Tag: Rep. Jerry Nadler

Nadler:…”God’s Will is of No Concern to This Congress”…So We Noticed

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, PoliticsLeave a comment
See the source image

The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity. I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God. – John Adams, 2nd President of the United States of America

ToddStarnes.com reports that

Rep. Greg Steube (R-FL) triggered a bunch of God-hating Democrats after he pointed out that God makes people uniquely male or female.

“When men or women claim to be able to choose their own sexual identity, they are making a statement that God did not know what he was doing when he created them,” the congressman said.

Steube accused Democrats of trying to define what it means to be male or female.

“The gender confusion that exists in our culture today is a clear rejection of God’s good design. Whenever a nation’s laws no longer reflect the standards of God that nation is in rebellion against him and will inevitably bear the consequences,” the congressman said. “We are seeing the consequences of rejecting God here in our country today.”

That comment drew a fiery response from Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY).

“What any religious tradition describes as God’s will is no concern of this Congress,” added New York Democrat Jerry Nadler.

Democrat Katherine Clark, of Massachusetts, hit out at any member of Congress who “describe transgender people as something less-than, as underserving, and illegitimate”.

May God have mercy on our nation and may He protect us from these godless, heathen Democrats.

Boys and girls, we really should not be surprised by the idiotic statement by Rep. Jerry Nadler.

For what now seems like an eternity, those on the Left side (along with some of those who claim to be on the Right Side) of the Political Aisle, have focused their attention on “radically changing” America.

They soon realized that they simply could not do it through popular culture and educational indoctrination, inundating America’s children with both overt and subliminal imaging designed to countermand the Traditional American Values that they were being raised with, in normal American Households, out here in “Flyover Country”, otherwise known as America’s Heartland…or “the Red States”.

Modern Liberals soon figured out that the way to program Americans into believing that “all paths lead to God” and that cradle-to-grave Nanny-State Government were the new American Standards for living our daily lives, was to turn Christian American Houses of Worship away from being instructors of the Word of God and a sanctuary in which to worship Our Creator, to, instead, being purveyors of the joys of Popular Culture. Wednesday Night Bible Studies were soon replaced by Yoga Classes and Encounter Groups. Religious Leaders were soon quoting philosophy, instead of the Bible in their Sunday Morning Sermons.

And, instead of taking a stand against those things of the world which were directly opposed to what is found in God’s Word, these “new, enlightened” churches started standing up for the “right” of a woman to have her baby prematurely yanked out of her womb with a set of tongs, standing up for the right of Adam to “marry” Steve, when the Bible states that marriage is between a man and a woman, and standing up for the equality of all faiths, when the Son of God firmly states, in John 14:6, that

I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

So, when is all this Christianity in America going to “fade away” as predicted and hoped for by “the Smartest People in the Room”?

As polls have shown…not any time soon.

America remains a nation whose population consists of 70-75%, who proclaim Jesus Christ as their Personal Savior and 92%, who believe in God.

However, if you read some of the comments posted on Websites and Facebook Political Pages, by self-appointed “pundits”, you would think that Christian Americans are the minority in this nation.

I can testify from personal experience, having caught flack for sticking to my Christian American Conservative Principles, since beginning my daily posts on this blog in April of 2010.

My posts, concerning American Christianity, seem to “touch a nerve” in both Liberals and Atheists, alike. (But, in at least some cases, I repeat myself.)

Their reaction has hardly been unexpected.

Of course, one of the Hot Button Issues, which those Liberals and Atheists who responded, over the years, immediately denied, was that our Founding Fathers were Christians and that our country was founded on a Judeo-Christian Belief System.

Evidently, they had never read anything, except what their like-minded, non-believing soothsayers, allowed them to. Or else, they would have read historical documents like President George Washington’s Thanksgiving Day Proclamation, written on November 1, 1777, and found at wallbuilders.com:

The committee appointed to prepare a recommendation to the several states, to set apart a day of public thanksgiving, brought in a report; which was taken into consideration, and agreed to as follows:

Forasmuch as it is the indispensable duty of all men to adore the superintending providence of Almighty God; to acknowledge with gratitude their obligation to him for benefits received, and to implore such farther blessings as they stand in need of; and it having pleased him in his abundant mercy not only to continue to us the innumerable bounties of his common providence, but also smile upon us in the prosecution of a just and necessary war, for the defense and establishment of our unalienable rights and liberties; particularly in that he hath been pleased in so great a measure to prosper the means used for the support of our troops and to crown our arms with most signal success:

It is therefore recommended to the legislative or executive powers of these United States, to set apart Thursday, the 18th day of December next, for solemn thanksgiving and praise; that with one heart and one voice the good people may express the grateful feelings of their hearts, and consecrate themselves to the service of their divine benefactor; and that together with their sincere acknowledgments and offerings, they may join the penitent confession of their manifold sins, whereby they had forfeited every favor, and their humble and earnest supplication that it may please God, through the merits of Jesus Christ, mercifully to forgive and blot them out of remembrance; that it may please him graciously to afford his blessings on the governments of these states respectively, and prosper the public council of the whole; to inspire our commanders both by land and sea, and all under them, with that wisdom and fortitude which may render them fit instruments, under the providence of Almighty God, to secure for these United States the greatest of all blessings, independence and peace; that it may please him to prosper the trade and manufactures of the people and the labor of the husbandman, that our land may yield its increase; to take schools and seminaries of education, so necessary for cultivating the principles of true liberty, virtue and piety, under his nurturing hand, and to prosper the means of religion for the promotion and enlargement of that kingdom which consisteth in righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Ghost.

And it is further recommended, that servile labor, and such recreation as, though at other times innocent, may be unbecoming the purpose of this appointment, be omitted on so solemn an occasion.

Of course, the Poster Boy for the claim by Liberal/Atheist responders, concerning the Founders’ lack of Christianity, is Thomas Jefferson.

Atheists like to bring up the fact that he wrote a version of the Bible which left out Christ’s miracles. What they are reluctant to do, though, is explain why he wrote his book that way. David Barton explains on wallbuilders.com:

The reader [of a newspaper article which Barton is replying to], as do many others, claimed that Jefferson omitted all miraculous events of Jesus from his “Bible.” Rarely do those who make this claim let Jefferson speak for himself. Jefferson’s own words explain that his intent for that book was not for it to be a “Bible,” but rather for it to be a primer for the Indians on the teachings of Christ (which is why Jefferson titled that work, “The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth”). What Jefferson did was to take the “red letter” portions of the New Testament and publish these teachings in order to introduce the Indians to Christian morality. And as President of the United States, Jefferson signed a treaty with the Kaskaskia tribe wherein he provided—at the government’s expense—Christian missionaries to the Indians. In fact, Jefferson himself declared, “I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus.” While many might question this claim, the fact remains that Jefferson called himself a Christian, not a deist.

Atheist Activists and young and/or misinformed Liberals and self-proclaimed “Libertarians” (but, in a lot of cases, I repeat myself), who reply to my posts, insist that Crosses and other Christian symbols have no place in the Public Square.

Relying on Far Left Ideologues or their own opinion as their “highest authority”, they continue their push to eliminate the practice of American Christianity and the Traditional American Morality and Ethics which go with it from Everyday American Life, attempting to regulate Christians’ role in American Society as remaining unseen and unheard from, worshiping in private, on Sunday mornings, only.

Or, as Actor and Professional Wrestler Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson would say, Modern American Liberals want American Christians to

Sit down, shut up, and know your role!

Unfortunately for them, our Constitution and the Bill of Rights reinforced our rights as Americans to practice our Faith as We see fit. 

The First Amendment to the Constitution still holds.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Being filled with human beings, America’s churches have made a lot of mistakes, However, they have also done a lot of good in the Name of the Lord.

Churches today have to walk a fine line.

The spiritual battle raging between the influence of American Popular Culture and those seeking the Will of God in their lives, takes all the strength…and prayer, that Christians can muster.

Modern Liberals seem to have great difficulty comprehending the role which Our Creator, the God of Abraham, played and plays in this Grand Experiment, known as the United States of America.

Why have Liberals ratcheted up their anti-Christian Vitriol and Negativity since January 21, 2009?

Why are they so focused on removing America’s Christian Heritage?

Well, as is usually my wont, I have been doing some “reckoning” about this.

It seems to this ol’ Southern Boy, living here in the Heartland, that America’s Christian Heritage and the very real fact of His influence in building and shaping America’s growth into the greatest country on the face of God’s Green Earth, not only stifles and interferes with Modern Liberals’ “anything goes”, “share the wealth”, “hive-mind”, “36 genders”, “man is his own god” Political Ideology, but the reality of God’s very existence, somewhere deep in their miserable, bitter psyches, scares the mess out of them.

Why else would they be trying so hard to fight against the influence of Someone Whom they really don’t believe in?

And, a second and final thought, found in the Word of God, occurred to me while watching “Chair” Jerry Nadler act like the south end of a north-bound mule

The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds; there is none who does good. – Psalms 14:1

Until He Comes,

KJ

AG Barr to Dems on House Judiciary Committee: “This is a Hearing…I Thought I Was the One Who Was Supposed to be Heard?” Why Were the Dems Afraid?

On By kingsjesterIn PoliticsLeave a comment

untitled (324)

https://twitter.com/dbongino/status/1288261161406865409?s=20

FoxNews.com reports that

Attorney General Bill Barr clashed with Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee Tuesday over accusations that he is carrying out President Trump’s political wishes, as he appeared for a long-awaited hearing where tensions also flared over protests and riots following George Floyd’s death in police custody.

The hearing, originally scheduled for 10 a.m. local time, was delayed after committee chairman Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., was in a car accident. Nadler did not suffer any injuries.

Once the hearing, which lasted until mid-afternoon, Nadler did not hesitate to express his scorn for Barr and his Justice Department.

“Thank you for being here, Mr. Barr,” Nadler said with a note of sarcasm, pointing out that this was the attorney general’s first time appearing before the committee.

The chairman went on to claim that Barr and his department have “downplayed the effects of systemic racism” in the wake of Floyd’s death and ongoing protests.

Addressing the department’s approach to cases related to the Russia probe, Nadler summed up the DOJ’s attitude by claiming that “the president’s enemies will be punished, his friends will be protected,” no matter the cost, and saying that the DOJ’s actions have caused “real damage to our democratic norms.”

“In your time at the department, you have aided and abetted the worst failings of the president,” Nadler said.

Ranking member Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, fired back in his opening that Democrats’ hostility toward Barr is based on one thing: “Spying.”

Jordan said that Democrats took exception to Barr accusing the Obama administration of spying on the Trump campaign, despite evidence that has come out revealing flaws in the FBI’s process in acquiring a warrant to monitor former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.

Jordan also pointed to evidence that the FBI engaged in questionable tactics in investigating Michael Flynn, whose criminal case the DOJ requested be dismissed. At another point in the hearing, Barr affirmed earlier reporting that he has appointed U.S. Attorney John Bash of the Western District of Texas to investigate the practice of “unmasking” Americans who have had conversations with foreign officials.

Jordan then addressed the ongoing unrest in the U.S., showing a lengthy montage of media clips that began with reporters calling the incidents “peaceful protests” and then going into a string of clips of violence and fires in various parts of the country.

Barr, speaking next with his opening remarks, did not shy away from Democrats’ accusations against him. He insisted that he acts independently of the president and that his goal is to make sure that everyone is treated equally under the law.

He emphatically stated that Trump “has not attempted to interfere” in decisions regarding the handling of criminal matters.

“On the contrary, he has told me from the start that he expects me to exercise my independent judgment to make whatever call I think is right,” he continued. “That is precisely what I have done.”

Barr also addressed the racial tension following Floyd’s death. While acknowledging the tragedy, he defended the criminal justice system by arguing that in the past 50 years progress has been made and that any racism on the part of individual officers is not due to “some deep-seated racism generally infecting our police departments.” He noted that “[p]olice forces today are far more diverse than ever before.”

The attorney general responded by recent calls to defund police as “grossly irresponsible.”

Barr also spoke out against “violent rioters and anarchists” that he said have “hijacked legitimate protests,” specifically mentioning the ongoing unrest in Portland as an example.

The Trump administration has been blasted in the media for sending federal officers in to quell the unrest, but Barr defended the effort, arguing that these are not peaceful protests, but “an assault on the Government of the United States.” He described the weapons that some demonstrators have used, and noted that a federal courthouse has been under siege.

The tension only escalated once the questioning began, with Nadler implying that Barr was using federal forces responding to unrest to provide material to aid Trump’s campaign.

When asked if he has discussed the campaign with Trump, Barr answered sharply, stating, “I’m a member of the Cabinet and there’s an election going on, obviously the topic comes up,” adding that “it shouldn’t be a surprise.”

Nadler later accused Barr of using federal forces to provide Trump with footage for campaign ads. When Barr tried to respond and say that he was not using federal law enforcement to help Trump’s campaign, Nadler spoke over him.

Later in the hearing, Barr got an opportunity to explain federal activities in Portland.

“Federal courts are under attack. Since when is it OK to burn down a federal court?” Barr said.

He said: “If someone went down the street to the Prettyman Court here, that beautiful courthouse we have right at the bottom of the hill and started breaking windows and firing industrial-grade fireworks in to start a fire, throw kerosene balloons in and start fires in the court, is that OK? Is that OK now? No, the U.S. Marshals have a duty to stop that and defend the courthouse, and that’s what we are doing in Portland. We are at the courthouse, defending the courthouse.”

“We are not out looking for trouble.”

At another point in the hearing, Barr lamented that only one political party seemed to be sticking up for federal property and condemning mobs.

“What makes me concerned for the country is this is the first time in my memory that the leaders of one of our two great political parties, the democratic party are not coming out and condemning mob violence and the attack on federal courts,” Barr said. “Why can’t we just say, you know, violence against federal courts has to stop? Could we hear something like that?”

Barr also had an opportunity to explain his positions in the Michael Flynn and Roger Stone cases, and launched an impassioned defense against the accusations that he has treated the president’s friends with particular and improper favor and gone after his enemies.

…The hearing was also full of tension between Barr and Democratic lawmakers as they fought to speak over one another. The questioning from Reps. Lou Correa, D-Calif., and Mary Gay Scanlon, D-Pa., became particularly heated as kept trying to respond to their comments.

“This is a hearing,” Barr said. “I thought I was the one who was supposed to be heard?”

Jordan came to Barr’s defense when he questioned Nadler on why he was permitting Democratic lawmakers to interrupt the attorney general and not let him respond to questions.

“For months you’ve tried to get the attorney to come,” Jordan told Nadler. “He’s here. Why don’t you let him speak? Why don’t you let him answer the questions?”

Jordan continued: “If you want the attorney general to come at least let him answer the accusations made against him…Time after time you refuse to let the attorney general answer the questions posed to him.“

I thought that AG Barr did a very good job yesterday.

The Democrats in the Judicial Committee did everything that they could to try to rattle him and get him to explode and be unprofessional,

They also knew that, if they let him answer that he would have made them look like the fanatical idiots that they are.

The problem is, by not letting him answer, they achieved the same outcome.

Average Americans were remarking all over Social Media yesterday about how badly the Dems were treating the Attorney General.

If they hoped that yesterday’s Inquisition was going to help the poor impression that average Americans already had of them, they overestimated themselves.

Their support of the rioters…err…”peaceful protesters” did not help the public’s perception of them, either.

The reason that the Democratic Elite refuse to condemn the rioters is the fact that hey are afraid of losing their positions within they political party if they don’t.

Their party chairman, Tom Perez, is a radical…a Latino Activist.

And, don’t forget about “The Squad” and their supporters.

Not to mention the fact that the money behind Antifa and BLM also lines the pockets of the Democrat Elite.

The fact is the Democrats would love to see this country become a “Socialist Paradise”.

The, they could grow even richer, just like the members of the Soviet Politburo did.

And, if those who enforce or laws are “defunded”, who would be left to stop them?

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Fired SDNY U.S. Atty Berman to Appear Before Nadler’s Judicial Committee, Is Nadler Trying to Get Out in Front of the Durham Report?

On By kingsjesterIn PoliticsLeave a comment

105910077-1557764670534img_3353

“We cannot rely on an election to solve our problems, when the president threatens the very integrity of that election,” House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y.

FoxNews.com reports that

Former Southern District of New York U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman will testify next week before the House Judiciary committee in a closed door hearing – just weeks after President Trump fired him.

Berman will appear before the Democrat-led House committee next Thursday, Fox News is told.

Attorney General William Barr informed Berman late last month that he was fired from his post as U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York.

At the time, Barr said he asked Trump to fire Berman after the Manhattan federal prosecutor said Friday he planned to stay on the job against the Trump Administration’s wishes.

“Unfortunately, with your statement of last night, you have chosen public spectacle over public service,” Barr said in the letter. “Because you have declared that you have no intention of resigning, I have asked the President to remove you as of today, and he has done so.”

Barr said Deputy U.S. Attorney Audrey Strauss was appointed to take over until a permanent successor is in place.

Berman’s appearance next week will be the latest event in a highly publicized feud between the former U.S. attorney and the Trump administration.

Barr and the White House announced in June that Trump will nominate Jay Clayton, the current chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), to replace Berman. But Berman, whose office has been a thorn in Trump’s side, said he learned of his “departure” from Barr’s press release and had no intention of leaving the job.

Barr initially said the U.S. attorney in New Jersey, Craig Carpenito, would take over on an acting basis beginning July 3 until Jay Clayton’s SEC confirmation. But Barr switched gears afterwards by announcing Strauss would manage the SDNY in the interim.

Democrats accused the Trump administration of trying to shut down Berman, who is leading investigations into the president’s allies.

“The president has doubled down on his fixer’s obstruction of investigations into him and his allies,” said Rep. Val Demings, D-Fla., a contender to be Joe Biden’s vice-presidential pick. “It is clear that nothing will restrain his corruption. No one is above the law. The American people will have their say.”

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., who helped prosecute the Trump impeachment case before the Senate, announced his committee will launch an investigation into Berman’s ouster, saying it “smacks of corruption and incompetence.”

The Southern District has prosecuted a number of Trump associates, including the president’s former personal lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen, who served a prison sentence for lying to Congress and campaign finance crimes. The office has also been investigating Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani’s business dealings, including whether he failed to register as a foreign agent, people familiar with the probe told The Associated Press.

Berman has also overseen the prosecution of two Florida businessmen, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, who were associates of Giuliani and tied to the Ukraine impeachment investigation. The men were charged in October with federal campaign finance violations, including hiding the origin of a $325,000 donation to a group supporting Trump’s reelection.

Former Trump national security adviser John Bolton said that Trump sought to interfere in a Southern District investigation into the Turkish Halkbank in an effort to cut deals with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.

Congressman Jerry Nadler absolutely despises President Trump.

For those of you who do not know how the roots of this hatred…

It began in 1985, when Nadler was a New York State assemblyman. The (Washington) Post reported that Trump, at the time, purchased property in Nadler’s district and wanted to build a development, which he reportedly wanted to call “Television City.” But Nadler wanted the property, which was a former railroad yard, to be upgraded instead. Nadler reportedly blocked Trump from public funds and mortgage insurance.

Trump ultimately began construction on the property and worked to develop residential buildings, but in 2005, after construction delays and pushback from lawmakers, Trump reportedly sold the property for $1.8 billion.

As far as the firing of Berman is concerned…

The Southern District of New York Prosecutor’s Office has been a Democratic Party stronghold for some time now.

The DOJ’s Southern District of New York Office has been the stomping grounds of several of those involved in the failed “Russia Probe” attempt to oust President Trump from office, including Former FBI Director Comey, FBI IG Horowitz, Mueller Investigator Andrew Weissman, Manhattan DA Cyrus Vance, Jr, and Daniel Goldman, who appeared as an attorney for the Democrats in the House Judiciary Committee Impeachment Inquiry Hearing.

All of them either worked in that office or had judicial standing in that district.

And, of course, they are the ones who prosecuted and convicted Roger Stone.

Isn’t it interesting that soon after Berman was fired, Ghislaine Maxwell, the girlfriend of the late, unlamented Jeffrey Epstein what finally arrested IN New Hampshire?

And, wouldn’t it be absolutely fascinating if, among the information which will be revealed when the final report is made public of U.S. Attorney John Durham’s inquiry into the Russia Investigation found a corrupt Deep State Operation within the SDNY which tied directly in to the Obama Department of Justice?

Nadler’s obsession could boomerang on him and the rest of the Democrat Elite.

Stay tuned.

Things could be getting very interesting in the very near future.

Until He Comes,

KJ

House Dems Tell Supreme Court That They are in the Middle of an “Ongoing Presidential Investigation”, Must Have Grand Jury Material From “Russia Probe”

On By kingsjesterIn PoliticsLeave a comment

untitled (317)

“The Committee’s impeachment investigation related to obstruction of justice pertaining to the Russia investigation is ongoing” Douglas Letter, House of Representatives General Counsel, Supreme Court Filing

FoxNews.com reports that

House Democrats told the Supreme Court on Monday that they are again in the midst of an “ongoing presidential impeachment investigation” as part of their “weighty constitutional responsibility” – and, the Democrats argued, redacted grand-jury material from Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s now-completed Russia probe must be turned over as a result.

Top Democrats have repeatedly suggested since President Trump was acquitted on two articles of impeachment in February that they might initiate new impeachment proceedings. In their brief with the Supreme Court, which seeks testimony, exhibits and transcripts, the Democrats promised that leaks won’t be a problem, owing to their “special protocols” that will ensure “secrecy.”

“The [House Judiciary] Committee’s investigation did not cease with the conclusion of the impeachment trial,” the Democrats told the nine justices on Monday. “If this material reveals new evidence supporting the conclusion that President Trump committed impeachable offenses that are not covered by the articles adopted by the House, the committee will proceed accordingly — including, if necessary, by considering whether to recommend new articles of impeachment.”

Specifically, the Democrats said they were looking into “the possible exercise of improper political influence over recent decisions made in the Roger Stone and Michael Flynn prosecutions, both of which were initiated by the special counsel.”

In Stone’s case, the DOJ reversed a sentencing recommendation to Judge Amy Berman Jackson by former Mueller prosecutors that Stone should receive nine years in prison for obstructing Congress and related charges, saying it was obviously too harsh; indeed, Jackson later sentenced Stone to just three years in prison.

And, the DOJ has moved to dismiss Flynn’s case entirely, citing a mountain of exculpatory material that has surfaced since his guilty plea on one count of false statements to FBI agents, even after prosecutors had assured the court they had turned over all potentially relevant documents. Neither Flynn nor Stone were accused of conspiring with Russians, despite months of unfounded speculation. (“Flynn to testify that Trump directed him to make contact with Russians: Report,” read a false 2017 CNBC headline. ABC News’ Brian Ross was suspended for the report’s inaccurate claim that then-candidate Trump had told Flynn to reach out to Moscow, which the network admitted was a “serious error.”)

Earlier this month, the DOJ filed an emergency 3 with the Supreme Court to temporarily block an order by theD.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, which held by a 2-1 vote that the government needed to turn over the grand-jury materials. The DOJ has argued that Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e) protects the secrecy of grand-jury materials and that the exception allowing the disclosure “preliminarily to or in connection with a judicial proceeding” didn’t apply, especially given Trump’s acquittal by the Senate in an impeachment trial earlier this year.

But, Democrats have argued that preliminary impeachment hearings in the House constitute a pending judicial proceeding. They emphasized in their filing with the Supreme Court on Monday that the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals explicitly agreed with them on that point.

“[B]ecause that exception encompasses impeachment proceedings and the committee has established a ‘particularized need’ for the grand jury materials, the order of the district court is affirmed,” Judge Judith Rogers wrote in the D.C. appellate court’s decision, siding with the House Democrats.

To establish a “particularized need” under existing case law, the Democrats noted, parties seeking grand-jury material under Rule 6(e) must show (1) “that the material they seek is needed to avoid a possible injustice in another judicial proceeding,” (2) “that the need for disclosure is greater than the need for continued secrecy,” and (3) “that their request is structured to cover only material so needed.”

The lower court in the case had also held that precedent supported the idea that an impeachment trial is akin to a judicial proceeding, citing a case that allowed the disclosure of grand jury material for the impeachment investigation of President Richard Nixon.

The Circuit Court also agreed that the lower court properly used its discretion in determining that the possibility of new articles of impeachment stemming from the grand jury materials satisfied the requirement for a “particularized need.”

The DOJ, however, has countered that having a court evaluate the House’s needs related to impeachment would be “in considerable tension with the House’s ‘sole Power of Impeachment’ and the Senate’s ‘sole Power to try all Impeachments,'” as laid out in the Constitution.

The Justice Department has also emphasized the need for a pause in the case. “Absent a stay of the court’s mandate, the government will have to disclose those materials on May 11, 2020, which would irrevocably lift their secrecy and possible frustrate the government’s ability to seek further review,” the DOJ wrote in their filing, explaining the necessity for the Supreme Court to step in.

But, the Democrats maintained, any delay would serve no legitimate purpose for the DOJ, and only continue to frustrate their Article I impeachment power.

…Trump has noted that no Russian collusion with his campaign was proven, and Republicans and even left-of-center commentators argued that Russian disinformation was irrelevant, given that social media and other platforms are already rife with inaccuracies.

“Before a pandemic, there was a time when we were relentlessly told to fear Russian social media accounts,” mused journalist Aaron Mate on Monday. “Their juvenile memes not only elected Trump, but also ‘sowed chaos.’ When Mueller indicted 13 Russians over it, he was hailed as a hero. Well, DOJ just dropped the case.”

What we have here, boys and girls, is the Democratic Party being so consumed by their hatred for a sitting President and those who elected him, that they are devoting their energy to a strategy to remove him from office which has failed before instead of reopening America so that its citizens may return to their jobs and provide for their families.

In a meeting of the House Judiciary Committee last December, Rep. Nadler said,

“We cannot rely on an election to solve our problems, when the president threatens the very integrity of that election.”

Nadler, Schiff, Pelosi, and the rest of the House Democrats are aware that average Americans have more important issues to deal with that their frivolous attempts at removing President Donald J. Trump from the Oval Office.

They don’t care.

Americans have seen this load of fertilizer before.

During the closing arguments of the First Impeachment Hearings, the citizens of the United States of America witnessed a bunch of lies which they had heard and seen before during the “Impeachment Inquiry” held by the House Democrats.

The House Managers, chosen by Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, repeated these lies ad infinitum in the hopes that their verbal torture would force “Moderate” Republican Senators to turn against President Donald J. Trump and to side with them and their Democrat colleagues in the Senate, instead of doing the right thing and standing in unity with their fellow Republicans and vote for dismissal of the Sham Impeachment or to acquit the President .

During their closing arguments, not only did the Democrat House Managers lie their hindquarters off, they instructed and insulted Republican Senators, telling them that they would not be doing “right” if they did not vote to impeach Trump.

Quite frankly, in this Deplorable’s eyes, Schiff, Nadler, Pelosi, Waters, Jeffries, and the rest of the House Democrats accomplished nothing by their behavior before, during, and after their Sham Impeachment except to establish themselves in the eyes of average Americans between the coasts as the “Poster Children” for the 3-year long National Temper Tantrum which began the night of November 8, 2016 when Political Outsider Donald J. Trump defeated the “Chosen One” Hillary Clinton to become the 45th President of the United States of America.

If the Democrat Elite believe that they would accomplish anything by attempting another Sham Impeachment of President Trump, they have not been paying attention.

Average Americans were not paying any attention to them at all the first time.

We watched clips of their whining on Fox News before and after WORK.

And, those Americans who began watching them, soon changed channels, as the ratings showed at the time.

From the Democratic Elite to be allowing the House Democrats to be attempting another Sham Impeachment, tells me that they know that Sleepy Joe Biden does not have a chance of being elected President this November.

I wish those affected by Trump Derangement Syndrome, like the House Democrats would work as hard to help average Americans as they do trying to overturn their 2016 President Election Votes.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Nadler Compares Trump’s Defending Himself Against House Dems After Ukraine Call to Nixon’s Actions After Watergate…Seriously?

On By kingsjesterIn PoliticsLeave a comment

gettyimages-1195479305-1-

FoxNews.com reports that

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler Thursday accused President Trump of putting his own personal interests above national security and American democracy and charged that Trump is the only president in history to violate his oath of office so flagrantly.

“No president has ever used his office to compel a foreign nation to help him cheat in our elections — prior presidents would be shocked to the core by such conduct and rightly so,” Rep. Nadler, D-N.Y., said in kicking off day two of the House impeachment managers’ opening statements.

“This conduct is not America First,” Nadler said, borrowing Trump’s campaign slogan. “It is Donald Trump first.”

Once Trump was caught pressuring Ukraine to interfere in the 2020 election by seeking investigations into Joe and Hunter Biden, he launched an unprecedented effort to stonewall Congress’ inquiry by denying documents and witnesses, Nadler charged.

“It puts even President Nixon to shame,” Nadler said.

Nadler’s tough talk set the scene for the second of three days of the House managers’ opening arguments against Trump, with a deep dive on the first article of impeachment, abuse of power.

On the first day of the opening arguments, Rep. Adam Schiff and his team used more than seven hours to make their case. That left 16 hours and 42 minutes on the opening statement clock between Thursday and Friday for the House Democrats. Then on Saturday, Trump’s lawyers take the floor.

As the public case continued before the camera, another political campaign was underway behind the scenes over the issue of calling new witnesses. Democrats are seeking four GOP senators to join them in demanding new evidence in the trial, but Republicans are actively trying to avoid any GOP defections. No new witnesses would mean a speedy trial and a quicker vote to acquit the president.

Democrats are demanding the Trump administration cough up documents they’ve withheld related to Ukraine dealings and allow testimony from new witnesses who failed to show in the House inquiry, including former National Security Adviser John Bolton.

They were especially galled that Trump was in Davos, Switzerland, earlier this week and “gloat[ing]” that he as “all the material” and the Democrats don’t, while warning that calling Bolton would be a national security risk.

“It is beyond belief — beyond belief — that the president of United States would even go to Davos in the middle of an impeachment trial, and then make statements like that to intimidate the jury, and to gloat over the fact that he has not turned documents over,” Sen. Tom Udall, D-N.M., said Thursday.

Some GOP senators have promoted witness reciprocity and called for Hunter Biden to testify about what he was doing on the board of the Ukraine energy company Burisma.

“Hunter Biden is a material witness, and if we’re going to call witnesses, I want to see him on the stand and those questions need to be asked,” Sen. Joshua Hawley, R-Mo., said Thursday.

After opening statements from both sides, there will be another vote on whether to allow for new witnesses and documents in the coming days.

Hawley wouldn’t predict whether there would be GOP defections but said the caucus is in regular talks to keep tabs on where senators stand.

“There’s an ongoing conversation, informal, on what people are thinking. We are spending a lot of time together,” Hawley said of the marathon trial sessions.

This latest Liberal Act of Desperation by Jerry Nadler clearly demonstrates how desperate the Democrat House Managers are to somehow make the Senate Republicans believe that President Donald J. Trump has actually done something impeachable.

For Nadler to state that the nonexistent “High Crimes and Misdemeanors” of President Trump are more Impeachment-worthy than the Break-in at the Watergate Hotel which led to the resulting threatened Impeachment and subsequent resignation of President Richard M. Nixon is not only incredulous…it’s downright idiotic.

As my 12 year old grandson would say,

Seriously, Grandpa?

Yep.

Early in the morning of June 17, 1972, several burglars were arrested inside the office of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), located in the Watergate building in Washington, D.C. This was no ordinary robbery: The prowlers were connected to President Richard Nixon’s reelection campaign, and they had been caught while attempting to wiretap phones and steal secret documents. While historians are not sure whether Nixon knew about the Watergate espionage operation before it happened, he took steps to cover it up afterwards, raising “hush money” for the burglars, trying to stop the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) from investigating the crime, destroying evidence and firing uncooperative staff members. In August 1974, after his role in the Watergate conspiracy had finally come to light, the president resigned. His successor, Gerald Ford, immediately pardoned Nixon for all the crimes he “committed or may have committed” while in office. Although Nixon was never prosecuted, the Watergate scandal changed American politics forever, leading many Americans to question their leadership and think more critically about the presidency. (courtesy of www.history.com)

Actually, Former Democratic Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton has more in common with Watergate that President Trump does.

And, her ethics were and are similar to those of the burglars.

In the spring of 1974, Hillary Rodham (Not-yet-Clinton) became a member of the presi­den­tial impeach­ment inquiry staff, advis­ing the Judicia­ry Commit­tee of the House of Repre­sen­ta­tives during the Water­gate Scandal. Her boss back then, Jerry Zeifman, now-retired gener­al counsel and chief of staff of the House Judicia­ry Commit­tee, tells a very reveal­ing story concern­ing her work there. According to Zeifman, a lifelong Democ­rat, Hillary got a job working on the inves­ti­ga­tion at the behest of her former Yale Law Profes­sor, Burke Marshall, also Sen. Ted Kennedy’s chief counsel in the Chappaquid­dick affair. When the Water­gate Inves­ti­ga­tion was over, Zeifman fired Hillary from the commit­tee staff and refused to give her a letter of recom­men­da­tion. That made the Future First Lady and Secre­tary of State one of only three people who earned that badge of dishon­or in Zeifman’s 17-year career. Why? Accord­ing to Zeifman,

Because she was a liar. She was an uneth­i­cal, dishon­est lawyer. She conspired to violate the Consti­tu­tion, the rules of the House, the rules of the commit­tee and the rules of confi­den­tial­i­ty.

Zeifman claims that she was one of sever­al individ­u­als includ­ing Marshall, Special Counsel John Doar, and Senior Associate Special Counsel (and future Clinton White House Counsel) Bernard Nussbaum, who plotted to deny Richard Nixon the right to counsel during the inves­ti­ga­tion.

Zeifman believes  that they were death­ly afraid of putting the break-in’s master­mind E. Howard Hunt on the stand to be cross-examined by Counsel to the Presi­dent.  The reason being, Hunt had the goods regard­ing some dirty dealings  in the Kennedy Admin­is­tra­tion that would have made Water­gate look like a kid busting open his Piggy Bank…dealings which purport­ed­ly includ­ed Kennedy’s complic­i­ty in the attempt­ed assas­si­na­tion of Fidel Castro.

Hillary and her associates were acting direct­ly again­st the decision of top Democ­rats, up to and includ­ing then-House Major­i­ty Leader Tip O’Neill, who all believed that Nixon clear­ly had the right to counsel.

The reason that Hillary and the rest came up with the scheme is because they believed that they could gain enough votes on the Judicia­ry Commit­tee to change House rules and deny counsel to Nixon.

In order to pull off this scheme, Zeifman says Hillary wrote a fraud­u­lent legal brief, and confis­cat­ed public documents to hide her decep­tion.

Hillary wanted to present in her brief that there was no right to repre­sen­ta­tion by counsel during an impeach­ment proceed­ing. Zeifman told Hillary about the case of Supre­me Court Justice William O. Douglas, who faced an impeach­ment attempt in 1970….

As soon as the impeach­ment resolu­tions were intro­duced by (then-House Minor­i­ty Leader Gerald) Ford, and they were referred to the House Judicia­ry Commit­tee, the first thing Douglas did was hire himself a lawyer.

Douglas was allowed to keep counsel by the Judicial Commit­tee in place at the time, which clear­ly estab­lished a prece­dent. Zeifman told Hillary that all the documents estab­lish­ing this fact were in the Judicia­ry Committee’s public files.

That was  a mistake, per Zeifman…

Hillary then removed all the Douglas files to the offices where she was locat­ed, which at that time was secured and inacces­si­ble to the public.

Hillary then wrote a legal brief which argued that there was no prece­dent for the right to repre­sen­ta­tion by counsel during an impeach­ment proceeding…ignoring the Douglas case complete­ly.

The brief was so laugh­ing­ly fraud­u­lent, Zeifman believes Hillary would have been disbarred if she had ever actual­ly submit­ted it to a judge.

Zeifman says that if Hillary and her associates had succeed­ed, members of the House Judicia­ry Commit­tee would have also been denied the right to cross-examine witness­es, and denied the oppor­tu­ni­ty to even be a part of the draft­ing of articles of impeach­ment again­st Nixon.

Wait just a cotton-pickin’ minute…

A bunch of high ranking Democrats, including at least one unethical, dishonest, lying lawyer conspiring to violate the Constitution in order to Impeach and remove a sitting President.

Now, why does that sound familiar?

The names have changed…but the political party and their relative morality and situational ethics remain the same.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

 

 

Nadler: “We Cannot Rely on an Election to Solve Our Problems”…a “Silent” Coup No More

On By kingsjesterIn PoliticsLeave a comment

pbox

Outrageous. Jerry Nadler just said we can’t rely on an election to oust Trump. This has never been about wrongdoing, and has ALWAYS been about overturning an election. – Ryan Fournier, Twitter, 12/11/19

FoxNews.com reports that

The House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday night began a fiery “markup” process for the two articles of impeachment against President Trump that they have settled on, barreling toward a final floor vote even as moderate Democrats have floated the idea of backing down in favor of a censure resolution.

Almost immediately, the evening proceedings broke out into heated disagreement, as the panel’s top Democrat declared that it would be unsafe to wait until the 2020 election to remove Trump, and another claimed Trump’s actions were an “affront to the memory of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.” Meanwhile, the ranking Republican slammed Democrats for attacking Ukraine’s leader because he had undercut their case against Trump.

“We cannot rely on an election to solve our problems, when the president threatens the very integrity of that election,” House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., said in his opening statement, claiming Trump’s discussions with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky about Joe and Hunter Biden’s dealingsin the country, and the White House’s temporary withholding of military aid to Ukraine, constituted an “urgent” threat to national security.

“This committee now owes it to the American people to give these articles careful attention,” Nadler added at the beginning of the markup for the impeachment articles, which included obstruction of Congress and abuse of power.

Nadler, who lamented that he had a “heavy heart” over the ordeal, said there were three key questions for Congress to evaluate: whether the evidence clearly showed that Trump committed the acts alleged in his dealings with Ukraine, whether the acts rose to the impeachment standard of “high crimes and misdemeanors,” and what the consequences for national security were if Congress failed to act.

The top Republican on the panel, Rep. Doug Collins of Georgia, shot back that Democrats have been trying to impeach Trump since he took office. He echoed the White House’s argument that the impeachment was politically motivated theater, long in the works and foreshadowed openly by Democrats for months, if not years.

Collins noted that Zelensky has repeatedly denied Trump ever pressured him, and that Democrats then turned on Zelensky to call him a “liar.” Collins went on to slam the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee for hosting a hearing with three anti-Trump law professors with no personal knowledge of any relevant conduct by the president; Republicans invited one professor.

Former President Barack Obama, Republicans have said, also withheld lethal military aid to Ukraine, amid concerns about the country’s documented corruption and the potential risks of escalating conflict with Russia.

As the members debated, the White House Office of Management and Budget released a lengthy legal justificationfor the withholding of aid to Ukraine, which was obtained by Fox News. OMB classified the temporary pause in providing the aid to Ukraine as a “programmatic delay” that was necessary and proper under the law to “ensure that funds were not obligated prematurely in a manner that could conflict with the President’s foreign policy.”

Collins and Wisconsin GOP Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner each observed that unlike previous presidents who have faced impeachment, Trump was not accused of any offense actually defined anywhere by law: neither “abuse of power” nor “obstruction of Congress” is a recognized federal or state crime. (The separate charge of contempt of Congress, according to the DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel, exempts the president for separation-of-powers reasons.)

The late-night markup session marked something of a doubleheader for Congress, after Justice Department Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz’s testimony dominated most of the day. The night is expected to consist mostly of opening statements, before the markup adjourns and resumes at 9 a.m. ET on Thursday.

Nadler is the second Democrat to express their distrust of American Voters recently.

WashingtonPost.com reported on November 19th that

Stressing the importance of the impeachment hearings, (Speaker of the House Nancy) Pelosi said in a “Dear Colleague” memo, “The weak response to these hearings has been, ‘Let the election decide.’ That dangerous position only adds to the urgency of our action, because the President is jeopardizing the integrity of the 2020 elections.”

Isn’t it funny how those who claim to be the most tolerant among us, are actually the most intolerant of all of us?

So, anyway, here we are…with a bunch of Professional Politicians, living in a bubble up on Capitol Hill, acting like they are French Aristocrats telling all of us to “eat cake” while they attempt to negate our Constitutional Right to chose the President of our country.

Meanwhile, it was reported yesterday that George Soros is paying for “rallies” in 50 cities on the day of the Impeachment Vote with paid and unpaid “useful idiots”, as represented by Pelosi, Nadler, Schiff, and company telling all of us normal Americans, living out here in the Heartland, how stupid and intolerant we are, for actually holding on to Traditional American Values and wanting to “Keep America Great” through the reelection of Donald J. Trump to the office of the President of the United States of America.

I have heard this kind of garbage before.

Back in 2011, I got into a discussion on Andrew Breitbart’s Big Government website with some Cheetos-munching, Mom’s basement-dwelling Lib with no home training, who proceeded to tell me that he would be proud to defecate on the American Flag.

If I could have reached through my computer monitor and throttled that useless, ungrateful spoiled brat, I would have.

That “dude” was yet another example of the useful idiots of this present generation, such as the members of Antifa, who seem to be garnering a lot of national attention for their outrageous, disrespectful…and, yes, intolerant, behavior.

Just as we have bore witness to the glorification of thugs and the vilifying of our local police departments by the Obama Administration and the local “communities” which they lay their lives on the line for, every day they put on their uniforms, the effects of LBJ’s “Great Society” on American Culture and the Black Family Unit, so are we witnessing, through the egocentric behavior of this present generation, what happens when children are left to “their own devices”, instead of being raised “in the way in which they should go”.

These “spoiled brats”, like “The Squad” and their fellow “New Bolsheviks” like Antifa, do not care about the “Will of the People”, but, rather, they are intent on implementing and enforcing their Far Left Political Ideology, resulting in a “Tyranny of the Minority”, which we are seeing play out, as they move to impeach President Trump on charges that do not match the legal criteria of “high crimes and misdemeanors” in an attempt to somehow halt the fulfilling of President Trump’s Campaign Promises in order to stop comeback of America which he has been responsible for and to hold on to their “FREE STUFF”-loving New Bolsheviks who vote blindly for the Democrat Party.

The behavior of the Congressional Democrats for over three years now has been reminiscent of a troll on Twitter or a Political Facebook Page.

If you have ever attempted to debate a Liberal on a Facebook Political Page or Twitter, they always attempt to present their opinions as facts, with nothing by Political Rhetoric to back them up.

The use of Karl Marx/Saul Alinsky-inspired “Class War Politics” by the Democratic Leadership, while promising to somehow restore Barack Hussein Obama’s “share the wealth” failed Domestic Policy, has inspired these self-absorbed Modern American Liberals to act like the Bolsheviks of the Russian Revolution, in an attempt to create a divided nation, the likes of which has not been seen since “The War of Northern Aggression”. for the sole purpose to gain back their political power.

When our Founding Fathers sat down to provide form and substance to the laws and procedures for governing this new country, which they had fought and won a bloody war over, by pledging their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor, they were very aware of the price of tyranny and the danger of mob rule.

They determined that this new nation would be a Constitutional Republic, having had their fill of monarchies.

And, that Sacred Document, our United States Constitution, gives each of us the right, including Trump, to speak our minds and be heard.

It gives the protestors of the Presidency of Donald J. Trump that right, too…but, not at the expense of others, by attempting to destroy a good man through lies and innuendos or by strong-arming and harassing those who refuse to believe the way they do, for the expressed purpose of denying someone their First Amendment Rights.

Our Constitution, in fact, allowed then-Democratic Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton to call all of us who believe in Traditional American Values and the preservation of American as the Greatest Country on God’s Green Earth “Deplorables”.

However, that same Constitution, which Americans have fought and died for to preserve, also gives me the right to label this Silent Coup Attempt culminating in a poorly-conceived attempt to impeach President Donald J. Trump for what it actually is:

“TREASONOUS SEDITION”.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Desperate Dems Reference Mueller Report During Impeachment Hearing, May Use it in Articles of Impeachment

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

04dc-impeach-facebookJumbo

The Democrats are apparently going to try to recycle a failed investigation.

FoxNews.com reports that

Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee appeared to lay the groundwork Wednesday for including the findings from former Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report on Russian meddling in the 2016 election in the ongoing impeachment inquiry into President Trump.

In his opening statement, House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., linked Russian interference during the 2016 presidential election with the allegations that Trump asked the Ukrainian president earlier this year to investigate a political rival in the 2020 election.

“President Trump welcomed foreign interference in the 2016 election, he demanded it for the 2020 election,” Nadler said. “In both cases, he got caught and, in both cases, he did everything in power to prevent the American people from learning about his conduct.”

Several of the Democratic legal experts referenced the Mueller report during their testimony.

One witness on Wednesday, University of North Carolina law professor Michael Gerhardt, told lawmakers in his opening statement, “The Mueller Report found at least five instances of the president’s obstruction of the Justice Department’s criminal investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and possible collusion between the president’s campaign and Russia.”

He added, “Taken either individually or collectively, these instances are strong evidence of criminal obstruction of justice.”

While Trump and Republicans have claimed that Mueller’s report exonerated him of any wrongdoing and should be put to rest, some Democrats have suggested recently that the report’s findings regarding obstruction of justice mean it should be included in any articles of impeachment.

“Obstruction of justice, I think, is too clear not to include” House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn, D-S.C., said Tuesday in an interview with McClatchy.

Adding the findings from the Mueller report to any possible articles of impeachment is a controversial matter within the Democratic Party, with more liberal Democrats pushing to have the report included. More centrist and moderate Democrats, however, prefer to stick with the Ukraine matter as a simpler narrative that Americans understand.

In the nearly 500 page report which was released to the public in April, Mueller and his team found that Russia worked “in sweeping and systematic fashion” to influence the 2016 elections and that the Trump campaign welcomed Moscow’s maneuvers, but that there was insufficient evidence to prove that the campaign ever “coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference activities.”

Mueller also decided not to pass judgment on whether Trump obstructed justice during the investigation and left it up to Congress to decide whether the president committed an impeachable offense.

During its hearings in the impeachment inquiry, the House Intelligence Committee did not focus on the Mueller report – instead honing in on whether Trump abused his office as he pressed Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to open investigations into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son’s business dealings in the country. At the time, Trump was withholding $400 million in military aid, jeopardizing key support as Ukraine faced an aggressive Russia at its border.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has said no decision has been made on whether there will be a House vote on impeaching Trump.

The Judiciary panel responsible for drafting articles of impeachment convened as Trump’s team was fanning out across Capitol Hill. Vice President Mike Pence met behind closed doors with House Republicans, and Senate Republicans were to huddle with the White House counsel as GOP lawmakers stand with the president.

The Democrats’ obsession with undoing the results of the 2016 Presidential Election has caused them to lose their last bit of sanity.

After Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report established that President Trump and his Campaign Staff did not collude with the Russians and that there was insufficient evidence to charge him with any sort of obstruction, the House Democrats have decided that they will attempt to salvage that report in order to impeach the President.

Let’s face it: yesterday’s day-long lecture by the Democrats’ “expert witnesses”, two snobbish Liberal Elites from the Halls of Academia was as big of a joke as doddering old man Mueller’s was on July 24th of this year.

What average Americans are going to remember is that a snobbish female professor made fun of a 13-year old boy’s name simply because she hated his father, who happened to be the President of the United States of America.

By trying to use a Special Counsel’s failed investigation to further a strictly partisan impeachment of a President who has turns America’s Economy around, the Far Left Democratic Party is proving that they are just as tone deaf as they were in the months before the 2016 Presidential Election.

The use of those snobbish professors as “expert witnesses” when they were not even present for the phone call in question was an example of the didactic behavior which the Democrats have become known for.

The “Smartest People in the Room” believe that Americans are gullible.

Their oversized egos have blinded them to the fact that average Americans between the coasts are bot buying their BS.

We know that they are desperate to get President Trump out of office because all of their potential Presidential Candidates are a bunch of Far Left Losers who stink on ice.

Nancy Pelosi is stuck between a rock and a hard place.

If she calls for an Impeachment Vote before Congeress leaves for the holidays, she may not get it.

And, even if she does, President Trump has already said that he wants a Senate Trial.

The reason for that is not only will he win but the widespread Democratic corruption which occurred under President Barack Hussein Obama will be brought up, including the Bidens and Burisma.

The Democrats are in a lose-lose situation.

Don’t let their bluster fool you.

Things are about to get interesting.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

WaPo: Desperate House Dems Soliciting Reports of Possible Impeachable Offenses to Expand Articles of Impeachment

On By kingsjesterIn PoliticsLeave a comment

05-blocker-dt-600

Without impeachment, that’s what they are looking at, a 7-2 Supreme Court by 2024, Roe v. Wade threatened, climate change in ruins, the borders closed, a wounded Democrat voter base, much of it officially in insane asylums by that time. Oh, and how about the destruction of the traditional black constituency?

Folks, they are scared, they are in fear like you can’t imagine. They will never portray this on TV and the Drive-Bys will never share it, but they are, because this is what Donald Trump’s reelection means to them. So without impeachment they’re left with Fauxcahontas, Crazy Bernie, Joe Biden sucking fingers if anybody dares to get close to him on a debate stage, screeching about an agenda that nobody wants.

It’s impeachment or bust now. They gotta keep women away from Biden. They gotta keep kids away from Biden. They gotta keep swimming pools away from Biden. Biden talks about how men loved watching his leg hair turn blond in the sun in the pool. Then there’s a picture of him sucking on his wife’s finger out there. Whew. They’re looking at all that or impeach. That’s why they’re scared out of their gourds, folks. And they’re angry because they have failed and it’s even gotten to this point now. – Rush Limbaugh, 12/2/19

According to The Washington Post,

House Democrats are debating whether to expand articles of impeachment to include charges beyond abuse of power in the Ukraine controversy, setting up a potential internal clash as the party races to impeach President Trump by Christmastime.

Members of the House Judiciary Committee and other more liberal-minded lawmakers and congressional aides have been privately discussing the possibility of drafting articles that include obstruction of justice or other “high crimes” they believe are clearly outlined in special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s report — or allegations that Trump has used his office to benefit his bottom line.

The idea, however, is running into resistance from some moderate Democrats wary of impeachment blowback in their GOP-leaning districts, as well as Democratic leaders who sought to keep impeachment narrowly focused on allegations that Trump pressured Ukraine to investigate his political rivals, according to officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity to talk freely.

The debate is expected to play out in leadership and caucus meetings this week, as the House Intelligence Committee prepares to hand the impeachment inquiry to the House Judiciary Committee. The Intelligence Committee is scheduled to vote Tuesday night on its final report on Ukraine, allowing Judiciary to then work on writing articles of impeachment based on that document.

But the Judiciary Committee also has asked other investigative panels to send any findings of Trump-related misdeeds that they believe are impeachable. And many of the committee members are hoping articles will refer to and cite their own months-long investigation into the Mueller report, which described 10 possible instances of obstruction by the president.

“One crime of these sorts is enough, but when you have a pattern, it is even stronger,” said Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), a House Judiciary Committee member and co-chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. She said there is a strong case to be made for citing Mueller’s report in impeachment articles but cautioned that no decision has been made. “If you show that this is not only real in what’s happening with Ukraine, but it’s the exact same pattern that Mueller documented . . . to me, that just strengthens the case.”

The discussions heated up Monday as Trump lashed out at impeachment investigators as he left Washington for a NATO meeting in London, then aboard Air Force One promptly took to his favorite social media platform — Twitter — to declare “case over.” Trump inaccurately portrayed fresh comments by Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky as proof that impeachment was unnecessary. Although Zelensky denied being engaged in a “quid pro quo,” he also questioned the fairness of Trump’s decision to freeze nearly $400 million in congressionally appropriated military aid when his country was at war with Russia.

“[Y]ou have to understand. We’re at war,” Zelensky said. “If you’re our strategic partner, then you can’t go blocking anything for us. I think that’s just about fairness. It’s not about a quid pro quo. It just goes without saying.”

Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill, sniping between Democrats and Republicans over the impeachment process escalated after the holiday break. Republicans issued a “prebuttal” of the Intelligence Committee report that is expected to lay out how Trump abused his power, refusing to acknowledge that Trump did anything wrong with Ukraine.

In a 123-page document, GOP investigators assert that Democrats failed to make the case that Trump committed impeachable high crimes and misdemeanors by withholding military aid and a highly sought-after White House meeting to compel Ukraine to launch investigations into his political rivals. Nor, the Republicans say, do Democrats have a basis for impeachment in Trump’s decision to spurn House document requests and witness subpoenas pertaining to Trump’s Ukraine dealings.

Instead, the GOP document contends, the impeachment effort is “an orchestrated campaign to upend our political system” — one “based on the accusations and assumptions of unelected bureaucrats who disagreed with President Trump’s policy initiatives and processes.”

“The evidence presented does not prove any of these Democrat allegations, and none of the Democrats’ witnesses testified to having evidence of bribery, extortion, or any high crime or misdemeanor,” the GOP said.

Now, let me get this straight.

The Democrats want to reinterpret Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report which exonerated President Trump and which led to Mueller’s embarrassing appearance before Congress during which Mueller came off as a doddering old man.

THIS is the “hard evidence” through which they want to impeach the president?

Are you kidding me?

These wannabe Marxists are making things up as they go along.

They are presuming President Trump to be guilty and trying to force him to prove himself innocent of their fictional charges against him.

You cannot impeach a President of the United States simply because you are a bunch of whiny little babies still having a temper tantrum over him winning the Presidency over your insufferable loser of a candidate.

Yesterday, President Trump tweeted…

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1201629794535923712

Even if the President was only trolling the Radical left, he makes a point.

Poll after poll show that the majority of Americans are against impeaching the President who has turned around our nation’s economy.

Unlike the Far Left idiots now running the Democratic Party, average Americans take pride in a prosperous America.

If such an action can be done, I believe that President Trump is within his rights as an American Citizen to take this Soviet-style Tribunal which the Dems are calling an “Impeachment Inquiry” to the Highest Court in the Land over grounds that he is being denied Due Process in a Political Witch Hunt.

The Democrats are intentionally trying to nullify the votes of Americans who voted the 45th President into office while trying to harm a sitting President in order to win the 2020 President Election.

There is nothing noble about the actions of the Far Left Democrats which have brought us to this point.

In fact, the Democrats have engaged in seditious treason against President Donald J. Trump since before he took the Oath of Office.

If going before the Supreme Court is what it takes to protect our Sovereign Country from a not-so-silent coup attempt, then so be it.

Let’s roll, Mr. President.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Nadler Schedules Hearings for Week Trump is at NATO Meeting…White House Lawyer Sends Blistering Letter in Return

On By kingsjesterIn PoliticsLeave a comment

trump-nadler-030519

We just held two weeks of hearings, after a month of closed door depositions—all of which revealed no evidence to support impeachment—and now we’re holding more hearings. This is fundamentally unserious. – Rep. Mark Meadows on Twitter

FoxNews.com reports that

The White House announced in a fiery letter Sunday night that President Trump and his lawyers won’t participate in the House Judiciary Committee’s first impeachment hearing scheduled for Wednesday — even accusing the panel’s Democratic chairman, Jerry Nadler, of “purposely” scheduling the proceedings when Trump would be attending the NATO Leaders’ Meeting in London.

The five-page letter came as the Democratic majority on the House Intelligence Committee was preparing to approve a report on Tuesday that will outline possible charges of bribery or “high crimes and misdemeanors,” the constitutional standard for impeachment. After receiving the report, the Judiciary Committee would prepare actual charges.

“This baseless and highly partisan inquiry violates all past historical precedent, basic due process rights, and fundamental fairness,” wrote White House counsel Pat Cipollone, continuing the West Wing’s attack on the procedural form of the impeachment proceedings. Cipollone said Nadler provided only “vague” details about the hearing, and that unnamed academics — and not “fact witnesses” — would apparently be attending.

“When the Judiciary Committee scheduled a similar hearing during the Clinton impeachment process, it allowed those questioning the witnesses two-and-a-half weeks’ notice to prepare, and it scheduled the hearing on a date suggested by the president’s attorneys,” Cipollone wrote. “Today, by contrast, you have afforded the president no scheduling input, no meaningful information and so little time to prepare that you have effectively denied the administration a fair opportunity to participate.”

Cipollone’s letter made clear that his response applied only to the Wednesday hearing, at least for now. Cipollone demanded more information from Democrats on how they intended to conduct further hearings before Trump would decide whether to participate in those hearings, amid sagging national support for Democrats’ probe.

Specifically, Cipollone demanded to know whether Republicans would be able to cross-examine and call defense witnesses, as well as whether Republicans could call “fact witnesses” — including House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. (AP)
House-passed rules provide the president and his attorneys the right to cross-examine witnesses and review evidence before the committee, but little ability to bring forward witnesses of their own.

“If [Schiff] chooses not to (testify), then I really question his veracity in what he’s putting in his report,” said Rep. Doug Collins, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee. “It’s easy to hide behind a report,” Collins added. “But it’s going to be another thing to actually get up and have to answer questions.”

Schiff has come under scrutiny from Republicans, in part because of his overtly partisan comments and his previous claim in a televised interview that “we have not spoken directly with the whistleblower.” A Schiff spokesperson later narrowed that claim in October, telling Fox News that Schiff himself “does not know the identity of the whistleblower, and has not met with or spoken with the whistleblower or their counsel” for any reason.

An aide to Schiff insisted that when Schiff mentioned “we” had not spoken to the whistleblower, he was referring to members of the full House intelligence committee, rather than staff. NBC National Security reporter Ken Dilanian flagged Schiff’s explanation as “deceptive” late Wednesday, and Schiff acknowledged he “should have been more clear” concerning whistleblower contacts.

The panel of constitutional scholars who will testify on Wednesday will weigh in on the question of whether the president committed an impeachable offense by allegedly withholding of military aid to Ukraine until it investigated former Vice President Joe Biden.

During impeachment hearings last month, a career State Department official testified that in January or February 2015, he “became aware that [Joe Biden’s son] Hunter Biden was on the board” of Ukrainian company Burisma Holdings while his father Joe Biden was overseeing Ukraine policy as vice president — and that he raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest at the time. Joe Biden has openly bragged about pressuring Ukraine to fire its top prosecutor while he was investigating Burisma, by threatening to withhold critical U.S. aid.

Republicans had urged President Trump not to attend the Democrats’ hearings, arguing that his presence would validate a process they have repeatedly derided as partisan. In his letter, Cipollone repeatedly derided what he called Democrats’ “fundamentally unfair” process.

“Inviting the Administration now to participate in an after-the-fact constitutional law seminar — with yet-to-be-named witnesses — only demonstrates further the countless procedural deficiencies that have infected this inquiry from its inception and shows the lack of seriousness with which you are undertaking these proceedings,” Cipollone wrote.

Nadler had written the president last week announcing a hearing for Dec. 4 at 10 a.m., and notified him of the committee’s intentions to provide him with “certain privileges” while they consider “whether to recommend articles of impeachment to the full House.” Nadler also extended an invitation to the president, asking whether “you and your counsel plan to attend the hearing or make a request to question the witness panel.”

With polls showing support for impeachment flagging, Democrats were aiming for a final House vote by Christmas, which would set the stage for a likely Senate trial in January. Surveys have shown that independents are souring on the idea of impeaching and removing Trump from office, including in critical battleground states like Wisconsin, even as House Democrats aggressively presented their focus-group-tested “bribery” case against the president over the past two weeks.
“I do believe that all evidence certainly will be included in that report so the Judiciary Committee can make the necessary decisions that they need to,” said Rep. Val Demings, D-Fla., a member of both the Intelligence and Judiciary committees.

She said Democrats had not yet finalized witnesses for the upcoming Judiciary hearings and were waiting to hear back from Trump on his plans to present a defense.

“If he has not done anything wrong, we’re certainly anxious to hear his explanation of that,” Demings said.

The House Judiciary’s impeachment hearings will follow last month’s hearings by the House Intelligence Committee, which heard from 12 witnesses during five days of testimony.

Trump has previously suggested that he might be willing to offer written testimony under certain conditions, though aides suggested they did not anticipate Democrats would ever agree to them.

“The Democrats are holding the most ridiculous Impeachment hearings in history. Read the Transcripts, NOTHING was done or said wrong!” Trump tweeted Saturday.

Late Sunday, Trump tweeted a link to a Fox News opinion piece written by legal analyst Gregg Jarrett, and quoted the piece as saying the president had done “nothing impeachable.”

Gregg Jarrett is exactly right.

So, why is Rep. Jerry Nadler continuing the Democrats’ Dog and Pony Show which they euphemistically call an “Impeachment Inquiry”?

The answer is simple. Rep. Jerry Nadler is pursuing a vendetta against President Donald J. Trump.

Back on April 9th of this year, FoxNews.com posted about this decades-old dust-up…

“Congressman Jerry Nadler fought me for years on a very large development I built on the West Side of Manhattan. He wanted a Rail Yard built underneath the development or even better, to stop the job. He didn’t get either & the development became VERY successful,” Trump tweeted Tuesday.

“Nevertheless, I got along very well with Jerry during the zoning and building process. Then I changed course (slightly), became President, and now I am dealing with Congressman Nadler again. Some things never end, but hopefully it will all go well for everyone. Only time will tell!” he added.

The president’s tweets come after The Washington Post reported on the history of their feud. The Post reported that it began in 1985, when Nadler was a New York State assemblyman. The Post reported that Trump, at the time, purchased property in Nadler’s district and wanted to build a development, which he reportedly wanted to call “Television City.” But Nadler wanted the property, which was a former railroad yard, to be upgraded instead. Nadler reportedly blocked Trump from public funds and mortgage insurance.

Trump ultimately began construction on the property and worked to develop residential buildings, but in 2005, after construction delays and pushback from lawmakers, Trump reportedly sold the property for $1.8 billion.

Nadler and the rest of the House Democrats are allowing their least experienced members, “The Squad” and the rest of the wannabe Marxists to control their actions.

The president is under no obligation to attend these partisan hearings.

The House of Representatives was established by our Founding Fathers to be like the British House of Commons, that is, the LOWER House of Congress with the Senate being patterned after the House of Lords, or, the UPPER House.

The president does not answer to Congress. He can act on his own accord concerning matters of national security and foreign policy. And, the Judicial Branch has the ability to overturn legislation passed by Congress.

So, basically, the White House’s letter to Congress told them to go take a long walk on a short pier.

In their horrible grief over the disappointing outcomes of both the 2016 President Election and the Special Counsel’s Investigation, the Democratic Party, as evidenced by these Soviet-style Tribunals which they have been holding, has been experiencing a psychotic break for quite a while now.

They cannot and will not accept the reality in front of them.

With the majority of Americans still saying that they do not want President Trump to be impeached, the Democrats evidently are determined to destroy their party’s chance of winning the 2020 Presidential Election, if they even have one.

To be truthful, I believe that the chance of building a snowman in hell has better odds that the out-of-control Marxist Democrats have of winning the Presidency in 2020.

What are Nadler and the rest of the Democrats going to do when IG Horowitz’ and Attorney General Barr’s investigations both report the nefarious details of a silent coup to destroy both the Trump Presidential Campaign and his Presidency?

And, what happens when they lose control of the House of Representatives while Trump gets reelected in 2020?

Stay tuned, Deplorables.

..And, get your popcorn ready.

The Democrat Meltdown should be glorious.

Until He Comes,

KJ

DOJ Cites Dems’ Confusion Over Whether It’s an “Impeachment Investigation” to Block Dem Access to Grand Jury Material

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

fog-of-war-dt-600 (2)

FoxNews.com reports that

The Justice Department, in new court filings, sought to block congressional Democrats’ bid for secret grand jury material from the Robert Mueller investigation by citing the confusion inside the caucus over whether or not they’re pursuing an “impeachment investigation.”

In the Friday court filing, the DOJ argued that the House Judiciary Committee clearly is not.

“The committee’s own description of its investigation makes clear that it is too far removed from any potential judicial proceeding to qualify,” the DOJ said.

After muddled messaging on the matter, committee Democrats last week argued that they are leading an impeachment investigation, as the panel took its first formal vote establishing the procedures for those proceedings and hearings.

The lawmakers, in a related case in court, are seeking the release of secret grand jury material from Mueller’s investigation. A small percentage of the report remains redacted, as grand jury material must remain secret according to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, with narrow exceptions. But in a recent court filing, the committee claimed their investigation of Trump’s possible wrongdoing falls under the exception for judicial proceedings, including impeachment proceedings.

But the DOJ countered that what Democrats are doing is hardly such an investigation.

The DOJ also quoted House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., as once saying, “[a]n impeachment inquiry is when you consider only impeachment. That’s not what we’re doing.” Since then, Nadler has gone back and forth over whether or not his committee’s investigation is indeed an “impeachment inquiry.”

The developments come as President Trump on Monday accused the committee of botching their efforts. He then referred them to former President Barack Obama and former first lady Michelle Obama’s deal with Netflix, and the Obamas’ book deal from 2017, as well as other deals made by lawmakers.

“House Judiciary has given up on the Mueller Report, sadly for them after two years and $40,000,000 spent – ZERO COLLUSION, ZERO OBSTRUCTION. So they say, OK, lets look at everything else, and all of the deals that ‘Trump’ has done over his lifetime. But it doesn’t work that way,” Trump tweeted Monday. “I have a better idea. Look at the Obama Book Deal, or the ridiculous Netflix deal. Then look at all the deals made by the Dems in Congress, the ‘Congressional Slush Fund,’ and lastly the IG Reports. Take a look at them. Those investigations would be over FAST!

The IG reports include recently released findings that former FBI Director James Comey violated policies with his handling of memos documenting conversations with Trump — leaked to help bring about the appointment of a special counsel for the investigation of Trump campaign ties to Russian election interference efforts. Another report, expected to be released in the near future, will discuss whether the FBI acted improperly with regard to FISA warrant applications to conduct surveillance of former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page during the early stages of the Russia probe. DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz turned over a draft of his findings to Attorney General Bill Barr last week.

As for the Obamas, this isn’t the first time Trump implied that their book deal with Penguin Random House – which reportedly paid the former president and first lady more than $65 million for their memoirs – involved wrongdoing.

“We want to find out what happened with the last Democrat president,” Trump said in July. “Let’s look into Obama the way they’ve looked at me. From day one they’ve looked into everything that we’ve done. They could look into the book deal that President Obama made. Let’s subpoena all of his records.” The president did not elaborate on what such an investigation might find.

The “Congressional Slush Fund” Trump referred to is a Treasury Department fund that was used to pay millions of dollars in settlements to sexual harassment accusers.

President Trump makes some excellent points.

The Congressional Democrats, through the use of committees as political weapons have, since gaining control of the House of Representatives after the 2018 Midterm Elections, devoted the overwhelming majority of their time in session trying to undo the results of the 2016 Presidential election, by any means necessary.

Just as Captain Ahab did not care 4that he was the only one on his ship obsessed with killing the Great White Whale, Moby Dick, so are the Democrats in Congress oblivious to the fact that the majority of Americans do not want the 45th President of the United States of America to be impeached.

The Democrats are nothing but a bunch of hypocrites on a fool’s errand.

Instead of working on behalf of those who sent them to Washington to pass legislation to better our Sovereign Nation, the Congressional Democrats are instead on a quest to take down the man who has turned around his predecessor’s failing economy into a job boom which has created the lowest Black American Unemployment Numbers in our nation’s history.

These imbecilic Democrat Lightweights don’t care that Former President Obama is running a shadow government just blocks away from the White House. They don’t care that he sent Former Secretary of State John Kerry to go advise the Iranians as to how to “handle” President Trump, in what cannot be called anything but an act of treasonous sedition.

And, they could care less that Former President Obama and members of his Administration have taken over Netflix and are producing propaganda and, drawing exorbitant salaries while doing it.

Heck, they don’t even care that one of their own, Rep. Ilhan Omar, married her brother.

All the Democrats in Congress care about, now that they see that they cannot remove President Trump from office before the next Presidential Elections, is to somehow damage him to the point where “Sleepy Joe” Biden or “Lieawatha” Warren might have some sort of chance to beat Trump in the 2020 Presidential Election.

Yeah sure. Good luck with that.

The reports from Inspector General Horowitz and Attorney General Barr’s men, Huber and Dunham, will be published soon.

And, it’s like the old saying says,

It’s all on the wheel. What goes around…comes around.

Until He Comes,

KJ