Rudy Giuliani Lays Out Biden’s Ukraine Money Laundering Schemes – The Senate Ignores…


Rudy Giuliani appears on Fox News with Maria Bartiromo to outline the evidence that highlights how Joe and Hunter Biden profited from a Ukraine scheme to pay political bribes through a money laundering scheme.

Unfortunately along with Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham, the Senate finance and Senate Foreign Affairs committees refuse to review the information due to the sensitivity of the politics. Additionally, Attorney General Bill Barr has told his lawyers that no investigations of political corruption will be permitted without his direct approval.

Rudy Giuliani Discusses the Evidence of Corruption The DOJ and Congress are Intentionally Ignoring….


Rudy Giuliani has spent over a year gathering evidence of wide-scale corruption, money laundering and fraudulently created political operations deployed against Donald Trump.

Unfortunately, because of the successful defense strategies of an alliance of interests: Obama White House officials, democrats, republicans, media and current DOJ officials to include AG Bill Barr, Mr. Giuliani has been alinsky’d – isolated, ridiculed, marginalized and controversialized. A once great corruption investigator, prosecutor, New York City mayor and presidential candidate, is now reduced to hosting a podcast.

As a direct result of the DC protective agenda, ie. marginalize the messenger, nothing Giuliani has uncovered will be used, discussed or acted upon by any officials in/around the institutions of government; including the DOJ.  However, Giuliani discusses the evidence with Fox News host Jesse Watters.

Too Big To Jail?…


According to reports late last year U.S. Attorney John Durham and U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr were spending time on a narrowed focus looking carefully at CIA activity in the 2016 presidential election. One quote from a media-voice increasingly sympathetic to a political deep-state noted:

“One British official with knowledge of Barr’s wish list presented to London commented that “it is like nothing we have come across before, they are basically asking, in quite robust terms, for help in doing a hatchet job on their own intelligence services””. (Link)

It is interesting that quote comes from a British intelligence official, as there appears to be mounting evidence of an extensive CIA operation that likely involved U.K. intelligence services. In addition, and as a direct outcome, there is an aspect to the CIA operation that overlaps with both a U.S. and U.K. need to keep Wikileaks founder Julian Assange under tight control. In this outline we will explain where corrupt U.S. and U.K. interests merge.

To understand the risk that Julian Assange represented to CIA interests, it is important to understand just how extensive the operations of the CIA were in 2016. It is within this network of foreign and domestic operations where FBI Agent Peter Strzok is clearly working as a bridge between the CIA and FBI operations.

By now people are familiar with the construct of CIA operations involving Joseph Mifsud, the Maltese professor now generally admitted/identified as some kind of a western intelligence operative who was tasked to run an operation against Trump campaign official George Papadopoulos in both Italy (Rome) and London. {Go Deep}

In a similar fashion the CIA tasked U.S. intelligence asset Stefan Halper to target another Trump campaign official, Carter Page. Under the auspices of being a Cambridge Professor Stefan Halper also targeted General Michael Flynn. Additionally, using assistance from a female FBI agent under the false name Azra Turk, Mr. Halper also targeted Papadopoulos.

The initial operations to target Flynn, Papadopoulos and Page were all based overseas. This seemingly makes the CIA exploitation of the assets and the targets much easier.

One of the more interesting aspects to the Durham probe is a possibility of a paper-trail created as a result of the tasking operations. We should watch closely for more evidence of a paper trail as some congressional reps have hinted toward documented evidence (transcripts, recordings, reports) that are exculpatory to the targets (Page & Papadop). HPSCI Ranking Member Devin Nunes has strongly hinted that very specific exculpatory evidence was known to the FBI and yet withheld from the FISA application used against Carter Page that also mentions George Papadopoulos. I digress…

However, there is an aspect to the domestic U.S. operation that also bears the fingerprints of the CIA; only this time due to the restrictive laws on targets inside the U.S. the CIA aspect is less prominent. This is where FBI Agent Peter Strzok working for both agencies starts to become important.

Remember, it’s clear in the text messages Strzok has a working relationship with what he called their “sister agency”, the CIA. Additionally, Brennan has admitted Strzok helped write the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) which outlines the Russia narrative; and it is almost guaranteed the July 31st, 2016, “Electronic Communication” from the CIA to the FBI that originated FBI operation “Crossfire Hurricane” was co-authored from the CIA by Strzok…. and Strzok immediately used that EC to travel to London to debrief intelligence officials around Australian Ambassador to the U.K. Alexander Downer.

In short, Peter Strzok appears to be the very eager, profoundly overzealous James Bond wannabe, who acted as a bridge between the CIA and the FBI. The perfect type of FBI career agent for CIA Director John Brennan to utilize.

Fusion-GPS founder Glenn Simpson hired CIA Open Source analyst Nellie Ohr toward the end of 2015; at appropriately the same time as “FBI Contractors” were identified exploiting the NSA database and extracting information on a specific set of U.S. persons.

It was also Fusion-GPS founder Glenn Simpson who was domestically tasked with a Russian lobbyist named Natalia Veselnitskya. A little reported Russian Deputy Attorney General named Saak Albertovich Karapetyan was working double-agents for the CIA and Kremlin. Karapetyan was directing the foreign operations of Natalia Veselnitskaya, and Glenn Simpson was organizing her inside the U.S.

Glenn Simpson managed Veselnitskaya through the 2016 Trump Tower meeting with Donald Trump Jr. However, once the CIA/Fusion-GPS operation using Veselnitskaya started to unravel with public reporting… back in Russia Deputy AG Karapetyan fell out of a helicopter to his death (just before it crashed).

Simultaneously timed in late 2015 through mid 2016, there was a domestic FBI operation using a young Russian named Maria Butina tasked to run up against republican presidential candidates. According to Patrick Byrne, Butina’s handler, it was FBI agent Peter Strzok who was giving Byrne the instructions on where to send her. {Go Deep}

All of this context outlines the extent to which the CIA was openly involved in constructing a political operation that settled upon anyone in candidate Donald Trump’s orbit.

International operations directed by the CIA, and domestic operations seemingly directed by Peter Strzok operating with a foot in both agencies. [Strzok gets CIA service coin]

Recap: ♦Mifsud tasked against Papadopoulos (CIA). ♦Halper tasked against Flynn (CIA), Page (CIA), and Papadopoulos (CIA). ♦Azra Turk, pretending to be Halper asst, tasked against Papadopoulos (FBI). ♦Veselnitskaya tasked against Donald Trump Jr (CIA, Fusion-GPS). ♦Butina tasked against Trump, and Donald Trump Jr (FBI).

Additionally, Christopher Steele was a British intelligence officer, hired by Fusion-GPS to assemble and launder fraudulent intelligence information within his dossier. And we cannot forget Oleg Deripaska, a Russian oligarch, who was recruited by Asst. FBI Director Andrew McCabe to participate in running an operation against the Trump campaign and create the impression of Russian involvement. Deripaska refused to participate.

All of this engagement directly controlled by U.S. intelligence; and all of this intended to give a specific Russia impression. This predicate is presumably what John Durham is currently reviewing.

The key point of all that background is to see how committed the CIA and FBI were to the constructed narrative of Russia interfering with the 2016 election. The CIA, FBI, and by extension the DOJ, put a hell of a lot of work into it. Intelligence community work that Durham is now unraveling.

We also know specifically that John Durham is looking at the construct of the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA); and talking to CIA analysts who participated in the construct of the January 2017 report that bolstered the false appearance of Russian interference in the 2016 election. This is important because it ties in to the next part that involves Julian Assange and Wikileaks.

On April 11th, 2019, the Julian Assange indictment was unsealed in the EDVA.

From the indictment we discover it was under seal since March 6th, 2018:

(Link to pdf)

On Tuesday April 15th, 2019, more investigative material was released. Again, note the dates: Grand Jury, *December of 2017* This means FBI investigation prior to….

♦The FBI investigation took place prior to December 2017, it was coordinated through the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA) where Dana Boente was U.S. Attorney at the time.

♦The grand jury indictment was sealed from March of 2018 until after Mueller completed his investigation, April 2019.

Why the delay?

What was the DOJ waiting for?

Here’s where it gets interesting….

The FBI submission to the Grand Jury in December of 2017 was four months after congressman Dana Rohrabacher talked to Julian Assange in August of 2017: “Assange told a U.S. congressman … he can prove the leaked Democratic Party documents … did not come from Russia.”

(August 2017, The Hill Via John Solomon) Julian Assange told a U.S. congressman on Tuesday he can prove the leaked Democratic Party documents he published during last year’s election did not come from Russia and promised additional helpful information about the leaks in the near future.

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, a California Republican who is friendly to Russia and chairs an important House subcommittee on Eurasia policy, became the first American congressman to meet with Assange during a three-hour private gathering at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where the WikiLeaks founder has been holed up for years.

Rohrabacher recounted his conversation with Assange to The Hill.

“Our three-hour meeting covered a wide array of issues, including the WikiLeaks exposure of the DNC [Democratic National Committee] emails during last year’s presidential election,” Rohrabacher said, “Julian emphatically stated that the Russians were not involved in the hacking or disclosure of those emails.”

Pressed for more detail on the source of the documents, Rohrabacher said he had information to share privately with President Trump. (read more)

Knowing how much effort the CIA and FBI put into the Russia collusion-conspiracy narrative, it would make sense for the FBI to take keen interest after this August 2017 meeting between Rohrabacher and Assange; and why the FBI would quickly gather specific evidence (related to Wikileaks and Bradley Manning) for a grand jury by December 2017.

Within three months of the grand jury the DOJ generated an indictment and sealed it in March 2018. The EDVA sat on the indictment while the Mueller probe was ongoing.

As soon as the Mueller probe ended, on April 11th, 2019, a planned and coordinated effort between the U.K. and U.S. was executed; Julian Assange was forcibly arrested and removed from the Ecuadorian embassy in London, and the EDVA indictment was unsealed (link).

As a person who has researched this three year fiasco; including the ridiculously false 2016 Russian hacking/interference narrative: “17 intelligence agencies”, Joint Analysis Report (JAR) needed for Obama’s anti-Russia narrative in December ’16; and then a month later the ridiculously political Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) in January ’17; this timing against Assange is too coincidental.

It doesn’t take a deep researcher to see the aligned Deep State motive to control Julian Assange because the Mueller report was dependent on Russia cybercrimes, and that narrative is contingent on the Russia DNC hack story which Julian Assange disputes.

This is critical. The Weissmann/Mueller report contains claims that Russia hacked the DNC servers as the central element to the Russia interference narrative in the U.S. election. This claim is directly disputed by WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, as outlined during the Dana Rohrabacher interview, and by Julian Assange on-the-record statements.

Now Watch This Brief Interview:

.

The predicate for Robert Mueller’s investigation was specifically due to Russian interference in the 2016 election. The fulcrum for this Russia interference claim is the intelligence community assessment; and the only factual evidence claimed within the ICA is that Russia hacked the DNC servers; a claim only made possible by relying on forensic computer analysis from Crowdstrike, a DNC contractor.

The CIA holds a massive conflict of self-interest in upholding the Russian hacking claim. The FBI holds a massive interest in maintaining that claim. All of those foreign countries whose intelligence apparatus participated with Brennan and Strzok also have a vested self-interest in maintaining that Russia hacking and interference narrative.

Julian Assange is the only person with direct knowledge of how Wikileaks gained custody of the DNC emails; and Assange has claimed he has evidence it was not from a hack.

This Russian “hacking” claim is ultimately so important to the CIA, FBI, DOJ, ODNI and U.K intelligence apparatus…. Well, right there is the obvious motive to shut Assange down as soon intelligence officials knew the Mueller report was going to be public.

Now, if we know this, and you know this; and everything is cited and factual… well, then certainly AG Bill Barr knows this.

The $64,000 dollar question is: will they say so publicly?

Paul Sperry@paulsperry_

BREAKING: Carter Page revealed on John Solomon Reports podcast that special Spygate prosecutor John Durham’s team has not contacted him for an interview or asked him for any docs or records, even tho Durham is believed to be investigating FBI officials who illegally spied on Page

5,504 people are talking about this

brennan and haspel

Benedict Romney!


Romney is neither Mittens nor Pierre Delecto anymore. He’s now Benedict Romney–a turncoat and traitor.

Like Judge Andrew Napolitano, Romney didn’t receive spoils from the president and so he turned against him. Romney is a notorious flip flopper who has changed his positions repeatedly. His ‘GUILTY’ vote against Trump was a flop.

Romney didn’t try very hard to defeat a very beatable Obama. He will never be president and it must grate on him to see Trump’s success. Rick Gorka, a former Romney press secretary, said the senator’s decision to convict the president Trump for  ‘abuse of power’ was motivated by bitterness and jealousy. Romney claims he couldn’t vote “not guilty” due to his conscience. We laughed out loud when we heard him say that.

Romney has a severe case of ‘Trump Derangement Syndrome.’ He is McCain 2.0.

Nancy Pelosi tore up Trump’s speech and Mitt Romney tore up any chance he had of ever being respected again by his own party.

—Ben Garrison

Impeachment 2.0


I previously warned that the Democrats were considering a second Impeachment. The Democrats cannot defeat Trump in a fair election. They have sought to effectively stage a coup and Adam B. Schiff, California Democrat is launching an investigation of President Trump and his entire family as well as his businesses. The new theory is he must be guilty of money laundering and maybe bribery. Obviously, they are desperately trying to prevent a loss in 2020.

Meanwhile, in the Senate, there is a consideration that they will investigate the Democrats who launched the impeachment 1.0, to begin with. The fact the Impeachment was actually served on Trump and he had to respond on Saturday in writing the very day of the ECM turning point, appears to mark the decline and fall of the United States. The Impeachment powers have been completely abused and the Founding Fathers NEVER intended that a president should be impeached for any crime that did not have anything to do with his direct office.

 

To even allege that Trump should be investigated for having any business benefit because he is President flies in the face of the conduct of every politician not to mention Pelosi, Biden, and of course, Hillary Clinton (see Profiles in Corruption). The Democrats have refused to accept Trump as president from DAY ONE, and this posture has been so destructive to the nation as a whole, that our forecast for the 2020 election being violent and insane is probably going down as one of our major political forecasts along with BREXIT and the Trump ele4ction in 2016. This is by NO MEANS, something I would like to see and nothing to brag about.

As we move toward 2032, there is just no going back. What the Democrats have done is more than tearing up Trump’s speech, this is an outright political coup to overthrown our democratic form of government. The resentment will be so intense that this political decision will be the end of government as we know it. This has become a reality show with deadly consequences.

Perhaps now all the Doubting Thomas people who think the government is in control and the business cycle is dead, will wake up and realize the one thing you should NOT have in a portfolio is government debt as we cascade into 203

REPORT: Lt. Col. Vindman May Soon Be Removed From White House…


According to Jennifer Jacobs at Bloomberg News the Vindman weasel may soon be removed from the National Security Council.  Hopefully a full damage assessment has been conducted in the wake of the national security damage Vindman has created.

As would be expected from modern media the Bloomberg article is written to emphasize their ideological position that President Donald Trump, the head of the Executive Branch, should not be allowed to select the people who provide him advice and counsel:

Bloomberg – The White House is weighing a plan to dismiss Alexander Vindman from the National Security Council after he testified in President Donald Trump’s impeachment inquiry, preparing to position the move as part of a broader effort to shrink the foreign policy bureaucracy, two people familiar with the matter said.

[…] Senior officials were informed on Thursday that some staff would be leaving the White House, the people added. The moves have been in the works since at least last week and could come as soon as Friday.

The departure of Vindman could trigger objections from Democrats and possibly some Republicans. Those concerns could mount if the Trump administration acts against additional government officials. (read more)

When we consider that Lt. Col. Vindman was carrying out what he believed to be his role; and when you overlay his military purpose; and when we accept Vindman was assisting CIA agent Eric Ciaramella in constructing his dossier to remove President Trump; and when we stand back and look at the aggregate interests involved; and when we consider there was ZERO push-back from the ranks of military leadership, specifically the Joint Chiefs of Staff; and when you accept Vindman was simply allowed to return to his post inside the White House – where he remains today; well, the alarming aspect increases in direct proportion to the definition of the word: “coup”.

Beyond the debate about the optics of the “coup“, within the testimony of Lt. Col Vindman, the NSC witness readily admits to understanding the officially established policy of the President of The United States (an agreement between President Trump and President Zelenskyy), and stunningly admits that two weeks later he was giving countermanding instructions to his Ukrainian counterpart to ignore President Trump’s policies.

The coup against President Donald Trump went from soft, to hard. Consider…

The testimony from Lt. Col. Vindman is available here. [SCRIBD pdf below]

Borrowing from Roscoe B Davis, here are some highlights:

Representative John Ratcliffe begins deconstructing Lt. Col Vindman, while his arrogant attorneys begin trying to interfere with the questioning.

This next section is very interesting, and very important.

Congressman John Ratcliffe begins questioning Vindman from the perspective of an Article 92 violation {READ IT}, coupled with an Article 88 violation {READ IT}. President Trump, is Lt. Col Vindman’s superior. President Trump sets the foreign policy.

Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Homeland Security, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct. [Article 88, UCMJ]

Two weeks after President Trump has established an agreement with Ukraine President Zelenskyy, and established the policy direction therein, Lt. Col. Vindman is now giving contrary instructions to the Ukranian government. Vindman’s lawyer recognizes where the questioning is going and goes absolutely bananas:

Here’s the Full Transcript:

.

A reminder from the CIA “whistleblower” attorney. January 30th, 2017, ten days after President Trump’s inauguration: the “coup has started”

Transcript of President Trump Remarks on Impeachment Acquittal…


Earlier today President Donald Trump delivered remarks from the East room about the impeachment acquittal.  After spending more than three years under investigations by government agencies and operatives of DC politics, President Trump did not hold back in pointing out the corruption behind his opposition. [Transcript Below]

[Transcript] – THE PRESIDENT: Well, thank you very much. (Applause.) Thank you. Thank you. Wow. (Applause.) Well, thank you very much, everybody. Wow. We’ve all been through a lot together, and we probably deserve that hand for all of us, because it’s been a very unfair situation.

I invited some of our very good friends. And we have limited room, but everybody wanted to come. We kept it down to a minimum. And believe it or not, this is a minimum.

But a tremendous thing was done over the last number of months, but really, if you go back to it, over the last number of years. We had the witch hunt. It started from the day we came down the elevator, myself and our future First Lady, who’s with us right now. Thank you, Melania. (Applause.)

And it never really stopped. We’ve been going through this now for over three years. It was evil. It was corrupt. It was dirty cops. It was leakers and liars. And this should never, ever happen to another President ever. I don’t know that other Presidents would have been able to take it. Some people said, no, they wouldn’t have. But I can tell you, at a minimum, you have to focus on this because it can get away very quickly. No matter who you have with you, it can get away very quickly. It was a disgrace.

Had I not fired James Comey — who was a disaster, by the way — it’s possible I wouldn’t even be standing here right now. We caught him in the act. Dirty cops. Bad people. If this happened to President Obama, a lot of people would have been in jail for a long time already. Many, many years.

I want to start by thanking some of — and I call them friends, because, you know, you develop friendships and relationships when you’re in battle and war, much more so than, “Gee, let’s have a normal situation.”

With all that we’ve gone through, we’ve done, I think, more than any President and administration, and really, I say, for the most part, Republican congressmen, congresswomen, and Republican senators. We’ve done more than any administration in the first few years, if you look at all of the things we’ve done.

I watched this morning as they tried to take credit for the stock market from — (laughter) — from — think of that. Let me tell you, if we didn’t win, the stock market would have crashed. And the market was going up a lot before the election because it was looking we had a good chance to win, and then it went up tremendously from the time we won the election until the time we took office, which was November 8th to January 20th. And that’s our credit. That’s all our credit. And leading up to that point was our credit because there was hope.

And one of the reasons the stock market has gone up so much in the last few days is people think we’re doing so well. They liked the State of the Union speech. (Applause.) It really is — it’s a true honor to give it.

Making the State of the Union speech, I was with some people that have been around; they’ve been all over the world. And one of them, a highly sophisticated person, said, “You know, no matter where you go in the world, it doesn’t make any difference — there is nothing like what I witnessed tonight.” The beauty, the majesty of the Chamber. The power of the United States, the power of the people in this room.

Really, an amazing — I don’t think there is anything like that anywhere in the world. You can go to any other country, you can go to any other location, any other place. It’s the beauty of everything. It’s what it represents and how it represents our country.

I want to start by introducing some of the people that are here. I know some are going to be left out. But they work so hard. And this is really not a news conference. It’s not a speech. It’s not anything. It’s just we’re sort of — it’s a celebration, because we have something that just worked out. I mean, it worked out. We went through hell, unfairly. Did nothing wrong. Did nothing wrong. I’ve done things wrong in my life, I will admit. (Laughter.) Not purposely, but I’ve done things wrong. But this is what the end result is. (Applause.)

(The President holds up the front cover of The Washington Post newspaper.)

We can take that home, Honey. Maybe we’ll frame it. (Laughter.) It’s the only good headline I’ve ever had in the Washington Post, I’ll tell you. (Laughter.) But every paper is the same. Does anybody have those papers? Does anybody have them? Because they’re really like that. So I appreciate that.

But some of the people here have been incredible warriors. They’re warriors. And there’s nothing, from a legal standpoint — this is a political thing. And every time, I’d say, “This is unfair. Let’s go to court.” They’d say, “Sir, you can’t go to court. This is politics.” And we were treated unbelievably unfairly.

And you have to understand, we first went through Russia, Russia, Russia. It was all bullshit. (Laughter.) We then went through the Mueller report. And they should have come back one day later. They didn’t. They came back two years later, after lives were ruined, after people went bankrupt, after people lost all their money.

People came to Washington to help other people. “Bright-eyed and bushy-tailed,” I say. They came — one or two or three people in particular, but many people.

We had a rough campaign. It was nasty. It was one of the nastiest, they say. They say Andrew Jackson was always the nastiest campaign. They actually said we topped it. (Laughter.) It was a nasty — it was a nasty — both in the primaries and in the — in the election.

But, you see, we thought, after the election, it would stop. But it didn’t stop; it just started. And tremendous corruption. Tremendous corruption.

So we had a campaign. Little did we know we were running against some very, very bad and evil people with fake dossiers, with all of these horrible, dirty cops that took these dossiers and did bad things. They knew all about it. The FISA courts should be ashamed of themselves.

It’s a very tough thing. And then we ended up winning on Russia, Russia, Russia. It should have taken the one day, as I said, and it took years.

Then Bob Mueller testified. That didn’t work out so well for the other side. (Laughter.) But they should have said, that first week — because it came out. Is that right, Jim Jordan? They knew in the first two days actually. Devin, is that right? Two days. They knew that we were totally innocent.

But they kept it going, Mark. They kept it going forever because they wanted to inflict political pain on somebody that had just won an election that, to — a lot of people were surprised. I mean, we had polls that said we were going to win. We had Los Angeles Times and a few — a few papers, actually, said it was — we were going to win but it was going to be close.

And we did win. It was one of the greatest wins of all time. And they said, “Okay, he won.” And, you know, I wrote this down because that was where a thing called the “insurance policy” — to me, when I saw the insurance policy — and that was done long before the election. That was done when they thought that Hillary Clinton was going to win.

And, by the way, Hillary Clinton and the DNC paid for millions — millions of dollars — the fake dossier. And now Christopher Steele admits that it’s a fake because he got sued by rich people. I should have sued him too. But when you’re President, people don’t like suing.

I want to thank my legal team, by the way — not for that advice, but for other advice. (Applause.) Pat, Jay. Pat. You guys stand up, please. (Applause.) Great job. (Applause.)

Right at the beginning, they said, “Sir, you have nothing to worry about. All of the facts are on your side.” I said, “You don’t understand. That doesn’t matter. That doesn’t matter.” And that was really true.

They made up facts. A corrupt politician named Adam Schiff made up my statement to the Ukrainian president. He brought it out of thin air. Just made it up. They say he’s a screenwriter — a failed screenwriter. He tried to go into — unfortunately, he went into politics after that. (Laughter.) Remember he said the statement, which is a mob statement: “Don’t call me. I’ll call you.” I didn’t say that.

Fortunately, for all of us here today and for our country, we had transcripts. We had transcribers — professional transcribers. Then they said, “Oh, well, maybe the transcription is not correct.” But Lieutenant Colonel Vindman and his twin brother — right? — we had some people that — really amazing.

But we did everything. We said, “What’s wrong with it?” “Well, they didn’t add this word or that one.” It didn’t matter. I said, “Add it. They’re probably wrong, but add it.”

So now everyone agrees that they were perfectly accurate. When you read those transcripts, Tim Scott — I don’t know if Tim is here, but he said, “Sir…” He was the first one to call me. “Sir, I read the transcript. You did nothing wrong.” And, Mitch, he stayed there, right from the beginning. He never changed.

And, Mitch McConnell, I want to tell you: You did a fantastic job. (Applause.) Somebody said, “You know, Mitch is quiet.” I said, “He’s not quiet. He’s not quiet.” These are the — he doesn’t want people to know him. And they said, “Is Mitch smart?” I said, “Well, let’s put it this way: For many, many years, a lot of very smart — bad, in many cases, sometimes good — but people have been trying to take his place. And to the best of my knowledge, I’ve never even heard the subject come up, because they’ve been wiped out so fast. (Laughter.) This guy is great, and I appreciate it, Mitch. (Applause.)

And he’s also given us 191 now. (Applause.) A hundred and ninety-one federal judges. Two Supreme Court judges, right? It’s up to 191. (Applause.) True.

Great guy. Great guy. He’s a tough guy to read. I’m good at reading people. A tough guy to read. I’d call him. My wife would say, “How did you do with Mitch?” “Uhh, I don’t know.” (Laughter.) That’s what makes him good — when you can read somebody. Fantastic job.

And he understood, rightfully, that this was crooked politics. This was crooked politics. How about all these people, they’re running for office. They’re saying the worst things about me, like eight senators on the Democrat side. Most of them got wiped out. You know, they got their 1 percent or less. Most of them got less. They decided to go home. “Let’s go back to California.” Let’s go back to wherever they came from. “Let’s go back to New York.”

How about that one? Our New York senator, Gillibrand. “Let’s go back to New York,” after they get nothing. And then they take an oath that they will be fair, that they will be reason- — and all of the different things. And they had to sign. They’re not fair.

But here’s the beauty: So we have four left. They’re saying the most horrendous things about me. It’s okay, it’s politics. And then they’re supposed to vote — on me. They’re trying to replace me, and then they’re supposed to be voting. So I think it’s — I mean, I think it’s incredible.

But — so, Mitch, I want to thank you very much. Incredible. And you have some of your folks here, and they’re incredible people — and they’ve been, right from the beginning.

And, again, you’re out of session. Unfortunately, I didn’t — you know, I only told these folks, “Let’s do this today.” We did a prayer breakfast this morning, and I thought that was really good. In fact, that was so good it might wipe this out. But by the end — by the time we finished this, we’ll wipe that one out — those statements. (Laughter.)

I had — I had Nancy Pelosi sitting four seats away, and I’m saying things that a lot of people wouldn’t have said — (laughter) — but I meant every — (laughter) — I meant every word of it.

But we have some of the folks that are going to be leaving right after this, and they work hard — and they did work hard. Bill Cassidy, Senator. Stand up, Bill. What a guy. (Applause.) Great man. When I need to know about health insurance and preexisting conditions and individual mandates, I call Bill or I call Barrasso. We get those two guys; they know more than anybody.

A man who just became a senator — he’s a little bit like me; we have a couple of them. A very successful guy in business, and he said, “What the hell, I’ll run for the Senate” — from Indiana. And he ran. And I saw him on television, destroying his opponent in a debate. I said, “You know, this guy could win.” And I got behind him. And, Mike Braun, you have done some great job. Thank you very much. (Applause.) Tough. Tough. Thank you.

A man who got James Comey to choke, and he was just talking in his regular voice. He is the roughest man. He’s actually an unbelievable — and I appreciate the letter you sent me today. I just got it. But he’s got this voice that scares people. (Laughter.) You know, people from Iowa can be very tough. We’re doing very well in Iowa.

But I’ll tell you, Chuck Grassley — he’s looking at Comey: “Well, you tell me, what did you say?” (Laughter.) Now, he wasn’t being rough. That was just the way he talked. (Laughter.) And that was when Comey — I think that was when Comey announced that he was leaking, lying, and everything else, right? He choked because he never heard anybody talk like that. (Laughter.)

You know, you should have gone — I wish you got angry. You could have gotten the whole ballgame. He would have said, “I give up.” (Laughter.) Chuck Grassley is an incredible guy. (Applause.)

And a man who — you know, he was running against a tough, smart campaign and we learned how good she was, right? She was a great campaigner. In fact, by the end of the campaign, she was actually — I thought she was more for me than you were, Josh. I was worried. (Laughter.) I saw her ad; she was saying the greatest things about me. And you know who I’m talking about.

And I went to a great place — Missouri — and I said, “Who do you have to beat her?” And they said, “Well, we have four people.” I said, “Let me see them. I’m got to interview…” — can you imagine? I’m interviewing people for the United States Senate. This is what I do. Where have I gone? But I love it. I love it because we’re getting great people.

The first one I met was Josh Hawley. After about 10 minutes, I said to the people, “Don’t show me anybody else. This is the guy.” He was the attorney general. Did a phenomenal job in the state. Highly respected. And — Claire McCaskill.

So, the theory was you couldn’t beat her. Great campaigner. Remember the last campaign, she was going to be taken out. She was always going to be taken out, then she wins and people say, “How did that happen?” Didn’t happen with him.

But she got so friendly toward me. In fact, one of the ads I still have. I’m putting it in the archives as one of the best ads I’ve ever made. (Laughter.) And she tried to convince people that we were best friends. But Josh ended up winning by five or six points.

You were unbelievable. You were tough. And you are something. And one of the greatest supporters on the impeachment hoax was Josh Hawley. He was incensed actually; I watched it. He was incensed at what they were doing and what they were saying.

And those were the ones — you know, I had some that said, “Oh, I wish you didn’t make the call.” And that’s okay, if they need that. It’s incorrect. It’s totally incorrect. And then you have some that used religion as a crutch. They never used it before. An article written today: “Never heard him use it before.” But today, you know, it’s one of those things. But, you know, it’s a failed presidential candidate, so things can happen when you fail so badly running for President.

But, Josh Hawley, I want to thank you. You were right from the beginning. Man, did I make a good choice. (Applause.) Thank you, Josh. Tremendous future. A man who is brilliant and who actually was deceived, to an extent, comes from a great state, Utah, where my poll numbers have gone through the roof. And one of the senators’ poll numbers, and not this one, went down big. You saw that. You saw that, Mike?

But Mike Lee is a brilliant guy. He’s difficult. (Laughter.) Whenever I sign bills — you know, we do sign a lot of legislation that’s — it’s big and it’s powerful, but it’s sort of everybody has to approve it. And I see 99 to 1 — (laughter) — 99 to 1. I say, “Don’t tell me who’s the one.” (Laughter.) “Is it Mike?” “Yes.” (Laughter.) And he always has a good reason for it too, by the way. But he is — he’s incredible. And right at the beginning, he knew we were right, Mike, and I appreciate it very much. You’re just fantastic. And say hello to the people of Utah and tell them, “I’m sorry about Mitt Romney. I’m sorry.” (Laughter and applause.) Okay?

We can say that Mike Lee is, by far, the most popular senator from the state. But you’ve done a fantastic job, Mike, in many ways. In many ways.

A young woman who I didn’t know at all, but she’s been so supportive — and I’ve had great support from other people in that state. And she’s been so supportive, and she’s been downright nasty and mean about the unfairness to the President. And Kelly Loeffler, I appreciate very much. Thank you. (Applause.) Great.

She saw it very early on, and we have — I don’t know if we have other senators here, but we got a hell of a lot of congressmen. And I’ll go over them quickly, but they have — they have also been — you know, it helped when we won 197 to nothing. That’s got to be a first, Kevin. Right? Is that, like, a first?

The Republicans have this image. See, I say Democrats are lousy politicians because they have lousy policy: open borders, sanctuary cities. They have horrible policy. Who the hell can win? Oh, their new policy is: Raise taxes. They want to raise taxes. You know, all my life, I wasn’t in politics, but I’d say, if you’re a politician, you want to say, “We’re going to lower taxes.” They want to raise taxes.

So they have open borders, sanctuary cities. “Raise everybody’s taxes. Get rid of everybody’s healthcare.” A hundred and eighty million people in the United States. And they’re really happy. “And we’re going to give you a healthcare that’s going to cost more money than the country could make in 30 years if it really does well.” That’s one year.

So I’ve always said they’re lousy politicians, but they do two things: They are vicious and mean. Vicious. These people are vicious. Adam Schiff is a vicious, horrible person. Nancy Pelosi is a horrible person. And she wanted to impeach a long time ago. When she said, “I pray for the President. I pray for the…” — she doesn’t pray. She may pray, but she prays for the opposite. (Laughter.) But I doubt she prays at all.

And these are vicious people, but they do two things: They stick together, historically. I’m not talking now. They stick together like glue. That’s how they impeached, because they had whatever the number is — 220 people. So if they don’t lose anybody, they’ll be able to impeach anybody. You could be George Washington. You could have just won the war, and they say, “Let’s get him out of office.” And they stuck together, and they’re vicious as hell. And they’ll probably come back for more, but maybe not because the Republican Party’s poll numbers, Mitch, have now gone up more than any time, I think, since 2004, 2005, and you know what happened then.

But in normal times — decades, you would call it; that was a little unusual time; it was for a very short period — the Republicans [sic] Party — Party’s poll numbers and Donald Trump’s poll numbers are the highest I’ve ever had them. So maybe they were. It’s no way to get your poll numbers up. It’s not worth it — because from my family’s standpoint, it’s been very unfair for my family. It’s been very unfair to the country.

Think of it. A phone call. A very good phone call. I know bad phone calls. This is a phone call with many people. I think Mike Pompeo was probably on the call. Where is Mike? Mike Pompeo was on the call. Many people were on the call. I know there were many people. They even have “apprenti,” bringing up an old favorite word of mine. “The Apprentice.” They have “apprenti.” They have people on these calls. And I know there are many.

When I speak to the head of a nation — and they have many people on. I mean, also on — do you think they just — in the case of Ukraine, he’s a new president, seems like a very nice person, by the way. His whole thing was corruption. He’s going to stop corruption. We even have a treaty — 2001, 1999. It’s a treaty — signed treaty — that we will work together to root out corruption in Ukraine.

I probably have a legal obligation, Mr. Attorney, to report corruption. But they don’t think it’s corrupt when a son that made no money, that got thrown out of the military, that had no money at all, is working for $3 million up front, $83,000 a month. And that’s only Ukraine. Then goes to China, picks up $1.5 billion. Then goes to Romania, I hear, and many other countries.

They think that’s okay? Because if it is — is Ivanka in the audience? Is Ivanka here? Boy, my kids could make a fortune. (Laughter.) They could make a fortune. It’s corrupt. But it’s not even that; it’s just general corruption.

And the other thing, as mentioned in the call and something that I’ve told Mike Pence, our great Vice President — I would tell him all the time, and I told him when he went on the trip, because he was over there. He never mentioned anything about this when you had your meeting. It’s a terrible thing.

But I told Mike. I said, “Mike, we’re giving them money, and, you know, you’re always torn about that because we have our country to build, we have our cities to build and our roads to fix. But we’re giving them money. Tell me, why isn’t Germany paying money? Why isn’t France? Why isn’t United Kingdom paying money? Why aren’t they paying money? Why are we paying them money?” Is that a correct statement, Mike?

I say, “Find out what the hell is going on.” And I told that to all of my people, OMB. I said — I asked that question: “How much is Germany paying? Why isn’t Germany paying?” Why is the United States always the sucker? Because we’re a bunch of suckers. But that’s turning around fast. But it makes it harder when stuff like this happens, because you want to focus, and you want to focus perfectly.

Think what we could have done if the same energy was put into infrastructure, prescription drug prices. Think of what we could have done. And I’m now talking both sides. Think of what we could have done if we had the same genius — because it’s genius.

I will say, it’s genius on the other side — maybe even more so because they took nothing and brought me to a final vote of impeachment. That’s a very ugly word to me. It’s a very dark word. Very ugly. They took nothing. They took a phone call that was a totally appropriate call. I call it a “perfect call” because it was. And they brought me to the final stages of impeachment.

But now we have that gorgeous word — I never thought a word would sound so good. It’s called “total acquittal.” (Applause.) Total acquittal.

So — so I want to, if I could, real fast, just introduce a few of the people. I have to start with — I have to start with Kevin. Man, did you do a job. Lucky you’re there. Lucky you’re there because it wouldn’t have worked out. If you don’t have the right people — I’ll tell you, Kevin McCarthy has done an incredible job. (Applause.) Really. Stand up.

And he loves this job, and he loves this country. I’ll tell you what: Mitch and Kevin, they love what they do. Now, Mitch wouldn’t even tell you he liked it. (Laughter.) I’d say, “Mitch, do you like it?” “I don’t know.” (Laughter.) He’s the greatest poker player, right?

Kevin will say, “I love it.” Right? And I will say that you’re going to be Speaker of the House because of this impeachment hoax. (Applause.) I really believe it. I really believe it. And I’m going to work hard on it. I’m going to try and get out to those Trump — those Trump areas that we won by a lot.

And, you know, in ’18, we didn’t win. We just won two seats in North Carolina — two wonderful seats in North Carolina that were not supposed to be won. But I went and I made speeches, and we had rallies, and we did a great job and we won. We took two seats. Nobody writes about that. If we lost them, it would have been the biggest story of the year.

But we’re going to go, we’re going to do a job, and we’re going to win a lot of seats. We’re going to win a lot of seats. People are very angry that Nancy Pelosi and all of these guys — I mean, Nadler — I know him much of my life; he’s fought me in New York for 25 years. I always beat him. And I had to beat him another time. And I’ll probably have to beat him again. Because if they find that I happen to walk across the street, and maybe go against the light or something, “Let’s impeach him.” (Laughter.)

So we’ll probably have to do it again because these people have gone stone-cold crazy. But I’ve beaten them all my life, and I’ll beat them again if I have to. (Applause.) But what they’re doing is very unfair. Very unfair.

So Kevin McCarthy has been great. So, a few names, right? And there’ll be a few you forget. If you want, you can raise and I’ll say, “Great. Love to have you. Wonderful.” (Laughter.) But we’re going to do the best we can. And I have my Cabinet, but my Cabinet is different — I appoint them. Okay? I didn’t see all of them helping so much. (Laughter.) You know, they were running their various bureaucracies, right? (Laughter.) No, my Cabinet is great, and they’re all here.

But today is the day to celebrate these great warriors, right? These are great warriors. They really fought hard for us. And —

So I’ll start: Kelly Armstrong, North Dakota. Kelly, thank you. Great job. (Applause.) Great job.

Jim Banks of Indiana. Jim, thank you. Great job. (Applause.)

Andy Biggs. Where is Andy? Boy, oh, boy, Andy. He got — (applause) — there’s a guy. He’s tough. I hear we’re doing well in Arizona, huh? It’s going good, yeah? I think so. I think I saw a poll that was very good for me. I think we have to make sure Martha is going to do — I think Martha is going to do good. But we have some states that are going to be not easy, but Arizona has been great.

And we’re stopping illegal aliens from coming in. We’re putting up walls. New Mexico, too, a state that’s never been in play for Republicans, is totally in play. Right? Nevada is really looking good. We’re doing well. We’re doing well. We’re going to have a great — there’s more spirit. I will say this: There’s more spirit now for the Republican Party, by far, than the Democrats.

You know, Mike Pence just got back from a place — a beautiful place that Chuck Grassley knows well: Iowa. And he was talking about these fiasco — the Democrats, they can’t count some simple votes, and yet they want to take over your healthcare system. Think of that. (Laughter.) No, think of it.

But we also had an election out there, and we got 98 percent of the vote. We have two people running, you know, and I guess they consider them non-people, but they are running. I mean, one was a governor. One was a congressman. They’re running. We got 98 percent of the vote.

And everybody from the media was saying, “Who are those crowds over there?” You know, they expect it to be one of these competitive — where everybody is running because they want to win, they want to win. And it was Trump. Right, Mark Meadows? It was Trump. This was a Trump crowd.

And a lot of — actually, a lot of my guys went there. They went to Iowa. And a lot of friends went there, and we had tremendous — they say the spirit — the spirit for the Republican Party right now is stronger, I think, than it’s ever been in the history of our country. I think it’s stronger than it’s ever been. (Applause.)

And that includes Honest Abe Lincoln. You know, a lot of people forget Abe Lincoln. I wish he were here. I’d give him one hell of an introduction. Right? (Laughter.) But he was — he was a Republican. Abe Lincoln. Honest Abe.

Bradley Byrne, Alabama. What a great place. (Applause.) Thank you, Bradley.

A man who has been an unbelievable friend of mine and spokesman, and somebody that — that I really like. And I know, Kelly, you’re going to end up liking him a lot. Something is going to happen that’s going to be very good. I don’t know. I haven’t figured it out yet. But Doug Collins — where is he? Where is Doug? (Applause.) You have been so great. Thank you very much, Doug. Thank you very much. Thank you. Really amazing job.

A young man who is — born with a great gene, because I know his father and how great a politician he was. But he’s from Florida. Sometimes controversial, but actually, he’s not controversial. He’s solid as a rock and he’s a friend of mine. Matt Gaetz. Matt? (Applause.) Thank you, Matt. Thank you. Great job.

All right, this guy. So he’s the NCAA — meaning, a couple of years ago, when he was in college — wrestling champion. NCAA. That’s the big deal. That means, in all of college, you’re the champ, you’re the best. His record was ridiculous. Nobody would — nobody could beat him. And I see it. You know, every time, I see it. When I first got to know him — Jim Jordan — when I first got to know Jim, I said, “Huh, he never wears a jacket. What the hell is going on?” (Laughter.) He’s obviously very proud of his body. (Laughter and applause.)

And they say where he works out — you know, where the congressmen, senators, they work out — they say, when Jim works out — even though he’s not as young as he was, but he works out — the machine starts burning. You know, it’s just a different form of a workout than us. Right, Sonny? And — there he is. Look at that guy.

But one day I’m looking, and he looks tough. And I’m looking, and I’m looking at those ears. And I say, “Those ears have something going on there.” I said, “Did you ever wrestle?” “Yeah, I did.” But he doesn’t talk. But I checked. This guy was a world — this guy was a champion, top, top wrestler. And when I had the top — I had all of the teams.

And, by the way, your Super Bowl champions are coming, I think next week or soon. Very soon. And every one of them want to be here. (Applause.) And the coach loves us. The coach is great. Andy Reid. And every one of them want to be here. We have — people love it.

But we had all of the NCAA championship teams here. They had the golf, the basketball. They had every team here. And one of the teams was wrestling. The wrestling team. Was that Penn State? And Penn State won the title. They have a great team.

And I walked up with Jim, and it’s like I didn’t exist. (Laughter.) Those wrestlers, they grabbed him. They love Jim Jordan, and we love you too because you are some warrior. (Applause.) True. True.

A woman who became a star — we have a couple of women that became stars. You two. And I always liked the name of her — you know, I liked the name, “Lesko.” I liked it. That’s how I picked it. I liked the name. I saw that face. I saw that everything. They gave me cards. She had like seven opponents, right?

And you have no idea how much the public appreciates how smart, how sharp you are. This I can’t tell. I can’t tell. They just said, “You know, she’s really good. She’s really talented.” And I said, “Let’s go.” We worked with her. She won her race. Tough race. It’s no longer tough. Because what she does out there is incredible. Arizona loves her.

But you were so incredible, representing — I don’t say “me” — representing our country and getting it out of this impeachment hoax. What you did was incredible.

So, Debbie, please stand up. Debbie Lesko. (Applause.)

A man who I — I became very friendly with — I don’t know why. Do you ever have where — I’ll ask the media: If certain people call, you take their calls. Other people call — if they don’t have information, they won’t take anybody’s call. But other people call, and you don’t.

This is a guy — he just — he’s just a very special guy. His wife I actually like better than him, to be honest. (Laughter.) Because he doesn’t know that I know that he didn’t actually support me right from the beginning, but she did. (Laughter.)

And on my worst day — right? — on my worst day, my worst — I won’t tell you why it was my worst, but it was not one of those good days — she got on a bus, got many other buses and women all over North Carolina, and they toured North Carolina. Well, Mark was back sort of semi-supporting another candidate, which he ended up leaving very quickly. I don’t think you had a choice, because of your wife, but thank her.

And Mark Meadows, he’s an extraordinary guy. I mean, the only problem is, I guess, he’s announcing — he’d only win by 40 points, but he’s announcing that he’ll be not running this time. Do you have somebody good to run? Somebody going to win your district by at least 20 points, please? Okay? But he’s a tremendously talented man, not just as a politician. As a human being, he’s incredible.

And during these horrible times — I mean, the way he worked and Jim and all of you guys — the way they worked so — it was like their life was at stake. So many.

Ron DeSantis is another one. He worked so hard. Then he called me. He said, “Sir, I’d like to run for governor.” I said, “Governor? I don’t want you to run. I like you staying.” “No, I want to run for governor.” And I said, “Well, if you have to.” “I’d like your support.” I said, “How can I support you? You’re at three.” He was at three. He had no money. Somebody was at 38 and they had $22 million cash, right? I said, “Look, if it’s important, I’ll do it,” because they — he’s been another great warrior. And he’s — by the way, he ran. I endorsed him. His numbers went through the roof.

The man who we beat, who was expected to win easily, called me after the race. He said, “You endorsed him, and it was like a nuclear bomb went off. There was nothing I could do.” He never even spent his money. He saved it.

But Ron DeSantis is another one, and now he’s the governor of Florida. And, by the way, he’s a great governor. He’s a very popular governor. His numbers are in the 70s. And he’s done a great job.

But, Mark, I want to thank you very much. Fantastic job. Thank you very much. Mark Meadows. (Applause.)

And Mike Johnson of Louisiana. Where’s Mike? Central casting. What a job. You can represent me anytime. (Applause.) You can represent me anytime. Thank you. What a job you’ve done. Thank you, Mike.

And a man nobody has ever heard of, except the other side. He’s the other side’s worst nightmare. This guy goes down into dungeons and basements; he’ll find a document, no matter what. He’s the most legitimate human being. He’s the hardest worker. He’s unbelievable. He took tremendous abuse. I mean, abuse.

The — the media and, you know, the other side, and the bad ones, the leakers, the liars, the dirty cops — they wanted to destroy him. They tried. They got close, but he wouldn’t let it happen. And, honestly, in a certain way, he was the first one. Wouldn’t you say, Jim and Mark and everybody? This was the first guy. He came out of nowhere. He’s saying, “These people are corrupt.” He’s still saying it. And he was unbelievable. Devin Nunes. He was unbelievable. Unbelievable. (Applause.) That’s so true, Devin.

He’d come in and say — I didn’t even know hi;, I just heard there were like — there was this congressman who kept going into a basement — into files. (Laughter.) He knew something was wrong. You felt it, right? And now we know a lot more than we knew then, right? You never thought it was as bad as it is. And hopefully we’re going to take care of things, because we can never, ever allow this to happen again. (Applause.)

Scott Perry of Pennsylvania. Scott, thank you. (Applause.) Thank you, Scott. Really great. And you’re doing very well over there, by the way. Just saw your numbers.
A man who is a — I mean, central casting. If I’m going to pick Perry Mason, I’m going to do a remake of Perry Mason — other than Bill Barr, I’d pick this guy. But I have to say, I’ll pick Barr. I pick Barr first, right? (Laughter.) John Ratcliffe, right? But I have to tell you, if we’re doing a remake of Perry Mason, the man I get — there’s nobody in Hollywood like this — John Ratcliffe, right? (Applause.) Stand up, John.

So — such a great lawyer. Incredible guy. Incredible talent. But just a great lawyer and we appreciate it. He gets on that screen, and everyone says, “I agree.” The other side folds up so fast. We’ll probably be using a lot of you in the next year. But you have been fantastic, John. We appreciate it. Thank you very much.

A man who’s braver than me and braver than all of us in this room. He got — he got whacked. He got whacked. My Steve, right? I went to the hospital with our great First Lady that night. Right, honey? And we saw a man that was not going to make it. He was not going to make it. He was — the doctor — and I told him his wife — I said, “She loves you.” “Why do you say that?” Because she was devastated.

A lot of wives wouldn’t give a damn. (Laughter.) A lot of — a lot of wives — a lot of wives would have said, “Oh, yeah.” I said, “How’s he doing?” “Oh…” She couldn’t even talk. She was inconsolable. Most wives would say, “Not good. Listen, I’m going home now.” (Laughter.) But the doctor came in — the wife is like — she was a total mess. She was really devastated. And he really — it looked like he had a 20, 25 percent chance. I think you set a record for blood loss.

And, Steve Scalise, I — actually, honestly, I think you’re better looking now. You’re more handsome now. (Laughter.) You — you weren’t that good looking. You look good now. (Laughter.) He looks better now. Can you believe it? I don’t know what the hell that is. (Applause.) It’s true. Better now. (Applause.) What a guy.

And he was practicing — he was practicing for the baseball game against, I guess, the Democrats, right? And this whack-job started shooting. Hurt Roger — I don’t know if Roger is here. But hurt a number of people — hit them. But really hit Steve. He — Steve was at second base. He was the second baseman. And he went down and it was terrible. I mean, I saw the whole thing and it was terrible.

Fortunately, you had two brave policemen with you. Because of your high position in Congress, you had two policemen and they were amazing — the man and a woman. And they came and they didn’t have rifles. They were against a, supposedly, pretty good sharpshooter with rifles — good equipment. And all they had was a gun. And they started coming in from the outfield, shooting. And they’re so far away that a handgun is not preferred. This guy has the rifle and he’s hitting people. And he was going to move up and there was no out. I mean, if he would have been able to move up, there was no way to get out. The entrance was a single entranceway on the other side, where he was.

So everyone went into the dugout — ran into the dugout, but Steve was really hit badly in the stomach, and — with a bullet that rips you apart. It was supposed to do that. It rips — it rips you apart.

And these two people came charging forward. Boom. Boom. Boom. And one of them — you know who — one of them — him? — got the shooter. Hit him. And then got him. Killed him from the long distance. It was amazing. If you didn’t have those two people — you can imagine, right? You could imagine what would happen.

So Melania and I went to the hospital that night. And he was in such bad shape, and he’s been working ever since, so hard. But six months ago, they had a baseball game at the Nationals Park. And I’m watching and it’s — it’s on television. And it’s just, you know, a game. People — you want to win it, right? And Steve’s at second base. The poor guy can’t even walk.

Do you remember Bobby Richardson for the New York Yankees? He was known for range, Louie. Range. He had the greatest range. If a ball is hit to shortstop — Bobby Richardson is the second player, the second baseman — Bobby Richardson would field the ball. If it’s hit to first base, he’ll throw it to the first baseman. He had unbelievable range. This was not Steve Scalise. (Laughter.) Steve had no range. (Laughter.) One foot and he has to fall down, right? Because, you know, he was trying to get better. I don’t know who the hell put you on the field. (Laughter.)

And this is a true story. So the game starts and the first pitch — Steve is standing at second base and the guy is really in bad shape. And I said, “This is terrible.” A shot — groundball shot is hit to second and Steve. I say — I didn’t have time to think too much, but I said, “This is not good. That ball is going toward him.”

And this guy stopped that ball, caught the call. He’s now laying down. He throws the ball to first base. He gets him out. I said, “It’s the most incredible thing.” I’ve never seen — athletically — (applause) — I’ve never seen anything like it, right?

And he gets him out and they then took him out of the game, which was a very wise thing because you could never do that again in a million years. (Laughter.) But you weren’t going to let that ball go through. I don’t care if it was hit by the greatest of all time, right? That ball was not going through you, because you are a warrior. Steve is — he is fantastic. You are fantastic. You and Liz and Kevin.

What a great — what a group. I mean, what a group. I got lucky. I got lucky because you need the right people. If I had the wrong people there, he — maybe a different story. Maybe we’d be celebrating something else. But I really want to thank you, Steve Scalise.

And, Elise, you — I just read this story; she’s the most incredible — what’s going on with you, Elise. So I even said — you know, I was up campaigning for her, helping her. But I thought, “She looks good. She looks like good talent.” But did I not realize, when she opens that mouth, you were killing them, Elise. (Laughter.) You were killing them. (Applause.)

Elise — and there’s a big story in the New York Post — I love the New York Post because they treat me well. There aren’t too many of you that do. But today, you’re treating me well. I even had a great headline — New York Times, Washington Post. I had all of these great headlines. Maybe we should just end it right there. (Laughter.)

But you had the greatest story, yesterday in the Post, that people from all over the country are contributing to her campaign. They were so enthralled with the way you handled yourself, what you said, the way you said it. And I’ll always be your friend. I think it was — it’s really an amazing story. What a great future you have. What a great future. Thank you. (Applause.) The First Lady agrees, by the way. The First Lady agrees.

And Michael Turner, you can represent me anytime. Where’s Michael? Where is he? (Applause.) Or you can represent me. How good were you? There’s another — there’s another Perry Mason type, I think. Right? What do you think, John? But, Michael, you were fantastic and we appreciate it.

Brad Wenstrup. Where’s Brad? Brad. (Applause.) Great, great job. This is a big day for lawyers. You notice only the lawyers stayed? All the lawyers stayed behind.

Lee Zeldin. How good are you? How good are you? (Applause.) Man.

And, Louie, your name is not down. They didn’t give me your name. Do you know — if I didn’t announce Louie — (laughter) — whoever the hell made this list, I got to get rid of because I — if I wouldn’t have announced Louie, it might have been the end of the presidency. (Laughter.) Louie, you have been so great. So tough and so smart. I got it just — (laughs) — I got it. But Louie has been amazing. He’s a tough guy. He’s a smart guy. He’s streetwise like crazy. We love Texas, and we’re with you all the way, Louie. We’re with you all the way. Thank you very much. (Applause.)

So that’s the story. We have a great group of warriors, and there are others left, and, I guess, probably, I’m sure I didn’t mention a few, and I apologize if that’s the case. How’s CPAC doing? Good? Huh? My man, stand up please, will you? He’s the one who said, “You should run.” (Applause.) Right?

Matt said — it’s like five years ago, six years ago. And I made a speech, and then they do some kind of a straw poll: “Who made the best speech?” And he said, “I made the best speech.” With all this professional — I hate to say this: With all these professional politicians, they voted, by far, the best speech was Trump. He calls me, he says, “You should run for politics.” I say, “What do I know about politics?”

But you know what? We learned quickly, and our country has never done better than it’s doing right now. (Applause.) So it’s been good. (Applause.) But thank you, Matt. Great. Say hello.

So that’s the story. We’ve been treated very unfairly. Fortunately, we have great men and women that came to our defense. If we didn’t, this would have been a horrific incident for our country. When you have Lisa and Peter, the lovers, the FBI lovers: “I want to believe the path you threw out for” Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. That’s the office. “There’s no way he gets elected” — meaning me. “There’s no way he gets elected.”

This is Peter, to Lisa. He’s probably trying to impress her, for obvious reasons. (Laughter.) “There’s no way he gets elected. But I’m afraid we can’t take the risk.” Now, think of this. In other words, if I get elected, they can’t — “they”; two low-lifes — they can’t take the risk. They can’t take the risk. Think of it.

And that’s where it came up, the greatest word of all: “insurance policy.” So he says, “But I’m afraid we can’t take the risk. She may lose.” It’s like an insurance policy. In the unlikely event you die before you’re 40 — in other words, if I won, they were going to do exactly what they did to us. They were going to try and overthrow the government of the United States — a duly elected president.

And if I didn’t fire James Comey, we would have never found this stuff. Because when I fired that sleazebag, all hell broke out. They were ratting on each other. They were running for the hills. Let’s see what happens. Let’s see what happens. It’s in the hands of some very talented people. We’re going to have to see what happens.

But I can tell you, in my opinion, these are the crookedest, most dishonest, dirtiest people I’ve ever seen. They said — this is Strzok: “God, Hillary should win 100 million to one.” This is about me. This is an agent from the FBI. Look how they let her off. Thirty-three thousand emails deleted. Nothing happens to her. Nothing happens. It’s unbelievable.

But think of that — “God, Hillary should win” — when these guys are investigating Hillary. Then they go to work for Mueller — the two of them — and when Muller found out that everybody knew that they were 100 percent this way, he let them go. But they deleted all of their emails and text messages.

So when we got the phone, they were all deleted. Could you imagine the treasure trove? They illegally deleted. So they left. They left Bob Mueller. He had the look, but he didn’t have a lot of other things. Always had the look. Mr. G-Man.

And I love the FBI and the FBI loves me — 99 percent. It was the top scum. And the FBI people don’t like the top scum.

So think of that: 100 million to one. And he’s investigating me. And then, “God, Trump is a loathsome human being, isn’t he?” These are the people looking at me. I’m really not a bad person. And Page said, “Yes, he’s awful.” How would you like to have that? This is just — this is the good stuff. There’s stuff a hundred times worse than that. These are all dirty people.

And now, I just heard that they’re suing the United States of America because they were interfered with. We’re not going to let it happen. Just not going to let it happen. We cannot let this happen to our country. We can’t. (Applause.)

So, I’m going to leave now. And I don’t know if any of you have anything to say. You could say it. But this is sort of a day of celebration, because we went through hell.

And I’m sure that Pelosi and Cryin’ Chuck — I’ve known this guy all the — the only time I ever saw him cry was when it was appropriate. Known him for a long time. Cryin’ Chuck. But I’m sure they’ll try and cook up other things. They’ll go through the state of New York. They’ll go through other places. They’ll do whatever they can. Because instead of wanting to heal our country and fix our country, all they want to do — in my opinion, it’s almost like they want to destroy our country. We can’t let it happen.

Jim Jordan, did you want to say something? Go ahead. Huh? Mark?

REPRESENTATIVE MEADOWS: No, I just — I wanted to just say that this reflection today, it is a small reflection of the kind of support you have all across the country. We’ve got your back. (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT: Well, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. (Applause.)

This was a highly partisan situation. Pelosi said — I copied it down exactly. Before the impeachment — she wanted to impeach from day one, by the way. Don’t let it fool you. You know, she said, “No, the impeachment is a very serious thing.” I said, “She wants to impeach. Watch.”

Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and so overwhelming and bipartisan — bipartisan. It was 197 to nothing. And other than one failed presidential candidate — and I call that “half a vote” because he actually voted for us on the other one. But we had one failed presidential candidate. That’s the only half a vote we lost. So, we had almost 53 to nothing. We had 197 to nothing. And the only one that voted against was a guy that can’t stand the fact that he ran one of the worst campaigns in the history of the presidency.

But she said, “There’s something so compelling — it has to be so compelling and so overwhelming and bipartisan. I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country” — she was right about that — “and it’s just not worth it.” That was Nancy Pelosi a year ago. Right?

And I think it’s a shame. I think it’s a shame. But as I said, if we can put this genius to work on roads and highways and bridges and all of the things we can do — prescription drugs. You know, we had — Secretary Azar is here and I want to thank him for this, but we had — first time in 51 years, where drug prices actually came down last year. First time in 51 years. But what we can do, working with both parties in Congress, is — would be unbelievable. It would be unbelievable — all we can do.

And I know Chuck Grassley is working very hard on it and Mitch is working very hard on it. But what we can do is — is incredible. What we can do, just generally. We’ve done so much without it. We’ve rebuilt our military. We’ve cut regulations at a level that nobody thought possible. We’ll always protect our Second Amendment; we all know that.

But I just want to tell you that it’s an honor to be with you all. I want to apologize to my family for having them have to go through a phony, rotten deal by some very evil and sick people. And Ivanka is here, and my — my sons and my whole family, and that includes Barron. (Applause.) That includes Barron, who is up there as a young boy.

Stand up, honey. (Applause.) Ivanka, thank you, honey. Come. Come. (Applause.) (The President hugs Ivanka Trump.)

Come here, baby. (Applause.) (The President hugs the First Lady.)

So I just want to thank my family for sticking through it. This was not part of the deal. I was going to run for President, and if I won, I was going do a great job. I didn’t know that I was going to run, and then when I got in, I was going to have to run again and again and again. Every week, I had to run again. That wasn’t the deal, but they stuck with me.

And I’m so glad I did it because we are making progress and doing things for our great people that everybody said couldn’t be done. Our country is thriving. Our country is just respected again. And it’s an honor to be with the people in this room.

Thank you very much, everybody. (Applause.) Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. (Applause.)

[END Transcript]

President Trump Delivers Remarks Following Impeachment Acquittal – 12:00pm ET Livestream…


President Trump announced yesterday he would be delivering remarks from the White House today discussing the conclusion of the House impeachment effort.  The anticipated start time is Noon today.

UPDATE: Video Added

Fox10 Livestream Link – GST Livestream Link

.

ACQUITTED !! – Now Let’s Get Down To Business…


In the spring of 2018 a group of congressional reps led by Devin Nunes, Mark Meadows, Jim Jordan, Matt Gaetz, Louie Gohmert, Lee Zeldin and Bob Goodlatte, asked President Trump to declassify a series of documents so the public could see how former officials in the DOJ & FBI abused their offices and conducted political surveillance.

In September of 2018, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein asked President Trump not to declassify those same documents until after the Mueller probe was complete. Rosenstein informed the President (confirmed in later POTUS interviews) that declassifying the material could be interpreted as impeding the Mueller investigation.

Two months later, in November 2018, the mid-term election took place. Republicans lost the House and their committee chairs. Many people suspectthe mid-term election was the real motive for the Sept. 2018 request from Rosenstein. Four months after the mid-term, March 2019, the Mueller investigation of President Trump ended.

Two months after the Mueller probe ended U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr, a profoundly supportive voice for DAG Rosenstein, asked President Trump to grant him unilateral declassification authority to assist the purposes and intents of his DOJ effort. President Trump granted U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr with the authority to declassify on May 23rd, 2019; granting access to the same documents requested by congress a year earlier.

May 23, 2019:

Each time President Trump came close to declassifying the material someone from the DOJ intercepted the anticipated action and blocked the release. In the fall of 2018 it was DAG Rod Rosenstein. In the summer of 2019 it was AG Bill Barr….

Amid the twists and turns many people have forgotten about the material congress asked President Trump to declassify two-years-ago. Additionally there has been some material cited that just seemingly slipped away without follow-up. Consider:

  • Whatever happened to the forty pages of Lisa Page and Andrew McCabe text messages that Catherine Herridge noted nine months ago? Herridge only published four of the pages in March 2019.
  • Why are the Lisa Page and Peter Strzok text messages still redacted two years after their original release (December 1st, 2017)?
  • Where’s the release of the Susan Rice inauguration day memo to the file?
  • Why didn’t the DOJ/FBI release all of the Bruce Ohr 302’s without redaction? Will those fully unredacted 302’s be part of the IG report release?
  • Where’s the unredacted David Archey FBI declarations that were previously ordered to be released by a DC judge?
  • The Mueller investigation ended 10 months ago. Why are we still not able to see the unredacted three authorization memos that Rosenstein gave to the special counsel on May 17th, August 2nd and October 20th, 2017?

Those simple questions (and releases) are in addition to the original list that congress provided to President Trump back in the spring of 2018. A declassification list that DAG Rod Rosenstein asked President Trump not to release until after the Mueller investigation.

  • All versions of the Carter Page FISA applications.
  • All of the Bruce Ohr 302’s filled out by the FBI. [Without redactions]
  • All of Bruce Ohr’s emails. All supportive documents and material provided by Bruce Ohr to the FBI. [Without redactions]
  • All relevant documents pertaining to the supportive material within the FISA application.
  • All intelligence documents that were presented to the Gang of Eight in 2016 that pertain to the FISA application used against U.S. person Carter Page; including all intelligence documents that may not have been presented to the FISA Court. Presumably this would include the revealed State Dept Kavalac email; and the FBI transcripts from wiretaps of George Papadopoulos (also listed in Carter Page FISA). [AKA ‘Bucket Five’]
  • All unredacted text messages and email content between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok on all devices.
  • The originating CIA “EC” or two-page electronic communication from former CIA Director John Brennan to FBI Director James Comey that started Operation Crossfire Hurricane in July 2016.

Additionally, since the 2018 list was developed, more information surfaced about the underlying material. This created the tell-tale sign of a document trail that is easily followed:

♦ The August 2nd, 2017, two-page scope memo provided by DAG Rod Rosenstein to special counsel Robert Mueller to expand the fraudulent Trump investigation, and initiate the more purposeful obstruction of justice investigation. Also the October 20th, 2017, third scope memo that expanded the investigation again, and targeted additional people including Michael Flynn’s family. The Scope Memos are keys to unlocking the underlying spy/surveillance cover-up. [SEE HERE and SEE HERE]

♦ The July 31st, 2016, Crossfire Hurricane counterintelligence operation originated from a scheme within the intelligence apparatus. The CIA operation created the originating “Electronic Communication” memo. Declassify that two-page “EC” document that Brennan gave to Comey. [The trail is found within the Weissmann report and the use of Alexander Downer – SEE HERE]

♦ Release and declassify all of the Comey memos that document the investigative steps taken by the FBI as an outcome of the operation coordinated by CIA Director John Brennan in early 2016. [The trail was memorialized by James Comey – SEE HERE] Release and declassify the declarations of FBI Agent David Archey that describe the purpose of the Comey memos:

♦ Reveal the November 2015 through April 2016 FISA-702 search query abuse by declassifying the April 2017 court opinion written by FISC Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer. Show the FBI contractors behind the 85% fraudulent search queries. [Crowdstrike? Fusion-GPS? Nellie Ohr? Daniel Richman?] This was a weaponized surveillance and domestic political spying operation. [The trail was laid down in specific detail by Judge Collyer – SEE HERE]

♦ Did anyone question former DOJ-NSD (National Security Division) head John Carlin, and get his testimony about why he hid the abuse from the FISA court in October 2016; why the DOJ-NSD rushed the Carter Page application to beat NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers to the FISA court; and why did John Carlin quit immediately thereafter?

♦ The Carter Page FISA application (October 2016) was fraudulent, and likely based on deceptions to the FISA Court. Declassify the entire document, and release the transcripts of those who signed the application(s); and/or depose those who have not yet testified. The creation of the Steele Dossier was the cover-up operation. [SEE HERE] What version of the FISA application will be released (if at all)?

♦ Release all of the Lisa Page and Peter Strzok text messages without redactions. Let sunlight pour in on the actual conversation(s) that were taking place when Crossfire Hurricane (July ’16) and the FISA Application (Oct ’16) were taking place. The current redactions were made by the people who weaponized the intelligence system for political surveillance and spy operation. This is likely why Page and Strzok texts were redacted!

♦ Release all of Bruce Ohr 302’s without redactions. And FBI notes from interviews and debriefing sessions, and other relevant documents associated with the interviews of Bruce Ohr and his internal communications. Including exculpatory evidence that Bruce Ohr may have shared with FBI Agent Joseph Pientka. [And did anyone get a deposition from this Pientka fella?] Bruce Ohr is the courier, carrying information from those outside to those on the inside.

If President Trump genuinely wants to deal with the FBI issue… All he has to do is remind himself what congressional allies wanted almost two years ago; and release the requested documentation… everything after that becomes much easier.

The Dow – Impeachment – Economic Confidence Model


QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong
Thank you for this education. I’ve had to unlearn almost everything from the MBA I got. They’ll never teach this stuff in schools, it’s too dangerous.
Question: If the Dow closes above the January high in Feb, would that be a cycle inversion, with the market going up when it should have turned down on the Jan 2020 ECM? Or it implies a shallower pullback ahead? I’m still a little confused on how to read the signals.

Many thanks

AA

ANSWER: No, we are not in a cycle inversion. The Dow aligned with the ECM, not the NASDAQ which the forecast array showed was aligned with February, not January. Then Socrates wrote in the report on Friday 31st of January noting there was a RARE event that had taken place on the Weekly Level of our model. Socrates wrote:

———————————————-
RARE SUPER POSITION EVENT

We have elected an Intermediate and Long-Term Weekly Bullish Reversal. However, we have also elected a Short-Term Bearish Reversal in a Superposition Event warning that this may prove to be a low.
———————————————-

As I have warned, this was not going to be a major crash. This is still a choppy consolidation and even at the WEC, I showed we had a consecutive string of Monthly Directional Changes into April. Each market has its own cycle. If it coincides with the ECM, all that reflects is that such a market is often the focus of attention. But this turn in the ECM is so profound, the changes in the trend are so many it appears that perhaps the most serious issue will be political. I warned that Trump would not be found guilty. But this issue shows that there is a constitutional problem. The Framers of the Constitution NEVER took into account that the impeachment process would be so abused in this manner. There was no HIGH CRIME or MISDEMEANOR that Trump committed.

Even Bill Clinton, who did create a felony of perjury that any citizen would have been put in prison for, I disagreed with his impeachment because it was in a private legal case. It did not involve the office of the president. This claim that Trump sought foreign interference in the US election is really bogus. He asked them to “investigate” which if the FBI had asked it would not be an issue. He did not ask to make up something. Hillary paid to create the fake dossier by a foreign agent alleging acts in Russia. She actually did seek to interfere in the election and it was that dossier which then was used by the FBI to wiretap Trump’s campaign. That is Watergate stuff that forced Nixon to resign.

The whistle-blower met with the Democrat Schiff and he not only lied about that, but then they protected his identity when others like Snowden and Assange would be put to death if they could. This is a complete abuse of the whistle-blower statute that Schiff has violated denying Snowden and Assange Equal Protection of the Law. I would not even shake the hand of Schiff. What he has done is just outrageous and an abuse of power of his office. He has undermined the Constitution and destroyed the very power of impeachment forever. It was NEVER intended to be a tool to remove an opponent to influence elections or to bring an impeachment simply because you disagree with the president’s decision.

The Constitution demands that all members of Congress must take an oath of office to support the Constitution before assuming office. In order to comply with the Constitution, Congress has enacted federal laws to execute and enforce this constitutional requirement. Federal law regulating oath of office by government officials is divided into four parts along with an executive order which further defines the law for purposes of enforcement. 5 U.S.C. 3331 provides the text of the actual oath of office members of Congress are required to take before assuming office. 5 U.S.C. 3333 requires ALLmembers of Congress to sign an affidavit that they have taken the oath of office required by 5 U.S.C. 3331 and have not or will not violate that oath of office during their tenure of office as defined by the third part of the law, 5 U.S.C. 7311 which explicitly makes it a federal criminal offense (and a violation of oath of office) for anyone employed in the United States Government (including members of Congress) to “advocate the overthrow of our constitutional form of government”. The fourth federal law, 18 U.S.C. 1918 provides penalties for violation of the oath office described in 5 U.S.C. 7311 which include: (1) removal from office and; (2) confinement or a fine.

Executive Order 10450 defines “advocate” and specifies it is a violation of 5 U.S.C. 7311  for any person taking the oath of office to advocate “the alteration … of the form of the government of the United States by unconstitutional means.” Our form of government is defined by the Constitution of the United States. It can only be “altered” by constitutional amendment. Thus, according to Executive Order 10450 declarers any actions taken by government officials who have taken the oath of office prescribed by 5 U.S.C. 3331 which alters the form of government other by Constitutional Amendment, is a criminal violation of the 5 U.S.C. 7311.

Adam Schiff should stand trial and a jury should decide if he has violated the Constitution for the personal political gain of his party based upon probable clause that he lied about meeting the whistle-blower.

If we look at the hatred in politics and Pelosi tearing up the State of the Union speech and the Squad not even attending, we have witnessed the very collapse of the United States. This is the end of a functioning government. I BELIEVE this may be the turning point when we look with highlight back on January 18th, 2020.

On January 16th, 2020 at 2 p.m., Chief Justice John Roberts traveled by car from the Supreme Court to the Senate to assume his role as presiding officer over the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump. Roberts received a formal invitation to attend from Secretary of the Senate Julie Adams that morning. Upon arriving at the Senate, Chief Justice Roberts was sworn in by Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa), acting as president pro tempore of the Senate. Shortly after senators took an oath to do “impartial justice,” the body unanimously moved to issue a summons to President Trump notifying him of their trial and the charges against him. That was all the 16th and Trump was required to respond to the summons PRECISELY in writing by Saturday evening the very day of the Economic Confidence Model – January 18th, 2020.

I have been a real scholar of constitutional law. I have even had lawyers call me for my opinion. In law school, they teach you maybe a few weeks on the Constitution. The vast majority of laws are statutory which is really the meat and potatoes. Rarely do issues rise to the level of the Constitution because most laws are presumed to be constitutional and it is your burden to prove they are wrong. What this Impeachment of Trump has demonstrated is that the Founding Fathers never anticipated that politics would disintegrate in such a fashion. The oath the senators took to be “impartial” was a joke – nobody was for this was a partisan battle to the death of the Constitution. The Democrats know they cannot defeat Trump, so they themselves interfered with the 2020 election and tried to have him removed.

After Clinton and Trump impeachments, as a constitutional scholar, these impeachments demonstrate that because the Founding Fathers never defined what constitutes a HIGH CRIME or MISDEMEANOR, it has allowed the process to be abused. This Trump Impeachment to me was the deathblow to the Constitution and any possible hope of a fair, impartial, and reasonable democracy from here on out.


  • 5 U.S.C. 3331:

    “An individual, except the President, elected or appointed to an office of honor or profit in the civil service or uniformed services shall take the following oath: ‘I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.’”

    5 U.S.C. 3333:

    “…an individual who accepts office or employment in the Government of the United states…shall execute an affidavit within 60 days after accepting the office or employment that his acceptance and holding of the office or employment does not or will not violate section 7311 of this title. The affidavit is prima facie evidence that the acceptance and holding of office or employment by the affiant does not or will not violate section 7311 of this title.”

    5 U.S.C. 7311 (1):

    “An individual may not accept or hold a position in the Government of the United States of the government of the District of Columbia if he (1) advocates the overthrow of our constitutional form of government…”

    18 U.S.C. 1918:

    “Whoever violates the provisions of section 7311 of title 5 that an individual may not accept or hold a position in the Government of the United States or the government of the District of Columbia if he (1) advocates the overthrow of our constitutional form of government [and] shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year and a day or both.”

  • Executive Order 10450