“Doral-Gate”

It could not get any worse: the President is trampling on the Emoluments Clause of the U.S. Constitution!

Wow. Just think of it: Donald Trump signed a contract to host at HIS resort property in Miami — “Trump Doral” — the upcoming G7 Summit. Everyone knows it is illegal for a president to politically enrich themselves purposely by using the office of the Presidency to create any financial gain for themselves. Mr. Trump owns Doral! What did he think when he signed that contract?!?

Emoluments Clause of the Constitution

The emoluments clause, also called the foreign emoluments clause, is a provision of the U.S. Constitution (Article I, Section 9, Paragraph 8) that generally prohibits federal officeholders from receiving any gift, payment, or another thing of value from a foreign state or its rulers, officers, or representatives. The clause provides that: “No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States, and no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.”

The Constitution also contains a “domestic emoluments clause” (Article II, Section 1, Paragraph 7), which prohibits the president from receiving any “Emolument” from the federal government or the states beyond “a Compensation” for his “Services” as chief executive. The common purpose of the foreign emoluments clause was to ensure that the country’s leaders would not be improperly influenced, even unconsciously, through gift-giving, then a common and generally corrupt practice among European rulers and diplomats.

How dare the President think he would get a pass from his obligation under that clause in the Constitution and contract with the G7 to host that world gathering? Hotel rooms, meeting rooms, food, and services cost money. Those international diplomats with security and support staff will pay Trump Doral for their visit! That’s unconstitutional and, of course, is an impeachable offense!

You will probably be surprised to know that there are already several lawsuits filed against President Trump using as their purpose and legal support the Emoluments Clause in the Constitution. Those were filed immediately after his election in 2016. There is an excellent and comprehensive analysis of these cases and how several state and federal courts have already ruled on those. This specific analysis is written in legal language and certainly is not in the format I prefer: “Executive Summary.” I’m a bit slow, and it takes pictures with explanations to help me understand intricate legal issues. I am attaching the three-page analysis of existing Emoluments litigation against President Trump. Here’s a link: https://truthnewsnet.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/The-Emoluments-Clauses-Litigation.pdf

Feel free to examine it yourself. For those of you like me who prefer the “executive summary” version of the intricate and court-tested legal opinion of these, here it is: “There’s No There There!”

So why the uproar? There IS much uproar.

How about a swim to cool-off at Trump Doral?

Here’s the take of House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY): “The Administration’s announcement that President Trump’s Doral Miami resort will be the site of the next G7 summit is among the most brazen examples yet of the President’s corruption. He is exploiting his office and making official U.S. government decisions for his personal financial gain. The Emoluments Clauses of the Constitution exist to prevent exactly this kind of corruption. The Committee will continue investigating, litigating and legislating regarding these matters—including pressing for answers to our prior requests about the G7 selection process—but we will not allow this latest abuse of power to distract from Congress’ efforts to get to the bottom of the President’s interference in the 2020 election.” 

And it’s not just Democrats. The FOX News Legal Contributor — former Judge Andrew Napolitano — weighed in: “He has bought himself an enormous headache now with the choice of this. This is about as direct and profound a violation of the Emoluments Clause as one could create,” Napolitano told Neil Cavuto on Fox Business. Napolitano also pointed to Mick Mulvaney’s insistence that Trump would not “profit” from hosting the G-7 Summit at Trump Doral in Florida.

“Most respectfully, Mr. Mulvaney’s focus on profit, while it may make sense in the economic world, is not what the Framers were concerned about,” Napolitano said. “They were concerned about a gift or cash coming directly or indirectly to the president of the United States, even if it’s done at a loss. Now, the president owns shares of stock in a corporation that is one of the owners of this, along with many other investors. He also owns shares of stock in the corporation that manages it. So those corporations will receive a great deal of money from foreign heads of state because this is there.”That’s exactly, exactly what the Emoluments Clause was written to prohibit,” he said.

Let me analyze for you my perspective from spending much time reading and researching the Emoluments Clause and how it impacts President Trump. I have also spent a few hours reading the linked legal analysis and courts’ findings in litigation against the President since his election. I have much respect for Judge Napolitano and his experience. In full disclosure, I hold NO respect for Rep. Nadler, who, with Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) in my opinion, are the bookends to Democrat Party and “Deep State” corruption in Washington. But, Nadler chairs the House Judiciary Committee, so I must say as a Christian “Render to Caesar that that is Caesar’s.” (That means to respect the office Mr. Nadler holds)

After my research and those existing court decisions, my finding is that Trump Doral hosting the G7 summit is NOT in any way a violation of the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution. 

But I’m just a blogger/podcaster. What do we know? The Democrats always know more than others about pretty much everything. Once again, they know more than we do. And they are screaming — LOUDLY.

So what basis is there for the Noise?

The Noise

I know this will come as a surprise to you, but the Emoluments Clause uproar is just one more link in the Impeachment Debacle that Democrats have forced on the American public. They’ve tried so many things to rid themselves of Donald Trump. None have so far been successful. Why? Because there’s been no impeachable offense on the part of the President that support his impeachment.

First, it was Russian Collusion. Then Conspiracy and Obstruction of Justice. Those were just the tips of the iceberg. There are plenty more: 91 more, to be exact!

Do you think I’m kidding? Heck no. Democrats have floated allegations of Trump impeachable offenses that so far number 94. Want to see what they are? Click on the following link that will take you to a page listing those. Then for complete details of each, you can click on the number of that allegation and see complete details: https://lists.grabien.com/list-things-democrats-have-said-trump-could-be-impeached

Summary

With those two attachments and your looking and reading their contents closely, your Saturday is full of essential information. I hope it’s not too much for you to process. After all, it’s Saturday with college football! But I wanted to illustrate to you how voracious these Democrats are to get rid of Mr. Trump. I have only been able to surmise why they are so deadset to impeach him. Do they not interact with American voters who are in their lives experiencing the fruits of the improvements in the nation that are results of Trump’s accomplishments? Do they think that Americans are dumb and cannot watch the national news and examine products from liberal and conservative news sources and determine on their own which are legitimate and which are providing us the news organization’s perspective and not merely the news that we can use to assess the reality of what has happened? I do not understand.

                         A little Golf?

This is NOT solely a conservative issue. This is NOT solely a liberal issue. This is an American political issue that has become an information war. “DoralGate” is simply the latest arrow in the quiver of liberalism that the anti-Trump proponents grabbed that might be the right ammunition to exterminate the 45th U.S. President.

By the way: DoralGate might be number 95 in their list of impeachment justifications. But it will not be the last. There’s another 15 months in President Trump’s first term in office. At the present rate, Democrats could run that number up to 200 impeachment reasons!

One more thought: How would Democrats feel if the President said this to the G7 partners regarding their stays at Doral: “We’ll comp the hotel rooms and meeting rooms for your entire contingency. Just pay for your food and tip the help.” Do you think that would pacify the anti-Trump Democrats and never-Trump Republicans? Probably not. Remember their continuing mantra: “Facts don’t matter. We believe in ‘Symbolism over Substance.'”

In closing, let me pose just one question to you: Do you think that maybe the President purposely put this G7 deal together knowing the amount of uproar from the Left it would initiate? If so, who would be surprised? The President is really good at carrying around that sharp stick and pokes his political opponents consistently. I think it would be hilarious if that’s what he’s doing. More uproar, more noise, and more drama between Donald Trump and the Left.

Nothing more needs to be said.

Play

U.S. Insurrection: It’s Happening Now

We all thought the U.S. was kept safe by our military, our intelligence agencies, our federal and state law enforcement agents and officers, and by the best judicial system on Earth. Since America’s establishment using the U.S. Constitution as the template for all legal actions, our political leaders have consistently worked with federal and state courts to make sure those small things in U.K. law from which our forefathers fled were guaranteed to never creep into U.S. law. And until now, they haven’t. But it appears it just might be happening now — though quietly and stealthily.

It was common in the United Kingdom for those of different social and economic statuses to be treated differently under the 1600s U.K. law. Theirs was a very “top-down” legal system that favored the wealthy and politically connected. Their laws were well planned and fair in their implementation, but enforcement became lax and unilateral. That atmosphere was a significant contributor to our founders’ decision to leave the British Empire for the New World.

In America, the Constitution very demonstrably guaranteed such arbitrary law enforcement as in Britain would not happen here. For 200+ years, it seemed to work well. It began to quietly change as the American populace began to withdraw from activism in government as social systems changed over the last few decades and we all just got too busy in our private lives. Where citizen involvement in government diminished, political control increased to fill the gaps. With that came extreme partisanship and arbitrary treatment in our justice system. That has evolved into similar treatment in the U.S. as in the British Empire in the 17th Century. And today, we see its results: almost unilateral law enforcement based on social, political, and economic class. That system is now front-and-center every day.

In the past two decades, we have recognized inequality in the Criminal Justice system. Court decisions regarding guilt and innocence and sentencing were (and in some cases still are) racially unfair. For example, in most drug arrests for possession of narcotics and distribution, statistics show African American offenders experience a much higher conviction rate and stiffer sentences than do White Americans. Why does that happen? After all, guilt or innocence and sentencing determined in the Justice system are to be racially blind. That’s a question that criminal justice experts and sociologists have investigated for decades. Study after study shows that racial bias permeates federal, state, and local law enforcement arrests, trials, and sentencing.

The purpose of pointing this out is to remind you that “Equal Justice under the Law” has been since 1776 an integral part of the protection for all Americans from inconsistent adjudication of penalties for crimes. Defendants’ rights are guaranteed Constitutionally. But that promise has been watered down year after year, in court after court, and now has found a foothold in civil proceedings just as in criminal cases. Politicians have watched as it happened and have slipped it into government operations at every level. It’s being used secretly in cases today where no crime has even been committed — like in impeachment.

I know, I know: impeachment is not a criminal matter. It’s a political matter. That fact has been stated over and over in the media during the last three years. Why not until now? Donald Trump wasn’t President. He is now, and most of the politicians who sit on the left side of the aisle don’t like his being President and want to find “a” way or “some” ways to drive him from office.

So why is the impeachment process, not a criminal operation? Because of the “Virginia Plan.”

The Virginia Plan

The Constitutional Convention in 1787 was full of heated debate over many issues of the Constitution. Those settlers had just escaped from the ruthless government of England’s King George III. Three Virginians together worked diligently to find a fair and equitable method to remove an American president (and other members of government) for specific wrongdoing. This was to guarantee Americans no monarch are despot could assume control of the government just because of being the nation’s leader. After considerable debate, those three Virginians agreed that a president should be impeached for “abuses of power that subvert the Constitution, the integrity of government, or the rule of law.” Those three were James Madison, George Mason, and Edmund Randolph. Members had already determined the necessity of including “acts of treason and bribery” that have since been considered as “High crimes and misdemeanors.”

Purposely our forefathers drew a line between criminal and civil actions for removal through impeachment. Their purpose was to keep despots and factions in politics from usurping control of the American government. Impeachment was designed so that between presidential elections, a president who used his or her office to take advantage of citizens and institutions could be removed from office without waiting for the next election. This method worked effectively for more than 250 years primarily as a deterrent for those in office who might be tempted. But it’s no longer working in the Trump Administration

Presumption of Innocence

“Innocent until proven guilty” has been a staple of criminal justice since the beginning of America. Because of non-royals’ arbitrary treatment as “guilty until proven innocent” in Britain, America’s settlers demanded that to flip in criminal cases. It has always been a staple in U.S. criminal justice and has even found its way into many civil proceedings. But there’s a catch to that.

The presumption of innocence seems forgotten in the so-called “court of public opinion.” When high profile criminal cases capture media attention, the public opinion seems to sway towards presuming the person is guilty – before he even steps foot inside a courtroom to have a judge or jury determine whether or not he is guilty. This ‘presumption of guilt’ in the public’s opinion can be devastating to reputations; careers; families, and almost every other aspect of life. Even if eventually found “not guilty” in a court of law, recovering from a public smearing of one’s name and reputation may prove impossible.

The problem we face in this run up to what is now almost certain to be the impeachment of Donald Trump as Leftist politicians with glee point to the standard set by our forefathers that differentiate between civil and criminal treatment in impeachment. Impeachment is NOT a criminal process — it’s strictly a political matter only. That means a President facing impeachment cannot claim ownership of the presumption of innocence. And so this group of Democrats are foaming at the mouth to go after Mr. Trump. Ultimately their unified purpose is to not only impeach the President but to drive him out of office. They view this issue of criminal vs. political as the straw which they have grasped to move the needle in their favor. They are universally giddy that they feel certain this is their “AHA” moment. They do not have to give President Trump the presumption of innocence. They can destroy him politically with impunity!

Summary

The Left have gone crazy with their newfound power. Their quest to find small tidbits of allegation of wrongdoing by Mr. Trump adds fuel to the fire of hatred that drives their every move. Speaker Pelosi handed the keys of impeachment to her bulldog, Rep. Adam Schiff who in his political career has never waited for facts but mounts attacks against those he identifies as his foes with whatever he can use to denigrate them politically while demeaning them personally. He’s basking in his current quest to destroy the Trump presidency.

But here’s what is happening: Mob Rule. Various hate groups from the left like Antifa and other disguised hard-left political groups have joined Schiff and his gang to in organized fashion to foment hatred of not just the President, but of all those who have and still do support him. Truth no longer matters. The loophole our founding fathers left in their roadmap for impeachment that the presumption of innocence is not a necessary element are driving all of these to whip the mob into a frenzy that will only grow stronger as their lust for destruction seems to be within their grasp.

It does not matter if their ploy achieves success or not. The horse of insurrection is already out of the barn and is ripping at the fiber of the foundation of our nation. It’s now OK to ignore laws, promote lawbreaking, wink selectively at those who break the “appropriate” laws, and teach our children and grandchildren that federal law is old, unfair, arbitrary and outdated. Therefore, we have every right to simply ignore it.

Sadly, it appears we just a few days ahead of the complete abolition of our Constitutional structure that will be termed to “be in the best interest of the majority of Americans” when it happens. And many Americans are and will be fine with that process.

Regardless of outcome, be certain that if this insurrection is allowed to succeed with the impeachment of the President and the Media in tandem with the Democrat Party assume government power for the next 4 or 8 years, American social, political, and economic structures and social interactions have paved the way for this destructive White House issue.

What will our nation look like if this leftist project is allowed by American voters to prevail in its local establishment? No one knows for certain. But one thing that IS certain is that if the Left and their Media attack dogs successfully remove Donald Trump from office, America as the historical leader of freedom among all nations will immediately die. Any type of socialistic political process will fail miserably. The problem is those who could stop this debacle are those who have been brainwashed by our grade school and college professors and teachers.

Is it too late to stop it? The answer to that is way above my pay-grade. All we can do is continuously speak truths to the two generations behind us as often as we can. Be vocal about capitalism, a representative democracy, And the Rule of Law in all your interactions with those you know and love.

And we can pray: pray for “all those in leadership over us,” and pray that God will somehow regain their mental and emotional factors.

Best to You,

 

 

Dan E. Newman

 

 

It’s Groundhog Day — Again!

What’s the groundhog fable? If on Groundhog Day the groundhog emerges from his den and he immediately sees his shadow, he will retreat, and Winter will continue for six more weeks. I don’t know how many days have been American voters’ Groundhog Day. Each day we emerge to see the shadow of Washington on the ground in front of us. So we go back into our lives, and the crud in Washington continues. The only difference is the D.C. crud will undoubtedly last longer than six more weeks.

While the House with a multitude of new scheduled hearings is scratching for anything to fuel Trump impeachment, the Grand Groundhog — House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) — keeps coming out to a microphone saying, “There’s no requirement that we have a vote. We’re not here to call bluffs. We’re here to find the truth to uphold the Constitution of the United States. Doing so is not a game for us. This is deadly serious.” The House Speaker then retreats to wherever it is she stays while nothing gets done for another day, another week, but hopefully NOT another year, in Congress.

Americans know full well what members of the Democrat side of the aisle in the House ARE doing: “Impeachment Inquiry.” But what are House members NOT doing?

“They’re Not Doing Any of This”
  1. The House is NOT taking up legislation to reform immigration law.
  2. The House is NOT a taking up legislation to take care of the Dreamers that are not citizens but are young Americans who were brought to the U.S. by their illegal parents and have lived here — many of them — for years.
  3. The House is NOT taking up legislation to honestly examine and debate options with the intent to complete a border barrier on our Southern border to curb illegal crossings.
  4. The House is NOT taking actions to repair the Healthcare debacle that they with Democrats in the Senate created with Obamacare — a health finance program that without serious editing and revisions will bankrupt America.
  5. The House is NOT taking up legislation to curb the opioid crisis that is killing thousands of Americans each month.
  6. The House is NOT taking up legislation to address the nation’s homeless problem that is concentrated in the largest U.S. cities.
  7. The House is NOT taking up real budget issues with long term projections and agreement on government spending tackling waste with honesty to balance the budget.
  8. The House is NOT taking up legislation to support efforts of the Trump Administration that have proven successful in attracting significant corporations that previously abandoned the U.S. for other countries with more favorable economics. President Trump has shown the restructuring of Obama-era corporate taxing and regulation assists in attracting new business with existing U.S. companies while attracting foreign-based companies to relocate to the U.S.
  9. The House is NOT taking up legislation to tackle the deadly graft and corruption among elected officials and unelected bureaucrats in Washington, D.C.
  10. The House is NOT taking up legislation to assure federal and state elections are operated honestly and without foreign interference.
  11. The House is NOT taking up legislation to eliminate election fraud in all 50 states in spite of assurances by former President Obama that there have been NO frauds committed in previous elections.
  12. The House is NOT taking up legislation to rein-in the unfairness of federal election campaign finance.
  13. The House is NOT taking up legislation to regulate or to altogether eliminate federal lobbying, which would remove much of the financial corruption running rampant among members of Congress and members of special interests.
  14. The House is NOT taking up legislation regarding federal and private partnerships for critical infrastructure programs across the country.
  15. The House is NOT taking up legislation regarding the restructuring of the federal tax system to make it fairer and simpler so that every American contributes at some level with personal and corporate investment in its government operations.
  16. The House is NOT taking up legislation to assist our allies in the Middle East in the development of policies to stem terrorist attacks by ISIS and other organizations.
  17. The House is NOT taking up legislation to assure all international agreements between the U.S. and other governments are treaties that require confirmation by the U.S. Senate.
  18. The House is NOT taking up legislation to correct issues that resulted from the federal takeover of the management of college student loans.
  19. The House is NOT taking up legislation to eliminate some House recesses and shorten others to process more legislation that is passed-over because of session time restrictions.

Here’s the big reason the House is not doing more: their work schedule. (click on the hyperlink to go to the 2019 Full House Legislative Calendar) https://truthnewsnet.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/2019-House-Schedule.pdf

If you look through the calendar as compared to yours, here’s how many days in each month the House was in session as of October 15, 2019, and how many workdays they have not worked (“workdays are M-F minus federal holidays):

  • January they were in session 19 of 24 workdays
  • February they were in session 16 of 20 workdays
  • March they were in session 16 of 21 workdays
  • April they were in session 14 of 22 workdays
  • May they were in session 17 of 22 workdays
  • June they were in session 17 of 20 workdays
  • July they were in session 17 of 23 workdays
  • August they were in session 9 of 22 workdays
  • September they were in session 16 of 20 workdays
  • October 1 thru October 15 they were in session 5 of 12 workdays

That means in 2019, of 206 possible workdays (Monday through Friday of each week minus Federal Holidays), the House has been in session so far just 146. That means they worked only 71% of the time they could have worked conducting legislative tasks.

In fairness, these Representatives will maintain that they took time to meet with their constituents in their districts during the year and took time with their families for vacations. No one loves family vacations more than I. But taking one week for a family vacation during each of the two years of their two-year-term seems fair. Allowing two weeks per year to campaign in their home districts while meeting with constituents still means they would have worked 156 days of the possible 206 they could have been in session or just 76% of their time while taking a week for vacation and two weeks for meeting with and campaigning among their constituents in their respective districts.

I agree with the premise that the Congressional job is tough. I agree that being away from home while living in a pressure-packed political environment with weighty expectations for job performance is robust. But they each knew all of this when they chose to campaign for the job.

In my professional career, I have had hundreds, if not thousands of employees. Each of those during their job interview received in writing what their job expectations were, work schedule, and a full list of benefits. Each of those hired was expected to abide by the requirements of their job that were revealed and agreed to when they accepted employment. Why should it be different for members of Congress? How can we expect less and allow less than we do from any non-political employee of our own?

Americans have during the last decade lived in a nonstop news environment. That 24/7 news cycle is the “new” norm. Subsequently, Americans are learning more details of government operations. Americans are now as never before understanding the specifics of accomplishments by our elected officials in passing legislation. Therefore Americans know better than ever how the bureaucracy of Washington D.C. was created and has been perpetuated to facilitate working conditions, compensation, and benefits for members themselves that are not as were intended. Americans are angry.

Summary

D.C. is not working. Congressional operations must be changed. Members of Congress must work smarter, harder, and longer in their present jobs. If their Congressional job is too harsh, they should resign.

One might consider that an unrealistic expectation. But we all know to live and work in Washington is harder and more demanding than in Hometown America. That is why just a few can do so successfully. Based on the Congressional favorability ratings of Americans, members of Congress are felt to be less than expected and accomplishing far less than expected by Americans. And Americans who see all that is left unfinished are more than ever demanding changes to be made. Congress must complete those essential tasks that are pushed to the back of the line in each Congressional session and never finished.

If you’ve wondered why the Democrat-controlled House has essentially one agenda only — Impeachment — wonder no more. It is because the Democrat Party has only one plank in their party platform for the 2020 election. If Donald Trump is re-elected, it will obliterate their historical operating methods, shine the light of truth in the Swamp, and expose the waste and lack of fulfillment of necessary tasks by each Congress. They cannot allow that to happen.

Expect the angst, bitterness and vocal haranguing to only worsen the closer we get to November of 2020. Don’t expect much legislative progress either. Democrats refuse to allow Mr. Trump any new legislative triumphs until they hopefully vote him out of office.

In the meantime, expect another Ground Hog Day or two often in the next year or so.

Play

Context or Soundbites?

The most shocking thing about the current House Democrat closed-door hearings is that by locking-down those hearings, Dems are locking-out Congressional Republicans who are responsible for Congressional actions to the citizens they represent. In Monday’s 9-hour House Joint Committee hearing with Fiona Hill— a former State Department employee — reams of testimony from Ms. Hill are out there somewhere in the “blogosphere,” but in a place which is taboo to Republicans.

Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz attempted to enter the hearing but was told he could not. A Congressional parliamentarian who controls hearing access stated that because Rep. Gaetz is not a member of any of the three committees that joined together for this hearing, House rules precluded him from being in the room.

The House Intelligence Committee, chaired by California Democrat Adam Schiff, is running the meetings, but the investigation also includes the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, as well as the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Gaetz IS a member of the Judiciary Committee, which has the sole power to instigate impeachment proceedings against a president. Here’s what Gaetz said about that: “Judiciary Chairman [Nadler] claimed to have begun the impeachment inquiry weeks ago,” he wrote. “Now, his own Judiciary members aren’t even allowed to participate in it.”

So why all the secrecy? After all, these interviews and testimony are expressly for one purpose: to find evidence to use in the impeachment of the president of the United States. It is safe to say the Democrat game plan is to control all the information released about these hearings — including “their” version of testimony given. Why? They must control the context.

Context

“Context” defined by Merriam-Webster: “the parts of a discourse that surround a word or passage and can throw light on its meaning.”

Words on their own cannot be allowed outside the committee hearing walls. Democrats must filter all testimony and edit it down to just a few sentences — a few sentences that supposedly encompass all of the nine-ten hours of testimony.

That isn’t possible. Context — especially that in such a lengthy meeting replete with Q & A of members of Congress and a key witness — is necessary to capture the meanings of events and people investigated along with their testimony.

But Democrats cannot afford for the light of truth to be seen and heard by Americans outside of Washington. Democrats are afraid of the truth! In the case of President Trump, the truth is that there was no wrongdoing on his part — indeed, not anything impeachable. And what has been “leaked” to the media from these hearings is certainly benign at its worst and supportive of the President at its best. Neither of those narratives is what Democrats want to discuss in Breitbart, in the Wall Street Journal, or on FOX News. So what do they do? Simply delete any context.

Context in these hearings is required. Here’s a sample news story that illustrates the necessity of context:

”A six-year-old Salt Lake City child died in a horrible car crash on Nevada’s I-15 yesterday afternoon. The mother was the driver of the car. She lost control of her vehicle at mile marker 456, leaving the road running head-on into a bridge abutment. Blood tests are inconclusive as to the possible role  of alcohol in the wreck.”

Here’s the same story in context:

”A young girl riding in a car with her mother died in a car crash north of Las Vegas. The woman, who police say was driving below the speed limit, was driving north on Interstate 15 late yesterday afternoon. She along with her daughter who was in her booster chair were the only ones in their car. At mile marker 456, the driver of a late model Chevrolet pickup southbound on I-15 lost control, crossed the median striking the car occupied by the Salt Lake City mother and daughter. The young girl was pronounced dead at the scene while her mother is reported to be in serious condition at Valley Hospital in Las Vegas. She is expected to make a full recovery. Tests for possible alcohol influence of the truck driver is being investigated.”

You see, context can dramatically change the narrative given to those who have no firsthand knowledge of an event. The presentation is everything.

In all of these hearings conducted by Congressional Democrats behind closed doors are supposed to be either classified or purposely kept secret to “protect the witnesses from outside threats and harassment.” We all know now that it is nothing but nonsense. Their purpose is singular: to trap Americans with out-of-context narrative to paint a picture of facts that are NOT factual but are to make Democrats and their agenda appear palatable, accurate and truthful — even when they are anything but that.

Without Context What Do We Get?

Here’s the problem with the “Adam Schiff Hearing Plan:”

  • It is impossible to know what questions were asked in the hearing. Who asked what? What were the witness’ answers?
  • What exactly did the witness say in their answers to the questions?
  • What was the demeanor of the witness? Did he/she get rattled? If so, as a result of which question? What exactly was their response?
  • Who from the committee asked what questions?

Without the answers to these specific questions, it is impossible to put anything we are told from that hearing in context to give the full story, just like in the car wreck story given above. But in a natural setting, it is far less likely and much more secretive.

Do you remember the cries from Democrats when President Trump had the transcript of his conversation with Ukraine’s President Zelensky released to the media? The call transcript was ripped to shreds because “it was partisan, opinionated, and in snippets rather than being the actual phone call to allow House members to hear conversations to ascertain what was being asked and answered.”

So what is different from the Zelensky call transcript and the actions of the Democrats running these closed-door hearings? From the average American’s perspective, there is NO difference.

Details from House Committee Hearings

They held a nine-hour hearing with former State Department employee Fiona Hill. What have you heard about the content of that hearing? After all, it was a confidential hearing of which NO ONE had the authority to leak hearing contents. Are you surprised details were leaked — to CNN?

Washington (CNN) Some of the White House’s most senior foreign policy officials were trying to raise the alarm about the administration’s potentially illegal activity in Ukraine well before President Donald Trump’s now notorious call with his counterpart in Kiev, according to stunning new testimony in the impeachment inquiry.

Fiona Hill, Trump’s former top Russia adviser, said in a startling deposition Monday that then-national security adviser John Bolton told her to tip off White House lawyers about the activities of Giuliani and others, according to sources familiar with her testimony. Bolton’s advice followed a meeting two weeks before the call between the two presidents on July 25, one source said.
Is it any surprise that the private, secret, confidential testimony at a hearing in which no Republican members participated and that CNN immediately released a story about? No confirmation, no interviews with Hill allowed, and no way for any American to factually counter details released.
Does that sound like part of the legal process in the Nation that guarantees  access to question one’s accuser and the protection of human rights in such matters? What is going on? Answer: Democrat response in made-for-media edited and faceless soundbites that cannot be verified for accuracy. The fingerprints of Adam Schiff are all over this hearing.
Why were Democrats so hell-bent on keeping Ms. Hill’s testimony away from Republican scrutiny? That answer is in this story:
House Democrats’ interest in Hill’s testimony goes beyond the Ukraine whistleblower issues. She’s an associate of Christopher Steele, the British ex-spy who produced the 2016 dossier on then-presidential candidate Trump, which included salacious allegations about his past activities in Moscow as a businessman. House Democrats hope that with Hill’s front row seat to Russia-related events, she can provide details about Trump’s conversations with Russian President Vladimir Putin and the May 2017 Oval Office meeting between Trump and two top Russian officials.

Summary: Soundbites

Here’s what is happening: Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Eric Swalwell (D-CA), with the approval of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) are presenting an orchestrated fiasco in which secret hearings conducted in which they attack current and former Trump associates in desperate attempts to induce one or several to turn on Mr. Trump and provide dirt on the President. Even if there continues to be no dirt exposed about the President, you can bet Democrats have offered some deals if they’ll flip and even if they’ll say something negative even if not authentic!

Their primary interest in Fiona Hill is that she was an associate of Christopher Steele, who was the author of the Steele Dossier, used as THE evidence that prompted the electronic surveillance of Carter Page and the justification for the investigation of the Trump Campaign. They still feel they can tie the President to Russians, which will give them leverage in the 2020 election. To that end, they are using anything they can to confuse Americans.

Who had Russian dealings in the 2016 election? Not Donald Trump; it was Hillary Clinton! Her campaign funded the Steele Dossier. They depend on young Americans and their naïveté to overcome the tired and ineffective policies of the  “old folks” from the Great Old Party. That’s why Republicans are not allowed to attend these hearings. They’d see everything and would know the truth firsthand.

Democrats want to with soundbites only not present facts or quotes or even snippets of witness testimonies. They want Americans to “just trust us” and believe what they claim to be a factual hook, line, and sinker. And, sadly, there is a large number of Americans who will believe all that. After all, these are members of Congress. Surely they would not mislead the American public, right?

It all boils down to this: Securing and maintaining the viability of the Deep State is all that matters to Democrats and their publicity department — CNN and MSNBC. The question is: “Will it be a successful exercise, or will it destroy the small amounts of American trust and belief in Congress.”

Let’s hope that President Trump and his staff can keep themselves above the fray. If so, there will be a resounding beat-down in 2020 that will flood the streets of Washington with conservatives and also in cities across America.

Play

House Oversight Committee: What are They Hiding From Americans?

According to Bill Shakespeare, “The eyes are the windows to the soul.” Looking at Adam Schiff, (picture to the left) one would think his soul is full of some pretty nasty stuff!

An almost universal feeling for political savvy Americans is distrust of Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) who chairs the powerful House Oversight Committee. That Committee is charged with looking into operations of every department of every government entity in operation including financial and actual operating procedures.

As the makeup of Congress changes, so does the constitution of every committee. The majority party has a very attractive chore that House leadership gets to use to give their party legislative power over those in the minority party. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi as do all Speakers carefully chose those to chair the most important  committees. For the House Judiciary Committee — where “real” impeachment must be initiated according to the U.S. Constitution — Pelosi appointed as chairman Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY). The arguably second most powerful committee — the House Oversight Committee — is led by the Democrat Party “Witchhunt Bulldog” Rep. Adam Schiff of California. Both committees since Democrats won House control have concentrated almost solely on getting rid of President Trump. (Forget about legislation: “Let’s Get Trump!) Both Schiff and Nadler have walked through the fields of harvested evidence ignoring the “real” crop of facts to daisy-pick any piece of evidence they think they can use to use against President Trump. Their problem has been that there are not very many pieces showing Trump wrongdoing. Never mind: they’re really good at manufacturing “evidence” to say what they need it to say.

Having no factual evidence against President Trump should end their nonstop committee hearings, one would think. Not so. They both continue to dominate the focus of the House with some new piece of “evidence” that requires virtually every minute of their committees’ time to investigate rather than to conduct the normal business of the House of Representatives.

Schiff is without question the most partisan, the angriest, and most vile member of House leadership. He’s so vile, he makes fellow Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) look like a kindergarten school teacher. We will not chronicle all the lies he has told through the last few years — we’ve done that before. But what we will do is ask some questions in an attempt to discover if he is hiding and what he is hiding from Americans. Why would we think he is hiding something? Just follow this line of reasoning:

  • The House is contemplating pursuing the most impactful act to our nation’s political institution and its structure: the impeachment of President Donald Trump.
  • The House of Representatives is known as the “Peoples’ House” — they are supposedly chosen to serve a short term of two years and while doing so representing those like-minded other citizens from their communities. They are to speak “our” minds not their own.
  • Following that line of reasoning, one’s expectation should be they are to reflect the people of one’s own district in writing bills and passing bills into law, strictly for the betterment of their districts first but put into the context of what’s best for the Nation.
  • Impeachment is not a legal issue. The House is constitutionally required to investigate a president when applicable for the commitment of “High crimes and Misdemeanors.”  The House does not conduct a trial for impeachment. The House investigates, gathers evidence, and determines if the evidence is sufficient to pass Articles of Impeachment that then go to the Senate which holds the sole Constitutional authority to try those impeached.

So why does this House of Representatives (led by Schiff rather than House Speaker Pelosi) insist on privately conducting what are called “classified” hearings with witnesses rather than conduct these hearings with full television and radio coverage so that Americans can see and hear the testimony of witnesses? Both Schiff and Nadler have continually maintained they have “sufficient evidence to justify the impeachment of President Trump.” That’s the question we are working to answer for you — hopefully today.

What Does it Take to Justify Impeachment?

“Treason, High Crimes and Misdemeanors.” According to Article II Section IV of the Constitution, these elements must in whole or even in part be evident and verifiable to successfully impeach a President. So what does that phrase actually mean?

The charge of high crimes and misdemeanors covers allegations of misconduct by officials, such as dishonesty, negligence, perjury of oath, abuse of authority, bribery, intimidation, misuse of public funds or assets, failure to supervise, dereliction of duty, unbecoming conduct, refusal to obey a lawful order, chronic intoxication, or tax evasion. Offenses by officials also include ordinary crimes, but perhaps with different standards of proof and punishment than for non-officials, on the grounds that more is expected of officials by their oaths of office. The word “High” refers to the offense and not the office. Any elected government official may be impeached. There are some who posit that “High” refers to the level of office. But that interpretation is false, and lowers a standard of similarity, whereby the US Constitution refers to Treason and Bribery, and other crimes that are “High”—of equivalence to Treason and Bribery. Some also akin “Misdemeanors” as current lower crimes in many jurisdictions. At the founding there was no reference to a misdemeanor in criminal law. High Crimes and Misdemeanors provides for other malfeasance at a level similar to Treason and Bribery. Indeed the offense may not even be a breach of criminal statute. (See Harvard Law Review) The majority view is that a president can legally be impeached for “intentional, evil deeds” that “drastically subvert the Constitution and involve an unforgivable abuse of the presidency — even if those deeds didn’t violate any criminal laws.”

Just to be totally transparent, President Trump to be impeached does not have to have broken any laws of any kind. That means, of course, no American president should break any laws. That is troubling to millions of Americans, as it should be. The conclusion for all of us should be that President Trump can be impeached for committing an act or acts that do not reveal any criminal wrongdoing.

Members of Democrat Party leadership in the House have exhibited not a single choke or filter on their stated and obvious plans to impeach President Trump. We previously showed you a live report from a sitting member of the House who two days before Donald Trump had even taken the oath of office stated he would vote for articles of impeachment of Donald Trump as President.

But back to Adam Schiff. So far, the Oversight Committee hearings, for the most part, have been held behind closed doors. The reasoning provided by Schiff for the secrecy is to both protect the identities of those who testify, and to make certain that those who would “literally attack these witnesses will not have possible ammunition for any attacks. We know they are out there,” said Schiff.

Any reasonable person who has watched Schiff’s actions since 2o16 know he and his cohorts have one purpose for their anti-Trump rhetoric and now with House power are fulfilling: Stop Donald Trump!

Rep. Adam Schiff: “Full Speed Ahead!”

Schiff did not just get started with impeachment. Schiff impeachment calls began in earnest shortly after Mr. Trump moved into the White House. Republicans pointed to a March 2017 appearance on MSNBC in which Schiff said “there is more than circumstantial evidence now” of a relationship between Russia and Trump’s associates. In December of that year, Schiff said on CNN: “The Russians offered help, the campaign accepted help. The Russians gave help and the president made full use of that help. That is pretty damning, whether it is proof beyond a reasonable doubt of conspiracy or not.”

And in May of 2018, Schiff said on ABC that the Russian trolling of Democratic National Committee emails is “like Watergate in the sense that you had a break-in at the Democratic headquarters, in this case, a virtual one, not a physical break-in, and you had a president as part of a cover-up,” he said. Schiff said later that the Russia investigation is “size and scope probably beyond Watergate.”

On numerous occasions, Schiff said publicly that he had plenty of evidence of Mr. Trump’s wrongdoing that was sufficient to impeach him and successfully try and convict him in the Senate. So why has that not happened until these latest attempts? There’s a simple answer: Schiff lied; there’s no “irrefutable evidence” that supports impeachment; he’s pushing forward in hopes of finding someone from the White House to turn on President Trump and provide damning evidence against him. That did not happen in 2018 or so far in 2019. But Adam Schiff has made it abundantly clear: he will not quit until he drives Donald Trump from office.

What’s Hidden?

One must first believe there really is something hidden that Schiff and Company are desperately keeping from Americans.  The “and Company” (of “Schiff and Company) would be the likes of James Clapper, John Brennan, Andrew McCabe, Nellie Ohr, Bruce Ohr, and many officials in the former Administration. It appears that much of the investigatory findings of such wrongdoing that occurred before and during the Russia Collusion investigation are about to be dumped on the American public — in fact as early as Friday, October 18th. Like most Americans who are waiting for that information certain to be included in the Inspector General’s report, one would think members of the House of Representatives would be psyched— psyched that the truth will finally be released. It should include details of the matters surrounding 2016 election tampering and the alleged wrongdoing by government employees accused of illegal investigations against Mr. Trump. It is safe to say that Rep. Adam Schiff is not one of those Americans hoping to get to the truth. In fact, Mr. Schiff is trying to hide the truth. Let me explain.

  • There’s MUCH at stake for MANY people. John Brennan, James Clapper, James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strozk, and others who were operatives whose communications have shown extreme animus for Mr. Trump will certainly be fingered in this report. Any of those who have been exposed for committing illegal activities should and probably will be referred to the Justice Department for prosecution. Those could very well be the list of those included in the previous sentence and even others. And there probably will be trials and prison sentences for some of those exposed and referred for prosecution.
  • How could the 2.5 year Mueller investigation with 30 fulltime investigators and staff who spent $30 million dollars investigating these claims against the President be so inept as to miss any Trump wrongdoing? Obviously, there was none. But that’s not good enough for Mr. Schiff.
  • Remember the “Ukraine-Gate” Schiff initiated investigation? Remember that first whistleblower who certainly had dirt on the President regarding that phone call with Ukraine President Zelensky? “The American people need to hear from that Whistleblower who has evidence of pressure put on President Zelensky to investigate President Trump’s leading opponent in 2020’s election,” said Rep. Schiff. Guess what — Schiff said this on CBS October 13th: “Our primary interest right now is making sure that that person is protected,” Schiff stated. “Indeed, now there is more than one whistleblower, that they are protected. And given that we already have the call record, we don’t need the whistleblower, who wasn’t on the call, to tell us what took place during the call. We have the best evidence of that.” Schiff could not care less about the whistleblower. He, some from his staff, and probably other committee members met with the first whistleblower long before the claim was made. There is actually evidence that Schiff and Company assisted in the preparation of the whistleblower filing. We already know that the whistleblower is a former CIA operative who was loyal to former CIA Director John Brennan who is alleged to have taken part in this whistleblower action. Schiff is just concerned about being implicated in his own actions.

Summary

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) is treading water as hard and fast as possible. What are he and other members of his committee hiding? The answer to that is apparently their personal involvement in cover-ups and lies for which they are personally responsible. They are petrified that the Friday October 18 release of Inspector General Michael Horowitz’ report on wrongdoing in the 2016 Trump election investigation will implicate them in multiple ways.

Their evidence of wrongdoing must be significant. Why? D.C. politicians have historically been able to hide most of their wrongdoing — especially political corruption. With this President and his commitment to “draining the Swamp,” they are really nervous — and they should be. Mr. Trump has pulled the plug on the tub these swamp creatures have called their own for decades. And when the water that they have used for cover is drained away, the critters in the swamp are fighting for survival.

But what is the purpose — the single purpose — of Democrats closing of the hearings to the public? They must control the narrative of what comes to the public from these hearings. What we’ve seen so far in their endeavors is only couched stories that are incomplete replete with cherry-picked tidbits when taken out of context of the full hearings can make the President look bad. They do not want the American to see and hear any of this testimony in context. They MUST control the narrative to have any hope of getting Mr. Trump.

Their attacks on their “foe” of three years have apparently been unsuccessful. Why? Because Mr. Trump has apparently kept his nose clean. Their actions since 2016, however, have been exactly opposite of President Trump’s.

They should be nervous — maybe even more than just nervous. With the information that has oozed out of the IG report, some of them should be concerned about who will be their cell mates!

Play

Weaponization of Everything

Fiery words are pretty much all we are being given in the “War for the White House 2020” playing out on the national stage every day. It seems to have become commonplace to attack the other side while at the same time to attack those on the same side. Further, those attacks increase in rage and furor daily as presidential candidates play the “one-upmanship” game to get more coverage, more headlines, more mentions in the press and social media. To do that, they must find ways to demand such attention. How to do that? Weaponize each attack.

“Weaponization” is defined as the act of preparing some “thing” or some “process” to be used as a weapon. Live television interviews, radio talk shows, Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram have been found to be perfect forums for communication to tens of millions of potential voters for 2020’s elections. Today’s political parties, candidates, and political support groups have created and refined the perfect process and weapon to use for this election cycle: Weaponization of the entire American political process.

Putting people who are different from us in classification or “bucket” with others of the same ilk is not unusual. It’s been done for centuries. Just about everything that makes people different qualifies as an appropriate classification: race, ethnic origin, country of origin, language, skin color, religion, sex, political beliefs, and even hair color are qualifiers. Race and racism have been the catch-words in America for at least the last 50 years. But today religion — “Islamophobia” — and sexual preference and conservative/liberal political views have taken the lead roles in the identity battle.

But in the 1940s and 1950s, there was another classification that I haven’t heard in decades: “McCarthyism.” McCarthyism is the forefather of forefathers regarding group classification of people.

Very few Americans younger than age 60 even know what “McCarthyism” was. But they are getting a really good look. As a backstop for today’s story, let’s first take a quick “McCarthyism” history tour.

“McCarthyism”

McCarthyism is the practice of making accusations of subversion or treason without proper regard for evidence. The term refers to U.S. Senator Joseph McCarthy (R-WI) and has its origins in the period in the United States known as the Second Red Scare, lasting from the late 1940s through the 1950s. It was characterized by heightened political repression and a campaign spreading fear of Communist influence on American institutions and of espionage by Soviet agents.

Before anyone today dismisses the importance of this McCarthy comparison, please don’t make that mistake. Most of you were not alive when this tore the nation apart shortly after the end of World War II. But it is eerily similar to what we are seeing flood the nation today, in the exact same way.

During the McCarthy era, hundreds of Americans were accused of being “communists” or “communist sympathizers;” they became the subject of aggressive investigations and questioning before government or private-industry panels, committees, and agencies. The primary targets of such suspicions were government employees, those in the entertainment industry, academicians, and labor-union activists. Suspicions were often given credence despite inconclusive or questionable evidence, and the level of threat posed by a person’s real or supposed leftist associations or beliefs were sometimes exaggerated. Many people suffered the loss of employment or destruction of their careers; some were imprisoned. Most of these punishments came about through trial verdicts that were later overturned, laws that were later declared unconstitutional, dismissals for reasons later declared illegal or actionable, or extra-legal procedures, such as informal blacklists, that would come into general disrepute.

Estimating the number of victims of McCarthy is difficult. The number imprisoned is in the hundreds, and some ten or twelve thousand lost their jobs. In many cases, simply being subpoenaed by HUAC or one of the other committees was sufficient cause to be fired. Many of those who were imprisoned, lost their jobs, or were questioned by committees did, in fact, have a past or present connection of some kind with the Communist Party.

Even thinking about such travesties happening in the United States is incomprehensible. After all, this is the “Land of the Free” and the “Home of the Brave.” There’s that little First Amendment that should have protected those Americans. After all, the protection of political ideologies is included in the First Amendment. Maybe that was lost or simply overlooked back then.

Nothing like that could ever happen today, could it?

Yes, it can, and it does.

The “New” McCarthyism

Only one thing we see today in America best fits the mold of McCarthyism: “Political Weaponization.“ And the buzz word that seems to play perfectly into the hands of those who are adept at weaponizing politics is “Racism.” Whoa! Racism is something that is real, tangible and presents all around us. McCarthyism though real was just a dream of a radical right-winger in the 40s and 50s to put those who espoused a specific and different ideology down: Communism. Racism is certainly a really important personal attitude that lives in the hearts of millions that forces others to deal with every day. And it diminishes the significance and importance of diversity, forcing all to struggle to be no different than their next-door neighbor or suffer becoming an outcast — or in Hillary Clinton’s world, a “deplorable.”

Actual racism tears nations, states, towns and cities, and even families apart. Throw politics into the mix, and “Political Racism“ is a scourge that needs to be identified and expunged as quickly as possible.

Just as happened with McCarthyism, political racism in America has been weaponized. And it’s used most often to create the superiority of some by pointing to others of a different political class as being less valuable, less qualified and less worthy than the pointer.

It’s no longer just pointing; political racism is as useful as any weapon ever devised. And today’s model of political racism has been crafted with one thought in mind: denigrate others who — when grouped together with racial AND political perspective — makes denigration easier to dole out and harder for the accused to overcome. Just like the Nazis in the 30s and 40s and Communists in the 50s and 60s, using political philosophy in conjunction with the horrors created using race gives groups of powerful politicians more deadly and damaging tools to use against their foes. The worst part of political racism? There are no clear-cut tools on which one can rely for vindication when accused. That fact in itself proves why political groups today have pounced on its use to destroy those with whom they disagree.

Weaponized Racism

How does one weaponize racism in politics?


Have you noticed the 2019 tactic of the “new” Leftists in Washington? For example: Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) continuously when being confronted for her seriously flawed statements about every current political issue as they arise, simply responds using NO facts to counter any assertions. Why is that? Because the Left has perfected the weaponization of a phrase that stops all abruptly when used: “You’re a racist!” When that weapon is used politically, there is no simple way to counter. Being called a racist today is actually worse than being called a pedophile. Politically, no one can afford to be called a racist. It’s a label that sticks permanently regardless of its truthfulness when used.

And it gets worse.

Beginning with the campaign cycle in 2016, the Left recognized there was a new way to counter political attacks for policy disagreements. If an opponent backs one into a corner regarding any political issue, one can fight to get out of the corner by just making the allegation of “political racism.” Guess who was the first to find that out: Donald Trump.

There are dozens and dozens of examples where his political opponents could not explain their positions that were and are counter to his: the Rule of Law, Illegal Immigration, border security, sanctuary cities, the border wall, terrorism, political expectations of U.S. foreign “partners” supposedly aligned on every international issue with the U.S. in true partnership. In fact, they are one thing publicly and another when the meeting room door closes. This list could go on and on.

What are the big political issues today?

  • Immigration
  • Healthcare
  • Tax relief for the Middle Class
  • Fair Wages
  • Sexuality
  • Taxes on the Wealthy
  • College Debt
  • Trade Policies

This list too could be (and should be) exhaustive. Certainly, we can list plenty of others. But that’s not the objective today. It’s to identify and call-out the inequities and untruths being pandered by Democrats and others left of Dems to all Americans in an effort to legitimize them.

What’s the easiest way to quieten those who although using reason still continually give examples that support their positions while they give examples that destroy the counter(s) to their position? Racism.

Political Racism That’s Not Racism at All

Islamist Terrorism.  Don’t dare to try to convince a Democrat there is anything wrong with Islam. And there might not be! But don’t use any truths to explain any of the problems — not so much with the religion of Islam, but with many of those who use it politically to weaponize their causes.

Have you heard this anytime recently? “Islam and Muslims are people and a religion of peace.” We’ve heard it again and again. Why not reply this way when they get in your face “If Islam is so peaceful, why is there such violence and terrorism all over the Middle East — the home of Islam?

Ask them that and you and the only response you will get is, “You’re just a Racist!”or “You’re just an Islamaphobe!”

Lawbreaking.  This one boggles the brain. The one thing that differentiates our country from every other country is our strict historical adherence to the Rule of Law. For centuries we have operated in a way that makes laws duly created by those elected, activated in local, state, entities, empowered those in law enforcement to make certain everyone adheres to all those laws, and holds those accountable who don’t.

What do we see happening 24/7 in the U.S. today? Constant ignoring of multiple laws by multiple people. Illegals pouring over our southern border; rampant use of marijuana — which violates federal laws — and other drug laws across all jurisdictions; and even laws pertaining to political corruption.

So what happens? Someone in some position makes an arbitrary decision or two to ignore this law, turn your back on another while jamming one down the throats of offenders.

How does political racism fit into this scenario? Every opponent of open borders and sanctuary cities, holding illegals responsible for all their lawbreaking which starts by their being in the U.S. illegally can not be explained in any other way than just outright lawlessness. 

But if you do that, the response has nothing at all to do with the Rule of Law or even changing laws legally with which they disagree. Their answer is simply this: “You oppose what’s happening because you are a Racist!”

Election Violations. The absolute worst regarding our elections is voter fraud. Thirty-seven states have identified from the 2016 election massive voter fraud — several of which had more votes cast in various jurisdictions than those registered to vote in those districts! Ever hear anything about that from the Mainstream Media? Nope. Why not? If you say anything about it, Leftists will attack with their favorite label: “You oppose it because you’re Racist!”

Another is voter ID laws. They still scream at those who want to protect the validity of the most sacred American right of all: voting. “African Americans are unduly penalized if a voter ID is required to vote. Many are uneducated, poor, transportation-less, and cannot pay the fees for voter ID’s.”

It’s sad to hear such from government authorities. But it’s sadder to know those who make these claims actually believe Americans believe that to be the case. Logic has no place in that argument. Political Ideology is the only thing that matters to them. In reality, having identification in America today is mandatory just to get through a day!

What can you NOT get without a government ID?

  • Driver’s License
  • Insurance Card
  • Welfare Benefits
  • Medicare Card
  • Treatment at a hospital or clinic
  • Auto insurance
  • Rent a car
  • Fly commercially
  • Enter any federal government building
  • Entry into numerous public events

But the two that ice the cake for me are these:

You cannot enter any official event of the Democrat Party or even attend their Convention!

You cannot go to any one of Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) campaign rallies, meetings or other official events!

Disagree with anyone on the Left about this insane premise and they have one defense and one only: “You’re a Racist!”

Summary

I’m done. I long for the days when in Franklin, Louisiana, I stood in my debate class after learning how to debate other students about a random topic given to us by our teacher. We all were required to use facts — evidence — that supported either side of each of these controversial subjects. We used quotations from reputable experts, statistics, and data collected from various sources.

I won most of the debates in which I participated in high school. But every one of those that I won, I won because of facts, statistics, evidence, quotes, the precedence of previous confrontations in each applicable field, but I never won a single one by calling my opponent a Racist!

You know what? I never had to. They either presented facts that proved their positions more effectively than did I, or I won with better and more accurate supporting facts.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez-Cortez (D-NY) could never survive in a world in which she was taken to task by authority figures in her life that would test every premise she has made since 2018 requiring facts. She has quite a posse that operate the same way, too. Their answer to those who confront them with facts is almost always “You’re a Racist!”

Facts Matter — Truth WILL Prevail

Bullet Points: October 12, 2019

Washington D.C. is going crazy if they’re not already there! How can we pick the most important stories of the last few days? There are dozens out there we think you’d like to dig into. We’ll give you the headline bullet points of our top picks. If you want to get the entire story of all or any, there’s a hyperlink at the end of each bullet point on which you can click to go to the full story.

Have a great weekend!

Bullet Points

Summary

After you complete your morning’s read of the stories you deem most important to you, it is suggested you find a way to relax the next couple of days. Things are heating up in Washington and heating up quickly. Impeachment is now about a 50/50 chance. But that probability is rising every day. We’ll keep you posted daily on the status of impeachment.

Have a great weekend!

Dan

The Seed of a Miracle

Scott and Kori were happily married. Both had careers after earning three college degrees between them and were ambitious and hard-working young adults. They wanted children but decided to wait a few years to get their careers on track. They then decided to take the plunge into parenthood. The day was joyous beyond words as they gave the news to their family, “We’re pregnant!” Both came from large and close-knit families that united as one big, happy family when they married. The pair launched into preparations as all young Moms and Dads “in waiting” do. And they were having so much fun!

One day Kori felt something different about the baby. To make certain, their doctor had them see a specialist. They where shocked to hear the news that their baby had a chromosomal disorder — “Turners Syndrome.” And babies with that seldom survive. Imagine the horror of having your baby with a certain death sentence living — at least for now — in your body. Still, they prayed, hoping for a miracle. But the inevitable happened: one day the baby quit moving. The fear for their baby in an instant became their reality.

Kori gave birth to Emerson who was stillborn. Those years of waiting, planning, and creating the perfect scenario for their first baby just melted into their tears, anguish, and unspeakable pain. It seemed the pair were living in a fog while preparations were made for Emerson’s funeral. It was a graveside close-family funeral. Driving up to that gravesite and seeing that tiny white coffin and knowing it held the first daughter and the first grandchild is unexplainable. But it happened. That single moment galvanized the most devastating loss a mother and father can ever feel: the loss of a child.

In the days that followed, Scott and Kori took a trip to Scottsdale, Arizona just to refresh and reset their hearts and minds. They in the past year of their lives had lived through the joy of a first pregnancy, the excitement of knowing they’re having a daughter only to have death steal all of it away. They needed to recoup. And they did. Little did they know that trip would initiate a newness in their lives they had never imagined. As fate would have it, a trip to the Fashion Mall in Scottsdale started the pair on a trek down life’s road that changed them forever.

A close pastor friend and his wife happened to be in Scottsdale at the same time. And at the very moment that pastor and his wife were at the Mall, Kori and Scott ran into them while shopping.

The pastor had just completed a sermon-series at his church titled “The Providence of God.” He pulled Scott to the side and said, “We can’t always find answers for bad things that happen to us. Sometimes bad things just happen to good people.” He then told Scott this: “If you and Kori will resist the temptation to shake your fists in God’s face in anger, He will pay you back. God promised that.”

Those words rocked the pair. They were doing their best to find a way to walk through the darkness of their devastation and to move-on with their lives. Those words rang true to them — they’re both hard workers and positive believers. They decided to not just “give it a whirl,” but to “give it their best.” And so they did, looking for that God “payback.”

It wasn’t but several months of believing God’s promise to “repay evil with good” while resisting the natural blame folks most often put on God, they found out they were once again pregnant! A second baby was on its way. But it was even better: THEY  WERE PREGNANT WITH TWINS!

August 29, 2005 — the day Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans — in a Louisiana town 300 miles from the Big Easy, Earth saw Grace and Emmaline Shurley arrive. You can imagine the glee for the entire extended family when the pair of beautiful babies moved into the Shurley home with Mom and Dad. Scott and Kori were more than excited…and thankful.

In this picture are Grace and Emmaline fourteen years later. They are amazing young women, wonderful students, friends, cousins, granddaughters and Christians who have already set their worlds on fire.

           Grace and Emmaline Shurley

Kori is the best Mom one could imagine. She has a very successful career in architectural design, owns her own company and is continuously in great demand. Scott owns his own company as well — a medical services company that has clients all over America.

But all of this goodness sprang from one little thing: a seed. For a moment, let’s go back a bit. Do you remember the story of Noah and his ark in the Bible? God became so upset with men because he could find only Noah and his family that were God-fearing. He told Noah to build an ark, to get two of every kind of animal, and get on that ark. God then sent rain that lasted for forty days and destroyed every human except Noah and his family members.

When that flood was over, God promised Noah that as long as the Earth existed there would never again be such a flood. Further, God said (In Genesis 8) “As long as Earth exists, men will always have Winter and Summer, Hot and Cold, Nightime and Daytime, and there will always be “reap and sow.”

We can all understand those first promises, but that last one: Hmmm… What does “reap and sow” mean? That means that everything people throughout time have and will plant in the ground, those people will always see results directly from their planted seed. In other words, when one plants peach seeds, peaches grow.

To that end, Scott and Kori purposely did just that. They planted their just anger and rage for losing their baby in such a horrible way in God’s promise. They decided to just trust God and test what He promised. The reaping they were allowed to receive provided not one, but two healthy baby girls! Though as heart-wrenching as it was to see their firstborn not live, Emmaline and Grace have taken the sting of death away and shown their parents every day that living in expectation instead of living in grief and despair is much more valuable and provides much more good for them and their family than any anger could have.

I miss Emerson. I was there that day when we buried their little girl and our granddaughter. I cannot imagine the pain and heartache this cost our baby girl and her husband. But we too knew what they learned in that mall in Scottsdale: “The Best is Yet to Come.”

Oh, and as a P.S. to this story, Kori a few years later discovered breast cancer. Rather than panic, she and Scott pulled together to tackle one more major life problem — their second. Even though the odds of a second such devastation happening were minuscule, they had no choice but to accept the challenge and go to war again. And in war one more time, they triumphed.

July 17, 2017, I told their story here at TruthNewsNetwork. Some of you may remember that. But today is even more special. Last Friday, Kori celebrated being 10 years cancer-free!

 

 

Kori Shurley

Play

Can Dems Win Without Impeachment?

Certainly, House Democrats are dead-set on the impeachment of President Trump. In fact, it can be honestly stated that they have for more than two years been on the path towards impeachment. Their latest method is called by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi a preliminary impeachment “inquiry.” Never mind there is no Constitutional provision or historical example for such action. We have previously detailed the impeachment process required by the U.S. Constitution. So why would Pelosi label it as an impeachment “inquiry?” Rep. Al Green (D-TX) publicly explained that so Americans would know what impeachment’s real purpose must be when he said this: “We can’t beat Donald Trump at the polls. The only way we can defeat him in 2020 is to impeach him.” That tells us what they’re up to regarding impeachment. But this brings a question to mind: Can Democrats beat President Trump in 2020 WITHOUT impeachment?

Dems Case For Impeachment

Democrats have made significant never-before-seen moves for their attempt to impeach President Trump. In the three previous U.S. presidential impeachments, as required they all began in the House of Representatives. The process itself required a vote in the House for impeachment’s initiation. As Trump’s attorneys have stated, without that vote, the results which must contain those of a majority of House members to move forward, a “formal” impeachment process cannot begin. In all three of those historical impeachments — Andrew Johnson, Richard Nixon, and Bill Clinton — such a vote was taken.

That vote is necessary for very critical reasons: when the House votes to initiate impeachment, doing so triggers a process not exactly like but akin to those of a civil trial. The defendant has the right to face his or her accusers, the defense uses similar guidelines as in a civil matter, such as calling their own witnesses, subpoenas for evidence and testimony, and has the right to object to witnesses and/or the production of certain types of evidence by the opposition. Normally the defense has the power to question the accusers under oath. In the current version of impeachment floated by the Left, historical and normal precedents are not in place. Preliminarily, House Democrats have stated in the current impeachment “inquiry,” there is to be no defense authority to issue subpoenas, no cross-examination of witnesses, the calling of their own defense witnesses, or basic objections that are allowed to be included on the record. The President and his legal staff have arduously pushed-back on this unprecedented impeachment process and put House Democrats on notice that the White House will NOT comply with any of their demands unless and until the House initiates the historical process of impeachment. How? Have a full vote in the House.

As far as Democratic “ammunition” to support impeachment, the same old talking points are front and center: election collusion by the Trump Campaign, first with Russia in 2016 — which was debunked in the Mueller Report — the President’s alleged obstruction of justice, which was also debunked, and the latest allegation is Mr. Trump’s collusion with Ukraine to interfere somehow in the 2020 presidential election. Add to that Mr. Trump’s unilateral pullout of troops previously protecting Kurds in Syria which has opened up the door for Turkey to take military action against the Kurds, and impeachment cries are louder.

Leading their charge is America’s favorite Congressional litigator: Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA). Schiff himself is facing a barrage of allegations of wrongdoing. Those include, but are not exclusive to, lying on numerous occasions, committing “real” collusion with members of a foreign government himself, efforts on his part to get foreign sources to provide information defamatory to the President, even though the sources of that information were known to be unreliable at best but that were knowingly unverified and unverifiable.

That now-infamous phone call between President Trump and Ukraine’s President Zelensky was what the Democrats termed the “final straw” necessary to justify their formal push for impeachment. President Trump to their chagrin immediately released the official transcript of that call which showed NO evidence of any wrongdoing on the part of President Trump. Democrats shouted to the World that in the call, President Trump threatened Ukraine with withholding of financial aid for Ukraine that Congress had already approved. That was false. Then Democrats grasped at this theory: “Mr. Trump asked Mr. Zelensky to continue Ukraine’s canceled corruption investigation of then VP Joe Biden and his son Hunter. That proves that President Trump was trying to force Ukraine to investigate Biden — Trump’s chief opponent in the 2020 presidential race. Trump’s trying to impact for his favor a foreign government to investigate Biden for the purpose of pushing Biden out of the race!”

One of the problems with that claim is that President Zelensky said there was no such request make of Mr. Trump that included any type of quid pro quo. That was confirmed by the recently resigned Special Envoy to Ukraine, Kurt Volker. Volker resigned that position last week but stated after that in a closed-door congressional hearing that there was NO such request from President Trump or any other request that could even remotely be construed as a bargaining attempt by President Trump.

But that’s not good enough for Democrats. When their “evidence” they are using to get Mr. Trump is debunked, they just double-down. And they have again. When that first whistleblower who wasn’t legally a “whistleblower’s” story was proven to be unsubstantiated, Democrats are ready to trot out another!

What Happens if the House Votes to Impeach?

Without over-simplification, there will be a formal investigation. Evidence of Trump’s alleged wrongdoing will be presented in the form of multiple types of evidence, the testimony of witnesses, and probable testimony by the President. Subsequent to those, charges are devised by the House Judiciary Committee. Each charge will be presented to the full House and voted on separately. If a majority of House Members vote to confirm one or more of the charges, those will be turned over to the Senate to consider. The Senate will vote to either take up each charge or decline to. The charges (if any) that are voted to be taken up will then be included in a real trial of the President. If he is convicted of any of the charges, he will then be removed from office. If not, (as in the case of Bill Clinton) the impeachment process is completed.

What Happens Then?

The President will be free to proceed with the obligations of his office in serving, presumably through the 2020 election. Of course, if re-elected he will remain in office for a second term.

The Polls

As always, one can find a presidential poll that supports pretty much any position. Normally a network considered by most to be a conservative news outlet — FOX News — released a poll Wednesday, October 9, 2019, that showed more than 50% of Americans currently support an impeachment preceding to be held to consider the removal of President Trump. The Quinnipiac Polling organization, however, released another poll that shows that 37% of Americans want impeachment to take place.

This polling process leads us to make this observation: almost every poll “tries” to poll a realistic segment of Americans whose opinions “should” reflect the majority of Americans. However, the fact that most polling segments are of at the most of 1000-2000 Americans, it is simply not pragmatic to accept that such a small section of the American population could realistically provide accurate and factual representation of ALL Americans. Who can forget polling on the very morning of the 2016 election? By almost every poll, Hillary Clinton had already won the election.

I find it hard to believe that Americans at this point want the President impeached. But who am I to say? After all, my saying so would be simply my opinion. Of course, it depends on which newscaster, which news writer, which opinion show host you read or listen to, you’ll find if not an exact 50-50 split on opinion, something close to it.

Summary

Until this apparent abandonment by the Trump Administration of the Kurds in Syria who have been guarding hundreds of ISIS fighters in jails there, I could not see a way that would lead Americans to support impeachment. The Kurd’s argument is for another day. That (just like in all political circumstances) requires a lengthy and very detailed conversation. We’ll take it up, but we’ll wait and do so in another story on another day. But the Left has been pummeling the President for doing so, even if it was one of his campaign promises in 2016. Sadly, there are Republicans who support President Trump that have come out loudly against these military actions.

The tide of American opinion on this issue could weigh heavily on how this impeachment decision goes. And as of today, it doesn’t look good for the President on that front.

However, we all know there are numerous circumstances within our country that certainly trump (no pun intended) consideration of any foreign situations. Americans have under this President determined to view the necessary functions of the U.S. government in a new light. They understand the U.S. cannot afford to police the whole world and need to allow foreign entities to be their own countries and fight the fights which they choose. This may be one of those.

War is never easy. And in wars, someone always dies. That’s a functional and horrific by-product of each war. But we did NOT pick this or any other Middle Eastern war currently underway. We have stepped in to back those considered to be our allies. This is one of those cases.

It’s too soon to make a call there.

I have always and still feel that the impeachment pending as well as the 2020 election both depend on how Americans feel about themselves, their homes, their jobs, their families, and the economy of the United States. Even with the things hanging over the U.S. that are, if these factors in an imaginery pile are leaning toward the good of Americans, President Trump will NOT be removed from office and WILL be re-elected.

That’s just my two cents!

 

Play

New Collusion Exposed: It’s NOT Trump

We’ve spent the last three years looking for the “Boogie Man” that Donald Trump used to unethically and illegally win Mr. Trump the 2016 presidency. After all, his election victory certainly is not because Americans chose him to be their president.

Immediately after the Trump inauguration, the Russia Collusion story was initiated. We know much now that many suspected but could not be proven at the time: that the Collusion story and subsequent investigation was a sham — a diversion pitched to Americans by a posse of unethical politicians and top-level Intelligence officials who for not-yet verified reasons desperately needed Hillary Clinton in the White House.

The Mueller Investigation from the day Mueller was named Special Counsel for the Russian probe was thought to be simply a diversion instigated by those in that “posse.” They were desperate to find that Donald Trump had some way and somehow reached out to Russia for election help and that they could uncover and expose it. They needed Donald Trump out of the picture.

Mueller exonerated Mr. Trump with his final report. That is factual in spite of the cries from the Media that the Mueller findings did not do so. Subsequently, there was a “Muller Probe-Lite” that lasted a minute or so as the Left ramped up charges of Trump’s obstruction of justice. It quickly faded away.

Here came Ukraine! President Trump was stated to have in a telephone conversation with the newly elected Ukrainian President asked President Zelensky to open a corruption investigation into Joe and Hunter Biden. Those allegations were made and immediately became headlines in every newspaper, online news outlet, television and radio talk show: “President Trump Seeks Ukraine Help for 2020 Assistance.” Of course, those headlines were lies.

You now know the truth: Pelosi and Co. had already announced an “impeachment inquiry.” They were in a panic to find justification to initiate impeachment proceedings against the President. When this fake-news was released, that was their proverbial “straw” needed for “more formal” impeachment proceedings. And it’s on!

Trump blew their minds when he immediately released the transcript of the phone call. They were shocked that he did so without any formal subpoena for the mud they could use against him. The call transcript vindicated the President for his alleged attempt to receive election help from Ukraine to find dirt on a Trump 2020 election opponent: former VP Joe Biden.

There was NO collusion between Donald Trump and Ukraine.

But it has been revealed there MAY be some collusion with Ukraine by a very important U.S. politician that does not live in the White House but works on Capitol Hill: Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA).

Schiff hates Donald Trump. He’s spent every waking minute since the 2016 election saying and doing anything and everything he can do to possibly assist him to get Trump out of office. We don’t need to list those for you — they’ve been all over the news. The leftist media fawn at his every word, most of which are false as they pertain to the President. But now, Mr. Schiff has been exposed as being in the tank for a very wealthy and very politically connected billionaire oligarch from Ukraine!

Mr. Schiff May Really Be “Shifty Schiff”

Have you before heard the name, Igor Pasternak? Before we’re done today, you’ll know quite a bit about this Ukrainian gun dealer, business mogul and a major contributor to politicians in the U.S. As long ago as 2014, we have been able to find links between Pasternak and multiple U.S. politicians.

Pasternak, who was raised and educated in Ukraine before immigrating to the United States, is a passionate promoter of Ukrainian culture and business. He has been active in both Los Angeles and Washington, D.C. to support increased ties between the two countries and has been especially active in building awareness of Ukraine’s strategic economic importance among Members of Congress. Since political protests broke out across Ukraine in late 2013, Pasternak has worked to personally inform and educate Members of Congress about the importance of Ukraine to European and US security.

That’s the good stuff.

Igor is an arms dealer who sells arms that include fully automatic M4, M16 rifles as well as much more sophisticated and “serious” military arms. He’s armed the armies and militia of many countries in the Middle East, Europe, and Southeast Asia. And, more importantly, he is very connected to those on the “dark side” of politics in Ukraine.

He’s been in the U.S. for some time. And while here, he quickly learned the importance of obtaining and nurturing relationships with heavyweight U.S. politicians. He quickly found a willing candidate to fill such a role: Adam Schiff.

Hmm… This is Rep. Adam Schiff — the California Democrat who is in front of television cameras and radio microphones daily in his quest to kick Donald Trump out of the White House. His latest ploy is to attempt to connect President Trump with Ukraine’s president Zelensky alleging the President has attempted to pressure Zelensky to investigate Joe and Hunter Biden for apparent corruption with other Ukrainians using Congressional approved foreign aid for Ukraine as a tool. But it seems Schiff may be leveraging Ukraine from another direction for some other purpose.

How are Schiff and Pasternak Connected?

It started this way: Pasternak emigrated to the U.S. in 1994 where he started a company: Aeroscraft. Pasternak then reached into the U.S. political atmosphere to find some friendly politicians who could help him assist the Ukrainian government on a really big project: transitioning their military firearms away from those previously used and relied on from Russia. Pasternak suggested the M16 American rifle. Introducing Adam Schiff.

Newsweek followed the Ukraine small-arms problem as a Ukrainian arms company — Ukroboronservis — sought to partner with an American company for the project: Aeroscraft.

Aeroscraft, the American firm owned by Pasternak partnered with Ukroboronservis to produce M16s, is a California-based aviation company specializing in lighter-than-air aircraft—including airships intended for U.S. military use.

As most Americans know, there have been for decades amazing foreign business opportunities for foreign companies through partnerships and joint-ventures with American companies to reach world markets. Aeroscraft sought those opportunities using Pasternak’s Ukraine connections and with political assistance in the U.S. As a Californian, the obvious place to start was with California politicians. He met Adam Schiff and the two clicked. One thing led to another and Pasternak became a major fundraiser for Schiff.

I’m not sure you can read the picture on the left, but it’s an invitation to a “Taste of Ukraine Reception” held by Pasternak at his home for a $2500 contribution per person. The recipient of the proceeds was “Adam Schiff for Congress.” That was in 2013.

There have been other fundraisers held by Pasternak for politicians other than Schiff. But Schiff has been the most involved. Even this year (2019) Schiff during one Congressional recess made a trip to Ukraine. Under the current circumstances, that’s really not surprising. He was part of a group that was sponsored by Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center. See Schiff’s name underlined in red on the flight manifest shown on the right side of the story. The trip for that group happened from August 24 to August 31, 2019.

Who is The Atlantic Council? The Atlantic Council is an American Atlanticist think tank in the field of international affairs. Founded in 1961, it provides a forum for international political, business, and intellectual leaders. It manages ten regional centers and functional programs related to international security and global economic prosperity. It is headquartered in Washington, D.C. It is a member of the Atlantic Treaty Association.

Summary

So what does this association between Congressman Schiff and Igor Pasternak mean? Is it on its face somehow evil? Does it portend unethical or evil behavior on the part of either Schiff or Pasternak? Not necessarily. But, in the words of those on the left at the release of the Mueller Report, while this association does not implicate either gentleman for any wrongdoing, it does NOT exonerate either.

It’s humorous that if we are to use the definitions, thought processes and practices that the Left have sold-out to, Schiff, in this case, would not only be evil, but in cahoots with a Ukranian billionaire oligarch who’s in the tank with an element of the Ukraine government that is corrupt and they’ve found a way to manufacture American-made M16’s and sell them to the Ukranian government. What’s that old saying I’ve shared with you many times: “If it quacks and waddles it’s probably a duck.”

In all sincerity, I have no factual information about this relationship. We did reach out to Rep. Schiff’s office for comment. I expect someone will call me back to comment when Hell freezes over! Nevertheless, we have and will stick with the legitimate, righteous, and Constitutional way to approach the possible relationship of Mr. Schiff and Mr. Pasternak being to somehow be for criminal purposes — you know: “Innocent until proven guilty.” It just seems in the environment created by Schiff in the witchhunt of Donald Trump that Mr. Schiff may be able to at least shed light on how one conducts such activities, even if he is not personally part of any illegalities. By his measure, however, we would be guilty if you or I was in such a relationship.

By the way: in the picture below, that’s Igor Pasternak…with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi1

 

 

 

 

 

 

Play