Senate Impeachment Trial:Day One

The fireworks were aplenty! But as all the world looked on, the United States Senate gaveled in and began just the third impeachment trial in United States history. As House Speaker Pelosi (D-CA) said after the House voted to impeach President Trump a month ago: “Donald Trump will be impeached…FOREVER!”

But will the Senate convict him in this trial and remove him from office? If so, Mr. Trump would be the first such United States President to be evicted from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

However, the fire of Impeachment was just lighted on Tuesday. We have a long way to go. As promised, we present for you a summary of the topics of import from Day One of the Senate impeachment trial in bullet point:

  • Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts and each Senator had already been sworn last week. The Senate was gaveled into session at about noon. The first order of business was to consider the rules with which the Impeachment trial would be governed. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell presented a resolution with proposed details of trial operations that the Republican majority had determined. The fireworks then began.
  • The House Managers (“Prosecutors”) led by Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and the President’s defense team each took exact amounts of time to debate each issue of the Trial Resolution. The most contentious element of the Impeachment Resolution was/is the calling of witnesses and the presentation of physical evidence.
  • Leading House Manager Rep. Adam Schiff made the argument (which he restated throughout the Tuesday trial) that the President has continued to make statements that Article II of the Constitution gives a President authority to “do anything he wants to do.”
  • The President’s attorneys argued that the House refused to take their issues regarding members of the Administration refusing to appear before Congress or to provide subpoenaed documents through the court system. The House Managers on the floor admitted that going to federal court would get in the way of impeaching the President before the election.
  • The President’s attorneys argued that the House subpoenas for witness testimony from Administration members and documents were each invalid because none of them were issued with the consent of the House — only from various committees, which is a violation.
  • Senate rejects Schumer amendment calling for a subpoena for White House witnesses and documents: On a party-line vote, 53-47, the Senate votes to put aside — or kill — Schumer’s amendment to subpoena witnesses and reports from the White House.
  • Senator Schumer proposed a new amendment to subpoena documents from the State Department related to calls between President Trump and Ukrainian President Zelenskiy. The Senate rejected the amendment proposed for the subpoena for State Department documents by a vote of 53-47.
  • Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) started the process by presenting Democrat proposed amendments to the resolution. The majority of Democrat amendments introduced on Tuesday dealt with the calling of specific witnesses from the Trump Administration. Some of those wishing to be called are:
  • Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney: Mulvaney is said to have approved a meeting between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky that was conditioned on investigations into Hunter Biden and Burisma, according to testimony from National Security Council member Fiona Hill. Democrats hope to question him about that meeting, and his role in the delay in releasing nearly $400 million in military aid to Ukraine. The Senate rejected the amendment proposed for the appearance of Mr. Mulvaney by a vote of 53-47.
  • Former National Security Advisor John Bolton: Bolton had a meeting with Trump about removing the hold on aid to Ukraine, according to testimony from former National Security Council official Tim Morrison. Bolton has hinted he has information about Trump’s attempts to pressure Ukraine that is not yet known to Congress. He refused to testify before the House without a court order, but Democrats hope he can shed light on how much high-level officials knew about the pressure campaign — and when they knew what. The Senate rejected the amendment proposed for Bolton’s appearance by a vote of 53-47.
  • Associate Director for National Security, Office of Management and Budget Michael Duffey: Duffey, a political appointee at the Office of Management and Budget, sent emails to the White House about the hold the president wanted on aid to Ukraine, according to witness testimony from OMB official Mark Sandy during the House inquiry. Duffey also refused to testify before the House but may be able to clarify the timeline around the release of the aid. The Senate rejected the amendment proposed for the appearance of Asst. Director Duffey by a vote of 53-47.
  • Mulvaney senior adviser Robert Blair: As an aide to Mulvaney, Blair was involved in communications between the Office of Management and Budget and the White House, and could provide testimony about the timing of releasing aid to Ukraine, according to Sandy’s sworn statements during the House inquiry. The Senate rejected the amendment proposed for Blair’s appearance by a vote of 53-47.
  • Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) initiated a debate on an amendment to “prevent the selective admission of evidence and to provide for the appropriate handling of classified and confidential materials,” again failed along party lines, 53-47.
  • Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) proposed an amendment to accelerate witness votes. The Senate rejected the amendment proposed to accelerate witness votes by a vote of 52-48.
  • Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) proposed an amendment for there to be an independent arbiter to determine which witnesses submitted by either side are a material witness to this trial and which should be allowed to provide testimony and which is not. Schiff’s proposal was for Chief Justice Roberts to be that independent arbiter. The Senate rejected the amendment proposed to rely on an arbiter to determine in any future witness testimony which witnesses would be material witnesses and therefore allowed to testify and which are not by a vote of 53-47. (Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) crossed party line to support this amendment.)
  • The Final Vote of the Day was to approve on Party lines the Trial Rules presented by Majority Leader McConnell


On the first day of the Senate Impeachment Trial, eight proposed amendments to the Resolution entered by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to set the orders of the operation of the trial. Each proposed amendment was “tabled” by votes down party lines: 53-47. “Tabled” is nothing more than a technical way for legislators to claim “innocent” when confronted with their vote on each of these issues. The “tabling” of an amendment is not a vote against an amendment, instead of saying, “We will not vote on this amendment at this time. It is highly unlikely such a vote on these amendments will ever happen, so the effect is the same.

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts has a tomorrow morning conflict that will require his present across the street from the U.S. Capitol at 10:00 AM tomorrow to hear oral arguments on a SCOTUS case. The impeachment trial will reconvene after noon.

My Thoughts

We all knew this was not going to be a fast process, even though the House rushed their impeachment inquiry saying it was necessary for their investigation be completed quickly. But their actions Tuesday were surprising to me. Multiple times Rep. Adam Schiff stated, “the impeachment case and evidence provided by the House is ironclad proof that the President committed impeachable offenses. If that indeed is true, why did they spend thirteen hours in the Senate demanding that they are provided an unfettered ability to collect more evidence and interrogate more witnesses? Any reasonable person would have to conclude that their evidence is not “ironclad,” as Mr. Schiff continually maintained.

Also, over and over again in the Tuesday trial reminded the Senators in the Chamber how easy and quick it would be for all those witnesses they requested to be subpoenaed for their testimony to appear and testify NOW. Why did they NOT issue subpoenas and pursue any of those not responded to those subpoenas before they moved to an impeachment trial?

The answer to that question is that they “didn’t want to take up all the time they have before the 2020 election,” so they did not pursue their legal remedies to obtain that testimony but relied on the Senate during the impeachment trial to do so.

The Senate adjourned 1:48 AM and will reconvene at 1:00 PM Eastern on Wednesday. Chief Justice Roberts has commitments to the oral arguments at the Supreme Court Wednesday morning beginning at 10:00 AM Eastern.

In conclusion, the one thing that made the biggest impression on me — and that impression is very alarming — is that Rep. Adam Schiff is NOT an honest person. He’s not a reasonable person — at least in this setting. Mr. Schiff is NOT understanding, conducive to work hard for consensus or to negotiate. Worst of all for me is that as unreasonable as I have felt he is, especially in his anger for President Trump, I feel is a really evil person. I am not passing judgement on he or any other member of Congress. But Rep. Schiff demeaned again and again not just President Trump, but every Republican that voted for Mr. Trump. He made clear over and over that he “knows” that the President actually colluded with Russians in 2016 and that he is working with them for this upcoming election.

I cannot make this stuff up. It is the actual fabric of the cloth Americans have weaved and put in charge of our government. The blanket — our “cloth” — belongs to Mr. Trump and a small group of elites that he has hand-chosen.

Wednesday is Day Two of the Impeachment of President Trump. And we have it all for you here! Make sure you are here on Wednesday and every day this week. You’ll not be surprised and certainly not disappointed.

One final thought before you leave today: please click on the link below and listen to this 90-second notice:

Impeachment Because of…?

Before we begin today, pause just a moment and click on the following link and listen to this 90-second message:

This doesn’t often happen at TruthNewsNetwork: we don’t reprint the articles of other writers, and we certainly don’t do that for editorials from CNN! This CNN “contributor,” Scott Jennings, worked formerly for George W. Bush and Senator Mitch McConnell. He owns a public relations firm in Louisville. CNN uses him as their “token” conservative on their website.

This column was published shortly after the House Judiciary Committee hearing at which those three brilliant law professors weighed-in with their facts about the basis for the impeachment of President Trump.

Read this while knowing that the people on the left are not all without reason and understanding. How and why they use what they have is beyond me, but at least they know their quest to rid the White House of its current inhabitant does not resonate well with most Americans.

Read and enjoy this. We’ll reconvene right after.

Scott Jennings

When the global elite are aligned against him and laughing like the immature cool kids you hated in middle school, President Donald Trump is winning.

When the liberal law professors are neglecting their Thanksgiving turkeys to read congressional transcripts and snarking about Trump’s 13-year old son, Trump is winning.
When the politicians are mad — so mad that they have shut down all policymaking to impeach the President of the United States on what constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley called “wafer thin” evidence —Trump is winning.
You have to remember: Donald Trump wasn’t elected to fit in with these people — the political, intellectual class — to make them happy, or to become one of them. He was elected to break them. And that’s apparently what he’s done.
After Wednesday’s House Judiciary Committee hearing featuring three liberal law professors and Thursday’s announcement by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi that her conference is moving forward with impeachment, the die is cast — Donald Trump will be the third president in American history to be impeached by the House of Representatives.
And honestly, that’s just fine with Trump’s supporters. What better evidence is there that you’ve shaken Washington to its core when the minders of a system you’ve come to despise are leveling the gravest punishment the system permits against the very President who is doing the shaking up?
We can lawyer this to death, but for many Americans this comes down to a simple observation — Trump said he was going to rattle their cages, and by golly they seem rattled.
Trump’s supporters have known since election night that this day would eventually come. After all, his sworn enemies have been openly promising it since before he was sworn into office! They’ve used words like “resistance,” “coup,” “insurance policy,” and “impeachment” so often that, now that they are actually doing it, the American people — and Republicans especially — are offering a collective yawn.
Rueful analysts stare into television cameras, lamenting and wondering why Republicans aren’t fleeing from the President over the impeachment hearings (he stands at 90% approval among his party in the latest Gallup poll). But there won’t be massive convulsions in public opinion because everyone has known for three years what was going to happen.
Sure, some Democrats gamely argue that Pelosi didn’t really want to go through with it, but she had to out of a sense of duty to the Constitution. But it’s a half-hearted argument at best. It’s true that Pelosi had no choice, although it’s not because of the Constitution. Rather, her party’s left flank and their inflamed grassroots activists overwhelmed her.
This is a one-sided, partisan impeachment. It’s the exact kind of thing Congressman Jerry Nadler, now chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, warned Republicans about in 1998, during Bill Clinton’s impeachment.
But political party leaders almost always do what the bulk of their party’s supporters want them to. Republicans — no matter how moderate — got in line to cut taxes and confirm an avalanche of conservative judges because that’s what their activists expected.
And what have Democrats wanted more than anything since Trump’s election? Since the confirmation hearings for Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh? Since Trump made Twitter his private channel to the electorate? Since the Mueller probe? Since the Trump Hotel story? Since questions over Jared Kushner’s security clearance? Since…you name it?
The answer is obvious: to undo the 2016 election by any means necessary. It’s a political itch that had to be scratched, and Pelosi could hold off her tormented partisans no longer.
So here we are, headed for a rushed, hyper-partisan (and futile) exercise put on by the very elites Trump railed against to get himself elected in the first place. But for all the relief they might feel in finally striking this blow against Donald Trump, I wonder: have these Trump opponents even considered what this impeachment signals to the American people?
That partisanship is more important than policymaking? That House Democrats have no confidence in their party’s ability to beat Donald Trump in an election?
And, perhaps most alarmingly, that impeachment — once reserved for the gravest of situations — is now just another tool to inflict damage on their political opponents.


Democrats sure do enjoy raining on the parade that is the Trump economy. Joe Biden, who somehow remains the Democratic frontrunner, recently accused President Trump of “squandering” the Obama economy in recent years. Squandering what, exactly?

Under the Obama administration, America’s unemployment rate peaked at 10 percent — the highest figure since the early 1980s. Employers struggled to create jobs, while employees and job-seekers saw fewer opportunities in the private sector. President Trump, to his credit, has described today’s U.S. economy as one of the strongest ever. In his words: “Wages are rising, incomes are soaring, and 2.5 million Americans have been lifted out of poverty in less than three years.”

So who’s right? Well, the numbers are in, and they tell the same story: The Trump economy is indeed soaring.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ latest jobs report, here are the facts:

  • the U.S. economy added 128,000 jobs in October of 2019— exceeding initial estimates of 75,000.
  • America’s unemployment rate (3.6 percent) remains one of the lowest in the last 50 years.
  • The total employment level reached a new high of 158.5 million people.
  • The unemployment rate for African-Americans dropped to a record low of 5.4 percent.
  • At the same time, Latino business owners are ramping up investment and taking their businesses to unprecedented heights, supporting employees, and job-seekers in the process. Between 2017 and 2018, the revenues of Latino-owned companies jumped nearly 25 percent, while the average income of such businesses has improved by more than 46 percent this year alone.

Job creators can thank the president and his pro-growth economic agenda. For years now, the Trump administration has focused on rolling back the size of government to help entrepreneurs do what they do best: Create, invest, and grow. During the Obama years, taxes steadily rose, while rules and regulations seemingly crept into every aspect of American life.

Not so with Trump. He believes in the American Dream, not a government-run economy. He believes that American ingenuity, when left alone, is more than enough to drive economic growth for decades to come. That ingenuity — the power of the American Dream — is enough to take our economy to new heights.

Tax reform is a prime example. While Democrats only look for new ways to increase taxes and fund trillion-dollar programs like the “Green New Deal” and other massive spending programs, President Trump figured out that the best deal is for individual Americans to keep and use that money themselves. Since President Trump signed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act into law, more than 800 U.S. employers — large and small — have announced new hires, pay raises, benefit increases, bonus distributions, facility expansions, and utility rate reductions because of the lower tax burden. From Apple and Walmart to local bookstores and mom-and-pop diners, America’s job creators now have more resources to invest in business expansion and job creation — and they are investing in those resources.

By 2027, projections are that the TCJA will create more than 1.2 million full-time-equivalent jobs. In 2019 alone, tax reform led to the creation of nearly 250,000 career opportunities for Americans across the country.

The verdict is in: When it comes to the U.S. economy, nothing is being “squandered.” We are experiencing one of the most substantial economic resurgences in American history. Our economy is roaring because of the millions of Americans who now feel empowered to create, invest, and grow under the Trump administration.


Today is a really full day: the first day of the Senate trial and the announcement of a new chapter in the life of Truth News Network. I hope you listened to the audio snippet at the top of today’s story — it’s essential. If you didn’t do so already, please do. We need to hear from you with your opinion. Because we’re all part of the same family, your thoughts and ideas are significant to us here.

Don’t forget that during the night tonight, we will publish in bullet point format the highlights of Tuesday’s Day 1 Senate impeachment trial happenings. That headline synopsis will accompany our daily story and podcasts as long as the impeachment trial lasts.

If you want to assure you never miss any of these headlines, stories, or podcasts, enter your name and email address on the right side of the site’s homepage. When you do, you will (overnight when new stories are published) receive a simple notification email that contains a link to the latest stories and podcasts. You can click on the link and go right to the story. And it will provide every day a synopsis of the previous day’s impeachment trial happenings.

“Happy Impeachment Tuesday!”

It’s Begun: House Lunacy Part II in the Senate

It’s impossible to comprehend the exact purposes for Democrats’ impeachment of Donald Trump. There is certainly no reasonable purpose for doing so. Yet they continue to pile on with allegation after allegation, witness after witness. They claim that each piece of “evidence” and each witness bring factual proof that President Trump committed impeachable offenses.

House prosecutors over the weekend released the 111-page summary of “evidence” with which they expect the Senate to use to remove Donald Trump from office. In doing so, the ridiculousness of this is illustrated best in this first paragraph of the summary of their impeachment plan:

“President Donald J. Trump used his official powers to pressure a foreign government to interfere in a United States election for his political gain, and then attempted to cover up his scheme by obstructing Congress’s investigation into his misconduct. The Constitution provides a remedy when the President commits such serious abuses of his office: impeachment and removal. The Senate must use that remedy now to safeguard the 2020 U.S. election, protect our constitutional form of government, and eliminate the threat that the President poses to America’s national security.”

Honestly, I am past tired of having to address over and over their ridiculous claims and assertions. Mr. Trump did NOT use his powers to pressure a foreign government to do anything. He didn’t pressure Ukraine in any way. And Democrats’ witnesses before the House Judiciary committee each stated clearly when asked that Donald Trump did NOT commit any impeachable offense. None gave ANY evidence of ANY impeachable wrongdoing by the President.

Steny Hoyer — Nancy Pelosi’s #2 in the House — said this about the impeachment inquiry last month by remarking that Trump was afforded “every opportunity to prove his innocence. Instead, he ignored Congressional subpoenas for documents and testimony by White House officials and ordered his subordinates not to cooperate. This itself is unprecedented,” Hoyer claimed.

First, ignoring Congressional subpoenas by a President is anything but unprecedented. It has happened hundreds of times in the past. EVERY president has exerted executive privilege as a reason for not providing subpoenaed documents and testimony.

Secondly, when I heard Hoyer say that the President was provided “every opportunity” to prove his innocence, I did a double-take. Yes, I have felt personally for a long time that Democrats don’t want only to handpick specific laws that are OK for which law enforcement to ignore enforcement, but Democrats want the entire U.S. Justice System blown up. They indict members of law enforcement who DO enforce laws that Democrats don’t like. 

There are many ironies in what Hoyer stated when he said that reveal what’s far more profound in the Democrat Party platform of today. Do you find yourself ever questioning what the Democrat Platform is for 2020? I don’t know for sure. But in light of much of what Dems are doing and attempting to do in D.C. and what they are pushing nationally, I have some ideas. Let’s take a quick look:

  • They refuse to find ways to pass immigration laws that stop illegal entries into the U.S.
  • They take action in court again and again against executive orders issued by Mr. Trump regarding enforcement of border laws he does try to curtail the lawlessness Dems promote.
  • They refused twice to accept proposed legislation by the Trump Administration to give DACA recipients temporary legal status and then a path to citizenship. Why? Because the provision included funding of a wall to close the southern border.
  • They refuse to join in any action to shore up America’s election system by mandating voter ID for voters. Further, in every state that has passed any voter ID laws, they take those states to court to block.
  • Year after year, Democrat leadership have turned their backs on the enforcement of laws protecting America’s young men and women from sex and drug traffickers. Until the Trump Administration and this Department of Justice, the implementation of such laws was non-existent. In Trump’s three years, more than 100,000 have been brought to justice, and 500,000 young Americans were saved from sex traffickers.
  • Drug laws. There are federal laws against the sale of illegal drugs and those who sell them. Obama’s DOJ was instructed by the White House not to enforce those laws. They didn’t. This White House says: “You don’t like existing drug laws that you passed, change the laws!”

These are just a few of the hundreds of examples of the trampling of the Rule of Law that came with our forefathers from Europe and which is the bedrock of the most exceptional justice system on Earth.

Their justice methodology? “We’ll tell you which laws to enforce, which to ignore, and who can and cannot be held to the enforcement of each of those laws.”

Back to Impeachment

So with the grandeur of a British royal reception, Senate Democrats welcomed Speaker Pelosi, Rep. Adam Schiff, and others at the end of the long trek from the House to the Senate carrying their two articles of impeachment for the Senate trial to use this week.

What can we expect?

At the end of this article, we have posted a .pdf of the 111-page summary by the House prosecutors of their case against Mr. Trump. Feel free to download it and read it at your leisure. If you’re honest and trust the Constitution, you’ll do nothing but shake your head in disgust. Not surprisingly, there is NOTHING it contains that has anything to do with collusion, violation of the emoluments clause, obstruction of justice, Quid pro Quo, bribery, or any other “High Crime or Misdemeanor.” Each of these has been the charges levied against POTUS by Democrats they said he committed, and they would use to impeach. NONE WERE FOUND, AND NONE ARE INCLUDED IN THE ARTICLES.

But there’s plenty of hatred, anger, disgust, lies, misquotes, and LACK OF EVIDENCE.

You’ll note, they’ve stopped talking about Mr. Trump’s collusion that changed the outcome of the 2016 election. They now want the Senate to remove the President from office for what “he might do to impact the 2020 election.” How ironic is that!

The irony? The FBI warned former President Obama several years before the 2016 election that the Russians and other bad actors were working diligently to hack into our election system. Yet, no one in the Obama DOJ reached out to any of the 50 states to warn them of “credible threats” against our election system.

After the 2016 election, acting AG Rod Rosenstein stated there was no election hacking that was successful or changed even one vote in the 2016 election.

Now Democrats want to spit in the faces of 63 million Americans who, in a democratic election, chose for Donald Trump to be President. And they’re attempting that with not a single shred of evidence of a Trump impeachable offense.

Watch/Listen to this summary of what House Democrat Prosectors gave as justification for doing so:


Oddly, Nancy Pelosi ordered gold pens to use in her ceremonial signing of the articles of impeachment before turning them over to the Senate — real gold pens for which American taxpayers paid. Speaker Pelosi has demeaned President Trump since the inception of his campaign and daily since. She’s called him every name in the book.

Many Americans and I doubt that she, as she claims, prays for the President every day. I cannot weigh in on that. I don’t know her heart. But her actions and words speak highly about her disdain for Donald Trump.

I’ll finish by pointing out this one irony: do you know how many pens Speaker Pelosi ordered and used in that ceremony and then gave away? Thirty: thirty gold pens. That sounds eerily like “thirty pieces of silver” Judas received for selling-out Jesus.

Irony? Pelosi used and gave away gold pens. Judas only got silver. Pelosi had to one-up even Judas.

(Here’s the House Impeachment Memorandum download)



“Let’s Get Ready to Rumble…!”

Impeachment is about to ramp up in the trial in the Senate. We have been informed that all the preliminaries were completed on Saturday and that the actual trial is set to begin Tuesday morning. We said we’d be with you today with the details and timeline for the impeachment trial today. But we were informed late last night those details will not be made public until Monday.

Here’s what we can tell you:

  • Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts was sworn to preside over the trial;
  • All of the members of the U.S. Senate have been sworn;
  • The Prosecutors from the House were sworn as well;
  • The detailed articles of impeachment were brought over from the House of Representatives and formally presented to the Senate for the trial.

As far as any late news regarding the submission and acceptance of “new” evidence in the form of documents and/or witness testimony is still to be determined. As you know, House members along with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer have for weeks been demanding for the Senate leaders to agree to coordinate the structure of the trial with House leaders and to set up its structure before the trial begins. In fact, that is why House Speaker Pelosi kept the articles away from the Senate for 28 days, trying to use that delivery as leverage over the Senate. It did not work.

Both Senators and Representatives have tossed around their personal ideas regarding the call of witnesses to testify. Of course, the Democrats are demanding they be allowed to call witnesses: the same ones they called before. They are especially interested in “forcing” all those they subpoenaed that did not appear before the House because of executive privilege. Additionally, they certainly wish to hear from the just “discovered” Rudy Guliani “friend” who gave Democrats some information Dems say incriminate the President.

Republicans, on the other hand, wish to call and hear from the whistleblower, Rep. Adam Schiff (which is unlikely to testify), former VP Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, and a number of former members of the Obama intelligence department.

Even if witnesses WILL be called is up in the air and will remain so for several days.

Remember: when the trial starts, it will daily last all day and into the evening, six days a week until it is completed. It is going to be very difficult to follow every important moment in the trial. We certainly want to make certain none at TruthNewsNetwork miss a thing. What we will do is every morning when our email with story link goes out to all our partners include a bullet-point summary of the important impeachment trial matters from the previous day. If you’re a TruthNewsNetwork subscriber, you’ll get that overnight email with the link early every morning. If you haven’t enrolled, please do so by filling in the form at the bottom right of the home page of

Have a great end to your weekend, and get set: we’re going to have a wild week!

Bullet Points: Saturday, January 18, 2020

What could be more appropriate to drop headlines about today than “Impeachment!” And we will not disappoint.

But there are other important things going on in the nation and elsewhere in the world that are critical to the United States. Let’s look at those before we get the latest on impeachment. Here’s how this works:

We give you a headline of a story with basic facts contained in that story. If after reading our thoughts you want more details, simply click on the provided link and it will take you directly to a full story.

Enjoy this Saturday morning with your warm cup of tea or coffee while catching up with what’s gone on in the world during your busy week.


  • If the video streaming world wasn’t crowded enough with the likes of Hulu, Netflix, Roku, and Disney, NBC is introducing a new streaming product: Peacock. NBC management understands they need a way to differentiate their streaming product to put some space between theirs and those who have been in the market for some time. Peacock will actually have two levels of service — one that will be free but has ads, and a second for-pay version. For more details, click on this link:
  • Where or where has James Comey been lately? We’re not certain if he’s in the States or on another continent. But we are sure of one thing: his wife took his laptop away so he cannot tweet! Seriously though, the former FBI Director is back in the news and back under fire from the Legal system. Prosecutors are looking at an old case involving a Russian document and the likelihood that the then FBI Director leaked contents of the document to the Press. (Sounds familiar, right?) That would be a violation of the handling of classified documents. For more details, click on this link:
  • Most of us have seen some bizarre behavior in airports before, but probably none like Miami passengers saw in baggage claim. A woman wearing a dark blue bikini walking through that area decided she was either too warm or just uncomfortable in her tiny bikini. Her answer: to take off the bikini! But the story doesn’t end there. For more details, click on this link:
  • In a shocking and unexpected move, Russian President Vladimir Putin accepted the resignations of the entire Russian government! The move by Putin is part of a just-announced overhaul of the Russian government to apparently spread government power over more people. Hmmm… That doesn’t sound like Putin’s action, does it!? What’s he up to? For complete details, click on this link:
  • HBO announced that it has teamed up with CNN’s Reliable Sources host Brian Stelter for a documentary about the rise of “fake news” just days after it was announced that the news network settled its defamation lawsuit with Covington Catholic High School student, Nick Sandmann. There is much irony in this announcement — CNN, which is often called the “Fake News Network,” is thought by many to be the last network to publish stories about fake news. And Brian Stelter had been exposed in numerous lies and gross misrepresentations of the news in the last few years. For more details, click on this link:
  • It’s been a while since there has been an illegal immigrant caravan from Central America heading to the U.S. southern border. But a group of between 1,000 and 3,000 have left Honduras, entered Guatemala, and are headed to the U.S. border. American and Mexican officials ran checks at the Honduran/Guatemala border for identification and proof that children were with their parents. Could this be the next illegal immigration problem for the U.S.? For complete details, click on this link:
  • Do you remember the movie statement regarding the monstrous Wall Street banks: “They’re too big to fail?” Americans can now say the same thing about Big Tech. “Alphabet” — the parent holding company of Google — became the fifth Tech firm to eclipse the $1 Trillion valuation mark. Those already made it are Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, and Facebook. The question kicked around by lawmakers about Big Tech centers around allegations of monopolies in technology dominating tech economics. For complete details, click on this link:
  • Did you receive your invitation to join more than 100 “other” billionaires in Davos, Switzerland next week for their annual economic summit? If not by now, you probably won’t be included on the guest list that includes 2000 others who don’t register on the “billionaire scale,” but certainly are among the world’s richest people. Of course, they’ll talk about climate change — after each flying into Davos on their private jets that are said to have an average price tag of $40 million each. And they don’t get much gas mileage! For details, click on this link:
  • This weekend, four teams that remain in the hunt for SuperBowl LIV will duke it out to the final two. The four quarterbacks on these teams have much at stake in their football careers as they suit up on Sunday. Green Bay’s Aaron Rodgers, San Francisco’s Jimmy Garappolo, Tennessee’s Ryan Tannehill, and Kansas City’s Patrick Mahomes each have a lot on the line. For complete details, click on this link:
  • There were many folks honored during the National Championship football game Monday in New Orleans. And they all were not football players. Teachers of the year were also given accolades. But in doing so, there was one teach — just one — who chose to do the old “kneel during the national anthem” protest. A Minnesota teacher was the participant. For more details, click on this link:
  • The Trump Impeachment investigation defense team picked up two very qualified attorneys in preparation for the Senate trial: Clinton impeachment prosecutor Ken Star and New York defense attorney Alan Dershowitz. For complete details, click on this link:

Don’t forget that tomorrow — Sunday — make sure you come back. We should have the complete scheduling details for the Senate impeachment trial from Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. We will discuss impeachment information that is new and layout our timing plan for our coverage on a daily basis for you of the investigation process.

“To My Democrat Brothers and Sisters….”

I’m NOT a Republican. I’m NOT a Democrat. I’m registered as “other” in my state, where one cannot register to vote as an “Independent.” But I AM a politically conservative independent.

That said, today I am making a few points addressed primarily to the thousands of my friends and relatives who are Democrats. I in no way am today demeaning the process of political parties in the U.S. But I echo the sentiments of the third President of the United States, Thomas Jefferson when he said:

“Both of our political parties, at least the honest portion of them, agree conscientiously in the same object: the public good; but they differ essentially in what they deem the means of promoting that good. One side believes it best done by one composition of the governing powers, the other by a different one. One fears most the ignorance of the people; the other the selfishness of rulers independent of them. Which is right, time and experience will prove.”

It’s safe to say that Jefferson was not a fan of political parties. There were two major parties just as now. It’s uncanny that Jefferson’s America experienced the same or similar angst with political parties as do we. However, just as did Jefferson in his day, we too need to find ways to mitigate the damages perpetrated by political parties in our America. And attempting that today is proving to be just as tricky as then. I’m beginning to feel the same way Jefferson felt when he said this:

If I could not go to Heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all.”

The “Villains”

I’m certain political parties themselves are not the entities with which Jefferson had his beef. The same holds today. The methods used by political parties and the reasoning that initiates their operating tactics are the aggravating elements of political parties. After all, their very existence is to coordinate efforts and garner resources sufficient to work to destroy their party counterparts continually! There’s nothing in party operations that can be considered “peaceful while diligent” methodology.

So who ARE the villains in politics? Today, there are several different parties on the nation’s political landscape. But the main two are apparent: Democrat and Republican parties. Let’s chat a bit about OUR political parties.


I am by no means a Republican hack. I have today (and also in the past) many issues with the Republican Party. Most of those things the GOP has done that rub me wrong are simply things that, when put in the perspective held by most Americans, are useless attempts to give Republicans an advantage of some sort regarding some political issue. And most of those end up being useless at worst and ineffective at best.

Take, for instance, the impeachment of Bill Clinton.

No doubt Bill Clinton made some horrible choices in his personal life. No doubt, some of those personal choices spilled over into his “public” life — particularly in the Oval Office. I understand that everyone has the explicit right to feel he should have been removed from office. But in my mind, as bad as were those improprieties with the intern that occurred in the White House, my question was then and still is, “Were those impeachable offenses?” Here come the Republicans.

They didn’t care about Hillary Clinton as Bill Clinton’s wife and how horrible it was her finding out about her husband’s dalliance with Monica Lewinsky in a news report. They didn’t care that the President of the United States had taken advantage of a 20-something-year-old young woman. All they cared about was that President Clinton’s wrongdoing justified their desire to run him out of the White House. Using that information alone, they launched a multi-year impeachment debacle that resulted in nothing but embarrassment for the President.

Then House Speaker Newt Gingrich spearheaded the Clinton impeachment. His doing so along with the House impeachment set the Republican Party back for quite a while. All that resulted is that Bill Clinton is today, and probably always will be, considered one of America’s most accomplished modern presidents.

George W. Bush

Republicans were ecstatic after the Clinton debacle to see one of their own back in the White House. “W” was able to take advantage of some excellent economics and international circumstances that he inherited. But he had that Middle East “thing” — Iraq — eating at him from the day of his inauguration. His father, who had tangled first with Saddam Hussein felt he left a job undone. The World Trade Center bombing took us right back into war with Iraq that many say should have never happened. Those weapons of mass destruction Bush used as fuel to start that war never were uncovered.

Thousands of young men and women paid the price for that uncertain war with their lives. Many think Bush 43 did that only to finish the feud between Hussein and Bush 41. We probably will never know for sure.

“W” missed some great opportunities for doing some extraordinary things for the U.S. during his eight years in office. He was the perfect president to initiate actions to fix the southern border illegal problems. I felt certain he could have mastered an effective immigration overhaul that would have repaired the border issues while simultaneously closing loopholes in other areas of immigration. He neglected to instigate any real immigration reform.

Though he gave it a valiant effort, Bush 43 gave up his proposed reform of Social Security to protect its longevity. I attended his Social Security reform meeting in Louisiana in which he promoted a partial conversion of the system to privatization that would have given participants options for the investment of at least their contributions into the system. He, of course, received major Democrat pushback for the idea. He walked away from it.

In his second term, it was as if he walked away from the campaign promises he made — like he just gave up. Spending went through the roof. He let Democrats run roughshod over budgets while deficits and U.S. debt went through the roof. It seemed the Iraq war wore him out, and he just gave up.

Mitt Romney

I thought Mitt had a decent shot at turning the White House back to red. He fought hard for a while. But at the very end of his campaign, when polls showed he had cut into Obama’s standing with Americans to a level many thought would not happen, he seemed just to quit. It appeared to many — including me — that he at some point decided he didn’t want to take on the responsibility of running a nation. The last 45 days of his campaign proved that to be true. And Obama easily won his second term.

Today’s GOP is looking more and more like a “status quo” party. Until the impeachment attacks on the President, Republicans played into the sense that all they want is to make no waves — to be the party of “Can’t we just get along?”

Impeachment brought the GOP back to attention. Impeachment, in the wake of the tremendous Trump accomplishments, even with scant support, opened their eyes. Little by little, I have watched as more Republicans have jumped aboard the “Trump Train.” As a party, they are as united as I can remember since the Twin Towers toppled.

Republicans seem more engaged, more challenged, and more resolute to prove the Trump Agenda is real, productive, and all-inclusive. None of it is politically motivated but driven by one thing: Mr. Trump, when campaigning, made promises that he has kept today.

Then The Democrats on the Left

This is where I part ways with Democrats: we have nothing in common anymore. When Trump beat Hillary, it was on. And the war instigated by Democrats against President Trump is one of historic proportions. And in starting and perpetuating this war, Democrats are daily giving Americans new clues proving that Democrats have lost touch with average Americans.

What is most troubling and what confirms that Democrats have lost it is their immediate and total dismissals of facts regarding Mr. Trump. Add to that their consistent expressions of anger and hatred for first Mr. Trump then for every American who supports him and more and more Americans are leaving the Democrat Party.

It appears that Democrat leadership and most Democrats have abandoned all reason. Think about this: they’re impeaching Trump amid many amazing accomplishments handed to Americans by this Trump Administration:

  • Lowest unemployment in decades;
  • More Americans employed than ever;
  • More jobs available than Americans to fill them;
  • Record federal revenue;
  • Lowest income tax rates in a generation;
  • Re-patriation of hundreds of billions in corporate income with a Trump deal that has put billions into new jobs, benefits, and expansions;
  • Two of the most significant trade agreements in U.S. history:  China, and USMCA — the treaty with Canada and Mexico;
  • Six million fewer Americans on government assistance because they have jobs which didn’t even exist four years ago.

We could continue listing his accomplishments but will stop for the sake of time.

This investigative impeachment process has been a charade — a clown show. Orchestrated by Nancy Pelosi, Jerry Nadler, and Adam Schiff, it has each day exposed Democrat hatred and subsequent losses of reason. It’s all over the marketplace. And Americans are learning the truth of the Democrat Party: they want only to control the lives of Americans — all Americans.

After a faux House investigation that resulted in articles of impeachment, and after the stall by Speaker Pelosi for three weeks to refer those articles to the Senate, she finally did while simultaneously “finding” new evidence with which to implicate the President in something else.

Here’s the synopsis of this evidence as presented by the Associated Press:

House Democrats have released a trove of documents they obtained from Lev Parnas, a close associate of President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, including a handwritten note that mentions asking Ukraine’s president to investigate “the Biden case.”

The documents, obtained as part of the impeachment investigation, show Parnas communicating with Giuliani before the removal of Marie Yovanovitch, who was the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine. A man named Robert F. Hyde disparaged Yovanovitch in messages to Parnas and gave him updates on her location and cell phone use, raising questions about possible surveillance.

Among the documents is a screenshot of a previously undisclosed letter from Giuliani to Ukrainian President Volodymir Zelenskiy dated May 10, 2019, which was before Zelenskiy took office. In the letter, Giuliani requests a meeting with Zelenskiy “as personal counsel to President Trump and with his knowledge and consent.” In the letter, Giuliani said he would be accompanied at the meeting by Victoria Toensing, a Washington attorney and Trump ally.

The notes were scratched by hand on a Ritz Carlton note pad paper and are barely legible. Additionally, the wrongdoing alleged is at best second-hand and provides no evidence that the President knew any of the conversations or if he even knows those included in the comments!

One important note was left out of of the plethora of stories about this “blockbuster” expose: Parnas and his business partner, Igor Fruman, both U.S. citizens who emigrated from the former Soviet bloc, were indicted last year on charges of conspiracy, making false statements and falsification of records!

You can’t make this stuff up. And Democrats make no apology for their ignoble allegations of this ridiculous “evidence” that lacks any remnant of the possibility of holding any truth.

Keep in mind, however, that Americans have never seen any piece of the mountains of evidence held by Rep. Adam Schiff that — according to Schiff himself and confirmed by other Democrat House members — are absolute that Mr. Trump colluded with Vladimir Putin and other Russians to steal the 2016 election. And Schiff will be in the Senate on behalf of the House trying the President of the United States! Why doesn’t Schiff simply reveal the Trump treasonous he has claimed for more than two years exist and end this impeachment debacle?


To my friends that hold to Democrat blue, I am sad to be an observer of the fall into oblivion by your party. Fueled by a fawning media that very obviously take marching orders from Democrat Party leaders have failed to convince Americans of Mr. Trump’s wrongdoing. While doing so, their hatred for “all things Trump” and “all Trump supporters” is there now for all to see.

Democrats as of today summarily reject that Americans wanted and still want a president who can deliver to Americans for the first time in ten years accomplishments that EACH are 100% for middle Americans and NOT just for elites that are mostly Democrats. And Trump has accomplished what he promised to accomplish when campaigning.

There are reasons why Mr. Trump won Americans’ votes in 2500 counties and parishes in 2016 while Hillary Clinton won votes in just 500 counties. Yes, those 500 counties happened to be from California, New York, Connecticut, Chicago, Massachusetts, Maryland, and Washington, D.C. That election and its results are the reason for the establishment of the electoral college. Democrats refuse to accept that as viable.

For my Democrat brothers and sisters, only one thing ahead is certain — at least in my projections for 2020: Donald Trump will not only win in a margin far wider than did Obama and Bill Clinton in their elections as President, Republicans will win a larger margin in the Senate AND Republicans will gain once more the majority in the House of Representatives.

Why will all this happen? Americans have had it with the constant untruths and gross misrepresentations made and given to Americans by Democrats and other Leftists. And Americans, while glorying in their larger net paychecks and lower taxes and new jobs and skyrocketing investment and retirement accounts that withered away under Obama, are not so stupid as to snatch all the actions put in place by Mr. Trump and go back to 2016 financially. Americans are smarter than that. And most Americans understand today that Totalitarianism is unwanted here. Americans are more committed than ever to a market of free ideas.

Those Americans will gladly support Mr. Trump in November.


How Much Does it Cost to Impeach a President?

Really….what is this Impeachment process costing America? Make no mistake: the costs are staggering. Our nation not since World War II has experienced anything so expensive and so life changing as this drama thrust on the world stage to capture the attention of hundreds of millions.

How expensive is it going to be? Let’s measure the impeachment ticket balance.

Add It Up

Although Republicans insist the impeachment proceedings are a partisan farce and Democrats claim that our democracy is literally at stake, there’s one result of impeachment that neither party can deny. It’s costing taxpayers — bigly, as President Trump would say.

As House Democrats have pursued impeachment for the past three months, they’ve already cost taxpayers $3.06 million, according to Heritage Foundation’s research.

Add up lawyers’ fees and the salaries of staff whose duties have been consumed by impeachment proceedings, and taxpayers are footing a hefty bill. As the Daily Signal reports, the price tag could be even higher.

The total likely is a low estimate because it does not factor in overtime hours for U.S. Capitol Police when House hearings ran well into the late evenings. The total also doesn’t include the cost of executive branch expenses, travel costs for witnesses, or supplies and materials.

While members of Congress waste time on the House floor reading the Pledge of Allegiance or comparing Trump to Jesus, both arguments for and against impeachment have wallowed in meaningless rhetoric. As support for impeachment appears to be dropping, Democrats are going to have to prove to voters that they’re doing the right thing, and they need to do it before public opinion turns even further away, tanking Democrats’ chances in 2020.

At the moment, House Democrats’ empty rhetoric isn’t helping their case much. And each second costs taxpayers more money.

Impeachment History in $$$

In 1999, The New York Times reported that five months of impeachment work on former President Bill Clinton’s case cost $1.2 million, according to records from the House Judiciary Committee. Adjusted for the cost of inflation, $1.2 million in 1999 would be equal to about $1.8 million in 2020 dollars, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistic’s consumer price index inflation calculator.

Here’s a breakdown of some of the individual legal costs connected to the Clinton case detailed by the Times:

  • Payments to Chief Republican Investigator David Schippers: as much as $20,000 per month
  • Payments to Democratic counsel Abbe Lowell: as much as $18,000 per month

In 2020 dollars, those costs would be:

  • Chief investigator’s monthly salary: $30,179.05
  • Head counsel to represent the president: $27,161.15

Theoretically, in the exact same circumstances today  it would cost around $100,000 more to pay the lead investigator and counsel in this presidential impeachment case than it did in 1999, when Clinton’s impeachment trial concluded. Add to that an inflated cost of paying for the work of entire legal teams on both sides, and you have a considerable increase over 1999’s $2 million in impeachment costs.

If one adds to the actual impeachment process costs the expense of the 2.5 year Robert Mueller investigation, and the dollars for impeachment explodes. Mueller’s price tag was an estimated $40 million.

No matter if any of these numbers are accurate, impeachment costs are exorbitant. The only way Democrats can attempt to justify any of this expense is not and cannot be based on facts. The only reason they can possibly present for justification is that “history demands a president guilty of wrongdoing be held accountable.” And then there’s the constantly quoted saying by Pelosi and Company, “No one’s above the Law.” Pelosi can say that, but that’s not what she really means. What she is REALLY saying is “We’re creating a narrative that the President is guilty of wrongdoing.We don’t have evidence of impeachable offenses, so we’re going to do our best to sell the political narrative we have to the American people.”

Let’s be honest: the actual articles of impeachment sent over to the Senate have nothing to do with what Democrat members in the House used in multiple impeachment motions in the first months of his presidency. Remember: just hours after he spoke his oath of office, on mainstream newspaper published a story with this headline: “Let Impeachment Begin!”

From the beginning of his presidency, numerous Democrats made this ridiculous statement: “Donald Trump is guilty of impeachable offenses committed even before he was elected!” Do you know how ridiculous that is? No president can commit an impeachable offense WITHOUT BEING PRESIDENT! What they SHOULD have said was, “We don’t have any evidence of any impeachable offense by Mr. Trump. But we hate him. So we’re going to scour the world to find some wrongdoing we can accuse him of and impeach him.”

I questioned President Trump’s constant use of the term “Witch Hunt” for the Mueller investigation. But now I thoroughly understand the amazing similarities between this impeachment circus and the actual witch hunts that sent dozens and dozens of innocent people to their deaths in Salem, Massachusetts: “The Salem Witch Trials.”

The dollars and cents estimates of impeachment detailed above are hardly a drop in the bucket of the real impeachment costs. Don’t think for one moment those can be measured with a calculator. One thing is certain though, History will detail the cost of this charade. It certainly will NOT have dollar signs.

The REAL Cost of Impeachment

One entire generation of Americans — and maybe two generations — have been virtually lost when it comes to truth in politics. The current elementary, high school, and college generation have been brainwashed by educators who in large swallowed the pill of Socialism that has consumed their thinking. And what do teachers and professors all do? Teach their students not what they should regarding American government but what those educators personally think and feel about politics. (It’s all about politics, not government)

Do your children have a Civics class at their middle or high school? If they do, they are the rare fortunate ones. Civics is a lost compilation of the structure of the greatest country in World history and its government and operations. Instead this and the last generation have been filled with these thoughts: “Capitalism is an evil manipulation of the economy to benefit only large companies and the top 2% of the wealthiest Americans. Those corporations and wealthy Americans pay hardly anything in taxes while the middle class bear the brunt of financing the United States.”

Here’s the conundrum with that: there’s no debate of those statements. No one is there to present an alternative perspective. And since American adults have held confidence in our public educators’ teaching methods, (assuming that they still do as teachers did in our years in school) we have trusted them to feed our kids the truth about Capitalism, Democracy, Socialism and Totalitariansim, and free markets.

They haven’t done this. Now we have a generation that has not only lost its way and grasp on the truth, they have developed what they feel is the reality that Democracy, Capitalism, and free market ideas are oppressive concepts forced on Americans for decades.

How could that be? It’s simple: if a baby pig from birth is not allowed to oink but taught to bark each day, after a while it will begin to think and act like a dog!

That may be an extreme example, but, after all, isn’t that how education works? We teach what we want others to learn and duplicate in their own lives. That’s what these Millennials and Gen X-er’s are doing: living what they’ve been taught.

The Big “Kahuna”

Sadly, there’s one much bigger cost playing out in today’s political system illustrated most vividly in this impeachment process. We’ve said this often here at TNN: “The difference between Democrats (the Left) and Republicans (The Right) is that when political opponents of Republicans disagree with those Republicans, Republicans do not like what these opponents feel and express. When political opponents of Democrats disagree with Democrats, Democrats do not like what these opponents feel and express. But today’s Democrats take that one step further: THEY HATE THOSE REPUBLICANS!

This hatred, vitriol and vicious rejection of everyone with a different political perspective than do these Leftists has split America right down the middle. Polls don’t necessarily show how deep and concentrated it is. Why? Because many conservatives by the nature of Conservatism on the most part don’t become confrontational in political disputes while leftists often go right to the confrontation from the start. So conservatives just walk away.

I’m not foolish: I know there are hateful conservatives among Republicans. I also know that in the context of the whole of American conservatives, that number is minimal and is NOT the skeleton of the Conservative movement.

I sadly know that those Leftists that have found themselves in demonstrations-turned-riots shown on television beating and severely hurting conservatives have no hunger for truth or justice. All they know is the hunger their hatred pushes them to appease. And that hatred is quickly turning to evil. And evil is stealthily stealing the soul of America.


House Speaker Pelosi with total arrogance consistently denigrates President Trump, publicly makes baseless allegations against him she knows when they’re made against him that their false. She shows NO remorse for doing so. She consistently attacks him personally. And she has NEVER given him credit for a single accomplishment of all those that have created better lives — significantly better lives — for tens of millions of Americans.

A House Speaker that is untruthful, disrespectful of the Presidency, the U.S. Government, America’s election system, and all conservative Americans has never existed before in my lifetime. Quite simply, most Americans do not know how to respond to this. I could detail example after example of the anger and hatred by Leftists in the U.S. government and in the media. Let’s not go there — I’m certain we agree about that.

One thing is certain: our nation has taken on brand new characteristics that have never before been seen in the majority in the U.S. I pray they NEVER become representative of the majority in the nation.

What is about to occur is that the nation will in the next few weeks witness firsthand how far left these people are and that the only sustenance for their rabid hunger for power is total domination. And they’ve pushed the throttle to the floor to get there.

Truth will expose them, their intentions, and the process they’ve chosen for power and domination of every aspect of American life.

I doubt Americans will allow fulfillment of their dream. I PRAY Americans will not allow it.


Citizenship No Longer Necessary to Vote in the U.S.

Most Americans have looked-on with growing concern as states across the nation are allowing non-citizens the right to vote. There are many reasons for such concerns. Those reasons center on fears of the weaponization of the votes of illegals for partisan political gain. A political party, if able to convince illegals that party can “help” those illegals in some ways sufficient to gain their votes, can gain control   of those votes. If you’ve ever wondered why Democrats from top to bottom of their party fight closing the southern border, resist the revision of immigration laws, hate ICE and Border Patrol agents, and continuously berate those inu Congress who support legal immigration, wonder no more. For Democrats, their immigrant support is about one thing: votes.

There certainly are those in the Democrat Party who have soft hearts for real refugees who are seeking asylum from persecution in their home countries. But the majority of Dems look at each illegal immigrant that finds their way into the U.S. as a potential future vote for the Democrat Party.

Why are Democrats so set on increasing their base in this way? Why do they fight legal immigration laws currently in force while refusing to legislatively work with members of Congress to fix laws that they dislike?


The Democrat Party (and the Republican Party for that matter) conduct massive amounts of continuing research — primarily polling. This polling is to discover what voters think and try to corral as many as possible into the Democrat Party while picking off as many as possible from the Republican Party (That cuts both ways.) Voters who are NOT party-affiliated are BIG targets.

It is apparent that Democrats more than the GOP have launched significant efforts to seize political power across America. Dems are sure that with political power, they are better able to easily control the political processes — ALL of the political processes — in the United States. Dems are no longer content to go with the normal flow of election results every two years. They want permanencypermanent political power.

But here’s their problem: during the last four decades, Americans have become more involved in the political process than ever before. The information that flows from satellite communication, the internet, and the availability of 24/7 news and other information, has captured the eyes and ears of the nation. One would think that is great news for everyone, including political parties. After all, the “whole” truth beamed to Americans from multiple sources should always result in decisions that are rooted in facts. For some, though, facts are often undesirable. And sometimes, plans are implemented to change those facts or at least the perception of what “real” facts are in political matters.

Try as both parties have, in the last twenty years, the percentage of voter-split between Democrats, Republicans, and Independents has barely changed. According to Gallup, in 2005, 29% of registered voters were Republicans, 32% were Democrats, and 36% were Independents. Fast-forward to 2019; It’s 28% Republican, 28% Democrats, and 41% Independents. Considering the two-decade registered voter split, political power remains almost equally divided. Independents hold the balance for victory in every national election. (See the voter numbers in the following chart)

              Registered Voter Split for all U.S. States and the District of Columbia

Non-Citizen Voting: Illegal

Mass immigration has made a significant impact on American electoral politics. Despite the fact that it is a crime for aliens to vote in federal elections, noncitizens and illegal aliens are counted when apportioning congressional districts. This means that areas with large numbers of illegal alien residents gain additional representatives in Congress based on U.S. Census results.

In addition, there is evidence that both foreign nationals who are lawfully present in the United States and illegal aliens have voted in recent elections. Noncitizens have been discovered on voter registration rolls in both Virginia and Pennsylvania.  And the Office of the U.S. Attorney for the Western District of New York recently announced that it charged a Canadian woman with making a false claim to citizenship after she registered and voted in more than 20 elections.

Several past elections – for the presidency and other offices – have been extremely close. Accordingly, ballots cast by noncitizen voters have the potential to improperly alter the outcome of elections. Consider how close the 2000 presidential election was as was the 2016 presidential election. Could the outcomes have been affected by noncitizen voting? The answer is yes.

With the 2020 election fast approaching, the possibility exists that voting by noncitizens could significantly influence the results. Many immigrants’ rights groups contend that noncitizen voting constitutes a harmless misunderstanding of the rules and should not cause great concern. Many feel  it enables individuals whose interests may not coincide with those of the American people to exert influence on our domestic politics. Given the rate at which both the legal and illegal alien populations have grown, the United States should be concerned with ensuring that the electoral power of U.S. citizens is not undermined and with protecting the United States from foreign influence.

In March of 2019 (3/20/2019) we shared examples of verified findings that in the 2016 federal elections several million illegal votes were cast in the U.S. Yet our government refuses to diligently and aggressively prosecute illegal voters with maximum felony sentences for doing so.

Voter ID

The United States does not currently issue any general-use document intended to confirm both identity and citizenship. There have been numerous attempts made to mandate some form of acceptable legal identification for all to use to vote in a federal election. Those on the left have fought vigorously in the courts to keep such a requirement from being implemented. Though the mantra in opposition universally centers around such a requirement being unfair, unnecessary, and racist in nature, most Americans simply shake their heads in disbelief. One cannot fly on a plane, rent a car, apply for or receive federal government assistance, open bank accounts, purchase a car, marry, or enter many buildings without proof of identity. An ID is required for anyone to enter any national Democrat Party meeting or convention and even a called meeting of Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA).

The cries for identification for voters have been ratcheted up by recent actions taken on the part of several states. Knowing that state-issued drivers licenses seem to be the easiest method for personal identification, several states are now allowing licenses for illegal aliens.

Democrats in the New York Senate January 9, 2020, passed a law that would automatically register anyone as a voter when they get their driver’s license, something all illegal aliens can get since December. Senate Bill S6457B, which is in the process of being passed by the Assembly, provides that anyone who obtains a driver’s license in New York state will be registered as a voter by default unless they specifically mark a box waiving membership on the voter roll.

What is disturbing about this measure is that it would de facto grant the right to vote to hundreds of thousands of immigrants who, as of December 2019, can obtain a driver’s license in New York state thanks to a law passed in June. Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed the Green Light Act last year, which allows anyone over the age of 16 to apply for a driver’s license regardless of immigration status, and will also not require a Social Security number.

The Right to Vote

Those that fight so aggressively against Voter ID claim such requirements circumvent the right to vote. What enfuriates millions of legal Americans is the Constitutional guidelines that gave Americans the right to vote and the laws that control voting eligibility are being trampled or just ignored.

“Wait a minute,” you say. “Where in the Constitution is the process of voting guaranteed to every American? That’s a good question.

You may be surprised to learn there is NO specific section of any Article or Amendment in the Constitution that grants or guarantees the right to vote to every citizen. But there are certainly mentions of the right to vote.

The phrase appears for the first time in the Fourteenth Amendment, which says that states shall lose congressional representation “when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime.”

But whatever Section Two of the Fourteenth Amendment means, it really can’t mean that everyone must be allowed to vote. It penalizes states that withhold the ballot but does not require them to grant it. The Fifteenth Amendment, however, does speak specifically of “the right of citizens of the United States to vote.”

In this form, it will appear a total of three more times, each time now protected against abridgment, as an individual right “of citizens,” one that can be enforced by both courts and Congress. Yet courts and citizens remain oddly ambivalent about it; it is common to regard voting as a “privilege,” an incident of citizenship granted to some but not all. The “privilege” over the years has been made dependent on literacy, or long residency in a community, or ability to prove identity, or lack of a criminal past. None of these conditions would be allowed to restrict free speech, or freedom from “unreasonable” searches, or the right to counsel, even though each of those rights is mentioned once in the Constitution. The right to vote of citizens of the United States remains a kind of stepchild in the family of American rights, perhaps because it is not listed in the Bill of Rights.

In the Fifteenth Amendment, the right to vote is not to be “denied or abridged on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.” Note the second verb. Many things might “abridge” a right without “denying” it altogether. Whatever the status of the right as a right, it is apparently strictly protected from any kind of limit — any kind of limit, that is, based on “race, color, or previous condition of servitude.” The target is clear — racial restrictions on voting, or restrictions of the voting rights of former slaves. It is common to describe the amendment as aimed solely at racial restrictions on the right to vote.

Voter ID

This process is claimed by strict Constitutionalists to be one of preserving the privilege of voting by preventing anyone who is not a citizen from voting. As mentioned above, it is a federal crime to vote illegally in an election for federal officials. States that have passed strict voter ID laws find themselves in federal court defending against suits based on discrimination charges alleging that such laws actually “abridge” the right to vote based on race. Somehow their conclusion is that minority people under such a requirement it is discrimination. Why? Because, they say, minorities do not have the same capabilities to register to vote as do white Americans: obtaining drivers licenses, state issued ID cards, passports, etc.

Though those claims are really vapid, liberal courts around the nation in multiple such cases agree with those making these claims. I find it humorous to watch interviews with dozens and dozens of African Americans in multiple cities both large and small that state the racism in this matter is from those who say minorities do not have the capabilities in large to obtain ID’s. 

One 55-year-old African American woman  who lives in New York expressed it best: “It is insulting for anyone to think blacks don’t have ID’s.” She continued, “Think about it: we can’t fly on a plane, apply for social security benefits, Medicaid, federal assistance, buy cigarettes or beer, drive a car, and even go our children’s school without proof of identification.” She concluded with this: “I don’t know a single African American adult that does NOT have a photo ID.”


What should be the ONLY factor that weighs on the minds of any Americans about being able to vote or not is the “LEGALITY” of someone to vote. What IS included in the Constitution is the Rule of Law. In our Constitution, in Congress, and in State House across the country, bills are passed, agreed to as required and signed into law by Presidents and governors. Each of these is part of the process of governing legally — or adherence to the Rule of Law.

To that end, here’s what EVERY American should demand: the enforcement of every passed law in the United States…period. Certainly, everyone has a right to object to any law. But no one has the right to break any law.

There’s a process in the U.S. regarding federal laws, in states regarding state laws, and locally regarding local laws to amend laws, change laws, or doing away altogether with laws the populace desires. That’s part of the Rule of Law. And anyone who breaks any of those laws does so illegally and, by definition, is guilty of breaking the law.

When did it become OK for anyone — anyone at all — to arbitrarily break laws or simply ignore them? Doing so is NOT OK.

And if Democrats choose to fight to allow illegals who enter the country by breaking laws, or to encourage any to vote illegally, they should be held accountable.

One final note: it is the height of anti-Americanism to vote illegally and/or to encourage others to vote illegally. And it’s stupidity for any American to facilitate such actions.

Ukraine U.S. Election Fraud Real & Being Hidden: for $$$$

It is surprising to me that the Media would not even touch the self-professed blackmail of the former Ukrainian President by former Vice President Joe Biden. I’m sure you remember these few sentences at a public gathering in which Biden not only confessed his blackmail, he bragged about it:

Remember this: Biden was named by Obama to oversee the massive corruption in Ukraine for the Obama Administration. Biden had spent much time there purportedly to concentrate on the certainty that Ukraine had been — among other things — aggressively trying to interfere in the U.S. 2016 election. 

And then there’s the Burisma Holdings mystery.

Only foolish people believe that Biden’s son Hunter received a seat on the Burisma Board of Directors as a result of his expertise in oil and gas. Hunter Biden knew NOTHING about the energy business. Yet he was paid $83,000 a month to serve on the Board of the largest Ukrainian oil and gas company. The only explanation is that he got that position only because he was the son of the U.S. Vice President.

Why do you think today’s media pile-on all those who today mention the Ukraine election-interference story when those claims were accepted as fact by all a few years ago? (We’ll get into those reasons in a bit) Today’s news outlet leaders then touted Ukraine’s election interference on par with that of Russia. But today, they report that all those who believe Ukraine’s 2016 election interference happened are nothing more than conspiracy theorists.

  • Chuck Todd of NBC’s Meet The Press actually laughed at Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) for believing Ukraine tried to interfere in U.S. elections;
  • Even FBI Director Christopher Wray said there was no indication that Ukraine meddled in the 2016 U.S. elections. “We have no information that indicates that Ukraine interfered with the 2016 presidential election;”
  • U.S. Senators Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Mitt Romney (R-UT) both state there was no Ukrainian interference in the 2016 U.S. election;
  • A Ukrainian Court found that Ukraine DID attempt to impact the U.S. 2016 election on the behalf of Hillary Clinton.

These denials — even from several Republican Senators — are odd. Why? In light of the approximate seven stories from reputable news sources that have NO leanings toward the Republican Party all ran investigative stories chronicling the 2016 election interference by Ukraine:

1. Financial Times, 08/28/2016

The Financial Times reported Ukraine attempted to intervene in the U.S. election.

“The prospect of Mr. Trump, who has praised Ukraine’s arch-enemy Vladimir Putin, becoming leader of the country’s biggest ally has spurred not just Mr. Leshchenko but Kyiv’s wider political leadership to do something they would never have attempted before: intervene, however indirectly, in a U.S. election,” Financial Times reported.

2. Politico, 01/11/2017

Politico reported the Ukrainian government tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump.

“Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office. They also disseminated documents implicating a top Trump aide in corruption and suggested they were investigating the matter, only to back away after the election,” Politico reported.

They also reported that a Ukrainian-American operative who was consulting for the Democratic National Committee met with top officials in the Ukrainian Embassy in Washington, D.C., to expose ties between Trump, Paul Manafort, and Russia.

3. Financial Times, 12/22/2016

The Financial Times reported Russia used Ukrainian technology to hack the DNC server in the 2016 election. Based on the reporting, it appears the technology used to hack the election was operated in eastern Ukraine.

“The discovery of an alleged Russian government hack of a Ukrainian mobile phone app has boosted investigators’ confidence that Moscow was behind the hacking of Democratic National Committee servers in the U.S.before the presidential election,” cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike said.

The firm, which was hired by the DNC to rebuild its cyber defenses after the attack, said “Fancy Bear”– a code name it assigned to hackers that it believes are associated with Russian military intelligence, the “GRU” — had implanted malware in an Android mobile phone application used by anti-Russian forces operating in eastern Ukraine.

4. Politico, 02/23/2017

In 2017, Politico reported that a Ukrainian parliamentarian attempted to contact Paul Manafort, claiming to have politically damaging information about Manafort as well as Trump.

“The undated communications, which are allegedly from the iPhone for Manafort’s daughter, include a text that appears to come from a Ukrainian parliamentarian named Serhiy Leschenko, seeking to reach her father, in which he claims to have politically damaging information about both Manafort and Trump,” Politico said.

5. New York Times, 12/12/2018

Ukranian courts ruled that releasing information to Manafort about the 2016 U.S. election was illegal interference.

“Both lawmakers asserted that if the release of the slush fund information broke the law, then it should be viewed as an illegal effort to influence the United States presidential election in favor of Hillary Clinton by damaging the Trump campaign,” the New York Times reported.

Why The Sudden Denial of the 2016 Ukrainian Election Interference?

Ukraine has always struggled with government corruption. Ukraine depends heavily on its friendly neighbors and those from the West for military and other types of foreign aid. Its proximity to Russia and several other strategic considerations have for 20+ years kept Ukraine in the “political corruption” spotlight. There has been so much speculation about Ukraine’s interference in our 2016 election AND so much demonstrative denial by the Media, it is incumbent for the truth to be vetted and passed along to Americans.

We (with outside assistance) have tracked the Ukrainian 2016 U.S. election interference with great difficulty. What follows is a complete “roadmap” for all interested in providing proof that Ukraine DID attempt 2016 U.S. election interference.
As is our normal practice to make reading easier, these details are put in bullet format that are numbered from 1-18.
Please don’t get lost in these. It may appear to be much information, but this is a heretofore hidden roadmap showing how to get from “A” — how U.S. corrupted politicians — get to “B” — accessing the U.S. political process in our government for personal gain.
  1. The Ukraine Crisis Media Center was founded by Soros in March 2014. This organization is Ukraine’s version of Media Matters.
  2. Serhiy Leshchenko was a Ukraine Member of Parliament.
  3. NABU — Ukraine’s Anti-Corruption Bureau — is formed and, the Executive director is Artem Sytnyk.
  4. Another NGO (Non-governmental Organization) was founded by Soros called the AntAC (Anti-Corruption Action Centre). They received $1.7 million in funding, about $1 million from the U.S. Departments of State and DOJ, and $290,000 from Soros’ International Renaissance Foundation. THIS is the organization that the Obama Administration worked through.
  5. NABU and the Obama government were working closely with Soros NGO Anti-Corruption Action Centre (AntAC) in Ukraine, as John Solomon reports on The Hill. When Ukrainian prosecutors investigated AntAC over a missing $4.4 million in U.S. funding, they were told to stand down by Obama officials. This is the missing money for Joe Biden’s son. Biden’s son was coordinating activity in Ukraine for the Obama Administration.
  6. AntAC (Obama administration and George Soros) pushed a Ukrainian investigation into then-Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort’s business activities in Ukraine – WITH HELP FROM THE FBI, according to John Solomon from The Hill.
  7. On March 21, 2017, Leschenko and Sytnyk, held a press conference at the Ukraine Crisis Media Center, alleging Manafort took $12.7 million in illegal payments from Ukrainians and made a claim of a “black cashbox ledger.”
  8. Leschenko gave the info to Alexandra Chalupa, a DNC operative who worked with Hillary Clinton. Both Chalupa and Arepovitch, the CEO of Crowdstrike, are connected to a hard left authoritarian fascist group in Ukraine.
  9. April 28, 2016 – Chalupa and Isikoff, a Yahoo Reporter who was deeply involved with Christopher Steele, held a press conference in Washington, D.C., and invited 68 Ukrainian journalists and distributed the dirt on Manafort. The program was called the Open World Leadership Center, held at the Library of Congress, and again, connected to George Soros.
  10. NABU and the Obama Administration worked closely with Soros NGO AntAC. When Ukrainian prosecutors investigated AntAC over a missing $4.4 million in U.S. funding, they were told to stand down by Obama officials. Again, this is all tied to Hunter Biden and the missing $3 million dollars from Burisma Holdings. “When the new prosecutor general Yuri Lutsenko went to meet Obama Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, he says he was stunned when the ambassador “gave me a list of people whom we should not prosecute.”
  11. Chalupa received details of the payments from Leschenko. Payment detail from 2007-2012 lists advertising, computers, polling, consultant fees, etc. NONE OF THE PAYMENTS OR Manafort’s signatures WERE EVER CONFIRMED.
  12. Chalupa also passed the Black Ledger info on to Glenn Simpson at Fusion GPS, who passed them on to DOJ staffer Nellie Ohr. Ohr passed the info on to her husband, Bruce Ohr.  On May 30, 2016, Nellie Ohr sent an email to Bruce Ohr and Justice Department staffers under the subject line “Reported Trove of Documents on Ukrainian Party of Regions’ ‘Black Cashbox,’” which means they were investigating Paul Manafort prior to the July 31, 2016, inception of “Crossfire Hurricane.”
  13. Isikoff broke the story on Yahoo on Aug. 18, 2016, one of the first public mentions of purported “collusion with Russia” by the Trump team. Manafort had to step down as Trump’s campaign manager the next day.
  14. In addition, Leshchenko served as a direct source of information for Fusion GPS—and their hired researcher—former CIA contractor Nellie Ohr. Yes, Nellie received info from Ukrainians, directly or via Fusion GPS, to influence a Presidential election.
  15. Ohr told congressional investigators on Oct. 19, 2018, when pressed, she recalled them, “mentioning someone named Serhiy Leshchenko, a Ukrainian.” She later admitted she knew of Leshchenko before her time at Fusion GPS as he was a “very well-known, Ukrainian, anti-corruption activist.” Leshchenko had adopted a robust anti-Trump stance (because Trump wanted to pursue a more friendly relationship with Russia). And remember, Putin is a nemesis to George Soros.
  16. Remember when Manafort was charged with witness tampering, by the Mueller Special Counsel? Manafort’s daughter’s phone was hacked, and a text message was discovered. It was reported by Politico in late February 2017, that a hack of the phone belonging to one of Manafort’s daughters revealed a text containing a blackmail threat that Manafort has attributed to Leshchenko. It’s not known with any certainty who sent the text, which includes an attachment that references “the Yanukovych accounting book” and lists an email address for Leshchenko. Manafort received additional charges because of the text.
  17. Leschenko and Sytnyk were found guilty. “December 2018, a Kyiv court ruled that Leshchenko, along with NABU Director Artem Sytnyk ‘acted illegally’ when they revealed that Manafort’s surname and signature were found in the so-called ‘black ledger’ of ousted President Viktor Yanukovych’s Party of Regions,” the Kyiv Post reported on Dec. 12, 2018.
  18. Leschenko and Sytnyk interfered in an American election. ” The court noted the material was part of a pre-trial investigation and its release “led to interference in the electoral processes of the United States in 2016 and harmed the interests of Ukraine as a state.”


I know that’s a lot of information to follow. By way of explanation as we close today’s story, we’ll ask some pointed and salient questions to at least have all looking and listening in to get on the same page:

  • Why has there been so much intense interest in Ukraine by the American government during the Obama Administration?
  • Why would President Obama appoint his Vice President to head the corruption investigations by the U.S. of a foreign nation — ANY foreign country?
  • Why would the Ukrainian government (that was rife with corruption) investigate corruption of Burisma Holdings during the time Hunter Biden was a member of the Board of Directors?
  • Why would Vice President Biden even care about the Burisma investigation — a sovereign country and one of that country’s privately held corporations?
  • Why would the Vice President not only demand the firing of that Ukrainian prosecutor but give Ukraine eight hours to fire him?
  • Why would any foreign OR domestic energy resource company hire Hunter Biden paying him $83,000 per month to serve on their Board of Directors?
  • Are they protecting someone some others? If so, who?

Let’s fast forward to 2020:

  • Why would so many U.S. news sources vehemently deny Ukrainian interference in the 2016 U.S. election after thorough investigatory research found and reported previously that Ukraine DID interfere in the 2016 election?
  • Why would Congressional Democrats and former V.P. Biden pushback on Hunter Biden and the former V.P. testifying before a Congressional committee investigating Ukraine corruption?
  • Why would Senators Mitt Romney and Lindsey Graham — in light of scads of evidence that prove Ukraine 2016 U.S. election interference — not only reject the alleged Ukraine interference but refuse to support the investigation to determine its validity and who was involved?
  • Why would the current FBI Director Chris Wray deny the Ukraine election interference when so much evidence exists confirming it?
  • With the 1999 Treaty between the U.S. and Ukraine specifically for both countries to collaborate on political corruption in each that pertains to the other NOT instigate a formal U.S. investigation into this corruption that John Solomon from The Hill along with information garnered by others uncovered?

Many feel if such an investigation is allowed to occur, it will lead not only to the Obama White House but to the Obama Department of Justice as well as to multiple current and former members of Congress.

What’s the common piece of evidence? “Show Me The Money!”



Roadblocks, losses, rejection, failures, being not good enough: all these are things that most of us can relate to. It is rare when someone — ANYone — can say honestly, “I’ve not experienced any of those.”

Going through these things are normal occurrences. And each contains unique elements that do no impact everyone the same way. That makes it almost impossible to create a perfect how-to manual with accurate instructions one can use to solve the problem. Because of that, many just throw-in-the-towel.

Thankfully there has always been a sense of “anyone can do anything if they try hard enough” spirit in the U.S. That encourages many to dust themselves off after failures and go after the same objective again or go tackle a new one.

Have you known anyone that seems bullet-proof? No matter what they face that doesn’t work out, they just move on to a different way of doing it, or they just move on to something else.

Have you ever faced one or two of these circumstances? How did you handle losing or not being good enough or rejected? Did you give up or stop trying?

Today just might be a magical few minutes that change your life and maybe even many others through you. What follows is a video that is timed perfectly for this topic and today especially.

LSU faces Clemson tonight in the College Football National Championship. These are without question the best two college football teams in the nation. That means each roster is bloated with phenomenal athletes. Each has a quarterback that most experts feel are not just the best two college quarterbacks this season, but maybe the best two QB’s to play at the same time in college history.

I’m an LSU fan: a Louisiana “lifer.” I’m excited that the Tigers — “our” Tigers — are facing Clemson’s Tigers for the trophy. More than the chance to win that championship, I am ecstatic that for the last two years I have personally witnessed one of the most amazing responses to adversity ever seen in college athletics. Take a few minutes and watch this video then let’s get back together for two minutes.

Meet “Joe.”

Joe when not allowed to play at Ohio State knew he had failed. He kept trying. He worked hard to be the best at quarterback. He never quit.

After things like this happen to most of us and we choose to give up, we quit. But worse, most of us want to place blame for our failure.

“Your wedding didn’t work out and you divorced your husband.” Our response to that: “Yeah…But….”

“You were fired at your job.” Our response: “Yeah…But…”

It’s the “Yeah…But…” that destroys millions of lives yearly. How? Just look at Joe Burrow.

He was benched again and again at his dream college, Ohio State. He kept working. He kept getting better. He never gave up. He never quit. His friends and teammates taunted him and maybe his position opponents talked down to him. He almost certainly heard this: “Hey, man. You aren’t good enough. You got permanently benched. You’ll never play quarterback.”

Joe could have said, “Yeah…But…” and rattled off a list of excuses. He didn’t do that. He simply found a way to push through. He transferred to LSU and began a college football historical run that is probably long from over.

If Joe had listened to and accepted what the Ohio State coaches said and did to him, he’d be somewhere working today, probably in the private sector. Instead, Joe Burrow leads LSU tonight into the college championship game. And in a couple of months, he’ll undoubtedly be the first college quarterback taken in the NFL draft — maybe even the #1 player drafted — and begin what portends to be a dramatically successful NFL career.

Joe never said “Yeah…But…” When anyone said any of those things to him, he probably just looked at them and smiled.

Geaux Tigers!