flaws, is valuable to us as a check on Russia’s aggression, another conclusion about which the president is skeptical.
That is, on the critical matter of America’s interests in the Russia/Ukraine dynamic, I think the policy community is right, and President Trump is wrong. If I were president, I would resist gratuitous provocations, butI would not publicly associate myself with the delusion that stable friendship is possible (or, frankly, desirable) with Putin’s anti-American dictatorship, which runs its country like a Mafia family and is acting on its revanchist ambitions.
But you see, much like the policy community, I am not the president. Donald Trump is.
The president, not diplomats, sets ‘official foreign policy’
There’s an important revelation from the first day of impeachment hearings that I haven’t heard discussed. It has to do with the witnesses’ strange notion of how foreign policy works.
Deputy Assistant Secretary of State George Kent and Acting Ambassador to Ukraine William Taylor both accused President Trump of interfering with U.S. foreign policy in Ukraine. They indicated they differed with Trump’s skepticism of Ukraine’s newest leadership, and they disagreed with Trump’s apparent decision to keep Ukraine at a measured distance while he assessed the situation.
They further said that Trump gave approval for his attorney and adviser, Rudy Giuliani, to develop a communications channel on Ukraine diplomacy that was outside the “regular” diplomatic chain. Some in the media have dubbed that a “shadow campaign.”
Kent and Taylor strongly disapproved.
“Kent and Taylor … gave compelling testimony about why [President Trump’s] ‘shadow campaign’ was so at odds with America’s official foreign policy,” wrote Rolling Stone.
Impeachment case against Trump is falling apart – Democrats want to hurt him in 2020 election
The supposedly devastating case for the impeachment of President Trump that partisan Democrats have been hyping in endless media interviews began falling apart Wednesday as the House Intelligence Committee opened its televised witch hunt against the president.
Desperate Democrats know they have no chance of removing President Trump in a trial in the Republican-controlled Senate. But they are determined to use their House majority to impeach him and send their ridiculous case against him to the Senate for a pointless trial for one reason only: to hurt his reelection chances.
This is what the whole disgraceful publicity stunt Democrats are calling an impeachment inquiry is all about – pure politics and nothing else.
Hong Kong is the new Berlin
Yesterday marked the 30th anniversary of the Berlin Wall’s collapse. Its ruin would pave the way for the end of the Cold War and mark the abject failure of…
Joy Behar’s advice for 2020 Dems on guns: ‘Wait until you get elected and then take them away’
Joy Behar has some advice for Democrats who are running for president: Even if you want to confiscate guns from civilians, don’t tell voters that in advance.
The ladies of ABC’s “The View” conducted an autopsy of former Texas Rep. Beto O’Rourke’s presidential campaign on Monday when his plan to take guns from law-abiding citizens came up.
“They should not tell everything they’re going to do,” Ms. Behar said of the Texan’s now-famous “hell yes” attitude toward gun confiscation in America.
“If you are going to take people’s guns away, wait until you get elected and then take them away,” Ms. Behar said to laughs and clapping from the studio audience. “Don’t tell them ahead of time.”
Co-host Meghan McCain, a guns rights supporter, welcomed Ms. Behar’s commentary.
Eric Holder Takes Virginia
The Democratic plan to dominate state legislatures has its first electoral success.
Analysts are reading Tuesday’s tea leaves, predicting what the off-year election results mean for the presidential race. But one victory is beyond dispute. Former Attorney General Eric Holder will be celebrating this week for a decade.
Democrats on Tuesday won total control of Virginia’s government, adding both chambers of the General Assembly to the governor’s mansion. They will redraw Virginia’s legislative district lines after next year’s census. The Old Dominion was already moving left, though the redistricting power likely cements Democratic dominance over Virginia for the next 10 years.
This was Mr. Holder’s plan. While most prominent Democrats spent the months following Donald Trump’s election plotting future runs, Mr. Holder was launching the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, committed to domination of electoral mapmaking through the courts and legislatures. The NDRC spent its first years aggressively litigating legislative maps it didn’t like, to great success. Virginia’s election was the first test of the electoral piece of Mr. Holder’s strategy, and it will now serve as the model by which Democrats attempt to gain redistricting power in 11 other key states next year.
Democrats challenge election laws in battleground states
A year before the 2020 presidential election, Democratic groups are filing lawsuits in new and emerging battleground states, challenging election laws and procedures they say disproportionately affect young and minority voters.
Those groups have filed seven lawsuits in recent weeks, challenging election laws in five states. And more suits are coming, said Marc Elias, the Democratic election law expert whose firm is overseeing the litigation.
In Georgia, Texas and Arizona, coalitions of Democratic groups are challenging state laws that will list Republican candidates first in any given race. Social science research has found that a candidate listed first on a ballot can benefit by as much as 2.5 percentage points, through what researchers call the primacy effect.
“Especially given the history of Republican efforts at voter suppression in Georgia, the result from the last election should not determine who wins the next one,” said Nikema Williams, who heads the Georgia Democratic Party.
Mitch McConnell Is About to Steamroll Democrats with Another 30 Conservative Judges By the End of the Year
While Democrats obsess over impeachment, McConnell and Trump are packing the courts for a generation.
In the face of some stunning electoral setbacks this week, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and President Trump are trying to get their party to refocus the mission at hand: confirming judges.
Now, with the government lurching ever closer to another shutdown in the coming weeks, and with Democrats opposing the GOP’s attempt to move on to a defense spending bill, McConnell is planning to confirm at least 30 conservative judicial nominees before year’s end, which will bring joy to Trump’s base and build a legacy that will outlast both of their political careers.
McConnell and Trump have already overseen the confirmation of more than 150 judges — a whopping 40 more than former President Barack Obama had confirmed at a similar point in his tenure.
Liberal Democrat Alan Dershowitz Shreds Dems’ Stalinist Anti-Trump Madness: They’re ‘Now Making Up Crimes’
On Sunday, liberal Democrat Alan Dershowitz compared his own party to Stalinist police.
Appearing on John Catsimatidis’s The Cats Roundtable radio show, the attorney ripped CNN over its impeachment coverage, explaining that the network won’t even let him come on anymore:
“CNN has banned me from their airwaves. CNN will not allow me on their network because they don’t want a liberal Democrat to be telling their viewers the truth about the Constitution.”
That’s a mouthful.
Alan asserted we’ve reached the point where left-wing congresspeople are digging into fantasy to try to nail Trump:
“The Democrats are now making up crimes.”
Host John asked, “Do the Democrats today think that the American public is so stupid on some of the things they’re doing?”
In Alan’s view, you should fear the Left:
“They’re very scary. They’re very frightening to any civil libertarian. Whether you’re a Democrat or Republican; whether you come from New York or the middle of the country, you should be frightened by efforts to try to create crimes out of nothing.”
He called out another network by name:
“The latest twist was people on television — particularly CNN and MSNBC — are saying that if the president or somebody else was to name the whistleblower in the Ukrainian situation, that person would be guilty of a crime. I said in the afternoon yesterday — searching the federal criminal statutes from beginning to end — I couldn’t find the crime.”
Alternative Realities: Competing Views of the Impeachment Efforts
Few people have neutral feelings about President Donald Trump or the impeachment process that is being conducted against him. Listening to commentary from either officials or seasoned analysts on both sides of the debate, it is hard to believe that the same set of events is being discussed.
Yet that is exactly the reality faced by today’s political observer. For more than a month, it has been commonplace to hear the inquiry over the president’s dealings with his Ukrainian counterpart described as a “partisan witch hunt” designed to undo an election by sworn foes of the president or, alternatively, as the appropriate response to a dangerous abuse of executive power, which Congress has a responsibility to stop in an effort to protect the American people.
After weeks of complaints from defenders of the president over the closed-door hearings taking place, last Thursday, the House of Representatives voted for the first time to formally authorize an impeachment inquiry. The vote, which passed on nearly purely partisan lines, will make public the testimony gathered by committees over the past month and set guidelines for how the process should proceed.
Yet it seems unlikely that the vote will do much to change the talking points or the impression that there are alternate realities. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said before casting her vote to proceed with the inquiry, “What is at stake in all this is nothing less than our democracy,” and within minutes of the final tally, the White House released a statement that “the president has done nothing wrong, and the Democrats know it.”
States must push for a federal balanced budget amendment
Time to relieve the federal government of its debt addiction.
Imagine a person who makes $46,000 per year carrying $300,000 in debt. Interest payments alone are $10,000. Worst of all, that person continues to spend more than they bring in each year. Sooner or later, the credit runs out. If that person was a family member or friend, we would have an intervention. Unfortunately, the individual in question happens to be the federal government.
Clearly, Washington-based politicians cannot fix the looming federal debt crisis. Therefore, the states must lead. It is time for state lawmakers to hold an intervention to relieve the federal government of its debt-addiction.
Thankfully, our Founders gave us the tools to bypass Congress and go directly to the states. Under Article V of the U.S. Constitution, two-thirds of the states can approve resolutions to apply for a convention. There, delegates will debate, draft and propose an amendment which would then be sent back to the states where three-fourths must vote to ratify the language for it to be added to our Constitution.
President Ronald Reagan championed the idea in the 1980s but fell two states short at 32 of the 34 states required to call a convention to propose a Balanced Budget Amendment. By 2012, there were only 12 states left. Today, there are 28 states on record calling for a convention to bring up the sole subject of a Balanced Budget Amendment.
