Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *

Showing posts with label impeachment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label impeachment. Show all posts

Sunday, December 22, 2019

This Scares Us--Can Roberts Be Trusted?

Rep. Mo Brooks questions Chief Justice Roberts’ ability to conduct fair impeachment trial

December 22, 2019
Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts has been called out by Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL) for being “mentally erratic” in his legal foundation.
Ads by Revcontent
Once House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) releases the articles of impeachment to the Senate, Justice Roberts will preside over the Senate impeachment trial. Brooks called Roberts’ impartiality into question in an appearance on Huntsville, AL radio’s WVNN on Saturday.
While much of the current conversation has focused on how Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Senate Minority leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) will handle the Senate impeachment proceedings, Brooks turned the spotlight on Roberts.
He pointed to Roberts’ opinion on Obamacare as an example of that “erratic” thinking, saying that “out of nine Supreme Court justices, he was the only one who thought that Obamacare was not socialized medicine […] He thought it was a tax increase, therefore it was permissible.”
“Justice Roberts engaged in this kind of legal gymnastics in his own brain that all eight of the other Supreme Court justices thought was rather bizarre. But nonetheless, he was the deciding vote on Obamacare. So, I don’t trust John Roberts’ judgment,” the Alabama Republican continued.
Brooks went on to speculate about how Roberts’ may choose to preside over the trial, commenting:
“I don’t know if he would be passive. I don’t know if he would be aggressive. Typically, the trial judge by way of example would be responsible for making evidentiary rulings, what is admissible in a trial and what is not. And I don’t know if John Roberts is in a position to do that in a way that I believe is appropriate.”
Brooks cast doubt on how Roberts will influence the trial and remarked that he would “much rather we have someone who is fairly consistent and reliable — someone we could trust in a reasoned way to come up with what is fair and just.”

Tuesday, December 10, 2019

True? Probably


BOMBSHELL REPORT: George Soros behind Trump impeachment

by Frank Holmes, reporter
Over the last few weeks, Congressional Democrats have televised hearings and drawn up Articles of Impeachment against President Donald Trump — but a new report shows that the entire impeach Trump effort is being led and bankrolled by someone whose face is never seen.
All roads to impeachment lead back to billionaire George Soros. He literally paid the bills for the man browbeating Trump’s defenders in front of the cameras.
House Democrats picked Norm Eisen to cross-examine Republican witnesses during the first week of impeachment hearings — and to lie about Trump.

Eisen faked up a video of the president to make him look like he’s above the law. The video shows Trump saying that the Constitution “allows me to do whatever I want.”
Trump actually said Article II “would allow me to fire” corrupt functionaries like Robert Mueller… and it does.
But where does Eisen get his funding?
It should come as no surprise that Eisen is a major recipient of funding by the shadowy billionaire George Soros and his network of political patronage.
Eisen realized that investigative watchdog groups like Judicial Watch destroyed Bill Clinton and other Democrats by bringing their deep corruption to light.
So in 2003, Eisen founded a group called Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) to target Republicans…and the funding came from the most powerful globalist in U.S. politics.
CREW has brought in millions from George Soros over the years. Soros donated $1.35 million in 2017 alone through his “charity,” the Open Society Foundations.

CREW also rakes in cash from the Democracy Alliance, a secretive political slush fund that Soros founded to launder donations from himself and fellow elites to hard-left organizations who will do their bidding, without leaving fingerprints.
Eisen’s group got paid to file complaints that Republican officials had committed “ethics violations.” But critics say when it comes to the worst Democratic abuses of power, CREW sees no evil.
CREW is a “one-eyed watchdog,” according to Scott Walter of the Capital Research Center. “The right eye doesn’t work. Just the left.”
Still, the liberal media report CREW’s most far-fetched allegations 24/7.
“Before ‘fake news’ there was CREW,” wrote Richard Berman in The Washington Times.
CREW’s leaders let the cat out of the bag in secret documents obtained by The Horn.
Eisen left CREW for a few years to work for the Democrats directly: He was President Barack Obama’s “ethics czar” and a foreign ambassador. Then, in 2016, Eisen rejoined CREW as its chairman of the board.

In the meantime, CREW was led by David Brock, one of Soros’ and the Clintons’ favorite political tools.
Although Brock officially stepped aside—so CREW wouldn’t look so partisan—Brock presented CREW as one of the groups he led in a secret memo intended only to be seen by his high-rolling donors.
Brock said, if donors would just open up their wallets, CREW would pepper the Trump administration with lawsuits and charges of “possible conflicts of interest and ethical problems on an unprecedented scale.”
Eisen and CREW led the charge publicly. But even fellow liberals said that, when he accused Trump of violating the Constitution’s Emolument Clause by maintaining his vast business holdings, his attacks were petty and off-base.
So did a federal judge, who threw Eisen’s lawsuit out of court last year… but Eisen only doubled-down on trying to impeach Trump.

George Soros has his own reasons to bankroll the effort: revenge.
Soros believed that Trump would destroy the U.S. economy and stacked his investments heavily on a recession.
Instead, the stock market has broken records year after year, and the unemployment level is the lowest in 50 years.
He wants to get back at Trump, and CREW wants to keep cashing Soros’ checks.
The fact that Democrats turned to Eisen shows who’s really pulling the strings on the Trump impeachment.
Frank Holmes is a veteran journalist and an outspoken conservative that talks about the news that was in his weekly article, “On The Holmes Front.”

Tuesday, November 12, 2019

Its Sad. Its Despicable. Heads Should Fall.

Impeachment Inquiry Faces New Hurdles

  • 11/12/2019 12:00 AM 
  • Source: AAN 
  • by: AAN Staff
The impeachment inquiry into President Trump's supposed quid pro quo is getting more farcical by the day, courtesy of Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff's laughably incompetent "leadership."

Gregg Jarrett, writing an opinion piece for Fox News, explains:
 
At first, Schiff wanted the faux "whistleblower" who triggered the impeachment farce to testify. Then, suddenly, he didn't. What changed? In the interim, evidence emerged that Schiff and/or his staff colluded with the "whistleblower" before the complaint was ever filed and then lied about it, earning Schiff "Four Pinocchios" from The Washington Post.

The chairman now wants to conceal his own role in engineering the pretext for impeachment and his subsequent deceit. This is why he has insisted that the "whistleblower" remain anonymous, despite no such right, guarantee, privilege, or entitlement written in the law, as I explained in an earlier column. Even though the undercover informant (reportedly working for the CIA) does not qualify for whistleblower status under the law as determined by the Department of Justice, any effort by Republicans to call him as a witness will be blocked by Schiff.

But Schiff's machinations are more malevolent than masking the key witness. Those he will call to testify are already on record dishing up prodigious plates of multiple hearsay and rank speculation. It is obvious from the released transcripts of the heretofore "super top-secret" inquisition that none of them have any firsthand knowledge of a "quid pro quo" allegedly demanded by President Trump.

For example, Bill Taylor, the acting ambassador to Ukraine who will testify on Wednesday, told Schiff's committee that it was his "understanding" there was a link between U.S. security assistance and an investigation of Joe and Hunter Biden. How did Taylor arrive at his opinion? He heard it through discussions with other diplomats, although there is no indication that any of these individuals had direct knowledge of anything. The chain of hearsay went something like this: the European Union Ambassador Gordon Sondland told National Security Council official Tim Morrison who, in turn, told Taylor that there was a purported "quid pro quo."

However, the truth is less politically convenient for Democrats. For Sondland originally testified that after a conversation with President Trump the commander-in-chief told him, unequivocally, "I want nothing ... I want no quid pro quo." Buttressing this initial claim, Sondland added that he never believed there was a precondition on military aid to Ukraine. Only later did he revise his testimony, stating, "I presumed that the aid suspension had become linked to the proposed anti-corruption statement." 

Of course, such anecdotes are just the proverbial tip of the iceberg.

Thursday, October 24, 2019

This Is What Scares Us!

Poll: Support for Impeachment Probe Hits High of 55%

WASHINGTON, DC - OCTOBER 15: (L-R) Representative Mark Meadows (R-NC) and Representative Adam Schiff (D-CA), Chairman of the House Select Committee on Intelligence Committee returns to a closed session before the House Intelligence, Foreign Affairs and Oversight committees October 15, 2019 at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC. Kent was …
asos Katopodis/Getty Images
3:29

A newly-released poll shows support for the House Democrats’ impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump has hit a new high.

According to a Quinnipiac University survey, 55 percent of respondents said they support the impeachment probe, while 43 percent stated they oppose it. The same poll found last week that 51 percent backed the inquiry and 45 percent disapproved it.
Opposition to impeachment remains high among Republicans with nearly nine in ten Republicans, or 88 percent, stating they are against it. Conversely, 93 percent of Democrats approve of the inquiry, as well as 58 percent of independents. Approval for the inquiry climbed eight percent among independents, the poll shows. Further, the survey states President Trump’s approval rating fell under 40 percent for the first time since the probe started as 38 percent of respondents said they approve of his job performance, while 58 percent disapprove.
The poll, which had 1,587 respondents, was conducted between October 17st and 21st and had a margin of error of just over three percent.
The poll comes as House Democrats continue to move swiftly with an inquiry that was launched in the wake of a partisan CIA officer’s so-called “whistleblower” complaint claiming the president pressured the leader of Ukraine to investigate allegations of corruption against former vice president and 2020 candidate Joe Biden and his son, Hunter.
Both President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky have repeatedly denied any pressure was applied to probe the Biden family, and in a nod to transparency, the White House publically released a transcript of the world leaders’ July 25th conversation to show no pressure or quid pro quo occurred.
The survey also comes as House Republicans have reached a breaking point with how House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) has run the closed-door impeachment inquiry.
Laura Cooper, a senior official who oversees Ukraine policy, arrived Wednesday morning on Capitol Hill to appear before the House panels conducting the investigation. Shortly afterward, more than two dozen Republican House members held a news conference outside the secure room in the Capitol where the deposition was taking place.
The Republicans decried that the deposition was happening behind closed doors and said Americans should be able to read the transcripts of any interviews being conducted as part of impeachment.
Republicans then walked into the meeting unannounced, and the deposition was put on hold. The two sides were trying to resolve the standoff, Republicans who left the meeting said.
House Foreign Affairs Committee member Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-NY) said during the press conference:
The members are still there. We want to hear from this witness. But we want our colleagues to hear from this witness, too. Especially those members who are on the House Armed Services Committee. The person coming to testify is from the Department of Defense.
This is more the jurisdiction of the House Armed Services Committee than it is than any of the other three committees [involved in the impeachment inquiry]. But we want the deposition to take place, but we don’t want it to be happening so much in secret that even most of Congress can’t even know what’s going on.
Last week, 184 House Republicans voted in favor of a resolution to censure Schiff for his handling of the impeachment probe.

Wednesday, October 23, 2019

Is Trump Headed For Conviction?


SHOCK! 46 GOP Senators REFUSE to rule out impeachment

Are Republicans in the Senate preparing to betray President Donald Trump and back Democrats’ impeachment efforts?
Only seven were willing to go on the record and expressly say, “No.”
It is a dangerous time for the Trump administration. Democrats say the testimony of diplomat William Taylor on Tuesday, including the notes he provided, is proof that Trump committed an impeachable office.

Trump himself said an impeachment trial was a “foregone conclusion” on Monday. [Read more: Trump: ‘I WILL be impeached]
Since Taylor’s testimony, many Republican leaders have been quiet. So conservative news site The Daily Caller called the offices of all 53 GOP senators between Monday and Tuesday and asked if they’d completely ruled out removing Trump from the White House.
The answers they received were surprising. The Daily Caller reported that while almost every Republican criticized House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s impeachment inquiry, only seven went on the record and vowed they would not remove Trump from office.
Sens. Cindy Hyde-Smith, R-M.S., Thom Tillis, R-N.C., Jim Inhofe, R-O.K., Roger Wicker, R-M.S., Mike Rounds, D-S.D., Rob Portman, R-O.H., and Jerry Moran, R-K.S., all explicitly said they would not vote to remove Trump from office.
The other 46 Republican senators gave a variety of answers.

Some said they were willing to look at the evidence if a formal impeachment trial began. Some referred The Daily Caller to previous answers or declined to comment. Many simply didn’t respond to the request for a statement. Still others refused to answer the question based on hypotheticals.
For example, Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-T.N., said he didn’t support the impeachment inquiry because it will divide the country further — but won’t comment on his vote.
“An election, which is just around the corner, is the right way to decide who should be president. Impeachment has never removed a president. It will only divide the country further. If the House impeaches the president, the Senate would be the jury,” Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-T.N., reportedly said. ” There would be many twists and turns between now and a Senate trial. Therefore, as a potential juror, I will have nothing more to say about impeachment until all the evidence is presented and all the arguments are made.”
Sen. Rick Scott, R-F.L., said he would continue to listen to evidence but isn’t convinced Trump committed a crime. Scott also condemned Rep. Adam Schiff’s, D-Calif. impeachment inquiry process.
“No one showed me that there’s a violation of the law,” Scott told The Caller. “The standard is high crimes and misdemeanors. I think this is just the Democrats. They’ve always been wanting to impeach this guy, Trump, since he got elected and this is just the latest example. I’m always going to keep listening to when information comes out. But it’s crazy that they’re doing all this work over there in secret.”

Sen. John Boozman, R-A.R., blasted the impeachment inquiry in a statement — but didn’t rule out removing Trump if the evidence presented at a hypothetical trial were damning.
“The Senate voted unanimously to request that the whistleblower complaint be turned over to the Senate Intelligence Committee,” Boozman said. “This is the responsible manner in which to investigate accusations. The Speaker is ignoring this process with her blatantly partisan tactics. Democrats have long sought to weaken the president, appease their base and further divide the country through impeachment.”
The office of Sen. Susan Collins, R-M.E., reportedly referred The Daily Caller to a previous statement by the senator.
“I am amazed that some of my colleagues have already made up their minds one way or the other before all the evidence is in and before the facts are known,” Collins had said. “I think that’s entirely inappropriate whether they’re for impeachment or against impeachment. under the constitution, the role of the senator is to act as a juror and that’s what I did in the case of the impeachment trial of Bill Clinton and should this come before us, and I think it will, that’s what I will do here.”

Senate Leader Mitch Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-K.Y., told reporters on Tuesday he would have no control over an impeachment trial.
“It wouldn’t be up to me,” McConnell said in a press conference Tuesday. “Unlike other processes in the Senate, the majority leader does not really have ball control here.”
He said there “are all kinds of potentials” for trial, depending on what articles of impeachment House Democrats send to the Senate.
McConnell said he was planning a sitdown with Senator Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., to agree on a process, but said the “balls and strikes” of an impeachment trial would be under the control of Supreme Court Justice John Roberts.
“I don’t see anybody in all of this who would be able to control the process,” McConnell said. “At some point, it ends. I have no idea how long this will go on.”
What do you think?