Tuesday, September 24, 2019

How Will Impeachment Play Out For Democrats



  1. Then there is the "I have no idea, but I am disgusted by the whole thing" option.
    It seems that the Dems now openly regard presidential elections they don't win unconstitutional.

    When we add up the Dems and the MSM, I would say that in my life I have never seen so many so unreasonable and out for blood. Nor can I say I have ever been more disappointed in the so-called enlightened and certainly spoiled commentariat class. They have tasted blood. But it does seem to go well with an anti-Israel chianti.

    Occasional-Cortex is happy because she chirps that her district has had to live with Trump's policies, which one can only assume are too onerous even to mention! She, like so many others, cannot be bothered to get any more specific than that. And there is no reason to when you have the MSM colluding with you. Besides, we wouldn't want to tax her little brain without some jelly beans handy to replace her blood sugar. Specifcs will be outlawed under an Occasional-Cortex Administration along with facts and reason. They only get in the way of "what everyone knows."

    Hillary Clinton is asking for impeachment. Funny, but didn't this begin with her own little "me too" election moment?
    The demagoguery involved in all this is unreal.
    I don't care about any of these people! I just want my country back!

    At any rate, welcome to Am-arabia.

  2. Excellent awesome comment Jeff. I have added a 4th and 5th choice and enabled multiple votes

  3. To multiple vote press change vote, pick new choices and vote.

    1. Picking new choice only changed my vote, didn't add one.

    2. hmmmm worked for me Jeff Still playing with the app

      1.I pressed change vote in lower left bottom corner (this negates your original vote)

      2. I selected 2 choices, my original and my 2nd choice

      3. I pressed blue vote notice

  4. IOW, you have to repick your original choice I think

    1. Here's what it's giving me, #1, #4 $ #5.
      I voted for #1 and #5 only, even though that sounds a bit contradictory. I don't know why it has me picking #4.

      Maybe we can get others to play, and see what happens.

    2. Sorry for the bugs Jeff I was slightly surprised it worked in the first place. Its a pretty neat site and can do a lot of different things but Im not sure how useful it will be for our site. Im gonna explore it though.

  5. Over at Dkos the little pol pots are congratulating MSNBC for cutting Trump's press conference when he starts talking about Biden. Because he lied. Something doesn't compute there, if you caught him in a lie, shouldn't you show reruns of it while gleefully pointing it out? Unless you don't want the viewers to hear the said lie. I'm so grateful to our educated overlords for shielding us from wrong think.

    1. LOL Jacob. I tell ya, I never thought I would come to despise the Democratic party but the progressive takeover has made them so evil and stoopid.

    2. Doodad,
      I will second that. These people frighten me.
      "First they went after ______, and I said nothing because I wasn't _______. "

  6. How impeachment will play out for Democrats will be largely determined by the news media.

    The news media is largely biased in favor of the Democrats.

    Even more so, the news media is overwhelmingly biased against President Donald Trump:

    Mark R. Levin (a lawyer and
    author of the best-selling book
    Unfreedom of the Press) said:

    “The media’s Progressive ideology and Democratic
    Party bias are in full bloom as evidenced by their
    frenzied obsession with ‘getting’ President Trump...”

    “...the constant media refrain is trying to convince
    the American people of a demonstrably false narrative...”

    Deconstructing where American media has
    gone wrong
    by Deborah Fineblum, 2019/6/14

    Mark R. Levin
    (a lawyer and best-selling author) said:

    Given the Progressive ideology and Democratic Party attachment of the modern media and journalists, their commitment to “community” journalism and social activism, and with the integration of opinion and news making objective truth increasingly difficult to discern, is the public actually receiving predominantly news or propaganda or pseudo-information?

    SOURCE: Unfreedom of the Press
    (chapter 5, page 117) by Mark R. Levin,
    published by Threshold Editions, year 2019, NYC,
    ISBN 9781476773094 * ISBN 1476773092

    Mark R. Levin
    (a lawyer and best-selling author) said:

    A November 2018 survey of 462 financial journalists by professors at Arizona State University and Texas A&M University, of which more than 70% of those surveyed were affiliated with: the Wall Street Journal, Financial Times, Bloomberg News, Associated Press, Forbes, The New York Times, Reuters, or the Washington Post, revealed that even most financial journalists are political Progressives.

    When asked: “Generally speaking, how would you describe your political views?” the journalists responded: very Liberal 17.63%; somewhat Liberal 40.84%; moderate 37.12%; somewhat Conservative 3.94%; and, very Conservative 0.046%. Thus, nearly 60% of financial journalists surveyed were Liberal, and less than 5% were Conservative.

    SOURCE: Unfreedom of the Press
    (chapter 1, page 20) by Mark R. Levin,
    published by Threshold Editions, year 2019, NYC,
    ISBN 9781476773094 * ISBN 1476773092

    Harry Maryles said:

    “I am so tired of the extreme media bias. And yes.

    It is extreme. Never before has it come into such stark focus as it has under the Trump administration.

    There is hardly any mention of the name Trump without either an overt or disguised negative comment.

    It almost doesn’t matter who is reporting it.
    The attitude is the same.
    Anything the President says or does is bad.
    No matter what it is.
    Even his accomplishments are spun into the negative.”

    SOURCE: The Truth about Trump and
    Illegal Aliens
    by Harry Maryles, 2019/7/12

    Eric Starkman
    (Los Angeles-based writer and journalist) said:

    “The mainstream media has abandoned all pretense of objectivity.

    Whereas in the past journalists viewed themselves as unbiased chroniclers of the news, their focus today is on manufacturing it and dominating the ensuing conversations.

    A journalist’s influence today isn’t determined by the quality or accuracy of their reporting, but rather the size of their Twitter following and the frequency of their television appearances.”

    Why Crown Heights Hate Crimes Aren’t Newsworthy
    by Eric Starkman, 2019 February 17, in The Algemeiner:

  7. Progressives have ruined the Democratic Party, much worse ultra-liberals in 1968-72. At least the latter were pursuing American values. Democrats must overcome and regain the liberal mantle, which by nature welcomes diversity of ideas, free expression, and individual over group rights.

    The things Democrats have decried they have now become, only they have more style. In a perfect world, what they pursue would backfire. They are too short-sighted and filled with hate to see the damage caused to the presidency itself, or to understand the precedents they set for "resistance" when they hold power. Not good in either case, especially when the people, who they do not trust, can decide in an election for themselves if Trump should stay.

    Good article here:


  8. Now I understand, this isn't a pro-Israel or pro-Jewish site. It is simply a pro-Republican, pro-Trump site.

    1. You don't understand the label on your underwear.

    2. Default Progressive position today is a continuum from some form of BDS to outright anti Zionism. All Progressives support eviction of half a million Jewish people from their homes.

      Some trick questions:
      1. Which major party in the US is the home of Progressive movement?
      2. Which party's presidential candidates are supporting BDS?
      3 .What was the name of US President that moved US embassy to Jerusalem and recognized Golan Heights as part of Israel?
      (Hint: not Barack Obama).

    3. Joseph, everyone here is pro-Israel and pro-Jew. It just so happens that the only political party that also is happens to be the Repubs led by Israel's greatest supporter, Donald Trump. I know that's hard to take for hard core Dems and Trump haters, but there it is.

      Granted, all this Trump stuff probably takes up too much space but it is topical and on topic considering Trump's support of Israel. I believe every lover of Israel should do all they can to encourage Jexodus. Dems are on a journey to becoming as anti-semitic as the labour party in the UK.

    4. Actually, you don't understand at all. Typical of so many critics of Trump and Israel. Woke=Ignorant. It is ridiculous to say this isn't a pro-Israel or pro-Jewish site, and it is in poor taste to make gratuitous comments.

    5. Jacob: All three points you raise from your questions are true, but they have nothing whatsoever to do with the issue at hand.

      The issue at hand is what should be the response to Trump's call to Zelensky. Embedded in that issue is whether or not Trump's motive for his call was corrupt. Did he threaten an unlawful withholding of Congressionally appropriated funds? What was the nature of Biden's call while he was Vice President to Zelensky's predecessor?

      To paraphrase Ben Dror-Yemini, it's not so important whether or not you believe that articles of impeachment, or even an inquiry, are in order. What is important is that you accept the underlying facts.

    6. Maybe you should answer your own questions.

      Ukraine did not know about the cut in funding, and Trump has explained the rationale, to get Europe to pony up, as he has been saying in general (see NATO) since the start. Clearly, Biden bragged about the nature of his call as VP, and there are sworn statements that Biden's son was being scrutinized. The son was both unqualified and receiving obscene amounts of money, too. The involved favor was tied to the 2016 election, not to Biden. Those are underlying facts. And after the Russia hoax, are Democrats entitled to the benefit of the doubt that they are saving the Republic?

    7. "Trump has explained the rationale"

      You trust any self-serving alibi Trump serves up?

      "Clearly, Biden bragged about the nature of his call as VP, and there are sworn statements that Biden's son was being scrutinized."

      Either you are a complete hack or, to be charitable, you outsource your thinking to complete hacks.

      The reality is that the previous prosecutor in Ukraine was viewed across the American government and in the EU as uncommitted to prosecuting corruption. An example is halting the investigation of the company that hired Hunter Biden. You are not entitled to your own facts that anyone following the matter thought otherwise.

      "The son was both unqualified and receiving obscene amounts of money, too."

      Complete red herring. The course of action Biden could have done to keep his son on that board would have been to keep that prosecutor in place which would have kept any investigation dormant. Any evidence contrary, other than Trump's say-so?

      "And after the Russia hoax"

      There is absolutely nothing unfounded about Russia. False maybe, but not unfounded. Calling it a hoax simply shows that you're nothing more than a hack.

    8. So what qualification does Hunter Biden possess, besides being the VP's son?

    9. You call others a hack? You sound more the part with your projection.

      1. Trump has railed against NATO allies shortchanging us and their own interests. This was another example. If you are too obsessed to recognize his pattern, that's on you.

      Mr. Trump did not discuss the delay in the military assistance on the July 25 call with Mr. Zelensky, according to people familiar with the conversation. A Ukrainian official said Mr. Zelensky’s government did not learn of the delay until about one month after the call.


      2. Biden did brag. If you want to pretend otherwise, your prerogative.

      FLASHBACK, 2018: Joe Biden Brags At CFR Meeting About Withholding Aid To Ukraine To Force Firing Of Prosecutor


      There are sworn statements on the record. Guess you know better.

      Sworn Statement of Ukraine Presecutor General Viktor Shokin That He Was Forced Out of Office by US VP Joe Biden


      3. Biden's son's qualifications are a red herring for you, but others can see the disconnect that you are so dismissive about. Why else did he get that money? And it was the same with the money from China. Keep pretending that he got it on merit.

      4. Russia was a hoax. Or were you in a cave when Mueller and the Trump hating people he hired could not find anything? Or perhaps too busy listening to Rachel Maddow? They spied on Americans and used foreign governments. They misled the FISA court. They tried to entrap Trump. The red herrings are courtesy of you.

      5. Waiting for you to cite an example of criminality or authoritarianism. Actually, below you mention the press. Cite one example where Trump actually restricted the press or used the power of government against the press. It was Obama that acted against journalists.

      Since 2009, the Obama administration has prosecuted more people as whistleblowers under the 1917 Espionage Act than all former presidents combined, a fact often rehashed in journalistic circles. In some of those cases, officials seized journalists’ phone and email records to use in their investigation. James Goodale, who was The New York Times’ chief counsel during Pentagon Papers coverage, has told CJR that Obama’s aggressive crackdown on whistleblowers is “antediluvian, conservative, backwards. Worse than Nixon. He thinks that anyone who leaks is a spy! I mean, it’s cuckoo.”


      There are many other examples to refute your nonsense. You disparage since you can do no else. Woke=ignorant.

    10. "So what qualification does Hunter Biden possess, besides being the VP's son?"

      How dense can you be? Calling it a red herring is not a claim that there is any inaccuracy about the statement. It is a claim that the factuality of the statement has no bearing on the issue at hand. Hunter Biden was being, as Ramban would have put it, noval birshut hatorah. That provides no indication that Joe Biden's call to Ukraine's president had any corrupt element, once you look at all the surrounding evidence.

    11. "1. Trump has railed against NATO allies shortchanging us and their own interests."

      And he threatens to unwind the alliance as his response.

      "2. Biden did brag. If you want to pretend otherwise, your prerogative."

      He bragged about standing up for honest government, starting with a prosecutor who would forcefully pursue corruption cases. If someone had done that with Chiang in the 1940's, perhaps we wouldn't be stuck with Mao and his successors.

      "3. Biden's son's qualifications are a red herring for you..."

      Read my response to Jacob.

      "4. Russia was a hoax. Or were you in a cave when Mueller and the Trump hating people he hired could not find anything?"

      Blindly accepting Barr's spin.

      "You disparage since you can do no else. *Woke=ignorant.*"

      Rich you you complain about disparagement and then call me "woke." I care about truth. You seem to be satisfied with what the right-wing spinmeisters are able to shade as truthy.

      Are you mevattel movement-conservatism to Israel or are you mevattel Israel to movement-conservatism? Pushing defense of Trump advances movement-conservatism insofar as anyone accepts it. However, yoking defense of Israel to such defense of Trump will, for those who are not committed to Israel but absolutely reject your defense of Trump, to associate the defense of Israel with what they see as the speciousness of the defense of Trump. In effect, you're saying to such people that it's double or nothing, either accept both Israel and movement-conservatism or accept neither.

    12. 1. "And he threatens to unwind the alliance as his response." Red Herring! Not as dense as you think, despite your pattern of name calling. Actually, Jens Stoltenberg, the Sec general of NATO, praised Trump for making the alliance stronger. Missed that one, eh?

      "NATO Secretary General thanks President Trump for his strong leadership"


      2 & 3. Biden's bragging is suspect on it's face. You're the one twisting it into something else. So who is the real spinmeister? Good government? Are you kidding? Was it good when they used the IRS to go after pro-Israel groups? Or journalists? At minimum, Biden should be looked at more completely. If he did nothing wrong, try to ban people from even speaking about it?

      "Biden Campaign Urges TV Networks to Stop Booking Giuliani"


      4. Russia. Mueller who found nothing, then tried to smear Trump anyway. Funny that no one talks about the Mueller report anymore. Name one crime that was committed, since you seem to know so much. Suggest you read the following, even though it's a bit dated.

      "Taibbi: On Russiagate and Our Refusal to Face Why Trump Won"


      Perhaps you are the one blinded.

      As to disparagement, if memory serves, you started. Or was hack a compliment? Don't like being called woke or ignorant, watch your own language first! "Woke=ignorant" is different than calling someone a hack several times. If you do not see that, no surprise.

      Finally, you should worry about what you say, rather than tell others what they are saying. It's uncool to put words in someone's mouth. Reading your words show you do not understand anyway. It is the corruption of Democrats and progressives that is the issue. You seem to be pretend they are above fault. Trump is less a conservative than a pragmatist, and less corrupt than his enemies. Further, trying to convince haters of Israel or Trump, often the same people, is a foolish venture. People that support Israel get blamed for causing antisemitism. Seems you're making the same type of argument as you dictate what is appropriate.

    13. Dems and others desperately wanted Trump gone yet with all their resources and money Mueller et al could not find a crime to do it. This is the worst part of all of this; the refusal to accept the will of the people....branding half the nation stupid, deplorable etc. How horrific is that in a place like the US?

    14. I know I'm too dense too see nuance in Hunter Biden receiving bribes from Ukraine for access to his daddy (while daddy is a sitting VP in charge of foreign aid to said Ukraine). You won't enlighten us either, probably because our feeble brains won't grasp the complexities of you explanation.

    15. "Hunter Biden receiving bribes from Ukraine for access to his daddy"

      Yes, Burisma thought they were getting that for the money they payed him. Please cite evidence that he actually had the means to deliver.

      In the absence of such evidence, in what other way could it be relevant? Sorting the relevant from the irrelevant is not that complex.

    16. "Actually, below you mention the press. Cite one example where Trump actually restricted the press or used the power of government against the press. It was Obama that acted against journalists."

      There are the actions Trump has taken to increase costs for Jeff Bezos' primary business in retaliation for the Washington Post's coverage of him. It's not direct action against the press, but neither was Orban's actions against the Hungarian press. Orban's method was to let it be known which publication were officially approved and then refuse to give government contracts to anyone who advertised in unapproved publications. No journalists were prosecuted, but critical coverage was just as effectively hobbled. Trump's actions might not be as effective, but that doesn't demonstrate a lack of willingness to do so if a method of doing so without overt prosecution was available.

    17. Are you aware of what a red herring is?

      There have been plenty of investigations into any corruption by Joe Biden in connection with Hunter's affiliation with the Burisma board and they all concluded there was none. If you have any evidence that was not examined by any of those investigations, you would have legitimate grounds to question their conclusion. An example of that would be the material from the nuclear archive in relation to the IAEA's conclusion that Iran was complying with Obamadeal. In the absence of such evidence, you have no such grounds. Hunter's non-qualification for the board position he held was examined by those investigation and was deemed less significant than other factors, and thus does not qualify.

      Any assertion that Hunter's absolute lack of qualification for the position he held proves Joe Biden's corruption deserves as much respect as the belief of some that the fact that jet fuel fires burn at lower than the melting point of steel proves that there must have been an explosion that brought down the WTC.

    18. 1. You don't need means to deliver for there to be a bribe.

      2. Indirect action against the press? In other words, an admission of no actual restrictions. No going after persons or the families directly, as Trump's predecessor did. Instead, after the press is 90% slanted or false in it's stories, you appear to fault Trump for standing up. How much fake news has been perpetuated? Does that bother you?

      3. Citing Wikipedia re red herring is silly. In response to the assertion that aid to Ukraine was cut to force Europeans to pay more, saying that Trump hurts the NATO alliance is a red herring. Has NOTHING to do with why the aid was cut, and is demonstrably false, as shown by the words of the NATO Secretary General.

      3. Plenty of investigations of Biden? Yet the investigations in Ukraine were shut down. If there was no wrongdoing, what's the problem in taking an actual look? Your certainty that all is well is troubling because, frankly, you know nothing in the greater scheme than any other schmuck. Or do you prefer hack?

      4. In law, one can fight a subpoena, especially when there is not due process. The subpoena power can be misused. Is the impeachment inquiry lawful? Were you as concerned when Holder and Koskinen flaunted Congress? At least in those cases there was jurisdiction. The issue will play itself out. If Trump complied fully, wouldn't you find something else wrong? There's the rub.

      It's starting to look like the whistleblower tactic was just another setup. Do you believe Schiff is an honest broker? That Democrats are engaged in good government? Can you cite to actual high crimes and misdemeanors at play? Hating Trump is not justification.

    19. If you can't describe my arguments accurately, you're just a plain liar. It is not worth arguing with liars. Truth matters. No matter what smokescreens you want to create to obscure it.

      "1. You don't need means to deliver for there to be a bribe."

      Is there anything on Joe Biden from any of this? If Joe did not make himself available to Burisma in any manner because of Hunter's presence on the its board, Joe was not bribed. What evidence do you have that Hunter so much as mentioned any Burisma business with his father whatsoever?

      "2. Indirect action against the press? In other words, an admission of no actual restrictions."

      That's actually substantive. But you completely ignore how the ends of destroying the free press can be achieved without formal restrictions.

      "No going after persons or the families directly, as Trump's predecessor did."

      Any cases not involving the divulging of state secrets? I looked through the comments to see if there was a link I could follow to look at what you were referring to, but did not find anything.

      "Instead, after the press is 90% slanted or false in it's stories, you appear to fault Trump for standing up."

      The proper response is to support groups like CAMERA, not using any form of government power to go in the direction of Erdogan or Orban.

      "3. Citing Wikipedia re red herring is silly. In response to the assertion that aid to Ukraine was cut to force Europeans to pay more"

      How dishonest can you be? Sorry, but there is no other word to use for that. The expression "red herring" was used to describe the argument about Hunter Biden. Switching to discussion about legitimate policy dispute about the proper distribution of NATO expenses and how to avoid bearing more than our "fair share" is a mischaracterization of my argument, in other words a lie.

      "3. Plenty of investigations of Biden? Yet the investigations in Ukraine were shut down. If there was no wrongdoing, what's the problem in taking an actual look?"

      The burden of proof is on you to cite any flaws.

      "Your certainty that all is well is troubling because, frankly, you know nothing in the greater scheme than any other schmuck."

      Again you mischaracterize my argument. I wrote, "If you have any evidence that was not examined by any of those investigations, you would have legitimate grounds to question their conclusion." In the absence of any such evidence, all you did was malign me and portray me as closed to any evidence.

      "4. In law, one can fight a subpoena..."

      But one cannot claim that the issuer of the subpoena has no authority to issue the subpoena. I explicitly stated that distinction and because that doesn't fit the point you wanted to make, you omitted that fact. Even a challenge of that distinction would be valid. Your point is the same type of conflation as those who whine about how criticizing Israeli policy is not antisemitic after accusing Israel of harvesting Palestinian organs.

      Responses to accurate characterizations will get respectful responses. Just don't wallow about how you should be allowed to mischaracterize my arguments and still be considered an honest debater.

    20. So we agree on something:
      1 Hunter Biden's sole qualification is his daddy connection.
      2 Foreign entity thought they could influence Joe by paying Hunter.
      3 Hunter took the money for several years.

      Now we don't know if Joe actually committed treason by influencing US policy at their request.
      So at best he used his government position to enrich his family (abuse of office).
      On top of that if he lead them on, took the money, and did not deliver anything, he's con man.
      And if he did deliver, he's a traitor.

    21. Joe Biden officially declared net worth is $9 million, up from $1.5 million since his term as a VP ended. He made it all through hard honest back breaking work and exceptional business savvy. Same as all of our betters in Washington. As Obama would put it: "Not a smidgen of corruption". Nothing to see here.

    22. Are you a "liar" when you twist the words of other people? That is exactly what you did, repeatedly.

      From an comment yesterday directed to you: "Finally, you should worry about what you say, rather than tell others what they are saying. It's uncool to put words in someone's mouth. Reading your words show you do not understand anyway."

      A hack, dense, a liar. All you were called is woke=ignorant. You keep proving it, too.

      1. Bribery: Are you a defense attorney for the Bidens? If nothing else, there was a clear appearance of impropriety. That’s enough to scrutinize further. In the phone conversation, Trump seemed most concerned about corruption and the attempts to frame him in 2016. If that occurred, then it is the same, conceptually, as what you now wet your pants about, using a foreign entity to did dirt on political opponents. Seems like that matters little to you, that Ukraine was likely used by Obama & Co. against Trump. That the CIA operative “whistleblower” may have been part of that effort going back to 2016. Instead, you obsess to defend the Bidens and gloss over corruption. Typical.

      2. The press: The press has not been stopped from disseminating anything. Talk about a red herring. Day after day the press trumpets the misdeeds of Trump. Did you read about the hurricane and the magic marker? Actually, the free press is more threatened by those that want to censor or cancel what they do not like. Yet, you scream with fake outrage over something that has not happened.

      Then you bring out the old standby, state secrets, to justify improper behavior. Comey and Brennan could not have said it better! There are slews of articles that show the disregard of Obama and Co. for the rights of the media and Americans. Obama campaigned on a promise to protect government whistle-blowers, then made greater use of the Espionage Act to prosecute leakers and menace journalists than all other presidents combined. For example:

      Obama’s Justice Department accessed the personal email of a Fox News reporter and surveilled the reporter’s parents and colleagues. They seized the home, work and mobile phone records of journalists at the Associated Press.

      Risen, who fought the administration to protect his sources, got so deep in his own legal battle with Obama that he selected a reading list for prison before the government finally backed off.

      White House officials subverted the press in a number of ways while touting themselves as the most transparent in history.

      Obama routinely banned news photographers from official events. He went months between press conferences and used social media to circumvent reporters.

      First lady Michelle Obama took policy trips overseas with no press on her airplane. The White House scrubbed public visitor logs of names it didn’t want in the news.

      The Obama administration posted the worst record in history for fulfilling requests for public records under the Freedom of Information Act.


    23. Continuation:

      You say the proper response is to support groups like CAMERA, not using any form of government power to go in the direction of Erdogan or Orban. Again, name one instance where the press has been oppressed like with Erdogan. Another red herring. In fact, a complete misrepresentation by comparison. Will you next make the Nazi comparison?

      3. Red herring: You said the expression "red herring" was used to describe the argument about Hunter Biden. So what! You switched the discussion about withholding the aid (that Ukraine did not even know until well afterwards) into a claim that Trump was harming NATO. It was YOU that turned the discourse. What’s worse is that your red herring was demonstrably false. So, again, are you also a liar?

      3. Investigations of Biden: The investigations in Ukraine appear to have been shut down. If there was no wrongdoing, what's the problem in taking an actual look?

      As for, "The burden of proof is on you to cite any flaws," no it’s not. The burden is on the people properly charged to investigate, and it looks like they never completed the investigations. Get real.

      As to your certainty about things, you don't know more than any other schmuck. As to whether you were "maligned," the person that labels others as hacks and liars objects to being called a know-nothing when he acts like a know it all. Enough said.

      4. Subpoenas: "One cannot claim that the issuer of the subpoena has no authority to issue the subpoena." Actually, one can make the exact claim that there was no jurisdiction, or authority. Learn the law.

      As for the remark about Israel, it was not the best analogy, but you fail to comprehend. You essentially said that Trump’s actions causes people to reject support of Israel. How is that different than saying that Israel’s actions causes people rationalize antisemitism? The fact is that haters will hate no matter what Trump or Israel does.

      Finally, concerning accuracy in characterizations and respect, you have projected so much that it’s laughable. Where is your accuracy respect? You have been the one engages in name calling and impugning character. I guess the best response is to say, go pound sand!

  9. Why would any head of state now want to talk to a President of the US knowing Congress could force transcripts could be released. Dems have gone rogue and must be eliminated as a majority party for America to function again. Commie tactics by a bunch of Commies intent on destroying America whether real Commies or useful idiots.

    1. They are either not thinking or they're planning somehow to be the majority party forever so that no one ever pulls these noxious shenanigans on a Dem president. ....They're not thinking.
      You are right that these are Commie tactics. They get out in front yelling that there is a crime so that whatever they find is then presumed to be criminal.
      They have created such a hateful portrait of Trump, they are now compelled to believe it. They now believe their own press. They can no longer distinguish reality from fiction, fact from Biden, responsibility from Beto, capitalism from Bernie, America from the three stooges, Omar, Tlaib, & AOC.

    2. And a so-called whistle blower with six degrees of separation. It's either Kevin Bacon or Christine Blasey-Ford.

    3. It's starting to look like the "whistleblower," submission was drafted by a lawyer/law team rather than an average Joe. This suggests either CIA complicity or Dem complicity. I think Trump at al have some nasty surprises ahead for these spies and coup masters.

  10. This comment has been removed by the author.

  11. These same types, similarly, go after Republicans these days. The blind among them must pretend there is no parallel, or that among them these very same types go after and went after Jews. Woke=ignorant.

    "College Republicans in Connecticut Raise Alarm on Campus Harassment Over Political Views"


    Progressivism is not liberalism. Progressives have driven many liberals away, appropriated liberal ideals, and now rule the Democratic Party. Rather than acknowledge the reality, they instead disparage liberals that remain liberals. They are afraid to confront the bigots in their midst that are intent to tear down the most liberal social system in human history, based largely on Jewish law and tradition. Go figure.

    At least we see a new notion, "Cancel Culture." The question is whether liberalism can survive the onslaught. The surreal world created by progressives cannot stand on its weight. That does not mean that humans will not suffer great misery before they come to realize their mistake.

  12. Drudge has a headline "Rat Falls From White House Ceiling." A real ratty rat; not a Dem operative leaking as much shite s possible. How ironic.

  13. "Impeachment is a process for removing a president from office so that Mike Pence will become president and outlaw rainbows and then all the unicorns will come and stab him and then your party will have the power instead of the bad orange party. The process of impeachment is laid out in Articles One and Two of the Constitution, and before the process of impeachment can begin, each member of the House of Representatives must assign an intern to find a copy of the Constitution and pretend to have read it. Then the Congressman himself must stare at the articles until the liquor kicks in and the words blur and become meaningless. Of course, he will have already done that with the rest of the Constitution before taking office.

    Article Two says the president can be impeached for treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors such as being Republican or attempting to stop the slow spread of federal power until it swallows every last trace of liberty like the blob in the movie of the same name.

    After pretending to read the Constitution, a congressman must then go on TV and talk crap while his friend the interviewer looks very serious even though they both know its crap, it’s just that obvious.

    Finally, the congress takes a vote and then everyone goes back to doing whatever they were doing before. Namely nothing."


  14. Neither party is monolithic. The Democrats have a faction that rejects the Palestinianism and perversion of international law into a tool for subjugating the Jews which you describe, and there is a Republican faction that rejects the lawlessness and authoritarianism of Trumpism. While neither of those factions dominates its respective party, the Democratic faction is able to make a minor presence in elected office but the Republican faction is confined to think tanks.

  15. More monolithic than implied.

    Lawlessness and authoritarianism of Trumpism? Please cite examples of each.

    Interesting that you appear to parallel pro-Israel, moderate Democrats in elected office with lawless authoritarian Republicans in think tanks as small factions. Extremism is far more prevalent and obvious in the Democratic power structure, including bias against Israel.

  16. As to authoritarianism, there are the attacks on the media as "enemies of the people." It is a behavior that is associated with Erdogan, Orban, and Chavez/Maduro.

    "Extremism is far more prevalent and obvious in the Democratic power structure"

    The Democrats have to contend with likes of Abigail Spanberger and Ben McAdams who can derail anything the anti-Israel wing might want to push through Congress. The closest equivalent from the Republicans is the likes of Jerry Taylor and David Frum.

  17. the lawlessness and authoritarianism of Trumpism

    Cite one example of lawlessness.

    As to authoritariansm, it is not Trump that used the wheels of government to go after enemies, including the press.

    Pro-Israel Group Receives Apology from IRS for Unfair Scrutiny


    “I’m president, I’m not king,” Barack Obama famously said back on October 25, 2010, responding to requests from groups supporting rights for illegal immigrants to unilaterally implement immigration reform. (He would later attribute the “problem” to the fact that he’s “the president of the United States, not the emperor of the United States.”) “There’s a limit to the discretion that I can show because I’m obliged to execute the law,” he added. “I can’t just make the laws up myself.”

    Six months later, he explicitly tied his point to his inability to stop deportations. “With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that’s just not the case,” he said on March 28, 2011. “There are enough laws on the books by Congress that are very clear in terms of how we have to enforce our immigration system that for me to simply through executive order ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as President.”


    We all know what happened and who acted like a king. Or should we say authoritarian?

  18. Sad to say, very sad, but imagine for one moment if Democrats had accepted the election in 2016 (after insinuating that others would not) and not tried to impeach Trump from Day 1, if good stuff might have happened.

    Are Democrats and Trump haters so blind that they cannot detect the imbalance here? The media IS corrupt. It cares ONLY to fan the flames and make money. Anti-Trump is overbearing. Yet, under the surface, how many actual examples of wrong, as compared to aesthetics, can be cited? Where are these crimes please? Even if one does not like the decisions, Article II powers are quite extensive.

    When similar things occurred under others (cages for kids), was there outrage? Just like with Israel, complete double standard. It's not hard to see through such behavior. Impeachment ad nauseum. Trump is bad ad nauseum. Do any Democrats consider there may have been wrongdoing in their name? Do they ever consider that they are seen as patsies, locked in a bubble lacking diversity of thought? That to object to the dogma can predictably result in being ostracized? Not a very liberal or happy existence to be in.

    As offputting Trump can be, are his opponents better? One can argue, with facts, that they are more corrupt. By any means necessary is NOT democratic.

    It is sad to see progressives, people of intelligence (especially in their own minds), be so blinded as to not see how far they are from the liberal values that brought civil rights and individual liberties. The globalist world will not be based on American notions of freedom and prosperity, the very things they rely on to bring havoc. Woke=ignorant.

    As Joni Mitchell wrote:

    Don't it always seem to go
    That you don't know what you've got
    'Till it's gone
    They paved paradise
    And put up a parking lot.

    These people, that live in paradise, have bare conception that it wasn't always so easy as they have it. They will not only put up a parking lot, but they seem ready to sanction parking violations with hard labor or even worse. No thanks.

  19. Let's see if I have this straight. Because he is currently a candidate to possibly be the Dem candidate, Joe Biden is immune to any investigating (even if he is hiding a pee tape somewhere.)Handy, that. So.....if he runs and gets elected can the impeachment process start then or will he have some other protection...oh wait, the Dems might still hold the House....nevermind, I get it all now.

  20. As to lawlessness, there's his declaration that the entire executive branch does not need to answer any Congressional subpoenas. Yes, prior presidents have challenged individual subpoenas, but they have not challenged the validity of Congress issuing any subpoena at all.

    There also is the matter of his entire business career in which he took the attitude that if his counterparties couldn't sustain the legal slog through the court system, then whatever he would do was valid.

  21. The Dems and their friends in Hollywood and the news media have yet to accept the results of the 2016 election. And have been working to reverse it since it happened. What could be dirtier?
    They all spun off full throttle into this Russia conspiracy. Who didn't know from the start it was just a bunch of crap ? Come on.
    Donald Trump's business career well mirrors the careers of our political class of harumfers. He knows where the skeletons are buried.
    Now, Hillary, yes deeply dirty Hillary Clinton, has said Trump is an illegitimate president and that "he knows it."
    Hillary is dirty, and she knows it. She spits on the people who think and believe un-Hillary thoughts - calls them "deplorables" and irredeemable. Irredeemable! That's a Nazi. Mr. Trump, for all his possible shortcomings has done nothing close to that.

  22. Overall, it's not Biden that matters. So many of these politicians are corrupt and line their pockets and the pockets of their their families.

    The more important corruption surrounding Ukraine concerns the 2016 election. Biden is a sideshow, although there is clearly an appearance of impropriety.

    The way this is unfolding makes it look orchestrated. What amazes is that regular Democrats continue to believe after being misled so many times, and how they refuse to listen or learn about the other side of issues. The science is settled in cancel culture and to think otherwise is to be negated. In other words, woke=ignorant.

  23. N Korea nuke talks ended the same day they started. Ya figure. Wouldn't have anything to do with traitorous Dems talking impeachment would it? Dems, America's enemies best friends.

  24. James Comey, December 2018

    "I have total confidence that the FISA process was followed and that the entire case was handled in a thoughtful, responsible way... I think the notion that FISA was abused here is nonsense."

    ha ha ha ha ha ha