“President Roosevelt clearly had the right to send to the United States Senate and the United States Congress a proposal to pack the court. It was totally within his right to do that. He violated no law. He was legalistically, absolutely correct. “But it was a bonehead idea. It was a terrible, terrible mistake to make. And it put in question, if for an entire decade, the independence of the most-significant body … in this country, the Supreme Court of the United States of America.” – Senator Joe Biden, 1983
FoxNews.com reports that
Democratic lawmakers are set to unveil legislation Thursday to expand the number of justices on the Supreme Court.
Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., and Reps. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., Hank Johnson, D-Ga., and Mondaire Jones, D-N.Y., will hold a press conference on Thursday to introduce the proposal on the steps of the Supreme Court.
Given their control of the White House and the Senate, the legislation could allow them to supersede the current conservative majority by “packing” the Court with liberal justices.
Spokespeople for the lawmakers’ offices did not return Fox News’ requests Wednesday night for further details.
The Intercept reported on Wednesday that the legislation will propose expanding the court to 13 justices, from nine.
The Supreme Court has had nine justices since the 19th century, though it is not required by the Constitution.
Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, introduced legislation earlier this year that included a constitutional amendment to preserve the current number of sitting justices, as well as provisions prohibiting congress from passing legislation to expand the number.
Cruz first introduced that legislation in October, as some Democrats indicated an openness to expanding the size of the high court following the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Ginsburg’s vacancy was filled by Donald Trump-appointee Amy Coney Barrett, marking Trump’s third appointment to the Supreme Court. Justice Barrett also tilted the ideological power balance of the court in favor of conservatives 6 to 3.
Democrats often attribute part of that shift in the court to the fact that then-Sen. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., refused to consider Merrick Garland – nominated by President Barack Obama in 2016 – to fill a vacant seat during an election year. That seat, belonging to Antonin Scalia, was eventually filled by conservative Justice Neil M. Gorsuch.
Trump also appointed Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
…Biden has previously opposed the idea of court-packing. However, he said in the fall that he intended to set up a bipartisan commission to study Supreme Court reforms.
This week, the president signed an executive order forming the “Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States” to analyze the merits of proposed reforms.
The Democrats desperately want to pack the court so that, like all fascist governments before them, they can rule with impunity.
For the last several decades, and especially during the Obama Administration, the Liberals of the Democratic Party relied upon Judicial Activism to overturn the will of the American People and to “get their way” on matters of political and societal importance.
Sometimes they won and sometimes they lost.
A big win for the Democrats was the Supreme court ruling allowing gays to get married.
It was taken to the courts by the Democrats after American Citizens voted not to allow gay marriage in their states. Liberal Judicial Activist Judges, some gay themselves, began striking down the referendums passed in individual states, finally leading to a ruling by the United States Supreme Court.
During the Trump Administration, Judicial Activists attempted to thwart some of the actions taken of behalf of the American People by our President, such as their attempts to stop the Travel Ban, designed to keep those who would seek to do Americans harm out of our Sovereign Nation.
According to Founding Father Alexander Hamilton, in the following Federalist Paper, Americans have nothing to fear from the Judiciary when they act alone. It’s when they act in concert with others, such as Liberal Politicians in Congress, that Americans need to be afraid.
From The Federalist #78
Whoever attentively considers the different departments of power must perceive, that, in a government in which they are separated from each other, the judiciary, from the nature of its functions, will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution; because it will be least in a capacity to annoy or injure them. The Executive not only dispenses the honors, but holds the sword of the community. The legislature not only commands the purse, but prescribes the rules by which the duties and rights of every citizen are to be regulated. The judiciary, on the contrary, has no influence over either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society; and can take no active resolution whatever. It may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments.
As the 2022 Midterm Elections loom in the distance, we, as Americans, must remember that the Majority Party in both houses of Congress and the President are the ones who will shape our Judicial System for decades to come.
That is why we must get out and vote when the time comes.
However, what we can do right now, is let our Republican Representatives and Senators know that not only must they hold the line on keeping the Supreme Court just the way it is, they also must sway at least 3 “Moderate Democratic Representatives to vote with them.
If the Republicans do not prevent the Democrats’ attempt to pack the Supreme Court, our Judiciary will change from one which interprets and enforces the Constitution to one which rewrites and ignores it, while ensuring that Democrats remain in power in Washington, D.C. in perpetuity.
This must not be allowed to happen.
We must, once again, rise up, speak out, and let the Democrat Elite know that we are not going to allow them to “radically change” our Sovereign Nation, like we did on November 8, 2016.
Our future as a Constitutional Republic depends on it.
Until He Comes,
DONATIONS ARE WELCOME AND APPRECIATED.
Make a one-time donation
Make a monthly donation
Make a yearly donation
Choose an amount
Or enter a custom amount
Your contribution is appreciated.
Your contribution is appreciated.
Your contribution is appreciated.DonateDonate monthlyDonate yearly
Nadler insisted on Face the Nation that all “relevant witnesses must be heard” — meaning their witnesses. Yet, if allowing witnesses meant Hunter Biden being called, he suggested that they would reject any deal — and any witnesses. He dismissed any negotiation as a cover up: “Any Republican senator who says there should be no witnesses, or even that witnesses should be negotiated, is part of the cover-up.” – Jonathan Turley
There is a reason that Jerry Nadler and the Democrats do not want Hunter Biden to be questioned by President Trump’s Legal Team.
It could bring down an entire Administration…and it would not be President Trump’s.
Breitbart.com reports that
Hunter Biden, son of 2020 presidential candidate Joe Biden, has come under scrutiny for his business links to Ukrainian natural gas firm Burisma while his father was vice president.
Now, a new book by author Peter Schweizer reveals Hunter Biden forged other business deals with individuals and entities tied with the governments of Russia, China, and Kazakhstan, that reportedly scored him hundreds of millions of dollars.
The book, titled Profiles in Corruption: Abuse of Power by America’s Progressive Elite., lays out how Hunter Biden and his business partners, in addition to his numerous Rosemont-branded entities and ventures, was deeply involved with an entity called the Burnham Financial Group.
Hunter and his business partner, Devon Archer, used Burnham to make foreign deals with governments and oligarchs, according to a copy of the book viewed by Breitbart News.
One of those oligarchs included Nurlan Abduov, the associate of another Kazakh oligarch, Kenges Rakishev. Rakishev is the son-in-law of the former vice prime minister of Kazakhstan, Imangali Tasmagambetov. Tasmagamvetov was also formerly the defense minister, and is now the Kazakh ambassador to Russia.
According to the book, an account Hunter regularly received funds from showed money arriving from a firm run by Rakishev in 2014:
“A Morgan Stanley investment account from which Hunter regularly received funds shows money arriving from mysterious sources around the world. There is a $142,300 deposit in April 2014 from Kazakh oligarch–controlled Novatus Holdings. Kenges Rakishev, whose father-in-law is the former vice prime minister of Kazakhstan and a close ally of Kazakh dictator Nursultan
Nazarbayev, runs the offshore firm.
While Burnham received funds from Kazakh oligarchs, Archer acted as a backchannel between Kazakhstan to then-Secretary of State John Kerry, according to the book. (Kerry’s stepson Chris Heinz was a business partner with Biden and Archer in some of their ventures).”
In a July 11, 2013, email, Kerry’s chief of staff David Wade wrote to Archer:
“Devon: understand you spoke to the Secretary re having him call [Kazakh] Foreign Minister Idrisov today, can you let me know topics Idrisov wants to talk about/any requests he’ll have of the boss, so we can get paper prepared for a call. Hopefully, the situation on the home front will leave him time to do it.”
Burnham also had business deals with two mysterious Chinese companies — Kirin Global Enterprses Limited and Harvest Global Investors, according to the book.
Kirin Global Enterprise Limited was an investment vehicle run by Xiangyao (or Yaojun) “Larry” Liu and Guo Jianfeng, according to Schweizer. “Very little is known about Kirin or its two principals, other than the fact that they invest heavily in mainland Chinese real estate,” he writes. Harvest Global Investors was a Chinese investment firm linked to the government in Beijing.
Burnham also had a financial relationship with Russian Oligarch Yelena Baturina, a billionaire with extensive political connections in Moscow and links to Russian organized crime, according to Schweizer. Archer said Baturina invested $200 million into “various investment funds” with which he was involved.
Burnham also got wrapped up in a $60 million fraudulent bond scheme to rip off union pension funds and the poorest Indian tribe in America, the Oglala Sioux, Schweizer writes.
In May 2016, Archer was arrested in New York and charged with “orchestrating a scheme to defraud investors and a Native American tribal entity of tens of millions of dollars.”
Some of the targeted were government employee or labor union organizations that had supported Joe Biden in the past. Biden has long described himself as a “union man.”
Although Hunter Biden was not charged, Schweizer writes, “his fingerprints were all over Burnham.” The legitimacy that his name and political status as the vice president’s son lent to Burnham was brought up repeatedly during the trial, he writes.
That status was used as a means of both recruiting pension money into the scheme and alleviating investors’ concerns, he writes. In an August 2014 email, Jason Galanis, who was convicted in the bond scheme, agreed that Burnham had “value beyond capital” because of their political connections.
Hunter Biden had an office at Burnham’s New York City offices on Fifty-Seventh Street, and during the trial, numerous witnesses came forward describing Hunter’s involvement with the firm, according to the book.
Schweizer writes these deals have long been a pattern with the Biden family, to include Hunter Biden:
“With the election of his father as vice president, Hunter Biden launched businesses fused to his father’s power that led him to lucrative deals with a rogue’s gallery of governments and oligarchs around the world. Sometimes he would hitch a prominent ride with his father aboard Air Force Two to visit a country where he was courting business. Other times, the deals would be done more discreetly. Always they involved foreign entities that appeared to be seeking something from his father. Often, the countries in question, including Ukraine, Russia, and Kazakhstan, had highly corrupt political cultures.”
In short, Hunter Biden was not cutting business deals in Japan or Great Britain, where disclosure rules and corporate governance might require greater scrutiny. These were deals in the truly dark corners of the world.
If you have been wondering why the Democrats have been arguing that Hunter Biden is irrelevant to their Impeachment of President Trump, the above article should have answered your questions.
Hunter Biden was the point of the spear in a Foreign Policy scandal which is just a small part of what will go down as the most corrupt Presidential Administration in history, making the Warren G. Harding Teapot Dome Scandal pale in comparison.
All of this boggles the mind. Think about it:
The Clinton Foundation Pay-for-Play
The Bidens’ misuse of the power of the Vice-President for personal gain
President Barack Hussein Obama’s $150 billion bribe of the murderous Mullahs of Iran which included hosting Radical Islamists like the late (Thank God) Gen. Quassem Soleimani at the White House
The trading of Muslim Terrorists for the traitorous Bowe Berdahl
What if this whole continuous attack on President Trump…the Special Counsel’s “Russian Collusion” investigation and the hurried Democratic House Impeachment are all part of a strategy to cover up the out-of-control corruption, both foreign and domestic, which took place during the Obama Administration with the knowledge and consent of President Barack Hussein Obama, himself?
That would certainly explain the Democrats’ over-the-top reaction to losing the 2016 Presidential Election and their vicious rhetoric and unconstitutional political actions and schemes since.
If the House Democrats continue to insist today in attempting to bully the Senate into calling witnesses against President Trump, then as Senator Ted Cruz has said, for each Democrat Witness that it allow, a corresponding Witness for the Defense MUST be allowed to testify.
Time timing of the release of this information about the Bidens’ criminality certainly favors the Presidents’ case for asking for information from the President of Ukraine.
President Trump was right all along.
I have this feeling that things are about to get very interesting and this could be the start of something BIG.
Until He Comes,
The Democrats have not made the case that he did anything illegal, cheated or stole or whatever else in Ukraine. And, by the way, the American people are perfectly capable of understanding, “Wait a minute. I thought this was all about Russia. Now you’re saying that the guy committed an impeachable offense in a phone call to Ukraine, and we’ve seen the transcript,” and still in all of this, you can’t go ask anybody, what did Trump do and have anybody tell you.
I’m telling you, this has been a giant bomb, because all it has been is an effort to convince the American people that Trump didn’t deserve to win in 2016, and they haven’t made that case. They haven’t made the case that the election of 2016 should be overturned. They were never gonna be able to make that case, and they haven’t even come close to it. They’re flailing, folks. It’s embarrassing. – Rush Limbaugh, 12/10/19
FoxNews.com reports that
Rep. Debbie Dingell, D-Mich., said that while she is worried about division within the nation, it is “highly unlikely” she will vote against impeaching President Trump.
On Tuesday morning, House Democrats unveiled articles of impeachment against the president, alleging abuse of power and obstruction of Congress regarding his interactions with Ukraine.
Appearing on “America’s Newsroom” with hosts Bill Hemmer and Heather Childers, Dingell echoed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s, D-Calif., statements that it is a “sad day for our country.”
Dingell said that, while she is waiting to read the formal recommendations by the House Judiciary Committee, she thinks there has been a “lot of evidence that the president did hold up money to the Ukraine that had been appropriated by the Congress in exchange for investigating a potential political candidate.”
“I was elected to protect our Constitution and our democracy,” the congresswoman continued. “And, that’s what my vote is going to reflect. Have we in some way endangered our national security? And I think things that I’ve seen and the obstruction of justice lead me to be very concerned.”
She added that her voting “no” on impeachment is probably “highly unlikely,” but that she thinks it’s a “very individual moral decision.”
“I’m worried about interference on our next election,” she said.
Meantime, a new poll showed support for impeachment going down among voters in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Impeachment and removal is opposed by 50.8 percent of voters in Michigan, 52.2 percent of voters in Pennsylvania, and 57.9 percent of voters in Wisconsin, according to the Firehouse/Optimus December Battleground State Poll.
Dingell responded by saying she “wasn’t elected to do what was popularly right.”
“I did not come out for impeachment last summer when everybody else around me was. And, as I’ve said before, Tom Steyer bought 40 ads against me, because I am worried about how divided the country is.”
I am sure that she is because WashingtonTimes.com reports that the majority of Americans do not want our 45th President impeached.
A majority of Americans now oppose impeaching and removing President Trump from office, according to a new Quinnipiac University poll Tuesday that signals Democrats’ month of hearings to make their case has failed.
Quinnipiac found 51% of registered voters surveyed said they don’t want to see the president ousted through impeachment. That’s the first time the number has been above 50% since before Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced an impeachment inquiry in late September.
Another 45% do want to see the president impeached and forced out.
So, a majority of Americans, as confirmed by the two polls above, do not believe the B.S. which the Democrats have been continuously shoveling toward the American public for the last 3 years.
I’m betting that a lot of the House Dems representing Red Districts are extremely nervous right now.
In fact, there is a story going around that 15-20 of the House Dems are seriously thinking about voting no in impeaching Trump.
That places Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi in quite a dilemma.
I do not believe that Pelosi and the rest of the old guard Democrats in the House, with the exclusion of Schiff and Nadler, actually wanted to impeach Trump in the first place.
Sure, they mouthed off about it a lot but that was just to get millenials’ support.
The Squad and the rest of the young Marxists among them forced the issue, putting continuous pressure on Pelosi, Stoyer, and the rest until they were forced into this laughable attempt at Impeachment which resulted in two very weak charges, or Articles of Impeachment.
The Democrats know that they do not stand a snowball’s chance in Hell of getting the Senate to impeach Trump.
So, Pelosi now has to figure out the best way to somehow “save face”.
Her options are to allow the vote to fail or to somehow muster the votes to pass it and sent it to the Senate where the Republican majority will either dismiss it or acquit the President after a Senate Trial.
Congress is now sitting at 9% popularity rating due to the self-centered political chicanery of the Democrats.
With the stupid political strategy of not doing anything for their constituents which they have displayed since Donald J. Trump was elected President, it is a wonder that their popularity is not polling in negative numbers.
They have dug their own hole and it could not happen to a more deserving bunch of popinjays.
Until He Comes,
Would you like a Kleenex, Congressman Schiff?
FoxNews.com reports that
Democrats in Congress attacked Attorney General William Barr Wednesday evening ahead of the Justice Department’s planned release of a redacted version of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and allegations of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian officials.
Barr is set to hold a 9:30 a.m. news conference Thursday accompanied by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who oversaw the Mueller investigation after the special counsel’s appointment in May 2017. Neither Mueller nor other members of his team will attend, according to special counsel spokesman Peter Carr. Democrats have criticized the timing of the news conference, saying that Barr would get to present his interpretation of the Mueller report before Congress and the public see it.
At a news conference Wednesday evening, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., said the panel was expected to receive a copy of the report between 11 a.m. and noon, “well after the attorney general’s 9:30 a.m. press conference. This is wrong.”
“The attorney general appears to be waging a media campaign on behalf of President Trump, the very subject of the investigation at the heart of the Mueller report,” Nadler told reporters. “Rather than letting the facts of the report speak for themselves, the attorney general has taken unprecedented steps to spin Mueller’s nearly two-year investigation.”
Hakeem Jeffries, another member of the Judiciary Committee and the chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, accused Barr — whom Jeffries dubbed the “so-called Attorney General” of “presiding over a dog and pony show.
“Here is a thought,” Jeffries added. “Release the Mueller report tomorrow morning and keep your mouth shut. You have ZERO credibility.”
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., tweeted that Barr “has thrown out his credibility & the DOJ’s independence with his single-minded effort to protect @realDonaldTrump above all else. The American people deserve the truth, not a sanitized version of the Mueller Report approved by the Trump Admin.”
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said, “The process is poisoned before the report is even released.”
“Barr shouldn’t be spinning the report at all, but it’s doubly outrageous he’s doing it before America is given a chance to read it,” Schumer added.
Democrats were further angered Wednesday by a New York Times report which said Justice Department officials have had “numerous conversations with White House lawyers” about Mueller’s conclusions, which have aided the president’s legal team as it prepares a rebuttal to the special counsel’s report. The Times report has not been independently confirmed by Fox News.
Late Wednesday, Nadler and four other Democratic committee chairs released a joint statement calling on Barr to cancel the Thursday morning news conference, calling it “unnecessary and inappropriate.”
“He [Barr] should let the full report speak for itself, read the statement from Nadler, Adam Schiff, D-Calif., Elijah Cummings, D-Md., Maxine Waters, D-Calif., and Eliot Engel, D-N.Y. “The Attorney General should cancel the press conference and provide the full report to Congress, as we have requested. With the Special Counsel’s fact-gathering work concluded, it is now Congress’ responsibility to assess the findings and evidence and proceed accordingly.”
In court filings in the case against Roger Stone on Wednesday, the Justice Department also said it planned to provide a “limited number” of members of Congress and their staff access to a copy of the Mueller report with fewer redactions than the public version.
Nadler claimed Wednesday evening that the Judiciary Committee “has no knowledge of this and this should not be read as any agreement or knowledge or assent on our part.”
Nadler added that he would “probably find it useful” to call Mueller and members of his team to testify after reading the version of the report Barr releases.
The report is expected to reveal what Mueller uncovered about ties between the Trump campaign and Russia that fell short of criminal conduct. And, it likely will lay out the special counsel’s conclusions about formative episodes in Trump’s presidency, including his firing of FBI Director James Comey; his request of Comey to end an investigation into Trump’s first national security adviser, Michael Flynn; his relentless badgering of former Attorney General Jeff Sessions over his recusal from the Russia investigation; and his role in drafting an explanation about a meeting his oldest son took at Trump Tower with a Kremlin-connected lawyer.
The report is not expected to place the president in legal jeopardy, as Barr made his own decision that Trump shouldn’t be prosecuted for obstruction. But it is likely to contain unflattering details about the president’s efforts to control the Russia investigation
Overall, Mueller brought charges against 34 people — including six Trump aides and advisers — and revealed a sophisticated, wide-ranging Russian effort to influence the 2016 presidential election. Twenty-five of those charged were Russians accused either in the hacking of Democratic email accounts or of a hidden but powerful social media effort to spread disinformation online.
Five former Trump aides or advisers pleaded guilty and agreed to cooperate in Mueller’s investigation, including former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, former national security adviser Michael Flynn and his former personal lawyer, Michael Cohen. Stone is awaiting trial on charges including false statements and obstruction.
I am shocked. Shocked, I tell you.
How dare Attorney General Barr hold a press conference before allowing Congress to see the redacted Mueller Report.
Why…why…it is almost as if he is the top legal authority in America…or something.
Doesn’t he know that the Legislative Branch actually governs our Sovereign Nation and not the Executive Branch?
After all, Speaker of the House Pelosi has been telling everyone who will listen, including our European Allies, that she is the president’s co-equal.
Even though she’s not.
Seriously, have you ever seen a bunch of unscrupulous political hacks attempt to make something out of nothing simply because they are sore losers?
The entire country has figured out that President Trump did not “collude” with the Russians.
The neverending bad behavior of the Democrats reminds me of the old saying
If your enemy is digging himself a hole, hand him another shovel.
Let them rant.
Congress already has horrible popularity poll numbers. Instead of continuing to try to undo the results of the 2016 Presidential Election, shouldn’t they actually be trying to pass laws to improve the lives of the American People?
I guess not. That would be too much like “right”.
Yesterday, I saw a Fox News Poll in which 4 out of 10 Americans believed that the Trump Campaign was spied upon by the FBI and DOJ under the Obama Administration.
What are the House Democrats going to do when AG Barr begins that investigation, as he has promised to?
Tell him that he can’t?
Good luck with that.
Today and the days to follow should be very interesting.
Pass the popcorn.
Until He Comes,