Advertisements
Open post

Impeachment Tuesday: Have Right and Wrong “Departed?”

Today’s Campaign Update, Part II
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

Guest Piece by Karen Kataline

On the eve of Impeachment Tuesday in the Senate, I am acutely aware of how strong the positions of people on opposite sides of this historic event are. Both believe they are right and the other side is wrong.

When it comes to the really big truths in life, I’ve never been a fan of bet-hedging or the notion that “The truth is somewhere in the middle.” There are facts and there are what you think and feel about them. Some often confuse the two.  But with so much outright propaganda in politics today, how does one determine the facts?

The dilemma reminds me of the 2006 film, “The Departed” with Jack Nicholson, Matt Damon, Leonardo DiCaprio and Mark Wahlberg.

It’s a clever concept and an intricate story about a mob-connected man (Damon) who becomes a Boston cop to infiltrate the police, while an honest Boston cop with a shady past (DiCaprio) goes under cover to infiltrate the Irish mob.

It’s sort of a role reversal story but the main characters don’t know they are walking in each others’ shoes until later in the film.

When the two men finally come face to face and one captures the other, both beg a well-meaning cop to shoot the other because “He’s the bad guy.”  Since the cop doesn’t have enough information, he does the cautious thing by doing nothing.

The scene is a vivid portrayal of what happens when good is portrayed as evil and evil is portrayed as good. With enough confusion, the average citizen washes his hands of the entire situation and goes to a movie—-maybe even “The Departed” where they know it’s only a movie.

In the case of Donald Trump, the Democrats don’t believe we should consider that the same players have made numerous accusations, all of which have proven to be false—many by the Special Counsel and his team. No matter how many more false accusations they make, they are never held accountable, nor do they ever concede anything. They simply pivot to even more outlandish accusations believing they’ll never be held accountable for those either.  Their motives and misdeeds are regularly revealed to the public but of course, they simply beg us to believe that their opponents (Donald Trump and anyone who supports him and his policies) are the bad guys.

The American People will be the jury come Impeachment Tuesday. They will watch the ever-virulent Democrats try to remove a stunningly successful (even by what used to be their own standards) President, on false accusations which even if true, are not crimes. Yet, the propaganda media has managed to convince a certain segment of the population that prosperity and success are dangerous and failure is infinitely preferable.

While acquittal is the likely outcome in this exercise and Democrats have known that from the start, what is most fascinating is that they think the wholly partisan smearing of Donald Trump as an “Impeached President” will help them in November. Others, like my friend Dr. Gerard Lameiro, think it’s exactly the opposite. They say the longer Democrats keep impeachment in the foreground, the more Republicans will win. I tend to agree. So Lindsay Graham, “Cool it!”

This Tuesday, as will be the case on the first Tuesday in November, the direction we decide to go as a country won’t be just a day at the movies. We will choose between right and wrong, Big government vs. restrained government, and Capitalism vs. Communism.

With issues as big as these, it’s time to know where we stand. The best answer is not “somewhere in the middle.”

Karen Kataline is a commentator, columnist & talk show host. She holds a Master’s Degree from Columbia University and is a frequent guest host on AM Talk Radio.

That is all.

 

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Advertisements
Open post

The Fake News is Flying Over the Senate Impeachment Trial

Today’s Campaign Update
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

CBS was the Deep State’s choice to run with the Monday narrative-setting piece. – The Democrat/Media/Deep State pressure campaign on several GOP senator related to the upcoming Senate trial of President Donald Trump continued to mount on Monday. CBS News became the chosen vessel to run with yet another story based on an anonymous “source” designed to pressure not only the Usual Suspects among the Republican caucus, but also to add to their numbers.

From the CBS fake report:

Washington — The White House is preparing for some Republican senators to join Democrats in voting to call witnesses in President Trump’s impeachment trial, which could get underway in the coming days.

Senior White House officials tell CBS News they increasingly believe that at least four Republicans, and likely more, will vote to call witnesses. In addition to Senators Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine, Mitt Romney of Utah and possibly Cory Gardner of Colorado, the White House also views Rand Paul of Kentucky as a “wild card” and Senator Lamar Alexander of Tennessee as an “institutionalist” who might vote to call witnesses, as one official put it.

Last week, Collins said she was working with a “fairly small group” of GOP senators to allow new testimony, adding that her colleagues “should be completely open to calling witnesses.” Romney has expressed an interest in hearing from former national security adviser John Bolton, who has said he would testify under subpoena. Murkowski said last week that the Senate should proceed as it did during the 1999 Clinton impeachment trial.

Note the story leads by naming the Usual Suspects who everyone knows are the most likely RINOs to go off the rails on any issue: Mitt Romney, Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski, the three who can most often be relied upon to go squishy whenever the going gets tough. But the media knows that they need to pressure at least one more Republican squish to side with their Democrat buddies in order to get anything done, so now they are moving to add to the list. In fact, they may even need more than four GOP traitors, since Democrats Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Doug Jones of Alabama would both pay dearly back at home for supporting this impeachment scam.

So, first Republican name up? Cory Gardner of Colorado, who is facing a tough re-election campaign against former Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper. Oh, hey, and it’s purely a coincidence that, on the day on which this unsourced CBS story is published, Gardner suddenly gets attacked by a group led by Kellyanne Conway’s piggish husband George:

A group run by anti-Trump conservatives has released an advertisement targeting one of the most vulnerable Republican senators, Colorado Sen. Cory Gardner.

Gardner, 45, has one of the toughest reelection campaigns in the nation as the centrist Republican attempts to maintain his seat with President Trump on the ballot next to him. Trump lost Colorado in 2016 by 4.9%, and the Cook Political Report listed Gardner’s seat as a toss-up.

The Lincoln Project, a group led by George Conway, the husband of Trump’s counselor Kellyanne Conway, Steve Schmidt, John Weaver, and Rick Wilson, targeted Gardner for siding with Trump on several issues. The advertisement opens with the question, “Why are you losing?” and proceeds to blame Gardner’s tight reelection race on his relationship with Trump.

Now, Conway’s group doesn’t have much of a budget to pay for running the ad, but boy is it getting tons of free play in the corrupt news media. Funny how that happens.

Next up on the list of potential GOP turncoats is Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, who we just saw last week tossing a hissy fit with his libertarian buddy, Utah Senator Mike Lee, coming out a White House briefing on the situation with Iran. Oddly, the CBS article does not mention Sen. Lee as another potential Democrat ally. Frankly, I think he’s more likely to go rogue than Sen. Paul.

Finally, CBS goes after Lamar Alexander of Tennessee because he’s supposedly an “institutionalist,” whatever that means in the demented minds of corrupt reporters and editors. Honestly, that’s probably because the corrupt media always goes after Sen. Alexander in situations like this. They did the same thing during the Democrat fiasco over the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh, and failed. I honestly don’t see Sen. Alexander as a problem here.

And think about this where Alexander the “institutionalist” is concerned: No one in the history of the U.S. Senate was more of an “institutionalist” than the current Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell. Funny, we don’t see any corrupt media articles speculating about Cocaine Mitch, do we?

So, at the end of the day, what we have here is yet another narrative-setting piece for the Deep State. It’s a fake report based on zero named “sources,” and most likely no real source with any knowledge of the situation at all. The only “facts” on which it is based are a couple of off-hand comments made by Collins and Murkowski to local reporters in their home states. The one statement – by Collins – that is recounted by CBS could mean nothing more than that she ran into Senators Murkowski and Paul in the Hallway of Hart Senate Office Building and chatted with them for a couple of minutes about whether or not they wanted to hear testimony from Hunter Biden about the various illegitimate children he has fathered in several different states.

Here is what we do know: 

  1. Mitch McConnell completely rolled Nancy Pelosi in the political gamesmanship leading up to this trial;
  2. Lacking any leverage whatsoever, Pelosi will transmit the articles of impeachment over to the Senate in the coming days;
  3. McConnell has the 51 votes he needs to proceed with the trial using the same Senate rules that were employed during the trial of Bill Clinton;
  4. Pelosi’s house managers – most likely Adam Schiff and Jabba the Nadler, which will be a hoot – will present the Democrats’ sham case;
  5. After that part of the trial has been completed, then and only then will there potentially be a vote to call witnesses who did not testify during the House’s Soviet-style hearings;
  6. Nobody – not CBS, the senators or anyone else – knows how any of these Republican senators will vote when that time comes.

So, get used to this kind of sham story from the corrupt media. With the Senate trial set to begin early next week, the pressure campaign on these and possibly additional GOP senators will only continue to mount. It’s going to be like the Kavanaugh fiasco all over again: The hit pieces will only become increasingly shrill as the Democrats become increasingly desperate as they see their impeachment scam failing to change minds.

Yes, it’s all despicable. Yes, it’s demented, and depraved, and disgusting. But hey, this is Democrats and their corrupt media toadies we’re talking about here – you expected something else?

That is all.

 

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

And Just Like That, Pelosi Caves…

Today’s Campaign Update, Part III
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

This really wasn’t that hard to predict. – Yesterday, the Campaign Update told you that Nancy Pelosi had two choices in her idiotic tactic of holding onto her fake articles of impeachment: Either she would cave on the matter, or get rolled by Mitch McConnell.

From yesterday’s piece:

The Kabuki Dance in the DC Swamp between San Fran Nan and Cocaine Mitch is about to come to its grand climax. – The only question at this point is whether the drunken Speaker with the constantly misbehaving dentures will cave in and deliver her vodka-stained articles of impeachment to the Senate, or whether the Senate Majority Leader will deem them to have been delivered and begin the Senate trial anyway…

This is a clear indication that the master of Senate procedure either has been told by the always semi-lucid Speaker that she plans to communicate the articles to the Senate no later than early next week, or that McConnell has simply had enough of his DC Swamp Kabuki Dance with her and plans to proceed regardless.

Late this morning, Pelosi’s choice became clear:

From the Politico piece:

Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced she will transmit the articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump next week, ending a heated standoff with Senate Republicans over the terms of the impeachment trial.

“I have asked Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler to be prepared to bring to the Floor next week a resolution to appoint managers and transmit articles of impeachment to the Senate,” Pelosi said in a letter to House Democrats.

She caved. Simple as that.

Folks, we have a winner!

Mitch McConnell Offers President Obama 'Three-Fourths' Compromise on SCOTUS Pick

That is all.

 

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Pelosi Will Either Cave or get Rolled by McConnell – the Choice is Hers

Today’s Campaign Update, Part II
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

The Kabuki Dance in the DC Swamp between San Fran Nan and Cocaine Mitch is about to come to its grand climax. – The only question at this point is whether the drunken Speaker with the constantly misbehaving dentures will cave in and deliver her vodka-stained articles of impeachment to the Senate, or whether the Senate Majority Leader will deem them to have been delivered and begin the Senate trial anyway.

The Hill reported Thursday afternoon that Majority Leader Mitch McConnell:

…warned lawmakers during the caucus meeting that they should not expect to be able to go home next weekend, indicating that the long-delayed trial will be underway.

Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) added that McConnell told senators that the two articles would be sent over “soon,” expecting them in the “next day or two.”

“There’s no reason for us to stay this weekend, but don’t expect to be home next weekend was the basic message,” Cramer added after the closed-door caucus lunch.

This is a clear indication that the master of Senate procedure either has been told by the always semi-lucid Speaker that she plans to communicate the articles to the Senate no later than early next week, or that McConnell has simply had enough of his DC Swamp Kabuki Dance with her and plans to proceed regardless.

McConnell’s advisory to GOP senators came a few hours after a slurring, stammering Pelosi told a gathering of corrupt, fawning reporters that she did not plan to hold the articles in her gnarly claws indefinitely and would deliver them to the Senate “soon”:

She further said that “we want to see what they’re willing to do, and the manner in which they will do it,” referring to McConnell and the Senate. Well, McConnell already made that crystal clear in a statement on the Senate floor yesterday, announcing that there will be no negotiations with Pelosi over the Senate process, and that he has the 51 votes he needs to proceed with the same rules governing this Senate trial that governed the trial of Bill Clinton.

We told you last week that Pelosi had no leverage in her standoff with McConnell, and yesterday pointed out the reality that the Majority Leader had completely out-flanked her as a result. Hardball politics in the nation’s capital – or anywhere else, for that matter – is all about leverage, and when you have none, you are destined to lose.

Pelosi is destined to lose in her idiotic impeachment scam, and today she appeared to finally, if reluctantly, acknowledge her reality. We’ll see if that momentary lucidity can withstand her third vodka martini tonight.

That is all.

 

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Cocaine Mitch Has Outflanked San Fran Nan

Today’s Campaign Update, Part II
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

Never, never, ever underestimate the ability of Mitch McConnell to work the process in the Senate. – Mitch McConnell told a very disappointed group of corrupt reporters on Tuesday that he now has the 51 Republican votes he needs to move forward with the very same Senate rules for a Senate trial on Nancy Pelosi’s ridiculous articles of impeachment that were used to govern the Senate trail of Bill Clinton.

As reported by U.S. News and World Report:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said he has the votes to start President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial as soon as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi releases the documents, winning support from GOP senators to postpone a decision on calling witnesses.

The announcement Tuesday was significant, enabling McConnell to bypass for now Democratic demands for new testimony as he launches the third impeachment trial in the nation’s history. It could begin this week if Pelosi sends the articles of impeachment to the Senate.

What this means is that no more than two of the three RINO Usual Suspect senators – Mitt Romney, Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski – who have been targeted by the corrupt media for pressure campaigns designed to bully them into breaking party ranks have taken the bait.

As we cautioned you here at the Campaign Update the day after Christmas, you have to take media reports of senators going wobbly on this impeachment matter with a grain of salt. That was the day when the corrupt media went wild with a report that Murkowski had told an Anchorage, Alaska reporter that she was “disturbed” when she heard McConnell state that he would be working “hand in glove” with counsel for the President to determine how the Senate trial would be managed.

The press went crazy again last week, when Sen. Collins made a similar statement of “concern” about the process and indicated she was “open” to calling additional witnesses in the Senate. Well, at least one of those two ladies, and maybe both of them, have now indicated to the Senate Majority Leader that their concerns do not rise to the level of siding with a bunch of seditious Democrats who are attempting to execute a coup d’etat on U.S. soil.

You can say what you want to about these two ladies being “squishy” – which they both undeniably are on several specific issues – but it is a drastic error and completely unfair to them to equate their squishiness to being disloyal to the country, as the Democrats have become. One would think that the performance by Collins in supporting the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court would have schooled everyone on this regard forever where she is concerned.

Process-wise, what McConnell’s reaching this 51-vote threshold means is that, whenever San Fran Nan decides to finally release her sham articles of impeachment to the Senate, this is what will happen:

  • Chief Justice John Roberts will convene the Senate trial, with all 100 senators – including the four Democrats who are still presidential candidates – required to be in attendance for 6 days every week until the trial concludes;
  • The House Managers – a set of both Democrat and Republican House members – will present the case for impeachment, which will consume several days;
  • The lawyers for President Trump will then present his case, which will also likely consume several days;
  • Then and only then will the Senate hold a procedural vote to determine whether or not it will call additional witnesses;
  • More than likely, unless there is some major development related to Ukraine between now and then, the Senate will vote to dismiss the case at that time. That assumes that McConnell, the master of Senate process, can hold his 51 votes together.

All in all, assuming McConnell holds his majority together, the trial in the Senate will consume about two weeks.

Pelosi will now come under great pressure from the Democrat presidential candidates to go ahead and release the articles so that this can all play out prior to the Iowa caucuses that will take place on February 3. However, she wants to keep them in-hand until the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals rules on a pending case that would, if  it goes the Democrats’ way, give them access to the Mueller Witch Hunt grand jury material and potentially allow the House Democrats to enforce their sham subpoenas. But oral arguments were just heard in that case last Friday, and it could be weeks before any decision is rendered.

So, bottom line: Mitch McConnell has completely out-maneuvered Pelosi on this. She is now in a corner, clinging to a tactic that has failed to move public opinion against the President, and utterly failed to move any GOP senators into the pro-removal column.

Somebody go make her a Bloody Mary. She’s going to need one this morning. Maybe two.

That is all.

 

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Is there a ‘Truth-Telling Trend’ on the Horizon for 2020?

Today’s Campaign Update, Part II
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

…”CREATIVES”  WHO PRIDED THEMSELVES ON THINKING “OUTSIDE THE BOX” ARE NOW THE FIRST ONES TO TRY TO PUT YOU IN THAT BOX.

Hollywood Director Terry Gilliam recently had the temerity to say he’s ‘tired’ of white men being blamed for everything that is wrong in the world.”

Predictable gasps are still being heard from Hollywood, Washington, and the Leftist Media establishment as they plot to destroy his career, his reputation and his life.

We’ve watched this pattern again and again. The more breathlessly the sanctimonious Left claims offense, the more likely they are guilty of precisely that offense.

On the heels of the Gilliam moment, we have a “Gervais moment.”  Ricky Gervais is currently the toast of flyover country for his scathing rebuke of Hollywood hypocrisy at The Golden Globe Awards.

Many of us had stopped watching those self-congratulatory lecture-fests a long time ago, but the video of his opening monologue is everywhere.  If you haven’t seen it yet, take a look. It’s a delicious, belated Christmas present.

In a country that has stood as a beacon to the rights and traditions of free expression,  it has been heartbreaking to see how much courage is required by an individual these days, simply to tell the truth as he or she sees it.  Of course, that’s only if it doesn’t comport with Leftist orthodoxy.  If you tout hate for history, Donald Trump, Conservatives (you know the list) or for America, you get free reign—even to the point of pummeling a 14-year-old kid wearing a MAGA hat on a subway train.

How did we get here?  While we were doing other things, America became the land of the freely offended and the home of the brave new world—where the same “creatives” who formerly prided themselves on thinking “outside the box” are now the first ones to try put you in that box.

With the New Year, it looks like that caldron of hypocrisy has finally begun to boil over.  In preparation for a raucus and rowdy election year, Americans are itching for a major comeuppance – from Barr, and from Durham, from McConnell and from Nunes, from Dancer, and Prancer, and of course, from one of the all-time greatest in the comeuppance business, Donald Trump.

The Left has cheered our enemies and trashed our country one too many times and it looks like everyday Americans are ready for the fight.

Is this the beginning of a trend?  If it isn’t, we can help make it one.  Let’s congratulate Gilliam and Gervais and start telling our own truth louder and more often than ever.  As we grow the numbers of those who defy the speech bullies we’ll get that pendulum swinging back toward freedom and the Rule of Law faster than ever.

Just like those gym commercials that are so abundant this time of year.  Speaking up and telling the truth is like a muscle. Use it or lose it.

 

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Ted Cruz Sends Some Shots Across Multiple Bows in Fox News Interview

Today’s Campaign Update, Part II
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

Texas Senator Ted Cruz appeared in a pre-recorded interview with Maria Bartiromo on Sunday Morning Futures yesterday. In his segment, the Senator lays out how he expects the Senate impeachment trial will proceed, including his clear expectation that the trial will begin “in early January.” So, Sen. Cruz either expects that San Fran Nan Pelosi will relent in her idiotic tactic of withholding the Houses’s imbecilic articles of impeachment, or that Mitch McConnell will simply deem the articles to have been transmitted to the Senate and proceed without her. Oh, how I do hope it will be the latter scenario.

Regardless, a clip of the interview appears below, followed by a verbatim transcript of the Senators remarks:

 

For those who still prefer to read stuff, here is a Transcript:

Bartiromo: Senator, it is always a pleasure to see you.

Sen. Cruz: Good to be with you, Maria, thank you.

Bartiromo: So, Nancy Pelosi said, after the impeachment, that maybe she will sit on the articles of impeachment before sending it over to you and your colleagues in the Senate. Can she do that?

Sen. Cruz: [Laughing] You know, you can’t make this up. Listen, I think this is a sign of weakness. This is a sign she understands just how weak these articles are. These articles of impeachment that they actually voted on were really an admission of failure.

The House Democrats haven’t even alleged any ‘high crimes and misdemeanors,’ much less proven any. And so now, Pelosi is in a situation where she knows that when it goes to the Senate there’s going to be a fair trial, we’re going to give both sides the opportunity to present their case, we’re going to protect due process. But she also knows that the result of a fair trial is that these impeachment claims are going to be thrown out, because they haven’t met the constitutional standard.

Bartiromo: Would you want to see witnesses in a Senate trial?

Sen. Cruz: I would, but let me tell you how I think it’s likely to play out. The trial will start in early January. It will start with the Chief Justice of the United States swearing in all 100 senators.

It will then shift to the House managers presenting their case – that’ll probably take several days. They’ll stand up, they’ll present evidence, they’ll make arguments.

Then it will shift to the White House, to the defense team for the President making their case. The President’s going to have a full and fair opportunity to defend himself.

It then will shift to questions. Now, here’s where it’s a little weird. I think some people, having seen what happened in the House, they’re expecting in the Senate to see a bunch of Senators asking questions. Well, the Senate impeachment rules prohibit any Senator from speaking in open session, in other words, when the TV cameras are on.

You’re not gonna see Elizabeth Warren and me going 15 rounds on the Senate floor because that’s not allowed. We’re both gonna be sitting quietly at our desks. Now, we can submit questions, but the questions have to be in writing. We can write out the questions, we hand them down, and the Chief Justice asks the questions from the senators.

I think at that point, we are likely to recess and have a discussion. I think one of two things will happen:

One, it is possible that a majority of the Senate will be prepared [to say], let’s move forward, let’s vote, they haven’t met their threshold, they haven’t come close, let’s reject these claims. I think that’s an outcome that could happen.

Secondly, there could well be a procedural fight. Do we need more evidence? Do we need more witnesses? In which case, that question is decided by 51 senators.  Every legal question, the Chief Justice can rule in the first instance, but the Chief Justice can be overruled by 51 senators.

I think John Roberts is very likely to follow the Rhenquist precedent and just defer the procedural questions to the Senate, which means if 51 Republicans agree, we can resolve any legal issue. And to me, that means if the President wants to call Hunter Biden, if the President wants to call the Whistleblower, due process mandates that we allow the President to defend himself, to make his case.

And so, I think we should do so. But, that’s a decision in the first place for the White House and his legal team.

Bartiromo: Based on what you know today, do you expect any Republicans to vote to impeach [remove] in the Senate?

Sen. Cruz: You know, I don’t. It is certainly possible, and there are a couple that could vote that way. But I think anyone voting on the facts, anyone voting on the law, this is a very easy vote.

What they have alleged is not a ‘high crime or misdemeanor.’ There are two articles:

The first article is just this amorphous ‘abuse of power’, which, by the way, is ‘mal-administration.’ It’s literally the term that was rejected in the Constitutional Convention. That’s what they’re alleging. That plainly does not meet the Constitutional threshold.

The second article, though, is orders of magnitude weaker. The second article is ‘obstruction of congress,’ and interestingly enough, people are used to obstruction of justice…

Bartiromo: …Yeah, I’ve never heard of that, of ‘obstruction of congress,’ but I’ve heard of obstruction of power, or obstruction of justice…”

Sen. Cruz: Well, and obstruction of justice is a real crime, it’s a felony, it’s a serious felony…

Bartiromo: …But they have named it ‘obstruction of congress…’

Sen. Cruz:Because they couldn’t prove obstruction of justice. By the way, Bill Clinton was impeached on obstruction of justice; Richard Nixon was going to be impeached on obstruction of justice. But they couldn’t prove obstruction of justice.

The basis for their so-called ‘obstruction of congress’ claim is that the President and aides in the executive asserted privileges. That’s it.

For example, when they wanted John Bolton to testify – John Bolton, National Security Advisor to the President – his lawyer went to a federal district court and said, the House has asked me to testify, the White House is asserting executive privilege: Your honor, what do I do? Judge, I’ve got two conflicting demands here: I will do what you tell me to do.

You know what the House Democrats did? They said, ‘nevermind.’ They just backed away. They didn’t subpoena Bolton, they didn’t litigate it.

Remember, the Nixon case was litigated all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. The U.S. Supreme Court, at the end of the day, ordered the Nixon White House to hand over the White House tapes, and I think two days later, Nixon resigned. That’s how you actually fight these matters.

The House Democrats didn’t do that. Instead, their assertion is that simply claiming the privilege is an impeachable offense. If that were true, all 45 presidents going back to George Washington, every one of them would have committed impeachable offenses. That’s just laughable.

Bartiromo: This is a new precedent – it sure is.

[End]

Now, the thing to remember about Ted Cruz is that he is truly a Constitutional scholar. As a former Solicitor General of Texas, Senator Cruz argued nine cases before the U.S. Supreme Court. He understands the Constitution and he understands better than most current Senators the rules and laws surrounding impeachment and removal of a President.

Cruz and the other 52 GOP senators have also spent much of the past two weeks in meetings and calls with Majority Leader Mitch McConnell in an apparently successful effort to reach consensus on how to conduct the Senate trial. So, when Cruz states flatly that he expects the trial to begin “in early January,” that statement carries a lot of weight, and might indeed mean that Leader McConnell plans to convene the trial regardless of Pelosi’s cynical tactics.

I personally think that Cruz’s reminder that any procedural decision initially made by our very unreliable Chief Justice can be overruled by 51 Republican votes is meant as a shot across Justice Roberts’ bow. It is likely an indication that Cruz is confident that there are at least 51 GOP senators who are tired of this crap dragging on for weeks on end, and who are intent upon bringing it to as fast a conclusion as possible.  If that is the case, then Justice Roberts might want to avoid embarrassing himself by being overruled by 51 senators, and just play the case straight.

This interview, and the messages Senator Cruz – who remember, was Donald Trump’s chief competitor for the 2016 GOP nomination and who still harbors presidential ambitions of his own – sends within it, are a very important marker in the impeachment debate. This was not just a courtesy interview by the Senator, and that’s good news for America.

That is all.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

 

 

Open post

Impeachment is All About Leverage, and Pelosi Has None

Today’s Campaign Update, Part II
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

In politics, leverage matters.  – San Fran Nan Pelosi is playing at a losing game in her withholding of the House-approved articles of impeachment from the Senate. This is a game she cannot win unless Senate Republicans, led by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, hand it to her. Simply put, Pelosi has no leverage at all in this situation.

Whatever else one thinks of Leader McConnell, it must be recognized that he is perhaps the most canny user of political leverage who has ever served in his current role. While McConnell is receiving all sorts of advice from the political bleaters on both the right the left right now, no one on earth understands his role, responsibilities and power in this impeachment and removal exercise nearly as well as he does. And no one in modern times has understood the usage of political leverage like McConnell has.

In this current standoff – which actually is a standoff in Pelosi’s mind only – the Speaker is a piker compared to the Majority Leader. Her big hope is that her legion of corrupt toadies in the national news media will be able to apply so much pressure on RINO senators like Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins and Mitt Romney that they will turn to McConnell and beg him to give in to Pelosi’s and Chuck Schumer’s demands on how a senate trial should be conducted.

First, let’s all join Mitch in having a big, hearty belly laugh at demands from Democrats – who just finished conducting the most shameless, Soviet-style sham trial in the House that our nation has ever seen – that the Senate trial be “fair”:

Ok, now that we’ve gotten that out of our system, let’s next note the simple fact that the legal language contained in the articles of impeachment bill passed by the House requires Pelosi, by statute, to immediately transmit them over to the Senate. By withholding the articles from the Senate, San Fran Nan is in fact violating the terms of her own bill.

Comical.

Some observers are pointing out the reality that, if he wanted to do so, McConnell could simply declare the articles to have already been transmitted over to the Senate and go ahead with a trial. After all, the bill has been published by the House in the Federal Record and widely reported verbatim across the depth and breadth of the corrupt national news media. Thus, McConnell and everyone else in the Senate is already fully aware of them.

That makes logical sense, but McConnell is very unlikely to make that move for one reason: Tradition. The formal transmission of bills by couriers from one house of congress to the other is a throwback to a long-ago time before the existence of any form of electronic communication, all the way back to the founding of our nation. It’s a tradition, and no one on the face of the earth has a higher degree of respect for the archaic traditions of congress than Mitch McConnell.

To simply declare the articles to have been transmitted to the Senate without following the traditional process is simply anathema to the Majority Leader. So it’s really hard to see any scenario under which McConnell would take this step.

Besides, as McConnell has said himself, he doesn’t even want to be bothered with the damn things. He and his fellow GOP senators have better things to do, like continuing to confirm a record number of new federal judges who have been nominated by President Trump to all levels of the federal judiciary. A removal trial would tie up the Senate for weeks, perhaps even months if the President demands the ability to call witnesses who were refused during the sham House process. So, McConnell’s view is, who needs that?

But what about public opinion, which is what Pelosi is desperately attempting to move with this silly tactic? All the polls – even the fake polls conducted by CNN and other corrupt media outlets – throughout the month of December have been moving in President Trump’s direction. Unless Pelosi and her media toadies can somehow reverse that national trend, there is no political leverage to be had here, either.

As the situation exists today, Pelosi has unintentionally put President Trump right where he wants to be: Getting up every morning with the ability to throw out Tweets pounding on a very unpopular political foil. That foil right now is San Fran Nan herself.

Thus, as things stand today, Pelosi is fighting a silly, losing battle in which she has no political leverage at all. Unless something major changes over the next week and a half, we should expect her to do one of two things once congress reconvenes on January 7:

  • Formally transmit the articles of impeachment to the Senate; or
  • Announce that she plans to withhold them indefinitely pending more investigation and hearings by the House Intelligence and House Judiciary Committees.

The smart move would be to transmit the articles and try to salvage her House majority in the 2020 elections by focusing on an actual policy agenda. But she won’t do that because it would lead to neverending outrage from AOC and her Squad of political nitwits. The Squad and the social media Perpetual Outrage Mob to whom they cater have no understanding of political leverage, or lack thereof.

No, my bet is that Pelosi will try to have it both ways. Within a few days after the House reconvenes, she will go ahead and transmit the articles to the Senate, but also announce that her committees will continue to focus on the continuing impeachment witch hunt.

It’s a bad strategy in which she has no leverage whatsoever, but at this point, it truly is all she has.

2020 is going to be a long, sad year for the political left, which of course means it will be a great year for America.

That is all.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Watch McConnell’s Speech Lambasting Pelosi (Transcript Included)

Today’s Campaign Update, Part II
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

Mitch McConnell proves again that he is really with the Trump program on this impeachment sham. – The Senate Majority Leader this morning delivered what can only be described as an historic speech in the well of the Senate in response to Nancy Pelosi’s tactic of refusing to deliver her sham articles of impeachment to the Senate as required by her chamber’s own rules.

Everyone should watch and/or read this speech. It is brilliantly done. We here at the Campaign Update dutifully provide our loyal audience the opportunity to do both. First, a clip of the speech followed by a full transcript:

Here’s the full transcript:

Last night House Democrats finally did what they decided to do long ago: They voted to impeach President Trump.

Over the last 12 weeks, House Democrats have conducted the most rushed, least thorough, and most unfair impeachment inquiry in modern history.

Now their slapdash process has concluded in the first purely partisan presidential impeachment since the wake of the Civil War. The opposition to impeachment was bipartisan. Only one part of one faction wanted this outcome.

The House’s conduct risks deeply damaging the institutions of American government. This particular House of Representatives has let its partisan rage at this particular President create a toxic new precedent that will echo into the future.

That’s what I want to discuss now: The historic degree to which House Democrats have failed to do their duty — and what it will mean for the Senate to do ours.

Let’s start at the beginning. Let’s start with the fact that Washington Democrats made up their minds to impeach President Trump since before he was even inaugurated

Here’s a reporter in April 2016. Quote, “Donald Trump isn’t even the Republican nominee yet… [but] ‘Impeachment’ is already on the lips of pundits, newspaper editorials, constitutional scholars, and even a few members of Congress.”

On Inauguration Day 2017, this headline in the Washington Post: “The campaign to impeach President Trump has begun.” That was day one.

In April 2017, three months into the presidency, a senior House Democrat said “I’m going to fight every day until he’s impeached.” That was three months in.

In December 2017, two years ago, Congressman Jerry Nadler was openly campaigning to be ranking member on House Judiciary specifically because he was an expert on impeachment.

This week wasn’t even the first time House Democrats have introduced articles of impeachment. It was the seventh time.

They started less than six months after the president was sworn in.

They tried to impeach President Trump for being impolite to the press… For being mean to professional athletes… For changing President Obama’s policy on transgender people in the military.

All of these things were “high crimes and misdemeanors” according to Democrats.

This wasn’t just a few people. Scores of Democrats voted to move forward with impeachment on three of those prior occasions.

So let’s be clear. The House’s vote yesterday was not some neutral judgment that Democrats came to reluctantly. It was the pre-determined end of a partisan crusade that began before President Trump was even nominated, let alone sworn in.

For the very first time in modern history we have seen a political faction in Congress promise from the moment a presidential election ended that they would find some way to overturn it.

A few months ago, Democrats’ three-year-long impeachment in search of articles found its way to the subject of Ukraine. And House Democrats embarked on the most rushed, least thorough, and most unfair impeachment inquiry in modern history.

Chairman Schiff’s inquiry was poisoned by partisanship from the outset. Its procedures and parameters were unfair in unprecedented ways.

Democrats tried to make Chairman Schiff into a de facto Special Prosecutor, notwithstanding the fact that he is a partisan member of Congress who’d already engaged in strange and biased behavior.

He scrapped precedent to cut the Republican minority out of the process. He denied President Trump the same sorts of procedural rights that Houses of both parties had provided to past presidents of both parties.

President Trump’s counsel could not participate in Chairman Schiff’s hearings, present evidence, or cross-examine witnesses.

The House Judiciary Committee’s crack at this was even more ahistorical. It was like the Speaker called up Chairman Nadler and ordered one impeachment, rush delivery please.

That Committee found no facts of its own and did nothing to verify the Schiff report. Their only witnesses were liberal law professors and congressional staffers.

There’s a reason the impeachment inquiry that led to President Nixon’s resignation required about 14 months of hearings. 14 months. In addition to a special prosecutor’s investigation.

With President Clinton, the independent counsel’s inquiry had been underway for years before the House Judiciary Committee dug in. Mountains of evidence. Mountains of testimony from firsthand fact witnesses. Serious legal battles to get what was necessary.

This time around, House Democrats skipped all of that and spent just 12 weeks. 

More than a year of hearings for Nixon… multiple years of investigation for Clinton… and they’ve impeached President Trump in 12 weeks.

So let’s talk about what the House actually produced in those 12 weeks.

House Democrats’ rushed and rigged inquiry yielded two articles of impeachment. They are fundamentally unlike any articles that any prior House of Representatives has ever passed.

The first article concerns the core events which House Democrats claim are impeachable — the timing of aid to Ukraine.

But it does not even purport to allege any actual crime. Instead, they deploy this vague phrase, “abuse of power,” to impugn the president’s actions in a general, indeterminate way.

Speaker Pelosi’s House just gave into a temptation that every other House in history had managed to resist: They impeached a president whom they do not even allege has committed an actual crime known to our laws. They impeached simply because they disagree with a presidential act and question the motive behind it.

Look at history. The Andrew Johnson impeachment revolved around a clear violation of a criminal statute, albeit an unconstitutional one. Nixon had obstruction of justice — a felony under our laws. Clinton had perjury — also a felony.

Now, the Constitution does not say the House can impeach only those presidents who violate a law.

But history matters. Precedent matters. And there were important reasons why every previous House of Representatives in American history restrained itself from crossing this Rubicon.

The framers of our Constitution very specifically discussed whether the House should be able to impeach presidents just for “maladministration”— in other words, because the House simply thought the president had bad judgment or was doing a bad job.

The written records of the founders’ debates show they specifically rejected this. They realized it would create total dysfunction to set the bar for impeachment that low.

James Madison himself explained that allowing impeachment on that basis would mean the President serves at the pleasure of the Congress instead of the pleasure of the American people.

It would make the President a creature of Congress, not the head of a separate and equal branch. So there were powerful reasons why Congress after Congress for 230 years required presidential impeachments to revolve around clear, recognizable crimes, even though that was not a strict limitation.

Powerful reasons why, for 230 years, no House opened the Pandora’s box of subjective, political impeachments.

That 230-year tradition died last night.

Now, House Democrats have tried to say they had to impeach President Trump on this historically thin and subjective basis because the White House challenged their requests for more witnesses.

And that brings us to the second article of impeachment.

The House titled this one “obstruction of Congress.” What it really does is impeach the president for asserting presidential privilege.

The concept of executive privilege is another two-century-old constitutional tradition. Presidents starting with George Washington have invoked it. Federal courts have repeatedly affirmed it as a legitimate constitutional power.

House Democrats requested extraordinary amounts of sensitive information from President Trump’s White House — exactly the kinds of things over which presidents of both parties have asserted privilege in the past.

Predictably, and appropriately, President Trump did not simply roll over. He defended the constitutional authority of his office.

It is not a constitutional crisis for a House to want more information than a president wants to give up. It is a routine occurrence. The separation of powers is messy by design.

Here’s what should happen next: Either the President and Congress negotiate a settlement, or the third branch of government, the judiciary, addresses the dispute between the other two.

The Nixon impeachment featured disagreements over presidential privilege — so they went to the courts. The Clinton impeachment featured disagreements over presidential privilege — so they went to the courts.

This takes time. It’s inconvenient. That’s actually the point. Due process is not meant to maximize the convenience of the prosecutor. It is meant to protect the accused.

But this time was different. Remember: 14 months of hearings for Richard Nixon… years of investigation for Bill Clinton… but 12 weeks for President Trump.

Democrats didn’t have to rush this. But they chose to stick to their political timetable at the expense of pursuing more evidence through proper legal channels.

Nobody made Chairman Schiff do this. He chose to.

The Tuesday before last, on live television, Adam Schiff explained to the entire country that if House Democrats had let the justice system follow its normal course, they might not have gotten to impeach the president in time for the election!

In Nixon, the courts were allowed to do their work. In Clinton, the courts were allowed to do their work. Only these House Democrats decided due process is too much work and they’d rather impeach with no proof.

And, they tried to cover for their own partisan impatience by pretending that the routine occurrence of a president exerting constitutional privilege is itself a second impeachable offense.

The following is something that Adam Schiff literally said in early October. Here’s what he said:

Any action… that forces us to litigate, or have to consider litigation, will be considered further evidence of obstruction of justice.”

Here is what the Chairman effectively said, and what one of his committee members restated just this week: If the President asserts his constitutional rights, it’s that much more evidence he is guilty.

That kind of bullying is antithetical to American justice.

So those are House Democrats’ two articles of impeachment. That’s all their rushed and rigged inquiry could generate:

An act that the House does not even allege is criminal; and a nonsensical claim that exercising a legitimate presidential power is somehow an impeachable offense.

This is by far the thinnest basis for any House-passed presidential impeachment in American history. The thinnest and the weakest — and nothing else comes even close.

And candidly, I don’t think I am the only person around here who realizes this. Even before the House voted yesterday, Democrats had already started to signal uneasiness with its end product.

Before the articles even passed, the Senate Democratic Leader went on television to demand that this body re-do House Democrats’ homework for them. That the Senate should supplement Chairman Schiff’s sloppy work so it is more persuasive than Chairman Schiff himself bothered to make it.

Of course, every such demand simply confirms that House Democrats have rushed forward with a case that is much too weak.

Back in June, Speaker Pelosi promised the House would, quote, “build an ironclad case.” Never mind that she was basically promising impeachment months before the Ukraine events, but that’s a separate matter.

She promised “an ironclad case.”

And in March, Speaker Pelosi said this: “Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country.” End quote.

By the Speaker’s own standards, she has failed the country. This case is not compelling, not overwhelming, and as a result, not bipartisan. This failure was made clear to everyone earlier this week, when Senator Schumer began searching for ways the Senate could step out of our proper role and try to fix House Democrats’ failures for them.

And it was made even more clear last night, when Speaker Pelosi suggested that House Democrats may be too afraid to even transmit their work product to the Senate. 

The prosecutors are getting cold feet in front of the entire country and second-guessing whether they even want to go to trial.

They said impeachment was so urgent that it could not even wait for due process but now they’re content to sit on their hands. It is comical.

Democrats’ own actions concede that their allegations are unproven.

But the articles aren’t just unproven. They’re also constitutionally incoherent. Frankly, if either of these articles is blessed by the Senate, we could easily see the impeachment of every future president of either party.

Let me say that again: If the Senate blesses this historically low bar, we will invite the impeachment of every future president.

The House Democrats’ allegations, as presented, are incompatible with our constitutional order. They are unlike anything that has ever been seen in 230 years of this Republic.

House Democrats want to create new rules for this president because they feel uniquely enraged. But long after the partisan fever of this moment has broken, the institutional damage will remain.

I’ve described the threat to the presidency. But this also imperils the Senate itself. 

The House has created an unfair, unfinished product that looks nothing like any impeachment inquiry in American history. And if the Speaker ever gets her house in order, that mess will be dumped on the Senate’s lap.

If the Senate blesses this slapdash impeachment… if we say that from now on, this is enough… then we will invite an endless parade of impeachment trials.

Future Houses of either party will feel free to toss up a “jump ball” every time they feel angry. Free to swamp the Senate with trial after trial, no matter how baseless the charges.

We would be giving future Houses of either party unbelievable new power to paralyze the Senate at their whim.

More thin arguments. More incomplete evidence. More partisan impeachments.

In fact, this same House of Representatives has already indicated that they themselves may not be done impeaching!

The House Judiciary Committee told a federal court this week that it will continue its impeachment investigation even after voting on these articles. And multiple Democratic members have already called publicly for more.

If the Senate blesses this, if the nation accepts it, presidential impeachments may cease being once-in-a-generation events and become a constant part of the political background noise. 

This extraordinary tool of last resort may become just another part of the arms race of polarization.

Real statesmen would have recognized, no matter their view of this president, that trying to remove him on this thin and partisan basis could unsettle the foundations of our Republic.

Real statesmen would have recognized, no matter how much partisan animosity might be coursing through their veins, that cheapening the impeachment process was not the answer.

Historians will regard this as a great irony of this era: That so many who professed such concern for our norms and traditions themselves proved willing to trample our constitutional order to get their way.

It is long past time for Washington D.C. to get a little perspective.

President Trump is not the first president with a populist streak…Not the first to make entrenched elites uncomfortable. He’s certainly not the first president to speak bluntly… to mistrust the administrative state… or to rankle unelected bureaucrats.

And Heaven knows he is not our first president to assert the constitutional privileges of his office rather than roll over when Congress demands unlimited sensitive information.

None of these things is unprecedented.

I’ll tell you what would be unprecedented. It will be an unprecedented constitutional crisis if the Senate hands the House of Representatives a new, partisan “vote of no confidence” that the founders intentionally withheld, destroying the independence of the presidency.

It will be unprecedented if we agree that any future House that dislikes any future president can rush through an unfair inquiry, skip the legal system, and paralyze the Senate with a trial. The House could do that at will under this precedent.

It will be unprecedented if the Senate says secondhand and thirdhand testimony from unelected civil servants is enough to overturn the people’s vote.

It will be an unprecedented constitutional crisis if the Senate agrees to set the bar this low — forever.

It is clear what this moment requires. It requires the Senate to fulfill our founding purpose.

The framers built the Senate to provide stability. To take the long view for our Republic. To safeguard institutions from the momentary hysteria that sometimes consumes our politics. To keep partisan passions from boiling over.

The Senate exists for moments like this.

That’s why this body has the ultimate say in impeachments.

The framers knew the House would be too vulnerable to transient passions and violent factionalism. They needed a body that could consider legal questions about what has been proven and political questions about what the common good of our nation requires.

Hamilton said explicitly in Federalist 65 that impeachment involves not just legal questions, but inherently political judgments about what outcome best serves the nation.

The House can’t do both. The courts can’t do both.

This is as grave an assignment as the Constitution gives to any branch of government, and the framers knew only the Senate could handle it. Well, the moment the framers feared has arrived.

A political faction in the lower chamber have succumbed to partisan rage. They have fulfilled Hamilton’s prophesy that impeachment will, quote, “connect itself with the pre-existing factions… enlist all their animosities… [and] there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.” End quote.

That is what happened in the House last night. The vote did not reflect what had been proven. It only reflects how they feel about the President.

The Senate must put this right. We must rise to the occasion.

There is only one outcome that is suited to the paucity of evidence, the failed inquiry, the slapdash case.

Only one outcome suited to the fact that the accusations themselves are constitutionally incoherent.

Only one outcome that will preserve core precedents rather than smash them into bits in a fit of partisan rage because one party still cannot accept the American people’s choice in 2016.

It could not be clearer which outcome would serve the stabilizing, institution-preserving, fever-breaking role for which the United States Senate was created… and which outcome would betray it.

The Senate’s duty is clear. The Senate’s duty is clear.

When the time comes, we must fulfill it.’

[End]

 

That is all.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Posts navigation

1 2 3 4 5 6
Scroll to top
%d bloggers like this: