Special Opinion to the Mirror by Paul Plante.
First off, people, to understand where I am going here, we, the actual American people, whether born here or naturalized, need to ask ourselves why it is that of all the types of government there are in the world, we have this particular frame with an executive not beholden to the House of Representatives, because he does not serve at the pleasure of the House of Representatives, although the incoming Democrat party seems bent on changing that by using the threat of impeachment as a whip and a goad to bring the president under their direct control.
Think the Lilliputians, tiny people who are about one-twelfth the height of ordinary human beings who live in Lilliput, said to be ruled by an Emperor assisted by a first minister who carries a white staff and several other officials who later bring articles of impeachment against Gulliver on grounds of treason, and you are in the right ballpark!
Getting back to the main story here, which is about Adam Schiff, a top Lilliputian if there ever was one (no, people, there is no Constitutional bar to tiny people who are about one-twelfth the height of ordinary human beings serving in the United States House of Representatives as Democrats from California), we are hearing a lot these days about the “founders” from the Democrats and what are supposed their thoughts on the impeachment of a sitting U.S. president, and according to them, we have now reached the patently absurd position in this country, thanks to the Democrats, that a U.S. president can be impeached for allegedly defrauding the voters of the United States of America, who, by the way, do not elect presidents in the first place; the electoral college does, by not specifically telling them that while he was running for president, he was actually making hush payments to some women not his wife who he was alleged to have had carnal relations with, as if that could somehow disqualify a person from holding the office of president of the United States of America.
So let’s see what the actual founders have to say about why we have the frame of government in this country that we do, as opposed to all the alternatives, such as can be found in the Congo, and Iraq, and Saudi Arabia, for example.
Let’s start with FEDERALIST No. 6, Concerning Dangers from Dissensions Between the States, which is exactly what we are seeing in the United States of America today, actually, with red states and blue states, by Alexander Hamilton for the Independent Journal to the People of the State of New York, where we learn about our actual history, not the history being invented on the fly by the Democrats, from someone who was actually there when it was happening, to wit:
THE three last numbers of this paper have been dedicated to an enumeration of the dangers to which we should be exposed, in a state of disunion, from the arms and arts of foreign nations.
I shall now proceed to delineate dangers of a different and, perhaps, still more alarming kind— – those which will in all probability flow from dissensions between the States themselves, and from domestic factions and convulsions.
end quotes
Focus on that last line there, people, and more specifically on the words, “domestic factions and convulsions,” where convulsions can be taken to mean “a violent social or political upheaval,” with such synonyms as turmoil, agitation, and disorder, as in “the political convulsions of the period,” which takes us directly to an article in The Hill entitled “Schiff: Trump may face ‘real prospect of jail time’” by Michael Burke on 9 December 2018, where we are told as follows:
Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) on Sunday said that President Trump might “face the real prospect of jail time” after prosecutors indicated last week that he directed illegal payments during his 2016 presidential campaign.
end quotes
He “might,” Adam?
Do tell, dude!
Thanks for the timely head’s up, dude, but seriously, doesn’t the use of the word “might” imply that you are engaging in rank speculation?
Here, Adam, let me help you out by guiding you to an internet site entitled “Writing Explained,” and an article titled “May vs. Might: What’s the Difference?” where we learn that the two words may and might cause a lot of confusion in English and many writers aren’t sure when to use which one.
As to “might” as the word is used in The Hill article by California’s Adam Schiff, who incidentally is a Harvard-trained lawyer, so he should know the meaning of words as well as I do, it is used to express what is hypothetical, counterfactual, or remotely possible.
As the site tells us, right away we notice that might deals with situations that are speculative or did not actually happen, i.e. hypothetical, whereas may deals with situations that are possible or could be factual.
An easy way to express/remember this difference is that might suggests a lower probability than does may.
If something is very far-fetched, you probably want to use might.
You could say might is for things that are mighty far-fetched.
So, people, why then is California’s Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, who incidentally voted to invade Iraq based on bad intelligence, telling us in The Hill about something far-fetched?
And that answer is quite simple – California’s Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, is trying to inflame people’s passions in this country for the exact purpose of causing convulsions to disturb our national tranquility for cheap partisan political gain and in order to disrupt the functioning of our national government and to influence the next presidential election.
Simply stated, Adam Schiff is a Democrat bomb-thrower, which takes us back to The Hill, where bomb-thrower Schiff then states as follows, to wit:
“There’s a very real prospect that on the day Donald Trump leaves office, the Justice Department may indict him.”
end quotes
Oh, really Adam!
My goodness, how serious that sounds.
So, Adam, they may indict him on the very day he leaves office.
I see, I see.
But tell us, Adam, how is it that you happen to know the exact date that the Justice Department is going to indict Trump?
Are you colluding with the Justice Department to make that happen, Adam?
Getting back to The Hill:
“That he may be the first president in quite some time to face the real prospect of jail time,” he said on CBS’s “Face the Nation.”
end quotes
Now, people, really, can you believe this bull****?
Can you believe that the Justice Department, which doesn’t confirm or deny that it is conducting an investigation, is telling California’s Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, that the Justice Department is going to put Trump in jail after indicting him on the day he leaves office?
Is there anyone out there actually credulous (ready to believe especially on slight or uncertain evidence as in “few people are credulous enough to believe such nonsense”)enough to believe that crap?
But let’s not stop there, because it gets even wilder yet, as follows:
Schiff, who is likely to be the next chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, added that the next president may have to determine whether to pardon Trump.
“We have been discussing the issue of pardons the president may offer to people or dangle in front of people,” Schiff said.
“The bigger pardon question may come down the road, as the next president has to determine whether to pardon Donald Trump.”
end quotes
Now, people, no wonder that the Democrats have made Adam Schiff of California into the top dog Democrat on House Intelligence Committee – it is because he is so intelligent, he not only knows what is going on now, but in the future, as well, as we can see right above here where he raises the serious existential question as to whether the next president will bother to pardon Trump after the Justice Department indicts him on the day he leaves office, or whether that next president, especially if a Democrat, will leave Trump to rot in jail, as the Democrats so clearly want him to, in retaliation for him defeating the Democrat’s own Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election they thought they had sufficiently rigged for Hillary to win.
And that spew of speculative crap from Adam Schiff, the California Democrat who is likely to be the next chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, despite the fact that he himself seems to be greatly lacking in real intelligence, despite his Harvard law degree, takes us back to Federalist No. 6, as follows for a possible explanation as to why Adam Schiff of California is spewing such **** in The Hill, to wit:
A man must be far gone in Utopian speculations who can seriously doubt that, if these States should either be wholly disunited, or only united in partial confederacies, the subdivisions into which they might be thrown would have frequent and violent contests with each other.
To presume a want of motives for such contests as an argument against their existence, would be to forget that men are ambitious, vindictive, and rapacious.
end quotes
Enter Adam Schiff, people!
Stay tuned, for more is yet to come in this breaking story of drama and deceit from the nation’s capital of Washington, D.C. where truth, justice and the American way can no longer be found.
…
What a relief to see that there truly are intelligent beings on our planet. Thank you for speaking out about Adam Schiff . Despicable that this lowlife actually holds office in our country! What is even more alarming is the main stream media and their agenda. Keep telling the truth.
Yes, we Americans concerned about the future of OUR country owe a debt of gratitude to the Cape Charles Mirror for having the courage to print these kinds of articles that provoke us to think by giving us some facts to actually be able to think about, as opposed to the nattering nabobs of negativity in the main-stream media who suck up to demagogues like this Adam Schiff and print this crap he is spewing without bothering to fact-check any of it, so as to not disturb the narrative, which is what it is all about in the main-stream media.
What a farce! This is an idiot’s article written by an idiot.
Too chicken$&*@ to state your real name, hey?
You sir are the idiot
Sky B dude, what it is!
And let me say, sir, that I greatly admire your literary style, which seems a seamless synthesis of Hemingway and H. P. Lovecraft.
And yes, anymore, hearing the voice of Adam Schiff on the radio news causes me to throw up in my mouth, so you and I are on the same page in that regard.
And while We, the American people have you on the horn here, so to speak, consider this which you will certainly remember from your kindergarten classes in American citizenship:
According to Section 3 of Article II of our United States Constitution, it is the DUTY of a sitting American president, and this would include Trump, whether or not ditzy “NANCY NO” Pelosi likes it or not, to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.”
Are we on the same page here?
So, okay, moving right along, and here we all would welcome your opinion, what that clear Constitutional language means to me is that an American president has an affirmative duty to We, The American People, to actually do that, actually take care that the laws of our nation be faithfully executed, so that if an American president has reason to believe that an American citizen like Joe Biden or Hillary Clinton is violating the law, and here Joe Biden has indicted himself by his own mouth when he allegedly bragged about getting an investigation into his son quashed in Ukraine by using his clout as U.S. vice president in violation of OUR laws, that American president clearly has a duty to the American people to see that the matter is investigated, and if warranted, that the perpetrators, including Joe Biden himself, who is not above the law, are prosecuted to the fullest extent of OUR laws.
For which the smarmy little Adam Schiff is trying to impeach Trump on the most ridiculous of grounds that investigating Joe Biden for high crimes and misdemeanors is an impeachable offense because Joe Biden is a Democrat, because what Adam Schiff and the Democrats want instead is a cover-up when it is their people who are alleged to be violating the law, as is clearly the case with Joe Biden, who as said appears to have indicted himself with his own mouth while Hussein Obama’s vice president.
And because Trump won’t abide with the cover-up, Schiff and Pelosi are threatening Trump now with impeachment, to which I say, BRING IT ON, NANCY, because talk is cheap, and we are getting so sick and tired of hearing this same “obstruction of justice” bull**** over and over, and especially from Joe Biden, himself.
If there is obstruction of justice, and I believe there is, it is in the efforts of the Democrats to protect Joe Biden from prosecution for his alleged actions in Ukraine to protect corruption.
Since most leftist websites now seem to disallow comments, for good reason for them, we don’t see the real heartbeat of America nearly enough, but simply stated, schiff is undoubtedly one of the most if not the most loathsome SOB on the planet!
So who is this Adam Schiff we, the American people have been hearing so much about lately?
And that answer is quite simple – California’s Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, is a hack politician of the worst sort who is trying his damnedest to inflame people’s passions in this country for the exact purpose of causing convulsions to disturb our national tranquility not only for cheap partisan political gain and in order to disrupt the functioning of our national government and to influence the next presidential election, but to raise money for himself and the Democrats by purposefully and very skillfully using the arts of the demagogue to cause a violent political upheaval and turmoil, agitation, and disorder in our United States of America, which makes Democrat Adam Schiff a clear and present danger to our tranquility as a people in this country.
In a word, California Democrat is an enemy of the American people who are loyal to our Constitutional frame of government in this country.
In “An Address to the People of the State of New-York On the Subject of the Constitution, Agreed upon at Philadelphia, The 17th of September,” John Jay, a member of the New York State Convention, stated thusly about people like Adam Schiff, to wit:
There are times and seasons, when general evils spread general alarm and uneasiness, and yet arise from causes too complicated, and too little understood by many, to produce an unanimity of opinions respecting their remedies.
Hence it is, that on such occasions, the conflict of arguments too often excites a conflict of passions, and introduces a degree of discord and animosity, which, by agitating the public mind dispose it to precipitation and extravagance.
end quotes
Ah, yes, people, a conflict of passions that introduces a degree of discord and animosity by agitating the public mind to dispose it to precipitation and extravagance!
Said in a different way, Adam Schiff is trying to play us like a fiddle to tear us apart as a people and as a nation for partisan political gain.
And do I have proof of that?
Let’s go and see, starting with https://act.myngp.com/Forms/-4821868595118208256 where we find as follows, to wit:
CONGRESSMAN ADAM SCHIFF, A MOST EFFECTIVE LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION TO TRUMP IN CONGRESS, SUPPORT SANTA CLARA COUNTY DEMOCRATIC PARTY’S RESISTANCE EFFORTS!
Date: October 14, 2017
Time: 2:00 p.m.-4:30 p.m. (ALL)
Location: Stanford residence upon RSVP
$1K/$2.5K/$5K – Sponsorship levels
$1000 – Platinum – Reception & photo
$500 – Gold – Reception
$250 – Silver
$100 – Bronze
$50 – Young Dems only
VIP Reception 3:00-3:30 p.m. strictly observed due to time limitations.
In support of Santa Clara County Democratic Party Together We Can! fundraising campaign
Rep Adam Schiff fundraising event for SCCDP
Come hear Congressman Adam Schiff share the story of how he came to be one of Trump’s main nemeses on Capitol Hill with regard to the Russian interference and collusion investigations, where he played such a key role in moving things forward.
end quotes
Yes, people, Adam Schiff, along with Democrat Young Andy Cuomo of New York and Democrat U.S. Senator from New York City Charley, “Chuck” Schumer, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Democratic Socialists of America, who want to tear down our national borders, is the face of the RESISTANCE MOVEMENT here in the United States of America!
But resistance to what?
For that answer, let’s go back to the fundraising invitation to see what more we can learn about the Democrats’ plans for our future as a people here in the United States of America, to wit:
Why your support is needed now more than ever
Your generous donations will support SCCDP strategic efforts to flip the House in 2018 and beyond such as:
1) Flipping 7 targeted CA districts and other swing districts across the country red to blue.
2) Providing training to empower resistance volunteers to register voters and canvass effectively.
3) Hosting phone banks, texting voter outreach and organizing meetings for CA and swing state efforts.
4) Recruiting & sending our local volunteers into swing districts in CA and across the country.
5) Rapid response efforts that are key to big wins for the current Democratic minority in Congress.
6) Sustaining and expanding operations as needed including investing in necessary equipment.
7) Focused effort to win state houses across the country.
8) Partner with organizations addressing voter suppression to increase voter turnout.
9) Candidate training
We will be working directly with swing states in coordinated campaigns with the DNC to win in 2018!
Why?
Because we have thousands of volunteers we can mobilize in Silicon Valley.
We need to build the infrastructure resources to support at the highest level!
And we need your ongoing support to win in 2018 and 2020.
With gratitude,
Prameela Bartholomeusz
Finance Director, SCCDP
Bill James
Chair, SCCDP
Paid for by Santa Clara County United Democratic Campaign
end quotes
Does it sound like the Santa Clara County United Democratic Campaign is using Adam Schiff’s “resistance” to whatever it is he is resisting as a money-making tool to take over our various governments in this nation, state as well as federal, to put them all under the control of Silicon Valley in California?
Is that the way our Constitutional frame of government is supposed to work in this country?
And with respect to a further demonstration of the spew of political horse**** the potent demagogue California Democrat Adam Schiff is trying to feed us, let us turn to a Washi ngton Examiner article entitled “Adam Schiff: House intel is ‘already in touch’ with Cohen to testify again” by Naomi Lim on 12 December 2018, where we learn as follows, to wit:
The likely next House Intelligence Committee chairman says his panel wants to hear from Michael Cohen, President Trump’s former fixer, one more time before he goes to prison.
Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., told CNN Wednesday the committee was “already in touch” with Cohen’s counsel about a possible appearance ahead of his March 6 deadline to report to authorities for his three-year sentence.
“We are very eager to have him come and testify.”
“I was very pleased to see today that one of his lawyers issued a statement saying that he is more than willing to come and cooperate and share what he knows with us.”
“And we certainly intend to take him up on that,” Schiff said.
end quotes
Now, think about that for a moment, people – Michael Dean Cohen, the American attorney who was deputy finance chairman of the Republican National Committee from 2017 to 2018 known for having “a penchant for luxury” according to a 2017 New York Times article, is a convicted felon who among other crimes is guilty of lying to the same Congress this demagogue Democrat Adam Schiff of California is a member of.
So why then is Democrat demagogue Adam Schiff gloating about having this convicted liar testify to the same Congress he is already guilty of lying to?
Let’s go back to the article and see what more we can learn, as follows:
Schiff also said that the Justice Department ought to rethink its policy concerning whether a sitting president can be indicted and prosecuted given the alleged reference to potential wrongdoing by Trump in Cohen’s sentencing memo.
end quotes
AH, people, yes, the light bulb goes on – Schiff wants to use the testimony of a convicted liar to defeat our United States Constitution!
How so?
Well, when Schiff tells us that the Justice Department ought to rethink its policy concerning whether a sitting president can be indicted and prosecuted given the alleged reference to potential wrongdoing by Trump in Cohen’s sentencing memo, what Schiff is referring to is a document from the United States Department of Justice entitled “A Sitting President’s Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution” and dated October 16, 2000 which concludes that “the indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would unconstitutionally undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions.
end quotes
There, people, is the legal and Constitutional conclusion this Democrat demagogue Adam Schiff wants the Justice Department to change, based on the word of convicted liar Michael Cohen.
“We don’t like Trump,” says Democrat demagogue Adam Schiff, “and our liberal base wants him indicted and impeached, so change the Constitution so it says we can do that!”
And in the meantime, Trump, who I am not trying to defend in here, my interest as a loyal American citizen and veteran is not defending Trump, it is defending OUR Constitution and laws this Adam Schiff is trying to pervert for partisan political gain, and as a means of raising money for himself, instead of being innocent until proven guilty, which used to be the standard in America before Adam Schiff and the Democrats changed it, is guilty based mon the word of a convicted felon who is also a convicted liar.
Getting back to that Memorandum Opinion for the Attorney General Schiff wants to have changed based on the word of a convicted liar, it continues as follows, to wit:
In 1973, the Department concluded that the indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would impermissibly undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions.
We have been asked to summarize and review the analysis provided in support of that conclusion, and to consider whether any subsequent developments in the law lead us today to reconsider and modify or disavow that determination.
We believe that the conclusion reached by the Department in 1973 still represents the best interpretation of the Constitution.
end quotes
The best interpretation of OUR Constitution, people – that is what this California Democrat Adam Schiff wants changed!
WHY?
Not so little. At 5’11”, Schiff will be reasonably powerful:
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/12/24/adam-schiffs-plans-to-obliterate-trumps-red-line?fbclid=IwAR2VgNai9zF5VRt0slmMcoyFZCE2YclYuIMzUFfUks66QXvjfPVrLKDGhGI
Gulliver, hold on to your cojones.
Good morning, Carlos Bernstein, and the best of the season to you, and thank you for commenting and bringing that NEW YORKER article entitled “Adam Schiff’s Plans to Obliterate Trump’s Red Line – With the Democrats controlling the House, Schiff’s congressional investigation will follow the money” by Jeffrey Toobin in the December 24 & 31, 2018 Issue to our attention, wherein we are told “Schiff is not especially short or slight, but he does appear diminutive.”
Whether he is 3 feet 5 inches tall or 10 feet tall is really immaterial, as I am sure you will agree.
When I talk about “little” Adam Schiff, I am making a character reference, actually.
Consider this from that same article for a hint at what I am talking about, to wit:
Still, Schiff knows that his legacy, to say nothing of his political future, will be defined by his handling of the Russia investigation.
The challenge he faces has made him a national figure, and his harsh view of Trump has set the tone for many other Democrats to follow.
At times, he may already have gone too far.
After Michael Cohen pleaded guilty in the Southern District of New York to facilitating unlawful contributions to Trump’s campaign, specifically the payments to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal, Trump’s alleged former paramours, Schiff said, on CBS’s “Face the Nation,” that the President “faces the real prospect of jail time” for his role in the case.
Schiff told me, “The prosecutors said that Cohen deserved jail time because he helped conceal payments to women that, if they had been disclosed as they should have been, might have changed the outcome of the election.”
“But that argument applies with even more force to Trump himself, because he was the guy directing the scheme, and the beneficiary of it.”
“No jail time for him would be a terrible double standard.”
(Last week, Cohen was sentenced to thirty-six months for his crimes.)
Calling for the President to be incarcerated when he hasn’t yet even been charged, or the evidence against him fully revealed, is, at the very least, premature, and perhaps irresponsible.
end quotes
Focus on that last sentence about “irresponsibility.”
Schiff is not just some simple-minded schmoe out there on the street blowing off excess steam who doesn’t know any better that even the most despicable among us are innocent until proven guilty.
He is a Harvard-trained lawyer, which puts him in the class of top-notch lawyers here in America like Michael Cohen, and besides that, he was a hot-shot U.S. attorney, and now he is a United States Congressman.
So why is he feeding us this bull**** as he is doing in that article where he tells us that Trump defrauded the voters by allegedly concealing the payments to those two women, one of whom earns her living getting money as a sex worker?
Doesn’t he know that Trump lost the popular vote to Hillary Clinton?
More importantly, doesn’t he know that in America, the people do not elect presidents?
That is what the electoral college is for, as we can clearly see from FEDERALIST No. 68, The Mode of Electing the President, from the New York Packet to the People of the State of New York by Alexander Hamilton on Friday, March 14, 1788, to wit:
THE mode of appointment of the Chief Magistrate of the United States is almost the only part of the system, of any consequence, which has escaped without severe censure, or which has received the slightest mark of approbation from its opponents.
It was desirable that the sense of the people should operate in the choice of the person to whom so important a trust was to be confided.
This end will be answered by committing the right of making it, not to any preestablished body, but to men chosen by the people for the special purpose, and at the particular conjuncture.
It was equally desirable, that the immediate election should be made by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice.
A small number of persons, selected by their fellow-citizens from the general mass, will be most likely to possess the information and discernment requisite to such complicated investigations.
It was also peculiarly desirable to afford as little opportunity as possible to tumult and disorder.
This evil was not least to be dreaded in the election of a magistrate, who was to have so important an agency in the administration of the government as the President of the United States.
But the precautions which have been so happily concerted in the system under consideration, promise an effectual security against this mischief.
The choice of SEVERAL, to form an intermediate body of electors, will be much less apt to convulse the community with any extraordinary or violent movements, than the choice of ONE who was himself to be the final object of the public wishes.
And as the electors, chosen in each State, are to assemble and vote in the State in which they are chosen, this detached and divided situation will expose them much less to heats and ferments, which might be communicated from them to the people, than if they were all to be convened at one time, in one place.
Nothing was more to be desired than that every practicable obstacle should be opposed to cabal, intrigue, and corruption.
These most deadly adversaries of republican government might naturally have been expected to make their approaches from more than one quarter, but chiefly from the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils.
How could they better gratify this, than by raising a creature of their own to the chief magistracy of the Union?
But the convention have guarded against all danger of this sort, with the most provident and judicious attention.
They have not made the appointment of the President to depend on any preexisting bodies of men, who might be tampered with beforehand to prostitute their votes; but they have referred it in the first instance to an immediate act of the people of America, to be exerted in the choice of persons for the temporary and sole purpose of making the appointment.
And they have excluded from eligibility to this trust, all those who from situation might be suspected of too great devotion to the President in office.
No senator, representative, or other person holding a place of trust or profit under the United States, can be of the numbers of the electors.
Thus without corrupting the body of the people, the immediate agents in the election will at least enter upon the task free from any sinister bias.
Their transient existence, and their detached situation, already taken notice of, afford a satisfactory prospect of their continuing so, to the conclusion of it.
The business of corruption, when it is to embrace so considerable a number of men, requires time as well as means.
Nor would it be found easy suddenly to embark them, dispersed as they would be over thirteen States, in any combinations founded upon motives, which though they could not properly be denominated corrupt, might yet be of a nature to mislead them from their duty.
Another and no less important desideratum was, that the Executive should be independent for his continuance in office on all but the people themselves.
He might otherwise be tempted to sacrifice his duty to his complaisance for those whose favor was necessary to the duration of his official consequence.
This advantage will also be secured, by making his re-election to depend on a special body of representatives, deputed by the society for the single purpose of making the important choice.
All these advantages will happily combine in the plan devised by the convention; which is, that the people of each State shall choose a number of persons as electors, equal to the number of senators and representatives of such State in the national government, who shall assemble within the State, and vote for some fit person as President.
Their votes, thus given, are to be transmitted to the seat of the national government, and the person who may happen to have a majority of the whole number of votes will be the President.
The process of election affords a moral certainty, that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.
Talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity, may alone suffice to elevate a man to the first honors in a single State; but it will require other talents, and a different kind of merit, to establish him in the esteem and confidence of the whole Union, or of so considerable a portion of it as would be necessary to make him a successful candidate for the distinguished office of President of the United States.
It will not be too strong to say, that there will be a constant probability of seeing the station filled by characters pre-eminent for ability and virtue.
PUBLIUS.
end quotes
Kind of takes some wind out of the sails of our Adam Schiff, does it not, with respect to his claim of Trump defrauding the voters.
It’s almost 2019, and I am still waiting for Adam Schiff, the real expert here on “Russian interference” in our elections to bring forth any credible evidence that the Russians in some way interfered with the votes of the electoral college, or that Trump defrauded the Electoral College in some way, and let me make clear that I make all these statements as an American citizen.
When will that credible evidence be forthcoming?
In my lifetime?
Or how about never?
Outer limits ” the mutant ” episode with warren oates as “reese”with the very unsettling resemblance
Yorgi, dude, what it is, and what makes your 85-character TWEET above here interesting from a socio-political standpoint is its length, far longer than the 33-character norm for the majority of TWITTER users, which marks you out as one of the one percent of all people in America on TWITTER who do go beyond the norm, and in doing so, lose the comprehension of that majority of TWITTER users who can’t wrap their minds around more than 33 characters at a time, which means on TWITTER, unlike here, where we can assimilate whole pages of words without losing our place or trying to remember when half-way through what it said at the beginning, which means your cogent TWEET above here, where you managed to get in not only a 10-character word, but an 11-character word, as well, in the same TWEET, which people here to the north of Cape Charles think is quite impressive, very likely sailed right over the heads of millions of people in America who haven’t a clue as to what you said because you lost them at ‘Outer limits ” the mutant ” episode with’.
As to TWITTER, and it would be interesting from a social science/political science perspective to compare TWITTER demographics with Cape Charles Mirror demographics to see if any trends emerge, 34% of TWITTER users are females and 66% are males.
One would be curious as to how that would compare to in here, the make/female ratio, I mean.
Now according to the latest stats, and these are only 4 days old, 22% of US adults use Twitter.
What percentage of US adults use the Cape Charles Mirror?
If less, why would more US adults prefer TWITTER over the more comprehensive Cape Charles Mirror?
Too many words, do you think?
And here is something societally interesting and revealing, as well, to wit: 24% of All Internet male users use Twitter, whereas 21% of All Internet Female users use Twitter.
What do you see that trend portending?
Should the Cape Charles Mirror bow to the inevitable, do you think, to improve readership, by imposing a 33-character maximum of comments?
Afterall, there are 262 million International Twitter users (users outside the US) which make up 79% of all Twitter accounts, and with a 33-character limit in here, there is a good chance the Cape Charles Mirror could maybe siphon off a hundred million easily, which would put the Cape Charles Mirror into the same rarified air that TWITTER breathes and the next you know, we will be buying Cape Charles Mirror stock on Wall Street.
And talk about those cosmic confluences of events associated with the Cape Charles Mirror which we to the north attribute to the immense gravitational field of that bolus buried under Chesapeake Bay due to its density (Arrhenius in Chapter VII of his seminal scientific work “WORLDS IN THE MAKING – THE EVOLUTION OF THE UNIVERSE” by Svante Arrhenius, Director of the Physico-Chemical Nobel Institute in Stockholm, Sweden, published March, 1908, ” THE NEBULAR AND THE SOLAR STATES,” explains in great detail the tremendous forces which created the bolus out of cosmic dust and then hurled it at great speed right at Cape Charles, Virginia, forever after warping the local gravitational field so as to cause an endless succession of cosmic confluences as the gravitational field of the bolus continues to dominate what reality will be on the Eastern Shore of Virginia, anyway), it is Yorgi comparing the bizarre and surreal Adam Schiff IMPEACHMENT CIRCUS to an episode of all things, “The Outer Limits,” which was an American television series that was broadcast on ABC from September 16, 1963 to January 16, 1965 at 7:30 PM Eastern Time on Mondays, and I was a regular viewer, so I grasp the comparison quite well.
For those too young to remember “The Outer Limits,” while you might hear people today try to compare the series to “The Twilight Zone,” which I also watched, “The OUTER LIMITS” had a greater emphasis on science fiction stories as opposed to stories of fantasy or the supernatural matters.
Now, in my mind, what makes Yorgi’s comparison of the Adam Schiff IMPEACHMENT CIRCUS to an episode of “The Outer Limits” so spot on it isn’t funny is that each episode began with a “Control Voice” narration using an Orwellian theme of taking over your television, which Adam Schiff certainly did with all the proceedings of hgis long-running IMPEACHMENT CIRCUS, which ran as follows:
“There is nothing wrong with your television set.”
“Do not attempt to adjust the picture.”
“We are controlling transmission.”
“If we wish to make it louder, we will bring up the volume.”
“If we wish to make it softer, we will tune it to a whisper.”
“We will control the horizontal.”
“We will control the vertical.”
“We can roll the image, make it flutter.”
“We can change the focus to a soft blur or sharpen it to crystal clarity.”
“For the next hour, sit quietly and we will control all that you see and hear.”
“We repeat: there is nothing wrong with your television set.”
“You are about to participate in a great adventure.”
“You are about to experience the awe and mystery which reaches from the inner mind to – The Outer Limits.”
end quotes
In a modern day version, of course, we would have Keanu Reeves playing Adam, not Warren Oates, who nobody today even knows, and in what we would call “The Great Scene,” we would have Keanu Reeves standing up on the floor of the Senate, looking each senator in the eye, one by one by one, and then, making this impassioned speech not only to the assembled multitude, but to the nation and world, as well, to wit:
“Travelers and astronomers inform us that in the Southern heavens, near the Southern cross, there is a vast space which the uneducated call the ‘hole in the sky,’ where the eye of man, with the aid of the powers of the telescope, has been unable to discover nebulae, or asteroid, or comet, or planet, or star, or sun.”
“In that dreary, cold, dark region of space, which is only known to be less infinite by the evidences of creation elsewhere, the great author of celestial mechanism has left the chaos which was in the beginning.”
“If this earth were capable of the sentiments and emotions of justice and virtue which in human mortal beings are the evidences and pledge of our divine origin and immortal destiny, it would heave and throb with the energy of the elemental forces of nature, and project this enemy (referring to President Trump) of the Democrat Party and Nancy Pelosi into that vast region, there forever to exist in a solitude eternal as life or as the absence of life, emblematical of, if not really, that outer darkness of which the Savior of mankind spoke in warning to those who are enemies to themselves and of their race and of God.”
Outer Limits, indeed!
Thanks, Yorgi!
He couldn’t beat his way out of a wet paper bag.
Slide, dude, what it is?
And best of the season to you, dude.
And while it is possible, likely, even, although whoever does really know, that Adam Schiff couldn’t beat his way out of a wet paper bag, the fact of the matter is that as an unchallenged Democrat demagogue who has participated in 227 TV interviews where he gets to twist and skew the minds of the gullible and unwitting and unthinking in America with his horse**** the Cape Charles Mirror is graciously allowing to be debunked in here, something you won’t find happening in the main-stream media, and especially The New Yorker, which has the gall that it is fighting fake news when the story it printed about Adam Schiff is a raft of clearly misleading news, if not all of totally false; fact of the matter is that Adam Schiff, as Carlos Bernstein says, is very powerful right now in American politics, precisely because he is using main-stream media outlets like The New Yorker to create outrage that he is then able to harness; outrage that he is creating through the power of what are in essence outright lies, which outright lies, it might be said, are protected by the Arrest and Speech or Debate Clauses of Article I, Section 6 of the Constitution.
So Adam Schiff can legally use his position as a U.S. Congressperson to lie to us in order to cause civil disorder and tumults and sow discord, which he is doing quite well, which tumults and discord incidentally benefit the various security industries that pump money down the pockets of Adam Schiff https://www.jacobinmag.com/2018/02/adam-schiff-russia-intervention-raytheon-parsons , which I as an American citizen and combat veteran find quite despicable, to be truthful.
Check out the story “Who Is Adam Schiff?” by Branko Marcetic on 02.15.2018, where we have the following to consider:
Since Donald Trump’s election, a number of Democrats have tried to cast themselves as leaders of the “resistance.”
Few have done it with more gusto than Adam Schiff.
The California representative has become something like the point man for all things Trump-Russia, using his position as the highest-ranking Democrat on the House Select Intelligence Committee to act as the “guardian against the [administration’s] worst abuses” and making television appearances and public statements to warn about the administration’s alleged ties to Russia.
At the same time, Schiff has solidified his status as one of Congress’s leading anti-Russia hawks.
He has ardently supported harsher sanctions on Russia, warned of future election interference by the Kremlin, and cautioned that its operatives are trying “to tear us apart” through their online activities.
Last year, in response to the GOP’s decision not to endorse sending lethal arms to Ukraine in its platform — a policy he spent years working with Republicans like John McCain to push — he aggressively questioned those involved as part of the Trump-Russia investigation.
Schiff’s alarmism has paid off for him personally, catapulting him to national prominence and supplying him a potent theme for fundraising.
But it also has the potential to be profitable for another group: the arms manufacturers and military contractors that are among his biggest donors.
end quotes
Fear-mongering by this Adam Schiff put money in the pockets of his political supporters, and they in turn put money back in the pockets of Adam Schiff so he can tell us even more lies and divide us further.
Getting back to the Constitutional policy this Democrat demagogue Adam Schiff wants to change, the United States Department of Justice Memorandum Opinion for the Attorney General titled “A Sitting President’s Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution” dated October 16, 2000 continues in more detail as follows:
Both the OLC memorandum and the Solicitor General’s brief recognized that the President is not above the law, and that he is ultimately accountable for his misconduct that occurs before, during, and after his service to the country.
Each also recognized, however, that the President occupies a unique position within our constitutional order.
The Department concluded that neither the text nor the history of the Constitution ultimately provided dispositive guidance in determining whether a President is amenable to indictment or criminal prosecution while in office.
It therefore based its analysis on more general considerations of constitutional structure.
Because of the unique duties and demands of the Presidency, the Department concluded, a President cannot be called upon to answer the demands of another branch of the government in the same manner as can all other individuals.
end quotes
What the Department of Justice is saying there, and clearly this Democrat demagogue Adam Schiff does not like it and won’t stand for it, is that a sitting American president, even when the Democrats in the House of Representatives clearly don’t like him because he beat the pathological liar they had put up for president in the biggest liar’s contest in my living memory outside of when Hillary Clinton ran against Hussein Obama, does not answer the demands of pipsqueaks like Democrat Congressman from Burbank, California Adam Schiff.
How that must gall our Adam!
Getting back to the Constitutional policy at stake here, the October 16, 2000 Opinion for the Attorney General titled “A Sitting President’s Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution” continues as follows:
The OLC memorandum in particular concluded that the ordinary workings of the criminal process would impose burdens upon a sitting President that would directly and substantially impede the executive branch from performing its constitutionally assigned functions, and the accusation or adjudication of the criminal culpability of the nation’s chief executive by either a grand jury returning an indictment or a petit jury returning a verdict would have a dramatically destabilizing effect upon the ability of a coordinate branch of government to function.
end quotes
And that, people, is exactly what this Democrat demagogue Adam Schiff from Burbank, California is trying to make happen with his calls for Trump to be indicted based on the word of convicted liar Michael Cohen – he wants to exert a destabilizing effect upon the ability of the executive branch of our national government to function, so as to gain political points for the Democrats going into the 2020 presidential elections, where incidentally and not at all surprisingly, in the most recent edition of The New Yorker, the December 24 & 31, 2018 Issue, in a story entitled “Adam Schiff’s Plans to Obliterate Trump’s Red Line – With the Democrats controlling the House, Schiff’s congressional investigation will follow the money” by Jeffrey Toobin, we are told that Schiff’s travels during the recent mid-terms have led some to speculate that Schiff may be considering a long-shot bid for President in 2020, which takes us back to the Constitutional policy Schiff is trying to change here as expressed in the October 16, 2000 Opinion for the Attorney General titled “A Sitting President’s Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution,” to wit:
The Department therefore concluded in both the OLC memorandum and the Solicitor General’s brief that, while civil officers generally may be indicted and criminally prosecuted during their tenure in office, the constitutional structure permits a sitting President to be subject to criminal process only after he leaves office or is removed therefrom through the impeachment process.
end quotes
There, people, is the Constitutional hurdle to prosecuting Trump that this Adam Schiff has to get removed so he can become known as the Congressman who took down a sitting American president.
Incidentally, in that same New Yorker article, we are told as follows concerning Schiff, to wit:
It’s less known that, like many lawyers in Los Angeles, Schiff has been writing screenplays on the side for years, which together amount to a kind of autobiography.
end quotes
And here is he, people, now sitting in Congress, and trying to write another screenplay that is going to put little Adam in the White House in 2020.
And why not?
His district includes Hollywood, afterall!
On that note, please stay tuned, because there is more of that comprehensive October 16, 2000 Opinion for the Attorney General titled “A Sitting President’s Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution” that Adam Schiff is trying to get changed based on the testimony of convicted liar Michael Cohen yet to come.
I have Adam Schiff derangement syndrome. I don’t see a person’s face – I see a talking penis that should be hidden by pulling a big condom over his head
Better hurry down to the local drug store, Paul. I understand the price of Kool-Aide goes up at the first of the year!
Thank you, Chas, for the much needed laugh and reality check. I use opinion pieces like this and the resultant comment threads as a peek into Trump supporters’ takes on current events. The denial and Kool-Aide is still strong, I see.
Give us a peek into your take on current events….please.
Although I know I’ll be dog-piled, here goes.
It’s a long, complicated story, which is part of why the MSM has so utterly dropped the ball covering it.
Donald Trump is a con man. His father had mob ties. Trump inherited those ties and established new ones, especially after he failed with casinos in Atlantic City and banks won’t lend to him. That’s when he got into international money laundering.
Trump ran for president as a cynical bid to increase the value of his brand. The Apprentice TV shows weren’t bringing in as much money, so he decided to run for president (again — he dipped his toe in the water in 2012).
Trump has been on Russia’s radar since he visited in the 80s to try to build Trump Tower Moscow. Putin seems to have some serious blackmail on him; that’s why Trump is so deferential to the Russian dictator/president. At this point Russian government is effectively the Russian mob.
With the above in mind, check out this compilation of a Twitter thread. It’s an excellent overview of all of the alleged crimes and investigations around Trump.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1071216523556110337.html
I believe that eventually, somehow Trump will end up spending the rest of his life in jail. He has betrayed the United States in his quest for money and fame. Most of his family will get jail time, too. Mueller is playing it smart; he’s working with state prosecutors so Trump can’t pardon everyone around him and himself for everything.
You may not believe a word I wrote. That’s fine. It’s your prerogative.
For what it’s worth, I’m not a Hillary-loving libtard who wants to tax everyone to kingdom come and take everyone’s guns away. If I had it my way the Clintons would shut up and stay out of politics completely. I’d like to see competent centrists running the government. This country has serious problems, and they’re not getting solved by the clown show in D.C.
I see Cape Chuck had a good weed delivery this weekend.
Stacey, if Putin has proof of perfidy for blackmail it is HILLARY CLINTONS emails that provided it.
So, why oh shy would Putin; possessing HRC’s emails-ya know, with the “C” that she thought meant “copy”- want Trump to be in power?
Hint, sugarplum he wouldn’t. He’d want HILLARY to win since he OWNS her.
And guess what? It ain’t illegal to try to develop a hotel, anywhere.
Now, let’s talk AC. Failed casino? None failed. None. Was there economic turmoil that required the usage of an existing LAW; ie: Bankruptcy? Yes there was. MANY companies have used that over the centuries. Read a book.
Finally, if you want to see a couple who ” has betrayed the United States in THEIR quest for money and fame” one only has to look at the Clintons and their so called “Foundation”.
SMDH. Such kool aide drinking idiots. Ya know where that expression came from right? Over 900 super smert Democrats slurping down the cyanide, AFTER THEY KILLED THEIR KIDS.
And yes, Jim Jones was a YUUUUGGGEEEE San Francisco liberal democrat, best buddies of DiFi and all the rest of the anti-American left over there.
Stacy, what has any of that drivel got to do with Democrat demagogue Adam Schiff trying to shred our Constitution?
You tell us “(I)t’s a long, complicated story, which is part of why the MSM has so utterly dropped the ball covering it,” and then you tell us that Donald Trump is a con man and his father had mob ties.
What of it, Stacy?
What is the point?
And how is that any different that John F. Kennedy and his father?
Weren’t they close to the mob?
And then you tell us “Trump inherited those ties and established new ones, especially after he failed with casinos in Atlantic City and banks won’t lend to him.”
Have you even a shred of proof to back any of that up?
And Stacy, again, what of any of that?
Trump IS the president, is he not?
Are you saying that because he is mobbed up, that he can’t be president?
And then you come out with this gem: “That’s when he got into international money laundering.”
Okay!
Again, how is that relevant to anything this Democrat demagogue Congressman Adam Schiff is doing, or about to do?
Please enlighten us, because to me, it seems very much like you are taking us on a speculative wild goose chase with all this mob stuff and money laundering and all.
Let’s say it’s all true, Stacy – WHAT OF IT?
Then you come at us with this: “Trump ran for president as a cynical bid to increase the value of his brand.”
UH, didn’t Obama do the same, Stacy?
Dude comes into office without enough money to buy a decent pair of shoes or a suit that fit him right, and he leaved office ahead millions of dollars!
What’s up with that, Stacy?
And what about the Fox News article “The Obamas are on their way to becoming a billion-dollar brand” by Alex Pappas on 19 November 2018, where we are told as follows:
The cash keeps rolling in for Barack and Michelle Obama.
And it may not be long before they’re billionaires.
The New York Post reported the Obamas are on their way to becoming a billion-dollar brand, amid highly lucrative deals for books, speeches and Netflix videos.
The former president makes $400,000 per speech.
end quotes
How about Hussein Obama ran for president as a cynical bid to increase the value of his brand?
And then you come back with this: “The Apprentice TV shows weren’t bringing in as much money, so he decided to run for president (again — he dipped his toe in the water in 2012).”
What, Stacy, do you want us to make of that?
Should that have served as a disqualification for office, do you think – that his motives weren’t pure?
And that question takes us back to this assertion, to wit: “Trump has been on Russia’s radar since he visited in the 80s to try to build Trump Tower Moscow.”
“Putin seems to have some serious blackmail on him; that’s why Trump is so deferential to the Russian dictator/president.”
“At this point Russian government is effectively the Russian mob.”
end quotes
Stacy, let me tell you, you have a real talent for drama, you know that?
But of course you do.
So can we expect Adam Schiff, who is making money off of being the “resistance” to Trump, as if the Constitution somehow gave a Congressman like Adam Schiff the duty to be the “resistance” to a sitting president, to expose this serious blackmail Putin has on Trump?
Is that where this is going?
And no, Stacy, I am not going to go over to TWITTER, of all places, to try and find out either truth or facts, because TWITTER is the last place I would expect to find either, and frankly, Stacy, I am surprised and concerned that you are letting that crap on TWITTER get into your head to rot your mind!
And here we come, it seems, to your finale, to wit: I believe that eventually, somehow Trump will end up spending the rest of his life in jail.
He has betrayed the United States in his quest for money and fame.
Most of his family will get jail time, too. Mueller is playing it smart; he’s working with state prosecutors so Trump can’t pardon everyone around him and himself for everything.
You may not believe a word I wrote.
That’s fine.
It’s your prerogative.
end quotes
I thought Mueller was supposed to be investigating Russian interference in our elections, Stacy, which incidentally, has never yet been proven.
Where is he getting all this extra authority from?
And where are these state attorney generals getting any Constitutional authority to conduct criminal investigations of a sitting American president?
And Stacy, I don’t know about anyone else, but I never thought you were a Hillary-loving libtard who wants to tax everyone to kingdom come and take everyone’s guns away, and I’m glad to hear you are not.
And like you, I too would like to see competent people running the government, because as you so accurately stay, this country has serious problems, and they’re not getting solved by the clown show in D.C.
Given that Adam Schiff is a big part of that clown show then makes this expose even more relevant to the times we are in, does it not?
And Stacy, thank you for having the courage to make your opinion known!
The people that voted for our President do not really care what he has ‘Done’.
They were only concerned with what he was willing to ‘Do’.
I, personally, do not care if he has snorted a line of cocaine out of the crack of a prostitutes hind parts every day since his birth, so long as he is willing to fight the domestic terrorist known as The Liberal Democrat.
People in this country forget our history when it comes to who has occupied the oval office before Trump.
Hussein Obama himself, by his own admissions, was snorting cocaine before he was president.
Dick Nixon was a crook.
LBJ was a liar.
And that is just in recent times.
There is absolutely nothing in our Constitution that requires a presidential aspirant to be honest.
It is a hope they will be, but it is not required and if it was, which I would be for, it would eliminate dead wood like Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama from the presidential pool, along with future contenders like this Adam Schiff, who doesn’t mind misleading us and dividing us with his outright lies, and Young Andy Cuomo of New York state, as well.
As was said in FEDERALIST No. 51, The Structure of the Government Must Furnish the Proper Checks and Balances Between the Different Departments, from the New York Packet to the People of the State of New York by either Alexander Hamilton or Jemmy Madison on Friday, February 8, 1788:
It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government.
But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature?
If men were angels, no government would be necessary.
end quotes
Wouldn’t it be great if all of our presidential aspirants were in fact angels?
Except, Stacy, and by the way the best of the season to you, I am NOT a Trump supporter.
Personally, the dude turns me right off, but hey, that is just me.
So there is a fatal hole poked into your balloon here – POP!
My concern, Stacy, happens to be with OUR Constitution as written.
The Democrat demagogue Adam Schiff is trying to subvert our Constitution, Stacy.
As a loyal American citizen and combat veteran who incidentally is not a Republican, I am standing up to call his cards.
So, Stacy, tell us – which side are YOU on?
YUCK, you know what I am saying, Chas Cornweller?
You don’t drink that ****, do you?
Isn’t it recycled toxic sludge or something like that – you know, the **** that killed all those people down in Jonestown when you were young?
And dear friend and fellow American patriot Chas Cornweller, while I got you on the line during one of your rare public appearances in here, the best of the season to you, dude!
And seriously, Chas Cornweller, don’t be drinking that Kool-Aid **** that this Democrat demagogue Adam Schiff is trying to gull you into drinking – that toxic **** will rot your brain and that is a fact, plain and simple.
Oh, this is too easy…………..
Yes, Chas. You would know about the price of Kool Aid. None of us are surprised you know the pricing schedule.
And since we are expressing ourselves here, I am in a Holiday mood. A Merry Christmas to you Paul as well and a joyous, prosperous, peaceful New Year. And that goes to all the other Mirror readers as well. A special shout out to Stacey, now under the dogpile. Thanks for taking the deflection for me!
I’d also like to offer a nice large black lump of coal (don’t worry, it’s clean) to Mike K., Mr. Easy, Blue Hoss and John Parks. But, especially to J. Parks and his very, very special comment this year…”The people that voted for our President do not really care what he has ‘Done’. They were only concerned with what he was willing to ‘Do’. I, personally, do not care if he has snorted a line of cocaine out of the crack of a prostitutes’ hind parts every day since his birth, so long as he is willing to fight the domestic terrorist known as The Liberal Democrat.” That sir (in my honest opinion) constitutes one of the best one liners to denote just how far and low America has fallen in its quest to maintain total blind allegiance to ignorance, entitlement, divisiveness, hatred to fellow man and lastly, a complete and utterly lack of geo-political knowledge. You DO realize don’t you, that the majority of terrorist acts perpetrated in the past five years, have been instigated by white, mostly conservative, middle class white men with mental issues. The Liberal Democrat, as envisioned by you, is not only NOT a terrorist threat, but merely a touchstone on which you hang your hat of troubles and woe. When in actuality, the real threat to your well-being comes from those fine folks you keep sending to the Hill in D.C. who consistently vote against your best interests. I am speaking of Tax Reform (for the 1% – not the middle class), Unlimited Military Budget spending along with perpetuation of world-wide conflicts, Corporate greed feeding, lack of Health Care cost caps and blind allegiance to an administration who, in the fine parlance of another Mirror contributor; albeit weak – but perfect here…”Couldn’t beat their way out of wet paper bag!” Much less run the country. (my words)
Happy Holidays everyone and may the New Year bring more indictments (17 and counting), fresh prison sentences and a clean sweep of the Halls of Congress and elsewhere. HO HO HO! Merry Impeachment!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_BU5hR9gXE
“to denote just how far and low America has fallen in its quest to maintain total blind allegiance to ignorance, entitlement, divisiveness, hatred to fellow man and lastly, a complete and utterly lack of geo-political knowledge.”
We weren’t talking about the Clintons or the Obamas, Chas but I am surprised you wrote that about them.
“If I had a son…….”
Slurp that kool aide down, brudda. Keep on ignoring reality.
Ah, dear friend and fellow American patriot Chas Cornweller, now known here in the frozen wastelands to the north of Cape Charles, where an icy wind right now is whipping down from the north, trying to flay your skin with its blasts, as “Bobcat Charley” for your seeming love of fighting your way tooth and nail from out from under a dogpile, much like the animal that is your namesake, which loves nothing so much as tearing into a pile of dogs that it has lured into an ambush under a deadfall; let me say there is an actual thrill among the people up here when you come on the world stage here as you just did, leveling scorn right and left like the terrible swift sword in the Battle Hymn of the Republic, which spirited song I play quite well and quite often with spirit (think Scottish Highlanders going into battle with pipes skirling).
People, myself included to be candid and frank here, view it as akin to being in the presence of such powerful orators as Julius Caesar or Gaius Gracchus, and you have to go back that 2000+ years to find your match!
So no wonder we are excited, Chas Cornweller.
And seriously, Chas Cornweller – “A special shout out to Stacey, now under the dogpile?”
No, Chas Cornweller, she is not under a dog pile!
In fact, I would say that we older Americans in here have really taken her under our wing to educate her, Chas Cornweller, and not show her the error of her ways, but the error of this bull**** she is picking up from TWITTER!
I think Stacy has been treated with respect and kid gloves, Chas Cornweller, to be truthful.
Which brings us to this, Chas Cornweller, to wit: Thanks for taking the deflection for me!
But she didn’t, Chas Cornweller – she directed attention to your comment as a very excellent and might I say effective devil’s advocate in here about drinking the KOOL-AID, and that reference to KOOL-AID by yourself, and again, masterfully so, takes us right back to this “puff piece” (an article or story in the media that is excessively complimentary about a person) about Adam Schiff in the New Yorker entitled “Adam Schiff’s Plans to Obliterate Trump’s Red Line – With the Democrats controlling the House, Schiff’s congressional investigation will follow the money” by Jeffrey Toobin in the December 24 & 31, 2018 Issue to our attention, who incidentally informed us by way of background that Schiff is not especially short or slight, but he does appear diminutive, as follows:
Until March 20, 2017, Schiff’s skills were known to few.
Most of the committee’s business is conducted in secret, in a secure suite of offices three floors below the Capitol Visitor Center.
But on that day the Intelligence Committee held a rare public hearing, in which James Comey, who, at that point, was still the director of the F.B.I., publicly confirmed for the first time that the Bureau was investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election.
Before Comey began to speak, Schiff gave an opening statement in which he clinically—and devastatingly—summarized the existing evidence in the case.
“Last summer, at the height of a bitterly contested and hugely consequential Presidential campaign, a foreign, adversarial power intervened in an effort to weaken our democracy, and to influence the outcome for one candidate and against the other,” he said.
“That foreign adversary was, of course, Russia, and it acted through its intelligence agencies and upon the direct instructions of its autocratic ruler, Vladimir Putin, in order to help Donald J. Trump become the forty-fifth President of the United States.”
Michael Bahar, who was then Schiff’s top staffer on the committee, recalled, “Schiff kept saying at the time that it’s our job in Congress to educate people about what was really going on.”
“That’s the way he approached his opening statement.”
“He was saying, ‘This is what we need to look at.'”
“It was so compelling and so detailed.”
“It quickly became clear that it caused panic for those on the other side.”
end quotes
With respect to who it is that is dispensing KOOL-AID, Chas Cornweller, and so that you cannot slither off the hook here, as you are so adept at doing in debate by rapid-fire changing of the subject so that nobody can follow you any longer, and so give up out of mental fatigue, , I am going to pin you down to a critical and rational analysis of this one sentence from that March 20, 2017, where Schiff made his skills as a demagogue (a political leader who seeks support by appealing to popular desires and prejudices rather than by using rational argument with synonyms such as political agitator, soapbox orator, fomenter, and provocateur) known to the candid world with this following line, to wit:
“Last summer, at the height of a bitterly contested and hugely consequential Presidential campaign, a foreign, adversarial power intervened in an effort to weaken our democracy, and to influence the outcome for one candidate and against the other,” he said.
end quotes
Now, Chas Cornweller, what I want to do in here, courtesy of the Cape Charles Mirror, of course, is to take and parse that sentence like we used to do as schoolkids being taught grammer word for word to demonstrate how a skilled demagogue like California Democrat Adam Schiff can use words to warp and twist the minds of the weak-witted and gullible in this country, who according to a report that just came out yesterday that was done by some real top-shelf experts working for the U.S. Senate, constitute a majority of the people in this country, anymore, whose minds have been taken over by the Russians on FACEBOOK, TWITTER, YOUTUBE, INSTAGRAM, PINTEREST and TUMBLR.
Just about the only place you don’t find a Russian presence trying to warp people’s minds, by and large, anyway, is in here, where real Americans congregate, Chas Cornweller Americans whose minds are simply too strong to be misled by some Russian, who historically in the this country have always been fellow travelers with the Democrats.
But enough about the Russians, my goodness, we have heard so much about them that hearing some more is like trying to eat hot dogs every meal for a year or two – you reach a point of where they will no longer go down, and so it is with all this bull**** from Adam Schiff about “Russian interference” in our 2016 presidential race.
Unless and until Adam Schiff has investigated each and every member of the electoral college who voted for Trump to make sure they were not tainted by the Russians in some nefarious way so that they would vote for Trump, and not Hillary, and has presented us with that evidence that a member or many members or even all the members of the electoral college had been tampered with, there is no Russian interference, plain and simple.
So when Adam Schiff said on March 20, 2017 that “(L)ast summer, at the height of a bitterly contested and hugely consequential Presidential campaign, a foreign, adversarial power intervened in an effort to weaken our democracy, and to influence the outcome for one candidate and against the other,” he was engaging first in hyperbole by describing that race as “hugely consequential,” as if that race were somehow different from every other race in my lifetime, probably because Hillary was running, and then he was telling an outright lie, n’est-ce pas, Chas Cornweller?
Or is there another way of looking at it where Adam Schiff would not be lying?
If so, enlighten us?
And thank you in advance for doing so, Chas Cornweller!
It’s grammar not grammer.
Really??? Why do you care how he spelled something? Do you feel superior by correcting him? Guess What??? Your not.
I bet you voted for Bath House Barry and Hillary.
You Sir, and those like you, are a clear and present danger to the Judaeo Christian principles this country was founded on.
“A man who is not a liberal at 16 has no heart,” ventured British statesman Benjamin Disraeli, and “A man who is not a conservative at 60 has no head (brain).”
Best of the season to you, A friend.
And to you as well Paul!
Dear Friend,
Know that when you point your finger, three point back at you. Three quotes from three esteemed conservatives for you. Something to chew on, my friend.
A conservative is one who admires radicals, centuries after they’re dead. Leo Rosten
The resources of nature, like those of spirit, are running out, and all that a conscientious man can aspire to be is a literal conservative, hoarding what remains of culture and of natural wealth against the fierce appetites of modern life. Russell Kirk
Associate with men of good quality if you esteem your own reputation; for it is better to be alone than in bad company. George Washington
https://www.gofundme.com/TheTrumpWall
Watch the number climb with every refresh…
We The People are Tired of You…
Ah, yes, Chas Cornweller, George Washington: “The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism.”
“But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism.”
“The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty.”
― George Washington, George Washington’s Farewell Address
He is talking about Adam Schiff there, dear friend and fellow American patriot Chas Cornweller when he talks to us across the gulf of time about the disorders and miseries which result from the alternate domination of the Republicans over the Democrats and vice versa, sharpened by the spirit of revenge in this case by the Democrats because Trump beat Hillary Clinton, has gradually inclined the minds of liberal men and women to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual, in this case, Adam Schiff, and as the chief of the prevailing faction in our House of Representatives, Adam Schiff is turning this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty.
Thanks from a fellow American patriot, Chas Cornweller, for bringing that so clearly to our attention in here.
Interesting Paul, he could have just as well been speaking of Mike Pence, Orin Hatch, Mitch McConnell, Roy Blunt, Chuck Grassley and Lindsey Graham. Let’s read it again…
“The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty.” George Washington
Hm…sounds like to me, anyway, the eroding/corroding of the Republican Party as each indictment drives another nail into the coffin of the status of the present Administration and their Commander-In-Chief. The reality of which, the Democratic Party has the momentum of proof and the imagination of the American people, of whom await a just and honest end to the chicanery that has occurred over these past three years. I guess it’s all a matter of perspective, huh?
” hoarding what remains of culture and of natural wealth against the fierce appetites of modern life.”
THIS is what we on the Right are trying to do.
THIS is what you on the Left are trying to destroy.
“Obama, June 3: This was the moment – this was the time – when we came together to remake this great nation so that it may always reflect our very best selves, and our highest ideals. Thank you, God Bless you, and may God Bless the United States of America.”
To “remake” this great nation? One does not REMAKE something that is already great, unless one is lying.
Hear! Hear!!!
So sad to no longer recognize half this country’s citizens as my fellow Americans.
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.”
― Samuel Adams
There is no sadness in casting out the cancer that afflicts the body politic.
Fight the good fight, Ms. Foster!!!!!!
You are missing out on context, Mike:
Text of President Obama’s Remarks at the African Union
July 28, 2015 7:57 AM
Remarks as Prepared for Delivery–by President Barack Obama
Address to the People of Africa
African Union Headquarters
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
I also stand before you as the son of an African.
Africa and its people have helped shape who I am and how I see the world.
end quotes
There is your context, Mike, for what Obama means when he, as the son of an African, talks about remaking (make something differently) America – he wants to remake it into another Kenya, or the Congo.
And people wonder about foreign influence in our national politics!
Go figure.
Has anyone ever told you that you are like totally awesome, Chas Cornweller?
If not, let me be the first here.
Yes, Chas Cornweller, you are one heck of a josher, as in “he’s such a josher, you don’t think he would actually eat baby pandas for breakfast,” with your statement that “(T)he reality of which, the Democratic Party has the momentum of proof and the imagination of the American people, of whom await a just and honest end to the chicanery that has occurred over these past three years.”
And you are also very perceptive when you say “I guess it’s all a matter of perspective, huh?”
Of course it is, Chas Cornweller!
Did you honestly think it could be otherwise?
And Chas Cornweller, you are dead on the money when you say the Democrats (No, I am not a Republican) now have control of the imaginations of a good chunk of the American people, who we have just learned from a very serious report presented to the U.S. Senate by the Brits, are easily deceived and have been misled and lead by the nose by the Russians for several years now, on social media, and some 80 or 90 years before that, when you consider the Communist influence on the Democrat party going back to before WWII.
So the Democrats have long experience with playing with the imaginations of the gullible and weak-minded and just plain ignorant here in America, which are the ones the Democrat party likes to exploit.
For proof of that, Chas Cornweller, for I know you like proof, as should all Americans, really, consider this article entitled “Witnesses: Promises, then signatures – Voters testify in ballot fraud trial about what they were told before they signed papers” by Bob Gardinier of the Albany, New York Times Union on Friday, February 3, 2012, to wit:
TROY - Testimony from voters in the city ballot-fraud case revealed the tactics politicians and political operatives used and the promises they made to allegedly convince residents to sign over their voting privileges.
Several voters approached by operatives in the months before the 2009 Working Families Party primary for City Council testified Wednesday that to get their signatures, officials promised to end crime in their neighborhood or build a park for kids.
They said they were told a new city policy was being implemented to make it easier for people to vote and all they had to do was sign a piece of paper.
Testimony also showed operatives may have targeted immigrants and other people not familiar with the English language or the U.S. election process.
The testimony emerged at the trial of Board of Elections Commissioner Edward McDonough and former City Councilman Michael LoPorto.
The two Democrats are charged with taking part in an attempt by some Democrats to forge and cast about 50 absentee ballots in the Working Families Party 2009 primary for Troy City Council.
Jennifer Taylor, a prosecution witness who lived in Corliss Park, said she was visited by Councilman Kevin McGrath and another man she did not know.
She said she thought she was signing a piece of paper that would register her vote for McGrath.
“He told me he was going to clean up Corliss Park and I believed him and thought I was just voting for him so I signed a piece of paper,” Taylor said.
McGrath, who cooperated with the investigation and faces no charges, was on the ballot for that primary.
Instead, according to Special Prosecutor Trey Smith, Taylor’s vote was altered to show that she chose former City Council President Clement Campana, and former councilmen John Brown and Michael LoPorto.
Several Democrats have pleaded guilty in connection with the probe and will testify.
Others are under indictment awaiting trial.
Michele Zillgitt took the stand and said that Councilman Gary Galuski, who has been indicted in the case, came to her home and convinced her and her two mentally handicapped brothers, one who has since died, to sign a piece of paper.
“They said the city was making it easier this year and all I had to do was sign a piece of paper,” Zillgitt testified.
Instead her votes, like all the others, were allegedly cast for the same three candidates.
Other witnesses needed a Spanish language interpreter to get through their testimony.
Maritza Berrios said she was not even registered to vote in 2009.
Shown an absentee ballot with her signature, she said it was not hers.
Ana Berrios only said she signed something she was asked to sign.
She said she really did not know what it was.
When asked if she wrote in the required “where you will be on election day” box that she would be on vacation in Cape Cod, she replied, “I don’t even know where that is.”
Johanna Torres said she just did what she was told.
“He said sign here and I did and that was it,” Torres said.
Torres did not know the name of the officials who came to her door.
She said part of the piece of paper that she signed was covered up by another piece of paper to conceal what was printed there.
The trial continues Friday.
end quotes
Chas Cornweller, isn’t that just despicable (deserving contempt with synonyms such as contemptible, loathsome, detestable, reprehensible, abhorrent, abominable, awful, heinous, odious, vile, low, mean, abject, shameful, ignominious, shabby, ignoble, disreputable, discreditable, unworthy)?
Why do the Democrats use people like that, do you think, Chas Cornweller?
Is it in their DNA?
Dear friend and fellow American patriot Chas Cornweller, dude, let me bring you back on-topic here for a moment by focusing your attention on this sentence from the original post, to wit:
Getting back to the main story here, which is about Adam Schiff, a top Lilliputian if there ever was one (no, people, there is no Constitutional bar to tiny people who are about one-twelfth the height of ordinary human beings serving in the United States House of Representatives as Democrats from California), we are hearing a lot these days about the “founders” from the Democrats and what are supposed their thoughts on the impeachment of a sitting U.S. president, and according to them, we have now reached the patently absurd position in this country, thanks to the Democrats, that a U.S. president can be impeached for allegedly defrauding the voters of the United States of America, who, by the way, do not elect presidents in the first place; the electoral college does, by not specifically telling them that while he was running for president, he was actually making hush payments to some women not his wife who he was alleged to have had carnal relations with, as if that could somehow disqualify a person from holding the office of president of the United States of America.
end quotes
Have you any thoughts on that that you can share with us?
How about this – in the history of the United States presidency, which now spans some 220+ years, is Trump the first American president to have had alleged carnal relations with women not his wife?
And more to the point, is there such a thing, or can there even be such a thing in this country under our present frame of government as “defrauding” the voters during a presidential election campaign?
That is what we are discussing in here right now., Chas Cornweller, not the eroding/corroding of the Republican Party as each indictment drives another nail into the coffin of the status of the present Administration and their Commander-In-Chief.
The Republican party is largely if not totally irrelevant to this discussion, as are all those indictments, none of which give us any proof or evidence of the original claims of the Democrat party that their chosen liar, er, sorry, “presidential candidate,” was denied the election because of Russian “interference” in our 2016 presidential election.
That claim was bull**** then, and remains bull**** today, but the hype and hysteria being put forth by Adam Schiff and the Democrats about Trump now allegedly defrauding the voters by allegedly concealing the fact, which was never a secret, that he was a womanizer, has very effectively shifted people’s attention off that false claim and over onto Trump as a diversion
And what I am doing in here as a LOYAL AMERICAN CITIZEN who is a political independent who loathes Republicans almost as much as Democrats, and who is not a Trump supporter is letting Adam Schiff and the Democrats know that I do not like being lied to and misled by them, who are the party in this country who represent the interests of foreigners as a matter of policy, not the natural-born American people.
Where are you on that question, Chas Cornweller?
Which side are you on, and I don’t mean the Democrats versus the Republicans?
Why, Chas Cornweller, should we be supporting people like Adam Schiff who are lying to us for cheap partisan political gain?
Interesting Paul, interesting. Now, when you use the initials DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid, a self-replicating material present in nearly all living organisms as the main constituent of chromosomes. It is the carrier of genetic information.) in your statement, I am assuming you are using the pejorative sense of the term, as in distinctive characteristics or qualities? Personally, my DNA gave me my fine looks, noble build and zest for life that I possess, even to this day. Thank you, father, thank you mother. Now as far as Democrats having a lock on cheating at the ballot box, I suggest you do a network search of who cheated whom. I think you will find that Gerrymandering and outright mis-direction at the booth is the handy work of the Right, not the Left. Besides, I thought your ilk thought the Left too stupid to even get out their own way! No, dear sir, it is neither the political Right, nor the Political Left that deceives exclusively…but, both parties. It’s the nature of Politics. Tis the reason I shun all manner of political chicanery and only look for truth. Besides, it’s in their DNA, don’cha know?
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/12/11/18134636/north-carolina-9-election-fraud-voter-fraud
One example. One.
And you know darn well that starting with the Kennedy administration, we can provide THOUSANDS of examples of Leftist corruption.
Melowese Richardson anyone?
“The Rev. Al Sharpton, keynote speaker at Thursday’s rally to kick-off the campaign for an Ohio Voters’ Bill of Rights Ohio Constitutional amendment, even hugged Melowese Richardson.
Richardson, a Democrat, was convicted of voter fraud after using her position as poll worker to vote more than once in the 2012 presidential election. She got a five year prison term, but was released earlier this month after local Democratic activists pressed for a fairer term.
A judge sentenced her to probation instead.
Richardson was among the more than 400 at Word of Deliverance Church in Forest Park when Cincinnati National Action Network President Bobby Hilton called her on stage for a “welcome home.””
Show me where the Right has EVER celebrated one of ours who was convicted. Just one.
I double dog dare you.
‘Personally, my DNA gave me my fine looks, noble build and zest for life that I possess, even to this day. Thank you, father, thank you mother. ‘
They didn’t give you modesty.
WOW, Chas Cornweller!
GADZOOKS!
ZOUNDS!
When you let loose like you just did here, you remind me of Wellington’s infantry (me) confronted by Napolean’s massed cannon (you).
WHEW, Chas Cornweller, you really skinned me there, didn’t you, with this biting and cutting comment, to wit: “Besides, I thought your ilk thought the Left too stupid to even get out their own way!?”
Actually, my dear friend and fellow American patriot (and don’t let him kid you here, people, because Chas knows this same stuff better than I), in the minds of the founding fathers, suffrage was up to the states, period, and it was never intended to be universal, as that was seen by the founders, based on solid historical evidence which modern Americans aren’t even aware of, being more concerned with what will happen next, as opposed to yesterday, and ignore at their peril, but more importantly, the peril of the nation, as the best way to destroy the nation, by opening it up to foreign intrigue, which is exactly what has happened in the United States of America since Barack Obama became president,
We have people in this country, my dear friend and fellow natural-born American citizen Chas Cornweller (I know, I know, that counts for less than anything in America today but I am old and it is hard to change ingrained ways) who were actually misled by RUSSIANS who were able to tell these people, presumably Democrat voters, since the RUSSIANS were trying to elect Trump and hurt Hillary, which they failed to do since Hillary still won the popular vote, not Trump, the wrong way to vote, because these people who can vote had no idea how to do it.
These are the people who didn’t have suffrage in America at the time of the founding, and with good reason, Chas Cornweller – they were concerned with trying to save a failing nation, and they didn’t want or need the advice of people who didn’t even know how to vote, so they could be misled by RUSSIANS, coming into the picture.
And now, thanks to the Democrats, we are chock-a-block with people in this country, Chas Cornweller, and we know this is true from the Senate report the Brits did that showed how many people in this country are either totally owned by the RUSSIANS or are in thrall to the RUSSIANS.
That wasn’t supposed to be able to happen, Chas Cornweller.
But it obviously has.
We have met the enemy and it is us, Chas Cornweller.
We are getting in real time to see what happens when a nation opens up its insane asylums in a quest for full voter enrollment.
We got here by ourselves, Chas Cornweller.
By the way, Chas Cornweller, are you one of those in this country who is led around by the nose by the Russians?
Or do you think you think for yourself?
And seriously, Chas Cornweller, dude – you are a rational being in here, not ruled by the passions and emotions of the howling, shrieking, yowling mob – tell us this, and this is a universal question, Chas Cornweller, no matter what sexual orientation you might cling to, how can the Democrats claim to have the truth, about anything, when their chief spokesperson and point person, who has been interviewed some 227 times now, is telling us lies and is using demagoguery to divide us and to cause tumults and convulsions that are putting campaign cash in his pocket that he is then using to further extend his political influence in our national government?
If the Democrats really had the truth in their possession, Chas Cornweller, why then would it be necessary to rally around a demagogue like Adam Schiff?
And that has absolutely nothing to do with the Republicans, Chas Cornweller, so please, don’t you them as an excuse to not answer here.
Consider the Washington Examiner article “Some experts believe Trump can be impeached for conduct performed before becoming president” by Melissa Quinn on 6 December 2018, where Schiff is quoting pure bull**** that he would know was bull****, because he is in possession of and aware of what Schiff is referring to is a document from the United States Department of Justice entitled “A Sitting President’s Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution” and dated October 16, 2000 which concludes that “the indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would unconstitutionally undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions,” to wit:
Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, cited Porteous’ case when discussing whether sitting officials can be ousted for offenses committed before acquiring higher office.
“We now by constitutional terms — in a country that rarely has impeachment trials — have a precedent that you can be impeached and removed from office both for prior crimes and for lying under oath,” Schiff said during an event in October.
end quotes
That, Chas Cornweller, is out and out horse**** and intentionally so.
Tell us, Chas Cornweller, why should we tolerate being intentionally lied to by public officials like Adam Schiff, especially us VEET NAM veterans?
And as always, I seriously have to admire the ability of our fellow CCM correspondent Chas Cornweller to take these subjects he doesn’t like being openly discussed in here, like in this case, why we, the American people should be tolerant in the slightest degree to being fed a complete line of horse**** by this Democrat demagogue Adam Schiff of California, off into the weeds as he so skillfully did @ December 20, 2018 at 1:46 pm, where he posted as follows:
“Now as far as Democrats having a lock on cheating at the ballot box, I suggest you do a network search of who cheated whom.”
“I think you will find that Gerrymandering and outright mis-direction at the booth is the handy work of the Right, not the Left.”
end quotes
Talk about being served up some real red meat, people, there it is, right there before us, thanks to our dear friend and fellow American patriot Chas Cornweller, who is one of the top “devil’s advocates” on the planet, bar none!
So, is Gerrymandering really a form of “cheating” employed by those Chas Cornweller calls the “right,” as if that term actually meant something, which it doesn’t?
What is Gerrymandering, anyway?
Where did the term come from?
Good questions, America, so let us see what the venerable Wikipedia has to say on the subject, which is as follows:
The word gerrymander (originally written Gerry-mander) was used for the first time in the Boston Gazette on 26 March 1812.
The word was created in reaction to a redrawing of Massachusetts state senate election districts under Governor Elbridge Gerry.
end quotes
HMMMMMMMMMM, people, you know what I am saying?
1812 is a long way back, is it not?
And what about Elbridge Gerry?
Was he some right-wing racist, misogynist, homophobic lunatic as our dear friend and fellow American patriot Chas Cornweller would have us believe who was intent on depriving the black folks in this country of their votes so they couldn’t put Hillary Clinton in the White House instead of Trump?
This is what Wikipedia tells us of Mr. Elbridge Gerry, to wit:
Elbridge Gerry (July 17, 1744 (O.S. July 6, 1744) – November 23, 1814) was an American statesman and diplomat.
As a Democratic-Republican he served as the fifth Vice President of the United States under President James Madison from March 1813 until his death in November 1814.
He is known best for being the namesake of gerrymandering.
end quotes
HUH?
Served as vice president under Virginia’s Jemmy Madison?
HOLY COW, people!
Is our own Chas Cornweller telling us by implication here that Jemmy himself was some right-wing racist, misogynist, homophobic lunatic because he had Elbridge Gerry, the father of “gerrymandering,” as his vice president?
Seems so, does it not?
And who were these Democratic Republicans that Gerry belonged to?
Were they too a pack of slavering right-wing racist, misogynist, homophobic lunatics who didn’t want anybody but their ilk voting in America?
Here is what Wikipedia tells us on that score:
The Democratic-Republican Party (formally the Republican Party) was an American political party formed by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison around 1792 to oppose the centralizing policies of the new Federalist Party run by Alexander Hamilton, who was Secretary of the Treasury and chief architect of George Washington’s administration.
From 1801 to 1825, the new party controlled the presidency and Congress as well as most states during the First Party System.
It began in 1791 as one faction in Congress and included many politicians who had been opposed to the new constitution.
They called themselves Republicans after their ideology, republicanism.
They distrusted the Federalist tendency to centralize and loosely interpret the Constitution, believing these policies were signs of monarchism and anti-republican values.
The party splintered in 1824, with the faction loyal to Andrew Jackson coalescing into the Jacksonian movement (which would soon acquire the name Democratic Party), the faction led by John Quincy Adams and Henry Clay forming the National Republican Party and some other groups going on to form the Anti-Masonic Party.
The National Republicans, Anti-Masons, and other opponents of Andrew Jackson later formed themselves into the Whig Party.
During the time that this party existed, it was usually referred to as the Republican Party.
To distinguish it from the modern Republican Party (founded in 1854), historians, political scientists and pundits often refer to this party as the Democratic-Republican Party or the Jeffersonian Republican Party.
The modern Republican Party founded in 1854 deliberately chose to name itself after the Jeffersonians.
Modern Democratic politicians claim Jefferson as their founder.
end quotes
HMMMMMMMMMMMM, all over again, people – seems there is more to this equation than what our dear friend and fellow American patriot Chas Cornweller has fed us, but then, to his credit, we wasn’t trying to inform us – he was trying desperately to distract us away from the important question of why Democrat demagogue Adam Schiff is lying to us as a means of raising campaign cash.
Why doesn’t Chas Cornweller want us to discuss that question in here?
An d what about gerrymandering:
In 1812, Gerry signed a bill that redistricted Massachusetts to benefit his Democratic-Republican Party.
When mapped, one of the contorted districts in the Boston area was said to resemble the shape of a mythological salamander.
Gerrymander is a portmanteau of the governor’s last name and the word salamander.
The redistricting was a notable success for Gerry’s Democratic-Republican Party.
Although in the 1812 election both the Massachusetts House and governorship were won by Federalists by a comfortable margin and cost Gerry his job, the redistricted state senate remained firmly in Democratic-Republican hands.
The word gerrymander was reprinted numerous times in Federalist newspapers in Massachusetts, New England, and nationwide during the remainder of 1812.
This suggests some organized activity of the Federalists to disparage Governor Gerry in particular, and the growing Democratic-Republican party in general.
Gerrymandering soon began to be used to describe not only the original Massachusetts example, but also other cases of district shape manipulation for partisan gain in other states.
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the word’s acceptance was marked by its publication in a dictionary (1848) and in an encyclopedia (1868).
end quotes
WOW, people, the things you can learn in here in the Cape Charles Mirror if you happen to have an open mind!
So thank you Cape Charles Mirror for being here for the American people!
“By the way, Chas Cornweller, are you one of those in this country who is led around by the nose by the Russians?” To succinctly answer your question, Paul. No, I am not. I am one who likes to think, I think for myself.
Interestingly enough, I had a conversation with a friend, years ago, about this very subject of Social Media and just how very easy it would be to put across mis-leading information in a format that not only would be believable but directed to certain segments of society to influence and sway minds. You see, I have been a computer nerd for over thirty years. I have watched personal computers change such that commands had to be typed and symbols used for certain tasks back in the day. I watched the internet being born and grow into the universe it has become. I observed My Space (early attempt at social media) grow and die. I also watched Face Book come into existence and corral nearly a billion users into its sphere. Now we have Twitter, LinkedIn, Instagram, Tumblr, flickr, Yelp, nauseated yet? I could go on…there are literally hundreds of sites that we can use to deflect and direct our anonymous psyches on each other at a distance and through the medium of a box that neither confirms nor denies our existence. Beautiful. Not.
“We have met the enemy and it is us, Chas Cornweller.” A wonderful phrase sprouted from the incredible mind of Walt Kelly. Never have truer words been spoken, my friend. And in my mind and in my thinking (when I am doing it for myself) I believe the downfall will come from within. In fact, I believe it has already begun. We, as a people, are a selfish lot. We have divided into our little camps. We war with each other within our own society on the basis of race, levels of wealth and influence, social status, ageism, demographic and political affiliation. In any of these areas, information (or lack thereof) can be a major influence one’s persuasion. So, when I started seeing certain memes pop up in my feeds, I did some research. Guess what I found? That’s correct. And I found these as early as 2012. Most were directed against the Obama administration or Barack his self. And you want to know why I researched them in the first place? Because many of these memes were either posted or passed by friends of mine who, I consider very strong, enlightened Christians. And I wanted to know the source of these untruths and plainly evil lies they were spreading. I think you know where it led me.
So, Russian influence with false information? Are you kidding me? It’s the thing they do best. Agitate the American psyche, divide us from within. Begin the war from the inside and let us do all the fighting. Sit back and watch the walls tumble. And in the parlance that even Slide, Blue, and Tom and all the others can understand, ”We rose and took the bait!”
So, have the Russians played us for fools? As Sarah P. would say while sitting on her front porch and watching them from across her front yard, ”You Betcha!”
Merry Christmas, Paul. Keep the spirit alive! This will be my last comment for a while but look for my Christmas article this weekend. Peace. Chas.
” We have divided into our little camps.”
Then please tell me how DEMANDING that each and every American be divided into WhateverHYPHENAmerican is helping?
Strange how much of what you speak of did not exist prior to the 1965 Immigration act by that lovely patriot, Teddy Kennedy.
Merry Christmas to you as well, Chas. Nice to be able to say that without being castigated for not being ‘inclusive”.
No need to cast blame….you have shown the world your true colors. You can not choose our sides, who we hate, who we like.
We The People will ask no one’s permission to be free. I would rather die on my feet than live on my knees.
And once again, Chas Cornweller, a grateful nation owes you a great debt of gratitude for having the sheer gumption to put forth for consumption in here the great quantity of intellectual red meat you have literally not only packed, but “super-packed” as they like to say today where you respond to my existential question to you as to whether or not you were one of those in this country who is led around by the nose by the Russians?” by succinctly answering my question, as follows:
“Paul.”
“No, I am not.”
“I am one who likes to think, I think for myself.”
end quotes
And what a conundrum (a confusing and difficult problem or question) you have presented us here, Chas Cornweller, with that last sentence of yours above here, which has people up this way sitting around and scratching their heads, because they think you are asking a question, whether rhetorical, or not.
But enough of that, Chas Cornweller, and on to the real red meat in here, as follows:
“Interestingly enough, I (Chas Cornweller) had a conversation with a friend, years ago, about this very subject of Social Media and just how very easy it would be to put across mis-leading information in a format that not only would be believable but directed to certain segments of society to influence and sway minds.”
end quotes
And tell us true, Chas Cornweller, since when has that not been the case?
Consider these words, which I am sure you remember well from 7th grade civics, Chas Cornweller, to wit:
We should in such case again see the press teeming with publications for and against it; for as the minority would take pains to justify their dissent, so would the majority be industrious to display the wisdom of their proceedings.
Hence new divisions, new parties, and new distractions would ensue, and no one can foresee or conjecture when or how they would terminate.
end quotes
That, dear friend and fellow American patriot Chas Cornweller, as you will well remember, is John Jay in “An Address to the People of the State of New-York On the Subject of the Constitution, Agreed upon at Philadelphia, The 17th of September, 1787” printed by Samuel Loudon, Printer to the State. 1788.
So Chas Cornweller, being the computer nerd you are for over thirty years now, surely you have watched personal computers change such that commands had to be typed and symbols used for certain tasks back in the day.
Like many in America with working memories, Chas Cornweller, you watched the internet being born from out of the fertile mind of Al Gore and grow into the universe it has become.
And I would bet that a real computer nerd like yourself with a scientific bent befitting an amateur-but-well-respected ethologist My Space (early attempt at social media) grow and die and that you also watched Face Book come into existence and corral nearly a billion users into its sphere.
And as you know, Chas Cornweller, perhaps much better than I, which would not be surprising, now we have Twitter, LinkedIn, Instagram, Tumblr, flickr, Yelp – nauseated yet?
And I could go on, Chas Cornweller, because like the newspapers of and earlier day in America, there are now literally hundreds of sites that we can use to deflect and direct our anonymous psyches on each other at a distance and through the medium of a box that neither confirms nor denies our existence.
As you so cogently note, Chas Cornweller, “Beautiful, Not,” while I say it is what it is when it is for reasons of its own, and so I don’t trouble myself all that much with who is saying what on Twitter, LinkedIn, Instagram, Tumblr, flickr, Yelp or the literally hundreds of sites that people can use to deflect and direct their anonymous psyches on each other at a distance and through the medium of a box that neither confirms nor denies our existence.
It is no different than it ever has been, Chas Cornweller.
It’s just a different way of communicating.
The internet has not transformed people, and made them into something more than they were yesterday.
Rather, the internet is the truest democracy there can be, because you can find literally anybody and everybody on the internet along with every opinion under the sun, and then some, which takes us back to the truth in your conversation with a friend, years ago, about this very subject of Social Media and just how very easy it would be to put across mis-leading information in a format that not only would be believable but directed to certain segments of society to influence and sway minds.
Of course, Chas Cornweller.
So why does that surprise you?
And Chas Cornweller, with respect to the truth in your conversation with a friend, years ago, about this very subject of Social Media and just how very easy it would be to put across mis-leading information in a format that not only would be believable but directed to certain segments of society to influence and sway minds, that is exactly what this thread is about, this Burbank, California Democrat demagogue Adam Schiff using the internet and news media today to do exactly that with his bogus charge that a sitting American president can be impeached for failing to tell the voters in this country that he was allegedly paying off a couple of women he was alleged to have carnal relations with during the presidential campaign (can you imagine a day in our future when presidential candidates actually have to tell us the truth), and once again, Chas Cornweller, a grateful nation extends its gratitude to you for bringing that to our attention.
How easy it is in here to get distracted and find ourselves drifting further and further off-topic, which brings us to your statement that “We have met the enemy and it is us,” a wonderful phrase sprouted from the incredible mind of Walt Kelly, and as you so cogently note, never have truer words been spoken, my friend.
And when you say that in your mind and in your thinking, when it is you doing it for yourself, as opposed to the Brits at Oxford University in England doing it for you, that you believe the downfall will come from within, of course it will, Chas Cornweller.
Over 65 years ago, Chas Cornweller, my kindergarten teacher told us exactly that, and how, and why, because from within is the only place the downfall could come from for a nation that had just beaten the Nazis in Germany and Tojo’s crowd in Japan.
And you are dead on the money, Chas Cornweller, when you say in fact, you believe it has already begun.
Yes, it has begun, Chas Cornweller – the train has left the station and the journey to tomarrow has begun.
Fasten your seatbelts, people, there might be some turbulence ahead!
And again, Chas Cornweller, you are dead on the money when you say that by and large, the majority of We, as a people, are a selfish lot, divided into our little camps.
You say we war with each other within our own society on the basis of race, levels of wealth and influence, social status, ageism, demographic and political affiliation, and how true that is, Chas Cornweller – but then, it has never has been otherwise, has it.
We have been warring within our own society on the basis of race, levels of wealth and influence, social status, ageism, demographic and political affiliation since we have had a “society” in this nation, and yes, Chas Cornweller, in any of those areas, information (or lack thereof) can be a major influence one’s persuasion.
But when has it ever been different, Chas cornweller?
That was the purpose of the Federalist Papers, afterall, to provide necessary information as a major influence on people’s decision making back at the beginning of the nation, and that was the purpose of “An Address to the People of the State of New-York On the Subject of the Constitution, Agreed upon at Philadelphia, The 17th of September, 1787” by John Jay, printed by Samuel Loudon, Printer to the State. 1788.
And now we see the Cape Charles Mirror carrying on a vital American tradition of allowing the American people a platform to attack and debunk the lies of hack politicians in America like this Democrat demagogue from Burbank, California Adam Schiff.
So the system is working, Chas Cornweller, the system that allows us common citizens to shine a spotlight on the lies being told to our fellow citizens by those in positions of power in our national government for cheap partisan political gain, and a grateful nation thanks you for being a vital part of it by raising your voice in defense of our liberties in here as you so consistently and conscientiously do, week after week after week.
And before I further address the comments of our dear friend and fellow American patriot Chas Cornweller above here about Russian memes supporting Barack Hussein Obama when he was running against John McCain and Sarah Palin for president, the most famous and persistent of which was “If you are against Obama, it is because you are a racist,” I want to take a moment to get back on topic by pointing to the fact that while the Democrat demagogue from Burbank, California Congressman Adam Schiff is being featured in the CNN article “Schiff: ‘Prepared’ to force Mueller report release if White House blocks” by Eli Watkins on 23 December 2018, where we are told that California Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff said if President Donald Trump’s attorneys try to assert executive privilege to stop the public release of special counsel Robert Mueller’s eventual report, he would likely compel publication in some form, at the same time, we are being told in an article in The Hill entitled “Majority in poll want Trump impeached or censured” by Max Greenwood on 29 December 2018 that a majority of U.S. voters surveyed – 59 percent – said that the special counsel investigation is “hurting the country,” compared to 41 percent that said it is “helping” it.
So why is Democrat demagogue Adam Schiff for something that a majority of the American people feel is hurting the country?
“I’m prepared to make sure we do everything possible so that the public has the advantage of as much of the information as it can,” Schiff said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”
Ah, okay, Adam, I like the sounds of that, especially coming from a Democrat, the party that likes us to be as ignorant as a box of rocks so we will be tractable and therefore easily manipulated and misled by the horse***** the Democrats are consistently and constantly trying to feed us, but by this time, Adam, dude, what information is it that you think we are lacking?
I mean let’s face facts here, Adam – this Mueller dude, who frankly does not inspire confidence in the American people with his hang-dog appearance, always slouched forward as he is with real bad posture while staring downward at the ground like someone with poor self-esteem who is cowed and defeated by the world he is confronted with, has been probing and probing to beat the band at a cost to the U.S. taxpayers as of Sept. 30, 2018 of $25.2 million according to Politifact, and to date, despite all of his probings, he has uncovered absolutely no proof whatsoever that any members of the 2016 electoral college were interfered with in any way by the Russians.
So why should we be interested in any report he is going to produce which is going to do nothing but regurgitate the empty claims of the Democrats and Hillary Clinton that but for Russian interference in our election, which would require the Russians turning members of the electoral college to have them vote for Trump instead of Hillary, Hillary would be president instead of Trump?
According to the Cuomo News Network article above, Schiff is expected to chair the House Intelligence Committee when Democrats take the chamber next month, and he said he would likely use his subpoena power to obtain and release Mueller’s eventual report if he needed to.
“Now, there may be parts of the report that have to be redacted because they involved classified information or they involve grand jury material,” Schiff said, adding,
“This case is just too important to keep from the American people what it’s really about.”
end quotes
HUH?
This case is just too important to keep from the American people what it’s really about?
Who’s he trying to kid here?
This case is about Hillary Clinton, who thought she was entitled to be the next president because she is Hillary Clinton, and thus is special, losing the election to Trump, so that now, she and the desperate Democrats are searching all over God’s creation for some excuse other than that the Democrats were fools in the first place to run Hillary for president, and that excuse is that some how, in some mysterious way, the Russians put trump in the White House over Hillary.
So Adam, what does the Mueller Report have to tell us about that?
When do you think that Mueller might actually find some real evidence that the Russians were able to actually turn members of the 2016 electoral college in this country to put Trump in the White House?
How many more years, Adam, do you think we should remain patient with Mueller here?
How many more millions of our taxpayer dollars should we give to Mueller?
A curious nation would like to know, Adam, so enough with the bull****.
For once, please give us a straight answer!
And finally, we get to the veritable heart of what our dear friend and fellow American patriot Chas Cornweller is saying above here when he harkens back in time to when Obama was president where he says, “so, when I started seeing certain memes pop up in my feeds, I did some research.”
“Guess what I found?”
“That’s correct.”
“And I found these as early as 2012.”
end quotes
Now, to be quite frank here, people, this word “memes” is not a word from my vocabulary, nor is it a word that I use in conversation, because I think it is a contrived word, as so many words are, that simply describes an empty concept, as we can see from its following definition, to wit: an element of a culture or system of behavior that may be considered to be passed from one individual to another by nongenetic means, especially imitation.
In other words, monkey see, monkey do.
Somebody sees someone else acting a certain way that they think is cool or rad, or whatever, and so they begin to act the same way, thin king they are cool as well.
Did I say that memes are indications of juvenile behavior, or mindless behavior?
And of course they are.
The first time I came across the term “memes” was back in May of 2011 when I was following an on-line discussion of politics https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/the_livyjr_files/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=102&p=13402&hilit=memes#p13402 by a rabid Democrat who went by the screen name billfmsd.
His point in 2011 was that falsehoods take on a life of their own in mass communication, and in mass communications, memes are chosen, to which his debating partner replied as follows:
Falsehoods can only take on a life of their own where there is fertile ground for them to take root, billfmsd.
And that has been true now for thousands of years.
Mass communication in a crowded city is word of mouth communication, billfmsd.
Then, today, people pass that on with their TWEETS on TWITTER, and on their FACEBOOK, or COMMON GROUND, or whatever.
Falsehoods have been around a long, long time.
The internet hasn’t added anything to that.
In the end, either you stand for something.
Your choice.
Or you fall for anything.
Which again is a choice.
end quotes
That this billfmsd was a rabid Democrat can be seen from this DEMOCRAT UNDERGROUND post of his on Sat Feb 4 2017 12:43 AM, where he wrote as follows:
Hello everyone.
I am an addict.
And I need help.
I’m more of a political junkie than I want to be.
Anyway, I look forward to continuing political discourse here where it’s more welcome to speak favorably of democrats.
I do need help.
I need more democrats and less republicans in elected positions to cure my political addiction.
end quotes
And that takes us back to our dear friend and fellow countryman Chas Cornweller and his take on “memes” where he tells us that in his experience, most were directed against the Obama administration or Barack his self.
Now, let me say here that it would have been very helpful if Chas Cornweller had actually provided us with some examples of these memes he is talking about, but such it is when it is, and we must endeavor to persevere in the face of that reality.
Going back to Chas, we have:
“And you want to know why I researched them in the first place?”
“Because many of these memes were either posted or passed by friends of mine who, I consider very strong, enlightened Christians.”
“And I wanted to know the source of these untruths and plainly evil lies they were spreading.”
“I think you know where it led me.”
end quotes
And the simple answer is no, Chas, I have no idea where that led you.
I do know that as far back as when Hussein Obama was running against John McCain and Sarah Palin, on the political website I was monitoring back then, there were many people from foreign countries chiming in on behalf of Obama, calling people on that website who questioned anything to do with Obama racists, which I took umbrage with as an American citizen.
When I raised a complaint about it on that site, what the hell are these foreigners, people who are not citizens of this country, doing involving themselves in our internal political affairs, I ended up getting mobbed and swarmed by people on that forum who said that people in other countries have every right to come onto a political forum in America to express their concerns to us about who sits in the White House, since who sits in the White House has an impact on every single person in the world, not just Americans, and that was that, end of argument.
STFU about it!
If the people of the world who aren’t Americans want Hussein Obama in the White House because they think he will be good for them and their country, so be it, and if they do, and say so on an American website, it is not unlawful or illegal.
And that takes us back to Chas, as follows:
So, Russian influence with false information?
Are you kidding me?
It’s the thing they do best.
Agitate the American psyche, divide us from within.
Begin the war from the inside and let us do all the fighting.
Sit back and watch the walls tumble.
And in the parlance that even Slide, Blue, and Tom and all the others can understand, ”We rose and took the bait!”
So, have the Russians played us for fools?
As Sarah P. would say while sitting on her front porch and watching them from across her front yard, ”You Betcha!”
end quotes
If the Russians played us for fools back then, and perhaps they did, it was in their achievement in getting Obama, a Marxist, elected president of the United States of America.
And that takes me back to 2011, where in response to billfmsd’s comment that in mass communications, memes are chosen, his debating partner responded as follows:
Of course they are, billfmsd.
With at least as much care as the hunter puts into picking the right tasty morsal to put in his monkey trap.
Or the trout fisherman puts into discerning the bait that is making the trout rise today, instead of yesterday.
Just because a trap is baited with a a tasty morsal does not mean I am automatically snared by it, billfmsd.
First, I must enter in.
Just because somebody has put out a meme via mass communications does not mean that I have to be sucked in by it.
Natural selection is at play here, billfmsd.
Perhaps nature is using memes as bait to cull out of the herd those too stupid to live, in nature’s view.
end quotes
Back to you, Chas Cornweller – any thoughts in reply?
And think about it, people, and this is a universal question regardless of your political persuasion, how can the Democrats claim to have the truth, about anything, when their chief spokesperson and point person, Adam Schiff, who has been interviewed some 227 times now, is telling us lies and is using demagoguery to divide us and to cause tumults and convulsions that are putting campaign cash in his pocket that he is then using to further extend his political influence in our national government?
If the Democrats really had the truth in their possession, why then would it be necessary to rally around a demagogue like Adam Schiff, other than for campaign money?
And how do we know that Adam Schiff is using his demagoguery as a means of raising campaign cash for the Democrats?
How about the Washington Free Beacon “Rep. Adam Schiff Continues to Flex Newfound Fundraising Muscle – Spreading wealth to other candidates could signify campaign for leadership role” by Todd Shepherd on July 17, 2018, to wit:
The leadership PAC of Rep. Adam Schiff (D., Calif.) appears to be on pace to spend more in the 2018 election cycle than it did in all of its six previous House election cycles combined dating back to 2006, according to campaign finance data available from the FEC and ProPublica.
One longtime California Republican political operative who once campaigned against Schiff says it more than likely marks the beginning of a run at a leadership position, especially now that those ranks among the Democrats have been shaken up by Joe Crowley’s loss in New York—Crowley served as the chairman of the House Democratic Caucus.
end quotes
Yes, people, advancing in rank in the Democrat party today is like advancing as an officer in the British army back in colonial times when you bought your commissions instead of earning them by merit, so if Adam Schiff wants to rise in the Democrat ranks in the House of Representatives, he needs a lot of money to do so, as we see by returning to the Free Beacon article as follows:
In the previous six House election cycles, “USA PAC—United for a Strong America” doled out a combined total of just over $264,000.
After the latest filings for the present cycle that includes all activity in June, the PAC had spent a little more than $233,000, with most of those donations going to just about 70 Democratic candidates in competitive House races.
If the dating of the disbursements on FEC data is accurate, roughly 70 percent of the donations from Schiff’s PAC to the other candidates came within two to three days after Crowley’s loss.
In addition, the California congressman has been busy working for the party’s efforts as a whole to retake the majority.
As Politico‘s “California Playbook” newsletter reports, Schiff has also raised over $3.5 million for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.
end quotes
And pausing here for a moment with that thought in mind, let’s jump over to a Washington Post op-ed by none other than Democrat demagogue Adam Schiff entitled “How a Democratic House would check this erratic president” by Adam B. Schiff on October 12, 2018, where the Democrat demagogue tells us as follows:
Our democracy is broken, and President Trump is only one reason.
Congress is the other.
end quotes
Firstly, we don’t have a democracy in this country except in the small, constricted, and uninformed minds of Democrats like Adam Schiff, who simply invent American history on the fly to fulfill their needs of the moment, so that their version of history this morning might be vastly different from what they say history is tonight, and secondly, if in fact in some way democracy is broken in this country, it is because that is the historic propensity of democracy to be broken, given it is an unstable form of government, and thirdly, if democracy is broken it is thanks to people like Adam Schiff, along with Nancy Pelosi, to sell it out tom the highest bidders, which takes us back to the Free Beacon article as follows:
While the grand total of the figures from his own leadership PAC may pale in comparison to the joint fundraising committee of House speaker Paul Ryan or House minority leader Nancy Pelosi, all of these elements in the aggregate show a candidate who is now reaping a fundraising harvest from nationwide elements for his leading role in pressing back on the Trump administration from his perch as the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee.
end quotes
Ah, yes, God bless American politics, isn’t it – if you tell the right people the right kinds of lies, you too, like Adam Schiff could reap a fundraising harvest!
Getting back to the Free Beacon:
Jason Roe managed the Republican campaign in 2000 against Schiff and says the sharing of the wealth to so many swing races definitely looks like the beginning of a campaign for a leadership spot.
“I think it’s a two-fer,” Roe told the Washington Free Beacon.
“One, he’s ingratiating himself to the candidates who are running, and two, showing his colleagues in his caucus that he’s doing some lifting for the team.”
“A run for House speaker might be a little bit ambitious, but I could see him going for leader, whip,” said Roe, adding that the congressman’s barrage of TV appearances would also pad his résumé with colleagues.
As one might expect for a congressman who represents the Burbank area just north of Los Angeles, Schiff’s fundraising through his leadership PAC has gathered support from Hollywood types like Chelsea Handler and Judd Apatow.
But the out-of-state donations also include many political heavyweights, like Slim Fast founder S. Daniel Abraham from Florida.
From Colorado, Schiff has received support from high-powered lawyer and lobbyist Norm Brownstein, as well as from Pat Stryker, a mega-donor for Democrats in Colorado politics who also served as an Obama fundraising bundler in 2008.
The Soros family, George along with son Alex, have also given to Schiff this cycle.
Schiff also made the move in 2017 to create a joint fundraising committee, which, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, “can be created by two or more candidates, PACs or party committees to share the costs of fundraising, and split the proceeds.”
In this case, Schiff has created a joint committee—Schiff Leads—that can fundraise simultaneously for his candidate committee and his leadership PAC.
Schiff’s “United” PAC still has $90,000 cash on hand, while the joint fundraising committee has about $10,000.
end quotes
And all you got to do is tell the right kinds of lies to the right kind of people, and how the campaign money will roll in, which makes it as good a gig as rock & roll, if not better!
As to money-making demagoguery, consider the Washington Examiner article “Some experts believe Trump can be impeached for conduct performed before becoming president” by Melissa Quinn on 6 December 2018, where Schiff is quoting pure bull**** that he would know was bull****, because he is in possession of and aware of a document from the United States Department of Justice entitled “A Sitting President’s Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution” and dated October 16, 2000 which concludes that “the indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would unconstitutionally undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions,” as follows, to wit:
Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, cited Porteous’ case when discussing whether sitting officials can be ousted for offenses committed before acquiring higher office.
“We now by constitutional terms — in a country that rarely has impeachment trials — have a precedent that you can be impeached and removed from office both for prior crimes and for lying under oath,” Schiff said during an event in October.
end quotes
Except that, people, is out and out horse**** and intentionally so.
So why should we tolerate being intentionally lied to by public officials like Adam Schiff, especially us VEET NAM veterans?
Any thoughts, anyone?
As to this Democrat Adam Schiff of California being classed by myself as a demagogue, which his recent October 12, 2018 Washington Post op-ed entitled “How a Democratic House would check this erratic president” clearly makes him out to be, Wikipedia tells us that the term “demagogue,” which comes to us from the ancient Greeks, is a leader in a democracy who gains popularity by exploiting prejudice and ignorance among the common people, whipping up the passions of the crowd and shutting down reasoned deliberation.
That is clearly what Adam Schiff is doing, or attempting to do with his recent October 12, 2018 Washington Post op-ed entitled “How a Democratic House would check this erratic president,” where he uses the Federalist Papers in a disingenuous (not candid or sincere, typically by pretending that one knows less about something than one really does; synonyms: insincere, dishonest, untruthful, false, deceitful, duplicitous, lying, mendacious; hypocritical as in “that innocent, teary-eyed look is just part of a disingenuous act”) manner to exploit prejudice and ignorance among the common people of America who don’t know any better, although they really should, while whipping up the passions of the crowd and shutting down reasoned deliberation by telling us lies.
And then we come to the important part, as follows, to wit: Demagoguery exploits a fundamental flaw in democracy: because power is held by the people, it is possible for the people to give that power to someone who appeals to the lowest common denominator of a large segment of the population.
There, people, is Adam Schiff!
But let’s not simply take my word for it; let’s look further at the subject to see if I am right, as follows:
Demagogues have appeared in democracies since ancient Athens.
The word demagogue, originally meaning a leader of the common people, was first coined in ancient Greece with no negative connotation, but eventually came to mean a troublesome kind of leader who occasionally arose in Athenian democracy.
end quotes
So we are not looking at something new here, people – demagogues like Adam Schiff have been with us for thousands of years now, and whenever “democracy” rears its ugly head, there the demagogues will be, which is why the founding fathers of this country opted for a Republic, instead.
In ancient Greece, as today in this country, demagogues appealed directly to the emotions of the poor and uninformed, pursuing power, telling lies to stir up hysteria, exploiting crises to intensify popular support for their calls to immediate action and increased authority, and accusing moderate opponents of weakness or disloyalty to the nation.
That is Adam Schiff.
And this is again important: while many politicians in a democracy slightly manipulate narratives to cultivate popular support, demagogues use egregiously false narratives often based on fear.
So is Adam Schiff really a demagogue, then, as opposed to just another hack politician who slightly manipulates narratives to cultivate popular support?
For that answer, we must go back to his recent October 12, 2018 Washington Post op-ed entitled “How a Democratic House would check this erratic president, where we find as follows, to wit:
In 1788, as the states considered ratification of the Constitution, James Madison acknowledged in Federalist 51 that those drawn to public service were not all angels, creating an inherent difficulty in establishing a government administered by imperfect beings: “You must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.”
For nearly 2½ centuries, that is the way it has worked, with Congress serving as a restraint upon the executive and vice versa, and the courts serving to constrain both.
It is certainly true that Congresses sharing the same party as the president have seldom been as diligent as those that do not.
But devotion to country and the rule of law — if not the legislature’s own prerogative — has always been enough to stiffen the spine of Congress.
Until now.
The Republican Congress has not only failed to assert itself and review or investigate the conduct of the executive; worse, it has also been complicit in some of the president’s most egregious attacks on our democratic institutions.
end quotes
The Republican Congress has not only failed to assert itself and review or investigate the conduct of the executive; worse, it has also been complicit in some of the president’s most egregious attacks on our democratic institutions?
Oh, really, Adam Schiff, do tell, dude.
So, since you are quoting from the Federalist papers, Adam, tell us, where in any of them do you find any references whatsoever to a “Republican Congress?”
Besides a figment of your fertile imagination, Adam Schiff, what is a Republican Congress?
Do you mean a Congress dominated by a faction other than your Democrat faction, which did not have control of our Congress for many years precisely because the American people did not trust them with power in our national government?
And what “democratic institutions” is the president making these supposed “most egregious attacks” on, Adam Schiff?
Can you give us even one example of a “democratic institution” in this country that Trump has made an egregious attack on?
And until you do, Adam, I am going to classify that as a case of a demagogue using egregiously false narratives often based on fear to cause dissension in this country while stirring up passions, which makes for a vivid example of this Burbank, California Democrat demagogue Adam Schiff appealing directly to the emotions of the uninformed in this country, who are legion, while pursuing power for himself, telling us lies to stir up hysteria, while exploiting self-created “crises” to intensify popular support for his calls for increased authority for himself.
We are supposed to fear that Trump is going to attack our “democratic institutions,” as if they really existed in an objective reality outside of the fertile imagination of Democrat demagogue Adam Schiff.
So what about FEDERALIST No. 51, entitled “The Structure of the Government Must Furnish the Proper Checks and Balances Between the Different Departments,” from the New York Packet, an early version of the Cape Charles Mirror, to the People of the State of New York by either Alexander Hamilton or Jemmy Madison on Friday, February 8, 1788?
What does it really say?
Well, good question, so let’s take a look as follows:
TO WHAT expedient, then, shall we finally resort, for maintaining in practice the necessary partition of power among the several departments, as laid down in the Constitution?
The only answer that can be given is, that as all these exterior provisions are found to be inadequate, the defect must be supplied, by so contriving the interior structure of the government as that its several constituent parts may, by their mutual relations, be the means of keeping each other in their proper places.
Were the executive magistrate, or the judges, not independent of the legislature in this particular, their independence in every other would be merely nominal.
end quotes
Now, there is a key sentence, people, that is quite different from the false narrative Democrat demagogue Adam Schiff is presenting us with in his recent October 12, 2018 Washington Post op-ed entitled “How a Democratic House would check this erratic president,” where he tells us:
“For a role so vital to the proper functioning of our government, Congress’s oversight function is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution.”
“This was not due to any failure of the framers to appreciate the importance of Congress using all means at its disposal to ensure that the executive honors his or her responsibility to ‘take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.’”
“Quite the contrary: The rigorous exercise of oversight was an unquestioned presumption if, as Madison wrote, ambition was to counteract ambition.”
end quotes
In his diatribe (a forceful and bitter verbal attack against someone or something; synonyms: tirade, harangue, onslaught, attack, polemic, denunciation, broadside, fulmination, condemnation, censure, criticism) in the October 12, 2018 Washington Post op-ed entitled “How a Democratic House would check this erratic president,” the Democrat demagogue Adam Schiff proposes doing exactly that, however – putting the executive magistrate under the control of the Democrat faction in the House of Representatives, which takes us back to Federalist No. 51 as follows:
But the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department, consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others.
The provision for defense must in this, as in all other cases, be made commensurate to the danger of attack.
Ambition must be made to counteract ambition.
The interest of the man must be connected with the constitutional rights of the place.
end quotes
Now, people, based upon my reading of the Federalist Papers, which I have read through word for word several times now, and no, you do not need to be a Harvard law school graduate like Adam Schiff to understand them, since they were written with the common man and woman in mind, that is considerably different from the narrative that Adam Schiff is presenting us with.
What Adam Schiff wants to do to control Trump is to use Schiff’s ambition to be in control of the presidency as a Congressman to counteract Trump’s ambition to be in control of the presidency, which is a perversion of our Constitutional frame of government as laid out in the Federalist Papers, as we see by returning to Federalist No. 51 as follows:
It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government.
end quotes
Control the abuses of government, people, which clearly includes the abuses of the Democrat faction in control of the U.S. House of Representatives.
Getting back to Federalist No. 51:
But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature?
If men were angels, no government would be necessary.
If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.
In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.
A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.
In republican government, the legislative authority necessarily predominates.
The remedy for this inconveniency is to divide the legislature into different branches; and to render them, by different modes of election and different principles of action, as little connected with each other as the nature of their common functions and their common dependence on the society will admit.
It may even be necessary to guard against dangerous encroachments by still further precautions.
As the weight of the legislative authority requires that it should be thus divided, the weakness of the executive may require, on the other hand, that it should be fortified.
end quotes
That, people, is what Federalist No. 51 really says, and it concludes as follows:
Justice is the end of government.
end quotes
So is Adam Schiff promising us justice, then?
Or is he promoting a tyranny with him in charge?
Stay tuned, because Federalist No. 73, “The Provision For The Support of the Executive, and the Veto Power” from the New York Packet to the People of the State of New York by Alexander Hamilton on Friday, March 21, 1788 has more to say on that same subject.
And in the meantime, FEDERALIST No. 53, The House of Representatives, from the New York Packet to the People of the State of New York by either Hamilton or Madison on Tuesday, February 12, 1788, states as follows with respect to Adam Schiff himself:
No man can be a competent legislator who does not add to an upright intention and a sound judgment a certain degree of knowledge of the subjects on which he is to legislate.
end quotes
Based on that, we can say with assuredness that Adam Schiff is not a competent legislator because he is not of upright intention, nor is he of sound judgment.
And yes, people, FEDERALIST No. 73, The Provision For The Support of the Executive, and the Veto Power, from the New York Packet to the People of the State of New York by Alexander Hamilton on Friday, March 21, 1788, where we were told as follows concerning the necessary separation of power between the House of Representatives and the office of the executive magistrate that Burbank, California Democrat demagogue and congressperson Adam Schiff is trying to take control of, as follows:
THE third ingredient towards constituting the vigor of the executive authority, is an adequate provision for its support.
It is evident that, without proper attention to this article, the separation of the executive from the legislative department would be merely nominal and nugatory.
end quotes
And that is exactly what Burbank, California congressman Adam Schiff is attempting to accomplish here – to actually make separation of the executive from the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives merely nominal – Trump will be in the White House, but Adam Schiff will be the one setting the agenda and calling the tune to which the executive must dance, which takes us back to Federalist No. 73 as follows:
The legislature, with a discretionary power over the salary and emoluments of the Chief Magistrate, could render him as obsequious to their will as they might think proper to make him.
They might, in most cases, either reduce him by famine, or tempt him by largesses, to surrender at discretion his judgment to their inclinations.
end quotes
And what about openly threatening the executive with an on-going laundry list of investigations into every possible aspect of the executive’s life?
Is that too a way for the legislature, in this case the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives, to render the executive as obsequious to their will as they might think proper to make him?
Seems so to me, anyway, or I would not bother to make mention of it in here, which again takes us back to Federalist No. 73 as follows:
The propensity of the legislative department to intrude upon the rights, and to absorb the powers, of the other departments, has been already suggested and repeated; the insufficiency of a mere parchment delineation of the boundaries of each, has also been remarked upon; and the necessity of furnishing each with constitutional arms for its own defense, has been inferred and proved.
end quotes
There, people, we see from the pen of one of the actual founders where the founders saw the danger to our liberty as a people coming from, and that source was not the executive as Adam Schiff wants us to believe; no, that danger to our liberty comes from the legislative branch where we have Democrats like Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff in positions of power in the House of Representatives.
And that tales us to this conclusion from Federalist No. 73 as follows:
From these clear and indubitable principles results the propriety of a negative, either absolute or qualified, in the Executive, upon the acts of the legislative branches.
Without the one or the other, the former would be absolutely unable to defend himself against the depredations of the latter.
He might gradually be stripped of his authorities by successive resolutions, or annihilated by a single vote.
And in the one mode or the other, the legislative and executive powers might speedily come to be blended in the same hands.
If even no propensity had ever discovered itself in the legislative body to invade the rights of the Executive, the rules of just reasoning and theoretic propriety would of themselves teach us, that the one ought not to be left to the mercy of the other, but ought to possess a constitutional and effectual power of self defense.
But the power in question has a further use.
It not only serves as a shield to the Executive, but it furnishes an additional security against the enaction of improper laws.
It establishes a salutary check upon the legislative body, calculated to guard the community against the effects of faction, precipitancy, or of any impulse unfriendly to the public good, which may happen to influence a majority of that body.
end quotes
Calculated to guard the community against faction, people!
And that faction we are to be guarded against is the Democrat faction led by Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff in the House of Representatives.
And impulses unfriendly to the public good?
There, the founders were talking about Burbank, California Democrat demagogue Adam Schiff, people, and his use of the black arts of the political demagogue such as using egregiously false narratives often based on fear to cause dissension in this country while stirring up passions, which makes for a vivid example of this Burbank, California Democrat demagogue Adam Schiff appealing directly to the emotions of the uninformed in this country, who are legion, while pursuing power for himself, telling us lies to stir up hysteria, while exploiting self-created “crises” to intensify popular support for his calls for increased authority for himself.
And that is a clear textbook example of what the founders meant when talking about an impulse unfriendly to the public good!
Chas, dude, while we are waiting for something further to come from out of the mouth of Burbank, California Democrat Congressman Adam Schiff concerning his various investigations into Trump, why would very strong, enlightened Christians be spreading untruths and plainly evil lies about Barack Hussein Obama?
Did you ever get an answer as to that?
And OMG, people, the Democrats are just barely in power in what used to be our House of Representatives, now the Democrats “People’s House” as “Leader” Nancy Pelosi’s “NEW DAWN FOR AMERICA” rises, and already, and this was to be expected, the hog**** is flowing fast and thick in a veritable torrent that threatens to sweep the last vestiges of truth and justice in this nation away and bury them under in a mountain of lies, and here I am talking about Democrat political hacks Adam Schiff, Elijah Cummings, and Jerrold Nadler in the NBC News article “Democrats warn Trump not to ‘discourage’ or ‘intimidate’ Michael Cohen from testifying – Trump said Saturday that Cohen should ‘give information maybe on his father-in-law.'” by Allan Smith on Jan. 13, 2019, where we hear as follows, to wit:
Three top Democrats issued a warning to President Donald Trump on Sunday, saying he cannot “discourage, intimidate, or otherwise pressure” witnesses in response to his Saturday comments about his former attorney Michael Cohen.
“The integrity of our process to serve as an independent check on the Executive Branch must be respected by everyone, including the President,” Democratic chairmen Elijah Cummings, Adam Schiff and Jerrold Nadler of the House Oversight, Intelligence, and Judiciary Committees said in a joint statement.
“Our nation’s laws prohibit efforts to discourage, intimidate, or otherwise pressure a witness not to provide testimony to Congress.”
“The President should make no statement or take any action to obstruct Congress’ independent oversight and investigative efforts, including by seeking to discourage any witness from testifying in response to a duly authorized request from Congress.”
end quotes
Now, let me once again make it incandescently clear that I am not a Trump fan, nor am I a supporter of his, nor am I a Republican, nor do I support Republican causes, or Republicans themselves.
I am an AMERICAN citizen, and what I support is our Constitutional Republican frame of government as it is laid out in the Federalist Papers of Alexander Hamilton and James Madison which were written at the time of this nation’s political beginnings, and I am over 70 years of age, and as such I am damn sick and tired of this BULL**** political theater that is coming at us from Washington, D.C.
This whole sick show we have been being treated to since 2016 is for one reason, and one reason only, and that is because Hillary Clinton is not the president and Trump now is, and how that galls these puny lilliputians who dare to call themselves “public servants,” when they are anything but.
All this screeching and hollering coming at us from these Democrats about “RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE,” which never happened, is simply because Hillary Clinton lost the election.
So now, the Democrats are using every slimeball trick in their extensive arsenal of slimeball tricks they have developed and honed as weapons going back to before the Civil War, which they started by seceding from our Republic to start their own country so that they could continue to hold human beings as their slaves.
These Democrats tell us that “(T)he integrity of our process to serve as an independent check on the Executive Branch must be respected by everyone, including the President,” which is pure unadulterated HORSE****, and is a clear sign of the utter contempt that they have for the intelligence of the American people who they expect to believe that a slimeball lawyer named Michael Cohen, who has already been convicted of lying to Congress, is going to now come before these Democrats and tell us the truth, to which I say “HAH!”
And our Constitution does not make these Democrats an “independent check on the executive branch.”
Far from it.
The founders of this nation realized that the biggest threat to our liberty as a people was going to come at us not from the executive, from from the House of Representatives itself, and so it now is.
They tell us the President should make no statement or take any action to obstruct Congress’ independent oversight and investigative efforts, including by seeking to discourage any witness from testifying in response to a duly authorized request from Congress, as if the Congress has suddenly become a dictatorial power in this country, which is a tyranny the nation’s founders feared and took steps in the framing of our national government to guard against by creating a Senate as a separate body to guard against just such a tyranny coming from these Democrats that we are seeing now with these witch hunts they are conducting based on the up-coming public testimony of this convicted scumbag lawyer and liar Michael Cohen.
By way of review, this is the very same scumbag lawyer who in December was sentenced to three years in prison for what a Manhattan federal court judge called a “veritable smorgasbord” of criminal conduct, including making secret payments to women who claimed they had affairs with Trump, lying to Congress about the president’s business dealings with Russia and failing to report millions of dollars in income.
There, people, is the STAR WITNESS these Democrats are relying on to help them bring down Trump, because Trump is president and Hillary Clinton is not!
And just the other day, we had this same NBC News telling us as follows in a news story entitled “‘So many questions’: Lawmakers respond to bombshell Trump, Russia reports” by this same Allan Smith on 13 January 2019 as follows, to wit:
Democrats said two bombshell reports from The New York Times and Washington Post regarding President Donald Trump and Russia have raised serious questions.
“You know, there’s so many questions raised,” Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois said on ABC’s “This Week.”
“Why is he so chummy with Vladimir Putin, this man who is a former KGB agent, never been a friend to the United States, invaded our allies, threatens us around the world, and tries his damndest to undermine our elections, why is this President Trump’s best buddy?”
“I don’t get it.”
end quotes
Well, Dick, why we are at it here, let me tell you what it is that I don’t get.
In an ARABIAN BUSINESS article entitled “Saudi gives lavish gifts to Clinton, Obama – Kingdom gave most expensive gifts to former secretary of state, President in 2012, registry reveals” on 01 Sep. 2013, we were told that in addition to Hillary Clinton getting gold jewellery worth $500,000 from Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah in return for her turning her back on human rights violations against women in Saudi Arabia, she was also gifted with $560 worth of cognac from Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Now, Dick, tell us, because we would all really like to know, because you know, Dick, there’s so many questions raised, why was Hillary Clinton so chummy with Vladimir Putin, this man who is a former KGB agent, never been a friend to the United States, invaded our allies, threatens us around the world, and tries his damndest to undermine our elections, why is this Hillary Clinton’s best buddy?
I mean, Dick, I just don’t get it!
What were they colluding about, Dick?
I mean, dude, we have the evidence of a pay-off from Putin to Hillary right here before us, so what is up with that?
What was Putin paying off or buying off Hillary for?
Were the two of them conspiring and colluding together to set this whole sick show going on now in order to destroy our government?
It is the kind of thing Putin would do, isn’t it, Dick, if only he could find a willing accomplice, which it appears he did in the person of Hillary Clinton.
Or do you want us to believe that Putin gave her the cognac because she beat him three out of three arm wrestling?
The world is waiting for an answer, Dick, so when will it be forthcoming?
What did Hillary Clinton have to do to earn that pay-off from Putin of Russia?
And before proceeding further here, let us go back to this statement by Democratic chairmen Elijah Cummings, Adam Schiff and Jerrold Nadler of the House Oversight, Intelligence, and Judiciary Committees that “(T)he integrity of our process to serve as an independent check on the Executive Branch must be respected by everyone, including the President,” which is pure unadulterated HORSE**** of the kind that only a sniveling Democrat who knows nothing of our form of government, nor cares, can spew by the bushel full.
Who do these twerps (a silly, insignificant, or contemptible person) think they are telling us, the American people, that we have to respect them, when they are beneath contempt?
Have we just had a coup in this country the way our democracy-loving brothers and sisters in our sister state of Gabon just did, to restore democracy.
Are we now under a state of martial law imposed on us by these three Democrat stooges who are going to have this lying scumbag lawyer Michael Cohen as their STAR WITNESS in their STAR CHAMBER proceeding to bring down Trump because the electoral college picked him for president instead of “Lying Hillary” Clinton, who happens to be Putin’s best girlfriend?
So do we have to respect them, people?
Let’s go to the Federalist Papers and see what the nation’s founders have to say about it, starting with FEDERALIST No. 52, The House of Representatives, from the New York Packet to the People of the State of New York by either Alexander Hamilton or James Madison on Friday, February 8, 1788, as follows:
First.
As it is essential to liberty that the government in general should have a common interest with the people, so it is particularly essential that the branch of it under consideration should have an immediate dependence on, and an intimate sympathy with, the people.
end quotes
Now, tell me, people, do you really need a law degree from Harvard University to understand those words “essential to liberty?”
The “liberty” in question, people, happens to be ours, and with this threatening language of theirs above here where these three Democrat idiots are telling us that we have to respect them or else, they seem to be imposing a tyranny on us, to which, as someone, unlike these three Democrat clowns, who has served this country in its military, I say you had better bring a big lunch with you, because you are going to need it, which takes us back to Federalist No. 52, as follows:
In the second place, it has, on another occasion, been shown that the federal legislature will not only be restrained by its dependence on its people, as other legislative bodies are, but that it will be, moreover, watched and controlled by the several collateral legislatures, which other legislative bodies are not.
And in the third place, no comparison can be made between the means that will be possessed by the more permanent branches of the federal government for seducing, if they should be disposed to seduce, the House of Representatives from their duty to the people, and the means of influence over the popular branch possessed by the other branches of the government above cited.
With less power, therefore, to abuse, the federal representatives can be less tempted on one side, and will be doubly watched on the other.
end quotes
There we see the words “their duty to the people” with respect to the House of Representatives, not our duty to these three Democrat clowns who happen themselves to be, like the lying scumbag Michael Cohen, all lawyers, which is why they know nothing at all about the law or our Constitutional frame of government; just how to sling bull**** by the bucket-load, which is a unique skill one must possess in this country to be a lawyer, at least in my experience of them, which is considerable, which thought takes us back to these words from FEDERALIST No. 46, The Influence of the State and Federal Governments Compared, from the New York Packet to the People of the State of New York by James Madison on Tuesday, January 29, 1788, to wit:
Let us not insult the free and gallant citizens of America with the suspicion, that they would be less able to defend the rights of which they would be in actual possession, than the debased subjects of arbitrary power would be to rescue theirs from the hands of their oppressors.
end quotes
Those are words these three Democrat clowns telling us that we have to respect them, when they are unworthy of respect, should give some careful thought to before making further threatening noises like a growling lap dog, in our direction.
And that takes us to FEDERALIST No. 47, The Particular Structure of the New Government and the Distribution of Power Among Its Different Parts, from the New York Packet to the People of the State of New York by James Madison on Friday, February 1, 1788, as follows:
The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.
end quotes
Here, one can only think that Jemmy was possessed of prescient (having or showing knowledge of events before they take place) vision when he wrote those words which describe exactly what these three Democrat clowns named Schiff, Nadler and Cummings are now up to, where they are handing out marching orders not only to the American people, as if we were in thrall to them, or were still their slaves, but to the executive magistrate, as well – they are attempting to accumulate all of the powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in their hands, which definitely may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.
We then proceed to FEDERALIST No. 48, These Departments Should Not Be So Far Separated as to Have No Constitutional Control Over Each Other, from the New York Packet to the People of the State of New York by James Madison on Friday, February 1, 1788, where we have as follows:
It is agreed on all sides, that the powers properly belonging to one of the departments ought not to be directly and completely administered by either of the other departments.
It is equally evident, that none of them ought to possess, directly or indirectly, an overruling influence over the others, in the administration of their respective powers.
It will not be denied, that power is of an encroaching nature, and that it ought to be effectually restrained from passing the limits assigned to it.
end quotes
And that again brings us back to this coup these three Democrat stooges are attempting to pull off here, as if this were indeed Gabon, and not the United States of America – power is of an encroaching nature, and therefore it ought to be effectually restrained from passing the limits assigned to it, which takes us back to Federalist No. 48, as follows:
The legislative department is everywhere extending the sphere of its activity, and drawing all power into its impetuous vortex.
The founders of our republics have so much merit for the wisdom which they have displayed, that no task can be less pleasing than that of pointing out the errors into which they have fallen.
A respect for truth, however, obliges us to remark, that they seem never for a moment to have turned their eyes from the danger to liberty from the overgrown and all-grasping prerogative of an hereditary magistrate, supported and fortified by an hereditary branch of the legislative authority.
They seem never to have recollected the danger from legislative usurpations, which, by assembling all power in the same hands, must lead to the same tyranny as is threatened by executive usurpations.
In a government where numerous and extensive prerogatives are placed in the hands of an hereditary monarch, the executive department is very justly regarded as the source of danger, and watched with all the jealousy which a zeal for liberty ought to inspire.
In a democracy, where a multitude of people exercise in person the legislative functions, and are continually exposed, by their incapacity for regular deliberation and concerted measures, to the ambitious intrigues of their executive magistrates, tyranny may well be apprehended, on some favorable emergency, to start up in the same quarter.
But in a representative republic, where the executive magistracy is carefully limited; both in the extent and the duration of its power; and where the legislative power is exercised by an assembly, which is inspired, by a supposed influence over the people, with an intrepid confidence in its own strength; which is sufficiently numerous to feel all the passions which actuate a multitude, yet not so numerous as to be incapable of pursuing the objects of its passions, by means which reason prescribes; it is against the enterprising ambition of this department that the people ought to indulge all their jealousy and exhaust all their precautions.
The legislative department derives a superiority in our governments from other circumstances.
Its constitutional powers being at once more extensive, and less susceptible of precise limits, it can, with the greater facility, mask, under complicated and indirect measures, the encroachments which it makes on the co-ordinate departments.
end quotes
Which words bring us right to this very present moment where we now find ourselves, where the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives is encroaching on the office of the executive magistrate with the intention of making that office subordinate and under the control of the Democrats, which takes us back to these words of Jemmy Madison to WE, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE who are not Democrats, never were Democrats, and never will be Democrats, to wit:
In a representative republic, which is what we have here in the United States of America, which is not Gabon, or the Democratic Republic of the Congo, or Zimbabwe, or Somalia, as much as the Democrats in this country who are for one-world government would have us be, where the executive magistracy is carefully limited both in the extent and the duration of its power; and where the legislative power is exercised by an assembly now controlled by the Democrats who have an intrepid confidence in their own strength, feeling all the passions of the howling screeching mob which out them in power, and entirely capable of pursuing the objects of the passions of its howling, shrieking mob – it is against the enterprising ambition of this department that the people ought to indulge all their jealousy and exhaust all their precautions.
So, people, think on it carefully, which side are you planning to be on?
And while we are on the subject of the large load of HORSE**** being spewed at us by this alarmist pipsqueak bull**** artist Democrat Congressman from Burbank, California, Adam Schiff, who arrogantly thinks we are all stupid and uninformed, just because he is, and the supposed upcoming “BLOCKBUSTER” testimony of this slimeball lawyer and convicted liar Michael Cohen as reported in the New York Times story “Michael Cohen, Trump’s Former Lawyer, Agrees to Testify to Congress” by Maggie Haberman and Nicholas Fandos on Jan. 10, 2019, where the alarmist rag tells us that Mr. Cohen’s decision to appear before the House Oversight and Reform Committee on Feb. 7 sets the stage for a blockbuster public hearing that threatens to further damage the president’s image and could clarify the depth of his legal woes, and that Mr. Cohen, a consigliere to Mr. Trump when he was a real estate developer and presidential candidate as well as informally when he was president, was privy to the machinations of Mr. Trump’s inner circle and to key moments under scrutiny by both the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, and federal prosecutors in New York, and that he could soon share many of them on national television under oath, let’s take a much needed reality check here, people, which we are not going to get from the New Times, the Washington Post, or NBC News by dropping back in time a bit to an article in The Atlantic entitled “Why Didn’t Trump Build Anything in Russia? – The art of the deal runs into the reality of ‘a really scary place.’” by Julia Ioffe updated on September 25, 2017, where we learn that for all the bluster and bombast coming at us from Adam Schiff, as if he is possessed of secret information, which is hog****, Michael Cohen was little more than a clown and everybody except for Adam Schiff knew that a long time ago, while the Russians considered Trump as being little more than a lightweight and blowhard.
So much for Trump’s “high-level” connections in Russia – he NEVER had any!
But let’s not take my word for it; here is what The Atlantic has to say, to wit:
The American president has often bragged about his ability to cut deals and about how well he gets along with the Russians.
The press and investigators have speculated about the extent of his connections to the Russian business and political elite.
And yet, Trump never actually built anything in Moscow.
When the president said, shortly after his inauguration, “I don’t have any deals in Russia,” he wasn’t wrong.
The question is why.
When just about every other major hotel chain in the world was able to build in Moscow and beyond, why didn’t Trump close a deal in Russia?
The absence of Trump real estate in Russia, it turns out, is a revealing reflection of the disconnect between the image Trump projects and the reputation he and his surrogates have established in Russia.
In part it was because, as Donald Trump Jr. once said himself, Russia “really is a scary place.”
In a 2008 interview with a small trade publication, Trump Jr. said that he had taken “half a dozen trips to Russia in the last 18 months” and that “several buyers have been attracted to our projects there.”
But there was something getting in the way of those trips adding up to a Trump Tower Moscow.
“It is definitely not an issue of being able to find a deal,” Trump Jr. said, “but an issue of ‘Will I ever see my money back out of that deal or can I actually trust the person I am doing the deal with?’”
“As much as we want to take our business over there, Russia is just a different world.”
“… It is a question of who knows who, whose brother is paying off who, etc.”
Trump Jr., who did not respond to request for comment, was right: The world of Russian business is a dark and treacherous place, and Moscow real estate is one of its darkest corners.
“Moscow is like New York in many ways, just way more corrupt,” says a Western real-estate developer in Russia, who asked for anonymity in order not to jeopardize local partners and ongoing business deals.
“To pull a building out of the ground, you need so many permits, so many authorizations—the mind reels.”
“And all of it is so corrupt, it’s insane.”
To navigate all this, the Trump Organization would have needed a local partner that was not just a capable developer, but had the right political connections to secure all the necessary permissions.
“You need a good Russian partner, otherwise there’s no way,” says Mark Stiles, an American businessman who had extensive real-estate holdings in Russia.
end quotes
According to The Atlantic, and this has been public information for quite some time now, in 2013, six years ago now, Trump worked with a Russian dude named Agalarov, who had stellar connections at the very zenith of Russian political and business life, but that deal went sour after the Russian economy took a nosedive in 2014.
Then Trump’s man on the ground in Russia was a dude named Felix Sater, a Russian-born wheeler and dealer from the Russian-immigrant enclaves of Brooklyn who in the mid-90s was charged with securities fraud, but avoided prison time by becoming an FBI informant—a role that included providing the U.S. government with Soviet-era weapons purchased from an arms dealer.
In 2002, seventeen years ago now, Sater, who was renting office space in Manhattan’s Trump Tower, worked his way into Trump’s inner circle, and in 2004, fifteen years ago, Sater started traveling to Moscow and tried to put together Russian real-estate deals for Trump.
One potential deal, a Trump building on the territory of Moscow’s Soviet-era Sacco and Vanzetti Pencil Factory, fell through when the Russian partner was unable to get the right permits.
So much for “high level connections” in Russia, people!
With respect to this Sater, who himself was the subject of a New York Times story entitled “Real Estate Executive With Hand in Trump Projects Rose From Tangled Past” by Charles V. Bagli on Dec. 17, 2007, Alexey Kunitsin, who at the time was chairman of the board at Mirax, told The Atlantic, “I would never hire somebody like that.”
“You can’t trust him in any way, not in a professional setting, not in a personal setting.”
“You could see it very clearly.”
“He was telling constant crazy stories, wild fantasies about all the people he knew.”
“He was not a balanced dude.”
“He’s very emotional and gets into conflicts very easily.”
Kunitsin recalled that Sater would also brag to his coworkers at Mirax about how good he was at spending all the money he allegedly earned.
“It didn’t really inspire confidence, especially when he described it all so colorfully,” Kunitsin said.
Another former Mirax employee who dealt with Sater paints a similar portrait.
“He’s not a serious person,” the former Mirax employee said.
“He’s not a total bullsh***er, he can do some things, but he’s also a bullsh***er.”
“He tries to create the impression of someone who is extremely well-connected and very busy.”
That Sater raised suspicions and turned Moscow businessmen off with tales of conspicuous consumption, in a city where it is practically a sport, is deeply telling.
“You really have to be very talented to do that,” said a prominent Russian real-estate consultant, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he worried that speaking to a journalist would jeopardize his professional relationships in Moscow.
“And most people didn’t take him seriously.”
“He was ready to pay for a few bottles of Cristal in the club, but was not someone you want to make a serious deal with.”
end quotes
Then in 2010, nine years ago, Sater became a senior adviser to Donald Trump, according to his business cards and email signature, and that year, he was working on Trump’s development plans in Russia, again, and he ran into trouble, again, telling people in Moscow that he had a signed authorization from Trump to enter into negotiations on Trump’s behalf, but because of Sater’s flamboyant manner, few people believed the document was authentic.
“He was walking around with a power of attorney or something from Trump,” the Russian real-estate consultant said of Sater.
“It was a very suspicious-looking document.”
Sater’s reputation continued to haunt him, even in Russia.
“In 2010 when you Googled him you got a story from The New York Times about his past and it made things difficult for him,” says the former Mirax employee, referring to a 2007 article by Charles Bagli.
The piece was the first to dredge up Sater’s checkered history and to put it in one, reputable place.
It also didn’t help that Sater was a freelancer, and an outsider.
He may have been born in Moscow, but he had left as a child.
Despite a stint in Moscow in the 1990s, his return visits were brief and sporadic, his Russian accented by his long life in America.
He would have read to Russians as an American, a foreigner.
He had no obvious krysha, or “roof”—political protection as insurance against things going sideways.
“The first question when you’re doing business in Russia is: who’s your krysha?” says one longtime Western investor in Moscow, who asked for anonymity because of the sensitivities of doing business in such a treacherous environment.
“No krysha, no deal.”
Trump, whom Sater claimed to be representing, was not a good krysha either: He was a foreigner, lived in New York, and had no pull within the various power structures in Russia.
end quotes
Read that again, people – Trump had NO PULL within the various power structures in Russia!
Then, in the fall of 2015, months after Trump declared his presidential candidacy, Sater was at it again, according to reports in The Washington Post and New York Times, and in emails obtained by the Times, Sater bragged to Michael Cohen, Trump’s lawyer and unofficial campaign surrogate, that he had lined up financing for a Trump Tower in Moscow City from VTB, a bank under U.S. sanctions, but VTB denied that any such negotiations ever took place, saying through a spokesperson that “that not a single VTB group subsidiary had any dealings with Mr.Trump, his representatives or any companies affiliated with him.”
Sater also bragged to Cohen, the convicted liar who is Adam Schiff’s star witness, that “I will get Putin on this program and we will get Donald elected.”
That year, Trump signed a non-binding letter of intent, and Cohen told the Times that he spoke with Trump three times about the deal.
Again, the deal went nowhere.
According to the Times, for all his blustery promises of getting Putin involved, Sater did not even have the connections to get the proper permits to get the project going.
end quotes
And once again, people, focus on that last sentence – for all his blustery promises to the slimeball lawyer Michael Cohen of getting Putin involved, Sater did not even have the connections to get the proper permits to get the project going, which takes us back to the New York Times story “Michael Cohen, Trump’s Former Lawyer, Agrees to Testify to Congress” by Maggie Haberman and Nicholas Fandos on Jan. 10, 2019, where the slimeball Cohen was quoted as follows: .
“I look forward to having the privilege of being afforded a platform with which to give a full and credible account of the events which have transpired.”
end quotes
Uh, Michael, dude, The Atlantic already has the full and credible account of the events which have transpired, and that full and credible account has you looking like just what you are – an ignorant hack lawyer who is none too bright, which is probably why you are on your way to prison for being a liar, when you come right down to it.
And then we have in that same NYT story this HACK-O-CRAT Elijah Cummings, another lawyer, telling us that he had known Mr. Cohen would testify for some time and had spoken with him when arranging the hearing.
“He’ll have a chance to tell his side of the story, and we’ll have a chance to question him,” he said.
“The American people deserve that.”
end quotes
We deserve that, Elijah?
Get real, dude!
We already know the facts, so when you were quoted in a CNN interview in December comparing Mr. Cohen’s appearance to that of John Dean, President Richard M. Nixon’s White House counsel, in 1973 before a special Senate committee investigating the Watergate scandal, telling us “This is a watershed moment,” invoking Mr. Dean, who he said “changed the course of America” with his testimony, you are spewing as much bull**** as Adam Achiff, which takes us back to The Atlantic as follows:
With the project hopelessly stalled, Cohen tried to nudge it forward in January 2016 by calling in the big Russian political guns Sater had bragged about.
But Cohen seriously misfired, and instead emailed Putin’s mustachioed, bon vivant spokesman Dmitry Peskov for help with the Trump Tower project.
Moreover, Cohen told me, he sent the email to the general inbox for press inquiries listed on the Kremlin website.
Peskov confirmed to the Russian press that his office had received the email and chose to ignore it.
“As far as we don’t respond to business topics, this is not our job, we did not send a response,” Peskov said.
Some Western observers saw this as evidence of high-level contact between the Trump Organization and the Kremlin, but to veterans of the world of Moscow real estate, it was nothing but a rookie mistake.
They see the story as emblematic of why Trump could never build anything in Moscow, despite three decades of talk.
“That is like the stupidest, most absurd thing ever,” says the Western real-estate developer of Cohen’s email.
Nor were they surprised that the Trump team committed this error, given who was on the team.
“The Russians that he associates with, I would never do business with,” says the Western real-estate developer of Trump and his business partners from the former Soviet Union, like Sater.
“I’ve been involved with Russia for 25 years.”
“… A genuine developer could’ve done a lot with that brand.”
Yet the brand, for all its potential appeal to Moscow’s gaudy nouveau riches, didn’t have much cachet in Russia.
It was not well-known enough for Moscow developers to pay a premium to license the name.
“The Trump brand, which in America is very strong, in Russia it doesn’t have that kind of pull,” the former Mirax employee said.
“Russians won’t agree to pay 30 percent more for elite real estate” just because it was branded “Trump,” because “no one in Russia watched The Apprentice.”
The Russian real-estate consultant voiced a similar sentiment.
“In Russia, Trump’s name was never that interesting or notable so that someone would be willing to invest and license it,” he said.
“Everything that was built in Russia appreciated well without Trump’s name, so there was no need to pay for his name.”
“There was no business sense in licensing his name.”
Hotel brands like the Ritz Carlton or the Four Seasons are paid not just for their names but to actually run the hotel built by a developer.
All Trump offered was his name, and at a hefty mark-up at that.
The Russians were skeptical, especially given that Trump was not investing anything in any of these projects.
“Trump didn’t invest anything,” says Kunitsin, the former Mirax board chair, “and in my opinion, the brand is a little too expensive.”
“Trump wants a fee for branding and doesn’t put money in, so most developers’ in Moscow responses are ‘so what the f*** do we need him for?’” says one person familiar with the various licensing talks.
This was especially the case with Polonsky, who felt that his name was worth more in Moscow than Trump’s.
Says the source familiar with the talks, “Developers were all looking for people to bring money there, and Donald doesn’t write checks, he takes checks.”
“They said, ‘Why should we pay Donald Trump 10 or 15 percent, plus you had to write a check for a million up front to show you were serious, when we could pay three percent to Hyatt or four percent to Ritz Carlton?”
“What’s the big deal about Trump?’”
And for all Trump’s talk of being able to negotiate with the Russians in a way that Obama couldn’t, Trump’s people inspired no respect at Moscow’s real-estate negotiating table.
“Trump wants everything and he’s dealing with the Russians, who aren’t stupid,” says the Western investor in Russian real estate.
“If you want everything from the Russians, they’re not going to give it to you.”
“Trump’s way of negotiating is to ask for every f***ing thing.”
“The Russians have a different philosophy of negotiation: He who asks is the weak party.”
end quotes
And that, as they say in the movies, is the end of that story.
And what a crock it is, when these Democrats try to make us believe that trump is a big deal in Russia.
And talk about intentional alarmism coming at us from these Democrats who hate Trump and don’t mind dividing this country and destroying it to get at him, how about this statement, to wit: “you’ve got a president who the public knows is the subject of criminal investigation, may very well be involved in criminal activity …”
Talk about poison politics, people, in all truth, I do not recall a politician stooping so low to incite mob passions in this country since April 10, 1901, when Democrat William Randolph Hearst’s Journal attacked then-U.S. president McKinley in an editorial that ended with the following words: “Institutions, like men, will last until they die; and if bad institutions and bad men can be got rid of only by killing, then the killing must be done,” following that up in June by publishing another editorial that suggested “assassination can be a good thing.”
Three months later, Leon Czolgosz, 28, a self– described “socialist anarchist” shot McKinley in the stomach in Buffalo, New York, and the president lingered for a week before dying.
And here we are again, with a Newsweek article coming at us entitled “Senator Says Congress Almost Ready for Trump Indictment” by David Brennan on 16 January 2019, wherein we are told that a senior Democratic senator has suggested Congress is almost ready to indict President Donald Trump, and is hopeful he may face criminal charges.
HUH?
A senior Democrat senator is hopeful that the Democrat-controlled United States House of Representatives, now known as the “People’s House,” or United States Duma, although it really is Nancy Pelosi’s personal playhouse, as we learned in the POLITICO article “Pelosi gets revenge against one of the Dem rebels” by Heather Caygle, Rachael Bade and John Bresnahan on 16 January 2019 where we were told House Speaker Nancy Pelosi exacted revenge against one of her most outspoken detractors Tuesday night, blocking Rep. Kathleen Rice from landing a seat on the high-profile House Judiciary Committee, is going to indict Trump on criminal charges?
Since when?
Since when does the United States House of Representatives have the power to indict anyone in this country for alleged criminal activity?
Despite what these Democrats may think, the power to actually indict someone for a crime belongs to the courts and grand juries, not a Democrat kangaroo court, which is an unofficial court held by a group of people, in this case the Democrats who hate Trump, in order to try someone regarded, especially without good evidence, as guilty of a crime or misdemeanor.
That is what we are seeing here, people – a Democrat kangaroo court!
Or a Democrat Star Chamber, which are proceedings of a government body that are held in secret and produce arbitrary results.
This derogatory term takes its name from an English court, whose members were appointed by the crown, that met in the 15th to 17th centuries in a room that was apparently decorated with gilt stars, and decided guilt and punishment of people accused of violating the monarch’s orders, which practices made “star chamber” synonymous with any unfair and secretive proceedings.
And who was this senior Democrat senator?
None other than Sheldon Whitehouse, (born October 20, 1955), who is an American lawyer and politician serving as the junior United States Senator from Rhode Island since 2007.
According to his bio, he is a member of the Democratic Party and previously served as a United States Attorney from 1993 to 1998 and as the Attorney General of Rhode Island from 1999 to 2003.
As such, one would think that he would know better, especially as a United States Senator, who according to FEDERALIST No. 62, The Senate, for the Independent Journal to the People of the State of New York by either Alexander Hamilton or James Madison, due to the nature of the senatorial trust, is required to have a greater extent of information and stability of character than a member of the House of Representatives, to be making such inflammatory statements intended and designed to cast aspersions (an attack on the reputation or integrity of someone or something, with synonyms such as vilification, disparagement, denigration, defamation, defamation of character, denunciation, slander, revilement, calumny, slurs, smears, execration, and bad press) on a sitting American president.
Is Sheldon Whitehouse, like William Randolph Hearst before him, trying to in cite some anarchist to assassinate Trump?
Or what is his game?
The candid world would like to know.
And what am I talking about here, people – oh, silly me!
Of course this Democrat senator and former U.S. attorney Sheldon Whitehouse is engaged in character assassination of Trump, and this morning, he was joined in his efforts by something called “BUZZFEED,” and of course, the Washington Post then chimed in, as did NPR News, and there was little Adam Schiff, the lilliputian Democrat Congressman from Burbank, California, with his mouth running 240, as follows:
“The allegation that the President of the United States may have suborned perjury before our committee in an effort to curtail the investigation and cover up his business dealings with Russia is among the most serious to date.”
“We will do what’s necessary to find out if it’s true.”
end quotes
Yeah, right, Adam, and if anybody is stupid enough to believe a word you say, about pretty much anything, they probably already have a deed to the Brooklyn Bridge that they bought at a steep discount from the lying, incompetent, hack lawyer Michael Cohen who is your star witness in your effort to bring down Trump in an effort to make your puny self look presidential.
And as to whether Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.), chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, has any credibility or intelligence himself, let’s look at his Wikipedia bio, where we find as follows:
Adam Bennett Schiff (born June 22, 1960) is an American politician serving as the U.S. Representative for California’s 28th congressional district since 2013.
Schiff is an influential voice for the Democratic Party on foreign policy and national security issues in the House of Representatives.
2003 invasion of Iraq
Schiff voted in favor of the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
In February 2015, discussing how or whether to tailor Bush-era plans from 2001 and 2002 to fight ISIS, Schiff was asked if he regretted voting to invade.
He said, “Absolutely.”
“Unfortunately, our intelligence was dead wrong on that, on Saddam at that time.”
“[The vote] set in motion a cascading series of events which have [had] disastrous consequences.”
end quotes
There, people, is the “full Monty” of this little twerp Adam Schiff on full display – “Unfortunately, our intelligence was dead wrong on that,” but this time around, having found the right liar in the person of the scumbag lawyer Michael Cohen, the “intelligence” on Trump having told the lawyer Cohen to lie to Congress, when it is usually the other way around, with the scumbag lawyer telling the client to lie, is “rock solid,” especially because some un-named “law enforcement personnel,” who apparently overheard Mueller talking to somebody else in the next stall in the men’s room, told BUZZFEED all about it, and then BUZZFEED told the Washington Post and NPR about it, and that then caused Democratic leaders to react with fury and demand an investigation late yesterday following the BUZZFEED report that President Trump personally directed his former attorney, Michael Cohen, to lie to Congress about the president’s push for a lucrative condo project in Moscow in the lead-up to the 2016 election, which in turn gave the Washington Post, which has buried democracy in so much toxic bull**** it is a wonder that it will ever see the light of day again in our lifetimes the segue it needed for its BLOCKBUSTER EXPOSE entitled “Democrats demand investigation after report that Trump ordered Michael Cohen to lie to Congress” by Tim Elfrink on 18 January 2019, which stated as follows, to wit:
The Thursday night report from BuzzFeed News cites two unnamed federal law enforcement officials who say Cohen acknowledged in interviews with the office of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III that the president directed him to deceive Congress about key facts linking Trump to the proposed deal in Russia.
end quotes
Now, this is all notwithstanding that there never was a “proposed deal,” except in the fertile imaginations of Michael Cohen, the Washington Post, the New York Times, NBC News, and BUZZFEED.
So WTF is this “BUZZFEED” that these two “two unnamed federal law enforcement officials” would seek it out to tellit that Cohen acknowledged in interviews with the office of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III that the president directed him to deceive Congress about key facts linking Trump to the proposed deal in Russia?
To find that answer out, let’s go directly to BUZZFEED itself, to see who it says it is, so we can know the gospel truth here, instead of unsubstantiated rumors:
BuzzFeed is the world’s leading digital media company, which leverages data and innovation to reach hundreds of millions of people globally.
Our massive cross-platform network includes: BuzzFeed Originals, which creates articles, lists, quizzes, and videos; BuzzFeed Media Brands, which comprises a portfolio of identity-driven lifestyle brands including Tasty, the world’s largest social food network; BuzzFeed Studios, which produces original content across broadcast, cable, SVOD, film and digital platforms; and BuzzFeed News, which includes world-class reporting and investigative journalism.
The company also includes BuzzFeed Commerce, which develops social commerce products and experiences, as well as licensing and other strategic partnerships.
We operate a global news organization headquartered in New York and an entertainment studio based in Los Angeles, with global offices in London, Berlin, Madrid, Sydney, Mumbai, Tokyo, Sao Paulo, Mexico City and Toronto.
Our best work creates authentic audience engagement that fosters real-world impact, like Yanny vs. Laurel, Tasty, the infamous exploding watermelon, award-winning investigations from BuzzFeed News, and our staple and lists and quizzes.
end quotes
Ah, yes, people, BUZZFEED’s best work creates authentic audience engagement that fosters real-world impact, like Tasty, the infamous exploding watermelon, and now, they are following that “best work” up with this alleged world-class reporting and investigative journalism starring the convicted scumbag lawyer and liar Michael Cohen, the famous exploding watermelon-head lawyer who we read about in THE ATLANTIC article “Why Didn’t Trump Build Anything in Russia? – The art of the deal runs into the reality of ‘a really scary place.’” by Julia Ioffe updated on September 25, 2017, four months AFTER “special counsel” Robert Mueller was appointed by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein as special counsel overseeing an ongoing investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election and related matters, that after Hillary Clinton and the outraged Democrats had been screaming at the top of their lungs since December of 2016 that the Russians had conspired with Trump to put him in the White House instead of Hillary, as follows:
“The first question when you’re doing business in Russia is: who’s your krysha?” says one longtime Western investor in Moscow, who asked for anonymity because of the sensitivities of doing business in such a treacherous environment.
“No krysha, no deal.”
Polonsky had provided one such krysha, but by the time Sater tried in 2015 to build a Trump Tower in Moscow City, the capital’s modernist financial district, Polonsky was in prison and on trial for embezzlement.
Trump, whom Sater claimed to be representing, was not a good krysha either: He was a foreigner, lived in New York, and had no pull within the various power structures in Russia.
In the fall of 2015, months after Trump declared his presidential candidacy, Sater was at it again, according to reports in The Washington Post and New York Times.
In emails obtained by the Times, he bragged to Michael Cohen, Trump’s lawyer and unofficial campaign surrogate, that he had lined up financing for a Trump Tower in Moscow City from VTB, a bank under U.S. sanctions.
With the project hopelessly stalled, Cohen tried to nudge it forward in January 2016 by calling in the big Russian political guns Sater had bragged about.
But Cohen seriously misfired, and instead emailed Putin’s mustachioed, bon vivant spokesman Dmitry Peskov for help with the Trump Tower project.
Moreover, Cohen told me, he sent the email to the general inbox for press inquiries listed on the Kremlin website.
Peskov confirmed to the Russian press that his office had received the email and chose to ignore it.
“As far as we don’t respond to business topics, this is not our job, we did not send a response,” Peskov said.
Some Western observers saw this as evidence of high-level contact between the Trump Organization and the Kremlin, but to veterans of the world of Moscow real estate, it was nothing but a rookie mistake.
They see the story as emblematic of why Trump could never build anything in Moscow, despite three decades of talk.
“That is like the stupidest, most absurd thing ever,” says the Western real-estate developer of Cohen’s email.
Nor were they surprised that the Trump team committed this error, given who was on the team.
“The Russians that he associates with, I would never do business with,” says the Western real-estate developer of Trump and his business partners from the former Soviet Union, like Sater.
“I’ve been involved with Russia for 25 years.”
“… A genuine developer could’ve done a lot with that brand.”
Yet the brand, for all its potential appeal to Moscow’s gaudy nouveau riches, didn’t have much cachet in Russia.
It was not well-known enough for Moscow developers to pay a premium to license the name.
“The Trump brand, which in America is very strong, in Russia it doesn’t have that kind of pull,” the former Mirax employee said.
“Russians won’t agree to pay 30 percent more for elite real estate” just because it was branded “Trump,” because “no one in Russia watched The Apprentice.”
end quotes
As an aside here, you would think that BUZZFEED, which touts its alleged “world-class reporting and investigative journalism,” which is a crock of ****, would be well aware of this story in THE ATLANTIC, which they apparently aren’t, which in turn makes it quite clear that BUZZFEED is a fake news organization, along with a story by the New York Times entitled “Real Estate Executive With Hand in Trump Projects Rose From Tangled Past” by Charles V. Bagli on DEC. 17, 2007, ten years before Mueller was appointed “special counsel,” where we learn about this Sater as follows:
It is a classic tale of reinvention, American style.
Born in the Soviet Union in 1966, Felix H. Sater immigrated with his family to Brighton Beach when he was 8 years old.
At 24 he was a successful Wall Street broker, at 27 he was in prison after a bloody bar fight, and at 32 he was accused of conspiring with the Mafia to launder money and defraud investors.
Along the way he became embroiled in a plan to buy antiaircraft missiles on the black market for the Central Intelligence Agency in either Russia or Afghanistan, depending on which of his former associates is telling the story.
But in recent years Mr. Sater has resurfaced with a slightly different name and a new business card identifying him as a real estate executive based on Fifth Avenue.
And although he may not be a household name, one of the people he is doing business with is: Donald J. Trump.
Mr. Sater — who now goes by the name Satter — has been jetting to Denver, Phoenix, Fort Lauderdale, Fla., and elsewhere since 2003, promoting potential projects in partnership with Mr. Trump and others.
In New York, the company Mr. Sater works for, Bayrock Group, is a partner in the Trump SoHo, a sleek, 46-story glass tower condominium hotel under construction on a newly fashionable section of Spring Street.
But much remains unknown about Mr. Sater, 41, and determining the truth about his past is a bit like unraveling the plot of a spy novel: Almost every character tells a different tale.
A federal complaint brought against him in a 1998 money laundering and stock manipulation case was filed in secret and remains under seal.
A subsequent indictment in March 2000 stemming from the same investigation described Mr. Sater as an “unindicted co-conspirator” and a key figure in a $40 million scheme involving 19 stockbrokers and organized crime figures from four Mafia families.
The indictment asserted that Mr. Sater helped create fraudulent stock brokerages that were used to defraud investors and launder money.
Mr. Sater and his lawyer, Judd Burstein, repeatedly refused to discuss in detail his role in the stock scam.
But a onetime friend, Gennady Klotsman, who is known as Gene and who was accused with Mr. Sater as a co-conspirator, contends that they both pleaded guilty in 1998, and that Mr. Sater began cooperating with the authorities.
Prosecutors are unwilling to discuss either the 1998 complaint or the 2000 indictment.
end quotes
There is another “star witness” for Mueller’s “probe,” and Adam Schiff and the outraged Democrats, especially as he is already quite tight with “federal law enforcement.”
And when we read in the September 2017 edition of THE ATLANTIC that “(S)ome Western observers saw this as evidence of high-level contact between the Trump Organization and the Kremlin, but to veterans of the world of Moscow real estate, it was nothing but a rookie mistake,” those “western observers” are Mueller, Adam Schiff, the Democrats, the Washington Post, the New York Times, NBC News and BUZZFEED, who have created Mt. Everest out of something that wasn’t even a molehill, just a little pile of dirt.
Which now takes us back to the BLOCKBUSTER Washington Post EXPOSE, which is based on the BLOCKBUSTER BUZZFEED expose, which is based on “two unnamed federal law enforcement officials,” as follows:
Democratic leaders promised a quick probe into whether Trump, in fact, did direct Cohen to lie.
“I mean everything feels like a bombshell and we are all numb but I’m pretty sure if this story is true it’s – I’m going to be careful with my words here – something that congress must investigate thoroughly,” tweeted Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii).
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) tweeted, “Listen, if Mueller does have multiple sources confirming Trump directed Cohen to lie to Congress, then we need to know this ASAP.”
“Mueller shouldn’t end his inquiry, but it’s about time for him to show Congress his cards before it’s too late for us to act.”
Added Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.): “This stunning Trump Tower Moscow story establishes a clear case of Obstruction of Justice, a felony.”
“I’ve lost count now how many times @realDonaldTrump has engaged in Obstruction of Justice.”
“Oh, fyi the first Article of Impeachment for Richard Nixon was Obstruction of Justice.”
Lieu later added in another tweet that “Based on the Buzzfeed report and numerous other articles showing @realDonaldTrump committed Obstruction of Justice and other possible felonies, it is time for the House Judiciary Committee to start holding hearings to establish a record of whether @POTUS committed high crimes.”
end quotes
And there is the latest, people – make of it what you will.
As for me, I think it was the BUZZFEED entertainment studio based in Los Angeles that produced this farcical story as an authentic audience engagement that fosters real-world impact, like Tasty, the infamous exploding watermelon, so no wonder the Democrats and the Washington Post bit into it and sucked it up as the gospel truth!
Afterall, would the same people who brought us the much-beloved Tasty, the infamous exploding watermelon, lie to us about the scum-sucking, lying, incompetent hack lawyer Michael Cohen telling us that Trump told him to lie to Congress?
My goodness, people, perish the thought!
And talk about a House of Cards come tumbling down like a rotten tree in a stiff breeze, while these poison-spewing Democrats in “Shrieker” Pelosi’s “People’s House,” and the United States Senate, along with the Washington Post and NBC News and “BUZZFEED” all are forced to have to eat a healthy dose of crow (be humiliated by having to admit one’s mistakes), let’s go to the Washington Post story “In a rare move, Mueller’s office denies BuzzFeed report that Trump told Cohen to lie about Moscow project” by Devlin Barrett, Matt Zapotosky, and Karoun Demirjian on 19 January 2019, where we are treated to the following revelation, to wit:
Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s office on Friday denied an explosive report by BuzzFeed News that his investigators had gathered evidence showing President Trump directed his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, to lie to Congress about a prospective business deal in Moscow.
“BuzzFeed’s description of specific statements to the special counsel’s office, and characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office, regarding Michael Cohen’s congressional testimony are not accurate,” said Peter Carr, a spokesman for Mueller.
end quotes
So HOLY COW, people, how about that, now will you – it looks like the same people who brought us the much-beloved Tasty, the infamous exploding watermelon, did lie to us afterall about the scum-sucking, lying, incompetent hack lawyer Michael Cohen telling us that Trump told him to lie to Congress.
Who’d a thought it could happen – OH, THE HUMANITY!
Does that mean that they invented Tasty, the infamous exploding watermelon, as well?
He’s not real?
My goodness, people, perish the thought!
Getting back to the Washington Post article:
The statement was remarkable on several levels — first, the special counsel’s office speaks exceedingly rarely, and second, the statement seemed to drive a stake through a sensational allegation that Democratic lawmakers suggested earlier in the day could spell the end of the Trump presidency.
As earthshaking as the claims in the story were, no other media organizations were able to match them.
end quotes
No other media organizations were able to match the s0-called “earthshaking” claims because they were pure BULL****, but that did not stop them from repeating the BULL**** as if it were the gospel truth.
So much for “investigative” reporting – what a mockery!
One magpie starts mindlessly chattering and the whole flock then mindlessly joins in, which takes us back to the Washington Post as follows:
The story published by BuzzFeed on Thursday night attributed to two federal law enforcement officials an incendiary assertion: that Mueller had collected emails, texts and testimony indicating Trump had directed Cohen to lie to Congress about the extent of discussions surrounding a proposed Trump Tower project in Moscow.
end quotes
And let’s stop right here for a moment, people, while we are on this subject of “investigative” reporting versus intentional creation of toxic BULL****.
Is it unlawful for an American citizen to own real estate, in Russia?
No, it is not, unless your name is Trump, apparently.
Is it unlawful for an American to build a hotel in Russia?
Again, it is not, unless your name is Trump, and then, of course, it is.
And to check that out, I personally googled http://www.moscow-hotels.net/chain-hotels/ Trusted names in Moscow – International hotel chains, and here is what I found with my investigation, to wit:
Crowne Plaza – The chain that calls itself “The Place to Meet” offers one of Moscow’s best-value five-star hotels, and certainly has some of the city’s best MICE facilities.
It is also superbly located for access to the Moscow City business park and Moscow Expo Centre.
Hilton – Arguably the world’s most famous hotel company, Hilton was a late arrival to the Moscow market.
However, their first property in the city quickly became one of Moscow’s most popular and best value five-star hotels
Holiday Inn – Boasting more hotel rooms than any other company in Moscow, Holiday Inn operate five superior hotels in Moscow, offering very comfortable and surprisingly stylish accommodation, as well as first-class services for business travelers.
Marriott – Among the world’s best-known hotel chains, the American giant was one of the first to enter the Russian market.
In Moscow, there are currently six properties under the Marriott and Courtyard by Marriott brands, all with prime downtown locations.
Park Hyatt – When Park Hyatt opened their first Moscow property in 2001, it was the city’s first superior 5-star hotel and set a new benchmark for luxury standards in the city.
It remains at or very near the top of the Moscow hotel market.
Radisson – The first international luxury hotel in Moscow was opened by Radisson in 1991.
The chain now have three hotels in the city – a sumptuous five-star flagship and two four-star properties aimed squarely at business travelers.
Renaissance – This deluxe chain operated by Marriott International offers stylish accommodation and comprehensive services for business travelers.
The company currently has one Moscow property located just outside the city centre.
Ritz-Carlton – Few names have announced there arrival in Moscow more loudly than Ritz-Carlton.
When it opened in 2007, the brand’s Moscow property caused a sensation with the extravagant luxury of its interiors and the extraordinary range of services offered.
Sheraton – The deluxe executive brand from Starwood, Sheraton offers two Moscow properties, one in the downtown and one at Sheremetyevo Airport.
Both provide reliably high levels of 5-star accommodation and a full range of amenities.
end quotes
So what is all this HYSTERIA being fed to us by these hate-filled Democrats in the United States Congress about Trump having to be a “Russian puppet,” as the jilted and hate-filled Hillary Clinton calls him, because he wanted to tap into that same market?
Which takes us to the question, “is it unlawful for an American president to have been in business instead of having been a scum-sucking, lying, hack politician,” which takes us to a TIME magazine article entitled “6 Other Businessmen Who Became President of the United States” by Olivia B. Waxman on November 9, 2016, as follows:
With his victory in this week’s U.S. presidential election, real-estate mogul Donald Trump is in line to become the latest U.S. president to bring business credentials to the White House.
Here are other 20th century presidents who have been business executives — both successful and unsuccessful — before moving into the Executive Branch.
Surprisingly, four presidents who had successful business careers — Hoover, both Bushes and Carter — “had the four worst records in terms of gross domestic product performance,” Robert S. McElvaine, history professor at Milsaps College in Jackson, Miss., has argued in the Washington Post.
“The only president since Hoover with business experience under whom the economy did well was the one who was unsuccessful in business: Harry Truman, whose haberdashery shop went bankrupt after two years.”
If history tells us anything, then Trump will have a lot of work to do.
Warren Harding (elected 1920): Newspaper publisher
In 1884, the Ohio native raised $300 to purchase the Marion Star.
He turned the weekly paper into a daily, and then started another weekly version of with a staunchly Republican bent.
In total, Harding spent 39 years in the newspaper business.
Herbert Hoover (elected 1928): Mining magnate
The Stanford geology major worked as a mining engineer and opened his own mining consulting business.
The Republican’s fortune came from owning Burmese silver mines and publishing a leading textbook on mining engineering.
Harry S. Truman (becomes president 1945): Mining and oil investor; Haberdasher
In 1916, he invested in a lead and zinc mine in Commerce, Okla., “hoping to cash in on a rise in metal prices caused by the war,” a PBS American Experience doc notes.
He also invested in oil wells in the state.
And from 1919 to 1922, the Democrat and Missouri native sold men’s clothing in Kansas City.
None of the businesses were successful.
Jimmy Carter (elected 1976): Peanut farmer
The Democrat took over his parents’ 2,500-acre peanut farm after his father died in 1954.
After a drought rendered the crop useless, TIME reported in 1971, Carter “stepped up” his father’s “practice of buying local farmers‘ peanuts, then selling in bulk to the big processors,” which led Carter Warehouse to gross $800,000 annually by 1971, up from a mere $184 when Carter started.
George H.W. Bush (elected 1988): Oilman
The Republican got into the oil business as a salesperson for Dresser Industries and then co-founded Bush-Overbey Oil Development Co. and Zapata Petroleum Corp. in the 1950, and made about a million dollars selling his holdings in 1966, as TIME and LIFE reported back then.
George W. Bush (elected 2000): Oilman and managing partner of the Texas Rangers
Following in his father’s footsteps, he worked as a “landman,” searching mineral-rights titles in county courthouses around West Texas and then seeing if the owners would lease those rights to oil companies.
He founded the oil company Arbusto in 1977 (Spanish for Bush) and merged it with the oil-drilling firm Spectrum in 1984.
He bought the Texas Rangers with a group in 1989 and led the campaign to build the baseball team a new stadium, which increased the value of his holdings so much that when “his group sold the Rangers in 1998, Bush’s initial $500,000 investment paid him almost $15 million,” TIME reported in its June 21, 1999, cover story, when he was the GOP frontrunner in 2000 presidential race.
“He had finally followed his dad’s rule,” the magazine observed.
“Provide for your family before stepping into politics.”
http://time.com/4547837/donald-trump-business-presidents/
So, other than the fact that Trump beat Hillary, which has infuriated the poison-spewing Democrats who thought the oval office was their trinket because it was Hillary’s turn to be president after Hussein Obama, why is it suddenly unlawful for him to have been in business, or to have tried to get into the Russian hotel market like all these other American chains have done?
And while we wait for this twerp Adam Schiff to give us that answer, after he is done choking down all the crow feathers he has to eat, let’s go back to this sentence from that Washington Post article as follows:
That project never came to pass, but Cohen pleaded guilty last year to lying to Congress about the matter.
end quotes
That project never came to pass, people, as we learned from THE ATLANTIC article “Why Didn’t Trump Build Anything in Russia? – The art of the deal runs into the reality of ‘a really scary place.’” by Julia Ioffe updated on September 25, 2017, four months AFTER “special counsel” Robert Mueller was appointed by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein as special counsel overseeing an ongoing investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election and related matters, because Michael Cohen was an incompetent fool, end of story.
And that takes us back to the Washington Post, as follows:
The BuzzFeed report strongly implied the president might have committed a crime, dramatically raising speculation of possible impeachment.
Within hours, Democrats in Congress were publicly demanding answers.
The potential consequences of the report were so severe — immediate congressional investigations and a possible legal showdown with the White House — that Mueller decided to take the surprising step of publicly denying his investigation had gathered any such evidence.
The special counsel’s office has only rarely issued public statements since it was created in May 2017; it had never previously issued a public statement regarding evidence in its investigation into Trump and Russian interference in the 2016 election.
Inside the Justice Department, the statement was viewed as a huge step, and one that would have been taken only if the special counsel’s office viewed the story as almost entirely incorrect.
The special counsel’s office seemed to be disputing every aspect of the story that addressed comments or evidence given to its investigators.
end quotes
Simply said, the Democrats and BUZZFEED tried to game us, to pull a con on us, to treat us like fools, and they failed, which again takes us back to the Washin gton Post story, to wit:!
Following the special counsel’s denial, BuzzFeed insisted its story was correct.
In a statement, the website’s top editor, Ben Smith, said, “We stand by our reporting and the sources who informed it, and we urge the Special Counsel to make clear what he’s disputing.”
The story had claimed Cohen had acknowledged to Mueller’s prosecutors that the president directed him to deceive Congress about key facts linking the president to the proposed Trump Tower project in Moscow.
BuzzFeed also said Mueller learned about the directive to lie from “interviews with multiple witnesses from the Trump Organization and internal company emails, text messages, and a cache of other documents.”
Mueller’s denial, according to people familiar with the matter, aims to make clear that none of those statements in the story are accurate.
end quotes
And here I am going to thank the Cape Charles Mirror as an American citizen sick to death of this BULL**** story being spread by Hillary Clinton and the poison-spewing Democrats that Trump has to be a “Russian sleeper agent” because he is in business and tried to do a real estate deal in Russia, which in truth he was too incompetent to pull off, for being the one news outlet in America, perhaps the only one, for not joining the media bandwagon here, and trying to bury us under a literal mountain of BULL**** like the Democrats and their media toadies the Washington Post, NBC News and BUZZFEED have been trying to do, along with the New York Times.
To the contrary, thanks to its courage, the Cape Charles Mirror has been the one outlet where some light of day has been shed on this farce, for which we loyal American citizens owe the Cape Charles Mirror a debt of gratitude!
And boy oh boy, talking about people being impervious to reality, this Burbank, California Democrat Congressman Adam Schiff and BUZZFEED, the creators of the much-loved Tasty, the infamous exploding watermelon, and a totally-debunked story about the infamous exploding watermelon-head incompetent, lying lawyer Michael Cohen telling Mueller that it was Trump who told him to lie to Congress, take the cake.
Refusing to back down, BUZZFEED, who may well have invented Zippy, the Pinhead, as well, appears to be calling Mueller a liar in the Washington Post story “Inside the Mueller team’s decision to dispute BuzzFeed’s explosive story on Trump and Cohen” by Matt Zapotosky and Devlin Barrett on 20 January 2019, where we learn further details of this apparent con-game the creators of the much-loved Tasty, the infamous exploding watermelon are trying to pull on we, the American people, as follows:
When a BuzzFeed reporter first sought comment on the news outlet’s explosive report that President Trump had directed his lawyer to lie to Congress, the spokesman for special counsel Robert S. Mueller III treated the request as he would almost any other story.
The reporter informed Mueller’s spokesman, Peter Carr, that he and a colleague had “a story coming stating that Michael Cohen was directed by President Trump himself to lie to Congress about his negotiations related to the Trump Moscow project,” according to copies of their emails provided by a BuzzFeed spokesman.
Importantly, the reporter made no reference to the special counsel’s office specifically or evidence that Mueller’s investigators had uncovered.
“We’ll decline to comment,” Carr responded, a familiar refrain for those in the media who cover Mueller’s work.
The innocuous exchange belied the chaos it would produce.
When BuzzFeed published the story hours later, it far exceeded Carr’s initial impression, people familiar with the matter said, in that the reporting alleged that Cohen, Trump’s former lawyer and self-described fixer, “told the special counsel that after the election, the president personally instructed him to lie,” and that Mueller’s office learned of the directive “through interviews with multiple witnesses from the Trump Organization and internal company emails, text messages, and a cache of other documents.”
In the view of the special counsel’s office, that was wrong, two people familiar with the matter said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.
And with Democrats raising the specter of investigation and impeachment, Mueller’s team started discussing a step they had never before taken: publicly disputing reporting on evidence in their ongoing investigation.
Within 24 hours of the story’s publication, the special counsel’s office issued a statement doing just that.
end quotes
So there we have one side of the story as the Washington Post tries to pull its own fat out of the fire and distance itself from BUZZFEED, as it rightly should if it wants to emerge with a shred of credibility left here, which takes us to these words of Trump from that Washington Post story, to wit:
“I think that the BuzzFeed piece was a disgrace to our country.”
“It was a disgrace to journalism, and I think also that the coverage by the mainstream media was disgraceful, and I think it’s going to take a long time for the mainstream media to recover its credibility,” Trump said Saturday.
“It’s lost tremendous credibility.”
“And believe me, that hurts me when I see that.”
end quotes
As for me, who was taught when young that it was my personal obligation as an American citizen to know and stay aware of current events as part of my citizenship duties, and as a former public servant who was forced to watch helplessly as my name and professional reputation were destroyed by malicious, intentional, totally false reporting by the media in New York state, this before there was an internet and a Cape Charles Mirror with which to defend myself, I think what BUZZFEED did was emblematic of what the media in this country is capable of, and has been since Thomas Jefferson’s day, unrestrained as it is from having to print either truth or fact, which takes us back to the Washington Post article for BUZZFEED’s side of the story, as follows:
BuzzFeed has stood by its reporting.
“As we’ve reconfirmed our reporting, we’ve seen no indication that any specific aspect of our story is inaccurate.”
“We remain confident in what we’ve reported, and will share more as we are able,” Matt Mittenthal, a spokesman for the news outlet, said Saturday.
end quotes
Okay, Matt, let me try to wrap my mind around that – so, dude, do I have it right here – you have a lot more, but somehow, something is holding you back from being able to tell us what it is?
And after Mueller has taken pains to tell us, the American people, that what you printed was not true, you are still saying that it is?
So, dude, help us out here – are you saying that Mueller either is a liar or doesn’t know what he is talking about?
And while Matt chews on that and tries to figure out what he is going to say next as to why he can’t give us all these further details, let’s go back to the Washington Post article where we find as follows, to wit:
People familiar with the matter said Carr told others in the government that he would have more vigorously discouraged the reporters from proceeding with the story had he known it would allege Cohen had told the special counsel Trump directed him to lie — or that the special counsel was said to have learned this through interviews with Trump Organization witnesses, as well as internal company emails and text messages.
After Carr declined to comment to BuzzFeed, but before the story was published, he sent reporter Jason Leopold a partial transcript of Cohen’s plea hearing, in which Cohen admitted lying to Congress about the timing of discussions related to a possible Trump Tower project in Moscow, according to the emails BuzzFeed’s spokesman provided.
Cohen had claimed falsely that the company’s effort to build the tower ended in January 2016, when in fact discussions continued through June of that year, as Trump was clinching the Republican nomination for president.
“I made these misstatements to be consistent with Individual 1’s political messaging and out of loyalty to Individual 1,” Cohen said at his plea hearing late last year, using the term “Individual 1” to refer to Trump.
Carr, people familiar with the matter said, hoped Leopold would notice that Cohen had not said during the hearing that Trump had explicitly directed him to lie.
But Leopold, who co-authored the story with reporter Anthony Cormier, told the spokesman he was not taking any signals, and Carr acknowledged the point.
“I am not reading into what you sent and have interpreted it as an FYI,” Leopold wrote.
“Correct, just an FYI,” Carr responded.
end quotes
Now, the other day, I heard this BUZZFEED reporter Anthony Cormier speaking with NPR News, and since there is a published transcript entitled “BuzzFeed News Reporter Details Story About Trump, Michael Cohen And Lying To Congress” on January 18, 2019, Heard on Morning Edition, let’s rely on that instead of my memory, to wit:
A new story in BuzzFeed News says President Trump directed his former lawyer to lie to Congress.
Anthony Cormier, one of the BuzzFeed News reporters who broke the story, talks to Steve Inskeep.
STEVE INSKEEP, HOST: President Trump’s former lawyer Michael Cohen has admitted lying to Congress.
He says he lied about President Trump’s business dealings with Russia, that discussions of a Trump Tower Moscow continued deep into the presidential campaign.
According to BuzzFeed, Cohen says he was told to lie under oath by President Trump, which congressional Democrats are saying is suborning perjury, a crime.
Anthony Cormier is one of two BuzzFeed reporters who broke this story.
He’s on the line.
Good morning, sir.
ANTHONY CORMIER: Good morning, Steve.
INSKEEP: What is the evidence that Michael Cohen is telling this to federal investigators?
CORMIER: So according to our sources, who are two – I’ll characterize them as law enforcement officials with direct knowledge of the Trump Tower Moscow investigation – have told us that there is quite a bit of documentary evidence of this, whether those are emails, internal correspondence and witness interviews that they gathered before they spoke with Mr. Cohen at the special counsel.
And then Mr. Cohen, during his many interviews with the special counsel, confirmed that he was directed to lie to Congress.
INSKEEP: OK.
So you’re saying it’s not just that Michael Cohen says to federal prosecutors, listen, I lied, but the president told me to lie.
There is some kind of documentary record that would appear to corroborate that?
CORMIER: Yes.
That is absolutely correct.
INSKEEP: Have you seen any of those documents?
CORMIER: I have not.
But our two sources fully, 100 percent read into this.
They have reviewed these documents in person.
They know the sort of minutia of this aspect of the sort of sprawling special counsel investigation.
And we’ve managed to find ways to verify these people’s stories off the record through sourcing that we just weren’t able to use in the story.
INSKEEP: So I think you’re trying to tell me that you feel you have more than two sources, even though you were citing two sources because others were not speaking in a form that you could report.
CORMIER: Indeed.
INSKEEP: Does this story seem plausible to you, having covered Michael Cohen’s story for so long?
CORMIER: Well, I think there’s a clue that the special counsel’s office left in the sentencing memo of Mr. Cohen.
When Mr. Cohen pleaded guilty to lying to Congress, the special counsel’s office issued a memo saying that this is why – this is what we think he should be sentenced to.
And among the areas that Mr. Cohen has apparently been helpful was in helping the special counsel understand how his statement to Congress, in which he lied, was crafted.
It’s in the sentencing memo that has been largely overlooked.
We, of course, would never rely – our reporting would never be founded in sort of speculation.
But it was an interesting breadcrumb, so to speak, for us.
INSKEEP: So we know on the record from Robert Mueller’s office that Michael Cohen told them something about how it was that he came to lie before Congress and that he was helpful in some way.
And if I’m not mistaken, the memo also alludes to conversations with the White House in that part of the memo, right?
CORMIER: Indeed.
It absolutely does.
INSKEEP: So what you’ve done is taken it a step further, according to your sources.
And the assertion here is that it was the – was it the president himself, directly, who would have spoken to Michael Cohen, or was it through some intermediary, according to your reporting?
CORMIER: No.
It’s our understanding that this was directly from the president of the United States.
INSKEEP: So what is the implication of this?
CORMIER: This is problematic for the president.
This is a crime, if it’s true.
And our reporting suggests that it is.
We’ve heard nothing from the White House.
We’ve gotten a little bit of backlash from Trump’s spokesperson Rudy Giuliani, who suggested that – I believe, last night – if you believe Michael Cohen, that he wants to sell us the Brooklyn Bridge for all cash,
I think where Mr. Giuliani is mistaken is that our reporting is not based on Mr. Cohen.
He is not the one that has told us this.
INSKEEP: Anthony Cormier of BuzzFeed, thanks very much.
Really appreciate it.
CORMIER: Thanks, Steve.
https://www.npr.org/2019/01/18/686487338/buzzfeed-news-reporter-details-story-about-trump-michael-cohen-and-lying-to-cong
end quotes
Now, since this is a story that obviously is not going to go away, I’m going to stop here to let all of that sink in to be properly digested, which is the beauty of relying on transcripts – somebody cannot come back later, as BUZZFEED is trying to do here by implying that Mueller is a liar the reporter said what he said, and that is now a matter of public record, just as it should be, when BUZZFEED and the Democrats in Congress are publicly accusing a sitting American president of being a criminal, as we clearly see this BUZZFEED reporter Cormier doing in the NPR transcript above, and if this is all it takes to prove a president of the United States of America guilty of criminal activity, we are in grave trouble as a people and as a nation, and the excuse that nobody likes Trump so it is alright to do this in his case simply does not cut it with this American citizen, anyway, since the main take-away there from this Cormier’s own words is that he does not k now if there is a shred of evidence to back up what he is saying, since he has never, in his own words, seen any.
And in all seriousness here, people, if this on-going story reads like something from “TALES OF THE EXTREME BIZARRE,” that is because it is bizarre to an extreme, and if we were not getting this stuff from some trusted media sources like the Washington Post and CNN and NPR, one would think I was making this stuff up to test the credulity (a tendency to be too ready to believe that something is real or true, as in “the media and politicians moneylenders prey upon their credulity and inexperience” with synonyms such as gullibility, naivety, blind faith, childlikeness, simpleness, simplicity, and ignorance) of the readers of the Cape Charles Mirror, not only in this country, but in the world, as well, and let me take pains to assure the reader that such is not at all the case.
For example, who could possibly invent someone like Adam Schiff in a political novel and have him seem at all credible to even the least discerning reader, and yet, he is very real, which thought takes us back in time a bit to a Washington Examiner story entitled “Adam Schiff: House intel is ‘already in touch’ with Cohen to testify again” by Naomi Lim on 12 December 2018, where this present spell-binding political thriller begins as follows:
The likely next House Intelligence Committee chairman says his panel wants to hear from Michael Cohen, President Trump’s former fixer, one more time before he goes to prison.
Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., told CNN Wednesday the committee was “already in touch” with Cohen’s counsel about a possible appearance ahead of his March 6 deadline to report to authorities for his three-year sentence.
“We are very eager to have him come and testify.”
“I was very pleased to see today that one of his lawyers issued a statement saying that he is more than willing to come and cooperate and share what he knows with us.”
“And we certainly intend to take him up on that,” Schiff said.
end quotes
So, that is on December 12 of last year, roughly five-and-a-half weeks ago now, and then we jump ahead in time to now and we have this alternate version of reality from the CBS News story “Schiff wants Cohen to testify to House Intel Committee” by Holly Rosenkrantz on 20 January 2019, to wit:
Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff of California, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said Sunday he has a date in mind for Michael Cohen to testify before his panel “either voluntarily, or if necessary, by subpoena.”
Cohen, President Trump’s former personal attorney, has already agreed to testify publicly before the House Oversight Committee on Feb. 7, weeks before he begins serving a three-year prison sentence.
Schiff’s call for Cohen to testify comes in the wake of last week’s BuzzFeed News report that special counsel Robert Mueller has evidence that Mr. Trump directed Cohen to lie to Congress.
end quotes
So, here we have the infamous “BUZZFEED EXPOSE” from the people who brought America and the world that much-loved and quite zany Tasty, the infamous exploding watermelon entering the picture, so we can gauge this Adam Schiff’s reaction to it, which CBS News says is as follows, to wit:
A spokesman for Mueller issued a rare statement disputing the report, saying, “BuzzFeed’s description of specific statements to the special counsel’s office, and characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office, regarding Michael Cohen’s Congressional testimony are not accurate.”
Asked about the story, Schiff on Sunday emphasized the “need to pay particular attention to what we do know from the special counsel that was not included in this statement yesterday.”
“What we do know from the special counsel is that Michael Cohen has shared information about core matters of the Russian investigation that he learned from people associated with the Trump Organization, the business organization.”
“We also know from the special counsel that he has shared information about his communications with people associated with the White House during 2017 and 2018,” he said.
On Sunday, Schiff said that the statement from the special counsel’s office about the BuzzFeed story may have to do with “wanting to be able to use Michael Cohen as a witness in further prosecutions, and wanting to make sure that the public didn’t have a perception that he was saying more than he was saying at least to the special counsel.”
“There is a lot more to learn,” Schiff said.
“Congress has a fundamental interest in two things: First, in getting to the bottom of why a witness came before us and lied, and who else was knowledgeable that this was a lie.”
Schiff said his committee would do everything it could to make any eventual report by the special counsel public.
“Because they will fight us on this, we need to do our own investigations, because at the end of the day if the Justice Department tries to stonewall the release of that report for whatever reason, the American people are going to need to know what happened, and we’re going to have to press forth,” Schiff said.
end quote
Now, is that all a crock of crap, or what?
What is it that the American people can possibly learn from Adam Schiff that we do not already know?
And more to the point, is Adam Schiff, the Burbank, California, Democrat who is now the head of the INTELLIGENCE panel of the U.S. House of Representatives that dense and stupid?
Is he incapable of understanding the most simple words in the English language as in the Washington Post story “Inside the Mueller team’s decision to dispute BuzzFeed’s explosive story on Trump and Cohen” by Matt Zapotosky and Devlin Barrett on 20 January 2019, to wit:
People familiar with the matter said after BuzzFeed published its story — which was attributed to “two federal law enforcement officials involved in an investigation of the matter” — the special counsel’s office reviewed evidence to determine if there were any documents or witness interviews like those described, reaching out to those they thought might have a stake in the case.
They found none, these people said.
That, the people said, is in part why it took Mueller’s office nearly a day to dispute the story publicly.
In the interim, cable news outlets and other media organizations, including The Washington Post, dissected its possible implications — even as their reporters were unable to independently confirm it.
end quotes
So, to recap there for the benefit of this Burbank, California Democrat Adam Schiff who is telling us in the CBS News report that the statement from the special counsel’s office about the BuzzFeed story may have to do with “wanting to be able to use Michael Cohen as a witness in further prosecutions, and wanting to make sure that the public didn’t have a perception that he was saying more than he was saying at least to the special counsel,” which sounds absurd, and “there is a lot more to learn,” which is patently ridiculous, and “Congress has a fundamental interest in two things: First, in getting to the bottom of why a witness came before us and lied, and who else was knowledgeable that this was a lie,” people other than Adam Schiff who familiar with the matter said after BuzzFeed published its story — which was attributed to “two federal law enforcement officials involved in an investigation of the matter” — the special counsel’s office reviewed evidence to determine if there were any documents or witness interviews like those described, reaching out to those they thought might have a stake in the case, and they found none, these people said.
So what is it that Adam Schiff does not understand there, people, especially since the Washington Post article continued as follows, to wit:
Around 7:30 p.m. Friday, Carr distributed it to numerous media outlets via email.
“BuzzFeed’s description of specific statements to the Special Counsel’s Office, and characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office, regarding Michael Cohen’s congressional testimony are not accurate,” he wrote.
People familiar with the matter said the special counsel’s office meant the statement to be a denial of the central theses of the BuzzFeed story — particularly those that referenced what Cohen had told the special counsel, and what evidence the special counsel had gathered.
end quotes
Doesn’t Adam Schiff read the newspapers?
My goodness, you would think a HOT-SHOT Harvard lawyer like him on the INTELLIGENCE committee would be the first to know these things, not the last.
So why is he so ignorant?
And then we come back to BUZZFEED in that Washington Post story as follows, this on 20 January 2019:
“We stand by our reporting and the sources who informed it, and we urge the Special Counsel to make clear what he’s disputing,” BuzzFeed editor Ben Smith said in response to the special counsel’s statement.
end quotes
As to the mysterious “sources” the Mueller team knows nothing about, it is our belief here to the north of you that upon further investigation, they are going to turn out to be none other that Democrats Adam Schiff, who wants to be president, and Jerrold Nadler.
As to what Special Counsel is disputing, Ben, how about your whole bull**** story, which takes us back a couple of days to a CNN Business article with the intriguing title of “Reporter with checkered past comes back with Trump Tower Moscow bombshells for BuzzFeed” by Oliver Darcy, CNN Business, updated Fri., January 18, 2019, where this side of this bizarre story of lust for political power in Washington, D.C. gets told as follows:
New York (CNN Business) — Jason Leopold and Anthony Cormier, two reporters for BuzzFeed News, may have just scored the scoop that, if it is ultimately confirmed, irrevocably changes the course of the Trump presidency.
If so, it will represent for Leopold the apex of a comeback from a troubled personal and professional past.
end quotes
Now, I have to say that that lede does not serve to inspire a lot of confidence in this BUZZFEED article, but hey, we are compassionate people, so let’s not just jump to the immediate conclusion that these BUZZFEED writers are scam artists – no, let’s delve further so we don’t make a hasty judgment here:
On Thursday evening, the duo published a bombshell: A report that President Donald Trump personally directed Michael Cohen, his former attorney, to lie to Congress about the Moscow Trump Tower project.
If the story is accurate, it means Trump asked Cohen to commit perjury, a federal crime and potentially impeachable offense.
The story has not yet been corroborated by CNN or any other news outlet.
A spokesman for special counsel Robert Mueller’s office disputed parts of BuzzFeed News’ report.
“BuzzFeed’s description of specific statements to the Special Counsel’s Office, and characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office, regarding Michael Cohen’s Congressional testimony are not accurate,” Peter Carr said in a statement on Friday evening.
In response, BuzzFeed said, “We are continuing to report and determine what the special counsel is disputing.”
“We remain confident in the accuracy of our report.”
end quotes
Now seriously, people, when Peter Carr, the spokesman for special counsel Robert Mueller’s office tells us on 18 January 2019 that “BuzzFeed’s description of specific statements to the Special Counsel’s Office, and characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office, regarding Michael Cohen’s Congressional testimony are not accurate,” how man y different interpretations if that statement amenable to?
How many different meanings does the statement “not accurate” have?
Getting back to that 18 January 2019 CNN article, we have:
Since it was published, the story has dominated cable news and caught the eye of Congressional Democrats.
In a tweet, House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler said his committee would “get to the bottom of it.”
end quotes
As I said above, we believe that Jerry Nadler will “get to the bottom of this,” because he is the likel;y source of this BULL**** story along with Adam Schiff, which takes us back to the CNN story as follows:
Leopold and Cormier have broken a number of major stories on Trump Tower and Russia that have proven true.
But the intense attention to their latest scoop has also resurfaced Leopold’s checkered past.
Leopold, a former Los Angeles Times, Dow Jones, and Vice News reporter who has been at BuzzFeed since 2017, was involved in several major scandals that called into question the veracity of his reporting during George W. Bush’s presidency.
In 2002, Salon.com removed a story Leopold had written as a freelancer for the site.
Salon said that as it investigated a piece he wrote about Enron, including an allegation of plagiarism against him, Leopold “distributed an account of events” that was “riddled with inaccuracies and misrepresentations.”
Ultimately Salon said it “reluctantly had to conclude” Leopold’s piece carried “an instance of plagiarism,” despite his strong denials.
After the scandal, Leopold wrote a book in which he said he had engaged in “lying, cheating, and backstabbing” in his life; battled mental illness; and struggled with substance abuse.
“I have a checkered past, and I was hoping that by coming clean about my own past, it would allow me to move forward,” Leopold wrote, according to a 2005 article in The Washington Post.
But in 2006, Leopold found himself again in controversy.
He reported for Truthout.org that then-top White House aide Karl Rove had told then-President Bush and other administration officials that he was going to be indicted in relation to the Valerie Plame affair.
Leopold cited “people knowledgeable about these discussions” and reported Rove’s “indictment is imminent.”
But Rove never faced any charges.
A 2015 profile of Leopold in The New York Times noted that he has “been through a series of scandals.”
end quotes
And yes, people, I know what you are thinking – we are all human, and yes, we are not perfect, but my goodness, people, isn’t this stretching our own credulity a bit far to believe that this self[-admitted liar is now telling us the truth, when the office of special counsel says he isn’t?
And that takes us back to this revelation about this BUZZFEED reporter in that CNN article as follows:
“I love the score,” he told the Times “So maybe there’s this drug-ish thing in me that still exists, maybe that was always part of my personality.”
“I love the score.”
“I love the score!”
“Particularly when it is from the government!”
end quotes
“I love the score!”
And hey, why not?
Afterall, how many times in your life do you get a chance to finally make it to the big time and become famous for taking down an American president?
Wouldn’t that be the mother of all scores, which again takes us back to the 18 January 2019 CNN story, to wit:
Talking by phone Friday morning on “New Day,” Cormier was asked about Leopold’s past.
Cormier said his story was “100%” solid and that his sourcing “goes beyond” the two law enforcement sources in BuzzFeed News’ story.
“I am the individual who confirmed and verified that,” Cormier said, adding that he and Leopold were “able to gather information from individuals who know this happened.”
Reached for comment on Friday, Leopold referred questions to BuzzFeed News spokesperson Matt Mittenthal.
In a statement, Mittenthal vigorously stood by BuzzFeed News’ story and denounced online criticism that Leopold faced on Friday, much of which came from Trump supporters using his past to discredit Thursday’s report.
“Jason is one of the best journalists in the world, and he has proven it, with reporting that’s been months ahead of developments in the Mueller investigation,” Mittenthal said.
“His and Anthony’s work has been proven to be true at every turn — and it’s interesting that these personal attacks are surfacing only now, as the facts become more dangerous for the individuals involved.”
“BuzzFeed News stands by this story 100%.”
end quotes
Don’t you just love this stuff, people?
And that takes us to these closing words from Trump attorney Rudolph Giuliani, as follows:
“Any suggestion — from any source — that the President counseled Michael Cohen to lie is categorically false.”
“Michael Cohen is a convicted criminal and a liar.”
“To quote the prosecutors, he has traded on ‘a pattern of lies and dishonesty over an extended period of time’ and for that ‘he is going to pay a very, very serious price.'”
“Today’s claims are just more made-up lies born of Michael Cohen’s malice and desperation, in an effort to reduce his sentence.”
end quotes
And that is where matters stand right now, people, but as I said, this is a story that seems incapable of going away now that BUZZFEED and Adam Schiff have staked their reputations on it, so as always, so tuned for further developments, and the way this story is rolling, they are bound to be doozies!
And while we are on this subject of “investigative reporting,” and given we have this interlude while we wait for further developments in the farce, let us take a moment to delve what the relationship would have been between Trump, the non-lawyer businessman, and Michael Cohen, himself a member of the bar in New York state, and the best source of information on that subject that I can think of is to go directly to the source, itself, which in this case is a March 2003 address to the Albany, New York Bar Association, known in the corrupt ****-hole of New York as the “Bar Association of the stars,” given that the state’s top judges are members of that bar association, given by then-bar association president Michael P. Friedman, as follows:
Does anyone really think lawyering involves ethical behavior?
Some people do.
There are courses in legal ethics required for admission to the bar.
A separate test in legal ethics is supposed to measure one’s moral fitness for the practice of law.
We are required to have a few hours of ethical training as part of mandatory Continuing Legal Education.
Whoop Dee Doo.
Did you ever sit through one of these lectures?
For the most part they are lessons in how not to get sued, i.e. “Don’t steal your client’s money”; “Don’t take a case if you mdon’t know what you are doing”; and my personal favorite, “Don’t have sex with your client.”
Does any of this have to do with ethics, i.e. the betterment of society, moral duty or the distinction between good and bad?
I don’t think so.
I recently spoke to a class at Hartwick College on legal ethics.
They were struggling with a truly moral issue, i.e. the termination of life and the role of the health care professional.
As I spoke I realized that the practice of law is essentially amoral.
Our advice to clients is not designed to guide anyone in ethical behavior.
We do not exist to tell anyone what is right and wrong.
We are all but prohibited from doing so.
Our duty is to advise of the legal consequences of actions, and to promote the interests of our client within the boundaries of the legal system.
For this reason, we do not necessarily advise the guilty to accept their punishment, nor do we chastise the adulterer, the negligent driver and the trespasser.
We advise.
****
So, we don’t deal in fairness, we deal in legal results, without regard to ethics.
You think clients come to us for our opinions on good and evil?
Think again, Jack.
We are not the clergy.
After all, it is just “Ethical Considerations” in the Code of Professional Responsibility, as in “OK, I’ve considered it, now here’s what we do. . .”
end quotes
So, given that, does anyone in here think Trump went to Michael Cohen, the New York lawyer, for his opinions on good and evil?
If so, think again, Jack.
Michael Cohen was not the clergy, afterall.
He did not exist to tell anyone, including Trump, what was right and wrong.
He was all but prohibited from doing so.
His duty was to advise Trump of the legal consequences of actions, and to promote the interests of his client within the boundaries of the legal system.
Did he do that by lying to Con gress?
A question for our times that perhaps BUZZFEED and Adam Schiff can put their heads together, along with Jerry Nadler, to give us an answer to.
In the meantime, as always, stay tuned for further developments as they happen, when they happen.
And that above takes us back to the CBS News story “Schiff wants Cohen to testify to House Intel Committee” by Holly Rosenkrantz on 20 January 2019, where Burbank, California Democrat Adam Schiff poses the following conundrums to we, the American people, as follows: “Congress has a fundamental interest in two things: First, in getting to the bottom of why a witness came before us and lied, and who else was knowledgeable that this was a lie.”
Well, Adam, let me step in here as one of your fellow American citizens who is not nearly so confused as you so obviously are to help you out here by telling you that Michael Cohen lied to you because he is a New York lawyer, and that is what they do.
Why are you surprised by that?
Don’t lawyers lie out in California too?
Or is it truly different out there, perhaps because there is more sun?
And do you really think, Adam, that lawyering in New York state involves ethical behavior?
There are of course, courses in legal ethics required for admission to the bar in New York state, and a separate test in legal ethics is supposed to measure one’s moral fitness for the practice of law, and lawyers like Michael Cohen are required to have a few hours of ethical training as part of mandatory Continuing Legal Education, but you know what, Adam?.
Whoop Dee Doo, dude.
You’re a HOT SHOT Harvard lawyer, Adam, did you ever sit through one of these lectures?
If you did, you know first hand that for the most part they are lessons in how not to get sued, i.e. “Don’t steal your client’s money”; “Don’t take a case if you mdon’t know what you are doing”; and my personal favorite, “Don’t have sex with your client.”
And Adam, does any of that have to do with ethics, i.e. the betterment of society, moral duty or the distinction between good and bad?
I don’t think so, Adam, nor do I believe you and Jerry Nadler do, because you know as I do that the practice of law is essentially amoral, which is to say lacking a moral sense; unconcerned with the rightness or wrongness of something, unprincipled, without standards.
So Adam, dude, should we really be surprised that Michael Cohen is lying to you?
Afterall, Adam, in New York state, his advice to clients like Trump was not designed to guide anyone in ethical behavior, starting with Trump himself.
In New York state, Adam, lawyers like Michael Cohen do not exist to tell anyone what is right and wrong and they are all but prohibited from doing so.
His duty to Trump was to advise of the legal consequences of actions, and to promote the interests of his client within the boundaries of the legal system. which we both know are quite nebulous.
Simply said, Cohen was the advisor.
As such, like all other lawyers in New York state, Cohen didn’t deal in fairness, he dealt in legal results, without regard to ethics, which is why the dude is going to jail, when you think about it.
Do you think Trump went to Cohen for his opinions on good and evil?
Think again, Adam.
Cohen was not the clergy.
After all, Adam, it is just “Ethical Considerations” in the Code of Professional Responsibility, as in “OK, I’ve considered it, Donald, now here’s what we do. . .”
Does that help you out, Adam?
Does that help you to understand?
Yes, I thought it would, and Adam, you have yourself a very nice day.
And people, seriously can anyone believe this Washington Post, lately, which rag tells us everyday that “democracy dies in darkness” at the same time it is spewing mountains of pure hog**** intended to create that very darkness, as if we all were as stupid as those who reside within the confines of the Washington Beltway and get all their news from the Washington Post, never knowing the difference between horse**** and fact, and here I am referring the Washington Post story “Michael Cohen says Trump and Giuliani threatened him. Does that amount to witness tampering?” by Deanna Paul, who may still be sucking her thumb, or a Binky, based by her work product on 24 January 2019, where we are fed this dose of hog****, as follows:
President Trump’s former personal attorney Michael Cohen indefinitely postponed his upcoming congressional testimony Wednesday, citing “ongoing threats against his family from President Trump” and his attorney Rudolph W. Giuliani.
end quotes
STOP IT, Deanna Paul, just STOP IT!
Stop treating us with such contempt – we are not stupid and we are not uninformed!
POINT I: Michael Cohen is a witness to nothing, so he can’t be tampered with.
He was going to go in and put on a show before the FIRST DEMOCRAT TRIUMVIRATE of Adam Schiff, Jerry Nadler and Isaiah Cummings and tell a lot of lies like a trained parrot for them based on a bull***** BUZZFEED story about Mueller having evidence that Trump told Cohen to lie, and then Mueller did the unexpected by coming out and telling everyone the BUZZFEED article was false, and all of a sudden, “WHOOPSIE-DOODLE, boys, we got a problem,” so Schiff, Nadler and Cummings all sat down together and concocted this ruse, which in this case, is simply preposterous (contrary to reason or common sense; utterly absurd or ridiculous as in “a preposterous suggestion” with such apt synonyms as foolish, stupid, ludicrous, farcical, laughable, comical, risible, harebrained, asinine, inane, nonsensical, pointless, senseless, insane, unreasonable, irrational, illogical, outrageous, shocking, astonishing, monstrous, unbelievable, incredible, unthinkable) to think tRUMP threatened the lying scumbag lawyer Michael Cohen because Cohen is no more a witness to anything than is the man-in-the-moon, or the cow that jumped over the moon, for that matter.
That whole thing is a charade and farce.
Mueller blew the farce out of the water this weekend, and now, the lies Cohen was going to tell at that SHAM HEARING have been outed as lies by Mueller.
So how to pull that fat out of the fire.
Ah, yes, if you are Adam Schiff, Jerry Nadler and Isaiah Cummings – it is simple – just get Cohen to tell some more lies like “I’M SCARED, tRUMP SAID HE WOULD KILL EVERYBODY I EVER KNEW AND CARED ABOUT IF I TESTIFY AGAINST THEM, SO NOW I AM TOO SCARED TO TESTIFY.”
And the Washington Post, at least, will believe that.
However, outside of the Washington Post, and people inside the Washington Beltway, there is nobody else in America that is stupid enough to believe that horse****, and that is POINT I, which takes us to POINT II, which is why the Washington Post is bending over backwards to make a hero out of a lying scumbag lawyer like Michael Cohen.
Is it professional courtesy?
Now, let’s delve a bit further here to see exactly what the Washington Post is calling “witness tampering,” here, to wit:
In December, Trump harangued special counsel Robert S. Mueller III and witnesses to his ongoing Russia investigation.
One tweet went after Cohen, a week after he pleaded guilty of lying to Congress about the president’s real estate project in Russia, alleging that Cohen lied to Mueller and demanding his former fixer “serve a full and complete sentence.”
end quotes
Unbelievably, and incredibly, the Washington Post is calling that an “overt attack” on Cohen, which then takes us to this from that same Washington Post article, as follows:
Legal experts called the missives a newsworthy development that could amount to evidence of obstructing justice.
end quotes
HUH?
A newsworthy development that could amount to evidence of obstructing justice?
That charge is ludicrous, given that Cohen had already pleaded guilty to lying to Congress, and all Trump did was to say he should complete his full sentence, which is how a lot of loyal Americans who don’t like lying, scumbag lawyers like Cohen being lionized, glorified, honored, exalted, acclaimed, admired, commended, praised, extoled, applauded, hailed, made a fuss over, made much of, cried up, venerated, eulogized, sang paeans to, reverenced, paid homage to, paid tribute to, put on a pedestal, hero-worshiped, idolized, and adulated by the Washington Post feel about it.
Getting back to the horse**** spew from the Washington Post, we have this gem, to wit:
Norman Eisen, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, said in December that the most striking thing was that there were two statements in proximity.
“It comes very close to the statutory definition of witness tampering,” he said.
“He may have crossed the legal line.”
end quotes
Oh, really, Norman dude, do tell.
Saying publicly that a self-confessed liar should serve his time in prison comes very close to the statutory definition of witness tampering?
That is so much horse**** in so few words that it simply boggles the mind, Norman, and makes you sound like you are off your rocker!
And here we might note that from 2007 to 2009, Norman was active in the presidential campaign of his law school classmate Barack Obama before joining the transition team of then-President-elect Obama as deputy counsel, and on January 20, 2009, Obama named him Special Counsel for Ethics and Government Reform in the White House, which makes us have to wonder as to how impartial Norman is being here, as well as why the Washington Post sought him out as one of its “legal experts” who could be trusted to sayl Trump saying Cohen should serve his full sentence a “newsworthy development” that could amount to evidence of “obstructing justice.”
Only if one happens to be brain-dead, which takes us back to the Washington Post as follows:
Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-Va.) called it “serious” then, adding that “the President of the United States should not be using his platform to influence potential witnesses in a federal investigation involving his campaign.”
end quotes
Uh, Mark, dude, let me help you out here – Cohen’s days as a “potential witness” in a federal investigation are over!
The dude is a convicted liar, not a potential witness, and he is on his way to prison, where he belongs, not to the witness stand.
The FIRST TRIUMVIRATE of Schiff, Nadler and Cummings hoped to get a bevy more of lies out of Cohen before he went behind bars, tis true, but that scheme just got blown out of the water by Mueller, which destroyed any further value Cohen’s lies would have to THE FIRST TRIUMVIRATE, and now we have this ruse going on to explain why Cohen will no longer be there to tell his lies, which takes us to this batch of horse**** as follows:
“Donald Trump is not acting like an innocent man, he is acting like he is afraid of the truth,” former acting solicitor general Neal Katyal said Wednesday.
end quotes
WHAT?
Are you kidding me?
What truth, Neal?
What possible truth could a convicted liar like Michael Cohen have to tell us now?
And that brings us to this word from the FIRST TRIUMVIRATE, brought to us by the Washington Post, as follows:
Cohen was scheduled to testify publicly before the House Oversight Committee on Feb. 7, at the invitation of the committee’s chairman, Rep. Elijah E. Cummings (D-Md.).
In a joint statement, Cummings and Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Mass., chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, acknowledged Cohen’s “legitimate concerns,” adding that “efforts to intimidate witnesses, scare their family members, or prevent them from testifying before Congress are textbook mob tactics that we condemn in the strongest terms.”
end quotes
Textbook mob tactics that they condemn in the strongest terms, people!
So how about that now will you!
If that is not pure bull****, then nothing will ever be, but since these Democrats and the Washington Post are hanging tough here, and trying to brazen their way though with storms of more bull**** intended to bury democracy in darkness, it is obvious this story is still far from over, so please, stay tuned and don’t touch that dial as we wait for further developments as they happen.
And to see the total bull**** nature of this Washington Post story entitled “Michael Cohen says Trump and Giuliani threatened him. Does that amount to witness tampering?” by Deanna Paul, who may still be sucking her thumb, or a Binky, based by her work product on 24 January 2019, where we were fed this dose of hog**** that President Trump’s former personal attorney Michael Cohen indefinitely postponed his upcoming congressional testimony Wednesday, citing “ongoing threats against his family from President Trump” and his attorney Rudolph W. Giuliani, all we need do is turn to a Boston Globe story entitled “Michael Cohen subpoenaed to testify before Senate Intelligence Committee” by Michael Sisak and Eric Tucker, Associated Press, on January 24, 2019, the same day as the bull**** Washington Post story, wherein we learn as follows. to wit:
WASHINGTON (AP) — A Senate committee has subpoenaed President Donald Trump’s former personal lawyer Michael Cohen, his attorney said Thursday, and Cohen intends to comply with the interview demand related to the Russia investigation.
The development comes one day after Cohen postponed his public testimony to a House committee.
Lanny Davis, a lawyer for Cohen, disclosed the subpoena from the Senate Intelligence Committee in a one-sentence statement, and later told The Associated Press in a text message that “we will comply and hope to agree upon reasonable terms, ground rules and a date.”
Cohen earlier delayed his Feb. 7 appearance before the House Committee on Oversight and Reform on the advice of his legal team, citing ongoing cooperation in special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation and threats against his family.
end quotes
So WHOA, people, now what is up with that?
Out of one side of his mouth, we have the lying scumbag lawyer Michael Cohen saying he is too scared to testify, and now, here we have his lawyer (do all lawyers have lawyers?) telling us in a text message that “we will comply and hope to agree upon reasonable terms, ground rules and a date.”
They hope to agree upon reasonable terms, ground rules and a date?
HUH?
The dude is a convicted criminal, people – so what is up with this hope to agree upon reasonable terms, ground rules and a date?
Why is this criminal lawyer being treated with such respect here?
And getting back to the bull**** being spewed here by the Cohen team, we have this from the Boston Globe story, as follows:
Trump, along with his attorney, Rudy Giuliani, have publicly urged the Justice Department to investigate Cohen’s father-in-law, insinuating the Cohen relative was part of some unspecific criminal activity.
“If he wants to criticize Cohen, he can,’’ Davis said in an interview Thursday.
“Obviously, picking on his family publicly is a way of silencing him or intimidating him.”
“And certainly he has engendered great fear in his extended family, which is why we postponed it.’’
end quotes
Talk about laying it on thick (when someone is laying it on thick, they are exaggerating a statement in order to try to impress people), people, that Cohen lawyer is a master at the art form, which takes us back to the Boston Globe as follows:
Democrats have suggested they may subpoena Cohen to compel his testimony and the committee’s chairman, Rep. Elijah Cummings, said Cohen could be brought from prison to appear before Congress.
‘‘We will get his testimony,’’ Cummings said.
end quotes
Yeah, right, Elijah, dude, we’re sure you will!
In the meantime, since we are on the subject of glorifying criminals like this lying scumbag lawyer Michael Cohen, and FAKE NEWS, we have what very much appears to be a case of the Washington Post bending over backwards to defend the FAKE NEWS from BUZZFEED, the same people who brought us Tasty, the infamous exploding watermelon, in the story “BuzzFeed’s stumble is highest-profile misstep at a time when press is under greatest scrutiny” by Paul Farhi on January 19, 2019, were we are told as follows:
BuzzFeed News’s apparently mistaken story about Michael Cohen and President Trump is the highest-profile misstep yet for a news organization during a period of heightened and intense scrutiny of the press, as the special counsel’s office issued a thorough rebuke of the website’s story published Thursday.
end quotes
Actually, BUZZFEED’s “apparently mistaken story” was a total snow job, pure bull**** from front to back, which takes us to this breaking story from Variety entitled “BuzzFeed Layoffs Gut National News Desk, National Security Team” by Janko Roettgers, Senior Silicon Valley Correspondent, where we are brought up to date on that story as follows:
New details trickled out about the layoffs across BuzzFeed’s news division Friday, and the picture hasn’t been pretty: The publication’s entire national news desk has been laid off, as has almost the entire national security team, according to a source close to the company as well as tweets from affected writers and editors.
CEO Jonah Peretti painted the layoffs as a necessary step to “focus on content that is working” in a company-wide memo.
However, some questioned Friday whether the company was really focusing on “content that is working” with these layoffs.
BuzzFeed’s national news and national security teams broke some major stories on the Trump administration, Russia’s use of social media to shift public opinions in the United States, and other important subjects.
end quotes
So much for BUZZFEED, and for those who don’t know him, Paul Farhi is The Washington Post’s media reporter and he started at The Post in 1988 and has been a financial reporter, a political reporter and a Style reporter, which makes one wonder why he seems to be trying to defend BUZZFEED’s bull**** story that was debunked by Mueller over the weekend, as follows:
Reporters at the Guardian, CNN, McClatchy News and other outlets have published disputed, suspect or uncorroborated stories about Trump and the investigation swirling around him since special counsel Robert S. Mueller III began his probe 21 months ago.
Each instance has elicited cries of “fake news” from the president and his supporters, stoking the claim that the mainstream media is biased and irresponsible.
But these disputed stories have tended to be about distinct events or actions; they were effectively clues rather than conclusions about Trump’s potential criminality.
BuzzFeed’s story on Thursday, written by Jason Leopold and Anthony Cormier, was of a different nature and magnitude: It reported that prosecutors had detailed evidence that Trump had directed Cohen to lie to Congress about Trump’s proposed office tower project in Moscow in 2016 — a direct accusation of presidential criminality.
Democrats argued that would be an impeachable offense, if proved.
The big claim led to a big fall on Friday.
In an extraordinary statement, Mueller’s office cast doubt on BuzzFeed’s report.
“BuzzFeed’s description of specific statements to the special counsel’s office, and characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office, regarding Michael Cohen’s congressional testimony are not accurate,” the statement said, challenging the central thrust of BuzzFeed’s explosive story — that Mueller’s team had detailed evidence of felonious acts by the president.
The fact that the normally buttoned-up special counsel’s office felt compelled to issue a statement suggests that the story’s conclusions were too baldly stated and too consequential to stay unchallenged.
In effect, Mueller’s office seemed to be saying that BuzzFeed went too far and got some things wrong, though it did not say how or what.
Now, come on, people – Mueller’s office did not “seem to be saying” that BuzzFeed went too far and got some things wrong, it stated explicitly that the story was inaccurate – “BuzzFeed’s description of specific statements to the special counsel’s office, and characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office, regarding Michael Cohen’s congressional testimony are not accurate.”
Is that statement at all ambiguous?
The Washington Post seems to think so, as we see from the following:
In fact, what it didn’t say was important, too.
It didn’t say Mueller had no evidence that Trump had sought to influence Cohen — just that BuzzFeed’s description of such statements was inaccurate.
Nor did it spell out which reported statements were inaccurate and in what way.
Further, it offered no details about how BuzzFeed had mischaracterized any evidence that Mueller has collected.
end quotes
Can you believe this ****, people?
Getting back to the Washington Post story, we have:
This gave the online news organization a small bit of daylight and some hope of vindication.
end quotes
Some hope of vindication (the action of clearing someone of blame or suspicion; proof that someone or something is right, reasonable, or justified)?
Yeah, okay, Paul, whatever you say, dude, but I’m not going to wait around and hold my breath waiting for that to happen, but you can, dude – be my guest, which takes us back to his story, as follows:
In response to Mueller’s office, Editor Ben Smith issued a statement saying BuzzFeed stood by its story.
He urged Mueller “to make clear what he’s disputing.”
The Washington Post’s reporting on Friday indicated that “the special counsel’s office seemed to be disputing every aspect of the story that addressed comments or evidence given to its investigators.”
BuzzFeed has been in the uncomfortable position of being alone on its Cohen story.
No other news organization has confirmed or duplicated the story through its own reporting since BuzzFeed published it — typically a bad sign for the veracity of any reported allegation because scoops are often matched within hours when a major story breaks.
end quotes
So why then the effort to make BUZZFEED seem like the aggrieved party here?
And that takes us back to the Washington Post story where we are fed this line of bull****, to wit:
Under Smith’s tenure, BuzzFeed News has split from the main BuzzFeed site and become a source of serious investigative journalism and political reporting.
end quotes
Serious investigative journalism, people?
And that takes us back again to the story as follows:
Mueller’s spokesman, Peter Carr, has been a font of “no comments” to reporters since the special counsel’s office began looking in May 2017 into Russian involvement in the 2016 election.
He has remained silent amid tens of thousands of stories about Mueller’s investigation, even as some of these press reports appeared to go off track.
CNN has published at least two disputed stories on the Russia probe.
The first, in June 2017, reported that Congress was investigating a Russian investment fund with ties to Trump transition officials.
CNN retracted the article, which was based on a single anonymous source, but never said it was inaccurate; it also forced three journalists responsible for its publication to resign.
A second CNN article in July reported that Cohen intended to tell Mueller that Trump had approved a fateful meeting at Trump Tower in June 2016 between Russian operatives and his top campaign officials, Manafort, Donald Trump Jr. and son-in-law Jared Kushner.
Although one of the story’s key sources — Cohen’s lawyer, Lanny Davis — recanted his support for the claim after publication, CNN has also stood by this story, which was co-written by Carl Bernstein, one of The Post’s legendary Watergate reporters.
end quotes
Ah, yes, Lanny Davis, people, Michael Cohen’s lawyer who is telling us that Cohen feels threatened by Trump so he can’t testify to Schiff, Cummings, and Jerry Nadler, but he can testify to the Senate as long as they can agree upon reasonable terms, ground rules and a date, as if Cohen were a rock star trying to line up a gig at the Metropolitan Opera in New York City, and while he had to eat his words in the fake CNN story, this time around everything he is saying is spot-on gospel truth, which takes us back to the Washington Post story, as follows:
Ironically, Trump can now rely on his nemesis, Mueller, to advance his critique of BuzzFeed and the press.
Speaking to reporters Saturday, Trump called the BuzzFeed story “phony” and said the media has lost its credibility.
“I think that the Buzzfeed piece was a disgrace to our country.”
“It was a disgrace to journalism, and I think also that the coverage by the mainstream media was disgraceful, and I think it’s going to take a long time for the mainstream media to recover its credibility,” he said.
Trump, who has called Robert Mueller’s investigation a “witch hunt,” said he appreciated the special counsel’s statement: “I appreciate the special counsel coming out with a statement last night.”
“I think it was very appropriate that they did so; I very much appreciate that.”
end quotes
Yes, indeed, people, democracy, which is an unstable form of government even in the best of times, dies when it is buried under a mountain of bull****, and from what I can gather here, the Washington Post is doing its damndest to kill it.
Why?
According to the Urban Dictionary, “campy drama,” which is what we are seeing today coming out of Washington, D.C. with this Michael Cohen saga, where a lying scumbag lawyer convicted of being a criminal is being canonized and lionized and made into an American hero by among others, the Washington Post, is defined as being so extreme that it has an amusing appeal, while being so over the top and farcical and intentionally exaggerated so as not to be taken seriously.
Found primarily in television, theatre and motion pictures, and the Washington Post, camp endeavors for satire and, for those who fully understand and appreciate the risible nature of its material, it’s not surprising when it develops a cult following, which takes us to a POLITICO article entitled “Michael Cohen’s lawyer says he will comply with subpoena to testify” by Katie Galioto and Darren Samuelsohn on 24 January 2019, as follows:
Former Trump attorney Michael Cohen will comply with a subpoena from the Senate Intelligence Committee to testify before that panel, Cohen’s lawyer Lanny Davis said Thursday.
“Of course he will honor the subpoena,” Davis said on MSNBC when asked if Cohen would testify.
“But what he will do as a result of the subpoena is a legal issue that would come down to reasonable discussions.”
Cohen, whose relationship with President Donald Trump dates back a dozen years, was scheduled to testify before the House Oversight Committee on Feb. 7 until he delayed his appearance indefinitely Wednesday because of “ongoing threats against his family.”
Davis, in a statement on Wednesday, accused Trump and Rudy Giuliani, the president’s personal attorney, of making public comments in interviews and on social media that fueled the threats against Cohen.
On Thursday, Davis said there should be a criminal investigation into Giuliani for witness tampering and intimidation, calling Trump’s lawyer “mentally unstable” for his alleged attacks on Cohen’s wife and father-in-law.
He also urged Congress to protect Cohen with a resolution of censure as special counsel Robert Mueller conducts his investigation into whether the president’s campaign colluded with Russia.
Cohen is scheduled to report to prison March 6 to serve a three-year sentence.
He pleaded guilty to charges of tax evasion and lying to Congress last November, a plea elicited in part by Mueller.
end quotes
“Risable,” of course, is defined as “such as to provoke laughter,” with such synonyms as “laughable, ridiculous, absurd, comical, amusing, chucklesome, hilarious, droll, farcical, slapstick, silly, facetious, ludicrous, hysterical, uproarious, riotous, sidesplitting, zany, and grotesque,” which brings us to the question of just who the hell is this Lanny Davis, anyway, with his call for a criminal investigation into Rudolph Giuliani, who looks ever so much like a gnome (a legendary dwarfish creature supposed to guard the earth’s treasures underground, or a small ugly person) for witness tampering and intimidation on the grounds that Giuliani, who is Trump’s lawyer, is “mentally unstable?”
According to his Wikipedia bio, and I am sure that he would be very welcome to come in here and correct me if I get any of this wrong, Lanny Jesse Davis, born December 12, 1945, and a Democrat, is an American political operative, lawyer, consultant, lobbyist, author, and television commentator.
Ah, yes, people – a political operative, like Roger Stone, which would help explain why he has so much political clout with the Democrats in Washington who are looking to destroy Trump and his family and all of his businesses because he had the temerity to beat Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential race, when everybody knows that it was really Hillary Clinton’s turn to be president, not Trump’s.
Getting back to Lanny and his political connections in Washington, where right now the dude is the cock-of-the-walk (the leader in a group, especially one with a conceited, domineering manner) mas far as the simpering Democrats in Congress are concerned, he is the co-founder and partner of the law firm of Davis Goldberg & Galper PLLC, and co-founder and partner of the public relations firm Trident DMG, and from 1996 to 1998, he served as a special counsel to President Bill Clinton, and was a spokesperson for the President and the White House on matters concerning campaign-finance investigations and other legal issues.
So no wonder the dude is so big inside the Beltway – he has what is known down there as real street creds, having been tied in with Bill Clinton as he was.
Tying all of that background into today, in July 2018, Davis was hired by Michael Cohen, a former personal attorney to Donald Trump, to represent him as co-counsel in the Stormy Daniels–Donald Trump scandal, and Davis later represented Cohen when he pleaded guilty to tax fraud, bank fraud, and violation of campaign finance laws on August 21, 2018.
As an aside, Cohen might have been a lot better off to have hired himself a real criminal defense lawyer, instead of a poseur like Lanny Davis, but as they say, that is water over the dam now, and such is the way it goes.
Maybe Cohen thought Lanny Davis’s political connections and ties to the Democrats were going to save him, and if that is the case, Cohen sure made a bad decision, or maybe Cohen was just plain stupid.
Anyway, according to Wikipedia, Davis has been a regular television commentator and political and legal analyst for MSNBC, CNN, CNBC and network television news programs and he currently has a column called “Purple Nation” that appears regularly in a variety of publications spanning the political spectrum, including The Hill, The Huffington Post, FoxNews.com and The Daily Caller.
As an undergraduate at Yale, our Lanny was a member of the Delta Kappa Epsilon fraternity, and according to an item in U.S. News & World Report, as part of his initiation into the fraternity, Davis underwent hazing by, among others, the future President of the United States George W. Bush.
After that ordeal, Davis went on to receive his law degree from Yale Law School in 1970 and it was there that he first met Hillary Clinton, and you know what, people – it is not at all surprising that her name would have to come into this campy farce, given that it is all about Hillary, the woman scorned, who is now getting her revenge against Trump and his family, because they are in the White House while she is wandering in the woods with a jug of Ripple for her solace and company.
As another aside, the Cape Charles Playhouse should put this together as a campy drama for summer stock theater and it would be a sell-out, of that I am sure.
Getting back to Lanny, from 1970 to 1972, the dude was National Director of Youth Coalition for Muskie, the youth organization of Edmund S. Muskie’s unsuccessful campaign for the 1972 Democratic Party Presidential nomination, and in 976 Davis ran for Congress as a Democrat in Maryland’s 8th congressional district and lost to Republican Newton Steers.
It of course is of note that Lanny, like myself and many others in America less well off than he, was of an age where he should have been eligible for the draft, but there is no mention whatsoever as to how he managed, like Bill Clinton, to have avoided military service in Viet Nam.
Getting back to Lanny’s political connections, which are all important here, Lanny served three terms (1980–1992) on the Democratic National Committee representing the State of Maryland, and he was the treasurer for “Joltin’ Joe” Lieberman’s Reuniting Our Country PAC.
Lanny then served as special counsel to the President from 1996 to 1998, during which time he also was the spokesman for Clinton in issues regarding campaign finance investigations and other legal issues, including President Clinton’s impeachment trial.
After leaving the White House, Davis returned to Patton Boggs where he worked as a lobbyist for the nation of Pakistan prior to the attacks of September 11, 2001, and in 2003, Lanny became a partner in Washington, D.C. office of the law firm Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe where he provided counseling to corporations and government contractors on crisis management.
He left that firm in late 2009 to join McDermott Will & Emery, but separated from the firm seven months later to open his own company, Lanny J. Davis & Associates and he was a senior advisor and spokesman for the Israel Project.
In 2009, he did “damage control for hawkish Democratic congresswoman Jane Harman over the American Israel Public Affairs Committee leak story”.
In January 2012 Davis then launched a new public affairs firm, Purple Nation Solutions, and he also joined the Philadelphia-based law firm of Dilworth Paxson L.L.P. in March 2012, practicing out of the firm’s Washington office and focusing on “legal crisis management,” so we are talking about a dude with some real political horsepower here.
In October 2012 Davis was the subject of a CBS Sunday Morning segment where he took investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson behind the scenes into the world of lobbying, focusing on his work for eHealthInsurance.
In 2016, at the age of 70, Davis co-founded the law firm of Davis Goldberg & Galper with partners Adam Goldberg and Joshua Galper, stating that he needed to continue supporting his family but was too busy to handle his workload by himself, and in addition to co-founding Davis Goldberg & Galper, Davis started a new PR firm, called TridentDMG, in partnership with Eleanor McManus, who had worked with Davis since 2010 and previously served as a senior producer for CNN’s “Larry King Live.”
Then, in July 2018, Davis was hired by Michael Cohen, a former personal attorney to Donald Trump, to represent him as co-counsel in the Stormy Daniels–Donald Trump scandal, and in keeping with the script of this campy political passion play, Davis encouraged Cohen to violate lawyer-client confidentiality by revealing that he and Trump had discussed a payment surrounding a different affair with model Karen McDougal.
Davis later revealed that Cohen had secretly recorded the conversation with Trump, and he released a tape of the conversation to CNN, which played it on the air.
On it, Trump and Cohen can be heard discussing how to make a payment for “all of that info regarding our friend David,” interpreted as meaning David Pecker, the head of American Media which publishes the National Enquirer.
Having set the wheels of Trump’s destruction in motion, Davis continued to serve as Cohen’s attorney when Cohen came under federal criminal investigation by the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, and papers and other materials were seized from Cohen in April 2018 under a subpoena.
Davis then helped Cohen to negotiate a plea bargain under which he agreed to plead guilty to several charges in return for leniency in sentencing and on August 21, Cohen pleaded guilty to eight charges: five counts of tax evasion, one count of making false statements to a financial institution, one count of willfully causing an unlawful corporate contribution, and one count of making an excessive campaign contribution at the request of a candidate or campaign.
Reminds me of a quote I made to the Albany, New York Times Union, where, when asked about me representing myself in false criminal charges brought against me by the Democrats after a failed vehicular assault intended to tamper with me as witness against corruption in New York state on the grounds that someone who represents himself as a fool for a client, my response was I would rather have a fool for a client as opposed to a fool for a lawyer, which takes us back to this campy drama, as follows:
After Cohen’s guilty plea and conviction, Davis made several public comments, indicating that Cohen is ready to “tell everything about Donald Trump that he knows”, and alluding to Cohen’s knowledge which could be used against Trump.
He later added that he believed Cohen would agree to testify before Congress, even without immunity, and to keep the campy drama going strong, Lanny also rejected the possibility of a presidential pardon from Trump, saying that Cohen would “never accept a pardon from a man that he considers to be both corrupt and a dangerous person in the oval office.”
Isn’t this some great stuff, people – Mel Brooks himself would have trouble coming up with lines like these, and no wonder the Washington Post loves this story so much, because Lanny Davis, the public relations guru, is writing it for them, which saves them the trouble of having to do any real investigative reporting themselves – just wait for Lanny to hand them the next installment, and into print it goes!
Getting back to reality here, in 2008, Davis supported Senator Hillary Clinton in her race for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States, and appeared on Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC as a surrogate for her, and after Hillary, the woman scorned, conceded, Davis went on to support Hussein Obama for president.
Currently, Davis appears weekly on three radio programs: America’s Morning News Radio Show with John McCaslin, WMAL’s Mornings on the Mall, and Andy Parks Live, and quite fittingly, he was a participant in the D.C.’s Funniest Celebrity competition in 2011, which should serve to give the convicted criminal Michael Cohen some comfort, perhaps.
As to “opinions and criticism,” Glenn Greenwald, a lawyer and columnist for Salon, criticized Davis in 2009 for Davis’s perceived failure to disclose his clients, asserting that Lanny’s clients included dictatorships and opponents of unions and health care reform, and according to Salon columnist Justin Elliot, Lanny “specializes in lobbying for controversial corporate and foreign clients, particularly those seeking Democratic representation in Washington,” and he has “built a client list that now includes oligarchic coup supporters in Honduras, a dictator in Equatorial Guinea, for-profit colleges accused of exploiting students, and a company that dominates the manufacture of additives for infant formula”, as well as an “Ivory Coast strongman whose claims to that country’s presidency have been condemned by the international community and may even set off a civil war”.
Among his clients are “Ivory Coast leader and flagrant human rights violator Laurent Gbagbo” and “Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo, the longtime dictator of oil-rich Equatorial Guinea.”
“Just as Davis was assuring the American press that his client, Gbagbo, opposed violence, Gbagbo’s forces were in fact mounting a campaign of organized violence against the opposition”.
The latter representation has earned him criticism from human rights groups, who claim that he “appears to be engaged in little more than a whitewashing exercise designed to rehabilitate the image of the Obiang regime on the international stage,” and similar criticisms were aired in an acerbic exchange with Jon Lovett in The Atlantic.[41]
As I said, this was made for summer stock theater, and it is my hope that the Cape Charles Playhouse follows this up with a production, because it would be a hit and likely, it would make its way from Cape Charles to the big-time on the “Great White Way” in New York City, itself, where Lanny could be cast as a sort of modern-day Snidely Whiplash.
To conclude this installment of this on-going docu-drama, some of Davis’s emails with Hillary Clinton were released to the public as part of the Hillary Clinton email controversy, and the flattering emails were characterized by some media members as “cringeworthy,” which takes us to a story in the Weekly Standard entitled “Lanny’s Letter to Hillary Is D.C.’s Most Cringe-Inducing Document Ever” by Michael Warren on September 2, 2015 where we are informed as follows:
The latest stash of emails from Hillary Clinton’s private server released by the State Department has (once again!) revealed Washington to be a particularly unbearable place, employing particularly insufferable people.
From Clinton’s email correspondence with her senior staff we can observe how those with proximity to power engage in rare forms of backstabbing, obsequiousness, pettiness, bad humor, and self-obsession.
There was the revelation that Huma Abedin, Clinton’s aide-de-camp who held down multiple six-figure salaries at outside consulting firms while making $135,000 at State, apparently complains about not getting “paid enough.”
Another top Clinton aide, Philippe Reines, was seen tattling on a colleague directly to the secretary.
“I for one loved that you finally called out the ogrish males on your staff who roll their eyes at womens [sic] issues and events,” Reines wrote to Clinton before calling out one such male staffer by name.
The Reines email might be the second most cringe-inducing document in Washington ever.
The top (so far!) prize, however, certainly goes to Clinton lawyer, advocate, and all-around flunky Lanny Davis.
In September 2010 Davis sent his “dear friend Hillary” an email with the subject line “Personal – a personal favor.”
What follows are two pages of over-the-top praise for the former first lady, more than a healthy dose of self-promotion on Davis’s part, several hand-wringing apologies for even bothering the great and powerful Hillary Clinton with such a terrible request, and four groveling “pleases.”
The email has to be seen to be believed:
end quotes
And with that, which certainly is plenty, I will rest.
And let me step in here in the name of veracity to say that when I said above here @ JANUARY 24, 2019 AT 7:29 PM, “Uh, (Sen.) Mark (Warner), dude, let me help you out here – Cohen’s days as a “potential witness” in a federal investigation are over – the dude is a convicted liar, not a potential witness, and he is on his way to prison, where he belongs, not to the witness stand,” according to the CNBC article “Despite delay, Michael Cohen will testify before 3 congressional committees before going to prison” by Dan Mangan on 14 February 2019, I was dead wrong, which goes to show how little I know about how politics really does work in Washington, D.C., where a convicted liar is the most-sought-after witness down there, as well as the media darling, to wit:
President Donald Trump’s former lawyer Michael Cohen will testify before three congressional committees before he enters prison on March 6, his attorney Lanny Davis said Wednesday.
end quotes
Now, there is an indication of just how wrong I was, people, not one, not two, but three, count’em people, three congressional committees, and as I say, in the spirit of veracity, I have to admit to admit it in here to the candid world.
Getting back to the CNBC narrative:
Those panels include the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, where Cohen’s testimony will be public.
end quotes
The House Oversight Committee, of course, is Elijah E. Cummings committee, and of interest to this discussion that committee, thanks to Nancy Pelosi, numbers among its members Democratic Socialist Alexandria “Sandy the Bartender from Queens” Ocasio-Cortez, our “Evita,” and the ignorant, foul-mouthed Democratic Socialist Rashida Tlaib, now world-famous for publicly calling Trump a “motherf—–” in front of her own children, as we learn from the USA TODAY article “Ocasio-Cortez, other progressives land spots on powerful committee poised to investigate Trump” by Joel Shannon on 23 January 2019, as follows:
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and numerous other progressive Democrats have been appointed to the influential House Oversight and Reform committee, according to a Tuesday release from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
Ocasio-Cortez — who has emerged as the face of a new movement of young, liberal-leaning Democrats — is set to join the investigative committee that will serve as “a check on the executive branch,” Chairman Elijah E. Cummings said in the days following the 2018 midterm election.
Among the other progressive Democrats appointed to the committee: Michigan Rep. Rashida Tlaib, who grabbed headlines in January for using a profanity in her call to impeach President Donald Trump.
The committee was ranked one of the most influential in Congress in 2014 by The Atlantic, which noted that the committee investigates allegations of fraud and abuse within the federal government.
When asked about the outspoken nature of several new appointees to the committee, Cummings was dismissive, Politico reports: “If I based the choices going on the committee based on what people said or their reputations or whatever, I probably wouldn’t have a committee.”
Calling the committee “a powerful check on the Trump administration,” Axios has gathered a list including dozens of potential subpoena targets for the committee.
The Associated Press, citing two Democratic congressional staffers who spoke on condition of anonymity, reported in November that the committee would likely seek Trump’s business tax returns and other company-related financial records.
Trump’s personal income taxes, which he withheld during the 2016 campaign and during his two years in office, were at that time expected to be sought by the House Ways and Means Committee.
end quotes
Yes, people, the Democrats are gunning for Trump, big-time, and in their zeal, they are stacking the deck against him with certified and guaranteed Trump haters like AOC and Rashida Tlaib.
As to Rashida Tlaib, for a vivid example of the political clout the ignorant, foul-mouthed Democratic Socialist drama queen now wields in this country, we have this Florida Sun-Sentinel article entitled “Florida official may be reprimanded for comments about Muslim congresswoman” by Susannah Bryan on 16 January 2019 to consider, as follows:
FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. – An elected official from Hallandale Beach who accused a newly elected Muslim congresswoman of being an anti-Semite who might “blow up Capitol Hill” could face censure from her commission colleagues.
Commissioner Anabelle Lima-Taub has come under fierce attack in recent days for comments she made on Facebook after Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., was sworn into office.
Muslim advocacy groups have been demanding an apology from Lima-Taub after the South Florida Sun Sentinel broke the story on Monday.
Hallandale Beach Commissioner Michele Lazarow, who like Lima-Taub is Jewish, said Wednesday she plans to seek a public reprimand of her colleague for promoting bigotry, fueling hatred and creating a hostile environment for the city’s Muslim community.
Lima-Taub posted remarks on Facebook on Tuesday saying she had no plans to apologize or resign.
She could not be immediately reached for comment Wednesday.
“There is no religious litmus test to hold public office in the United States and any politician who would spout this kind of vile anti-Muslim rhetoric is clearly not fit to govern,” said Scott Simpson, a spokesman for the civil rights group Muslim Advocates.
Tlaib was sworn in to Congress on Jan. 3, only to hours later vow to help fellow Democrats go after President Donald Trump and “impeach the mother——.”
Five days later, Lima-Taub signed an online petition seeking to remove Tlaib from office and posted the petition on her personal Facebook page.
“Proudly signed,” Lima-Taub wrote.
“A Hamas-loving anti-Semite has NO place in government!”
“She is a danger and (I) would not put it past her to become a martyr and blow up Capitol Hill.”
Lazarow’s request for a public censure will come before the commission on Jan. 23.
“While individual commissioners have spoken out against Commissioner Lima-Taub’s hateful and bigoted remarks, I believe we need to take action as a city,” Lazarow said.
“We must send a message to our community that this behavior won’t be tolerated.”
Lazarow says she plans to withdraw her request for a reprimand should Lima-Taub “come to her senses” and issue a public apology.
“Instead of apologizing for her remarks, Commissioner Lima-Taub has doubled down, even going as far as demanding an apology from Congresswoman Tlaib,” Lazarow said.
“I believe we must take action to show all who are watching that Hallandale Beach isn’t a place that tolerates hatred and bigotry.”
The Florida chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) accused Lima-Taub of promoting xenophobic stereotypes.
“CAIR-Florida strongly condemns the disgraceful racist and Islamophobic statements published by Commissioner Annabelle Lima-Taub,” director Wilfredo Ruiz said.
“Her un-American, xenophobic statements establish that she is unfit to hold the commissioner’s seat.”
“She must apologize immediately and follow up with her resignation.”
end quotes
DO NOT, repeat, DO NOT say anything bad in any way about Rashida Tlaib – it is VERBOTEN!
And don’t forget it, either!
“Sandy” and Rashida then show up together as a song-and-dance team (hands down, people, there is no better dancer in the whole congress than Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez) in an article in The Hill entitled “Ocasio-Cortez, progressives accuse Trump of using socialism as scare tactic” by Juliegrace Brufke on 6 February 2019, where we are treated to the following:
Progressive Democrats accused President Trump of engaging in scare tactics for his warning in the State of the Union address about new calls for socialism in the United States.
“I thought it was great.”
“I think he’s scared,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) told reporters when asked about Trump’s remarks.
“He sees that everything is closing in on him and he knows that he’s losing the battle of public opinion.”
Ocasio-Cortez is a Democratic Socialist who has soared to political fame following her victory in a Democratic primary last summer.
end quotes
Ah, yes, people, our “Evita,” and don’t you just love here?
And isn’t she a natural to be on a congressional committee investigating Trump with an eye to either embarrassing him going into 2020, or forcing him out of office, that is looking to convicted liar Michael Cohen as their star witness in their endeavor?
Getting back to the story:
Trump in his speech said socialism had led to the economic and political disaster in Venezuela.
“Here, in the United States, we are alarmed by new calls to adopt socialism in our country.”
“America was founded on liberty and independence – not government coercion, domination, and control,” he said.
“We are born free, and we will stay free.”
“Tonight, we renew our resolve that America will never be a socialist country.”
Freshman Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), who has been a staunch critic of the president since taking office, accused Trump of not understanding what socialism is, adding she believes his rhetoric has further divided the country.
“I mean look, for me I think a lot of people don’t understand it (socialism).”
end quotes
Yeah, right, Rashida!
And there is the latest on this on-going campy drama.
Ah, yes, people, “campy drama!”
Found primarily in television, theatre and motion pictures, and the Washington Post, “camp,” defined as being so extreme that it has an amusing appeal, while being so over the top and farcical and intentionally exaggerated so as not to be taken seriously, endeavors for satire and, for those who fully understand and appreciate the risible nature of its material, it’s not surprising when it develops a cult following, which is what we are seeing today coming out of Washington, D.C. with this Michael Cohen saga, where a lying scumbag lawyer convicted of being a criminal is being canonized and lionized and made into an American hero by the Democrats now in power in Congress, which which takes us back to the CNBC story “Despite delay, Michael Cohen will testify before 3 congressional committees before going to prison” by Dan Mangan, where we have as follows:
Cohen had previously indefinitely postponed his appearance at that committee due to fears for his family’s safety.
end quotes
So staying with the drama queen aspects here of this Cohen saga, what has changed?
Is Cohen now under FBI or secret service protection?
Is that why he is no longer afraid to testify?
By way of review on that subject, a POLITICO article entitled “Michael Cohen’s lawyer says he will comply with subpoena to testify” by Katie Galioto and Darren Samuelsohn on 24 January 2019, informed us as to the alleged threats, as follows:
Cohen, whose relationship with President Donald Trump dates back a dozen years, was scheduled to testify before the House Oversight Committee on Feb. 7 until he delayed his appearance indefinitely Wednesday because of “ongoing threats against his family.”
Davis, in a statement on Wednesday, accused Trump and Rudy Giuliani, the president’s personal attorney, of making public comments in interviews and on social media that fueled the threats against Cohen.
On Thursday, Davis said there should be a criminal investigation into Giuliani for witness tampering and intimidation, calling Trump’s lawyer “mentally unstable” for his alleged attacks on Cohen’s wife and father-in-law.
He also urged Congress to protect Cohen with a resolution of censure as special counsel Robert Mueller conducts his investigation into whether the president’s campaign colluded with Russia.
end quotes
As to that alleged “collusion,” NBC NEWS recently had an article entitled “Senate panel has uncovered no direct evidence of conspiracy between Trump campaign and Russia” by Ken Dilanian on 12 February 2019, where we learn as follows:
WASHINGTON — After two years and 200 interviews, the Senate Intelligence Committee is approaching the end of its investigation into the 2016 election, having uncovered no direct evidence of a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia, according to both Democrats and Republicans on the committee.
“If we write a report based upon the facts that we have, then we don’t have anything that would suggest there was collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia,” Sen. Richard Burr of North Carolina, the Republican chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said last week in an interview with CBS News.
Burr was careful to note that more facts may yet be uncovered, but he also made clear that the investigation was nearing an end.
“We know we’re getting to the bottom of the barrel because there’re not new questions that we’re searching for answers to,” Burr said.
end quotes
Now, seriously, people, with the toxic politics of Washington. D.C., where the hate-filled Democrats are doing everything they can to harass and intimidate Trump, in an effort to either bring him under their control, as their lackey or running dog, or force him out of office, is that revelation going to end anything?
And of course it isn’t as we can see from the following from that same story, to wit:
Democratic Senate investigators who spoke to NBC News on condition of anonymity did not dispute Burr’s characterizations, but said they lacked context.
“We were never going find a contract signed in blood saying, ‘Hey Vlad, we’re going to collude,'” one Democratic aide said.
end quotes
But that is not going to stop them from searching for it, as we again see from that same story:
Now in power, House Democrats recently announced an expanded probe that will go beyond the 2016 election to examine whether any foreign government has undue financial influence on Trump or his family.
end quotes
Talk about the show that never ends, people, this is it, in spades.
Getting back to that story:
The Senate Intelligence Committee has been conducting the sole bipartisan inquiry, led by Burr and ranking Democrat Mark Warner of Virginia.
The committee has sifted through some 300,000 documents, investigators tell NBC News, including classified intelligence shedding light on how the Russians communicated about their covert operation to interfere in the 2016 election.
U.S. intelligence agencies assess that the operation began as an effort to sow chaos and morphed into a plan to help Trump win.
It included the hacking and leaking of embarrassing Democratic emails and the use of bots, trolls and fake accounts on social media to boost Trump, criticize Democrat Hillary Clinton and exacerbate political differences.
Democratic Senate investigators say it may take them six or seven months to craft their final report once they are done with witness interviews.
They say they have uncovered facts yet to be made public, and that they hope to make Americans more fully aware of the extent to which the Russians manipulated the U.S. presidential election with the help of some Trump officials, witting or unwitting.
The report, Democrats say, will not be good for Trump.
But they also made clear they haven’t found proof of their worst fear: That the president formed a corrupt pact with Russia to offer sanctions relief or other favorable treatment in return for Russian help in the election.
end quotes
So how much taxpayer money has been spent to date on this WITCH HUNT, for witch hunt is clearly is?
Mueller alone has blown through some $25 million already, but hey, it’s only money.
Getting back to the CNBC article “Despite delay, Michael Cohen will testify before 3 congressional committees before going to prison” by Dan Mangan on 14 February 2019, the campy drama concerning Cohen continues as follows:
Davis’s comments about Cohen’s revised plans to testify came a day after Cohen was blasted by Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr, R-N.C., for missing Tuesday’s originally scheduled appearance.
Cohen had asked for and received a postponement for that subpoenaed testimony due to lingering medical issues from recent shoulder surgery.
But Burr was fuming Tuesday after learning that Cohen had gone out Saturday night with his wife and friends at a New York City restaurant.
“He’s already stiffed us on being in Washington today because of an illness,” Burr said Tuesday.
“You have … on Twitter, a reporter reported he was having a wild night Saturday night eating out in New York with five buddies.”
“Didn’t seem to have any physical limitations.”
“And he was out with his wife last night.”
Davis on Tuesday night disputed Burr’s criticism, calling it “inaccurate.”
“Mr. Cohen was expected to and continues to suffer from severe post shoulder surgery pain, as confirmed by a letter from his surgeon, which was sent to Senator Burr and [Virginia Democratic Sen. Mark] Warner,” Davis said.
“The medication Mr. Cohen is currently taking made it impossible for him to testify this week.”
end quotes
If Hollywood was to try and stage this as grand farce, which it is, it would take them a hundred scriptwriters or more to come up with these same lines!
And that thought takes us to a Washington Post article entitled “House Intelligence chairman voices concern that Mueller’s scrutiny of Trump’s finances isn’t adequate” by Greg Miller on 11 February 2019, where smarmy little drama queen and twerp Adam Schiff re-enters the drama from stage right, walking into the party like he was walking on a yacht, his hat strategically dipped below one eye, his scarf, it was apricot, with one eye on the mirror as he watched himself gavotte, and all the Democrats dreamed that they’d be his partner, as follows:
The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee expressed concern Sunday that special counsel Robert S. Mueller III has not adequately scrutinized President Trump’s finances and said House investigators plan to probe Trump’s relationship with a bank implicated in Russian money laundering.
“We are not interested in our committee in whether he’s a tax cheat or not worth what he says he is,” Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) said in an appearance on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”
“What we are interested in is, does the president have business dealings with Russia such that it compromises the United States?”
end quotes
And notice how the dude can say that with a straight face, in the light of a Tribune Washington Bureau article entitled “Embattled Pelosi’s big survival weapon: money” by Anshu Siripurapu on 6/22/2017, as follows:
WASHINGTON — Here’s a huge reason Nancy Pelosi maintains her iron grip on House Democrats, even after another bruising — and in many party circles embarrassing — election loss: her ability to raise lots and lots of money.
The House Democratic leader has few current peers when it comes to pumping money into colleagues’ campaigns.
No other potential up-and-coming Democratic challenger to her leadership comes close.
Since 1990, she’s raised more than $9.2 million for party candidates, including $739,000 in the 2016 election cycle, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks contributions from candidate committees and affiliated PACs.
Pelosi’s office claims even loftier triumphs, saying she’s raised more than $500 million for Democrats since entering the party leadership in the early 2000s, including $141.5 million in the 2015-2016 cycle.
The totals, her office says, include money raised for the party not directly controlled by her committees.
Big donors to the party’s congressional campaign committee were also available to Pelosi through her “Speaker’s Cabinet” program, which gave them special access to the Democratic leader.
end quotes
“NEGATIVE NANCY NO” is two heartbeats away from the Oval Office, and she has been openly selling access to her office as speaker of the house to God-alone knows who, but of course Democrat Adam Schiff isn’t concerned about her compromising OUR government, because they are on the same team.
Getting back to that article:
Schiff voiced concern that Mueller has shied away from investigating Trump’s ties to the German lender, saying that “if the special counsel hasn’t subpoenaed Deutsche Bank, he can’t be doing much of a money laundering investigation.”
Schiff was referring to reports last year that Mueller’s office had told Trump’s lawyers it was not seeking Deutsche Bank records related to Trump’s accounts or loans.
end quotes
Don’t you just love this stuff, people?
Getting back to the rest of that story, we have:
The House Intelligence Committee has sought to bolster its investigative staff with financial and forensic accounting experts, part of an expansion of the Trump-Russia probe since Democrats gained control of the chamber.
en d quotes
As I say, people, the show that never ends!
Stay tuned for the next installment after we take a pause for station identification, and don’t touch that dial!
Paul Plante you are certainly a prolific writer and take the time to thoroughly research the facts. Enjoy your articles and commentary. Are you retired or do you work in the news media. Just curious. Keep writing and telling the truth. Eventually even the left will see the light.
Good afternoon, MAGA, and thanks for the feedback – it is appreciated.
And I am just an old disabled VEET NAM veteran with a very low tolerance for BULL****, which we are being buried in these days.
And the only connection I personally have with “news media” was being a football for a time for it or them to kick around and malign because as a public official charged with enforcement of the NYS Public Health Law, I wouldn’t take bribes.
As to researching the facts, that is a discipline that was instilled in me when I was young by my teachers, this after WWII, who made it clear to me that as an American citizen, I had an OBLIGATION to know what was going on in the world around me each and every day, and as distasteful as it has become here in “modern” America, each day I make it a point to go through the news, collecting as many different points of view as possible.
It is nice to know the effort is appreciated.
I am one of those old people in this country who believes that old people have a further obligation to society to act as an institutional memory, which the Cape Charles Mirror allows me to do in here.
With respect to the Cape Charles Mirror, in his “Address to the People of the United States” in January 1787, Benjamin Rush, a signer of the Declaration of Independence, stated thusly:
It should be a constant injunction to the postmasters, to convey newspapers free of all charge for postage.
They are not only the vehicles of knowledge and intelligence, but the centinels of the liberties of our country.
end quotes
To which I say, yes, the Cape Charles Mirror most certainly is, and lucky us as a result.
Cut the crap, indeed, Adam Schiff!
That is the message that comes across loud and clear in the Washington Examiner article “Trey Gowdy slams Adam Schiff for seeing ‘things that nobody else can see’ about collusion” by Caitlin Yilek on 25 February 2019, where we have as follows:
Former Rep. Trey Gowdy mocked House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., on Sunday for spreading the narrative in recent weeks that there is “evidence in plain sight” of collusion between President Trump’s 2016 campaign and Russia.
end quotes
Now, focus in on the word “narrative” in that sentence where “narrative” is taken to mean “a story,” for that is what the little Twerp-o-crat Adam Schiff actually is – a story-teller, and as a story-teller, or narrative spinner, Adam Schiff is not confined to telling either truth or fact.
It is a story he is telling, afterall, and he is what is known in the trade as a “flannel-mouth,” which is one who speaks in a glib manner with the intent of deceiving or manipulating others, and that takes us back to the Washington Examiner article as follows:
The Fox News contributor and former federal prosecutor called Schiff a “three-eyed raven” — a reference to a supernatural figure in the “Game of Thrones” series — “who can see things that nobody else can see, says he has evidence, more circumstantial, not quite direct.”
“By the way for those who didn’t go to law school, there’s no such thing.”
“There’s no such thing as evidence that is not circumstantial or direct,” Gowdy told Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures.”
end quotes
Said another way, the “flannel-mouth” hack politician Adam Schiff thinks he can prey on our ignorance to fill our heads with bull**** so that we will do as he wishes which is to turn again st a duly-elected American president as we head into the 202 presidential election season, where Adam Schiff himself may be a Democrat presidential contender, if only he can succeed in taking Trump all the way down.
Getting back to the Washington Examiner article and how Adam Schiff is playing the game of Washington, D.C. party politics, we have:
Gowdy, who served as chairman of the House Oversight Committee before retiring from Congress at the end of the last term, also accused Schiff of only appearing on networks that are friendly to him and won’t press him on “his bombastic statement completely unsupported by the facts.”
end quotes
For a flannel-mouth like Adam Schiff, that right there is a very important point to consider – what talk show hosts will let him spin out his bull**** without question, and which won’t, which takes us back to this conclusion from the Washington Examiner, as follows:
Schiff has not said whether he’ll accept Mueller’s findings if they show no collusion between Trump’s campaign and Russia as his committee embarks on a sweeping investigation into Trump’s financial transactions and Russia,
end quotes
So obviously, this thread looks to be going for a while longer, so please stay tuned, as we wait to see what bull**** and whoppers Adam Schiff will try to feed us next.
“It’s laughable that anyone would take a convicted liar like Cohen at his word, and pathetic to see him given yet another opportunity to spread his lies.”
That was White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders in a statement Tuesday in the Washington Post article “Cohen plans scathing testimony about Trump, Russia and Stormy Daniels” by Karoun Demirjian and Matt Zapotosky on 26 February 2019, and you know what, people – I happen to agree with her, especially with respect to the use of the word “pathetic,” for pathetic it certainly is, as well as quite embarrassing for the nation that such a spectacle would even be taking place in the first place.
Travesty (“a false, absurd, or distorted representation of something”) is another apt word for it.
According to the Washington Post Article, this is what is now going on down there in the foetid swamp with regard to the lying lawyer named Michael Cohen all the Democrats have come to love, to wit:
President Trump’s former lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen is on Capitol Hill Tuesday where he is expected to deliver specific and scathing testimony about his former boss’s business interests in Russia and a scheme to buy the silence of adult film actress Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election.
His closed-door testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee marks the first of three highly anticipated appearances this week.
He is scheduled to testify publicly on Wednesday before the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, and again in private on Thursday with the House Intelligence Committee.
According to a person familiar with his planned testimony, Cohen intends to paint Trump as a liar, a cheater and a racist during his interviews with lawmakers.
end quotes
Now, that is rich, convicted liar Michael Cohen is going to now call Trump a liar, as if Michael Cohen is somehow credible, beyond the old saw of “it takes a liar to recognize a liar.”
But there is even more, as the Washington Post tells us, to wit:
He is expected to share anecdotes about Trump’s behavior — Daniels alleged she had an affair with Trump years ago, a claim the president denies — as well as his financial dealings, the person said.
The person spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to describe Cohen’s expected testimony.
end quotes
What are the odds that the person who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to describe Cohen’s expected testimony was Adam Schiff himself, besides him being the odd’s on favorite?
And then we come to this, to wit:
Lawmakers are likely to ask Cohen to explain his knowledge of a possible Trump Tower project in Moscow — the details of which he previously misrepresented to Congress, precipitating his guilty plea in federal court late last year.
Both intelligence committees are expected to press Cohen about how long into the 2016 presidential campaign he continued to pursue plans for a Trump Tower project in Russia.
Lawmakers also are expected to ask Cohen, who was closely involved in Trump’s financial affairs, whether any foreign actors — Russian or otherwise — may have leverage over the president, his children and close associates, or their business interests.
end quote
What is their obsession with this failed hotel project?
Why are they dwelling on it?
It is not illegal for a presidential candidate to be involved in private business dealings while running for president.
It is not illegal for an American to own property in Russia, or to do business in Russia.
So who cares about when Trump actually knew his hotel project was going to be a failure, in large part because he had an incompetent lying lawyer name Michael Cohen working on it for him?
By way of review with respect to lying Michael Cohen, the Democrat’s star witness against Trump in their vendetta to bring him down in retaliation for having beaten Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election, the Washington Post gives us these background details:
He was sentenced to three years in prison for those lies, along with financial crimes, and is scheduled to begin serving his time in May.
end quote
That is what makes Cohen such an attractive witness for the Democrats – the fact that he has already proven that he can lie and will lie, and now, if the Democrats want or need a certain story to be told, regardless of whether it is completely false, because the Democrats really don’t care for the truth, Cohen is their man, which takes us back to the Washington Post and the real purpose of these Cohen hearings, to wit:
Although topics related to Russia will be off-limits during Wednesday’s public hearing, it is possible that that testimony will have the most significant impact on Trump’s reputation, with Cohen expected to offer an unflattering, behind-the-scenes portrait of the president as a person and businessman.
end quotes
And that is exactly right – the purpose of the Democrats in having Cohen come before their “investigative” committees is to have Cohen offer them an unflattering, behind-the-scenes portrait of the president as a person and businessman, a portrait that in all likelihood has already been rehearsed and arranged in advance, or the Democrats would not be bothjering with Cohen if they were not already certain of what he is going to say.
All in all, this Democrat horse**** is pretty incredible, when you come right down to it, but don’t go away and don’t touch that dial, because there is more yet to come in this political farce intended to bring down a sitting American president to avenge the woman scorned, Hillary Clinton.
Never in my life in this country have I seen such a sick and sorry spectacle as took place today in the foetid swamp of Washington, D.C. with this scripted “testimony” of the convicted liar Michael Cohen before the House committee of Elijah Cummings.
Today, we watched a convicted liar who was invited as a star witness to appear before Elijah Cummings and his inquisition pour a huge bucket of slime all over a sitting American president, which he was encouraged to do by the Democrats on the prophet Elijah’s committee of presidential inquisition.
Incredible stuff all the way around.
The one positive thing the Democrats have now accomplished is establishing the extreme public vetting going back to every detail of their life starting with childhood that all presidential candidates in this country, starting with Democrats, must now undergo, before they can be considered serious presidential candidates.
If Trump has to undergo such scrutiny as was apparent today, with Democrat Rep. Jackie Speier asking Cohen whether Trump has a love child and if he has ever struck Melania Trump, then every presidential candidate in America, starting with the Democrats, must undergo the same level of scrutiny, including if they too have love children.
What a noisome little creature this Burbank, California Democrat congressman Adam Schiff really is, when one steps back to consider his actions as a congressperson, and here I am referring directly to the POLITICO article “Schiff: There is still ‘significant evidence of collusion’” by Quint Forgey on 03/24/2019, where we are treated to the following dose of Adam Schiff, as follows:
Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, defended his assessment Sunday that there exists “significant evidence of collusion” between President Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign and the Kremlin — despite word from the Justice Department that special counsel Robert Mueller will not be recommending any further indictments in his investigation into Russian election interference.
end quotes
Oh, really, Adam?
“Significant evidence of collusion” between President Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign and the Kremlin?
Is that what you are telling us, Adam, or trying to sell us?
If so, then where is it?
And here we need to drop back in time a bit to an NBC NEWS article with the inflammatory title “Schiff: Real question is if Trump is under the influence of a foreign power” by Ken Dilanian on 20 March 2019, where we have the following background to consider, to wit:
WASHINGTON — Nearly two years into his investigation, special counsel Robert Mueller has not accused any member of the Trump campaign of conspiring with the 2016 election interference effort — and it’s not clear whether he will.
end quotes
And that takes us back to a BBC article entitled “What Happened: The long list of who Hillary Clinton blames” by Anthony Zurcher, North America reporter on 13 September 2017, one year and six (6) months ago now, where we have this necessary background to consider, to wit:
The beauty of Hillary Clinton’s new book title, What Happened, is it can be interpreted in so many ways.
Perhaps it’s a definitive account of the 2016 presidential election. “Here’s what happened”.
Maybe it’s an exclamation, like someone reacting to an unexpectedly loud noise (or an electoral earthquake). “Yikes! What happened!?”
Then again, it could be a stern mom, who just walked in on the mess her children (the voters) made in the living room. “Whaaaaat happened …”
Or is she the dazed boxer, picking herself up off the canvas after getting knocked out by a surprise punch from her opponent.
“Wha-, wha-, what happened???”
It’s up to readers to decide for themselves, but in Mrs Clinton’s recent interviews and in her book, which was formally released on Tuesday, she offers plenty of explanations from which to choose.
Here’s a list of just some of the factors to blame for the fact that she’s hitting book stores across the country, while Donald Trump is redecorating the Oval Office.
end quotes
This IS all about Hillary Clinton losing the 2016 presidential election, afterall – all of these investigations and probes and interrogations and witch hunts, and on that long list, which includes James Comey, is the name Vladimir Putin, and the following including a statement from Hillary, the woman scorned, to wit:
“I never imagined that he would have the audacity to launch a massive covert attack against our own democracy, right under our noses – and that he’d get away with it.”
Although few knew it at the time, there was mounting evidence over the course of the 2016 election that Russia was attempting to influence the outcome.
Through hacking of Democratic Party emails and state electoral databases, social media advert purchases and bots, and the proliferation of political propaganda, the US intelligence community has concluded that Russian President Vladimir Putin was attempting to put his finger on the electoral scale in favour of the Republican.
Mrs Clinton, needless to say, is not amused.
What’s more, she is convinced that members of the Trump team colluded with Russia to help get the Republican nominee elected.
“There certainly was communication and there certainly was an understanding of some sort,” she said in an interview with USA Today.
end quotes
There it is, right before your eyes – Hillary, who is omnicious in addition to being above the law in this country because of who she is, is convinced that members of the Trump team colluded with Russia to help get the Republican nominee elected, and the Democrats bought that hook, line and sinker, and now, with Mueller not charging anyone on Team Trump with colluding with the Russians, Hillary and the Democrats have a real credibility problem here, as if they didn’t before, and so the witch hunts have to move off in other directions, so enter the old reliable GRAND INQUISITOR Adam Schiff to come on stage to pick up where Mueller left off after finding there was nothing to find, which takes us back to the NBC News article as follows:
But legal experts, along with the congressman leading the House Russia investigation, tell NBC News that the most important question investigators must answer is one that may never have been suitable for the criminal courts: Whether President Trump or anyone around him is under the influence of a foreign government.
“It’s more important to know what Trump is NOW than to know what he did in 2016,” said Martin Lederman, professor at the Georgetown University Law Center and former deputy assistant attorney general in the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel during the Obama administration.
“It’s more important to know whether he has been compromised as president than whether his conduct during the campaign constituted a crime.”
end quotes
Ah, yes, the good old Democrats – when they find one narrative failing, they simply change narratives, so now, instead of having Trump colluding with the Russians to become president, we now have Trump in thrall (the state of being in someone’s power; a slave, servant, or captive) to the Russians, which takes us back to the NBC News article as follows:
Whether Mueller will answer that question in the absence of criminal charges is unclear.
But in an interview with NBC News, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff said he is steering his investigation in a new direction to focus on it — and he will demand any relevant evidence compiled by the FBI or Mueller’s team.
The California Democrat also expressed concern that Mueller hasn’t fully investigated Trump’s possible financial history with Russia.
“From what we can see either publicly or otherwise, it’s very much an open question whether this is something the special counsel has looked at,” Schiff told NBC News.
end quotes
Ah, look there, people, Mueller has not really conducted the investigation into Trump that needed to be conducted, perhaps because he is too old, or never learned how to conduct a proper investigation, so it is time for smarmy (ingratiating and wheedling in a way that is perceived as insincere or excessive; synonyms: unctuous, smooth, slick, oily, greasy) little Adam Schiff to step in and save the nation from Trump and the Russians.
Adam, Adam, he’s the man, if he can’t save America, nobody can!
Yea, Adam!
Getting back to the new narrative as presented to us by NBC News, we have:
Schiff said the public testimony from former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen that in 2016 Trump stood to earn hundreds of millions of dollars from a secret Moscow real estate project is a staggering conflict-of-interest that must be fully explored.
end quotes
That must be explored?
That’s bullcrap, because that so-called deal,m which never was a deal in the first place, just a Trump pipe dream, has already been looked at six ways to Sunday and there is nothing there, which won’t stop Adam Schiff from looking at least one more time, what with the 2020 presidential season rapidly approaching, and the Democrats now on the defensive here with Mueller’s failure to prosecute anyone for collusion with the Russians to put Trump in office, as Hillary was maintaining.
And getting back again to the new narrative, to replace the old, failed narrative, we have:
“I certainly agree that the counterintelligence investigation may be more important than the criminal investigation because it goes to a present threat to our national security — whether the president and anybody around him are compromised by a foreign power,” Schiff said.
“That’s not necessarily an issue that can be covered in indictments.”
end quotes
RUN!
RUN!
RUN FOR YOUR LIVES, PEOPLE, THE RUSSIANS ARE HERE AND THEY NOW OWN THE WHITE HOUSE!
And back to the bull**** from Adam Schiff we go on that note:
“What Americans should be concerned about is whether the president’s Russia policy is not dictated by our national interest but is dictated by his desire to make hundreds of millions of dollars off a tower in Moscow,” Schiff said.
end quotes
Make hundreds of millions of dollars off a tower in Moscow?
HUH?
Adam, dude, what are you on about there – there is no tower in Russia!
You are overwrought (in a state of nervous excitement or anxiety as in “Adam Schiff was too overwrought to listen to reason,” with synonyms: tense, agitated, nervous, on edge, edgy, keyed up, worked up, highly strung, neurotic, overexcited, beside oneself, distracted, distraught, under a strain, frantic, frenzied, hysterical, panicky, restless, jittery, fidgety, jumpy), Adam, and it is causing you to be delusional dude.
And now, a word from our sponsors as we pause for station identification.
And how the horse**** from the Democrats is flowing in with regard to the smarmy and noisome Adam Schiff now that Mueller has said he found no evidence of the collusion that the oily Adam Schiff has been touting since a POLITICO article two (2) years ago entitled “Schiff: There is now ‘more than circumstantial evidence’ of Trump-Russia collusion” by Madaline Conway on 03/22/2017, where we had as follows:
Rep. Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said Wednesday that there is “more than circumstantial evidence now” to suggest that President Donald Trump’s campaign may have colluded with Russia’s attempts to disrupt the election, but he would not offer details.
“I can tell you that the case is more than that,” Schiff told Chuck Todd on MSNBC.
“And I can’t go into the particulars, but there is more than circumstantial evidence now.”
When Todd followed up, asking if he had “seen direct evidence of collusion,” Schiff would not say so directly, but insisted that he has seen some “evidence that is not circumstantial” and is worth investigating.
“I don’t want to go into specifics, but I will say that there is evidence that is not circumstantial and is very much worthy of investigation, so that is what we ought to do,” Schiff said.
end quotes
Now, two years later, that has been shown to be what it always was – mealy-mouth horse****, and the Democrats are now swarming in droves to surround the smarmy little Adam and try and protect him from reality, as we can see in the POLITICO article “McCarthy demands Schiff step down as intel chairman” by Kyle Cheney, Sarah Ferris and John Bresnahan on 03/25/2019 where we have House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) calling on Schiff to step down as Intelligence Committee chairman during an interview on Monday, as follows:
“[Schiff] owes the American public an apology,” McCarthy said.
“Schiff has met the standard that he has imposed on other members of Congress of when they should step back from their positions.”
“He has exceeded that standard, and there is no question he should step down from the Intel chairmanship.”
end quotes
And with that, we drop back in time for a moment to a Roll Call article entitled “The House Democrats Considering Leadership Bids — So Far” posted Jul 17, 2018 by Lindsey McPherson where we have this essential background, to wit:
Adam B. Schiff
The House Intelligence ranking member said he “certainly” would be interested in being chairman of that panel if Democrats retake the majority, but he seemed to leave the door open to other possibilities as well.
“I’m a team player,” the California Democrat said July 11.
“And right now, I think all of us should be spending more time making sure this is not an academic discussion.”
Typically, leaders in the top posts give up their committee posts to focus on their leadership duties.
Both committee and leadership posts involve fundraising and some travel to help get others elected.
“I want to be in the majority, and so I’m traveling the country, doing everything I can to help our candidates and don’t think too much beyond that,” Schiff said.
end quotes
Adam Schiff is head of the “Intelligence” Committee not because he is intelligent, or has any intelligence, but because he has value to Nancy “Boss” Pelosi and the Democrat party agenda as a politically-reliable operative for the Democrats in that position, which takes us back to the Politico article where we have as follows:.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi defended Schiff on Monday, saying the reason he’s being attacked is because he’s been effective.
end quotes
Effective?
You’re barmy, Nancy!
The ONLY thing little Adam Schiff has been successful at, besides raising money for the Democrats, is stringing along a very compliant press for the last two years with a line of bull**** about him having evidence of Trump colluding with the Russians to win the 2016 election, and now, the oily little creature just got his pants pulled down in public because he has been lying.
And that takes us to this line of horse**** from that same Politico article as follows:
“Democrats aren’t going to be intimidated by the White House or Congressional Republicans, we’re not going to be distracted from securing the release of the full Mueller report and the underlying evidence, and we will continue to pursue legitimate oversight because that’s what the Constitution requires,” said Pelosi spokeswoman Ashley Etienne.
end quotes
And as an American citizen who took an oath to protect and defend that Constitution from domestic enemies like Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff and the Democrat party, I publicly challenge this Ashley Etienne to show us where the Constitution requires congressional Democrats like Adam Schiff to lie to the American people in the name of partisan politics.
As to who Ashley Etienne is, we have this press release from the Office of Nancy Pelosi which provides as follows:
“Pelosi Names Ashley Etienne as Communications Director, Caroline Behringer as Senior Communications Advisor”
March 13, 2017
Washington, D.C. – House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi announced the following staff changes in her communications operations led by longtime spokesman and Deputy Chief of Staff, Drew Hammill:
Ashley Etienne has been named Communications Director and Senior Advisor.
Etienne returns to the Leader’s office after serving in the Obama White House as Special Assistant to the President, Cabinet Communications Director and Communications Director for the President’s My Brother’s Keeper initiative since July 2014.
Etienne previously served as Pelosi’s Deputy Communications Director and Communications Director to House Government and Oversight Committee Ranking Member Elijah Cummings.
Etienne will serve as Pelosi’s primary spokesperson and lead efforts responding to the Trump Administration, including oversight and ethics, and work to coordinate messaging strategy among the standing committees of the House on these and other critical matters.
“Ashley Etienne has been a formidable strategic asset to Democrats on both sides of Pennsylvania Avenue,” said Leader Pelosi.
“Ashley’s experience in the White House and at the Oversight Committee make her uniquely equipped to lead House Democrats’ efforts to expose the dangerous and incompetent agenda of the Trump Administration.”
” We are excited to be welcoming her back to the team in this new role.”
end quotes
And there, people, is where Nancy Pelosi is squandering our tax dollars – on people who will flagrantly lie to us on behalf of the Democrat party.
And now a word from our sponsors as we take a break for station identification.
“If you’re going to shoot the king, don’t miss”
Niccolò Machiavelli (1469-1527) wrote in The Prince (1505 in Italian, 1513 in English) what has been translated as “Never do an enemy a small injury.” If one is striking out at an opponent, one should make sure that the fatal blow is struck, successfully ending the confrontation. Machiavelli wrote that “the injury that is to be done to a man ought to be of such a kind that one does not stand in fear of revenge.”
Those who conspired to destroy President Trump failed–to “kill the king”. If he is reelected; heaven help them!
This has been a coup attempt by the Democrats, plain and simple.
I no longer view them as my fellow Americans. Look to Chicago to see how they wish to operate. Just look at the Ju-sissy Mullett case. These people are at war with the rest of this country. I do not see this ending well for them, and it breaks my heart to think it. They are going to wake up a sleeping giant if they continue down the path they have chosen.
Donald J. Trump
Verified account
@realDonaldTrump
1h1 hour ago
More
FBI & DOJ to review the outrageous Jussie Smollett case in Chicago. It is an embarrassment to our Nation!
And while we are on the subject of the absolute mindless gibberish the now-disoriented Democrats are screeching at us, we have this classic gem from the article in THE HILL entitled “Pelosi defends Schiff after Republicans call for resignation” by Juliegrace Brufke on 03/25/19, as follows:
“The days of Congress ignoring the mountain of legal and ethical misconduct by this President and Administration are over.”
end quotes
What hogwash, people!
And that classic gem of Democrat stupidity and imbecility comes to us courtesy of Pelosi spokeswoman Ashley Etienne, who Nancy Pelosi herself told us in a March 13, 2017 press release was been a formidable strategic asset to Democrats on both sides of Pennsylvania Avenue because her experience in the White House and at the Oversight Committee makes her uniquely equipped to lead House Democrats’ efforts to expose the dangerous and incompetent agenda of the Trump Administration.
Note the language there, people – makes her “uniquely equipped to lead House Democrats’ efforts” to expose the dangerous and incompetent agenda of the Trump Administration.
In other words, Nancy Pelosi is spending our federal taxpayer dollars on a person who is in essence a Democrat party warlord.
For the taxpayer dollars Ashley Etienne receives in payment for her services to the Democrats, we, the people get nothing of value in return, which is a form of theft, on top of which we are treated as if we all were mindless and stupid, which is quite insulting, actually, which takes us back to the POLITICO article entitled “McCarthy demands Schiff step down as intel chairman” by Kyle Cheney, Sarah Ferris and John Bresnahan on 03/25/2019, to wit:
The GOP offensive comes as Schiff is forging ahead with a renewed congressional investigation of the Trump campaign’s contacts with Russia.
His committee is slated to publicly interview on Wednesday Trump associate Felix Sater about his efforts to strike a deal for a Trump Tower Moscow during the 2016 campaign.
On Thursday, the committee has a second Russia-focused hearing on how the Kremlin used oligarchs and their money to influence U.S. politics in 2016.
Democrats are privately raising concerns that Americans won’t have the stomach for a new, heavily politicized Trump-Russia probe, and Republicans are seizing the momentum from the Mueller findings to lash out at Schiff.
end quotes
So, there is the existential question now facing us, people, outside of the one of why the Democrats think we are all stupid just because the Democrats are, and that is do we American people have the stomach for a new, heavily politicized Trump-Russia probe?
And if there is any doubt left in anyone’s mind that the Democrats are actually stupid enough to keep their “Trump/Russia” conspiracy theory going with yet more MICHAEL COHEN-like congressional hearings coming, which means even more days of the daytime soaps and quiz shows and courtroom dramas Judge Hatchett or Hot Bench being pre-empted by congressional hearing after congressional hearing with scads more of congressional subpoenas being issued, this in the wake of the Mueller Report’s conclusion of no collusion between Trump and Russia despite the lying, scumbag ex-lawyer too stupid to keep his own dumb *** out of jail Michael Cohen telling the House Committee of Presidential Inquisition under Democrat Elijah “The Prophet” Cummings, who said he believed Cohen, that “Questions have been raised about whether I know of direct evidence that Mr. Trump or his campaign colluded with Russia, I do not, and I want to be clear that I have my suspicions,” since they don’t really have a lot of choice, having hooked their party’s star to that conspiracy theory going into the 2020 presidential elections, and being unable to back down now, with no other place to go, that doubt has been thoroughly removed by the article in THE HILL entitled “Tlaib unveils resolution to investigate Trump impeachment” by Cristina Marcos on 28 March 2019, where we are treated to the following information, to wit:
Freshman Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) unveiled a resolution on Wednesday that would call on the House Judiciary Committee to investigate whether President Trump committed impeachable offenses, despite a cool reception from most fellow Democrats.
end quotes
For those of you in the at-home viewing audience just now tuning into this long-running made-for-network TV SPECTACULAR, the House Judiciary Committee is the province of Jerrold Lewis “Jumping Jerry” Nadler, born June 13, 1947, who is an American attorney and politician who serves as the U.S. Representative from New York’s 10th congressional district and who is a Democrat currently in his 14th term in congress, where he has served since 1992.
As could be expected, therefore, to his credit, “Jumping Jerry” Nadler is a prodigious, powerhouse fundraiser for the Democrats, a prerequitie to holding a position of power such as “Jumping Jerry” Nadler wields, having raised $1,465,404 for the 2017-22018 cycle.
As to the ignorant and foul-mouthed Rashida Harbi Tlaib, born July 24, 1976, she is an American politician and lawyer serving as the U.S. Representative for Michigan’s 13th congressional district since 2019, which district includes the western half of Detroit, along with several of its western suburbs and much of the Downriver area.
In 2018, Tlaib won the Democratic nomination for the United States House of Representatives seat from Michigan’s 13th congressional district.
She ran unopposed in the general election and became the first Palestinian-American woman in Congress and, with Ilhan Omar (D-MN), one of the first two Muslim women elected to Congress.
Tlaib is a member of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA).
She and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez are the first two DSA members to serve in Congress.
Tlaib has been a vocal critic of the Trump administration and advocated impeachment of the President.
On foreign affairs, she has sharply criticized the Israeli government, called for an end to U.S. aid to Israel, and expressed support for the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign.
She completed a Bachelor of Arts in political science in 1998 from Wayne State University and she earned a Juris Doctor from Western Michigan University Cooley Law School in 2004.
Getting back to The Hill:
Tlaib said she is introducing her resolution so that it “ensures we don’t have a lawless society that results in irreparable harm to the American people.”
end quotes
Oh, really, Rashida, do tell – where is that happening, outside of the Democrat party?
Getting back to Rashida:
“Doing nothing when we are seeing blatant disregard of the United States Constitution, to our ethical norms, is dangerous.”
“No one, including the president of the United States, is above the law,” Tlaib said in a House floor speech.
end quotes
Actually, Hillary Clinton is above the law, but we all knew that, didn’t we, so moving right along:
Tlaib drew headlines on her first day in office in January when she was filmed at an event with supporters saying that Democrats should “impeach the motherf—-r,” in reference to Trump.
She began circulating a letter earlier this week to encourage colleagues to endorse her resolution, which calls on the House Judiciary Committee to investigate whether Trump is violating the Emoluments Clause by accepting foreign money through his businesses; attempted to “defraud the United States” by directing Cohen to make the hush-money payments; and whether the evidence from special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation finds obstruction of justice.
“An investigation will take a look at all of these things, with the question on, are these impeachable offenses?” Tlaib said in her speech.
en d quotes
So there we are, people, another episode of “welcome, my friends, to the show that never ends,” and after a break for station identification, we will be back with more of this breaking story, so please, don’t touch that dial.
“We have long since passed the point where Americans expect objectivity from the press.”
While that sounds very much like something I and millions of other Americans have been saying for some time now, and especially since 2016, after Hillary Clinton lost to Donald Trump and blamed it on everybody under the sun, including Trump colluding with the Russians to steal the election from Hillary, when everybody knew that it was Hillary’s turn to be president, that in fact is a sentence from a Washington Post article entitled “The Trump-Russia collusion hall of shame” by Marc A. Thiessen on March 28, 2019, where we had as follows:
The news that special counsel Robert S. Mueller III “did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government” has left a lot of people in Washington with a lot of explaining to do.
end quotes
Indeed, it most certainly does, starting with Burbank, California Democrat congressman Adam Schiff, which takes us back to the Washington Post article as follows:
Put aside the rogues’ gallery of reporters and pundits who assured us that Donald Trump had conspired with Vladimir Putin to steal the presidency.
end quotes
Of course, as we put aside the rogues’ gallery of reporters and pundits who assured us that Donald Trump had conspired with Vladimir Putin to steal the presidency, as has been made incandescently clear here in the Cape Charles Mirror, that “rogue’s gallery” of reporters includes reporters from the Washington Post itself, so this is quite a turn-around for them to be taking here, with a tacit admission of just how wrong that rag has been these last two years.
But moving right along:
What is most insidious are those who did have access to classified intelligence and led Americans to believe that they had seen what we could not: actual evidence of Trump-Russia collusion.
Recall that in 2016, Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) released a letter to FBI Director James B. Comey claiming the FBI had proof of Trump-Russia collusion.
“In my communications with you and other top officials in the national security community, it has become clear that you possess explosive information about close ties and coordination between Donald Trump, his top advisors, and the Russian government,” Reid declared.
When asked what information Reid was referring to, a spokesman said, “There have been classified briefings on this topic.”
“That is all I can say.”
end quotes
And there, people, is the BULL**** game these out-of-control rabid Democrats seething at the loss of the presidency to Trump have been playing with the American people since 2016 – making false claims that are supposedly based on “intelligence,” a quality the Democrats are sorely lacking of, when it fact they are nothing but pure horse****, something the Democrats are experts at.
Gettin g back to the Washington Post:
Trump has called for House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) to resign.
He is absolutely correct.
end quotes
WOW!
There is something I never expected to see in the pages of the Washington Post!
Getting back to the article:
Schiff repeatedly said that his committee had dug up “plenty of evidence of collusion or conspiracy.”
In March 2017, he said on “Meet the Press,” “I can’t go into the particulars, but there is more than circumstantial evidence now” and last May he told ABC that Trump’s Russia conspiracy is of “a size and scope probably beyond Watergate.”
Schiff is a disgrace.
end quotes
Now, there is something that has been said in the pages of the venerable Cape Charles Mirror all along, so it is good to see the Washington Post finally waking up to reality here, which thought takes us back to the Washington Post, to wit:
But he is not alone.
Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), a member of the Intelligence Committee, said, “In our investigation, we saw strong evidence of collusion” and declared Trump an agent “working on behalf of the Russians.”
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) claimed, “It’s clear that the campaign colluded, and there’s a lot of evidence of that.”
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), a member of the Judiciary Committee, assured us last year that “the evidence is pretty clear that there was collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians.”
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), a member of the Intelligence Committee, said, “There is no longer a question of whether this campaign sought to collude with a hostile foreign power to subvert America’s democracy.”
And recently, the committee’s vice chairman, Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-Va.), declared that “enormous amounts of evidence” exist of collusion between Trump and Russia and that “there’s no one that could factually say there’s not plenty of evidence of collaboration or communications between Trump Organization and Russians.”
Except for Mueller, of course.
These comments by people with access to intelligence were shameful.
end quotes
Yes, people, that is the exact word for what has been going on here for far too long – SHAMEFUL!
So, will we see the end of Adam Schiff as a House Committee Chairman?
Will he now do the right thing by resigning, not only from the House Intelligence Committee, but from the Congress itself?
All I can say is don’t touch that dial, and stay tuned for further developments as they happen.
“Republicans are afraid of the truth.”
“They’re just scaredy cats… afraid of a leader who’s calm, professional, patriotic.”
“I’m so proud of the work of Chairman Adam Schiff.”
“It’s their own insecurity.”
“Their own fear of the truth, their fear of the facts and their fear of an effective patriotic leader in his measured way who’s going to make sure that the American people know the truth.”
end quotes
That, people, was none other than Democrat from San Francisco, California Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi speaking out in real high praise of Democrat from Burbank, California Adam Schiff in the NBC NEWS article “House Intel Republicans call on Schiff to resign as chairman after Mueller report – Speaker Nancy Pelosi defended Schiff by saying ‘Republicans are afraid of the truth’.” by Adam Edelman on March 28, 2019, and in my mind, Nancy is off her rocker and has gone totally daft and barmy as well if she thinks we are actually stupid enough to think, based on his record, that Adam Schiff is an effective patriotic leader in his measured way who’s going to make sure that the American people know the truth.
Adam Schiff’s “truth” just got blown out of the water by the Mueller Report, but since Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats are afraid of the truth, they’re just scaredy cats, they can not accept that reality because of their own insecurity, their own fear of the truth, their fear of the facts, and so they continue to cling to the myth of Adam Schiff as the SAVIOR OF AMERICA, when he is anything but, which takes us to the NBC News article for the following:
All nine Republican members of the House Intelligence Committee have signed a letter calling for its chairman, Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff, to step down, citing his claims that there was evidence that President Donald Trump’s campaign colluded with the Russians during the 2016 race.
Rep. Mike Conaway, R-Texas, introduced the scathing letter during a public committee hearing Thursday and then read it aloud.
“Your willingness to continue to promote a demonstrably false narrative is alarming,” Conaway said.
“The findings of the special counsel conclusively refute your past and present exertions, and have exposed you of having abused your position to knowingly promote false information.”
“Your actions both past and present are incompatible with your duty as chairman of this committee,” Conaway added.
“As such, we have no faith in your ability to discharge your duties in a manner consistent with your constitutional responsibility, and urge your immediate resignation as chairman of the committee.”
end quotes
Those are the serious charges that Nancy Pelosi, as Speaker of the House, two heartbeats away from the Oval Office, God help the nation, is defending Adam Schiff against.
Meanwhile, according to that same article, earlier this week, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif, and numerous GOP lawmakers called on Schiff to resign as chairman for having claimed there was “more than circumstantial” evidence that Trump’s presidential campaign conspired with the Kremlin in an effort to win the 2016 presidential election.
McCarthy reiterated those calls at his weekly press conference Thursday, saying that Pelosi should remove Schiff to “restore trust in the Intelligence Committee.”
“All Americans should be concerned with the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee taking the position of judge and jury,” McCarthy added after pointing to moments when Schiff said there was evidence of collusion.
According to a summary of Mueller’s long-awaited findings by Attorney General William Barr, released Sunday, there was no coordination or conspiracy involving Trump, his campaign and the Russian government.
The summary also said Mueller had reached no conclusion about whether the president had obstructed justice, though Barr wrote that he decided there was insufficient evidence to pursue an obstruction charge.
Throughout the Mueller probe, Schiff had repeatedly suggested more incriminating information would emerge from the investigations into the Trump campaign.
“I can tell you that the case is more than that and I can’t go into the particulars, but there is more than circumstantial evidence now,” he told Chuck Todd on MSNBC’s “Meet the Press Daily” in March 2017.
end quotes
And there is where matters now stand in this rapidly developing story of political revenge against Donald Trump by the Democrats for Trump’s offense of cutting the line and getting into the oval office ahead of Hillary Clinton gone bad, but stay tuned, for this is just getting going, which means there is more yet to come.
And here, we need to once again drop back in time a bit, to a POLITICO article entitled “Lawmakers raise cash off Trump-Russia probe – The appeals for campaign money violate a long-standing unwritten rule against partisan activities surrounding the House Intelligence Committee” by Austin Wright and Darren Samuelsohn on 08/17/2017
Rep. Eric Swalwell’s campaign website features ominous photos of President Donald Trump, Donald Trump Jr. and Jared Kushner.
It warns about Russia’s attacks on last year’s presidential election and asks visitors to sign a petition demanding that a bipartisan commission investigate.
Those who sign are then asked to contribute $5, $10, $25 or more to the California Democrat.
Swalwell is one of the junior members of the House Intelligence Committee, which has long had an unspoken rule against engaging in partisan fundraising related to the panel’s secretive work.
But the panel’s high-profile Russia investigation is now putting that rule to the test, and experts are warning that some committee members’ recent appeals for campaign cash could undermine everyone’s credibility.
“If you’re trying to fundraise in a way that whips up partisanship, that’s going to make the important work of the committee that much harder, if not impossible,” said Michael Bahar, who until last May was the panel’s Democratic staff director.
end quotes
That was one year and seven months ago, and how quickly we forget these things.
Getting back to that article and tying it into the subject of this thread, we have:
Rep. Adam Schiff, the House panel’s top Democrat , last month sent a fundraising request tangentially related to his involvement in the House investigation that is looking into potential collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.
Trump last month took to Twitter to call Schiff “sleazy,” blasting him for spending “all of his time on television” talking about the investigation.
The California Democrat responded with a tweet of his own, saying Trump had attacked him for doing his job and asking his supporters to “chip in to stand with me.”
His post included a link to a fundraising website for Schiff’s campaign.
end quotes
Yes, indeed, this faux “Russia probe” has been very good for the fundraising efforts of the noxious and odious little TWERP-O-CRAT Adam Schiff and his beloved Democrat party, alright, which takes us back to POLITICO as follows:
Lawrence Noble, an expert in campaign finance and ethics with the Campaign Legal Center, said it was inevitable the Russia investigations would become a fundraising tool — a fact he considers unfortunate.
“It undermines public faith in the investigation and makes it look more partisan,” Noble said.
“It helps further politicize the issue, and that I think is not healthy because I’d like to think everybody would agree there are serious allegations of Russian involvement that need to be investigated.”
Bahar, who left his Capitol Hill staff job to work at the law firm Eversheds Sutherland, said the House Intelligence Committee has long had an unwritten understanding that members don’t issue appeals for campaign cash trading on their work for the committee.
end quotes
That was quite obviously then, and this is now, which takes us to a Tribune News Service article entitled “Republicans use the Mueller report to target Rep. Adam Schiff” by Jennifer Haberkorn, Los Angeles Times, on 29 March 2019, where we have as follows:
Schiff was also recently named to a key fundraising chairmanship post at the Democratic committee tasked with preserving the party’s majority in the House.
end quotes
Ah, yes, if one waits long enough, and actually has a working memory that can remember back more than two or three nano-seconds, the truth will out, and that truth, which is not Michael Cohen’s truth, is that for almost the last two years, this smarmy little Adam Schiff has been undermining public faith in the investigative process of the House Intelligence Committee by using it as a personal fundraising tool, as well as a fundraising tool for the rabid Democrats, who both want and need to continue the narrative that Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump are best friends, and that’s the reason that he won, because Hillary Clinton would have never lost on her own; it had to be someone else’s fault.
Adam, dude, you are no patriot!
If you were a patriot, you would not be a Democrat!
And what you have done, Adam, with all your partisan crap which has now been discredited, is used up the patience of American citizens who are not Democrats, which is about two-thirds of us, so Adam, it is time for you to go!
And watch that door don’t smack you on your *** on your way out!
If you are getting notices as you say, look down to the bottom where it says “unsubscribe” and click on that and away go your troubles down the drain.
And bringing this thread up to date, in a FOX News article entitled “Schiff hedges on Trump impeachment, says instead, ‘Vote his a– out of office'” by Victor Garcia on 27 April 2019, we have as follow:
Schiff told Maher he is advising his colleagues as well as the Democratic Party’s presidential candidates to not talk about Russia.
end quotes
HUSH!
SHHHHH!
SHUT YOUR MOUTHS!
DON’T SAY ANOTHER WORD ABOUT RUSSIA!
And that is because the folks at the Cape Charles Mirror have been systematically debunking the Schiff horse**** as fast as he can spew it!
So now, it is run silent, run deep!
Thanks for being there for the American people, Cape Charles Mirror!
You sure do have to hand it to Burbank, California Democrat congressman Adam Schiff – the dude can sling gobs of political horse**** with the best of them, and that is a fact, which takes us to a Reuters article entitled “House Intelligence chief warns spy agencies of Trump ‘politicization'” by Mark Hosenball on 1 June 2019, where we are treated to this latest dose of horse**** from out of the mouth of Democrat Adam Schiff, as follows:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff on Friday warned the FBI and U.S. spy agencies that President Donald Trump is trying to “politicize” U.S. intelligence and law enforcement.
end quotes
Now, that statement is totally ridiculous, as it implies that the heads of the intelligence agencies are too dim-witted to think for themselves, and thus, need someone of truly superior intelligence like the little twerp Adam Schiff to take them by the hand and guide them along the way, but then, it is nothing more than a purely partisan political statement by Adam Schiff to keep his name in print for fundraising reasons.
Continuing on with the Schiff spew of bull**** in that Reuters article, we have:
Schiff criticized Trump for giving Attorney General William Barr “sweeping” powers to declassify or downgrade the secrecy of government reporting while conducting what the Justice Department is calling a “review” of “intelligence activities” related to the 2016 U.S. presidential election campaign.
In letters to agency heads, Schiff said May 23 orders from Trump telling them to help with Barr’s review was “an effort by the President and the Attorney General to politicize the IC (intelligence community) and law enforcement, to deligitimize a well-founded investigation into the President, and to attack the President’s political enemies.”
end quotes
Now, people, in that sentence, there is this for all of us to have to consider in the light of all the documentation that now exists in the public record concerning Operation Crossfire Hurricane, the FBI spying program of the Trump campaign in 2016, to wit: In letters to agency heads, Schiff said May 23 orders from Trump telling them to help with Barr’s review was “an effort by the President and the Attorney General to deligitimize a well-founded investigation into the President.”
A “well-founded” investigation., Adam?
Do tell, dude.
And tell us, Adam, what exactly is the rational basis for you saying the investigation into Trump was “well-founded,” as opposed to politically motivated?
If you have evidence that the investigation into Trump was “well-founded,” Adam, then put the evidence for that on the table so the American people, of which I am one, can be fully informed, as you Democrats in congress keep telling us is really your purpose, as opposed to trying to divide the nation for partisan political gain for the Democrats.
Getting back to Reuters:
Schiff sent his letters, which Reuters saw, to the directors of National Intelligence, the FBI, CIA and National Security Agency.
He asked them to keep his panel informed about Barr’s review; provide documents produced for it; and tell the committee about any moves by Barr to declassify material over agency objections.
end quotes
And talk about CONGRESSIONAL OVERREACH there people: Adam Schiff is a member of the legislative branch of our federal government.
And the directors of National Intelligence, the FBI, CIA and National Security Agency all work for the executive branch, a totally separate branch of our federal government so that political opportunists like Democrat Adam Schiff, a mere congressman, can not gain access to them, as Adam Schiff is so obviously doing here, to POLITICIZE them, and that is to protect we, the American people, from grasping politicians like Adam Schiff, and for good reason.
So cut the crap, Adam Schiff – the **** you are shoveling here is getting awful deep, and it stinks to high heaven.
And what we are seeing there with that Reuters article entitled “House Intelligence chief warns spy agencies of Trump ‘politicization’” by Mark Hosenball on 1 June 2019, where Burbank, California Democrat congressman Adam Schiff, a member of the legislative branch of our federal government warned the FBI and U.S. spy agencies that President Donald Trump is trying to “politicize” U.S. intelligence and law enforcement, telling them in letters to agency heads that May 23 orders from Trump telling them to help with Barr’s review was “an effort by the President and the Attorney General to politicize the IC (intelligence community) and law enforcement, to deligitimize a well-founded investigation into the President, and to attack the President’s political enemies,” is a blatant example of what an attempt to OBSTRUCT JUSTICE looks like in real life.
And that attempt to OBSTRUCT JUSTICE here is by Adam Schiff, who very obviously is running scared here and wants a cover-up of how Operation Crossfire Hurricane came into being as a political act by the Obama administration.
And as to Crossfire Hurricane, that is old news.
The New York Times story had a story on it entitled “Code Name Crossfire Hurricane: The Secret Origins of the Trump Investigation” by Matt Apuzzo, Adam Goldman and Nicholas Fandos a year ago now on May 16, 2018, and Wikipedia has a page on it, as well, where we, the common people of America without any kind of security clearances are regaled with this super-secret FBI spy ****, as follows. to wit:
From late July to November 2016, a joint effort between the FBI, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and the National Security Agency (NSA) examined evidence of Russian meddling in the 2016 United States presidential election.
The FBI’s team enjoyed a large degree of autonomy within the broader interagency probe.
The Crossfire Hurricane investigation was officially opened on July 31, 2016, initially due to information on Trump campaign member George Papadopoulos’ early knowledge of Russians having damaging material on Donald Trump’s rival candidate Hillary Clinton.
The FBI’s work was taken over on May 17, 2017, by the Special Counsel investigation of 2017–2019, which eventually resulted in the Mueller Report.
Mueller concluded that Russian interference occurred in a “sweeping and systematic fashion” and that there were substantial links with the Trump campaign, but that the evidence available to investigators did not establish that the Trump campaign had “conspired or coordinated” with the Russian government.
end quotes
So cut your crap, Adam Schiff, and stop trying to OBSTRUCT JUSTICE here.
We the people want to know all the facts, and we do not appreciate your efforts to keep them hidden from us.
And staying with that Reuters article entitled “House Intelligence chief warns spy agencies of Trump ‘politicization’” by Mark Hosenball on 1 June 2019 for the moment, to see just how pathetically ignorant of reality smarmy little Burbank, California Democrat congressman Adam Schiff really is with his “warning” to the FBI and U.S. spy agencies that President Donald Trump is trying to “politicize” U.S. intelligence and law enforcement, telling them in letters to agency heads that May 23 orders from Trump telling them to help with Barr’s review was an effort by the President and the Attorney General to delegitimize a well-founded investigation into the President, let’s jump right to an article in THE HILL entitled “McCabe: No one in ‘Gang of Eight’ objected to FBI probe into Trump” by Brett Samuels on 02/19/19, where we have as follows with respect to just how “well founded” versus politically motivated the investigation into Trump really was, to wit:
Former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe said Tuesday that none of the top eight congressional leaders objected when he briefed them in 2017 on the bureau’s decision to open a counterintelligence investigation into President Trump.
“The purpose of the briefing was to let our congressional leadership know exactly what we’d been doing,” McCabe, who was the acting FBI director at the time, said during an interview on NBC’s “Today” show.
McCabe acknowledged that he ordered the investigation, but pushed back against suggestions that he’d acted alone in doing so.
He said that he consulted with his team, reviewed it with bureau lawyers and discussed it with Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein before moving forward.
end quotes
So, given that that article where McCabe spilled the beans as to who knew what and when about the FBI spying on Trump was roughly three-and-a-half months ago now, why did the smarmy little twerp Adam Schiff feel it necessary for him to send that warning to the head of the FBI, other than to get his name in print for partisan fundraising reasons to show the big donors that smarmy little Adam Schiff is still Trump’s very worst nightmare on the planet?
And notice that McCabe throws Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein under the bus there as being one of those who approved the FBI spying on Trump, that being the same Rod Rosenstein who then appointed the Mullet to continue the investigation of Trump, to damage him politically.
And he is the same Rod Rosenstein who shows up in an article in THE HILL entitled “FBI uncovered Russian bribery plot before Obama administration approved controversial nuclear deal with Moscow” by John Solomon and Alison Spann on 10/17/17, to wit:
The Obama administration’s decision to approve Rosatom’s purchase of Uranium One has been a source of political controversy since 2015.
That’s when conservative author Peter Schweitzer and The New York Times documented how Bill Clinton collected hundreds of thousands of dollars in Russian speaking fees and his charitable foundation collected millions in donations from parties interested in the deal while Hillary Clinton presided on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States.
The Obama administration and the Clintons defended their actions at the time, insisting there was no evidence that any Russians or donors engaged in wrongdoing and there was no national security reason for any member of the committee to oppose the Uranium One deal.
But FBI, Energy Department and court documents reviewed by The Hill show the FBI in fact had gathered substantial evidence well before the committee’s decision that Vadim Mikerin — the main Russian overseeing Putin’s nuclear expansion inside the United States — was engaged in wrongdoing starting in 2009.
Then-Attorney General Eric Holder was among the Obama administration officials joining Hillary Clinton on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States at the time the Uranium One deal was approved.
Multiple current and former government officials told The Hill they did not know whether the FBI or DOJ ever alerted committee members to the criminal activity they uncovered.
Spokesmen for Holder and Clinton did not return calls seeking comment.
The Justice Department also didn’t comment.
Mikerin was a director of Rosatom’s Tenex in Moscow since the early 2000s, where he oversaw Rosatom’s nuclear collaboration with the United States under the Megatons to Megwatts program and its commercial uranium sales to other countries.
In 2010, Mikerin was dispatched to the U.S. on a work visa approved by the Obama administration to open Rosatom’s new American arm called Tenam.
Between 2009 and January 2012, Mikerin “did knowingly and willfully combine, conspire confederate and agree with other persons … to obstruct, delay and affect commerce and the movement of an article and commodity (enriched uranium) in commerce by extortion,” a November 2014 indictment stated.
His illegal conduct was captured with the help of a confidential witness, an American businessman, who began making kickback payments at Mikerin’s direction and with the permission of the FBI.
The first kickback payment recorded by the FBI through its informant was dated Nov. 27, 2009, the records show.
In evidentiary affidavits signed in 2014 and 2015, an Energy Department agent assigned to assist the FBI in the case testified that Mikerin supervised a “racketeering scheme” that involved extortion, bribery, money laundering and kickbacks that were both directed by and provided benefit to more senior officials back in Russia.
“As part of the scheme, Mikerin, with the consent of higher level officials at TENEX and Rosatom (both Russian state-owned entities) would offer no-bid contracts to US businesses in exchange for kickbacks in the form of money payments made to some offshore banks accounts,” Agent David Gadren testified.
“Mikerin apparently then shared the proceeds with other co-conspirators associated with TENEX in Russia and elsewhere,” the agent added.
The investigation was ultimately supervised by then-U.S. Attorney Rod Rosenstein, an Obama appointee who now serves as President Trump’s deputy attorney general, and then-Assistant FBI Director Andrew McCabe, now the deputy FBI director under Trump, Justice Department documents show.
end quotes
And there is his buddy McCabe right in there with him, but in that case, where Hillary Clinton is clearly above the law, they seem to be involved in a cover-up and obstruction of justice!
And is Adam Schiff truly ignorant of all of this?
Or is he simply using his position as Chair of the Intelligence Committee to distract and mislead us, which takes us back to the article “McCabe: No one in ‘Gang of Eight’ objected to FBI probe into Trump” by Brett Samuels on 02/19/19, as follows:
“And I told Congress what we had done,” he said.
“No one objected,” he added in the interview.
“Not on legal grounds, not on constitutional grounds and not based on the facts.”
The New York Times first reported last month that the FBI launched an inquiry into whether Trump was working for Russia after the president fired former bureau chief James Comey.
McCabe took over as acting director after Comey’s ouster.
The “Gang of Eight” consists of the top two leaders from each party in each chamber of Congress. Representatives around the time of the 2017 meeting would have included Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), then-Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and then-House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).
end quotes
WOW!
How about that, now would you!
In 2017, two years ago now, Charley “CHUCK” Schumer and Nancy Pelosi knew all about the FBI spying on Trump, and two years ago, they had absolutely no problems whatsoever with it, according to McCabe, and what has he got to gain by lying about it now?
And if they knew all about the FBI spying on Trump two years ago, what is all this incessant racket they are making today, with all these stupid hearings of theirs, where they are flogging to death a horse that is already dead, trying to get it to run faster, when it can’t run at all, which reminds me of this political cartoon about the Democrats from the mid-1800s, which is so like them again today with this pursuit of theirs of Trump:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/74/The_modern_Gilpins.jpg
Give it a rest Paul; the bad guys are going down HARD! Just sit back and enjoy the show!
You know what confounds me, A friend – it is how someone so out of touch with reality as is smarmy little Burbank, California Democrat congressman Adam Schiff can become the head of the House of Representatives “Intelligence” committee, which doesn’t seem very intelligent, does it, not only putting someone like Adam Schiff who has no obvious intelligence onto the “intelligence” committee, but making him the head of it, as well.
You got good insights into things, A friend, what sense can you make of any of that?
And if anyone wanted proof that smarmy little Burbank, California Democrat congressman Adam Schiff is really not too swift, all they need do is to go to a VOX article entitled “McCabe: When I opened a case against Trump, I briefed top Republicans. They didn’t object” by Aaron Rupar@atrupar on Feb. 19, 2019, to wit:
During an interview on Tuesday’s edition of Today, former acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe said that in the immediate aftermath of then-FBI Director James Comey’s firing in May 2017, he briefed the “Gang of Eight” about his decision to open a counterintelligence investigation into President Donald Trump — and Republicans raised no objections to it.
“I told Congress what we had done,” McCabe said.
“No one objected.”
“Not on legal grounds, not on constitutional grounds, and not based on the facts.”
At that time, the “Gang of Eight” included Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Richard Burr (R-NC), then-House Speaker Paul Ryan, then-House Intelligence Committee Chair Devin Nunes (R-CA), and their Democratic counterparts — Chuck Schumer (NY), Mark Warner (VA), Nancy Pelosi (CA), and Adam Schiff (CA), respectively.
end quotes
You see that last name there, A friend?
Yes, indeed, it is the very same Adam Schiff who is feeding us all this bull**** today, as he divides the nation intentionally for partisan political purposes including fundraising.
So how can Adam Schiff plead ignorant today as to what was going on with Trump back in 2916 and 2017, when the FBI was spying on Trump, especially as it all has already been the subject of numerous news articles, such as this Washington Post article entitled “Rosenstein-McCabe feud dates back to angry standoff in front of Mueller” by Matt Zapotosky and Devlin Barrett on October 10, 2018, to wit:
Shortly after Robert S. Mueller III was appointed to investigate possible coordination between President Trump’s campaign and the Kremlin, he was drawn into a tense standoff in which Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein and then-acting FBI director Andrew McCabe each urged the other to step aside from the case, according to people familiar with the matter.
At the time of the confrontation in mid-May 2017, tensions were running high at the FBI and Justice Department, and between Rosenstein and McCabe.
Trump had just fired James B. Comey as the bureau’s director, and almost immediately afterward, FBI officials had opened a case into whether the president had obstructed justice.
The previously unreported episode involving Mueller, Rosenstein and McCabe — which occurred within days of Mueller’s becoming special counsel — underscores the deep suspicion between senior law enforcement officials who were about to embark on a historic, criminal investigation of the president.
end quotes
So, in 2017, and this according to the FBI’s Andy McCabe, the smarmy little Burbank, California Democrat Adam Schiff had no objections whatsoever, not on legal grounds, not on constitutional grounds, and not based on the facts, to opening up a historic criminal investigation of Donald Trump because Trump had just fired Jimmy Comey, and here it now is, 2019, and whatever happened with any of that investigation, which takes us back to the VOX article, as follows:
McCabe told Today host Savannah Guthrie that he ordered the opening of a counterintelligence investigation into Trump following Comey’s firing because “we had information that led us to believe that there might be a threat to national security, in this case that the president himself might be a threat to United States national security” — in particular, that Trump might be a Russian agent.
“The president, in our view, had gone to extreme measures to potentially impact — negatively impact, possibly turn off — our investigation of Russian meddling into the election, and Russian coordination with his campaign,” McCabe said.
“We thought that might be possible [that Trump was working for Russia] … you have to ask yourself, if you believe that the president might have obstructed justice for the purpose of ending our investigation into Russia, you have to ask yourself why.”
“Why would any president of the United States not want the FBI to get to the bottom of Russian interference in our election?”
end quotes
And now, A friend, with respect to your premise that the bad guys are going down HARD, which I’m not seeing any signs of happening, let us drop back to The New York Times article “Code Name Crossfire Hurricane: The Secret Origins of the Trump Investigation” by Matt Apuzzo, Adam Goldman and Nicholas Fandos on May 16, 2018, where we have a glimpse of the anti-Trump bias at the FBI while Andy McCabe was there investigating Trump, to wit:
Counterintelligence investigations can take years, but if the Russian government had influence over the Trump campaign, the F.B.I. wanted to know quickly.
One option was the most direct: interview the campaign officials about their Russian contacts.
That was discussed but not acted on, two former officials said, because interviewing witnesses or subpoenaing documents might thrust the investigation into public view, exactly what F.B.I. officials were trying to avoid during the heat of the presidential race.
“You do not take actions that will unnecessarily impact an election,” Sally Q. Yates, the former deputy attorney general, said in an interview.
She would not discuss details, but added, “Folks were very careful to make sure that actions that were being taken in connection with that investigation did not become public.”
Mr. Comey was briefed regularly on the Russia investigation, but one official said those briefings focused mostly on hacking and election interference.
The Crossfire Hurricane team did not present many crucial decisions for Mr. Comey to make.
Top officials became convinced that there was almost no chance they would answer the question of collusion before Election Day.
And that made agents even more cautious.
The F.B.I. obtained phone records and other documents using national security letters — a secret type of subpoena — officials said.
And at least one government informant met several times with Mr. Page and Mr. Papadopoulos, current and former officials said.
That has become a politically contentious point, with Mr. Trump’s allies questioning whether the F.B.I. was spying on the Trump campaign or trying to entrap campaign officials.
Looking back, some at the Justice Department and the F.B.I. now believe that agents could have been more aggressive.
They ultimately interviewed Mr. Papadopoulos in January 2017 and managed to keep it a secret, suggesting they could have done so much earlier.
“There is always a high degree of caution before taking overt steps in a counterintelligence investigation,” said Ms. McCord, who would not discuss details of the case.
“And that could have worked to the president’s benefit here.”
Such tactical discussions are reflected in one of Mr. Strzok’s most controversial texts, sent on Aug. 15, 2016, after a meeting in Mr. McCabe’s office.
“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office — that there’s no way he gets elected,” Mr. Strzok wrote, “but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk.”
“It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40.”
end quotes
Now, A friend, that is in August of 2016, and McCabe is obviously involved in that investigation to see if Trump was a tool of the Russians, as we were informed by the New York Times, to wit:
WASHINGTON — Within hours of opening an investigation into the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia in the summer of 2016, the F.B.I. dispatched a pair of agents to London on a mission so secretive that all but a handful of officials were kept in the dark.
Their assignment, which has not been previously reported, was to meet the Australian ambassador, who had evidence that one of Donald J. Trump’s advisers knew in advance about Russian election meddling.
After tense deliberations between Washington and Canberra, top Australian officials broke with diplomatic protocol and allowed the ambassador, Alexander Downer, to sit for an F.B.I. interview to describe his meeting with the campaign adviser, George Papadopoulos.
The agents summarized their highly unusual interview and sent word to Washington on Aug. 2, 2016, two days after the investigation was opened.
Their report helped provide the foundation for a case that, a year ago Thursday, became the special counsel investigation.
But at the time, a small group of F.B.I. officials knew it by its code name: Crossfire Hurricane.
end quotes
And that takes us back to the Washington Post, as follows:
McCabe was summoned to meet with Rosenstein and Mueller to talk about his possible recusal, these people said.
While the accounts of current and former officials familiar with the confrontation differ in some key respects, they agree on the basic terms of the discussion — Rosenstein wanted McCabe out of the Russia probe, and McCabe felt differently, arguing that it was the deputy attorney general, not the head of the FBI, who should step away from the case.
One person said part of Rosenstein’s argument was that, because McCabe had years earlier worn a T-shirt supporting his wife’s campaign for a state Senate seat in Virginia, he could not be considered objective in a political probe.
A photo of McCabe wearing the shirt had been posted on social media during the campaign, leading some to later question whether he had violated rules that limit government employees’ advocacy for political candidates.
McCabe’s wife had run unsuccessfully as a Democrat in 2015, with major financial support from a key ally of Hillary Clinton — an issue that prompted Trump to publicly and privately attack McCabe when he learned of it in late 2016.
Two people familiar with the meeting said McCabe brought with him to the meeting a document from FBI ethics officials that said McCabe had abided by ethics rules.
One person familiar with the confrontation denied that the T-shirt or his wife’s campaign was part of Rosenstein’s rationale, saying the proposed recusal had to do with McCabe’s recent public and private statements expressing deep loyalty to Comey and unhappiness over his firing.
McCabe argued that Rosenstein’s authoring of a memo — which criticized Comey’s handling of the earlier investigation of Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server when she was secretary of state — meant that the deputy attorney general was the one who should step away from the case.
“Andy was angry,” said one person familiar with the matter, adding that McCabe slapped the document down in front of Rosenstein at one point in the discussion.
Representatives for all three of the meeting’s participants declined to comment for this story.
In the end, neither Rosenstein nor McCabe recused from the Russia investigation, and it was clear in that meeting and after that Mueller would have a great degree of independence and control over his investigation, including management of Justice Department prosecutors and FBI agents detailed to him.
Mueller previously served as FBI director from 2001 to 2013.
The McCabe-Rosenstein relationship has only worsened with time.
McCabe was fired earlier this year over what the Justice Department’s inspector general said were falsehoods he told to internal FBI investigators.
That matter is now the subject of a grand jury investigation.
The contentious meeting between Mueller, Rosenstein and McCabe did not settle the public questions about who should or shouldn’t be involved in the Russia probe.
Some lawyers have argued that Rosenstein should have recused, given his central role in the Comey firing and conversations with White House officials leading up to that moment.
Typically, Justice Department recusals are done at the recommendation of the department’s ethics lawyers.
Rosenstein has remained the acting attorney general for the Russia probe, and people close to the case said that is in large part because Mueller is comfortable with that arrangement.
The Rosenstein-McCabe relationship has come under renewed scrutiny as lawmakers have demanded answers about memos written by McCabe and his then-senior counsel, FBI lawyer Lisa Page, about the discussions on May 16, 2017, in which McCabe wrote that Rosenstein suggested recording the president and discussed the 25th Amendment.
end quotes
So, A friend, you tell me – shouldn’t the Democrat head of the Intelligence committee of the United States House of Representatives be aware of all of that now, given as how it has been in the media?
And “give it a rest,” A friend?
Not hardly, dude!
That would be playing right into the hands of the “bad guys,” as you call them, the Democrats – that is what they are hoping will happen, that they can beat us into submission under a huge mountain of bull**** they are working in tandem to spew, so the streams just keep on coming.
The “bad guys,” the Democrats, know full well that by spewing forth all their lies in gouts, they hold the advantage, because the lies they tell in a couple of sentences then require paragraphs to debunk them, and in the meantime, the spew of horse**** continues unabated, so the mountain gets higher and higher.
So, when they finally decide to give it a rest and stop lying to us and feeding us gobs of horse****, then and only then will I cease my efforts to debunk their lies and horse****.
And seriously, A friend, would you expect anything less from me?
If we go to the political website of Adam Schiff, Democrat congressman from Burbank, California, we find the following propaganda spew, to wit:
Since his election to Congress in 2000, Congressman Adam Schiff has been a consistent and effective voice for our community, country and kids.
In Congress, Adam has focused on keeping our country safe, encouraging job and wage growth that is shared by everyone, protecting the civil rights of all Americans, and ensuring America is prepared to lead the world for the next century by supporting education and the sciences.
Adam is the top Democrat, or Ranking Member, on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
Adam currently represents the 28th Congressional District, which includes the cities of Glendale, Burbank, Pasadena, La Cañada, West Hollywood, and the communities of La Crescenta, Montrose, Sunland, Tujunga, as well as Silver Lake, Echo Park, Elysian Valley, Hollywood, Los Feliz and Griffith Park.
In Congress, Adam has distinguished himself as a leading voice on national security, where he has worked to protect our country and further our interests, while ensuring that our actions at home and abroad are in line with our values.
end quotes
And that self-serving statement about Adam Schiff “distinguishing” himself as a “leading voice” (God help the nation for that) on “national security” brings us back to a RealClearPolitics article entitled “There Was No Collusion, Adam Schiff” by dsaunders@sfchronicle.com on 31 March 2019, as follows:
WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump called on House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff to resign from Congress.
That, of course, is not going to happen.
Even after special counsel Robert Mueller found no conspiracy or coordination between Trump’s 2016 campaign and Russian actors, Schiff told The Washington Post, “Undoubtedly, there is collusion.”
end quotes
Adam Schiff is like a dog on a bone there, and he just is not going to let go, primarily because that is a good fundraising scam for him to employ – despite there being no evidence that Trump colluded with the Russians, Adam Schiff remains convinced that Trump had to collude with the Russians in order for him to have bested Democrat CHAMPION Hillary Clinton, who herself was very tight with the Russians, which takes us back to that article as follows:
That establishes Schiff as a facts-don’t-matter chairman who makes fellow Democrats seem immune to reality.
But that’s their right, and Schiff did win his Southern California district with 78 percent of the vote.
So instead of resigning, Schiff shrewdly started fundraising and campaigning on the heels of Trump’s demand.
“Adam won’t be intimidated,” a campaign tweet said, “Show Adam you have his back: add your name now.”
end quotes
Yes, people, it is all about raking in those BIG BUCK$, and for smarmy little twerp-o-crat Adam Schiff, that means he has to keep beating on that same drum over and over and over and over, as we again see by returning to that article as follows:
On Thursday, all nine Republicans on the committee called on Schiff to resign his chairmanship because he continued to argue there is evidence of collusion between Team Trump and the Russians.
As House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called GOP members “scaredy cats,” Schiff doubled down on his collusion claim, with sound bites about his high standards that soar above the low-ball behavior of the Trump campaign and Republicans who defend the Trump team.
“You may think it’s OK how Trump and his associates interacted with Russians during the campaign,” Schiff said to his colleagues.
“I don’t.”
“I think it’s immoral.”
“I think it’s unethical.”
“I think it’s unpatriotic.”
“And yes, I think it’s corrupt.”
end quotes
And as a loyal American citizen who is not a politician like Adam Schiff, I personally think it was immoral, unethical, unpatriotic, and yes, corrupt, the way Hillary Rodham Clinton interacted with the Russians, making them stronger at our expense as a nation and as a people, when she was Hussein Obama’s secretary of state, but the Democrats choose to turn their collective backs on all of that in a cover-up attempt to keep our attention off of Hillary’s dirty doing with the Russians, which takes to an article THE HILL entitled “Schiff: Intelligence agencies focused on Russian interference ‘even if the president isn’t'” by Zack Budryk on 16 June 2019, as follows:
House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) reacted Sunday to a New York Times report on U.S. intelligence agencies’ efforts against Russian election meddling that drew President Trump’s ire.
The Times article, published Saturday, detailed U.S. efforts to penetrate Russia’s power grid.
“It has gotten far, far more aggressive over the past year,” one senior intelligence official told the Times.
“We are doing things at a scale that we never contemplated a few years ago.”
“What I found most disturbing in that New York Times story was the fact that the security officials within the administration felt they couldn’t tell this to the president because they felt he might compromise that information,” Schiff said.
end quotes
Which, as can be expected from Adam Schiff, is horse****, if we actually bother to read the New York Times article, but before we do, let’s go back to a Washington Post article entitled “Obama’s secret struggle to punish Russia for Putin’s election assault” by Greg Miller, Ellen Nakashima, and Adam Entous on 23 June 2017, for some necessary background here that Adam Schiff, the head intelligence dude for the Democrats was apparently not familiar with, to wit:
A U.S. cyber-weapon
The most difficult measure to evaluate is one that Obama alluded to in only the most oblique fashion when announcing the U.S. response.
“We will continue to take a variety of actions at a time and place of our choosing, some of which will not be publicized,” he said in a statement released by the White House.
He was referring, in part, to a cyber operation that was designed to be detected by Moscow but not cause significant damage, officials said.
The operation, which entailed implanting computer code in sensitive computer systems that Russia was bound to find, served only as a reminder to Moscow of the United States’ cyber reach.
But Obama also signed the secret finding, officials said, authorizing a new covert program involving the NSA, CIA and U.S. Cyber Command.
The cyber operation is still in its early stages and involves deploying “implants” in Russian networks deemed “important to the adversary and that would cause them pain and discomfort if they were disrupted,” a former U.S. official said.
The implants were developed by the NSA and designed so that they could be triggered remotely as part of retaliatory cyber-strike in the face of Russian aggression, whether an attack on a power grid or interference in a future presidential race.
Officials familiar with the measures said that there was concern among some in the administration that the damage caused by the implants could be difficult to contain.
As a result, the administration requested a legal review, which concluded that the devices could be controlled well enough that their deployment would be considered “proportional” in varying scenarios of Russian provocation, a requirement under international law.
The operation was described as long-term, taking months to position the implants and requiring maintenance thereafter.
Under the rules of covert action, Obama’s signature was all that was necessary to set the operation in motion.
U.S. intelligence agencies do not need further approval from Trump, and officials said that he would have to issue a countermanding order to stop it.
The officials said that they have seen no indication that Trump has done so.
end quotes
So this cyber-warfare mentioned by Adam Schiff in the above article where he tells us that officials in Trump’s administration don’t trust him with this information, without mentioning who they might be, has been public knowledge now since 23 June 2017, almost two years now, thanks to the Washington Post, which is probably read by the Russians, so our “SECRET CYBER WAR” against the Russians is no secret at all, so Schiff is talking through his hat when he tells us that “security officials within the administration felt they couldn’t tell this to the president because they felt he might compromise that information.”
And to see exactly how stupid little Adam sounds there, let us go to the New York Times article entitled “U.S. Escalates Online Attacks on Russia’s Power Grid” by David E. Sanger and Nicole Perlroth on 16 June 2019 referenced above by Adam Schiff where we have as follows:
WASHINGTON — The United States is stepping up digital incursions into Russia’s electric power grid in a warning to President Vladimir V. Putin and a demonstration of how the Trump administration is using new authorities to deploy cybertools more aggressively, current and former government officials said.
end quotes
Now, I don’t know about any of you, but as I read that first sentence in the New York Times article, two things immediately leap out at us, to wit:
A) If the Trump administration is using new authorities to deploy cybertools more aggressively against Russia’s electric grid, then it would follow that Trump already is aware of what is going on, and
B) Since it is in the New York Times, the Russians also know about it.
So where is the big secret, Adam, besides in your fertile imagination?
Getting back to the NYT, let’s see what other “SECRETS” are being revealed here that these security officials within the administration felt they couldn’t tell to the president because they felt he might compromise that information, as if the NYT hasn’t already compromised it, to wit:
In interviews over the past three months, the officials described the previously unreported deployment of American computer code inside Russia’s grid and other targets as a classified companion to more publicly discussed action directed at Moscow’s disinformation and hacking units around the 2018 midterm elections.
Advocates of the more aggressive strategy said it was long overdue, after years of public warnings from the Department of Homeland Security and the F.B.I. that Russia has inserted malware that could sabotage American power plants, oil and gas pipelines, or water supplies in any future conflict with the United States.
But it also carries significant risk of escalating the daily digital Cold War between Washington and Moscow.
The administration declined to describe specific actions it was taking under the new authorities, which were granted separately by the White House and Congress last year to United States Cyber Command, the arm of the Pentagon that runs the military’s offensive and defensive operations in the online world.
end quotes
Now, this probably sails right over the head of Adam Schiff, who really is not very swift on the uptake, but one would think that if the White House, which is Trump, granted the authorities in the first place, that Trump would know about them before these so-called security officials within the administration who felt they couldn’t tell any of this to the president because they felt he might compromise that information according to Adam Schiff, so we can see exactly how stupid that statement of his really is, and again, since the New York Times has already compromised the information, what is the big deal, other than fundraising, of course.
Getting back to the NYT to see what other secrets are being revealed here, we have:
But in a public appearance on Tuesday, President Trump’s national security adviser, John R. Bolton, said the United States was now taking a broader view of potential digital targets as part of an effort “to say to Russia, or anybody else that’s engaged in cyberoperations against us, ‘You will pay a price.’”
Power grids have been a low-intensity battleground for years.
Since at least 2012, current and former officials say, the United States has put reconnaissance probes into the control systems of the Russian electric grid.
But now the American strategy has shifted more toward offense, officials say, with the placement of potentially crippling malware inside the Russian system at a depth and with an aggressiveness that had never been tried before.
It is intended partly as a warning, and partly to be poised to conduct cyberstrikes if a major conflict broke out between Washington and Moscow.
end quotes
So there we have what the Russians now know, if they didn’t before, which is highly doubtful, and it seems the only one who doesn’t have a clue as to what is going on here is Adam Schiff himself, especially since we have as follows from the NYT:
Mr. Trump issued new authorities to Cyber Command last summer, in a still-classified document known as National Security Presidential Memoranda 13, giving General Nakasone far more leeway to conduct offensive online operations without receiving presidential approval.
end quotes
Doesn’t this get exceedingly tedious here, people, having Adam Schiff constantly running around like a chicken with its head cut off, screeching about Trump giving away all of our secrets to the Russians, when in fact, that honor really should go to Hillary Clinton and Hussein Obama?
MEMO TO ADAM SCHIFF: Adam, dude, you are getting so tiresome with your stupid tirades against Trump which are based on lies, so give it a rest, dude!
Find something real to talk about, and maybe you can get some credibility back, but until then, Adam, when you look in the mirror, what you have staring back at you is a LOSER!
And talk about a political house of cards poorly built on shifting sand that can’t even withstand a zephyr breeze that is now coming down around his ears, with those ears belonging to the smarmy and unctuous Democrat from Hollywood, California little Adam Schiff, a top Democrat fundraiser, I am referring to the FOX News story “Trump tells Fox News DOJ looking into whether his phone calls were monitored” by Gregg Re on 20 June 2019, where we had as follows, to wit:
But, Trump condemned Democrats’ ongoing hearings on collusion and obstruction as an attempt at a “do-over” of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia probe.
“Take a look at Ukraine,” Trump said.
“How come the FBI didn’t take the server from the DNC?”
“Just think about that one, Sean.”
That was a reference to the DNC’s decision in 2016 to turn over its server to the private security firm Crowdstrike, rather than the FBI, after what prosecutors said was a Russian-led hack.
The Hill’s John Solomon reported earlier Wednesday that the FBI, in search warrant affidavits, relied heavily on leaked Ukrainian financial documents concerning former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort — even though the bureau was repeatedly warned that the documents were untrustworthy and likely fake.
Earlier this year, Ukraine Prosecutor General Yurii Lutsenko opened a probe into the so-called “black ledger” files that led to Manafort’s abrupt departure from the Trump campaign.
The investigation commenced after an unearthed audio recording showed that a senior Ukrainian anticorruption official apparently admitted to leaking Manafort’s financial information in 2016 — including his ties to pro-Russian actors in Ukraine — to benefit Clinton.
A Ukrainian court recently ruled that the Manafort leak amounted to illegal interference in the U.S. election.
A 2017 investigation by Politico found that Ukrainian officials not only publicly sought to undermine Trump by questioning his fitness for office, but also worked behind the scenes to secure a Clinton victory.
end quotes
WHOA, here, people – how come we are not hearing anything about any of that from the congressional intelligence guru smarmy Adam Schiff?
Because it will upset the apple cart of his narrative about Trump and the Russians, which in turn will impact on his ability to fundraise off the passel of lies he has been peddling for at least the last two years, if not longer.
Getting back to that story, we have:
Trump told Hannity the episode was hardly surprising, given that the Hillary Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee (DNC), through the firm Fusion GPS, funded British ex-spy Christopher Steele’s creation of an unverified and largely discredited dossier.
The FBI went on to cite the dossier in secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court applications to surveil former Trump aide Carter Page.
“I think it’s a disgrace,” Trump said.
Numerous issues with the Steele dossier’s reliability have surfaced, including several that were brought to the FBI’s attention before it cited the dossier in its FISA application and subsequent renewals.
Mueller’s report made plain, for example, that former Trump attorney Michael Cohen did not travel to Prague to conspire with Russian hackers seeking to access Democrat files, as the dossier alleged.
Mueller also was unable to substantiate the dossier’s claims that Page had received a large payment relating to the sale of a share of Rosneft, a Russian oil giant.
end quotes
Which takes us back in time to a little more that two years ago to the “Full transcript: FBI Director James Comey testifies on Russian interference in 2016 election – Comey, Rogers testify on alleged Russian interference in U.S. election – Key moments from the House Intelligence Committee hearing with FBI Director James Comey and NSA head Michael Rogers on alleged Russian meddling in U.S. politics” by Washington Post Staff on March 20, 2017, where we had smarmy little Adam spouting off about that same now-discredited Steele dossier, as follows:
SCHIFF: What is striking here is the degree to which the Russians were willing to undertake such an audacious and risky action against the most powerful nation on Earth.
But there is a lot we don’t know.
Most important, we do not yet know whether the Russians have the help of U.S. citizens including people associated with the Trump campaign.
Many of the Trump’s campaign personnel, including the president himself, have ties to Russia and Russian interests.
This is of course no crime.
On the other hand, if the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it aided or abetted the Russians, it would not only be a serious crime, it would also represent one of the most shocking betrayals of democracy in history.
end quotes
One of the most shocking betrayals of democracy in history?
Adam, that is horse**** and hyperbole, and nothing more!
If democracy has been shockingly betrayed, it is because democracy is an unstable form of government in the first place, and for no other reason other than that.
Getting back to smarmy little Adam and the now-discredited Steele dossier, we have:
The issue of U.S. person involvement is only one of the important matters that the chairman and I have agreed to investigate and which is memorialized in the detailed and bipartisan scope of investigation that we have signed.
We’ll also examine whether the intelligence community’s assessment of the Russian operation is supported by the raw intelligence, whether the U.S. government responded properly or missed the opportunity to stop this Russian attack much earlier and whether the leak of information about Michael Flynn or others is indicative of a systemic problem.
Today, most of my Democratic colleagues will be exploring with the witnesses the potential involvement of U.S. persons in the Russian attack on our democracy.
It is not that we feel the other issues are less important; they are very important, but rather because this issue is least understood by the public.
We realize of course that the witnesses may not be able to answer many of the questions in open session.
They may or may not be willing to disclose even whether there is an investigation.
But we hope to present to you directors and the public why we believe this is a matter of such gravity that it demands a thorough investigation not only by us as we intend to do but by the FBI as well.
Let me give you a short preview of what I expect you’ll be asked by our members.
Whether the Russian active measures campaign began as nothing more than an attempt to gather intelligence or was always intended to be more than that, we do not know and is one of the questions we hope to answer.
But we do know this; the months of July and August 2016 appear to have been pivotal.
It was at this time the Russians began using the information they had stolen to help Donald Trump and harm Hillary Clinton.
And so the question is, why?
What was happening in July, August of last year and were U.S. persons involved?
Here are some of the matters drawn from public sources alone since that is all we can discuss in this setting that concern us and we believe should concern all Americans.
In early July, Carter Page, someone candidate Trump identified as one of his national security advisors, travels to Moscow on a trip approved by the Trump campaign.
While in Moscow, he gives a speech critical of the United States and other western countries for what he believes is a hypocritical focus on democratization and efforts to fight corruption.
According to Christopher Steele, a British — a former British intelligence officer, who is reportedly held in high regard by U.S. intelligence, Russian sources tell him that Page has also had a secret meeting with Igor Sechin, CEO of the Russian gas giant, Rosneft.
Sechin is reported to be a former KGB agent and close friend of Putin’s.
According to Steele’s Russian sources, Page is offered brokerage fees by such an on a deal involving a 19 percent share of the company.
According to Reuters, the sale of a 19.5 percent share of Rosneft later takes place with unknown purchasers and unknown brokerage fees.
end quotes
Except we now know today, despite the crap Adam Schiff was spewing two years ago in that March 20, 2017 hearing which served as the basis for the subsequent Mullet Commission, Mueller was unable to substantiate the Steele dossier’s claims that Page had received a large payment relating to the sale of a share of Rosneft, a Russian oil giant, which seems to mstrongly indicate that back in March of 2017, smarmy6 little Adam Schiff was feeding we, the American people with falsehoods and lies in his effort to bring down the sitting president of the United States of America.
Shame on you, Adam, for thinking you could get away with lying to us unchallenged.
A criminal investigation has been announced investigating the investigators; let the indictments flow…
Yes, this all gets more and more weird by the day.
And the smarmy little Adam Schiff has succeeded in making himself a laughing stock outside of the Beltway with his claims that if Trump does not come to heel when given the command “heel” by Adam Schiff, a mere congressman from Hollywood, California, then Trump is “obstructing justice,” which is horse****.
Somehow, Adam has come to the conclusion, despite all the evidence from our history to the contrary, that as a mere congressman, which is all he is notwithstanding any other titles of royalty he might like to give himself, that Trump as president answer to congressman Adam Schiff, who sees himself as one of Trump’s councilors, which takes us to “Landholder VI” by Oliver Ellsworth in the Connecticut Courant, an early version of the Cape Charles Mirror, on December 10, 1787, as follows:
The President of the United States has no council, etc., says Col. Mason.
His proposed council would have been expensive — they must constantly attend the president, because the president constantly acts.
This council must have been composed of great characters, who could not be kept attending without great salaries, and if their opinions were binding on the president his responsibility would be destroyed — if divided, prevent vigor and dispatch — if not binding, they would be no security.
The states who have had such councils have found them useless, and complain of them as a dead weight.
In others, as in England, the supreme executive advises when and with whom he pleases; if any information is wanted, the heads of the departments who are always at hand can best give it, and from the manner of their appointment will be trustworthy.
Secrecy, vigor, dispatch and responsibility, require that the supreme executive should be one person, and unfettered otherwise than by the laws he is to execute.
end quotes
In our system of government then, smarmy little Adam Schiff is not the overseer of the president.
Too bad he is ignorant of that fact.
Adam Schiff is the living epitome and poster child of what a complete waste of time, tax payer dollars and government resources it has been putting the Democrats in charge of OUR United States House of Representatives, where that worthless faction led by “NANCY NO” Pelosi of ultra-liberal and quite whacked-out San Francisco, California, where she is treated as their queen, has accomplished virtually nothing of lasting positive consequence for WE, the AMERICAN PEOPLE who are not Democrats and do not drink their toxic Kool-Aid, except to divide the nation right down the middle into those who find the Democrats quite repellent, versus those who don’t like Trump, as a result of the efforts of the Democrats and Adam Schiff to demonize Trump every day of the week and twice at least on the Sunday morning talk shows, where the Democrats try to make us and keep us angry at Trump so we will be stupid and vote Democrat come next November.
One would think that if Adam Schiff was really concerned about the “national interest,” as opposed to his own considerable personal political interests, that he would be leading the effort to get to the bottom of whether Joe Biden was doing some hinky stuff with Ukraine while he was Obama’s vice president, as opposed to leading a massive effort at taxpayer expense to conduct a white-wash and cover-up to protect Joe Biden and the Democrat party.
I heard Adam Schiff on the radio news this morning, and frankly, the dude sounds like he is losing it big time.
What Schiff said that had me thinking he is going bonkers was that the only inference that can be taken from Mr. Kupperman being a no-show at Schiff’s hearing today was that Trump was trying to cover up something criminal!
What horsecrap!
POLITICO caught that action in an article entitled “Schiff warns Trump is inviting impeachment by blocking witnesses – The Intelligence Committee chairman vowed Democrats will not be slowed by legal battles in their march toward impeachment” by Kyle Cheney on 10/28/2019, as follows:
President Donald Trump’s effort to block a former national security aide from testifying in Democrats’ impeachment inquiry is strengthening the case for impeachment based on obstruction of Congress, House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said Monday.
But more significantly, Schiff said Trump’s direction that Kupperman ignore Congress’ subpoena — along with other witnesses the White House has sought to block — has formed “a very powerful case against the president for obstruction, an article of impeachment based on obstruction.”
Schiff also argued that the president is seeking to block Kupperman because he is concerned about a high-level source corroborating damning testimony that Trump pressured Ukraine to open investigations of his political rivals — and condition military aid and a White House visit on bending the European ally to his will.
end quotes
And there I have to say WHOA, Adam, wait a minute – Joe Biden is not Trump’s “political rival.”
Joe Biden has held himself out to the American people as a candidate for our highest office in this land, that of United States president, a position which by OUR Constitution is to take care that the laws, OUR laws, are enforced, and if Joe Biden cannot do that because he is corrupt, or compromised by a foreign power, then we the American people have both a need and a right to now about it.
So that, Adam, is a real cheap and quite shabby excuse for your cover-up and white-wash of Joe Biden that you are conducting here by going after Trump, instead of Joe Biden, that it is wrong for Trump to seek evidence that Joe Biden is corrupt because Joe , in your empty words, is a “political rival,” which takes us back to that POLITICO article as follows:
Schiff’s comments came shortly after Republicans derided the impeachment inquiry as a farce built on hearsay.
“Every single witness who talked to the president, each and every time they’ve said he did nothing wrong, he’s innocent of any charges.” Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) told reporters.
“It’s always people who talked to people who have talked to other people who think that he might have meant this.”
“When you get direct evidence, this president is not only innocent, but he certainly has not done anything impeachable and it’s time we bring this charade to a close.”
end quotes
And that is the latest from Adam Schiff’s “HEAR-SAY GATE SAGA”, where Trump is to be impeached because somebody overheard someone else telling a third persons what a fourth person said they heard from a fifth person about something Trump was said to have either said or done, which is why Trump should be impeached.
“God knows that fools and knaves have voice enough in government already; it is to be hoped these wise prophesiers of evil would not wish to give them a constitutional privilege to send members in proportion to their numbers.”
Those words were posted on December 12, 1787 in the “Cato” Essay in the Country Journal and Advertiser, Poughkeepsie with regard to our House of Representatives, and based on the show the Democrats in that House are giving us today with these endless Trump Impeachment Inquiries and Investigations, we have more of them now, then ever.
With respect to these never-ending hearings, consider the Washington Post article
“Democrats unveil procedures for Trump’s impeachment inquiry, rebutting GOP attacks” by Mike DeBonis on 29 October 2019, where we are treated to the following:
House Democrats unveiled new procedures for the impeachment inquiry of President Trump on Tuesday, responding to Republican demands for due process by setting out rules for future public hearings delving into whether Trump should be removed from office.
The resolution backed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) hands the lead role to the House Intelligence Committee and its chairman, Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.), who would have broad latitude to organize extended questioning of potential public witnesses.
end quotes
So, “NANCY NO” Pelosi is keeping Hollywood, California Congressman Adam Schiff in the spotlight, primarily because it is good for Democrat fund-raising efforts to do so, given Adam’s status as a top Democrat fundraiser, with him reporting as of 09/30/2019 that he has raised $25,071,876.
So what exactly is going on here, besides the Democrats still fixin’ to get with it with respect to actually voting to actually impeach Trump as opposed to voting to continue talking about impeaching Trump because they have no cause to do so, and need to keep hunting for one?
According to the Washington Post, which knows these things because the Democrats use them as a media outlet, we have this to consider:
Rules Committee Chairman Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) said Tuesday the resolution “outlines the next steps in this inquiry, including establishing the procedure for public-facing hearings conducted by the Intelligence Committee and the process for transferring evidence to the Judiciary Committee once they are completed.”
“The president’s Republican allies in Congress have tried to hide the president’s conduct, but the American people will now see the facts firsthand,” he said.
end quotes
We’re going to see the facts firsthand?
Really?
And when might that be?
Getting back to the Washington Post:
The drafting of the procedures took place among a tight circle of close Pelosi confidants, leaving rank-and-file lawmakers and even some top Democratic leaders in the dark.
end quotes
HUSH!
SHHHHH!
KEEP IT QUIET!
WE NEED THE SUSPENSE!
And the game goes on and on and on and on and on!
But wait, there is always more to come in this bizarre story, and it is as follows, to wit:
Addressing reporters Tuesday morning, House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) said he had not yet scheduled a vote on the resolution — contradicting Pelosi, who pledged to hold a vote this week.
“I have not read it yet; the members have not read it yet,” Hoyer said, showing some frustration at a meeting with reporters.
“We’re going to have to consider whether or not it’s ready to go on Thursday.”
“I hope that is the case.”
end quotes
So, from that we can infer that they are still in the stage of fixin’ to get with it, perhaps the penultimate stage of fixing to get with it as opposed to actually getting with it, but then again, the way this show has been going, perhaps not, which takes us back to the Washington Post, as follows:
Pelosi announced plans to vote on the resolution in a letter to Democratic members Monday, and, according to three House aides who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe private discussions, she has kept a tight leash on the process of drafting the measure — excluding Hoyer and other leaders.
end quotes
It’s all about politics and timing, people – nothing of substance, just appearance – if we will only give the Democrats a bit more time, they will finally find the dirt on Trump they need to impeach him, and we are just supposed to sit here and be patient, which is horsecrap, and that horse crap brings us to this horse crap from the Washington Post article, to wit:
Democratic leaders have been careful not to characterize the measure as authorizing the impeachment inquiry, something they say has been underway already for weeks without a House vote.
“We have an inquiry looking at whether articles of impeachment are justified by the facts,” Hoyer said.
“We’ve been doing that.”
“We are doing it.”
“We’re going to continue to do it.”
“This is about process as to when we move to out of the investigatory phase, which we’ve been in, into a phase where we have public hearings.”
“That’s what it is.”
“No more.”
“No less.”
end quotes
So, still smoke, people, but so far, no sighting of fire has yet been made, nor is it supposed to be, because this is a silly game, as we can see from the following:
Several Democrats said Tuesday they believed the vote would undermine Republicans, who for weeks have raised objections to the process Democrats have undertaken and have called for a formal vote on launching impeachment proceedings.
“The message this week is going to be: You asked for it, you got it,” said Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-N.J.).
Several members who attended a caucus meeting held at the Democratic National Committee Tuesday morning said they were ready to vote to formalize the next step in the impeachment investigation — including some in swing districts where the vote could be a political liability.
“I have no qualms about taking a vote,” said Rep. Abigail Spanberger (D-Va.), a freshman running in a district Trump previously won by 7 points.
“We’ve been clearly in an impeachment inquiry, and laying out the plans for the next step, I think, is a helpful thing to do for the American people to understand the parameters of the public hearings.”
Rep. Ron Kind (D-Wis.), a veteran lawmaker whose district voted for Trump by 5 points in 2016, also said he planned to support the measure: “We fully support a thorough investigation and we’re going to continue doing what we’re doing.”
end quotes
So, how the heck many “steps” are there anyway in an impeachment inquiry besides in this case a veritable plethora of them?
Is this a political version of climbing the stairway to heaven step by step by step ad infinitum?
And is this silly show starring Hollywood, California Congressman Adam Schiff ever going to end, or will his witch hunts go on forever?
Watching Adam Schiff currently speaking to the House what a piece of dog shit! Nancy just took the microphone; they both constitute a disgusting set of dog shit bookends!
And just think, right now, they are two of the most powerful people not only in America, but in the world, as well.
Antony and Cleopatra?
Caesar and Cleopatra?
Or Nancy Pelosi as Septimia Zenobia, the third century queen of the Palmyrene Empire in Syria, and Adam Schiff is her Odaenathus who became king in 260, thus elevating Palmyra to supreme power in the Near East by defeating the Sassanians and stabilizing the Roman East.
Consider that in 270, Zenobia launched an invasion which brought most of the Roman East under her sway and culminated with the annexation of Egypt.
By mid-271 her realm extended from Ancyra, central Anatolia, to southern Egypt, although she remained nominally subordinate to Rome.
Now, A friend, that is the same kind of raw political power that Nancy Pelosi possesses today, and truthfully, even considering Hillary Clinton, I don’t think there has been one woman with so much political power in the palm of her hand in between Nancy Pelosi and Zenobia.
Consider that like Nancy Pelosi, Zenobia was a cultured monarch who fostered an intellectual environment in her court, which was open to scholars and philosophers.
As the rise and fall of Zenobia has inspired historians, artists and novelists, so that Zenobia is a patriotic symbol in Syria, so too will Nancy Pelosi inspire not only historians and artists and novelists, but pretty much everyone, and that is something, isn’t it, A friend?
And thanks to the Cape Charles Mirror. we can say that we were there when it was all going down.
Good God, but how very tedious and absolutely silly this endless Democrat “impeachment inquiry” bull**** is, and what a surreal show the Democrats are giving us, as they prove on a daily basis what a mistake it was to put those clowns in charge of the House of Representatives, as we can see from the Fox News article “Two House Democrats break ranks with Pelosi on impeachment rules vote” by Tyler Olson on 31 October 2019, to wit:
Two House Democrats broke ranks with their party leadership on Thursday’s highly-contentious vote for a resolution setting the rules for the impeachment inquiry into President Trump.
end quotes
Now, to see just how very stupid this all is, we just need to focus on the phrase “contentious vote for a resolution setting the rules for the impeachment inquiry into President Trump.”
Haven’t they been conducting an impeachment inquiry into Trump since the 2016 presidential election?
Isn’t that what all the FBI investigations were about – getting criminal dirt, or any other kind of dirt on Trump that the Democrats could use to impeach him?
Isn’t that what the Mueller Hearings were all about?
So what the hell are these hearings about then?
Have they found even a shred of evidence of something that is impeachable?
For a glimpse at that answer, let’s go back to the Fox News article as follows:
The resolution passed 232-196 but lacked votes from Reps. Jeff Van Drew, D-N.J., who has long expressed skepticism about impeachment, and Collin Peterson, D-Minn., whose district Trump won by 31 points.
“At the end of the day we’ll have the same president and same candidate and a failed impeachment process, and the only difference would be that the president will have been exonerated of charges,” Van Drew said in a statement to Fox News.
Van Drew said that although he “feels concerned with many of the allegations related to the president,” he doesn’t think it’s enough to warrant Trump’s removal from office.
end quotes
So, there is one Democrat who is thinking straight, anyway.
But what about the rest of them?
Let’s go back to FOX and see what’s up, to wit:
Other Democrats said their support for Thursday’s resolution was not necessarily an indication of how they would vote on possible impeachment articles.
Freshman Rep. Kendra Horn, D-Okla., announced she would vote for the resolution while making clear it was not a vote for impeachment — just to authorize the rules for impeachment hearings.
end quotes
Ah, okay, sure, Kendra – and thanks for making it very clear for all of us who are wondering why the Democrats are wasting our time and tax dollars on this cavalcade of horsecrap what exactly it is that is going on here – you’re not voting to actually impeach Trump; to the contrary, you are voting to get with impeaching Trump at some time in the future based on your premise that if you conduct enough witch hunts and fishing expeditions, you might eventually uncover something of actual substance to impeach Trump with, but in the meantime, it is just a silly political game you are playing, which takes us back to Fox News, as follow:
In a letter to Democratic colleagues Monday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said she was bringing the rules resolution to the floor specifically to take that talking point away from Republicans.
“We are taking this step to eliminate any doubt as to whether the Trump administration may withhold documents, prevent witness testimony, disregard duly authorized subpoenas, or continue obstructing the House of Representatives,” Pelosi said.
end quotes
Obstructing the House of Representatives?
At what?
Obstructing the Democrats in the House of Representatives from reducing the Office of President to a sniveling creature of theirs so that the Office of President is merely an appendage of the House of Representatives to be controlled at all times by the Democrats?
Getting back to Fox News:
Republican representatives, however, have not been satisfied with the move, saying that the impeachment inquiry is already discredited by the secret hearings and bias against Trump from Democrats.
“It’s clear Pelosi needs to declare a mistrial,” Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., said Tuesday as he and Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, accused House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., of stopping a witness from answering certain Republican questions during a deposition.
“This has been a tainted process from the start.”
“What happened today confirms even worse just how poorly Adam Schiff is handling this process, denying the ability for Republicans to even ask basic questions that are critical to the heart of whether or not a President of the United States is impeached.”
Rep. Ross Spano, R-Fla., also criticized the resolution, noting Republicans will be unable to subpoena witnesses without the approval of Schiff, echoing a criticism other Republicans have leveled about the impeachment rules resolution released Tuesday.
end quotes
So, kiss due process of law good-bye, people of America, when a little twerp like the smarmy and unctuous Adam Schiff, Congressman of Hollywood, California can use his position as a committee chairman to so pervert process by impeding and obstructing witness testimony that it seems as if we are no longer living in the United States of America under rule of law, but have instead reverted to the status of a third-world banana republic ****hole.
So, recapping events in here to bring this thread up to date, because this silly drama starring top Democrat FUNDRAISER Adam Schiff, the smarmy and unctuous Democrat congressman from Hollywood, California is not only still going on, but is gaining steam, which is giving Adam a lot of face time on TV, which is a boon to his FUNDRAISING efforts, eleven months ago, on December 16, 2018, with the courtesy of the Cape Charles Mirror, I started this thread out thusly, to wit:
First off, people, to understand where I am going here, we, the actual American people, whether born here or naturalized, need to ask ourselves why it is that of all the types of government there are in the world, we have this particular frame with an executive not beholden to the House of Representatives, because he does not serve at the pleasure of the House of Representatives, although the incoming Democrat party seems bent on changing that by using the threat of impeachment as a whip and a goad to bring the president under their direct control.
end quotes
Well, people, here I am, eleven months later, to say that in fact, the office of the executive of the United States of America as originally envisioned by the founding fathers as a separate branch of OUR federal government no longer exists, having been effectively reduced to be nothing more than a pimple on the *** of Hollywood Congressman Adam Schiff, who in a silent but obvious coup d’état has assumed the powers and duties of the chief executive officer of the United States of America.
That is obvious when we see Adam Schiff calling U.S. ambassadors to heel, because any grade school kid used to be able to tell you that under our form of government based on rule of law, as we see from Wikipedia, Ambassadors of the United States are persons nominated as ambassadors by the President to serve as United States diplomats to individual nations of the world, to international organizations, and as ambassadors-at-large.
Ambassadors serve “at the pleasure of the President”, meaning they can be dismissed at any time.
end quotes
So, that is the way it was before Hollywood Democrat Adam Schiff launched his silent coup and made ambassadors responsible to him instead of Trump, so they can assist Adam Schiff in his coup.
So, the office of the presidency in the United States of America has become an irrelevancy, which takes us back to the opening lines of the original post, to wit:
Think the Lilliputians, tiny people who are about one-twelfth the height of ordinary human beings who live in Lilliput, said to be ruled by an Emperor assisted by a first minister who carries a white staff and several other officials who later bring articles of impeachment against Gulliver on grounds of treason, and you are in the right ballpark!
Despite OUR Constitution, Adam Schiff is now in charge of OUR foreign policy – a coup by any other name.
As to his fundraising, our Adam had a pretty good haul this last reporting period of 09/30/2019, with his campaign committee alone raising $4,377,168 to help Adam in his quest to totally destroy the Trump presidency.
Among the interesting donors was a law firm called Miller Barondess Llp.
What makes them interesting with respect to Adam Schiff taking control of our foreign policy away from Trump and giving it mto himself is the fact that the Firm obtained a judgment for $46.7 million following a two-month jury trial where the Firm represented California affiliates of Taiwanese-based Pou Chen Corporation.
Pou Chen Corporation is one of the world’s largest companies with over 400,000 employees and facilities located in Taiwan, China, Vietnam, Indonesia, Mexico and the United States.
Through its various operations, Pou Chen manufactures over 30% of the world’s athletic footwear and a whole host of electronic and other products for several major brands.
Adam’s contributors at Miller Barondess Llp. filed suit in 2005 against MTS Products, and its owner Ben Hsia, arising from an agreement to sell electronics products – laptop computers, monitors and related electronics – to Wal-Mart.
The clients of Adam’s contributors at Miller Barondess Llp had never done business before with Wal-Mart, and brought in MTS and Mr. Hsia because of their extensive prior dealings as an approved Wal-Mart supplier.
The venture sold over $50 million of products to Wal-Mart before dissolving amid allegations of non-payment of funds and defective products.
The jury deliberated for nine days before returning one of the largest verdicts of the year.
end quotes
So why do they need a piece of Adam Schiff, who is now the de facto president of the United States of America?
And then there is Quinn, Emanuel et al, and here, people, we are talking real bad-ass lawyers, the kind that you sure don’t want chewing into you for any reason.
They bill themselves as basically bad-to-the-bone type of dudes, as follows: litigation is a zero sum game; there is a winner and loser; we know how to win.
Impeaching a president is actually kind of like that, as well, when you think of it.
Now, that contributor to the political cause of Hollywood, California Congressman Adam Schiff boasts of having a pack of lawyers 800+ strong, which is a formidable army of lawyers, let me tell you, and they are in 23 offices in 10 different countries on 4 different continents, so one can clearly see why they would want to buy a piece of Adam Schiff and curry favor with him, given that he is now firmly in charge of our foreign policy and Trump is on his way out the door with the footprint of Adam Schiff on his backside.
ALL foreign policy since time immemorial between nations has involved a quid pro quo, which is something for something.
All American foreign policy, including the Cuban Missile Crisis, since George Washington was president has involved a quid pro quo of some sort.
It is absurd to think that it is otherwise.
If no quid pro quo was involved, it would not be diplomacy.
And Trump is not a presidential candidate with “Uncle Joe” Biden as his opponent – Trump happens to be a sitting United States president, and “Uncle Joe” is an American citizen who is not exempt from OUR laws because he happens to be a Democrat who is running for president.
Being a Democrat presidential candidate, despite what Adam Schiff would have us believe, does not confer immunity from OUR laws on the candidate.
And if Trump withheld a White House visit from the Ukrainian dude unless he would investigate the rampant corruption in the ****hole of a country that may have involved Joe Biden and his son, well, that was the proper thing for Trump to do, because why would we want some corrupt Ukrainian visiting OUR White House, just because the Democrats think it is the proper thing to do, being more in tune with and accepting of corruption as they are.
From pp.28,29 of “Dereliction of Duty, Lyndon Johnson, Robert McNamara, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Lies that led to Vietnam” by H.R. McMaster, re: the Cuban Missile Crisis and quid pro quos:
In combination with Robert Kennedy’s secret negotiations with the Soviet ambassador Anatoli Dobrynin, during which he discussed a quid pro quo arrangement involving the withdrawal of U.S. Jupiter missiles from Turkey, McNamara’s plan for gradually intensifying military pressure, or “turning the screw,” on the Soviets seemed to produce the desired result.
The Soviets agreed to withdraw the missiles in exchange for a U.S. promise not to invade Cuba and a secret pledge to remove American intermediate-range missiles from Turkey.
*******
Despite having declared “victory” in the missile crisis, the president was concerned that concessions to the Soviets would make him vulnerable to charges of appeasement and weakness.
He kept secret his agreement to remove American missiles from Turkey, and told reporters to downplay the extent of the American victory.
The president feared that boasts from Washington would incite the Soviet leader to reveal the missile bargain, made without consultation with NATO or the Turks.
Although the president could count on McNamara to tell the Congress that there was “absolutely no connection” between the removal of American missiles from Turkey and the resolution of the missile crisis, the JCS posed a special problem.
To keep the Chiefs “on the team,” Kennedy again invited them to the White House, where he lauded their advice and performance during the crisis.
Recognizing the duplicitous nature of the president’s praise, Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) Admiral Anderson remarked to his colleagues, “We have been had.”
Air Force Chief LeMay considered the missile trade and the fact that Soviet troops and non-nuclear weapons remained in Cuba “the greatest defeat in our history.”
This ABSURD FARCE that this zealot Democrat from Hollywood, California Adam Schiff is staging down in Washington, D.C., especially yesterday with that drama queen he had on his STUPID STAGE who was weeping and wailing about “smear campaigns” against her, BOO HOO HOO. when the fact of the matter was that she served at the pleasure of Trump who didn’t need some “cause” based on a “smear campaign” to remove her from her position, all he needed to do was say, “YOU’RE GONE,” is becoming positively disgusting, and I say that as an American citizen who doesn’t belong to either of those two contending parties down there in that foetid, pestilential swamp of Washington. D.C., which has become the world capital of total insanity where this smarmy and unctuous Hollywood, California Democrat Adam Schiff now thinks that the president of the United States of America serves at his pleasure, which thought on his part is in turn causing a constitutional crisis in this nation of ours, a constitutional crisis that was in fact anticipated by the founders, who thought they had put in place an enduring system which should have been robust enough to avert that crisis, as we can clearly see from a reading of FEDERALIST No. 10, “The Union as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection,” which it clearly has failed to be as this smarmy and unctuous zealot Adam Schiff is now proving with his STUPID SHOW or POLITICAL SOAP OPERA in Washington with a seemingly endless array of victims coming to testify under oath in public about being victims, and how bad that makes them feel inside, instead of feeling all warm and squishy as it should be here in America, to the People of the State of New York from the New York Packet by James Madison on Friday, November 23, 1787.
And with respect to Ukraine being a corrupt ****hole that this smarmy and unctuous Adam Schiff tells us our national security now depends on, which itself is an absurd and surreal proposition, in a March 2019 speech to the Ukraine Crisis Media Center, this same Marie Yovanovitch who is now whining to Schiff about being a “victim,” because today, America is in love with people who are victims and who whine in public about it, said that the Ukrainian government was not making sufficient progress to combat corruption, saying: “It is increasingly clear that Ukraine’s once-in-a-generation opportunity for change has not yet resulted in the anti-corruption or rule of law reforms that Ukrainians expect or deserve.”
So what the **** are we doing with that corrupt crowd in a nation where corruption is a way of life as an “ally” to protect our national security?
Have we fallen so low under Obama that we need a corrupt nation like Ukraine to protect us?
And why are we sending them any kind of military aid at all when just eight (8) months ago, Marie Yovanovitch was making it clear that the place was a corrupt ****hole where rule of law was a myth?
What the hell are we doing in bed with that corrupt crowd over there, Adam, which takes us to Federalist No. 10, as follows:
AMONG the numerous advantages promised by a well constructed Union, none deserves to be more accurately developed than its tendency to break and control the violence of faction.
end quotes
While that may in fact be true in theory, sadly for us American citizens today appalled at this sick spectacle this zealot Adam Schiff is staging in Washington in his efforts to destroy Donald Trump, our Union was not constructed near well enough to break the violence of faction, as we watch the violence of Democrat faction at work in Washington right now with these INQUISITORIAL WITCH HUNTS being conducted by the Hollywood Congressman who sees himself as MASTER OF THE KNOWN WORLD AND BEYOND, which again takes us back to Jemmy Madison and Federalist No. 10, as follows:
The friend of popular governments never finds himself so much alarmed for their character and fate, as when he contemplates their propensity to this dangerous vice.
He will not fail, therefore, to set a due value on any plan which, without violating the principles to which he is attached, provides a proper cure for it.
The instability, injustice, and confusion introduced into the public councils, have, in truth, been the mortal diseases under which popular governments have everywhere perished.
end quotes
And there is what we are seeing today occurring in our Republic with these Schiff Witch Hunts: instability, injustice, and confusion are being introduced into OUR public councils by Adam Schiff, and in truth, he and they represent the mortal diseases under which our federal government as we now know it may well perish, to be replaced by a DICTATORSHIP OF THE DEMOCRATS, which again takes us back to Federalist No. 10, as follows:
Complaints are everywhere heard from our most considerate and virtuous citizens, equally the friends of public and private faith, and of public and personal liberty, that our governments are too unstable, that the public good is disregarded in the conflicts of rival parties, and that measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority.
end quotes
And amen to that, Jemmy, dude – right on, because that is where we are right now in this country thanks to Adam Schiff – the public good is being totally disregarded in this conflict between the ravening Democrats and Trump over control of the office of the executive, which Adam Schiff is claiming for himself, and that as a result, measures are being decided by Schiff and the Democrats, not according to the rules of justice but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority in the House of Representatives.
Getting back to Federalist No. 10:
By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.
end quotes
Today, that is the CULT known as the Democrat party under its charismatic cult leader Nancy Pelosi who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, possibly insanity itself, adversed to the rights of us other citizens in this nation, and to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community who do not belong to the Cult of Democrats.
Getting back once again to Federalist No. 10, Jemmy Madison continued as follows:
The latent causes of faction are thus sown in the nature of man; and we see them everywhere brought into different degrees of activity, according to the different circumstances of civil society.
A zeal for different opinions concerning religion, concerning government, and many other points, as well of speculation as of practice; an attachment to different leaders ambitiously contending for pre-eminence and power; or to persons of other descriptions whose fortunes have been interesting to the human passions, have, in turn, divided mankind into parties, inflamed them with mutual animosity, and rendered them much more disposed to vex and oppress each other than to co-operate for their common good.
So strong is this propensity of mankind to fall into mutual animosities, that where no substantial occasion presents itself, the most frivolous and fanciful distinctions have been sufficient to kindle their unfriendly passions and excite their most violent conflicts.
end quotes
You would think with that last sentence that Jemmy was writing those words today as we view the violent passions of the ravening Democrats on display in Washington because Trump is president and Hillary Clinton is not – that, people, is the frivolous and fanciful distinction that has been sufficient in our times today to kindle the unfriendly passions of these Democrats to excite if they can the most violent conflicts between their cult members and the rest of us here in America who do not drink Democrat Kool-Aid.
And that is the latest from this sick spectacle raging in Washington, D.C. today, thanks to Adam Schiff and the Democrat cult here in America.
And now we pause for a commercial break and station identification, so if you need a sandwich or some other refreshments, now is the time to run to the concession stand and we will be right back after these words from our sponsors.
**********FLASH!!!!!!!****************
HUGE BREAKING NEWS!!!!
ASSOCIATED PRESS
“Schiff says Sondland testimony gets ‘right to the heart’ of the bribery allegation against Trump”
By Associated Press
Published: Nov 20, 2019 6:25 p.m. ET
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff said testimony by Ambassador Gordon Sondland “goes right to the heart of the issue of bribery as well as other potential high crimes and misdemeanors’’ by President Donald Trump.
end quotes
Except as we can clearly see from PERRIN v. UNITED STATES (1979), United States Supreme Court, No. 78-959, Argued: October 3, 1979 Decided: November 27, 1979, that is a continuation of the pure unadulterated HOG**** that has been spewing forth from the mouth of the wild-eyed zealot Hollywood, California Democrat Adam Schiff since December 2018, to wit:
At early common law, the crime of bribery extended only to the corruption of judges. 3 E. Coke, Institutes *144, *147 (1628).
By the time of Blackstone, bribery was defined as an offense involving a judge or “other person concerned in the administration of justice” and included the giver as well as the receiver of the bribe. 4 W. Blackstone, Commentaries *139-*140 (1765).
The writings of a 19th-century scholar inform us that by that time the crime of bribery had been expanded to include the corruption of any public official and the bribery of voters and witnesses as well. J. Stephen, Digest of the Criminal Law 85-87 (1877).
And by the 20th century, England had adopted the Prevention of Corruption Act making criminal the commercial bribery of agents and employees. Act of 1906, 6 Edw. 7, ch. 34, amended by the Prevention of Corruption Act of 1916, 6 & 7 Geo. 5, ch. 64.
end quotes
Thus, bribery would be somebody trying to bribe Trump, as we can see from 18 U.S.C. § 201, Bribery of public officials and witnesses, to wit:
(a) For the purpose of this section–
(1) the term “public official” means Member of Congress, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner, either before or after such official has qualified, or an officer or employee or person acting for or on behalf of the United States, or any department, agency or branch of Government thereof, including the District of Columbia, in any official function, under or by authority of any such department, agency, or branch of Government, or a juror;
(2) the term “person who has been selected to be a public official” means any person who has been nominated or appointed to be a public official, or has been officially informed that such person will be so nominated or appointed; and
(3) the term “official act” means any decision or action on any question, matter, cause, suit, proceeding or controversy, which may at any time be pending, or which may by law be brought before any public official, in such official’s official capacity, or in such official’s place of trust or profit.
(b) Whoever–
(1) directly or indirectly, corruptly gives, offers or promises anything of value to any public official or person who has been selected to be a public official, or offers or promises any public official or any person who has been selected to be a public official to give anything of value to any other person or entity, with intent–
(A) to influence any official act; or
(B) to influence such public official or person who has been selected to be a public official to commit or aid in committing, or collude in, or allow, any fraud, or make opportunity for the commission of any fraud, on the United States; or
(C) to induce such public official or such person who has been selected to be a public official to do or omit to do any act in violation of the lawful duty of such official or person;
(2) being a public official or person selected to be a public official, directly or indirectly, corruptly demands, seeks, receives, accepts, or agrees to receive or accept anything of value personally or for any other person or entity, in return for:
(A) being influenced in the performance of any official act;
(B) being influenced to commit or aid in committing, or to collude in, or allow, any fraud, or make opportunity for the commission of any fraud, on the United States; or
(C) being induced to do or omit to do any act in violation of the official duty of such official or person;
(3) directly or indirectly, corruptly gives, offers, or promises anything of value to any person, or offers or promises such person to give anything of value to any other person or entity, with intent to influence the testimony under oath or affirmation of such first-mentioned person as a witness upon a trial, hearing, or other proceeding, before any court, any committee of either House or both Houses of Congress, or any agency, commission, or officer authorized by the laws of the United States to hear evidence or take testimony, or with intent to influence such person to absent himself therefrom;
(4) directly or indirectly, corruptly demands, seeks, receives, accepts, or agrees to receive or accept anything of value personally or for any other person or entity in return for being influenced in testimony under oath or affirmation as a witness upon any such trial, hearing, or other proceeding, or in return for absenting himself therefrom;
shall be fined under this title or not more than three times the monetary equivalent of the thing of value, whichever is greater, or imprisoned for not more than fifteen years, or both, and may be disqualified from holding any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States.
(c) Whoever–
(1) otherwise than as provided by law for the proper discharge of official duty–
(A) directly or indirectly gives, offers, or promises anything of value to any public official, former public official, or person selected to be a public official, for or because of any official act performed or to be performed by such public official, former public official, or person selected to be a public official; or
(B) being a public official, former public official, or person selected to be a public official, otherwise than as provided by law for the proper discharge of official duty, directly or indirectly demands, seeks, receives, accepts, or agrees to receive or accept anything of value personally for or because of any official act performed or to be performed by such official or person;
(2) directly or indirectly, gives, offers, or promises anything of value to any person, for or because of the testimony under oath or affirmation given or to be given by such person as a witness upon a trial, hearing, or other proceeding, before any court, any committee of either House or both Houses of Congress, or any agency, commission, or officer authorized by the laws of the United States to hear evidence or take testimony, or for or because of such person’s absence therefrom;
(3) directly or indirectly, demands, seeks, receives, accepts, or agrees to receive or accept anything of value personally for or because of the testimony under oath or affirmation given or to be given by such person as a witness upon any such trial, hearing, or other proceeding, or for or because of such person’s absence therefrom;
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than two years, or both.
end quotes
Based on that, while it is ludicrous to think that Trump bribed the Ukrainian dude, it looks very much as if a case of BRIBERY could well be laid out against the smarmy and unctuous Hollywood, California Democrat who is soliciting campaign funds, a bribe by another name, in exchange for his efforts by any means to remove Trump from office!
To close:
17 November 2019
To: katherine.sullivan@cnn.com, chandelis.duster@cnn.com
Cc: cnn.feedback@cnn.com
RE: Your misleading statements
In your story “Pelosi to Trump: When you come after the whistleblower, ‘you’re in my wheelhouse'” updated 12:03 PM ET, Sun November 17, 2019. you make this misleading and/or intentionally false statement, to wit:
There is no evidence of wrongdoing by Joe or Hunter Biden.
end quotes
However, in the ABC News story “Allegations against Biden ‘not credible,’ testified US official now touted by Trump” on 8 November 2019, we had this:
Nevertheless, Volker acknowledged in his testimony that the allegations against Biden have “never actually been investigated” and have therefore never been directly or fully debunked.
end quotes
Which means that there is no evidence of wrongdoing by the Bidens because nobody ever looked, which is not at all the same as there being no evidence.
So, while this smarmy and unctuous wild-eyed Democrat zealot Adam Schiff, who reminds one very much of Oliver Cromwell or Maximilien François Marie Isidore de Robespierre, a member of the powerful Committee of Public Safety in revolutionary France who is best known for his role during the “Reign of Terror”, during which he exerted his influence to suppress the Girondins to the right, the Hébertists to the left and the Dantonists in the centre. who was eventually brought down by his obsession with the vision of an ideal republic and his indifference to the human costs of installing it, as is Adam Schiff today, tells us that testimony by Ambassador Gordon Sondland “goes right to the heart of the issue of bribery as well as other potential high crimes and misdemeanors’’ by President Donald Trump, in the Yahoo! News story “House Democrats ponder expanding impeachment probe after Sondland ‘game changer’ testimony” by Tom LoBianco on 22 November 2019, we had another Democrat calling it extortion, instead, to wit:
“In my view, what happened here is a textbook case of extortion, and I think that anybody who conspired with the president to engage in this criminal act should be looked at as well,” said Rep. Filemon Vela, a Texas Democrat.
end quotes
So, which is it – bribery?
Or extortion?
Or it is really both?
Or neither?
With respect to extortion of presidents of the United States of America, we have a United States statute which criminalize threats against the President and other federal officials which can be found in Chapter 41 of the U.S. Code, which chapter covers several different types of threat-related offenses involving federal government officials, plus related offenses such as blackmail, extortion, and receiving kickbacks from public works employees.
But that is attempting to extort the president of the United States of America so that doesn’t apply here, where it is alleged that Trump was extorting something from the dude over in the corrupt ****hole of Ukraine.
So what is extortion?
Turning to the experts at FINDLAW, we have as follows:
Extortion
Created by FindLaw’s team of legal writers and editors.
A large, intimidating man walks into a profitable liquor store in the heart of the city, not to buy anything but to offer “protection” to the shopkeeper (for a weekly fee, of course).
She declines, but he insists.
The man casually lists the names of her four children and states he wouldn’t want anything “bad” to happen to them.
The shopkeeper relents, agreeing to pay him a set amount each week.
Per the above illustration, extortion is the crime of obtaining money or property by threat to a victim’s property or loved ones, intimidation, or false claim of a right.
end quotes
So, okay, then, now that we have that squared away, did this Ambassador Gordon Sondland really tell the Democrats including this Filemon Vela, that Trump was trying to obtain money or property by threat to the Ukrainian dude’s property or loved ones, or intimidation, or false claim of a right?
Or is that all just Democrat horse****, because Trump never extorted anything from the Ukrainian dude which takes us back to the article on extortion, as follows:
Most states define extortion as the gaining of property or money by almost any kind of force or threat of violence, property damage, harm to reputation, or unfavorable government action.
While usually viewed as a form of theft/larceny, extortion differs from robbery in that the threat in question does not pose an imminent physical danger to the victim.
Extortion is a felony in all states.
Blackmail is a form of extortion in which the threat is to expose embarrassing and damaging information to family, friends, or the public.
Inherent in this common form of extortion is the threat to expose the details of someone’s private lives to the public unless money is exchanged.
Another common extortion crime is offering “protection” to a businessman to keep his business safe from burglary or vandalism.
For example, Dan goes to Victor’s place of business and demands monthly payment from Victor for the business’s “protection” from vandalism and after-hours theft.
Fearing that he or his business will suffer harm otherwise, Victor agrees to pay Dan.
Extortion can take place over the telephone, via mail, text, email or other computer or wireless communication.
If any method of interstate commerce is used in the extortion, it can be a federal crime.
Extortion Statutes
Virtually all extortion statutes require that a threat must be made to the person or property of the victim.
Threats to harm the victim’s friends or relatives may also be included.
It is not necessary for a threat to involve physical injury.
It may be sufficient to threaten to accuse another person of a crime or to expose a secret that would result in public embarrassment or ridicule.
The threat does not have to relate to an unlawful act.
Other types of threats sufficient to constitute extortion include those to harm the victim’s business and those to either testify against the victim or withhold testimony necessary to his or her defense or claim in an administrative proceeding or a lawsuit.
Many statutes also provide that any threat to harm another person in his or her career or reputation is extortion.
end quotes
Which takes us back to the Yahoo News article, as follows:
WASHINGTON — Ambassador Gordon Sondland’s explosive testimony Wednesday that “everyone was in the loop” on President Trump’s efforts to secure an investigation of a political rival prompted rank-and-file Democrats to discuss whether it was time to expand their probe.
Sondland testified in minute detail — down to the names of staffers and code words used internally to identify officials like Secretary of State Mike Pompeo — how Vice President Mike Pence, White House budget director Mick Mulvaney, former national security advisor John Bolton and others knew the intimate details of Trump’s plans.
“Was there a quid pro quo?” Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, testified.
“With regard to the requested White House call and White House meeting, the answer is yes.”
Georgia Democratic Rep. Hank Johnson described the testimony as a “smoking gun,” and Michigan Democrat Dan Kildee called it a “game changer.”
end quotes
WOW, people, that is HUGE – a “smoking gun” and a “game changer” all in one, except it isn’t at all!
IT’S GOSSIP!
Who in their right mind cares what code names anybody was called?
What does that have to do with anything, besides exactly nothing?
And the Secret Service has had code names for people in Washington since forever, so what is up with making an impeachment case out of the nicknames people in the White House were called, as if giving someone a nickname was a high crime or misdemeanor?
It’s the height of stupidity, isn’t it?
Getting back to that wild story from Yahoo, we have:
Sondland’s testimony added a flash of drama to impeachment hearings that, until Wednesday, had been fairly dry — filled with incredible detail of Trump’s efforts to coax an investigation of former Vice President Joe Biden from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, but lacking the high drama that Sondland provided.
end quotes
BINGO – there it is, people – the requisite amount of drama has finally been reached here to get this impeachment show finally on the road, as we see from the following:
Rep. Jamie Raskin, a Maryland Democrat and one of the lawmakers who will draw up the articles of impeachment after the public hearings, stood awestruck in his office Wednesday as he started watching Sondland’s testimony.
“I think this testimony will be explosive,” Raskin told Yahoo News just as Wednesday’s hearing opened.
“I think we have all the evidence we need.”
Raskin suggested that calling in additional witnesses as part of an expanded probe might be unnecessary.
“It would obviously be great to hear from the people who are the direct perpetrators of the scheme.”
“But we’ve heard from Sondland, and we’ve heard from [former U.S. diplomat to Ukraine Kurt] Volker, and we’ve heard from direct participants and eyewitnesses to everything that happened,” he said.
“There’s no alternative account of everything that happened out there.”
“That’s pretty clear evidence, and we’re not going to allow the president to drag this out for months and months.”
end quotes
So, sounds like game over for Trump from what Democrat Jamie Raskin is saying, and hey, the dude is a real-life Constitutional Scholar and esteemed law professor somewhere, anyway, and so he must know what he is talking about, right?
Or should that be not hardly?
Robespierre=guillotine=Trump.
And don’t think he won’t…………..metaphorically speaking.
But seriously for a moment, wouldn’t it be a hoot to see some actual heads roll?
Schiff’s round pate would probably roll the furthest while Nancy’s would just spin in place for a bit on that pointy chin and AOC? Well, AOC wouldn’t even notice her head was gone.
Don’t mind me, just a little beheading porn on a slow Saturday afternoon.
Now that I am done roaring with laughter, twice I have seen the live full face shot of this zealot Adam Schiff during these inquisitorial hearings of his where all manner of salacious, behind-the-scenes gossip is coming out as to what life in the very catty diplomatic service of the United States of America is really like, and what a pitiful crowd the lot of them are, a bunch of petty back-biters enjoying their moment on international TV as stars of the ADAM SHOW where they get to sling all kinds of **** about what they don’t like about Trump, and what somebody thought they heard somebody telling somebody else about what that person thought they overheard while evesdropping on their boss, as it is known out here in the wilds of America north of Cape Charles, and truly, it was like looking into the face and eyes of a religious zealot like Jim Jones or that Branch Davidian dude, or perhaps a Tomás de Torquemada with a Holy Office for the Propagation of the Democrat Faith, where Adam’s whole body was craning forward towards the camera while his eyes with a lot of white showing were bugging right out of the dude’s head like that dude in the Jim Carey movie whose eyes could pop right out of his head.
Not much scares me, I would say, but looking that zealot in the face like, even with the glass of the TV screen between us, with his eyes bugging out at me that literally scared the crap right out of me, I’m telling you, and that’s a fact!
And in his closing words, our little zealot Adam, who is rapidly gaining the agnomen of “THE PURIFIER” out here in the countryside, anyway, and who was quite emotional at the time as he was firmly caught in the grip of his religious fervor, invoked the hallowed words of Elijah “The Prophet” Cummings, who is now considered to be a Deity by Democrats in the manner of Caesar Augustus after his earthly passing, and said first, “there is nothing more dangerous than an unethical president who believes they are above the law,” and then, “WE ARE BETTER THAN THIS!”
Except you’re not, little Adam!
And yes, Adam, there is something far more dangerous than an unethical president who believes they are above the law, and that is an unethical Congressman like yourself who believes that you are above the law.
You, Adam Schiff, are a far bigger danger to our Constitution and American way of life than is Donald Trump, who had every right as OUR president to suspend that military aid to what is a corrupt ***hole.
So, yes, Mr. Otton, the appellation of Robespierre fits Adam Schiff very well in my mind, as he is literally out to destroy Trump and erase his name from the face of the earth, and there is no low he won’t stoop to, to get there.
He makes “Tailgunner Joe” McCarthy look like an all-around good guy by comparison.
“You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.”…Abraham Lincoln
“THE TRUTH MAY BE STRETCHED THIN, BUT IT NEVER BREAKS, AND IT ALWAYS SURFACES ABOVE LIES, AS OIL FLOATS ON WATER.”
to
–DON QUIXOTE.
They tried to “Kill the King” and failed! Now they will face the consequences…
Wrong tense, Michael C. Jordan – it should be “They are still trying to Kill the King,” not tried, as we can see from this Bloomberg article entitled “Trump Inquiry Won’t End With Impeachment Report, Schiff Says” by Billy House and Joe Light on 24 November 2019, to wit:
(Bloomberg) — The investigation of misconduct by the Trump administration will continue even after a House committee submits an initial report that could lead to the impeachment of President Donald Trump, said the Democrat leading the proceedings.
end quotes
Hey, why impeach the dude once when you can maybe impeach him a dozen or so times, instead, especially when you are doing so well fundraising off your efforts?
Right, Adam?
Getting back to that story:
Schiff said that the facts of what the president did “are really not contested” and that the Democratic case is “iron-clad.”
end quotes
What case?
That Trump has not violated his oath of office?
Because that is the only case that I can see that is still iron-clad here, which takes us back to the Bloomberg article as follows:
“The investigation isn’t going to end,” Schiff said.
end quotes
Hey, no ****, Adam, who’d a guessed it, dude!
And now the hog **** flows fast and furious here, to wit:
Schiff said that “there is a sense of urgency” in finishing and sending on the report, in the face of threats of foreign interference in the 2020 elections, but would not commit to a specific time line.
end quotes
Threats of foreign interference in the 2020 elections?
Do tell, Adam.
So what does that have to do with Trump rightfully demanding that Ukraine end the endemic corruption in that country as a condition of U.S. financial assistance which should not go to corrupt countries like Ukraine?
And the hog**** from out the mouth of the smarmy and unctuous Hollywood Democrat Adam Schiff keeps flowing freely and copiously, as we see from the following:
Asked on NBC’s “Meet the Press” if Bolton should testify, Schiff said, “People like John Bolton, whose deputies had the courage to come in and testify, are going to have to answer one day why they saved what they knew for a book rather than tell the country when the country needed to know.”
end quotes
Yeah, right, Adam!
So what is this “sense of urgency?”
Let’s go back to that Bloomberg article to see what we can learn on that question, to wit:
Senator Roger Wicker, a Mississippi Republican, also on NBC, took issue with Schiff’s characterization and said Democrats didn’t produce enough to warrant Trump’s removal.
“There was no direct evidence of pressure on the Ukrainian government to do a certain act in order for the aid to go forward,” Wicker said.
He also pointed to opinion polls showing support for impeachment is falling — something Schiff said on CNN wasn’t a consideration for Democrats.
end quotes
Except it is an issue for Democrats, and Adam Schiff is a mere fool for thinking otherwise as we see from an article in The Hill entitled “Independents souring on impeachment underscores risk for Democrats” by Jonathan Easley on 11/24/19, where we learn as follows:
New public opinion polls are moving against Democrats on impeachment as independents sour on the House inquiry and increasingly express opposition to the hearings that have consumed Washington in recent weeks.
The new data comes as a surprise to Democrats, many of whom believe witnesses have offered damning testimony about President Trump.
end quotes
And there is the main malfunction of these Democrats – they believe that because they believe something, that the rest of the nation will simply fall in with them, because they think we are all stupid – they think these witnesses of theirs have offered “DAMNING” testimony, when in fact, the whole sick show has been very tedious and boring, which brings us to this from that article, to wit:
“American voters are a lot smarter than the Washington elites and left-stream media give them credit for.”
“They really are.”
“They have a pretty good BS meter, and they smell BS,” the official added.
end quotes
And boy, do we ever, and the source of the smell is emanating from out the mouth of the smarmy and unctuous Hollywood, California Democrat Adam Schiff.
A farce, people, is defined as a “comic dramatic work using buffoonery and horseplay and typically including crude characterization and ludicrously improbable situations,” and that is an apt description of this stupid show the smarmy and unctuous Hollywood, California Democrat Adam Schiff has been staging in Washington, D.C.
However, a more apt description would be SHOW TRIAL following the 19 November 2019 SCHIFF CHARADE starring Pence “go fetch girl” Jennifer Williams, who was clueless about pretty much everything relative to impeaching a sitting American president, but notwithstanding, was there ready and eager to tell the world how little she knew about anything, because she was not all that important as the appointment secretary for Pence, who himself is really not that important, at all, and Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, who in one of the high points of his riveting testimony against Trump was submitted to this intense questioning from high-powered Democrat lawyer Mr. Goldman, to wit:
GOLDMAN: Colonel Vindman, what languages do you speak?
VINDMAN: I speak Russian and Ukrainian and a little bit of English.
end quotes
Yes, people, I am not making that up – it’s from the transcript of the SHOW TRIAL, if you can believe that.
As to a show trial, it is a public trial in which the judicial authorities, in this case Adam Schiff, “Jumping Jerry” Nadler and the congressional Democrats to included Nancy Pelosi, have already determined the guilt of the defendant, in this case, the sitting president of the United States, Donald Trump, whose real crime is being president instead of Democrat Hillary Clinton, the woman scorned in this drama.
As Adam Schiff demonstrated to the world on 19 November 2019, the actual trial, in this case aired on the main-stream media here in the United States so the who wide world including Putin in Russia could tune in to enjoy the show, especially Putin, has as its only goal the presentation of both the accusation and the verdict to the public so they will serve as both an impressive example and a warning to other would-be dissidents or transgressors.
As is the case here as Adam Schiff uses the old Soviet Union playbook to great advantage given the media coverage he is garnering, which in turn gives a boost to his fundraising efforts, which is really what it is all about for Adam, because for him to advance as a Democrat, he needs big buck$ to pave his way, show trials tend to be retributive rather than corrective and they are also conducted for propagandistic purposes.
With respect to the irony here, as well as where Adam Schiff is drawing his knowledge from as to how to stage the best show trial in the history of the world, as early as 1922, Lenin in Russia advocated staging several “model trials” in Soviet Russia and the Soviet Ukraine, so this horse**** show we are being treated to here in the United States of America is exactly the type of thing you would expect in some corrupt ****hole like out good friends and allies in the Ukraine, and if Putin in Russia wanted to bring America low, and make it seem weak and stupid, he could have picked no better person than the one he now has, the Hollywood, California Congressman Adam Schiff, Putin’s willing tool and “running dog” (a servile follower), to pull that off, which takes us back to the roots of Adam’s show trial to convict Trump. to wit:
Show trials were common during Joseph Stalin’s political repressions, such as the Moscow Trials of the Great Purge period (1937–38).
The Soviet authorities staged the actual trials meticulously, just as Adam Schiff has done here, with his well-coached witnesses against Trump.
Ands with respect to treatment the main-stream media in this country are giving this horse****, some solid public evidence of what really happened during the Moscow Trials came to the West through the Dewey Commission (1937), and after the collapse of the Soviet Union (1991), more information became available which in turn discredited the New York Times reporter Walter Duranty who claimed at the time that these trials were actually fair.
Never in my life have I seen something so absolutely COWARDLY as these hearings against Trump where he is publicly accused of all manner of crimes by the Democrats, his POLITICAL RIVALS who are out to destroy him any way they can.
Yes, COWARDLY, Adam Schiff, and distinctly un-American.
And Putin in Russia loves you for it!
And while we are on the subject of cowardly and un-American acts by Putin’s per poodle Adam Schiff intended to make America look small and stupid in the eyes of the world, the breaking news from the Washington Examiner just now is that while Trump is in Europe at a NATO meeting, Adam Schiff released his report on impeachment proceedings against President Trump today outlining the case for impeaching the president, whom Schiff and the Democrats accuse of withholding almost $400 million in military assistance to Ukraine in exchange for investigations into the 2016 presidential election and his 2020 rival Joe Biden.
BRING IT ON, Adam!
Impeach Trump for investigating an American citizen named Biden for alleged corrupt acts in the corrupt ****hole of Ukraine!
The world is waiting, Adam – get the impeachment show rolling!
We’re sick of all your endless cowardly accusations – now, stand up in the Senate as case manager as make them stick!
And as we can clearly see from an Associated Press story out today entitled “Democrats say they’re ready to press on with impeachment process” published Dec 4, 2019, this Schiff Impeachment Train is gathering speed as it careens down the tracks at speed with no brakes and no way of slowing down, to wit:
WASHINGTON — House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had a simple question for fellow Democrats behind closed doors Wednesday, addressing them as the Judiciary Committee considered articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump in an initial hearing that erupted in sharply partisan exchanges.
“Are you ready?” she asked rank-and-file lawmakers.
The answer was a resounding yes.
The Democrats also gave a standing ovation to Rep. Adam Schiff, whose Intelligence Committee report cataloged potential grounds for impeachment, overwhelmingly indicating they want to continue to press the inquiry rather than slow its advance or call a halt for fear of political costs in next year’s congressional elections.
end quotes
So, to the rabid, hateful, vindictive Democrats, the smarmy and unctuous Hollywood, California Democrat Congressman Adam Schiff has now assumed both SUPER HERO and DEMI-GOD status for his continued efforts to destroy by any means the man who usurped Hillary Clinton’s rightful place as Hussein Obama’s political successor to carry on his legacy, which takes us to some thoughts on impeachment, since that is the direction the spiteful and hateful Democrats are now taking the nation.
As to impeachment, the Framers of the Constitution saw impeachment as something reserved for acts that violated the public’s trust, and that is where this whole FARCE falls on its face, because by asking Ukraine to investigate alleged corruption by Joe Biden, Trump was doing his constitutional duty to take care that the laws are enforced, which is not a violation of the public’s trust whatsoever, except to the Democrats, of course.
As Alexander Hamilton pointed out in Federalist No. 65 with respect to trials of impeachment:
They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated POLITICAL, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.
end quotes
Which raises the question of what injuries were done immediately to society in this case, and that answer, and this is based on my own word-for-word reading of the transcript of the 19 November 2019 CHARADE where Pence appointments secretary Jennifer Williams and Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman were the star attractions, is none, at all.
And if there is a question of serious injuries being inflicted on society itself in this case, those injuries are being inflicted on society by the Democrats with this CHARADE of theirs which has made America look stupid and small and a laughing-stock in the eyes of the candid world, as we can see from the AP story as follows:
Democrats once hoped to sway Republicans to consider Trump’s removal, but they are now facing an ever-hardening partisan split over the swift-moving proceedings that are dividing Congress and the country.
end quotes
And they are right on the money when they say that the hate-filled Democrats are dividing the country, just as they did back in the 1800s when they seceded from the United States so they could keep their slaves.
Getting back to the latest news from the AP on the progress of the Schiff Impeachment Train, we have:
Pelosi, once reluctant to engage in a strictly party-line impeachment proceeding, is now leading colleagues to a likely partisan vote after a House investigation found that Trump seriously misused the power of his office to seek foreign interference in the U.S. election and then obstructed Congress in its efforts to investigate.
Elsewhere at the Capitol, Republicans at the Judiciary Committee hearing protested the proceedings as unfair, the dredging up of unfounded allegations as part of an effort to undo the 2016 election and remove Trump from office.
“You just don’t like the guy,” said Rep. Doug Collins of Georgia, the top Republican on the panel.
He called the proceedings a “disgrace’’ and a “sham.”
end quotes
And all the evidence in the record compiled by the smarmy and unctuous Democrat Adam Schiff supports that conclusion, and only that conclusion.
However:
Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., had a different view as he gaveled open the session.
The matter is serious and “the facts before us are undisputed,” he declared.
Nadler said the phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy wasn’t the first time Trump sought a foreign power to influence American elections, noting Russian interference in 2016.
“We cannot wait for the election to address the present crisis,” Nadler said.
“The president has shown us his pattern of conduct.”
“If we do not act to hold him in check, now, President Trump will almost certainly try again to solicit interference in the election for his personal political gain.”
end quotes
And there I am going to end for the moment, because this endless crap from these spite-filled Democrats makes me throw up in my mouth and that is a fact!
And with respect to this FARCE the other day where the Democrats who hate Trump trotted out some of their pet law professors to try to make the case to We, the American People, that Trump is a criminal who should be impeached because the Democrats say he is a criminal, m y initial response is that the Constitution means what the Federalist Papers say it means, and the Federalist Papers were addressed to the People of the State of New York, not to the pet Democrat law professors of New York, because both the Constitution and the Federalist Papers were meant for the COMMON MAN to understand without the need to go to Harvard Law School first, as we can clearly from FEDERALIST No. 62, The Senate, for the Independent Journal by either Alexander Hamilton or James Monroe, as follows:
In order to form an accurate judgment on both of these points, it will be proper to inquire into the purposes which are to be answered by a senate; and in order to ascertain these, it will be necessary to review the inconveniences which a republic must suffer from the want of such an institution.
First.
It is a misfortune incident to republican government, though in a less degree than to other governments, that those who administer it may forget their obligations to their constituents, and prove unfaithful to their important trust.
end quotes
And right there, the author is talking about the rabid Democrats in the House of Representatives who in their seething hatred of Trump have brought the functioning of our federal government to a standstill while making the United States look like a third-world banana republic on the world stage in the process, which has Putin in Russia clapping his hands in glee, which takes us back to Federalist No. 62, as follows:
In this point of view, a senate, as a second branch of the legislative assembly, distinct from, and dividing the power with, a first, must be in all cases a salutary check on the government.
It doubles the security to the people, by requiring the concurrence of two distinct bodies in schemes of usurpation or perfidy, where the ambition or corruption of one would otherwise be sufficient.
This is a precaution founded on such clear principles, and now so well understood in the United States, that it would be more than superfluous to enlarge on it.
end quotes
So, yes, clearly today we have schemes of usurpation and perfidy by the Democrats, which is why any impeachment trial of Trump would have to be in the Senate – to SAFEGUARD OUR INTERESTS as citizens of this nation from the schemes of usurpation and perfidy by the Democrats in the House of Representatives, which brings us to the two competing legal theories concerning impeachment, to wit:
As we are informed by FindLaw’s team of legal writers and editors in the article “Presidential Impeachment: The Legal Standard and Procedure,” the first general school of thought is that the standard enunciated by the Constitution is subject entirely to whatever interpretation Congress collectively wishes to make, which is the position taken by Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff and the rest of their pack of hate-filled Democrats based on this following from Congressman Gerald Ford, 116 Cong. Rec. H.3113-3114 (April 15, 1970), to wit:
“What, then, is an impeachable offense?”
“The only honest answer is that an impeachable offense is whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history; conviction results from whatever offense or offenses two-thirds of the other body considers to be sufficiently serious to require removal of the accused from office…”
end quotes
However, as we are further informed, this view, let us call it the SCHIFF VIEW, has been rejected by most legal scholars because it would have the effect of having the President serve at the pleasure of Congress.
But that is exactly what the Democrats want here – they want to PERVERT OUR Constitution so that in fact, the president does answer to smarmy and unctuous Congressmen like Adam Schiff.
The other view, the view that I adhere to as an American citizen who is not a Democrat, is that the Constitutional standard makes it necessary for a President to have committed an indictable crime in order to be subject to impeachment and removal from office, and there is where We, the American People come into the picture, because for there to be an indictable crime, there must be a determination by a CITIZEN GRAND JURY that a crime has been committed, and that simply has not happened here in this FARCE.
The proponents of this view, including myself, point to the tone of the language of Article II § 4 itself, which seems to be speaking in criminal law terms, as well as other places in the Constitution which seem to support this interpretation, as well – for example, Article III § 2 (3) which provides that “the trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be by jury.”
According to the Findlaw legal scholars, clearly the implication of this sentence from the Constitution is that impeachment is being treated as a criminal offense, ergo, impeachment requires a criminal offense to have been committed, and according to our American system of justice, as opposed to the old Soviet Union system of justice the Congressional Democrats are employing here to our detriment as a free people, where Trump has to prove himself innocent, a crime can only be said to have been committed after the facts have been submitted to a citizen grand jury to protect the rights of both the accused, and society itself, so in this case, Trump is clearly being railroaded by the congressional Democrats, which is to say, Trump is being convicted of a crime in a thoughtless, overly fast way, and that, people, is the epitome of un-American activities by these hate-filled Democrats intent on bringing Trump down to their level in any slimy and under-handed way they can, and what a disgusting spectacle it has been to date!
The Democrats have “Jumped the Shark”! The average of three recent respected polls have African-Americans supporting President Trump by 34%, not to mention significant increased support of Hispanics for him. If this support continues, the Democrats are “Dead in the water”! I believe that in the future the Republican party will split into “Right” and “Left” ideological factions, thus creating the nation’s two major political parties. The Democrat party will go the way of David Duke; an also ran party.
What do you think Paul?
You know something, A friend?
I am no longer sure of what to think, because never in my life have I experienced such mindlessness and sheer stupidity that we are now being exposed to on a daily basis by the rabid Democrats and the equally rabid and quite infantile main stream media, the “nattering nabobs of negativism” as William Safire, the former Nixon speechwriter turned New York Times op-ed columnist, had disgraced vice president Spiggy Agnew call them before he got disgraced by the media, and his own self, of course.
At the California Republican Convention in San Diego, Agnew loosed Safire’s most triumphant linguistic confection, as Will Bunch of the Philadelphia Inquirer termed it, to wit:
“In the United States today, we have more than our share of nattering nabobs of negativism.”
“They have formed their own 4-H club — the hopeless, hysterical hypochondriacs of history.”
end quotes
That, of course, was back in the tail-end of the VEET NAM times, which was itself a time of chaos and turmoil in this country, that these times today make look sane and rational by comparison, and in an Inquirer essay entitled “William Safire, ‘nattering nabobs’ and the power of words” posted September 27, 2009, Bunch wrote as follows which I think is quite relevant to the question you posed to me above, to wit:
“Today, the vast majority of Americans of all political stripes — conservative, liberal, centrist — don’t believe the nattering nabobs of negativism, a.k.a. the mainstream media, in record numbers.”
end quotes
And today, then years later, people have nothing but utter contempt for the mainstream media because it is nothing but outright lies , i.e. Trump is guilty of crimes, when his guilt has never been established by a grand jury, which is a basic right every American citizen, including Trump, who is himself an American citizen, although you would never know that from the media and the Democrats who are treating Trump like a felon who has lost his rights to due process of law, because he is considered guilty by the Democrats who have usurped the responsibilities of a citizen grand jury in the case of Trump, and they keep it up, day after day after day, both the media and the Democrats, who use the media very effectively to spread their poison and propaganda, and there are people out there sucking it all up as if it were the absolute gospel truth, to the point of where it has become impossible to communicate with those people on any level related to American citizenship.
So, A friend, riddle me this: what happens to nations when they no longer have citizens capable of rational thought, such as is the case in the United States of America today, where almost half the nation wants to impeach Trump based on anything or nothing at all, because that is what Nancy Pelosi wants, and they don’t think any further than that, just as the people in Jonestown didn’t ask question bs when told to drink the Kool-Aid and don’t mind the funny taste, you’ll get over it in a minute.
Said another way, to answer my own question, I think we are at a very politically unstable time in our nation’s history, where essentially, the Democrats have rejected all of American history to date with respect to Constitutional government, and are instead creating something totally new in their image, where the president is simply no more than a servant of the House Democrats, and people seem to be very accepting of that, despite the Constitution, precisely because they are totally unaware that it exists in the first place to define our federal frame of government.
People today mistake the Amendments as being the Constitution, as opposed to the Articles, and they further accept that it is the House Democrats or Nancy Pelosi who are the ultimate arbiters of what the Constitution means, because that is easy and keeps them from having to think for themselves, and so this game goes on.
Will the Democrats finally push the rope a bit too hard and turn the body of the American people against them?
If that does not happen, the people turning against the Democrats, because in my estimation as an American citizen, the Democrats are way off in LA-LA-LAND now with these wild accusations of Trump bribing some dude over in the corrupt ****hole of Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden’s role in corrupt activities in Ukraine while Joe was vice-president with a visit to the White House, something that 6,000 people do every day according to statistics on-line from the White House, then we are in big trouble as a nation!
As for the rest, A friend, all I can say is stay tuned, because this FARCE still has long legs and plenty of room left to run.
And let me close by saying that the other day, I heard Nancy Pelosi on the radio news after her HUGE ANNOUNCEMENT that she backed impeaching her political rival Trump because he was trying to dig into Democrat graft and corruption, which is forbidden in Washington, D.C., and she was confronted with the question of some Republican saying the Democrats have been out to impeach Trump since DAY ONE, and when she replied, I thought, “My God, she’s been hitting the sauce early, because she’s snockered,” as whatever she was trying to say in response came out all slurred, which made her sound like a belligerent drunk, and she finished by muttering something about the Constitution, to which I replied to myself, “Nancy Pelosi wouldn’t know the Constitution if it reared up and bit her right on the ***, and hard.”
And yet, there are people out there, and here we are talking about the media, who accept every word she utters as the facts in the matter without further review.
So how will this show finally end?
God alone knows that answer, but the show is going to be a wild one, and we have front row seats and it is cold and two feet of snow are on the ground up here, so I am going to hunker and enjoy the show as it comes.
And while we are on the subject of blatantly LAWLESS and UNCONSTITUTIONAL acts by Democrat Congresswoman from San Francisco Nancy Pelosi, and smarmy and unctuous “Pelosi Enforcer” and Democrat Congressman from Disneyland, California Adam Schiff, and “Jumping Jerry” Nadler and a veritable host of other lickspittle Democrats in Nancy Pelosi’s fawning coterie of House Democrats, A friend, let us go to Section 9 of Article I of OUR written United States Constitution, as opposed to the Democrat version that Nancy Pelosi keeps secure for the Democrats in her alimentary tract that the Democrats are relying on to impeach Trump for investigating an alleged corrupt Democrat who the Democrats are putting forth as their candidate for the office of OUR president, where it states in clear and unequivocal language as follows:
No Bill of Attainder …. shall be passed.
end quotes
Since people today are not familiar with this specific clause of OUR written Constitution, let’s visit the subject in more detail by going to the Annotations, as follows:
Bills of Attainder
”Bills of attainder . . . are such special acts of the legislature, as inflict capital punishments upon persons supposed to be guilty of high offences, such as treason and felony, without any conviction in the ordinary course of judicial proceedings.”
“If an act inflicts a milder degree of punishment than death, it is called a bill of pains and penalties. . . .”
“In such cases, the legislature assumes judicial magistracy, pronouncing upon the guilt of the party without any of the common forms and guards of trial, and satisfying itself with proofs, when such proofs are within its reach, whether they are conformable to the rules of evidence, or not.”
“In short, in all such cases, the legislature exercises the highest power of sovereignty, and what may be properly deemed an irresponsible despotic discretion, being governed solely by what it deems political necessity or expediency, and too often under the influence of unreasonable fears, or unfounded suspicions.”
The phrase ”bill of attainder,” as used in this clause and in clause 1 of Sec. 10, applies to bills of pains and penalties as well as to the traditional bills of attainder.
The prohibition embodied in this clause is not to be strictly and narrowly construed in the context of traditional forms but is to be interpreted in accordance with the designs of the framers so as to preclude trial by legislature, a violation of the separation of powers concept.
The clause thus prohibits all legislative acts, ”no matter what their form, that apply either to named individuals or to easily ascertainable members of a group in such a way as to inflict punishment on them without a judicial trial. . . .”
end quotes
And that, of course, is the exact BULL**** going on in the House of Representatives right now – not only is Trump constantly being slandered and ridiculed by the House Democrats and their lackeys and lickspittles in the mainstream media, who print every Democrat slander and accusation of criminal conduct by Trump without question, but by adjudging Trump guilty of crimes, which they now have done many times over, they have violated the prohibition embodied in this clause of Article I that is to be interpreted in accordance with the designs of the framers so as to preclude trial by legislature, a violation of the separation of powers concept with the clause thus prohibiting all legislative acts of the kind we are seeing here, ”no matter what their form, that apply to named individuals in such a way as to inflict punishment on them without a judicial trial.”
As to outright slander, listen to this bull**** flowing from out of the mouth of Nancy Pelosi in an Associated Press article entitled “‘No choice’ but to move quickly on impeachment, Pelosi says” published Dec 5, 2019, to wit:
WASHINGTON — House Democrats moved aggressively to draw up formal articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump on Thursday, with Speaker Nancy Pelosi saying he “leaves us no choice” but to act swiftly because he’s likely to corrupt the system again unless removed before next year’s election.
end quotes
Except, of course, there is NO EVIDENCE that Trump corrupted anything that I am yet to see, so there is one case alone of the House Democrats inflicting a punishment of Trump without a judicial trial which is a blatant violation of OUR written Constitution, as well as Trump’s rights as an American citizen, which the House Democrats seem to forget he is, which takes us back to that AP story as follows:
Congress must act, Pelosi said.
“The democracy is what is at stake.”
“The president’s actions have seriously violated the Constitution,” she said.
“He is trying to corrupt, once again, the election for his own benefit.”
end quotes
Now, the nattering nabobs of negavatism in the mainstream media just love that kind of horse****, Trump trying to corrupt the election again, even though he never corrupted an election before this, because it is for them a sensationalist story that is writing itself, or rather, the Democrat script writers are writing it for them, so all they have to do is file the horse**** under their by-line, and it saves them the exertion of actually having to think about anything other than the little bag of money they get to print this horse**** without any questions asked, and besides they don’t like Trump and are only too glad to join with Pelosi and the Democrats in destroying him, no matter how foul the means to which they will resort, which takes us back to the AP, as follows:
“The president has engaged in abuse of power, undermining our national security and jeopardizing the integrity of our elections.”
end quotes
HOW SO, Nancy?
And right there, A friend, is a TEXTBOOK CASE of the legislature under Nancy Pelosi assuming judicial magistracy by pronouncing upon the guilt of Trump without any of the common forms and guards of trial, and thereby exercising the highest power of sovereignty, and what may be properly deemed an irresponsible despotic discretion, being governed solely by what the Democrats and Nancy Pelosi deem political necessity or expediency, and as is so evident in this case, on a daily basis, under the influence of unreasonable fears and unfounded suspicions.
Getting back to the unfounded suspicions and unreasonable fears of Nancy Pelosi, who may well be suffering from a serious form of dementia, we have further from the AP as follows:
Pelosi emphasized the Russia connection, from special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe into 2016 election interference to the president’s phone call this summer with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy that set off alarms in Washington.
It’s Russia and President Vladimir Putin who benefited most from Trump’s actions toward Ukraine, she said.
“All roads lead to Putin.”
“Understand that,” she declared at a news conference.
“That was the a-ha moment.”
She spoke solemnly and calmly, but that changed when she was asked as she was leaving if she hates Trump.
Pelosi stiffened, returned to the podium and responded sharply that the president’s views and politics are for the voters to judge at elections but impeachment “is about the Constitution.”
But Democrats say the nation cannot wait for the 2020 election, alleging Trump’s past efforts to have foreign countries intervene in the presidential campaign is forcing them to act to prevent him from doing it again.
The number of articles and the allegations they will include will be both a legal and political exercise for the House committee chairmen, who will be meeting privately.
They must balance electoral dynamics while striving to hit the Constitution’s bar of “treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”
Pulling from the House’s 300-page investigation of the Ukraine matter, Democrats are focusing on at least three areas — abuse of power, bribery and obstruction — that could result in two to five articles, they say.
They argue that Trump abused the power of his office by putting personal political gain over national security interests, engaging in bribery by holding out $400 million in military aid that Congress had approved for Ukraine; and then obstructing Congress by stonewalling the investigation.
Some liberal Democrats want to reach further into Trump’s actions, particularly regarding the findings from special counsel Mueller’s report on Russian interference in the 2016 election.
That could produce an additional article of obstruction not only of Congress, but also of justice.
But more centrist and moderate Democrats, those lawmakers who are most at risk of political fallout from the impeachment proceedings, prefer to stick with the Ukraine matter as a simpler narrative that Americans can more easily understand.
end quotes
And indeed, the Ukraine matter is a very simple narrative that we American people can easily understand, and what we clearly understand is that the Ukraine matter is a great big nothing-burger – nothing to see there, people, everybody go back home, it was a false alarm – that is what I understand.
“I believe that in the future the Republican party will split into “Right” and “Left” ideological factions, thus creating the nation’s two major political parties. The Democrat party will go the way of David Duke; an also ran party.
What do you think Paul?”
Applying Article 1 – Section 9 to the President is improper.
Article 1 – Section 3 of the Constitution clearly outlines the procedure for impeachment of a President, Vice-President, or Civil Officer as intended by the framers. See: Federalist Papers 65 & 66
Here’s what I personally think right now:
*******************FLASH!!!!!*********************
*********HUGE BREAKING NEWS!!!!!!!!!************
*******EARTH-SHATTERING REVELATIONS ABOUND!!!!******
DEMOCRATS PELOSI AND “ENFORCER” ADAM SCHIFF ANNOUNCE THE MOST RIDICULOUS AND STUPID IMPEACHMENT CHARGES IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!
Sounding snockered again on the 12:00 noon news, as if she started hitting the sauce early this morning, San Francisco, California Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, who now sees herself as the all-powerful QUEEN of America, a position created for her specially by the Democrats in the ALTERNATE CONSTITUTION they govern under, which Democrat constitution has the Democrats in the House of Representatives all-powerful, and has the president serving at the pleasure of the House Democrats, was quoted in The Guardian, as follows:
Pelosi on impeachment: This is not about elections, it’s about the constitution
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is at an event in DC hosted by Politico, taking the first batch of questions from Politico reporter Anna Palmer on impeachment since the articles of impeachment were announced this morning.
end quotes
This of course was too rich of an occasion for Nancy to miss, snockered or not (and if she was in fact snockered, who in her adoring press gaggle would ever think of questioning her?), which brings us to this burst of horse**** that I heard Nancy slur her way through at noon, to wit:
“It’s a sad day actually, a solemn day.”
“It’s something that no one comes to Congress to do, to impeach a president.”
end quotes
Oh, get the **** out of here, Nancy, with that horse**** drivel, as if we were all as stupid and unquestioning as your media toadies – you people came into power on DAY ONE with your mouthpiece the foul-mouthed and ignorant Rashida Tlaib publicly proclaiming to the whole wide world that you and Adam Schiff and “Jumping Jerry” Nadler, so named for his ability to jump to a conclusion on the spur of the moment, and to then be able to arrange the evidence to support it, as he is doing here, with these STUPID IMPEACHMENT CHARGES, were going to impeach Trump, who your spokeswoman called a “MOTHER******” on your behalf, something you never bothered to deny, so don’t feed us that horse**** about it being a “sad day,” when we just the other day were reading about your pack of Democrats giving Adam Schiff a standing ovation for rigging some charges against Trump that you hope to wing by the American people as if we were all as STUPID as a Democrat, which takes us back to The Guardian, as follows:
Pelosi shrugged off a question of why the findings of the Mueller report weren’t included in the articles of impeachment.
end quotes
Oh, come on here, people – the findings of the Mueller Report cleared Trump of colluding with Russia!
Period!
That’s why Pelosi and her pack of Democrats couldn’t use the Mueller Report against Trump.
Getting back to Nancy’s drivel just a little bit ago, we have:
“I wish everyone just focused on what we are bringing forward because this is very serious violations of our constitution, undermining the national security of the United States, jeopardizing the integrity of our elections,” Pelosi said.
en d quotes
Nancy, you are cracked!
You and Adam Schiff right now, who are the ones trying to RIG the 2020 presidential elections in the favor of the Democrats, and by extension, Putin in Russia, who is the sole beneficiary of the harm that you two are doing to OUR nation, are the BIGGEST DOMESTIC ENEMIES of OUR Constitution that we as a free people have ever been confronted with, as you try to replace our written Constitution with your Democrat version that is pulled when needed straight from out of the *** of Nancy Pelosi, as we are seeing in real time right here, to wit:
“Instead of talking about what isn’t, this is what is, and that’s how we’re moving forward.”
end quotes
AND WHAT IT IS, NANCY, IS A PATHETIC FARCE!
IT’S STUPID!
Which takes us back to The Guardian as follows:
Pelosi is emphasizing that the impeachment isn’t about the election, which the Republicans are arguing that it is, but instead it’s about the Constitution and Congress’ role in checks and balances.
“We are saying goodbye to a republic… and saying hello to a king”.
end quotes
Damn right we are, Nancy – and the KING is you!
And boy oh boy, is the horse**** from these Democrats ever flowing fast and thick as we clearly see from a rambling and largely incoherent and patently untruthful speech from the smarmy and unctuous Hollywood, California Congressman Adam Schiff at a Democrat press conference earlier today to announce the formal impeachment of Trump on the most preposterous and imbecilic charges in the history of our nation, to wit:
“Some say why don’t you just wait.”
“Why don’t you just wait until you get the witnesses that the White House refuses to produce?”
“Why not just wait until you get the documents that the white house refuses to turn over, and people should understand what that argument really means.”
“It has taken us eight months to get a lower court ruling that Don McGahn has no right to defy Congress if it takes another eight months to get a second court or Supreme Court decision, that is not the end of the process.”
“It comes back to us, and we ask questions because he no longer has immunity and he claims something else that his answers are privileged and we have to go to court for another eight or 16 months.”
“The argument why don’t you just wait amounts to this: Why don’t you just let him cheat in one more election?”
“Why not let him cheat just one more time?”
“Why not let him have foreign help just one more time?”
“That is what that argument amounts to.”
end quotes
And that argument amounts to nothing more than a stinking pile of pure horse**** because Trump did not have foreign help a first time.
That is a DEBUNKED INSANE DEMOCRAT CONSPIRACY THEORY that rabid Democrats unable to think clearly like Adam Schiff just cannot let go of, as we see from a USA TODAY story entitled “FBI wiretap of Trump campaign aide was riddled with errors, but Russia probe was legally justified, IG report finds” by Kevin Johnson and Kristine Phillips on 10 December 2019, as follows:
Democrats on Capitol Hill said the report debunks conspiracy theories fanned by Trump and Republicans about how the Russia investigation began.
“Those discredited conspiracy theories were attempts to deflect from the President’s serious and ongoing misconduct, first urging Russia and now extorting Ukraine into interfering with our elections to benefit him personally and politically,” said Reps. Jerry Nadler and Carolyn Maloney, Democrats representing New York and chairs of the House Judiciary and Oversight committees, respectively.
end quotes
Reading that horse****, one can only conclude that Democrats like Jerry Nadler, Carolyn Mahoney and the smarmy and unctuous Adam Schiff are pathological liars, which are individuals who chronically tells grandiose lies that may stretch or exceed the limits of believability, as we clearly see from this from that same article, to wit:
Mueller’s two-year investigation found a “sweeping and systematic” effort by the Russian government to intercede in the election to help Trump win, but concluded neither the president nor his campaign conspired with Russians, according to the special counsel’s report released in April.
end quotes
But that finding makes no difference to the pathological liars of the Democrat party who simply make things up as they go, no matter how stupid or outrageous and unfounded those charges are, which takes us to a Washington Post article entitled “House Democrats unveil two articles of impeachment against Trump” by Rachael Bade, Mike DeBonis, Elise Viebeck and Toluse Olorunnipa on 10 December 2019, as follows:
House Democrats unveiled two articles of impeachment against President Trump on Tuesday, saying he had abused the power of his office and obstructed Congress in its investigation of his conduct regarding Ukraine.
“The evidence of the president’s misconduct is overwhelming and uncontested,” House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) said as he outlined a case against Trump and argued that his conduct was too grave to let stand until next year’s election.
“The argument, ‘why don’t you just wait?’ comes down to this: Why don’t you just let him cheat in just one more election?” Schiff said, calling impeachment “a question of duty.”
end quotes
And from now to November of 2020, despite that being an outrageous lie debunked by the Mueller Rep[ort, these Democrats are going to keep on hammering those lies home as they try to RIG the 2020 presidential election in favor of the Democrats, and by extension, Putin in Russia, who is just loving it as his proxies in the Democrat party try to bring this country low, as we see in this from that same article, to wit:
Describing Trump as a “continuing risk to the country,” Nadler forcefully accused the president of using his office to pressure Ukraine to launch political investigations and then trying to block Congress from investigating him.
“President Trump put himself before country,” he said.
“The president welcomed foreign interference in our election in 2016, he demanded it in 2020, and then he got caught.”
end quotes
Except that is not true.
Getting back to that article, we have “Jumping Jerry” Nadler stating as follows:
“To the members of this committee, to the members of the House, and to my fellow citizens, I want to be absolutely clear: The integrity of our next election is at stake.”
“Nothing could be more urgent.”
end quotes
And people, he is right – the integrity of our next election is indeed at stake as the Democrats try to RIG it in their and Putin’s favor, which is why We, the American People need to stand up to this Democrat horse**** as the Democrats try with outrageous lies to bury Trump, who they hate with a passion because he had the temerity to beat Hillary Clinton, Hussein Obama’s chosen successor, so they can win power in the 2020 presidential election, which takes us to this Washington Examiner article entitled “Schiff defends impeachment rush: ‘Why don’t you just let him cheat in one more election?'” by Susan Ferrechio on December 10, 2019, to wit:
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff said the House must move quickly to impeach President Trump to prevent him from cheating in the next election with “foreign help.”
Schiff, a California Democrat, strongly suggested in a press conference Tuesday that Trump colluded with the Russians to undermine the 2016 election and win the White House.
A two-year investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller did not charge Trump with collusion, but Democrats say there is evidence Trump welcomed Russia’s help.
end quotes
So, regardless of the facts, Adam Schiff and the Democrats are going to keep twisting the truth and facts to influence the 2020 presidential election, which takes us back to that article for this interesting comment from the smarmy and unctuous Adam Schiff, to wit:
Schiff said the evidence is clear Trump is trying to influence the 2020 election by seeking information from Ukraine regarding Democrats who may have sought the country’s help investigating Trump’s 2016 campaign.
end quotes
Now, talk about interesting revelations, alright – that sounds very much like an admission from Adam that indeed, the Democrats were seeking Ukraine’s help and foreign interference in our 2016 election by giving the Democrats dirt on Trump.
And the game goes on!
Obama spied. Comey lied.
Fake dossier led to Fake FISA.
Fake FISA led to Mueller investigation.
Fake whistleblower led to impeachment inquiry.
Deep State Dems were busy little elves.
And what I think, A friend, is that we are in the midst of a real CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS the likes of which we as a nation have not seen since 1861, when the Democrats repudiated OUR Constitution and seceded from the United States of America to form their own country where they could have slaves to their heart’s content, that is what I think.
Except this time, instead of going to the trouble to secede, they are simply taking over OUR national government from within in an archetypical palace coup such as you would expect to see happening in some third-world banana republic, much like Ukraine, in fact, where the one dude was forced to run for his life to seek asylum in Russia, and the main stream media is content to let it happen.
That is what I think.
As to the huge pile of pure BULL**** being heaped on us by the hour it seems from out of the mouth of the smarmy and unctuous Democrat Congressman from Disneyland in California Adam Schiff, let’s go back to that Washington Examiner article entitled “Schiff defends impeachment rush: ‘Why don’t you just let him cheat in one more election?’” by Susan Ferrechio on December 10, 2019, to the following, to wit:
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff said the House must move quickly to impeach President Trump to prevent him from cheating in the next election with “foreign help.”
Schiff, a California Democrat, strongly suggested in a press conference Tuesday that Trump colluded with the Russians to undermine the 2016 election and win the White House.
A two-year investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller did not charge Trump with collusion, but Democrats say there is evidence Trump welcomed Russia’s help.
end quotes
What I think is that that is a TEXTBOOK CASE of Adam Schiff DISCREDITING his own witness, Bob Mueller.
By “strongly suggesting” that Trump colluded with the Russians to undermine the 2016 election and win the White House after Mueller previously testified under oath on July 24, 2019 at the HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE HEARING ON OVERSIGHT OF THE REPORT ON THE INVESTIGATION INTO RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE IN THE 2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION: FORMER SPECIAL COUNSEL ROBERT S. MUELLER, III, that “the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired with the Russian government in its election interference activities,” Adam Schiff is strongly suggesting that Bob Mueller was incompetent as an investigator, and that Schiff knows Mueller’s investigation was seriously flawed, so that Schiff knows that Mueller was not being truthful with “Jumping Jerry” Nadler on 24 July 2019 when Bob Mueller told Nadler the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired with the Russian government in its election interference activities.
That’s what I think.
But I also think Schiff is talking out his *** by suggesting that he is in possession of evidence that Trump colluded with the Russians to undermine the 2016 election and win the White House.
As to “obstruction of Congress,” Trump as president is being criminally charged by the House Democrats with violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1505, Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees, which federal criminal statute states as follows:
Whoever, with intent to avoid, evade, prevent, or obstruct compliance, in whole or in part, with any civil investigative demand duly and properly made under the Antitrust Civil Process Act, willfully withholds, misrepresents, removes from any place, conceals, covers up, destroys, mutilates, alters, or by other means falsifies any documentary material, answers to written interrogatories, or oral testimony, which is the subject of such demand; or attempts to do so or solicits another to do so; or
Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication influences, obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede the due and proper administration of the law under which any pending proceeding is being had before any department or agency of the United States, or the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation is being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress–
Shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331 ), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both.
end quotes
The Democrats don’t want to just humiliate Trump and remove him from office – they want him wearing prison garb while doing time in a federal lock-up for standing up to the House Democrats who are trying to usurp his Constitutional authority over foreign policy as president.
So, what I think is that this is serious business, indeed, the president of the United States of America being charged with CRIMINAL CONDUCT for living up to his presidential path to take care that the laws are faithfully enforced.
I think that that is unprecedented in the history of our nation, to be truthful, and I think that that should be a matter of concern to every single person in the United States of America who cares about OUR United States Constitution and OUR Republic, both of which are being subverted by the vindictive and spiteful and hate-filled Democrats in the House of Representatives.
“I believe that in the future the Republican party will split into “Right” and “Left” ideological factions, thus creating the nation’s two major political parties. The Democrat party will go the way of David Duke; an also ran party.
What do you think Paul?”
If this question is too difficult for you Paul, I can ask you an easier one?
The question has no possible relevance to the HISTORIC EVENTS that happened last night in Washington, D.C., which carried over into today like a tidal wave.
What I find interesting here as an American citizen with respect to due process of law and equal protection of law is that as president of the United States of America, he has less rights in the House of Representatives than does a dog in the state of New York suspected of being rabid.
And if Trump were a Democrat who was a criminal, and he was being accused of a crime like rape or robbery without those charges first being submitted to a grand jury to protect the rights of the accused, the Democrat would be screaming to high heaven about how unfair it was to the Democrat criminal, but at the same time, they have no problems whatsoever with accusing Trump of a criminal violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1505, Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees, without first submitting the facts to a citizen grand jury to determine if in fact a crime or crimes have been committed.
So the House Democrats are stripping Trump of the most basic rights that any Democrat criminal would be entitled to, which I find incredible as an American citizen, as well as an UNCONSTITUTIONAL ABUSE OF POWER by the House Democrats who have no constitutional authority whatsoever to strip and American citizen of his rights in a KANGAROO COURT in the legislative branch of the federal government, which is exactly what is going on here, and it is absurd to think that Trump will get due process of law in the Senate on criminal charges that by our Constitution should be going before a citizen jury in a true court of law, where Trump is actually presumed to be innocent, as opposed to in the House, where he has been proclaimed guilty of a crime without any trial, at all.
And when the Democrats in the House of Representatives can unilaterally strip one American of his rights to due process of law and equal protection of law, they are then free to do it to any of us, which is tyranny and despotism, which brings us to the United States Supreme Court in Wisconsin v. Constantineau, 400 U.S. 433, 435 (1971), to wit:
“Where a person’s good name, reputation, honor, or integrity is at stake because of what the government is doing to him, notice and an opportunity to be heard are essential.”
“Only when the whole proceedings leading to the pinning of an unsavory label on a person are aired can oppressive results be prevented.”
end quotes
Too bad there is no way to actually enforce OUR Constitution against gross and blatant violations of it by these ravening Democrats in the House of Representatives.
DATE: 19 November 2019
PLACE: a meeting room somewhere in the bowels of the foetid, corrupt swamp known as Washington, D.C.
ACTION: Lt. Colonel Alexander Vindman, a uniformed member of the United States Army assigned to the White House as a flunky is being grilled intensely by the rabid Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives seeking any tiny piece of dirt they can finds in their effort to convince the American people that Donald Trump, the elected president of the United States of America should be removed from office.
As we tune into today’s episode of this STUPID POLITICAL FARCE, Lt. Col. Vindman is being grilled intensely by Democrat Congressman for Indiana’s 7th congressional district André D. Carson (born October 16, 1974), with a master of science degree in business management from Indiana Wesleyan University in Marion, Indiana, as follows:
CARSON: In — in this follow-on meeting, sir, Ambassador Sondland left, in your words, “no ambiguity” about what specific investigations he was requesting.
Ambassador Sondland made clear that he was requesting an investigation of Vice President Joe Biden’s son, isn’t that correct, sir?
VINDMAN: That is correct.
CARSON: Colonel, in your career, had you ever before witnessed an American official request that a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen who is related to the president’s political opponent?
VINDMAN: I have not.
CARSON: Colonel Vindman, I agree that there is no question that Ambassador Sondland was proposing a transaction to Ukrainian officials trading White House meetings for specific investigations with the full awareness of the president’s chief of staff, White House attorneys and his national security advisor.
end quotes
And there we have it, people, conclusive proof that Trump abused the powers of HIS office as United States president and that he obstructed Congress, as well.
And if you believe that horse****, I have a used bridge connecting the island of Manhattan with the City of Brooklyn for sale at a very attractive price that you might be interested in, but better hurry, because the offers are coming in fast and furious!
Call BR- 549 right now to make the deal of a lifetime!
And with the formal filing of CRIMINAL CHARGES of ABUSING HIS OFFICE by the House Democrats led by the smarmy and unctuous Hollywood, California Democrat Congressman Adam Schiff, We, the American People, who are the real jury here, given that according to Federalist No. 65, the AUTHORITY on the intentions of the founders with respect to when it is proper to use impeachment against a sitting American president as is the case now confronting us as citizens here in the United States of America, Alexander Hamilton, who knew a hell of a lot more about OUR Constitution than do Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler and Nancy Pelosi and the rest of her ilk, defined impeachable offenses as “those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust,” are confronted with another instance of Democrat Adam Schiff discrediting one of his own key witnesses, that being Lt. Colonel Alexander Vindman, who Schiff is essentially calling a liar and accusing him of lying to Congress, which is a serious business indeed.
The alleged false testimony by Lt. Colonel Vindman subsequently controverted and repudiated by Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler with the formal filing of criminal charges against Trump by them occurred during the 19 November 2019 appearance of Vindman in front of Adam Schiff’s seemingly inappropriately-named “House Intelligence Committee,” where the Democrats exhibited hardly any intelligence, at all, which hearing preceded the subsequent Nadler Committee Hearing where formal criminal charges were actually preferred against Trump after a quick trial before Nadler with Adam Schiff as prosecuting attorney in this following colloquy where Vindman is being intensely grilled by Democrat Congresswoman Karen Lorraine Jacqueline Speier, born May 14, 1950, an American politician with a J.D. degree from the University of California, Hastings College of the Law in 1976, who currently serves as a U.S. Representative for California’s 14th congressional district which includes the northern two-thirds of San Mateo County and the southwest quarter of San Francisco who on August 16, 2017, advocated for the use of the 25th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution to remove President Trump from office because of erratic behavior and mental instability “that place the country in great danger,” one of the Democrats failed opening shots at Trump, to wit:
SPEIER: Would it ever be U.S. policy in your experience to ask a foreign leader to open a political investigation?
VINDMAN: There are proper procedures in which to do that.
Certainly the president is well within his right to do that.
end quotes
And right there, of course, Schiff and Nadler and Nancy Pelosi have a real serious problem, because their own FACT WITNESS (an individual who has personal knowledge of events pertaining to the case can testify as to things they have personally observed or witnessed) brought in by Schiff to bolster Schiff’s impeachment case against Trump is making it incandescently clear that Trump DID NOT abuse his discretion when he asked the Ukrainian dude to investigate alleged corrupt acts by Joe Biden, which in turn were the subject of this cross-examination of Vindman during that same hearing by Congressman Christopher Douglas Stewart, an American politician who currently represents Utah’s 2nd congressional district in the United States House of Representatives, to wit:
There are, as I’ve stated previous, sitting here a couple days ago, there are dozens of corrupt nations in the world, hundreds of corrupt government officials.
Exactly one time did a vice president go to a nation and demand the specific firing of one individual and give a six-hour time limit and withhold or threaten to withhold $1 billion in aid if not.
It was the one individual who was investigating a company that was paying his son.
end quotes
So, based on the sworn testimony of Lt. Colonel Vindman, which was subsequently refuted by Adam Schiff, impeachment is clearly in appropriate here because for impeachment to be a valid exercise of the impeachment power of the House, it must be based on “those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust,” which according to Vindman, never happened; hence, no public trust was abused or violated, which makes impeachment in this case UNLAWFUL and UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
And how Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler got around that impediment to their impeachment case by discrediting the sworn testimony of Lt. Colonel Vindman, Schiff’s own star witness in this ridiculous impeachment drama which gets more ridiculous by the day, which brings us back to Alexander Hamilton, to wit:
“They (impeachment charges) are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.”
end quotes
But according to the sworn testimony of Lt. Col. Vindman, there were no injuries done to society itself by Trump, so what is up then with Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler convicting Trump of abusing his office after an UNCONSTITUTIONAL TRIAL in the House Judiciary Committee of “Jumping Jerry” Nadler who jumped to the conclusion Trump had to be guilty of something, anything really, back in October 0f 1988 as we can clearly see from the CNN article “Key House Democrats outline Trump investigations if they take back House Majority” by Lauren Fox and Jeremy Herb on 15 October 2018, to wit:
Democrats in the US House of Representatives are beginning to quietly prepare to hold the Trump administration accountable if they win the majority in November.
In more than a dozen interviews, CNN has learned that Democrats on virtually every committee in the House of Representatives are carefully positioning themselves to be ready in the event that they find themselves in the majority after the midterms.
After nearly a decade in the minority and two years having limited power to pursue oversight in the Trump administration, Democrats need to be prepared.
One Democratic leadership aide told CNN that at this point, the key role of leaders is to help each of the committees coordinate their efforts so that investigations are targeted and yield results, not just rhetoric.
Schiff wrote an op-ed in The Washington Post published online Friday making the case that a Democratic House would provide a check on Trump through oversight, detailing his plans for his panel.
“In the Intelligence Committee, we will assess the work we have accomplished despite the Republican efforts at obstruction, along with what the Senate and special counsel Robert S. Mueller III have examined, and determine what else needs a full accounting,” Schiff wrote.
“There are serious and credible allegations the Russians may possess financial leverage over the president, including perhaps the laundering of Russian money through his businesses.”
“It would be negligent to our national security not to find out.”
But he’s not the only chairman who’s likely to probe matters involving Russia.
Rep. Jerry Nadler, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, has pressed Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte, a Virginia Republican, to investigate possible Russian collusion, among other topics, rather than the GOP probe conducted into the FBI’s handling of the Russia investigation.
If Democrats have the majority, Nadler is likely to probe Russian meddling as part of a lengthy list of issues, from Michael Cohen’s payments to women to potential obstruction of justice to Trump’s finances.
Nadler, whose committee would be in charge of a potential impeachment process, has been careful to say he’s not planning to move forward on impeachment yet.
But all of the issues he’s signaled he wants to investigate would lay the groundwork for such a case should Democrats decide to press forward on it.
end quotes
But as we can clearly see from this worn testimony of Lt. Colonel Vindman that Schiff and Nadler are trying to scrub from the record, the Democrats never had anything more than rhetoric and a desire to hurt Trump as bad as they possibly can, which is shameful and reprehensible, and exactly the kind of low conduct the Democrats have no trouble stooping to whatsoever!
“We present you not just with high crimes and misdemeanors, but a constitutional crime in progress up to this very minute!”
That hysterical, incredible and patently ridiculous charge was made last night during a House Rules Committee meeting on the impeachment of Trump by Democrat Jamin Ben “Jamie” Raskin, born December 13, 1962, a politician with J.D. from Harvard Law School, who serves as the U.S. Representative for Maryland’s 8th congressional district located in Montgomery County, an affluent suburban county northwest of Washington, D.C., extending through rural Frederick County to the Pennsylvania border who prior to his election to Congress, was a constitutional law professor at American University Washington College of Law as we were informed in the Roll Call article “On impeachment eve, House Rules provides preview of divisive floor debate” by Katherine Tully-McManus on 17 December 2019, where we were reminded as follows:
The Democrats’ case is centered on the allegation that Trump leveraged a White House meeting and military aid to pressure Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter while Ukraine faced continued military aggression from Russia.
end quotes
But that charge by Jamie Raskin of “a constitutional crime in progress up to this very minute” is patently stupid, as could be expected from a Democrat, precisely because based on the record developed by the Democrats themselves during the Schiff Committee hearing on 19 November 2019 starring the bemedaled U.S. Army Lt. Colonel Alexander Vindman as the expert witness for the Democrats against Trump, Trump never violated his oath of office as the rabid and hate-filled Democrats are alleging today, nor was a “constitutional crime” ever committed, as we can clearly see in this colloquy between Lt. Col. Vindman and Congresswoman Elise Stefanik serving as the U.S. Representative for New York’s 21st congressional district, to wit:
STEFANIK: My question to both of you today will focus on the following, systemic corruption in Ukraine, two highlighting for the public that by law aid to Ukraine requires anti corruption efforts and three, who in our government has the decision-making authority when it comes to foreign policy and national security matters.
So on corruption in Ukraine, as Ambassador Yovanovitch testified, one of the key reasons why President Zelensky was overwhelmingly elected by the Ukrainian people was that they were finally standing up to rampant corruption in their country.
Would you both agree with the ambassador’s assessment?
VINDMAN: Yes.
WILLIAMS: Yes.
STEFANIK: And Ms. Williams, corruption was such a critical issue from your perspective that when you prepared the vice president for his congratulatory call with President Zelensky, you testified that the points you wanted to communicate on the call where the following quote, look forward to seeing President Zelensky really implement the agenda on which he had run related anticorruption reforms.
That is correct?
WILLIAMS: That is, yes.
STEFANIK: And Lieutenant Colonel Vindman, would you agree that this focus on anticorruption is a critical aspect of our policy towards Ukraine?
VINDMAN: I would.
end quotes
So much for Jamie Raskin’s stupid theory of not only “high crimes and misdemeanors, but a constitutional crime in progress up to this very minute,” because there were no “high” crimes, there were no misdemeanors, and the only constitutional crime in progress this very minute is this on-going effort by the Democrats to subvert OUR United States Constitution with this KANGAROO COURT they are running in the House of Representatives, which takes us back to that transcript excerpt, to wit:
STEFANIK: And Lieutenant Vindman, you are aware that in 2014 during the Obama Administration, the first anticorruption investigation partnered between the U.S., the U.K. and Ukraine was into the owner of the company, Burisma?
VINDMAN: I’m aware of it now.
STEFANIK: And Lieutenant Colonel Vindman, you testified that you were aware that Burisma had questionable business dealings.
That’s part of its track record?
VINDMAN: That is correct.
STEFANIK: You also testified that regarding Burisma, money laundering, tax evasion comports with your understanding of how business is done in Ukraine.
Is that correct?
VINDMAN: I’m not aware of specific incidents but my understanding is that it would not be out of the realm of the possible for Burisma.
STEFANIK: Well, that’s page 207 from your testimony but I’ll move on.
You are aware that Hunter Biden did sit on the board of Burisma at this time?
VINDMAN: I am.
STEFANIK: Well I know — I know that my constituents in New York 21 have many concerns about the fact that Hunter Biden, the son of the vice president, sat on the board of a corrupt company like Burisma.
The Obama Administration, state Department was also concerned and yet Adam Schiff refuses to allow this committee to call Hunter Biden despite our requests.
Every witness who has testified and has been asked this has answered yes.
Do you agree that Hunter Biden on the board of Burisma has the potential for the appearance of a conflict of interest?
VINDMAN: Certainly the potential, yes.
STEFANIK: And Ms. Williams?
WILLIAMS: Yes.
STEFANIK: Now shifting to the legal requirements that our aid to Ukraine is conditioned on anticorruption.
Lieutenant Colonel Vindman, you testified that you understood that Congress had passed under the Ukrainian Security Assistance Initiative, a legal obligation to certify that corruption is being addressed?
VINDMAN: That is correct.
STEFANIK: And you also testified that it is required by the National Defense Authorization Act?
VINDMAN: That is correct.
STEFANIK: So for the public listening, we are not just talking about President Trump focusing on anticorruption in Ukraine, but it is so critical so important that hard-earned taxpayer dollars when given to foreign nations that by law overwhelmingly bipartisan support requires anticorruption in Ukraine in order to get U.S. taxpayer-funded aid.
end quotes
So, Trump as president took an oath which states “I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States,” which requires him according to section 3 of Article II of OUR united States Constitution to take “Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” and Congress passed under the Ukrainian Security Assistance Initiative a legal obligation to certify that corruption is being addressed, and when Trump then complied with that law, according to the whacked-out, lost-in-space Democrats and Jamie Raskin, that adherence to that law by Trump then constituted not only “high crimes and misdemeanors, but a constitutional crime in progress up to this very minute,” which is simply bizarre!
Getting back to that transcript excerpt:
STEFANIK: And my last question Lieutenant Colonel Vindman, I know you serve in the NSC in the White House.
I served in the West Wing of the White House for President Bush on the Domestic Policy Council and in the Chief of Staff’s office so I’m very familiar with the policy process.
I also know that as a staff member, the person who sets the policy in the United States is the president, not the staff and you testified that the president sets the policy correct?
VINDMAN: That is correct.
STEFANIK: And do you agree that the president sets the policy as commander-in-chief, as you testified previously?
VINDMAN: Absolutely.
STEFANIK: Thank you.
end quotes
And it is out of that, that the Democrats have gotten the impeachment charges they are trying to enforce against Trump today- high crimes and misdemeanors, and a constitutional crime in progress up to this very minute!
And now we take a break from today’s episode of “WEIRD TALES OF THE DEMOCRATS OF WASHINGTON, D.C.” for station identification and a word from our sponsors, and if the dam don’t break, and the water don’t rise, we’ll be right back with further tales of the weird Democrats, so don’t go away and don’t touch that dial!
And while we wait for the Democrat Impeachment Train to get rolling again here, after its wheels appear to have fallen off, causing it to veer off the tracks asnd roll down a steep hill into a gully where it now lays prone on its back, let’s go to Zivotofsky ex rel. Zivotofsky v. Kerry 135 S. Ct. 2076 (2015) for a look at who really is in charge of OUR nation’s foreign policy – the president, or the Democrats in the House of Representatives, where we have the real LAW OF THE LAND on that important subject which is key to this up-comin g impeachment trial, assuming the Democrats can salvage the wreck from the gully it now lays in, to wit:
I. INTRODUCTION
“The power of originally recognizing a new state [is a] power the exercise of which is equivalent, under some circumstances, to a declaration of war.”
President Andrew Jackson made this observation as Texas pursued recognition as a new sovereign nation.
His statement highlights the significance of the act of recognition, which has bearing not only in a potential outbreak of war but also carries certain privileges regarding trade and treatment in a country’s legal system.
Despite the fact that even during the earliest days of the Republic, American leaders were acutely aware of the importance of formal recognition, they failed to clearly designate which branch of government exercises the “recognition power.”
end quotes
That, of course, is really the basis of this present kerfuffle between Nancy Pelosi and her raving, foam-at-the-mouth pack of Democrats and Trump over the corrupt ****-hole of Ukraine – who really is in charge?
Getting back to the view of the Supreme Court on that question, we have:
Throughout American history, this authority has been exercised by the President alone, by Congress alone, and, at times, by the President and Congress concurrently.
Until Zivotofsky ex rel. Zivotofsky v. Kerry, the Supreme Court of the United States had never been called upon to determine whether Congress or the President solely possessed this power.
The instigator of the controversy was a small section of the 2003 Foreign Relations Authorization Act, which addressed the place of birth on U.S. passports.
Section 214(d) of the Act granted a U.S. citizen born in Jerusalem the right to have the State Department list his or her location of birth as Israel.
This provision stood in contrast to the Executive Branch’s long-held position to not recognize any nation as possessing formal sovereignty over Jerusalem.
When Petitioner’s parents acted on his behalf to exercise his right under section 214(d), the State Department refused, stating that only the President could formally recognize a sovereign nation and that Congress lacked authority to contradict this position.
The Supreme Court ultimately agreed with the State Department’s argument, but built its support for this position upon tenuous ground.
The Court based its decision on the Constitution, case law, and historical precedent.
While these sources offer some support for the Court’s conclusion, it appears contrary to the drafters’ original intent and finds firmer footing in functionality and practicality than in the Constitution.
A majority of the Court focused on the President’s authority to recognize sovereign nations, and framed the issue as whether Congress can pass a law requiring a subordinate part of the Executive Branch to contradict the President.
In 2002, Menachem Binyamin Zivotofsky (hereinafter “Petitioner”) was born in Jerusalem to American citizens.
In December of that year, his mother went to the American Embassy in Tel Aviv and sought a consular report of birth abroad and a passport for Petitioner.
After the Embassy refused to comply with Petitioner’s mother’s request, Petitioner’s parents brought suit against the Secretary of State in an effort to have the courts enforce the statute.
The case first appeared in the District Court of the District of Columbia.
The district court dismissed the case for lack of standing and because it considered the issue a political question — whether Israel exercises sovereignty over Jerusalem—which could not be answered by the Judiciary.
However, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit reversed, ruling Petitioner did have standing, but agreed with the district court’s holding that the issue was a political question and could not be resolved by the Judicial Branch.
The Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari, vacated the judgment, remanded the case, and instructed the appellate court to determine whether Petitioner’s interpretation of the statute was correct and whether the statute itself was constitutional, but cautioned the appellate court to not address the political question of sovereignty.
The appellate court subsequently found the statute unconstitutional and held that only the President possessed the authority to recognize a foreign sovereign.
Petitioner appealed and the Court granted certiorari a second time.
This time, the Court affirmed the decision by the court of appeals and held that the recognition power was solely within the President’s authority.
III. COURT’S DECISION AND RATIONALE
A. Majority Opinion by Justice Kennedy
Justice Kennedy authored the majority opinion and was joined by Justices Ginsberg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan.
Justice Kennedy found that this case consisted of two issues: (1) Whether the President exercises exclusive control to formally recognize another sovereign nation, and (2) If the President possesses this power, whether Congress can require the President and his Secretary to issue statements which contradict the President’s official position.
Since this case concerned Presidential action that conflicted with the will of Congress, Justice Kennedy recognized that the President must have “exclusive” and “conclusive” authority for his action.
Presidential power is “at its lowest ebb” when the President acts contrary to the will of Congress and, in this situation, the President can rely solely on the authority the Constitution has granted the Executive Office.
Justice Kennedy began his analysis by determining whether the power to formally recognize a foreign sovereign was an exclusive power of the Executive Office.
The Court found the President did possess exclusive authority to formally recognize other sovereigns and reached this conclusion by assessing evidence found within the structure and text of the Constitution that addressed the President’s authority in international affairs and by reviewing precedent, historical practice, as well as practicality of engaging in foreign affairs.
First, Justice Kennedy turned to the Constitution, but found limited textual support for the theory that the Executive Branch is the sole possessor of the “recognition power” as the term never appears within the text.
Within the Constitution, Justice Kennedy looked to the “Reception Clause” as a Constitutional source for Presidential authority over recognition.
The Reception Clause states that the President “shall receive Ambassadors and other public ministers.”
Justice Kennedy noted that some scholars find this significant in light of the historical context.
At the time of America’s founding, governments considered the formal reception of another country’s ambassador as the equivalent of recognizing that nation’s sovereignty; however, during the Constitution’s ratification few gave much attention to the Reception Clause.
Initially, Alexander Hamilton dismissed the Reception Clause as merely a ministerial duty, but after President Washington formally recognized the new French government by receiving its ambassadors, Hamilton wrote that the clause did in fact authorize the President to formally recognize other nations.
Justice Kennedy considered this explanation persuasive and found that since the Constitution charged the President, and only the President, with receiving ambassadors, it implied that the President has authority to recognize sovereign governments.
Next, Justice Kennedy considered the other powers over international affairs that the Constitution granted the Executive Office: the power to make treaties and the power to appoint ambassadors.
Although Justice Kennedy acknowledged that these powers were subject to congressional approval, he considered it significant that Congress lacked authority to initiate diplomatic relations with foreign nations.
Justice Kennedy found that this indicated the Executive Branch was vested with more authority over international affairs than Congress.
Justice Kennedy considered these findings conclusive evidence that the President possesses recognition power and then addressed whether it is exclusive to the Executive.
To determine the exclusivity of this authority, Justice Kennedy reviewed case precedent and historical practice.
He concluded that in light of the lack of examples of Congress exercising this power, and the functional aspect of limiting this power to the Executive Branch, the Executive Branch could exercise unilateral power.
Since the Legislature and Executive have never quarreled over this issue before, the Court had limited precedent to consult.
First, Justice Kennedy addressed two cases involving disputes between the Federal government’s recognition of a sovereign nation and a state’s recognition of that nation.
In United States v. Pink and United States v. Belmont, New York courts declined to recognize property seized by the Soviet Government as belonging to Russia despite the fact that President Roosevelt formally recognized the Soviet Government and had entered into agreements with it.
In Belmont, the Supreme Court recognized the President’s authority to recognize governments and enter into diplomatic relations.
In Pink, the Court found that because the President had the authority to not only recognize another government but also “the power to determine the policy which is to govern the question of recognition,” the states must recognize that government as well.
Justice Kennedy admitted that these cases addressed the issue of a conflict between federal and state government and not whether the President has sole authority to formally recognize another sovereign government; however, Justice Kennedy found that these cases supported the contention that recognition power rested solely with the Executive.
Justice Kennedy considered Banco Nacional de Cuba v. Sabbatino even more instructive.
In this case, the Court refused to assume that ill will between the United States and Cuba sufficed for American courts to de-recognize Cuba since the Executive Branch still recognized the Cuban government.
The Court also remarked, “Political recognition is exclusively a function of the Executive.”
As with Belmont and Pink, Justice Kennedy found that this case provided strong support that the Court had previously determined that the President exercised exclusive authority over the formal recognition power.
The Secretary of State asserted that based upon United States v. CurtissWright Export Corp., the President possessed “exclusive authority” over all diplomatic affairs; however, Justice Kennedy declined to go so far.
He recognized that in Curtiss-Wright the Court’s description of the President’s exclusive power was unnecessary for its holding, and despite the case’s broad language, the Legislature retains its ability to make laws concerning diplomatic affairs.
Nevertheless, Justice Kennedy found that the power to recognize another sovereign belonged exclusively to the Executive Branch and is not subjected to Congress’ approval.
Next, Justice Kennedy reviewed historical precedent to support the theory that the President possesses this exclusive authority.
Justice Kennedy reviewed President Washington’s directions to his ambassador to begin relations with the new French government — without first consulting Congress.
The Executive Branch later agreed to receive the new French ambassador, an act that would be a public and official recognition of the new French government — again, without consulting Congress.
Justice Kennedy pointed to other instances where Congress deferred to the President’s decision, and even found instances where the President remained the party to formally recognize a foreign sovereign even though he had worked in concert with Congress to reach that decision.
According to Justice Kennedy, this evidence compelled the conclusion that Congress and the President have historically recognized the President’s exclusive authority over the power of recognition.
Moreover, Justice Kennedy found the practicality of only one branch of government exercising this recognition power particularly persuasive.
Citing American Insurance Ass’n v. Garamendi, Justice Kennedy asserted that the Nation should “speak . . . with one voice” in regards to recognizing a foreign sovereign.
Justice Kennedy argued, “only the Executive has the characteristic of unity at all times.”
He stated that the President’s ability to engage in more secretive diplomatic relations, which may lead to recognition, and the nature of the President’s position, which allows the President to take “decisive, unequivocal action” necessary to recognize a foreign sovereign, justify a finding that the “one voice” should come from the Executive Branch and not the Legislative Branch.
end quotes
That makes it sound very much as if Adam Schiff, the smarmy and unctuous Hollywood, California Democrat Congressman in charge of the inaptly-named “House Intelligence Committee,” himself is really not very intelligent at all, nor does he seem to know LAW OF THE LAND here in the United States of America, and he is trying to impeach Trump because Trump would not surrender his Constitutional duties with respect to the corrupt ****-hole to Nancy Pelosi and her pack of Democrats.
So quit stalling, Adam, and get this Impeachment Show back on the tracks so the American people can see you stand before the United States Senate as Chief Prosecuting Officer for the Democrats to defend your criminal charges against Trump for allegedly abusing his office.
That is a show that nobody will want to miss, Adam, so what is it that you are waiting for?
More time?
More witnesses?
And in the meantime from the internet:
SIGNATURES NEEDED
Donald Trump and his Republicans are trying to BULLY Rep. Adam Schiff.
Sign your name to show Rep. Schiff you have his back:
Email
Zip Code
PAID FOR BY HOUSE MAJORITY PAC.
http://WWW.THEHOUSEMAJORITYPAC.COM
Yes, indeed, people, and what a truly HISTORIC day this is, from my perspective as a loyal American citizen who has been and remains truly dumbfounded (greatly astonished or amazed, astounded, staggered, stupified) by this bizarre, ever-changing IMPEACHMENT SHOW being staged by the best script writers Hollywood has to offer starring, of course, the smarmy and unctuous Hollywood, California Democrat Congressman Adam Schiff, whose political base also includes GOOFY and MICKEY MOUSE in Disneyland, both of whom are said to be prolific Schiff fundraisers and bundlers, and who are said to vote early and often for Adam Schiff, their main man in the “People’s Congress,” of Nancy Pelosi, where even cartoon characters are entitled to congressional representation; and what makes it truly historic from my perspective is the fact that Nancy Pelosi has appointed our Adam to be the LEAD PROSECUTOR in Trump’s CRIMINAL TRIAL in the Senate, because criminal trial it is on fact going to be, with Adam aiming to hurt Trump real bad and do him a lot of damage the way the aging and ailing Thaddeus Stevens intended to do to “Democrat “King” Andy Johnson back on February 24, 1868.
That means that once the criminal trial gets under way, Adam Schiff is going to have to stand up before the CANDID WORLD, since this is an open proceeding, and the smarmy and unctuous Adam is going to have to explain to the world how exactly it is that Trump abused his office as president, when all the evidence from Schiff’s own witnesses, and here I mean Vindman, makes it clear that in his dealings with corrupt ****hole Ukraine, Trump was acting within his presidential authority.
In trying to do so, based on the record, Schiff is going to make a complete *** out of himself, and truly, that would be something worth buying a real-wide screen TV, just to be able to watch the look on Adam Schiff’s face when he realizes the world is laughing at him as if he were a clown turning tricks on the stage to amuse like Nancy Pelosi’s favorite court jester.
“He’s a full package!”
“He knows his purpose.”
“He knows his subject.”
“He always thinks strategically, and he respectfully connects with people.”
That, of course, is San Francisco Democrat and “Leader of the Pack” Nancy Pelosi gushing about the smarmy and unctuous Hollywood Democrat Adam Schiff in a New York Times puff piece on Adam entitled “Adam Schiff: Former Prosecutor Who Led Inquiry Will Helm Impeachment Team – In Representative Adam B. Schiff, Speaker Pelosi has chosen a lead impeachment manager who knows the case against President Trump but has become a lightning rod for Republican critics” by Sheryl Gay Stolberg updated Jan. 16, 2020, where we were regaled with Adam’s past successes as a criminal prosecutor, to wit:
WASHINGTON — As a young federal prosecutor in Los Angeles 30 years ago, Adam B. Schiff won the conviction of an F.B.I. agent who was seduced by a Soviet spy and traded secrets for gold and cash — a case, he said then, “of government misconduct and government corruption of the highest and most disturbing order.”
Mr. Schiff is now a 10th-term Democratic House member and the chairman of the Intelligence Committee, and he soon may find himself repeating that sentiment, this time as the lead House manager in the impeachment trial of President Trump.
Mr. Schiff makes no secret of his disdain for the president.
In an interview in October, he called Mr. Trump “infantile” and said he had brought “ill repute to the office” of the presidency.
end quotes
And yes, indeed, our Adam can repeat that hyperbolic sentiment about “government misconduct and government corruption of the highest and most disturbing order” over and over again, as much as he wants, it still is America, afterall, and Adam has as much right to talk like a fool or idiot as does anyone else in this country, and yes, he can make his disdain for Trump, who he hates with a passion, as clear as a sunlit day, but in this case, which is not the criminal trial of an FBI agent without the willpower to resist being seduced by a Soviet spy, Adam is actually going to have to prove that this too is a case “of government misconduct and government corruption of the highest and most disturbing order,” and to do that, in this specific case, he has to surmount a serious Constitutional challenge, given that he is nothing more than a mere congressman representing Disneyland and GOOFY and MICKEY MOUSE, who serves in OUR federal government pursuant to Article I of OUR Constitution, whereas his sworn enemy Trump., who is the only one in the drama who has actually sworn the oath of a United States president, serves under Article II, and Article II makes foreign relations the exclusive province of the executive and Senate, not the House of Representatives, which means that in this case, congressman Schiff has to demonstrate that whatever Trump did or didn’t do was a violation of Article II, which means that in reality, Trump in fact serves at the pleasure of Adam Schiff, a mere congressman pursuant to Article I, and there goes SEPARATION OF POWERS right out the window, along with OUR Constitution.
Thus, the Constitutional hurdle that Adam has to surmount.
And what makes the task confronting Adam even harder is that unlike the impeachment of Democrat “King” Andy Johnson back when, who was accused of violating an actual law of Congress, Trump is not accused of violating any laws; to the contrary, what Trump is being impeached for is looking for proof of that Democrat presidential front-runner Joe Biden was engaged in corrupt acts in Ukraine while he was Hussein Obama’s vice president.
So, when Nancy Pelosi goes on and on about a COVER-UP, she is correct; but the cover-up is being conducted by the Democrats to protect Joe Biden, not OUR Constitution, and not OUR Republic.
And the beat goes on!
Adam Schiff is a “full package,” alright, and actually, so is Nancy Pelosi, who is providing us with the necessary air of Opera Bouffe to accompany this farcical “IMPEACHMENT SAGA,” where American president Donald John Trump is being criminally prosecuted by Adam Schiff and the Democrats for investigating alleged corrupt acts by Democrat presidential front-runner Joe Biden when Biden was Hussein Obama’s vice president, as we are treated to in the Fox News article “Pelosi announces House impeachment managers to prosecute case against Trump” by Brooke Singman on 15 January 2020, as follows:
“This is about the Constitution of the United States,” Pelosi said, as she presented the Democrats’ legal team and noted that she put an emphasis on “litigators” in assembling them.
end quotes
And we had all better believe that there, Nancy Pelosi is quite correct – it is about OUR Constitution which the Democrats are trying to subvert and pervert with this impeachment trial which has Trump as president serving at the pleasure of Adam Schiff in the House of Representatives, which is a serious violation of OUR Constitutional SEPARATION OF POWERS.
If Pelosi, Schiff and the Democrats succeed in this case, never again will there be an executive in this nation who is anything more than an extension of Adam Schiff and a lackey of the Democrat party.
Getting back to the frankly bizarre statements Nancy is becoming famous for making, we have:
Announcing the managers, Pelosi argued the charges against the president will be a stain on his legacy, dramatically referring to an “impeachment that will last forever.”
end quotes
An impeachment that will last forever?
A stain on his legacy?
But of course it is, because that is what Nancy, in the world inside her mind, wants and needs it to be, and so, for her, it is, which takes us back to Fox News, as follows:
“This is a very serious matter and we take it to heart in a really solemn way,” Pelosi said.
end quotes
And actually, it is a very stupid matter, so there is nothing solemn about it, only something cheap and tawdry.
This is the same Nancy Pelosi who told us not that long as ago that impeachment was too good for Trump, and that Trump was not worth impeaching, and now all of a sudden, it has become a very serious matter and Nancy and her pack of Democrats take it to heart in a really solemn way, which kind of brings a tear to the eye when you think about it.
Getting back to Nancy’s inane comments in that Fox article, we have:
“It’s about the Constitution, it’s about the republic if we can keep it and [senators] shouldn’t be frivolous with the Constitution of the United States even though the president of the United States has.”
end quotes
It’s about the Republic if we can keep it?
HUH?
What on earth does that statement have to do with anything?
That is what Ben Franklin told a woman outside the building where the Constitutional Convention was being held in Philadelphia when she asked what form of government the convention had decided on – a Republic if we could keep it!
And we couldn’t and didn’t, which brings us back to the CNN (Cuomo News Network) article “READ: Pelosi statement on impeachment managers and sending articles to Senate” on 14 January 2020, where Nancy said as follows:
“In December, the House upheld its Constitutional duty to defend democracy For The People: passing two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump — abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.”
end quotes
And there went OUR Republic out the window, courtesy of Nancy Pelosi and the Democrat party, which takes us back to Fox for this last burst of mindless gibberish from Nancy Pelosi, as follows:
She added: “The president is not above the law.”
“He will be held accountable.”
“He already has been held accountable.”
“He has been impeached and you can never erase that.”
end quotes
Yes, Nancy, he has been impeached for investigating Democrat corruption, and that is something you can never erase!
And the bull**** from the Democrats continues to flow forth fast and furiously here with the POLITICO article “Battle over impeachment witnesses escalates” by John Bresnahan on 19 January 2020, where we have the latest update in the farce cooked up by Adam Schiff and the best screenwriters Hollywood has to offer, to wit:
With President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial just two days away, the battle over whether to call witnesses during the proceedings, including former national security adviser John Bolton, continues to heat up.
Several of the House managers for the impeachment trial, including Reps. Adam Schiff of California, Jerry Nadler and Hakeem Jeffries of New York, and Jason Crow of Colorado, appeared on Sunday news shows to urge the Senate to allow new witnesses and evidence during the process as they seek to oust Trump from office.
These Democrats repeatedly pushed the line that the only way to get a “fair trial” is through additional testimony and documents.
end quotes
Which is hog****, because they have brought criminal charges against Trump on the evidence they said at the time supported those criminal charges, and the only way now to get a truly “fair trial” is for the Democrats to prove the evidence they had at that time supports the criminal charges they brought against Trump based on that evidence.
If the evidence they had when the charges were brought does not support the charges, then that is a clear case of MALICIOUS PROSECUTION, which I can personally testify is a Democrat specialty – bringing false criminal charges against people for purely partisan political reasons, and here, it very much looks like they are getting caught at it and getting their pants pulled down in public, which has them panicking, which takes us back to the story, to wit:
“If the Senate decides, if Senator McConnell prevails and there are no witnesses, it will be the first impeachment trial in history that goes to conclusion without witnesses,” Schiff, the lead House manager for the trial, said during an appearance on ABC’s “This Week.”
“The threshold issue here is, will there be a fair trial?”
“Will the senators allow the House to call witnesses to introduce documents?”
“That is the foundational issue on which everything else rests.”
“And one thing that the public is overwhelmingly in support of, and that is a fair trial.”
end quotes
As a member of the public, yes, I would say that I am very much for a truly fair trial, which means that having brought criminal charges against a sitting American president, the smarmy and unctuous Democrat Congressman from Disneyland Adam Schiff now has to stand up there before the American people and show us how exactly it is the charges he brought against Trump are supported by the evidence he had in hand when he wrote his 300-page report supporting impeachment, which is akin to a citizen grand jury issuing a criminal indictment.
If this is the first impeachment trial without witnesses, the smarmy and unctuous Adam Schiff has no one but himself to blame for that, and if he can’t make his case to the American people without making a further POLITICAL DRAMA out of it, then it is he who deserves to be thoroughly embarrassed and censured for MALICIOUS PROSECUTION, which brings us back to the flow of bull**** from out of the Democrats this morning, to wit:
Jeffries added on “Fox News Sunday”: “The most important thing is that the American people deserve a fair trial.”
end quotes
Except it is not the American people who are on trial here – it is Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff and the Democrats who are really on trial, and finally so in a venue where they can’t play their silly, childish, disgusting political games, which takes us back to Hakeem, the Democrat, as follows:
“The Constitution deserves a fair trial.”
end quotes
HUH?
The Constitution deserves as fair trial?
But what did the Constitution do to cause it to be on trial, besides nothing?
Getting back to Hakeem and his totally inane comments in the Politico article, we have:
“Our democracy deserves a fair trial.”
end quotes
Our democracy deserves a fair trial?
My goodness, but the dude is really on a roll there, with everything under the sun going to be on trial in this IMPEACHMENT FARCE, which takes us back to Hakeem once more, to wit:
“And we believe that a fair trial involves witnesses.”
“It involves evidence.”
“It involves documents.”
end quotes
And you know what, Hakeem, We, the American People believe that, as well, and what we further believe is that when criminal charges HAVE BEEN brought, as is the case here, as members of the jury, it is our responsibility to weigh the evidence that is said to support the charges brought, and if the evidence gathered at the time the charges were brought does not support the charges, the charges get thrown out.
It is what is known as DISCOVERY, Hakeem, which is a legal term here in the United States of America to protect the due process rights of the accused.
Discovery, Hakeem, is the formal process of exchanging information between the parties about the witnesses and evidence to be presented at trial and the purpose of discovery is to make the parties aware of the evidence that may be presented at trial.
That is to prevent what is known in the lawyer’s trade as TRIAL BY AMBUSH, another Democrat specialty, where in what is known in Democrat parlance as the Ambush Trial, usually, it is a piece of evidence or a witness that has been concealed from the opposing side in a court case, so as to ensure that there is little to no chance of coming up with an adequate defense.
One would think that a high-powered, hard-charging lawyer like Hakeem Jeffries with his JD from New York University School of Law would be well aware of that, but as a Democrat who is also lawyer, obviously, he is not, which is not surprising at all, given the disdain Democrats have for RULE OF LAW and DUE PROCESS, which takes us back to Politico as follows:
But Senate Republicans, led by Sens. John Cornyn of Texas and David Perdue of Georgia, countered that the House managers should proceed with the evidence they used to impeach Trump in the House.
“I find it curious that Chairman Nadler of the Judiciary Committee called this a ‘rock-solid’ case,” Cornyn said on CBS’ “Face The Nation.
“But if the House isn’t prepared to go forward with the evidence that they produced in the impeachment inquiry, maybe they ought to withdraw the articles of impeachment and start over again.”
“This isn’t the Senate’s responsibility to make the case.”
“This, to me, seems to undermine or indicate that they’re getting cold feet or have a lack of confidence in what they’ve done so far,” Cornyn added.
end quotes
Which is hard logic to argue with, which brings this spew of ignorance from “Jumping Jerry” Nadler in response, to wit:
“And this whole controversy about whether there should be witnesses is just really a question of, does the Senate want to have a fair trial … or are they part of the cover-up of the president?” Nadler said on “Face The Nation.“
“Any Republican senator who says there should be no witnesses or even that witnesses should be negotiated is part of the cover-up.”
end quotes
Except there is no cover-up by the Republicans, Jerry – the only cover-up we can discern right now is the cover-up the Democrats are conducting of Joe Biden’s activities in Ukraine when he was Hussein Obama’s vice president.
And there is where matters now rest, with the Democrats running scared as this IMPEACHMENT FARCE gets real and the rubber meets the road in a Senate trial, but please, stay tuned, because if the Democrats have their way, this ridiculous farcical drama is far from over!
And being not one to avoid an opportunity to make himself look buffoonish, loopy and not all there, and not at all content to have appeared the fool and clown in the POLITICO article “Battle over impeachment witnesses escalates” by John Bresnahan on 19 January 2020, our own Adam Schiff, the hero of this long-running saga, also managed to insert his mouth into a Washington Post article entitled “Dershowitz distances himself from White House response to Democrats’ impeachment charges” by Felicia Sonmez and Mike DeBonis on 19 January 2020, as follows:
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.), the lead impeachment manager, said Sunday that Democrats will be “fighting for a fair trial” and pushed back against critics who have argued that the House should have done more to enforce its subpoenas before voting to impeach Trump.
end quotes
From that statement, all we can really conclude is that Adam Schiff is living in a world inside his head where the normal rules of gravity on this earth of ours clearly do not apply, because there is no “fight” the Democrats can now fight to put teeth into their slogan “fighting for a fair trial” would be to defend the evidence which is alleged to support the criminal charges Adam Schiff drafted against Trump.
All Adam has left to him now that he is about to be shown to all the candid world as a malicious, empty windbag, is to try and confuse us by making him look like the victim here, when he is anything but, which takes us back to the horse**** the Washington Post lets Adam Schiff spew in their newspaper, to wit:
“The reality is, because what the president is threatening to do is cheat in the next election, you cannot wait months and years to be able to remove that threat from office,” Schiff said on “This Week.”
end quotes
And get the **** out of here with that crap, Adam, because it is horse****!
Who is really cheating at the next election is yourself with these kinds of incriminating comments unsupported by any evidence, which nonetheless, doesn’t stop you from saying them, along with Nancy Pelosi, “Jumping Jerry” Nadler and the Democrat party, and it is disgustingly and patently obvious what you and the Democrats are about here, which takes us back to the Washington Post, where the saga gets even wilder, to wit:
Asked about a Politico report on the topic, Schiff also claimed that the CIA and the National Security Agency are withholding documents related to Ukraine under pressure from the White House and that intelligence officials are reluctant to testify publicly on global security threats because of fear of angering Trump.
“The NSA, in particular, is withholding what are potentially relevant documents to our oversight responsibilities on Ukraine, but also withholding documents potentially relevant that the senators might want to see during the trial,” he said.
“That is deeply concerning.”
“And there are signs that the CIA may be on the same tragic course.”
end quotes
Tragic course?
Hmmmmm.
Who is on the tragic course here from my perspective is Adam Schiff.
Can Adam now be nimble and snatch his fat back out of the fire without getting his fingers burned?
Stay tuned and now a word from our sponsors while we pause for station identification.
Dear Adam Schiff:
In plain and simple language that hopefully you are able to comprehend, we Americans who are not Democrats and who remain LOYAL to the United States Constitution as written, and as explained in the Federalist Papers, DO NOT want the United States Senate to give you Democrats in the House of Representatives any aid or assistance in protecting your corrupt democracy, when your corrupt democracy is the gravest threat OUR United States Constitution faces today, bar none, especially with this TRAVESTY (a false, absurd, or distorted representation of something) of an impeachment trial that is based solely on the fact that Trump was causing Democrat corruption to be investigated, which you are calling an “abuse” of his office, when it is clearly you, Adam Schiff, who have abused your office by bringing criminal charges against Trump without any credible evidence of criminality, and now you are getting caught at it, and so, you are squealing like a shoat caught under a rail fence trying to dig its way out, and you are squealing to us to save something we want no part of, which is your corrupt democracy, which corrupt democracy takes away all political power from everyone who is not a Democrat, and awards all that power to you, who has the president of the United States at his beck and call, since in your democracy, the president of the United States of America answers to you, not the Constitution, and not the law.
Surely, Adam, a real hot-shot lawyer like you with a J.D. from Harvard, probably the pre-eminent law school anywhere in the world cannot have forgotten these words of Chief Justice John Marshall in Marbury, 5 U.S. at 165–66, to wit:
“By the constitution of the United States, the President is invested with certain important political powers, in the exercise of which he is to use his own discretion, and is accountable only to his country in his political character, and to his own conscience.”
end quotes
That’s according to OUR United States Constitution, Adam, not your corrupt Democrat constitution that you keep for safekeeping in Nancy Pelosi’s rectal cavity.
Your democracy wants to strip that discretion from the president and make him accountable not to the country, but to you!
That democracy we want no part of Adam Schiff!
It has been corrupt for way too long and its time has passed and it is time to consign your corrupt democracy to the trashbin of history, and Adam, frankly, dude, you belong there yourself!
And what I am seeing here is that what the Hollywood screenwriters and animators who have created Adam Schiff, the Democrat Congressman who represents GOOFY and Mickey and Minnie Mouse and Snow White and the Seven Dwarves in Schiff’s congressional district of Disneyland, all of whom are said be to big Schiff fundraisers and bundlers, who was put into the most expensive congressional seat in the nation by big money dudes in Hollywood who wanted a pliable Democrat in that seat and were able to purchase it for him, have done here with this well-scripted and staged COLLOSSAL PHANTABULOUS IMPEACHMENT CIRCUS AND SIDESHOW, and masterfully so, is to make Californian Adam Schiff the Democrat 2020 presidential candidate by acclimation, which in turn has rendered all these Democrat primaries a nullity and the candidates running as political non-entities like Harold Stassen or Hillary Clinton, because the Hollywood scriptwriters and animators who created Adam Schiff have proven to the world that Schiff is now the only Democrat who has been able to lay a glove on Trump and lay him low.
So good-bye Joe Biden and barmy Bernie Sanders, and the rest of that crowd including shrill, shrieking Lizzie Warren who could have given herself a boost in the polls by dropping Bernie with a karate kick for calling her a liar on national TV, instead of whimpering and whining about it on national TV – they are all now “also-rans” because none of them can now hold a candle to Schiff, who has saved the SOUL of the nation from the likes of Donald Trump, who the scriptwriters have Adam saying, “He cheated and he will cheat again, because that is so who he is,” which truly is a catchy line, much like Marlon Brando in “On the Waterfront” telling his brother he could have been a contender, which is a catchy line too, having a good beat and meter as it does.
So yes, people, meet president Adam Schiff, who has just killed off the electoral college by linking it with a CRIMINAL like Trump, and by doing so, has brought us into the AGE OF DIRECT DEMOCRACY where the most votes cast wins, and since Schiff is a product of a democracy, he can declare himself like Augustus Caesar or Oliver Cromwell a dictator, until he has finished brandishing his terrible swift sword to suppress for once and for all the Trump faction of deplorables who have stolen the soul of America from good Democrats like Adam Schiff, who has just won it back for all the American people who are Democrats and who fervently believe in him, as does this admirer in this missive concerning President Schiff that is circulating on the internet in a bid to make Schiff the subject of a DRAFT by universal acclaim at the Democrat National Convention, to wit:
“A stunning performance and a superb closing argument by Adam Schiff in the impeachment hrgs.”
“It’s been a tough case, and although I know too little about him, if I could learn more, I would confidently vote for him as President.”
“The Dems. have got a big field granted, of geezers and back benchers,(no offense, since I’m a fellow geezer) but this guy has got that Kennedy like spirit of youth and energy that we so desperately need right now.”
“If you’ve seen him visually on the web, it’s obvious he’s really worked his rear end off this effort.”
end quotes
An American Mahdi arises!
Or should it be an American Cromwell?
And my goodness, people, talk about a true American LOLLAPALOOZA of an EXTRAVAGANZA, I am seeing the hand of a true master of the art of political illusion entering here, with the Hollywood scriptwriters bringing John Bolton, who has a book he wants to peddle to make himself some big bucks and to get his face seen on the talk show circuit, back into the script with some fantastic drama surrounding his re-entry, which really serves to spice this show up even more than it was already spiced up.
Here’s the story as we now have it:
So, wishing to do like other people leaving government service do, by writing a tell-all book with lots of gossip and salacious details in it which would make it a best-selling page-turner, as opposed to something left laying on the “remaindered” table for maybe $3.00, like Hillary Clinton’s book about herself and her failed career as a politician, John sat down and wrote his book, and here is where the scriptwriters have it getting interesting.
Because John might be selling U.S. national security secrets between the covers of his book, John wasn’t supposed to let anybody know about it, other than the NSC, which hasn’t completed, and maybe hasn’t even started vetting the book to make sure John didn’t include any sensitive national security stuff in there to make himself look important, and notwithstanding, by very mysterious circumstances, despite the book not being vetted, the New York Times got ahold of a copy, and now the salacious national security details leaked by whoever leaked John’s book, which wasn’t supposed to be made public, are front-page news in the New York Times, and it appears as if Bolton is now going to come before Adam Schiff to confess and repent and beg absolution and forgiveness for his sins.
Amazing stuff, when you come tight down to it.
As I say, from a pen in the hand of a true master.
And talk about zany antics and positively bizarre plot twists to keep hold of our imaginations during this Democrat impeachment circus, these Hollywood script writers staging this whole show first had Adam Schiff saying in his most officious voice that the Trump defense team presented a weak case as to why the weak case against Trump was a really weak case, which I thought kind of interesting from an intellectual conundrum point of view, where the smarmy and unctuous Hollywood, California Democrat Adam Schiff seems to be saying that he won because even though his weak case was constructed out of cobwebs and dust with a glue distilled from pig **** as a binding agent to hold his house of cards together, the Trump lawyers failed to lay it totally flat, which makes Schiff a better lawyer than they are, which will be a fantastic line in the script when they get the movie version out, with Brad Pitt playing Adam Schiff in the starring role.
But for the best bizarre plot twist of the day, and I have to say it is a good one, the Hollywood scriptwriters provided us with this absolute gem in the Bloomberg story “Senators Question Lawyers Starting Wednesday: Impeachment Update” by Steven T. Dennis and Laura Litvan on 28 January 2020, to wit:
Democrat Joe Biden said GOP Senator Joni Ernst’s comments a day earlier show that Republicans are using the impeachment trial to harm his campaign for the presidential nomination.
“She spilled the beans,” Biden told reporters in Muscatine, Iowa.
“She just came out and flat said it.”
“You know the whole impeachment trial for Trump is just a political hit job to try to smear me because he is scared to death of running against me.”
end quotes
Now, isn’t that just great for a complete turn-around for the narrative here?
All this time, we thought that it was the Democrats who were impeaching Trump to help out goofy old Joe Biden’s chances in the 2020 presidential election, and now, what we are learning from Joe himself is that the Republicans are really the ones who rigged this whole impeachment trial, not Adam Schiff and the Democrats, who we thought were the ones who rigged the impeachment trial, so that they san use the impeachment trial to actually help Trump, by hurting Joe’s chances by smearing him, when we all thought the Democrats were using the impeachment trial to smear Trump.
Masterful script writing, people!
Some of the best bizarre twists and turns I have come across in a political intrigue suspense novel in a long, long time.
And yes, as an American citizen, I say that Jack Bolton, the author of the tell-all coffee table book full of salacious gossip Jack has picked up in his years of being a political hanger-on in Washington that has brought Jack back into the political spotlight from the obscurity he was cast into on his ignominious exist from the White House, and good riddance, SHOULD BE called as a witness in Trump’s impeachment trial, and he should be asked this series of questions:
Question No. 1: Acting on the assumption that what you thought you heard the president say about aid to Ukraine might be in some way true, given that the United States Constitution as written gives the president considerable discretion when it comes to foreign military aid (“The conduct of the foreign relations of our government is committed by the Constitution to the executive and legislative [branches] . . . and the propriety of what may be done in the exercise of this political power is not subject to judicial inquiry or decision.” Oetjen v. Cent. Leather Co., 246 U.S. 297, 302, 38 S. Ct. 309, 62 L. Ed. 726 (1918)), in what way do you think the president’s alleged actions violated the provisions of the United States Constitution which give the president of the United States of America this discretion?
Question No. 2: As the national security advisor, what discretion did the United States Constitution give you over foreign policy and foreign military aid?
With coffee-table book writer and salacious gossip-monger Jack Bolton now coming onto the scene here in a bid to convince the United States Senate and the American people that his superior in the Executive branch who was picked by the American people, like it or not, to be Jack’s superior, was not competent to be Jack’s superior, in Jack’s superior judgment, which should alone be grounds to convict and remove Trump from office in what would be a fair trial for Adam Schiff, Charley “Chuck” Schumer and the Democrats, this Schiff COLLOSSUS of an impeachment circus is now reminding me of the court-martial scene from out of the book “The Caine Mutiny” by Herman Wouk where Lieutenant Commander Philip Francis Queeg, the captain of the destroyer minesweeper U.S.S. Caine, an obsolete warship converted from a World War I-era destroyer, has been relieved of duty by his crew of junior officers during a typhoon, which crew of junior officers had deemed the ship captain the Navy appointed over them to be too incompetent to handle and save the ship in that storm.
And for those who like to think for themselves and have the back story to this IMPEACHMENT FARCE and CIRCUS COLLOSSUS from the pen of the smarmy and unctuous Disneyland, California Democrat Adam Schiff himself, in his official flowery impeachment language, it is as follows:
U.S. House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
The Trump-Ukraine Impeachment Inquiry Report
The impeachment inquiry into Donald J. Trump, the 45th President of the United States, uncovered a months-long effort by President Trump to use the powers of his office to solicit foreign interference on his behalf in the 2020 election.
As described in this executive summary and the report that follows, President Trump’s scheme subverted U.S. foreign policy toward Ukraine and undermined our national security in favor of two politically motivated investigations that would help his presidential reelection campaign.
The President demanded that the newly-elected Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky, publicly announce investigations into a political rival that he apparently feared the most, former Vice President Joe Biden, and into a discredited theory that it was Ukraine, not Russia, that interfered in the 2016 presidential election.
To compel the Ukrainian President to do his political bidding, President Trump conditioned two official acts on the public announcement of the investigations: a coveted White House visit and critical U.S. military assistance Ukraine needed to fight its Russian adversary.
During a July 25, 2019, call between President Trump and President Zelensky, President Zelensky expressed gratitude for U.S. military assistance.
President Trump immediately responded by asking President Zelensky to “do us a favor though” and openly pressed for Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Biden and the 2016 conspiracy theory.
In turn, President Zelensky assured President Trump that he would pursue the investigation and reiterated his interest in the White House meeting.
Although President Trump’s scheme intentionally bypassed many career personnel, it was undertaken with the knowledge and approval of senior Administration officials, including the President’s Acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, and Secretary of Energy Rick Perry.
In fact, at a press conference weeks after public revelations about the scheme, Mr. Mulvaney publicly acknowledged that the President directly tied the hold on military aid to his desire to get Ukraine to conduct a political investigation, telling Americans to “get over it.”
President Trump and his senior officials may see nothing wrong with using the power of the Office of the President to pressure a foreign country to help the President’s reelection campaign.
Indeed, President Trump continues to encourage Ukraine and other foreign countries to engage in the same kind of election interference today.
However, the Founding Fathers prescribed a remedy for a chief executive who places his personal interests above those of the country: impeachment.
Accordingly, as part of the House of Representatives’ impeachment inquiry, the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, in coordination with the Committees on Oversight and Reform and Foreign Affairs, were compelled to undertake a serious, sober, and expeditious investigation into whether the President’s misconduct warrants that remedy.
In response, President Trump engaged in an unprecedented campaign of obstruction of this impeachment inquiry.
Nevertheless, due in large measure to patriotic and courageous public servants who provided the Committees with direct evidence of the President’s actions, the Committees uncovered significant misconduct on the part of the President of the United States.
As required under House Resolution 660, the Intelligence Committee, in consultation with the Committees on Oversight and Reform and Foreign Affairs, has prepared this report to detail the evidence uncovered to date, which will now be transmitted to the Judiciary Committee for its consideration.
end quotes
Given all of that, especially the part about Trump “fearing” goofy old Joe Biden, who right now is trailing barmy Bernie Sanders in Iowa as of last night, and the multitude of words that follow in Adam’s prolix presentation above here, which does go on and on and on and on like this FARCE we have been getting battered with since January of 2019 when the Democrats made it clear that they thought the sitting president of the United States was in the words of an illustrious and very well-respected Democrat a “mother******” and they were going to find some kind of dirt from somewhere to impeach him with, which they have done, how the hell much more “evidence” and how many more “witnesses” do we have to endure before this STUPID SHOW being crafted by the best screenwriters Hollywood has to offer is finally over?
And here I would like to say as an American citizen who is neither a Republican nor a Democrat that I think it was a very serious blunder on the part of the Senate Republicans to try and end this FARCE without calling as witnesses each and every person who could corroborate the statement of PROSECUTING ATTORNEY Adam Schiff in his U.S. House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Trump-Ukraine Impeachment Inquiry Report which is, in essence, the actual indictment of Trump by Schiff acting in the capacity of a GRAND JURY FOREMAN, where Schiff ascribes to Trump the following motive for his alleged actions in Ukraine, to wit:
The President demanded that the newly-elected Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky, publicly announce investigations into a political rival that he apparently FEARED THE MOST, former Vice President Joe Biden, and into a discredited theory that it was Ukraine, not Russia, that interfered in the 2016 presidential election.
end quotes
Now, this is not the wild ravings of some lunatic in an asylum somewhere, people – this is a LEGAL DOCUMENT that was used as the basis to waste a whole lot of government resources by the Democrats in the House of Representatives to protect Joe Biden and a blatant and transparent effort to influence the 2020 presidential election in the favor of the Democrats, by smearing Trump, which reminds me quite frankly of President George Washington in his Farewell Address warning of a moment when “cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.”
That is what Adam Schiff is representative of – the modern-day epitome of the cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men and women trying to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, and it is for that reason that I think it was a bad idea to stop thi8s FATRCE without forcing Adam Schiff to have to admit, publicly, that his statement that Trump “FEARED” Joe Biden was nothing but BULL**** invented by Schiff as a motive for Trump’s dealing with Ukraine, when he had nothing else plausible to hang his hat on.
EXPOSE that as a willful false statement by demand Schiff back it up with proof!
Otherwise, this FARCE will never come to an end – it is like the Armistice with Germany after WWI, which only caused another war.
By not popping the balloon full of bull**** that is Adam Schiff, the Republicans are leaving a wound festering, as we clearly see in the New York Times article “Republicans Block Impeachment Witnesses, Clearing Path for Trump Acquittal” by Michael D. Shear and Nicholas Fandos on 1 February 2020, as follows:
As they approached the final stage of the third presidential impeachment proceeding in United States history, Democrats condemned the witness vote and said it would render Mr. Trump’s trial illegitimate and his acquittal meaningless.
“America will remember this day, unfortunately, where the Senate did not live up to its responsibilities, when the Senate turned away from truth and went along with a sham trial,” said Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic leader.
“If the president is acquitted, with no witnesses, no documents, the acquittal will have no value because Americans will know that this trial was not a real trial.”
end quotes
The ONLY way to shut Charley “Chuck” Schumer up to heal the divided nation was to call for witnesses who don’t exist to corroborate the charge of the smarmy and unctuous Disneyland Democrat Adam Schiff that Trump’s sole motive for his actions with respect to Ukraine was FEAR of Joe Biden.
That would have been a show I would love to see, Adam Schiff parading in witness after witness, including the dude whose job it is to keep the presidential toilet clean, that they knew Trump feared Joe Biden because they overheard him telling somebody else that, or in the case of Jack Bolton, anyway, Trump confessed his fear of Joe Biden to their face.
Schiff tried to make Trump look small, so it would only have been fair, and conclusive, to show that Schiff is even smaller, by revealing to ALL the American people, and especially the Democrats, that Adam Schiff and the Democrats were the ones who rigged this trial, which takes us back to the NYT for this burst or rush of horse**** from out of the mouth of the smarmy and unctuous Adam Schiff, as follows:
“The facts will come — out in all of their horror, they will come out,” Mr. Schiff said.
“The witnesses the president is concealing will tell their stories,” he added.
“And we will be asked why we didn’t want to hear that information when we had the chance.”
“What answer shall we give if we do not pursue the truth now?”
end quotes
The answer I will give you, Adam, is you are the one concealing the truth, because if we all go back to your “Trump-Ukraine Impeachment Inquiry Report,” where we have the real truth about witnesses, as follows, and this in Adam’s own words as author of the report:
The report is the culmination of an investigation that began in September 2019 and intensified over the past three months as new revelations and evidence of the President’s misconduct towards Ukraine emerged.
Sustained by the tireless work of more than three dozen dedicated staff across the three Committees, we issued dozens of subpoenas for documents and testimony and took more than 100 hours of deposition testimony from 17 witnesses.
To provide the American people the opportunity to learn and evaluate the facts themselves, the Intelligence Committee held seven public hearings with 12 witnesses — including three requested by the Republican Minority — that totaled more than 30 hours.
end quotes
To provide We, the American People the opportunity to learn the facts supporting impeachment before the Articles of Impeachment were even drafted, which is some time in the past, now, pre-impeachment trial where we are now being told that the Republicans in the Senate are denying the House Democrats the witnesses they already called to craft this BOGUS set of Articles of Impeachment that are based on Trump fearing Joe Biden, which is patently ridiculous, Adam Schiff issued dozens of subpoenas for documents and testimony and took more than 100 hours of deposition testimony from 17 witnesses, and then held seven public hearings with 12 witnesses — including three requested by the Republican Minority — that totaled more than 30 hours, and resulted in nothing but a waste of time and government resources.
So what exactly is it that Charley “Chuck” Schumer and the smarmy and unctuous Adam Schiff now think we are missing in this sick saga?
The Democrats rigged a trial against Trump in the hopes of influencing the 2020 presidential election in their favor by smearing Trump endlessly, and now, the circus is over their HOUSE OF CARDS is coming tumbling down!
The only thing now left to do is to clean house in the House of Representatives, ridding it of the cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men like Adam Schiff and women like Nancy Pelosi of the Democrat party who have blatantly attempted to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying our Republic in the process.
Get out the Hose, Adam Schiff, and you too, Nancy Pelosi, time for the pair of you to go, and good riddance to the both of you!
In an interesting development which certainly has political tongues wagging up here to the north of you in the Democrat-controlled capital city of Albany, New York, as of the time of this writing (1:15 p.m. 4 Feb), there still has been no announced results from the Iowa caucuses, and the fear (Charley “Chuck” Schumer is a New York Democrat) is that barmy Bernie Sanders trounced Joe Biden in the graveyard of Joe’s prior campaigns for president (think plagiarization), which result would totally strip the smarmy and unctuous Adam Schiff of the only motive he could come up with the make Trump’s actions personal, not official, and that was Trump’s alleged “FEAR” of goofy old Joe, as we clearly see from the following:
U.S. House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
The Trump-Ukraine Impeachment Inquiry Report
The impeachment inquiry into Donald J. Trump, the 45th President of the United States, uncovered a months-long effort by President Trump to use the powers of his office to solicit foreign interference on his behalf in the 2020 election.
As described in this executive summary and the report that follows, President Trump’s scheme subverted U.S. foreign policy toward Ukraine and undermined our national security in favor of two politically motivated investigations that would help his presidential reelection campaign.
The President demanded that the newly-elected Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky, publicly announce investigations into a political rival that he apparently feared the most, former Vice President Joe Biden, and into a discredited theory that it was Ukraine, not Russia, that interfered in the 2016 presidential election.
end quotes
Now, as we have become painfully well aware of since the Democrats took control of the House of Representatives in January of 2019, and promptly announced to the world that they were going to impeach the “MOTHER******” Trump come hell or high water, they would find a reason, don’t worry, Adam Schiff is anything but subtle, and he thinks we are deaf and stupid, so in case we missed the part about Trump being afraid of Joe Biden, which is sheer invention on the part of Adam Schiff, who pulled that specious assertion from straight out of his ***, as I have gone through the record and can find NO witness testimony that Trump was afraid of Joe Biden, as opposed to being contemptuous of Joe, as a lot of Americans are, for him being so stupid in the run-up to the Iraq war and the stupidity in Washington, thanks to Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton, that has resulted in the mess Trump inherited over there thanks to the incompetence of Hussein Obama, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, he came back and reminded us of it, all over again, just in case we didn’t remember, to wit:
As this report details, the impeachment inquiry has found that President Trump, personally and acting through agents within and outside of the U.S. government, solicited the interference of a foreign government, Ukraine, to benefit his reelection.
In furtherance of this scheme, President Trump conditioned official acts on a public announcement by the new Ukrainian President, Volodymyr Zelensky, of politically-motivated investigations, including one into President Trump’s domestic political opponent.
In pressuring President Zelensky to carry out his demand, President Trump withheld a White House meeting desperately sought by the Ukrainian President, and critical U.S. military assistance to fight Russian aggression in eastern Ukraine.
The President engaged in this course of conduct for the benefit of his own presidential reelection, to harm the election prospects of a political rival, and to influence our nation’s upcoming presidential election to his advantage.
In doing so, the President placed his own personal and political interests above the national interests of the United States, sought to undermine the integrity of the U.S. presidential election process, and endangered U.S. national security.
end quotes
Now, excuse me here, people, but I am over 70, I am a veteran of the Viet Nam war, I know I have been lied to by Democrats before, although it took getting wounded in combat twice to come to the realization that I had been duped by Democrat Lyndon Baines John Johnson into thinking the Viet Cong in Viet Nam were in some incomprehensible-to-me reason dangers to our national security, so that before they got to here, it was necessary for us to go over there and rough them up, a bit to teach them what-for, so that statement by the smarmy and unctuous Adam Schiff, who does seem to possess a smallish neck, although it could be the camera angle that makes his neck look small, that Trump “endangered U.S. national security” is pure BULL****!
Our national security no more depends on that corrupt ****hole than it does on the Man-in-the-Moon, and I truly would like to hear Adam Schiff try to persuade me that it is otherwise, and again, I have read his reports, and nowhere does or can Adam Schiff detail how Ukraine is in any way vital to OUR national security here in the United States of America, when they can’t even defend their own people and territory.
Getting back to Trump allegedly fearing Joe Biden, who may be on his way out of the Democrat primaries because he wasn’t doing well in Iowa, here is more of the narrative from Schiff, to wit:
Our investigation determined that this telephone call was neither the start nor the end of President Trump’s efforts to bend U.S. foreign policy for his personal gain.
Rather, it was a dramatic crescendo within a months-long campaign driven by President Trump in which senior U.S. officials, including the Vice President, the Secretary of State, the Acting Chief of Staff, the Secretary of Energy, and others were either knowledgeable of or active participants in an effort to extract from a foreign nation the personal political benefits sought by the President.
Ultimately, this sweeping effort to stonewall the House of Representatives’ “sole Power of Impeachment” under the Constitution failed because witnesses courageously came forward and testified in response to lawful process.
The report that follows was only possible because of their sense of duty and devotion to their country and its Constitution.
Given the proximate threat of further presidential attempts to solicit foreign interference in our next election, we cannot wait to make a referral until our efforts to obtain additional testimony and documents wind their way through the courts.
The evidence of the President’s misconduct is overwhelming, and so too is the evidence of his obstruction of Congress.
Indeed, it would be hard to imagine a stronger or more complete case of obstruction than that demonstrated by the President since the inquiry began.
The decision to move forward with an impeachment inquiry is not one we took lightly.
In making the decision to move forward, we were struck by the fact that the President’s misconduct was not an isolated occurrence, nor was it the product of a naïve president.
Having witnessed the degree to which interference by a foreign power in 2016 harmed our democracy, President Trump cannot credibly claim ignorance to its pernicious effects.
Even more pointedly, the President’s July call with Ukrainian President Zelensky, in which he solicited an investigation to damage his most feared 2020 opponent, came the day after Special Counsel Robert Mueller testified to Congress about Russia’s efforts to damage his 2016 opponent and his urgent warning of the dangers of further foreign interference in the next election.
With this backdrop, the solicitation of new foreign intervention was the act of a president unbound, not one chastened by experience.
end quotes
Ah, yes, there we are back to the central theme of this on-going Democrat passion play/circus/theater of the absurd: “he (Trump) solicited an investigation to damage his most feared 2020 opponent …”
Say it enough times and what do you know, eventually, if said over and over enough times, it has to become true, doesn’t it, as in:
I. The President Conditioned a White House Meeting and Military Aid to Ukraine on a Public Announcement of Investigations Beneficial to his Reelection Campaign
The President’s Request for a Political Favor
President Trump then asked President Zelensky “to look into” former Vice President Biden’s role in encouraging Ukraine to remove a prosecutor widely viewed by the United States and numerous European partners to be corrupt.
In so doing, President Trump gave currency to a baseless allegation that Vice President Biden wanted to remove the corrupt prosecutor because he was investigating Burisma, a company on whose board the Vice President’s son sat at the time.
end quotes
Now, right there, people, we are seeing a BLATANT COVER-UP by the smarmy and unctuous Hollywood, California Democrat congressman Adam Schiff where he blurts out “President Trump gave currency to a baseless allegation that Vice President Biden wanted to remove the corrupt prosecutor because he was investigating Burisma, a company on whose board the Vice President’s son sat at the time,” because there is no evidence the charge is baseless, precisely because the charge has never been investigated, and Joe has never adequately explained what that was all about, nor has he ever been formally exonerated, so the charge is not baseless at all, and isn’t investigated because the Democrats are keeping the HUSH on that to protect Joe Biden, which takes us back to Trump being afraid of Joe Biden one more time, to wit:
Far from giving the “full-throated endorsement of the Ukraine reform agenda” that had been hoped for, the President instead demanded a political investigation into an American — the presidential candidate he evidently feared most, Joe Biden.
end quotes
See what I am saying, people – Trump had to be petrified scared of Joe Biden, because if he wasn’t, Adam Schiff wouldn’t be saying it over and over again, which brings us to this absolute gem in Adam’s report, to wit:
The President’s Hand-picked Agents Begin the Scheme
In comments that would foreshadow troubling events to come, Lt. Col. Vindman warned President Zelensky to stay out of U.S. domestic politics to avoid jeopardizing the bipartisan support Ukraine enjoyed in Congress.
end quotes
What stirring drama, people, as could be expected because this is the work product we are seeing here of some of the most creative minds among the Hollywood scriptwriters backing Adam Schiff along with the illusionists at Disneyland, where Adam is their congressman.
And now we pause for station identification and a word from our sponsors as we await the fate of goofy Joe Biden in Iowa, where the dude might end up back of the pack and pulling up lame, the moral of that story being Trump should have had the Ukrainian dude investigating Bernie Sanders, instead, because Trump was obviously afraid of the wrong candidate.
So, people, why is Ukraine really important to our national security here in the United States of America?
According to CHIEF PROSECUTING ATTORNEY Adam Schiff in his U.S. House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Trump-Ukraine Impeachment Inquiry Report which is, in essence, the actual indictment of Trump by Schiff acting in the capacity of a GRAND JURY FOREMAN, the reason Ukraine is so important to our national security here in the United States of America can be found in the section “President Trump Froze Vital Military Assistance,” as follows:
Ukraine experts at DOD, the State Department, and the NSC argued that it was in the national security interest of the United States to continue to support Ukraine.
As Mr. Morrison testified, “The United States aids Ukraine and her people so that they can fight Russia over there, and we don’t have to fight Russia here.”
end quotes
And as a Viet Nam combat veteran who heard that same exact BULL**** about why we had to fight the Vietnamese in Viet Nam, all I can say is that the mountain of BULL**** from Washington, D.C. just got a whole lot higher with that wild and extravagant claim, and by the way, I have been hearing that HOG**** about the Russians coming here to invade us since I was about five years old or so, and really, people, after some fifty years or more of the Russians not coming here to fight us, because they would get their clock cleaned if they tried, that claim is getting real old, and so its inclusion in this Adam Schiff Impeachment Circus is worthy of nothing but universal contempt for the claim, and for Adam Schiff who thinks we are all stupid enough to believe that if the Ukrainians do not stop the Russians, the next thing we know, they will be over here.
What fools those clowns are in Washington if they honestly think the corrupt Ukrainians can stop the Russians from invading the United States, regardless of how much military aid we provided them with.
And before we look further into the existential question of just who the hell is this idiot Tim Morrison who said to the smarmy and unctuous CHIEF DEMOCRAT INQUISITOR AND PROSECUTING ATTORNEY Adam Schiff, the Democrat congressman from Disneyland and Hollywood, California, impeaching Trump on national security grounds, that “(T)he United States aids Ukraine and her people so that they can fight Russia over there, and we don’t have to fight Russia here,” it has to be kept in mind that each and every Democrat that voted for impeachment on national security grounds, and this includes such illustrious military combat veterans as Cape Charles Congresswoman Elaine Luria and Tulsi Gabbard, has their basis for asserting a danger to our national security that asinine and patently ridiculous statement by Tim Morrison that “(T)he United States aids Ukraine and her people so that they can fight Russia over there, and we don’t have to fight Russia here,” which makes them all look quite stupid, given we are not at war with Russia, we haven’t been at war with Russia, there are no indications we intend to go to war with Russia, and Bill and Hillary Clinton are great friends with Putin of Russia.
How absolutely ridiculous the Morrison statement really is can be readily determined by reviewing the April 21, 2019 Cape Charles Mirror thread entitled “Op-Ed: Adam Schiff and the Russian Connection” where we learned from the 12 October 2018 RT News article entitled “California among top 10 investors in Russian debt thanks to cops & firefighters” by Max Whittake of Reuters, to wit:
It takes more than sanctions to scare California’s police and firefighters from investing in Russia.
The US state is reported to be a top 10 holder of Russia’s state-issued bonds.
The California Public Employees’ Retirement System, or Calpers, had about $460 million invested in Russian OFZ bonds as of the end of June, Bloomberg reports.
Other US investors like BlackRock and Stone Harbor Investment Partners remain among the top 10 holders of Russian bonds, according to the media.
BlackRock is the largest foreign holder of Russian OFZs with $2.53 billion invested.
Analysts have said that huge investments by US pension funds is a sign that they oppose rhetoric from the White House.
Investing in Russian bonds has been lucrative in the last years.
The central bank of Russia is offering a yield from 7 to 9 percent depending on the maturity of the bonds.
end quotes
So much for being at war with Russia, and that thread doesn’t stop there, because according to the RT News story “Sanctioned Russian assets attracting investment from biggest US pension funds” by Sergey Pyatakov / Sputnik published 22 Oct. 2018, the second largest pension fund in the US, California State Teachers’ Retirement System, or Calstrs, held about $9.5 million in Russian bonds and nearly $164 million in Lukoil receipts as of the end of 2017, according to media reports.
Meanwhile, the country’s fourth biggest fund Florida Retirement Systems (FRS) held Russian investments worth $354 million as of June 30 that year.
The holdings reportedly include shares of Novatek, Rosneft, VTB, Sberbank, Gazprom, Gazprom-neft, Lukoil, Surgutneftegas and Transneft.
At the same time, the New York State Common Retirement Fund, the third largest in the country, reportedly has $82.7 million worth of Russian investments in its portfolio – $59.3 million of which are companies on the sanctions list.
Investing in Russian state-issued obligations has been highly profitable over the last decade.
end quotes
So who then is this seeming lunatic Tim Morrison who is the smarmy and unctuous Adam Schiff’s key witness in his impeachment of Trump on national security grounds?
According to his Wikipedia bio, Timothy Aaron Morrison, born c. 1978, is an American Republican political adviser who was briefly the top U.S. adviser to President Trump on Russia and Europe on the White House National Security Council, a position he took over from his predecessor Fiona Hill in August 2019, and from which he resigned on October 31, 2019.
Before that, Tim served as senior director for countering weapons of mass destruction on the US National Security Council, a position he assumed on July 9, 2018.
Until then, he was policy director for the Republican staff on the House defense panel.
Tim entered politics as a professional staff member to Rep. Mark Kennedy, from 2000 to 2007.
As to his national security credentials, Tim doesn’t seem to really have any, which is likely why we find him uttering such lame, tired, and patently stupid lines as “(T)he United States aids Ukraine and her people so that they can fight Russia over there, and we don’t have to fight Russia here.”
Instead, Tim holds a Juris Doctor from George Washington University and a BA in Political Science from the University of Minnesota, which possession of a J.D. degree by Tim serves as an explanation for why it is that he does make real lame and stupid statements for Adam Schiff to then parrot, such as “(T)he United States aids Ukraine and her people so that they can fight Russia over there, and we don’t have to fight Russia here,” because Tim does not really know better, nor does Adam Schiff of the Democrats, for that matter, given that they have impeached Trump on national security grounds with Tim Morrison as their only source of support for that specious contention.
And GOOD GOD GERTIE, is this mental torture by Adam Schiff, “Jumping Jerry” Nadler, aka, “The Nads,” and Nancy Pelosi ever going to come to an end?
And here I am referring to the press conference “Jumping Jerry” held yesterday (5 Feb/ 2020) outside the Democrat caucus room where he announced even more Trump impeachment hearings, with this current impeachment only being at best the penultimate impeachment, or warm-up impeachment before the main round, which is the next impeachment yet to come, which takes us to an article in THE HILL entitled “Nadler says it’s ‘likely’ House will subpoena Bolton” by Cristina Marcos on 02/05/20, as follows:
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) said Wednesday that it is “likely” that the House will issue a subpoena to President Trump’s former national security adviser John Bolton.
“I think it’s likely, yes,” Nadler told reporters.
“We’ll want to call Bolton.”
Nadler elaborated that Democrats would continue their investigations even after the Senate’s expected vote later Wednesday to acquit Trump on the two articles of impeachment passed by the House.
Nadler defended pursuing further investigations into the White House in an election year.
“First of all, I think when you have a lawless president, you have to bring that to the fore and you have to spotlight that.”
“You have to protect the Constitution, whatever the political consequences.”
“Second of all, no, as more and more lawlessness comes out, I presume the public will understand that,” Nadler told reporters outside a Democratic caucus meeting.
end quotes
MEMO TO “JUMPING JERRY”: We are the public in here, and let us face it, Congressman Nadler, what we do understand, all too well by now, is that you Democrats are full of ****, and all you are doing with these hearings is trying our patience as well as wasting our time and government resources as we watch our national deficit rising ever higher as you Democrats throw out tax dollars away on your STUPID impeachment investigations which have gone nowhere.
Getting back to The Hill:
Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), the Democratic caucus chairman and one of the seven impeachment managers, said that subpoenaing Bolton would be a “question for further discussion” that would be decided by Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.).
end quotes
Ah, yes, people, NOTHING gets done by the Democrats without the express permission of Nancy Pelosi, and of course, Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Disneyland), who truly did not come across as being very intelligent himself as this IMPEACHMENT FARCE of his fizzled in the Senate and died an ignominious death, as it deserved to do, which takes us back to The Hill, to wit:
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) suggested on Wednesday that there is value in hearing from Bolton, even after the Senate impeachment trial has ended.
But he deferred the decision to the committee leaders, like Nadler, who have been examining Trump’s dealings with Ukraine.
“I don’t think they’re going to be precluded by any vote of the Senate on that,” Hoyer told reporters in the Capitol.
“But the committees will make that decision.”
Hoyer acknowledged that there are some moderate Democrats facing tough reelections who are ready to put the whole saga behind them and turn their focus to legislation.
But, he predicted voters will understand if Democrats frame the ongoing investigation as routine oversight, rather than a second stab at impeachment.
“The committees … will be making a determination whether that information is useful to get for their oversight responsibilities, not necessarily for the impeachment process, but for … closing the book, finding out the information,” he said.
“I think that they may well do that, but they’re going to make that decision.”
end quotes
And so, the stupid show will go on, and on and on, so get your popcorn now, people while there is an intermission, and we’ll be right back after this break for station identification.
So, yes, people, let us all rise up as one body, regardless of political affiliation, and demand that the THREE AMIGOS, as Adam Schiff, “Jumping Jerry” Nadler and Nancy Pelosi are lovingly known all across this great land of ours, revered as they are by all the American people as the SAVIORS of not only our democracy, but the very soul of our America, as well, and demand that post haste, they drag Jack Bolton into a public hearing and put him under oath, so that we the American people can hear him in his own words, answer these critical questions before we get much further into the 2020 presidential season, to wit:
QUESTION ONE: Jack, dude, tell us, on how many different occasions did Donald J. Trump confide in you as one of his closest friends and advisors that he greatly feared Joe Biden as a presidential opponent more than any other Democrat in the throng who could possibly run against Trump for president?
QUESTION TWO: Given the public record of Joe Biden’s considerable weakness as a presidential candidate, including dropping out of the race twice now, once for plagiarizing a speech, and once because he simply was a loser trailing behind everyone else, like he is doing all over again, what reasons did Donald J. Trump give you for fearing Joe Biden so much that he felt he needed the help of the dude in Ukraine to derail Joe’s campaign before it could even get going by uncovering the dirt on what Joe was up to over there when he was vice president and his worthless ne’er-do-well misfit son Hunter was given a cushy job on the Burisma board because Joe couldn’t get him anything else, especially after the kid got kicked out of the Navy for snorting coke?
QUESTION THREE: Jack, as a national security expert, one of our foremost, do you subscribe to the theory of Tim Morrison as stated to Adam Schiff that the United States aids Ukraine and her people so that they can fight Russia over there, and we don’t have to fight Russia here?
end quotes
Yes, people, let us finally, finally, for the sake of our mental health, before this INSANITY engulfs the entire nation as it has engulfed the Democrats, get to the bottom of things here and get this SICK SHOW over by getting Jack Bolton on the witness stand to get to the very bottom of Trump’s visceral fear of a two-time loser like Joe Biden, whose campaign, according to the New York Times article Joe Biden in Iowa: What Went Wrong in the Caucuses” by Katie Glueck, Jonathan Martin and Thomas Kaplan on 6 February 2020, was a real incompetent mess, to wit:
Mr. Biden’s performance in the Iowa caucuses on Monday dealt a damaging blow to the former vice president; with well over 90 percent of the results counted by Wednesday night, he trailed Pete Buttigieg and Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, with Senator Amy Klobuchar not far behind.
“I am not going to sugarcoat it,” Mr. Biden said Wednesday as he campaigned in New Hampshire.
“We took a gut punch in Iowa.”
But he now faces jittery donors, an uncertain landscape in upcoming Democratic contests and a sharp challenge to the central argument of his campaign message: that he is the party’s strongest candidate to win a general election.
Mr. Biden was also a less-than-inspiring presence on the trail, according to some voters, struggling at times in the homestretch to deliver crisp, energetic, on-message performances.
“His campaign is not a good campaign,” Roxanna Moritz, the Scott County auditor and a Biden supporter, said late last month.
And party officials continued to describe his Iowa organization as scattershot, an issue thrown into sharp relief at the party dinner in November, the Liberty and Justice Celebration.
Mr. Biden’s team said that it had around 1,200 people in the arena, many of whom went on to become precinct captains and dedicated volunteers.
But the empty seats and the smaller and less boisterous Biden sections spread throughout the arena cut a sharp contrast with the loud, unified crowds of Ms. Warren and Mr. Buttigieg, the former mayor of South Bend, Ind., in a major test of organizational strength.
More damaging than the evident differences in crowd strength was what many Iowa Democrats were seeing for the first time in person: a once-fiery candidate who was looking his age compared with a number of his younger rivals.
end quotes
So, yes, people, before things go too much further, we need to hear from Jack Bolton as to why Trump feared a known loser like Joe Biden so much that he had to turn to a Ukrainian dude to do him a favor here with respect to derailing Joe Biden’s campaign. because if it is true that Trump greatly feared Joe Biden, of all people, then Trump would have to be insane, which would bar him from running again.
And then there is this Vindman hysteria in the New York Times article “Trump Fires Impeachment Witnesses Gordon Sondland and Alexander Vindman in Post-Acquittal Purge” by Peter Baker, Maggie Haberman, Danny Hakim and Michael S. Schmidt (boy, it takes a lot of people to write a NYT story) on 8 February 2020, where we have the following moaning and shrieking by the Democrats, which shows them to be pathetically stupid, to wit:
The president’s critics had warned that he would feel unbound if acquitted, and some said that the dismissal of Mr. Sondland and the Vindman brothers proved their point, quickly calling it “the Friday night massacre,” as Senator Mark Warner, Democrat of Virginia, put it.
“These are the actions of a man who believes he is above the law,” said Representative Adam B. Schiff, Democrat of California and the lead House impeachment manager.
Mr. Schumer said the White House was running from the truth.
“This action is not a sign of strength,” he said.
“It only shows President Trump’s weakness.”
Ms. Pelosi said, “This goes too far.”
end quotes
And what ignorant hogwash that all is, which takes us back in time in our real American history, not the insane fantasy version the Democrats have created out of whole cloth, to November 5, 1862, the “Order Relieving General G. B. McClellan and Making Other Changes” by Abraham Lincoln, where in this order, one day after the congressional mid-term elections, U.S. president Abraham Lincoln relieved Union general George B. McClellan, a potential political rival, of command of the Army of the Potomac, to wit:
Executive Mansion, Washington, November 5, 1862.
By direction of the President, it is ordered that Major-General McClellan be relieved from the command of the Army of the Potomac, and that Major-General Burnside take the command of that army.
Also that Major-General Hunter take command of the corps in said army which is now commanded by General Burnside.
That Major-General Fitz-John Porter be relieved from command of the corps he now commands in said army, and that Major-General Hooker take command of said corps.
The general-in-chief is authorized, in [his] discretion, to issue an order substantially as the above, forthwith, or so soon as he may deem proper.
A. Lincoln.
end quotes
Now, people, that is OUR history, high school history, actually, and the president as commander-in-chief has the sole discretion to have in command in OUR military officers that he trusts.
When he can no longer trust them, then he sacks them, like Lincoln sacked McClellan, plain and simple.
So Vindman, who proved himself not only untrustworthy, but as dumb as a box of rocks, and who wants an idiot on the NSC, when he appeared before Adam Schiff in his bemedaled fancy dress uniform at one of Adam’s many hearings, and while in uniform, and on active duty, and blatantly assisted Schiff in trying to influence the 2020 presidential elections in the favor of the Democrats is gone, and so he should be, because military officers in uniform should not be playing at partisan politics.
END OF THAT STORY!
Reel it in, no one is reading these screeds.
Even the people that agree with you.
Like me.
Would you be at all surprised, Mr. Otton, to hear that I don’t give a flying **** about what you and your little clique think, or don’t think, or read, or don’t read?
You have made yourself totally inconsequential in my world by your own admissions that you yourself are unable to read more than a handful of words at a time, assuming they are very simple ones, and you live solely for the opportunity to rip into a liberal or purported liberal like Chas Cornweller like a great white shark lives to rip into a bunch of seals in the water off Cape Charles, or a surfer down in Florida, for that matter.
I’m not a part of that game, not being on anybody’s “side,” nor being a member of anybody’s little clique, like you and your friends who can’t read, and appear to have sleep apnia or some kind of condition that has them falling asleep at the wheel all the time.
Perhaps it is a geriatric thing.
In any event, Mr. Otton, you and I really have no need to interact, you having nothing to say, and me, tired of hearing it, so in closing, why don’t you take yourself down to the beach and watch the waves for awhile to soothe your troubled mind (ocean waves are said to be good for that), and have yourself a real good day!
And it is interesting from a historical perspective, now that this Adam Schiff Democrat Impeachment Farce is receding in the rear view mirror as it makes its way into the dustbin of history, where the farce belongs, to go back in time to a speech Democrat Congressman James Brooks (November 10, 1810 – April 30, 1873), a U.S. Representative from New York, made on the floor of the House of Representatives concerning the impeachment of Democrat president Andy Johnson, known as “King Andy,” on or about Feb. 22d, 1868, to wit:
Mr. Speaker, I had hoped to have an opportunity, at least, to submit a minority report before we entered upon this august proceeding of impeaching the chief executive officer of this Government.
But after a session of the Committee on Reconstruction, hardly an hour in length, violating an express rule of this House by sitting during the session — for Rule 72, provides that no committee shall sit during the session of the House without special leave — we have been summoned upon a very partial submission of facts, without any comprehension, in reality, of the charges which are made against the President of the United States, upon a new indictment, in a new form once more, and in a more alarming manner than ever, in this but a partial Congress, representing but a section of a portion of the people — in my judgment not representing the people of the United States at all — to act as a grand jury, with a large portion of that grand jury excluded from the jury-room here; and suddenly, impromptu perhaps, a vote is to be forced this very day — to impeach the President of the United States!
I am utterly inadequate to discharge the duty which has devolved upon me on this august day, the anniversary of the birthday of the Father of his country.
I am utterly unable upon this occasion either to do my duty to the people or to express myself with that deep solemnity which I feel in rising to resist this untoward, this unholy, this unconstitutional proceeding.
Indeed, I know not why the ghost of impeachment has appeared here in a new form.
We have attempted to lay it hitherto, and we have successfully laid it upon the floor of this House.
But a minority of the party on the other side (Radical Republicans), forcing its influence and its power upon a majority of a committee of this House, has at last succeeded in compelling its party to approach the House itself in a united, and therefore in a more solemn form, and to demand the impeachment of the President of the United States.
Sir, we have long been in the midst of a revolution.
Long, long has our country been agitated by the throes of that revolution.
But we are now approaching the last and the final stage of that revolution in which, like many revolutions that have preceded it, a legislative power not representing the people attempts to depose the executive power, and thus to overthrow that constitutional branch of the Government.
end quotes
Think about those words then from a Democrat Congressman concerning the impeachment of a Democrat president, about it being a legislative power not representing the people attempting to depose the executive power, and thus to overthrow that constitutional branch of the Government, and what those words are in turn saying about what Democrats Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi and “Jumping Jerry” Nadler were doing with respect to Trump, which was the exact same thing, to wit: a legislative power not representing the people attempting to depose the executive power, and thus to overthrow that constitutional branch of the Government, which takes us back to Congressman Brooks, as follows:
There is nothing new in all this.
There is nothing new in what we are doing, for men of the present but repeat the history of the past.
We are traversing over and over again the days of Cromwell and Charles I and Charles II, and we are traversing over and over again the scenes of the French revolution, baptized in blood in our introductory part, but I trust in God never again to be baptized by any revolutionary proceeding on the part of this House.
I have not and never have been a defender of all the opinions of General Jackson, but those on the other side who pretend to hold him as authority and those on this side who have ever held him as authority will find that in uttering the opinions which I have I but reutter the opinions which he advanced in his veto of July 10, 1832, when he said:
“The Congress, the Executive, and the court must each for itself be guided by its own opinion of the Constitution.”
“Each public officer who takes the oath to support the Constitution swears that he will support it as he understands it, and not as it is understood by others.”
The President of the United States has given his opinion upon the official tenure-of-office act and upon the Constitution of the United States by the appointment of Adjutant General Thomas as Secretary of War ad interim. and because of the exercise of that Constitutional right we are called upon here at once to pronounce him guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors and to demand his deposition and degradation therefor.
end quotes
Now, certainly, a real top-notch constitutional lawyer and scholar and Harvard Law School graduate and impeachment expert like the smarmy and unctuous Hollywood, California Democrat Congressman Adam Schiff cannot be ignorant of those words, given they are a part of the American public record of impeachments, that Adam must have consulted as a guide while bringing his impeachment charges against Trump, so why the double standard then?
If on July 10, 1832, American president Andrew Jackson, a Democrat, said “(T)he Congress, the Executive, and the court must each for itself be guided by its own opinion of the Constitution and each public officer who takes the oath to support the Constitution swears that he will support it as he understands it, and not as it is understood by others,” why was Schiff insisting that Trump has understand the Constitution as Schiff tells him it must be understood, or else, as if Schiff were the LORD PROTECTOR Cromwell himself?
Staying with our own American history here, it is interesting to note how similar the comments of the smarmy and unctuous Hollywood, California Democrat Congressman Adam Schiff were in our times today to those of Congressman John Armor Bingham (January 21, 1815 – March 19, 1900), an American Republican Representative from Ohio and a prosecutor in the impeachment trials of U.S. President Andrew Johnson, a Democrat.
In his U.S. House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Trump-Ukraine Impeachment Inquiry Report which formed the basis for the subsequent articles of impeachment against Trump, the smarmy and unctuous Adam Schiff stated thusly, to wit:
The decision to move forward with an impeachment inquiry is not one we took lightly.
Under the best of circumstances, impeachment is a wrenching process for the nation.
I resisted calls to undertake an impeachment investigation for many months on that basis, notwithstanding the existence of presidential misconduct that I believed to be deeply unethical and damaging to our democracy.
The alarming events and actions detailed in this report, however, left us with no choice but to proceed.
In making the decision to move forward, we were struck by the fact that the President’s misconduct was not an isolated occurrence, nor was it the product of a naïve president.
Instead, the efforts to involve Ukraine in our 2020 presidential election were undertaken by a President who himself was elected in 2016 with the benefit of an unprecedented and sweeping campaign of election interference undertaken by Russia in his favor, and which the President welcomed and utilized.
Having witnessed the degree to which interference by a foreign power in 2016 harmed our democracy, President Trump cannot credibly claim ignorance to its pernicious effects.
Even more pointedly, the President’s July call with Ukrainian President Zelensky, in which he solicited an investigation to damage his most feared 2020 opponent, came the day after Special Counsel Robert Mueller testified to Congress about Russia’s efforts to damage his 2016 opponent and his urgent warning of the dangers of further foreign interference in the next election.
With this backdrop, the solicitation of new foreign intervention was the act of a president unbound, not one chastened by experience.
It was the act of a president who viewed himself as unaccountable and determined to use his vast official powers to secure his reelection.
This repeated and pervasive threat to our democratic electoral process added urgency to our work.
end quotes
Now, compare those words of Schiff today with those of Republican Congressman Bingham on or about Feb. 22d, 1868 concerning “reluctance to impeach,” to wit:
Mr. Speaker, all right-minded men must concede that the question under consideration is one of supreme moment to all the people of the Republic.
I protest for myself, sir, that I am utterly incapable of approaching the discussion of this question in the spirit of a partisan.
I repel, sir, the intimation of the gentleman from New York, Mr. Brooks, that I am careless of the obligation of my oath or unconcerned about the supremacy of the Constitution and the laws.
I look upon the Constitution of the country as the very breath of the nation’s life.
I invoke this day upon the consideration of this great question the matchless name of Washington, as did the gentleman, and ask him, in the consideration of the matter now before us, to ponder upon those deathless words of the Father of our Country, wherein he declares that “the Constitution which at any time exists, till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people, is sacredly obligatory upon all” — upon all sir, from the President to the humblest citizen — standing within the jurisdiction of the Republic.
Washington but echoed the words that himself and his associates had imbedded in the text of the Constitution, that “this Constitution and the laws passed in pursuance thereof shall be the supreme law of the land.”
It shall be supreme over every officer; it shall be supreme over every State; it shall be supreme over every territory; it shall be supreme upon every deck covered by your flag in every zone all round the globe.
Every man within its jurisdiction, official and unofficial, must bow to the supremacy of the Constitution.
The gentleman says that the issue involved is an issue about an office.
I beg the gentleman’s pardon.
The issue involved is whether the supremacy of the Constitution shall be maintained by the people’s Representatives.
The President of the United States has assumed, sir, to set himself above the Constitution and the laws.
He has assumed to defy the law, he has assumed to challenge the people’s Representatives to sit in judgment upon his malfeasance in office.
Every man who has considered it worth while to observe my conduct touching this question that has so long agitated this House and agitated this country may have discovered that I have kept myself back and have endeavored to keep others back from making any unnecessary issue between the President and Representatives of the people touching the manner in which he discharged the duties of his great office.
I had no desire, sir, to have resort unnecessarily to this highest power reposed by the people in their Representatives and their Senators for the vindication of their own violated Constitution and violated laws.
Notwithstanding there was much in the conduct of the President to endanger the peace and repose of the country, yet, so long as there was any doubt upon the question of his liability to impeachment within the text and spirit of the Constitution, I was unwilling to utter one syllable to favor such a proposition or to record a vote to advance it.
end quotes
But in the end, like Schiff, Bingham not only voted to impeach, but became a prosecutor, as well.
It is interesting reading about the impeachment of Andy Johnson in 1868, the many parallels between that impeachment of a Democrat president by the radical Republicans in Congress at that time, versus the impeachment of a Republican president by radical Democrats in Congress in our times.
One would think that the Hollywood script writers who put the narrative for this now-failed Schiff IMPEACHMENT CIRCUS used the impeachment of Andy Johnson, which is well documented, as the basis for their script that Adam Schiff and the Democrats then followed.
Or hey, maybe they just made it up out of thin air!