Tag Archives: Impeachment

Jan 20 2020

Background Briefing With White House Counsel…


Re-Posted from The Conservative tree House on January 19, 2020 by 

In advance of the formal answer to the Senate summons, the White House counsel held a background press briefing with media.  Here’s the transcript as released:

MR. GIDLEY: Thank you very much. Good afternoon, everyone. Thanks for taking the time to join this background call regarding impeachment.

The ground rules are as follows: Information on this call is on background, and can attributable to “sources close to the President’s legal team.”

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Thanks, Hogan. I’m going to start, and then I’m sure my colleague is going to want to jump in.

So, from a procedural standpoint, we’re going to be filing in the next — probably next hour or two — our answer to the summons. [pdf Answer Here] This was the summons, which is part of the process that the Senate sent over to us with the articles of impeachment. We are issuing a very detailed response. This is not to be confused with our brief; our brief is not due until Monday.

The response that we will be putting forward will address both the procedural and the substantive issues raised in the articles of impeachment. When I talk about the procedural aspects, I’m referring to the procedural irregularities that took place during the course of the investigation. When we talk about substance, we’re referring to legal threshold standards, as it relates to impeachment under the Constitution. So, that’s going to give you an overview.

The answer — our response — will respond to both of those. I’ll give you a taste of it, a little bit, so that you have a sense of the tone of what we’re going to say. Our first response reads as follows:

The Honorable Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, hereby responds: The Articles of Impeachment submitted by House Democrats are a dangerous attack on the right of the American people to freely choose their President. This is a brazen and unlawful attempt to overturn the results of the 2016 election and interfere with the 2020 election — now just months away. This highly partisan and reckless obsession with impeaching the President began even before his election and continues to this day.

We next assert that:

The Articles of Impeachment are constitutionally invalid on their face. They fail to allege any crime or violation of law whatsoever, let alone “high Crimes or Misdemeanors.”

That is all required, of course, by the Constitution itself. So that’s why I’m saying both the process and the legal issues are being impacted here. And then we will respond to each and every one of the two articles separately.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Yeah, and I — this is [a source close to the President’s legal team]. I think, at the end, there’s a lot of detail in the response. The conclusion, at the end of the day, is that the articles of impeachment violate the Constitution. They are defective in their entirety. They are the product of invalid proceedings that flagrantly denied the President any due process rights. They rest on dangerous distortions of the Constitution that would do lasting damage to our structure of government.

The bottom line is: In the end, this entire process is nothing more than a dangerous attack on the American people themselves and their fundamental right to vote.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Let me give you some of the individual responses to the two articles of impeachment. With regard to the first article of impeachment, we are going to assert that they must be rejected because the — and it relates to the first article of impeachment — it fails on its face to state an impeachable offense. It alleges no crimes at all, let alone high crimes and misdemeanors, as required by the Constitution. In fact, it does not allege any violation of law whatsoever. We assert that the House Democrats’ abuse of power claim would do lasting damage to the separation of powers under the United States Constitution.

We then get into some very specific allegations, regarding the phone call itself, as it relates to this abuse of power claim. I will tell you this: We will address both the April 21st and July 25th phone calls. We will be making it very clear what President Zelensky said, as well as what the President of the United States said on those calls. We will again reiterate that the House record establishes that President Zelensky and his top aides have never said there was a quid pro quo situation, as that issue came up.

And remember: This case started — first it was going to be quid pro quo. Actually, first it would be extortion, then bribery, then quid pro quo, then it becomes abuse of power — with the word “quid pro quo” never showing up in the actual articles of impeachment.

We’re raising it because we’re going to remind the American people of exactly what this is all about and how it started. So that’s how that one is going to start.

We’re going to also take a look at the fact that the bilateral presidential meeting that was so often discussed actually did take place. The security assistance was sent. And all that took place without the Ukrainian government announcing any investigations.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: With respect to the second article of impeachment, our answer states very clearly that the second article of impeachment also fails on its face to state and impeachable offense. It does not allege any crime or violation of law whatsoever.

To the contrary, the President’s assertion of legitimate executive branch confidentiality interests, grounded in the separation of powers, cannot constitute obstruction of Congress.
Furthermore, the notion that President Trump obstructed Congress is absurd. President Trump acted with extraordinary and unprecedented transparency by declassifying and releasing the transcript of the July 25th call that is at the heart of this matter.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Let me add one other thing because this will apply to both — this will apply to both articles, but this is contained in our answer, and I think it’s important for you to have a sense of how that sets forth.

We’re also going to go to the process issue. So we’re going to say that House Democrats ran a fundamentally flawed and illegitimate process that denied the President every basic right, including the right to have counsel present, the right to cross examine a witness, and the right to present evidence. And despite all of this, the information that the House Democrats actually assembled disproves their claims against the President. We’re going to then assert — so that’s a process aspect.

Then we’re going to say the President, at all times, acted with full, constitutional legal authority in our own national interests, and continued his administration’s policy of unprecedented support for Ukraine, including the delivery of lethal military aid that was denied to the Ukrainians by the prior administration.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Again, with respect to article two, obstruction of Congress: We will state that the Trump administration replied appropriately to the subpoena and identified their constitutional defects. And this is an important point: Tellingly, House Democrats did not seek to enforce these constitutionally defective subpoenas in court. To the contrary, when one subpoena recipient sought a declaratory judgement as to the validity of the subpoena he had received, House Democrats quickly withdrew the subpoena to prevent the court from issuing a ruling.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: The way that this — so, I think what you’re getting at — what we’re giving you — this is about a six-page document, is the answer. It’s going to address both procedural irregularities, and substantive irregularities, including the lack of constitutional support for the position that the House advocated in the articles of impeachment.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: And it will address the articles both on the law and the facts.

MR. GIDLEY: Okay. Moderator, we’d like to open for questions now. But I want to remind the group one more time, if I may, that, again, the attribution here is “source close to the President’s legal team.” And, second, is a reminder that the content is embargoed until 5:00 p.m.

With that, if you could open it up for questions, we’d appreciate it.

Q Hi, guys. Thank you so much for doing this. This is Franco Ordoñez, from NPR. In addition to Dershowitz, who says he is going to give an opening statement, will each of you be giving an opening statement? And can you give a flavor of what each of you will be saying? Will you be, kind of, discussing each article, as you just kind of broke down right now, in the opening statement?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: So the way that we plan on it happening — of course, we’re coming up second in this process, as the House Managers will go first — is will do the initial opening, where he will address a variety of both substantive and constitutional and procedural position.

I will — as is planned right now, and this could change — I will go next, where I will be addressing more of an overview on the entire process, which will include, from beginning to end, on how we got there.

Now, we may break it up some. We don’t know yet — where, you know, my colleague goes for 45 minutes and I go for 45 minutes, and maybe we come back up later in the afternoon or evening. It’s going to depend on how the day is flowing.

And then, as to the question you’re asking about Alan and Ken Starr and Bob Ray, they will have discrete functions that they will be addressing at particular times. We don’t know what those times are yet; we just got to see how everything plays out.

Q Hey, it’s Zeke Miller, with AP. Thanks for doing the call. First of all, by any chance, is there any way you can move this on the record, since it’s awfully weird to have a call with “people close to a legal team” when we’re talking to the legal team?

And then, substantively, in terms of this response and the legal brief, do we expect this to sort of be the nature of the President’s defense here — sort of a broadside against the process? And are you concerned that that sort of rhetoric might not fly with the senators who have a more staid view of their chamber?

MR. GIDLEY: First things first, Zeke: Let me address the first question. The answer to that is no. You can call me after and we can have that conversation. But as far as the next one is concerned, I’ll turn it back over to the team.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Yeah, Zeke, this is [a source close to the President’s legal team]. I think it’s fair to say that this answer addresses both the law and the legal issues and the procedural issues — but also the facts, and takes the facts head on.

So I think it covers all of the issues, not just the procedural issues.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Right. And the brief — obviously, because we have a lot more we can write in the brief — will cover everything in much more detail.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: This is just the answer. But it does cover — as I have said, it’s both procedural and the substantive legal. It also makes the argument that all you really need to look at are the articles of impeachment themselves. That — if you look at them, they allege no violation of law whatsoever. They don’t remotely begin to approach what you would need to begin (inaudible) impeachment.

So that will be an additional argument that we’ll make — we’ll be making.

Q Hi, there. It’s Michael Moates, with D.C. Chronicle. Hey, I was just curious: The statement that you guys are going to be submitting as your answer, will that be made public through — after — are you guys going to pre-release that? Or are we going to be waiting until after that is submitted to Congress?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: It’s minutes away.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Yeah, the plan is: It’s embargoed until 5:00 p.m., and we expect to send you guys the text at that time.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: You’ll have the answer, in other words.

Q Good afternoon. This is Jon Decker, from Fox. Thank you for doing this. Republican lawmakers and those speaking on behalf of the President, including yourselves, have repeatedly said that there must be an underlying (inaudible) to meet the standard for impeachment and removal. And you’ve clearly made that point in the answer that you’ve just spoken about.

As you know, yesterday, the Government Accountability Office released a report saying that it was, in fact, illegal for President Trump to withhold military aid from Ukraine to pressure them to interfere in the 2020 election.

Based on this new development, in your view, wouldn’t you each agree that the Republicans’ own standard on impeachment and removal has now been met? Thank you.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Those aren’t — we’re dealing with discrete articles of impeachment. That’s what this — so, this is not twelve reports later, two week later. It’s a discrete — they brought up two articles of impeachment. That is what’s before the United States Senate.

And we obviously disagree with that conclusion. And, in addition to that, if you look at the articles of impeachment, it’s not only that they don’t allege any crime; they don’t allege any violation of any law whatsoever.

Q Hi, this is Andrew Feinberg, with Breakfast Media. Thanks for doing the call. It sounds a lot like the defense that you’re going to put forth is almost identical to what’s already been said by Republican members of the House, and the President, in his letter just before the vote on the impeachment articles. Is there anything new that we should expect to hear that perhaps addresses the actual allegations being made, rather than the process on these sort of broad brush arguments about the articles of impeachment not mentioning crimes? Anything that hasn’t already been brought up by the House, perhaps?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: There’s no question that, during the course of the presentations and the proceedings before the Senate and then the briefs that we’re going to be filing, we will be addressing both procedure irregularities — again, ignore those (inaudible) implications as well. And also, substantive issues that arise, including facts.

So all of that will be addressed. So, don’t — there shouldn’t be not misunderstanding that this is a factual — an attack only on process. We’re not ignoring the tainted process, because it has serious constitutional implications, but we’re going to be — it’s going to be a full throttle address.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: We will take the facts head on, and we believe that the facts will prove that the President — and have proven that the President did absolutely nothing wrong.

Q Good afternoon, [sources close to the President’s legal team]. This is Kelly O’Donnell, from NBC. When you look at the arc of how expect this trial to move forward, in terms of its length, your willingness or lack thereof to have witnesses, what is your latest thinking on what we should expect for your strategic ideas, going beyond this initial phase that you’re announcing today with the response to the articles?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, I think that, first — the first thing we have to look for is actually how the rules come out — the final rules, what the final agreements are. And I don’t think any of us — what we’re hearing is what you’re hearing, which is 24 hours, each side — which was under the Clinton model. That the witness decisions would be made after the presentation of the actual arguments by both counsels — or by the Managers and by our team.

And then, if there’s witnesses, it would proceed to a vote. And if they decide there’s going to be witnesses, there’d be depositions. And, by the way, if there’s witnesses, it means that, you know — Chuck Schumer takes the view that they hear the witnesses they demand. Well, you know, we would get to demand witnesses, too. It’s a two-way street.

So, we’re prepared for all contingencies. We’ll see what happens. It’s like any other trial; you prepare for the contingencies and you see what happens.

Q Hi, it’s Peter Baker, from the New York Times. Thanks for doing the call. Appreciate it. Quick question: You guys now have a lawyer on your team who has made the argument in the past that it is an impeachable offense to improperly invoke executive privilege to block an investigation. How do you — how are you going to square the statements and the positions that Judge Starr has taken in the past now that he’s on your team and will be on the Senate floor in the trial?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Yeah, let me address this, because (inaudible) obviously (inaudible). Obviously, the issue of the obstruction of Congress is a significant one, constitutionally. I think he will be very — we will be very pleased with Judge Starr’s presentation on how he’s going to move this forward, what he sees are the issues, and the different aspects of the fact of the activities that we’re involved in, in this situation with Bill Clinton’s, are markedly different than what even the allegations are here.

And remember: It was — Bill Clinton was asserting executive privilege over private conduct. This is markedly different. And I think that that’s a clean distinction and clean (inaudible).

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: All right. And, hey, on more thing, if I may address, too. Zeke, I believe you asked the question about the GAO. I just want to make this point. A couple things: First of all, the aid was released, and it was released before the deadline.

Second of all, it’s pretty clear that GAO is just inserting itself in today’s news cycle. Let’s be clear: They made a lot of rulings in the past that they’ve had to go back on, rulings they’ve had to change — and the media didn’t say a word about it when they went after Obama, they went after Clinton, they went after Bush. They’ve done it in the past.

So, this is nothing new from them. The fact is, we’re on strong legal footing, the President has done nothing wrong, and we believe that’s going to be borne out through this process.

Thanks everybody for the call.

[Transcript End]

[IMPEACHMENT ANSWER – pdf]

Jan 19 2020

Cheers Greet Trump at College Championship: Leftists Prove It Never Happened


151K subscribers

When President Trump and First Lady Melania walked onto the Superdome field before the LSU v. Clemson national championship college football game, the students and alumni erupted in raucous applause and cheers. Within minutes Leftists on Twitter and elsewhere had several theories to prove why it never happened. After all, college-educated Americans couldn’t possibly be glad to see Trump. Right Angle is a production of our Members. Join us: https://BillWhittle.com/register/ How’d you like to enjoy three nights sailing the Caribbean with the kind of people who would cheer the President of the United States? Find out how at http://bit.ly/StratoCruise2020
Jan 19 2020

The Real Conspiracy – Hillary & Pelosi


Armstrong Economics Blog/Politics

Re-Posted Jan 19, 2020 by Martin Armstrong

While everyone is left scratching their head as to why Pelosi, who said impeachment was bad for the country, suddenly changed and because of its greatest supporter in the Democrats. Then she held on to the articles of impeachment for about a month which she pretended was to force witnesses to be heard in the Senate, when she knew that her tactics were unconstitutional and even members of her own party were left trying to figure out just what the heck was she up to?

The 2016 election was stolen from Bernie which is why he went to complain to Obama after the votes were rigged and given to Hillary in California. Only after Bernie went to the White House and Obama told him to suck-it-up and take one for the team, did Bernie support Hillary.

This time, the Democrat power-brokers behind the curtain are looking to prevent Bernie once again from winning the nomination. But they also know that Joe Biden is damaged goods and they have no candidate who could possibly win against Trump.

Our computer has been projecting a Trump victory in 2020, but this is not something that will be by a wide margin. We are going to rerun the models and double-check the data to make sure there is no mistake for as it stands now, Trump would win in a landslide looking at a candidate of Biden or Bernie. There is something else brewing behind the curtain.

The Clintons have long been regarded as the most corrupt policial couple perhaps in history. The scheme is to drag out the Impeachment hearing, not to actually get rid of Trump, but to tie up all the senators running in the Democratic Party and force them off the campaign trail. Why? This is not just to give Biden a clear path. They also realize that Biden and his son could be called as witnesses and that will be contested in the Supreme Court.

Then there is all this talk that Pence should be impeached and removed as well. That means the third person in line for the Presidency would be Nancy Pelosi in the flesh. I do not believe this is being considered behind the curtain in any serious manner. However, it is being used as a distraction to hide from public view the real conspiracy behind the curtain.

The REAL conspiracy is that the Democratic candidates will be so divided that at the convention, they will move to DRAFT Hillary relieving her of ever having to appear in any primary or suffer the arrows from the herd of contenders. Tieing up the Impeachment in the Senate will not prevent Trump from campaigning, but it will clear the field of Democrats with an eye on the White House.

Let’s see. But this seems to be a real conspiracy in the works.

 

Jan 19 2020

President Trump Official Response to Senate Trial Notification…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on January 18, 2020 by 

A response to the formal summons from the Senate, notifying the Executive Office of the President of impeachment proceedings, was due at 6:00pm ET today.   The White House has responded [WH pdf link – and embed below] with a seven-page position answer.

[Via White House] THE HONORABLE DONALD J. TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, HEREBY RESPONDS:

The Articles of Impeachment submitted by House Democrats are a dangerous attack on the right of the American people to freely choose their President. This is a brazen and unlawful attempt to overturn the results of the 2016 election and interfere with the 2020 election—now just months away. The highly partisan and reckless obsession with impeaching the President began the day he was inaugurated and continues to this day.

.

Previously adopted by unanimous consent:

  • A Summons to the White House notifying them of the impeachment trial will be issued by the Senate.  A deadline for WH response: Saturday January 18th, 2020, 6:00pm,
  • The House of Representatives (impeachment managers) have a deadline of 5:00pm Saturday, January 18th, 2020, for the filing of their impeachment brief to the Senate.
  • The White House (defense lawyers) have a response deadline of 5:00pm Monday, January 20th, for their response to the House impeachment brief.
  • The House of Representatives (impeachment managers) have a deadline of Noon Tuesday, January 21st, for their rebuttal brief to the White House defense brief.
  • The Senate Trial begins at 1:00pm Eastern, Tuesday January 21st, 2020.

Senators will not be allowed to bring their cell phones or any electronic device into the Senate chamber while the trial is underway.

Jan 19 2020

DOJ Filing – Former Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein Admits to Authorizing Release of Lisa Page and Peter Strzok Text Messages…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on January 18, 2020 by 

It has always been a curious question about who released the controversial text messages between FBI lawyer Lisa Page and FBI Supervisory Agent Peter Strzok.  In a DOJ court brief (full pdf below) in support of a motion to dismiss the lawsuit of Peter Strzok, former Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein explains how and why he authorized the release:

It would have been a little more interesting if Rosenstein could have narrowed down the timing of OIG notification from “in the summer of 2017”, as it would outline specifically when Rosenstein became aware of the controversial issue.  Before or after he joined the crew in authorizing -and signing- a false FISA application?….

Obviously, at least in my opinion, the lack of specificity here is evidence of Rosenstein’s CYA motive.  If Rosenstein was aware of the texts from inside the key participants of the Crossfire Hurricane team, prior to authorizing the third FISA renewal… he was either a complete doofus, or complicit and willfully blind.   I digress.

Rosenstein saying he decided to release the text messages because they would inevitably become public after his testimony before the House Judiciary Committee during the Mueller investigation. Also saying he wanted to ensure they were not “cherry-picked” for public release by members of Chairman Bob Goodlatte’s committee.

“With the express understanding that it would not violate the Privacy Act and that the text messages would become public by the next day in any event, I authorized [Justice’s Office of Public Affairs] to disclose to the news media the text messages that were being disclosed to Congressional committees.”

Sketchy Rod Rosenstein’s five-page statement can found below in the attachment to the DOJ motion:

.

[Cloud Direct Link to pdf Format Here]

The original news reports from journalists gaining knowledge of the Strzok/Page text messages on December 2nd, 2017, always seemed tied to the ridiculous and coerced guilty plea by Michael Flynn signed two days earlier, November 30th, 2017.

Obviously those within the DOJ/FBI or IC were able to keep the texts hidden from “the summer” through the end of November….  Then Flynn was forced into the plea… and then suddenly a series of leaks from inside the FBI system started on December 1st, 2017.  That chain of events led to congress asking questions and demanding to see them.  As a result of those congressional inquires, Rosenstein authorized their release December 12th, 2017.

Jan 18 2020

Is Impeachment Always Political and Should it be Prevented?


Armstrong Economics Blog/Politics

Re-Posted Jan 17, 2020 by Martin Armstrong

COMMENT: I don’t believe your ECM and when the Republicans impeached Clinton this is just payback which is well deserved. They should shut your site down.

Oppressed Democrat

REPLY: Don’t worry, I have no desire to live forever. I understand that Socialists hate cycles and want to oppress everyone for their own benefits. I am in favor of splitting the country on political principles where you can live with people who think like you, free of people like me who just want to be left alone.

As for your payback, well you are wrong on that also. In the case of Clinton, the impeachment came out from the special prosecutor’s report, which this case against Trump did not. Clinton committed perjury and then tried to get his secretary to confirm his lie. Because of that “obstruction of justice,” it is true that the Republicans controlled the House of Representatives back then as the Democrats do today. However, Clinton was impeached on a bipartisan vote of 258–176 (31 Democrats joined Republicans) because this did come from the special prosecutor report. Nevertheless, I believe that was wrong anyhow.

Clinton was impeached for a crime that in a normal legal proceeding would have landed him in prison for 5 years. The grounds for impeachment were perjury to a grand jury (first article, 228–206)and obstruction of justice (third article, 221–212). I disagreed with that because I question if something ancillary to the position of president is grounds to impeach a president. The perjury was with respect to his sexual conduct. I do not believe that is grounds for impeachment.

 

The impeachment of Andrew Johnson took place on February 24, 1868. A president is supposed to be impeached only for “high crimes and misdemeanors,” which in my opinion have never been articulated against Trump, Clinton, or Johnson. Anything a president does that is short of treason against the country, I believe, was never intended to be included in the high crimes and misdemeanors.

If the president was driving and failed to renew his license, that is actually a misdemeanor. Driving with a suspended license is considered a misdemeanor and can come with pretty severe consequences. Other traffic misdemeanors that are criminal in nature include driving while intoxicated or driving while impaired by drugs. In some instances, reckless driving can be considered a misdemeanor as opposed to a traffic infraction. The Founding Fathers never envisioned that there could be demands for a license and the failure to pay the fee would be a misdemeanor. That certainly is not grounds for impeachment, which begs the question — have we created way too many laws?

The primary charge against Johnson was a violation of the Tenure of Office Act, which Congress passed because they wanted to punish the South and they felt that Johnson was too soft on the Confederate states. Johnson removed from office Edwin M. Stanton, who was the Secretary of War. He was eventually replaced with General Ulysses S. Grant.

Andrew Johnson was against being hard on the South and opposed the Radical Republicans who demanded the South be punished. During the mid-term election, the Radical Republicans gained more seats and nullified any possible veto of Johnson.

Johnson was the first American president to be impeached on March 2–3, 1868, when the House simply disagreed with his policies. The trial in the Senate began three days later, with Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase presiding. The Senate failed to convict Johnson by one single vote (35–19) on May 16th. They called a 10-day recess attempting to convict him on additional articles on May 26th, but they failed to convict with the same vote.

The legal importance of the impeachment and trial of Andrew Johnson went directly to the political implications for the separation of powers. Congress, as a matter of principle, abused its power in the Johnson impeachment as they are doing with Trump for the principle that Congress should not remove the president from office simply because its members disagreed with him over policy.

The abuse of the impeachment power is creating a system that is undermining the very structure of the Constitution destroying the separation of powers seeking to replace it by a government ruled by Congressional Dictatorial Government.

Consequently, the fact that you have taken the time to send this email verifies my concern that the rise of tensions will become violent for the election. This impeachment of Trump is entirely political and there can be no obstruction of justice where a president is subservient to the House of Representatives, which in and of itself has become a den of political nonsense.

I personally disagree with the power to impeach a president residing in the House of Representatives on a simple majority vote. That has clearly allowed for abuse of Congressional power, for in all cases impeachment has been used simply as a political tool because they dislike the president and/or his policies.

To me, it is an abuse of power for Pelosi to order all Democrats to vote for impeachment. That is a very dangerous precedent. I do NOT say that as a Trump supporter, but as an American with at least a legal background and 40 years of experience with politicians. The plain truth is that politicians will always act in their own self-interest, precisely as Adam Smith discovered in his invisible hand. That has led to the abuse of the impeachment power in all three cases.

Jan 18 2020

Senator Ted Cruz Walks Through Likely Senate Trial Process – Holds Same Concerns as Rand Paul…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on January 17, 2020 by 

Senator Ted Cruz appears for a discussion on the Senate impeachment trial.  Cruz walks through the most likely scenario of 24 hours prosecution case (two or three days), then 24 hours of defense case (two or three days); then the individual Senators submitting questions to the Chief Justice, John Roberts, to ask both sides.   This phase of the process should take two to three weeks total.  Then the issue of “witnesses” will be debated.

.

While the first week is unfolding in the Senate, President Trump will be attending the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, and negotiating more economic benefits for the U.S.  Quite a remarkable contrast.

Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump

Words of wisdom. Thank you Ted! https://twitter.com/sentedcruz/status/1217855192399601665 …

Senator Ted Cruz

✔@SenTedCruz

TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE: This is the beginning of the end of the abuse of the Constitution. The Senate will provide a fair trial for @realDonaldTrump. #impeachment #ArticlesOfImpeachment #ImpeachmentTrial #senate #SenateImpeachmentTrial

Embedded video

53.8K

Twitter Ads info and privacy
19.2K people are talking about this

Adopted yesterday by unanimous consent:

  • A Summons to the White House notifying them of the impeachment trial will be issued by the Senate and delivered by Saturday January 18th, 2020, 6:00pm,
  • The House of Representatives (impeachment managers) have a deadline of 5:00pm Saturday, January 18th, 2020, for the filing of their impeachment brief to the Senate.
  • The White House (defense lawyers) have a response deadline of 5:00pm Monday, January 20th, for their response to the House impeachment brief.
  • The House of Representatives (impeachment managers) have a deadline of Noon Tuesday, January 21st, for their rebuttal brief to the White House defense brief.
  • The Senate Trial begins at 1:00pm Eastern, Tuesday January 21st, 2020.

Senators will not be allowed to bring their cell phones or any electronic device into the Senate chamber while the trial is underway.

Jan 18 2020

Alan Dershowitz Discusses His Role During President Trump Impeachment Trial…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on January 17, 2020 by 

I’m skipping any further discussion of Pam Bondi because, quite frankly, while she may be considered a member of President Trump’s team, if we are honest about her background –particularly in the Zimmerman case fraud– there’s nothing good to say.

Bondi was the Florida AG and convinced Gov. Scott to appoint a special prosecutor.  Bondi picked her campaign manager, Jacksonville state attorney, Angela Corey; who constructed a fraudulent witness against the accused. AG Pam Bondi specifically knew Witness #8 was manufactured. In ’12/’13 Pam Bondi attempted to frame a transparently innocent man.

Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz appears on Fox News for a discussion of his role in the upcoming senate impeachment trial of President Trump. Mr. Dershowitz states he will be presenting the constitutional argument against the entire premise for the insufferable impeachment. WATCH:

Defense Lawyers

Jan 18 2020

President Trump Celebrates National Champion LSU Tigers at White House – Video and Transcript…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on January 17, 2020 by 

Earlier today President Trump honored NCAA Football Champion LSU Tigers with a celebration at the White House.  [Video and Transcript Below]

.

[Transcript] – THE PRESIDENT: Well, this is an exciting day in the White House. We have very exciting days — more than most Presidents, I would say, times 10. (Laughter.) We like to keep it that way. The coach likes to keep it that way. But we really do. We just had a — I was just telling the coach; I said, “I know I just made some additional money. We just had another all-time high for our stock market. Just hit.” So that will be 149 times in less than three years. That’s not bad. Coach, that’s good, right? (Applause.)

COACH ORGERON: It is.

THE PRESIDENT: Steve, that’s good. We’ll take that, Coach. Right?

COACH ORGERON: Yes, sir.

THE PRESIDENT: But today, it’s about the coach and the team and that unbelievable quarterback, unbelievable players.

It’s really my great privilege to welcome to the White House the College Football National Champions: the Louisiana State University Tigers. (Applause.)

And, Coach, we have a lot of politicians out there. So many I won’t really mention all of them. Well, there’s one I have to. Hello, Bill — your senator. But we have a lot of great politicians out here and some football players. The politicians — I have — I really respect the football players a lot more — (laughter) — to be honest.

We’re joined by many loyal fans of the purple and gold, including Ambassador Robert Lighthizer, who just did our great deal. Where’s Robert? Just did our great two deals. We just made the two largest trade deals in history: one with China and the other one with Mexico, Canada. (Applause.) And with China, we’ll be taking in $250 billion a year. And with Mexico, Canada, we’ll be taking in hundreds of billions of dollars a year, Bill. So that’s pretty good, right? And it makes our country stronger and better.

And you did a fantastic job. You could almost stand up here. Mentally, you could; physically, I don’t think you have what it takes, if I must be honest. (Laughter.)

And again, Senator Bill Cassidy. Bill, you’ve been a tremendous supporter of the team and your state. And we appreciate your being here very much. Thank you very much.

Steve Scalise, a special man. Got a lot of courage. You know, I went to the hospital. (Applause.) Coach, I went to the hospital. He had a problem — you know that problem. And I went to the hospital and the doctor was saying, “It doesn’t look good, sir. It doesn’t look good.” And he looks better now than before the accident. (Laughter.) It’s a hell of a way to happen, but Steve Scalise got a lot of guts, I’ll tell you that.

COACH ORGERON: Fights like a Tiger!

THE PRESIDENT: He’s a tiger. He fights — he “fights like a Tiger” is right. (Applause.)

And Mike Johnson. Mike, you’re around here someplace. Mike? Good, Mike. Thank you very much for being here. And Garret Graves. Thank you very much, Garret. Thank you for being here.

Also here with us are Louisiana’s Attorney General — terrific guy — Jeff Landry, and Secretary of State Ardoin. You know that, huh? (Laughter.) Where is — where’s — where are you? Yes. Thank you very much. Thank you, folks.

To all of the incredible coaches and players and — this team, your head coach. I watched him on television. I said, “Man, that guy is all — he’s all man. He’s a big, strong-looking guy.” (Laughter.) I didn’t know if he had laryngitis or was that his real voice? (Laughter.) It’s true. I think it was a combination of both. It was tough to start with, and then he had a little laryngitis. But, man, whatever the hell it was, Ed Orgeron — and, Ed, it worked. It really worked. You did a job that few people will ever be able to do again. The team is said to be one of the greatest teams — maybe the greatest team in the history of college football. Right? (Applause.) And that’s pretty amazing.

As well as interim President of LSU, Thomas Galligan. Where’s Thomas? Thomas?

MR. GALLIGAN: Right behind you.

THE PRESIDENT: Behind me? You’ve done a good job. Interim. I think we got to make him permanent. Forget about it. (Laughter.) That’s a hell of a job you’ve done, Tom.

MR. GALLIGAN: Thank you.

THE PRESIDENT: Pretty good job.

Your football program has inspired countless fans across the country, and it’s not just for what you have done on the football field — which is true.

In the face of a heartbreaking tragedy, you rallied together behind Offensive Coordinator Steve Ensminger. Where is Steve? Steve? Come up, Steve. (Applause.)

MR. ENSMINGER: (Inaudible.) (Off-mic.)

THE PRESIDENT: This guy. This guy. Come up here. Come up. Okay.

I mean what — your whole story — the whole — tragedy, and yet, so incredible the way you handled it. And the coach said you never wavered. The coach was just talking to me about it. You never wavered. So I want to thank you very much for being here. Thank you for everything you’ve done. Very inspirational, Steve. (Applause.)

This team showed the world what it means to look out for one another. And Steve is a real case study in that. But I want to thank you.

Three years ago, when LSU needed a head coach, they considered choosing someone younger. You’re a pretty young guy, right? Younger? That’s discrimination. You could sue them for that. (Laughter.) See, nowadays, you sue if you hear that. They want younger? Let’s sue them. (Laughter.) They made the right choice — that, I can tell you. And some might say a little bit less gruff. Does that make sense? And yet, to me, if I was casting a movie — I told him today, that’s my football coach. (Laughter.) There’s nobody in Hollywood that can play the role better than this guy. Right, Coach?

Instead, they put their faith in a hometown boy from Lafourche Parish. (Laughter.) Ed Orgeron did not let Louisiana down in any way. And today — Coach “O”, as they call him — you may well be the most beloved coach anywhere in the land. And we have some great coaches. (Applause.) We have some great coaches. And you played against a great coach, who was here last year. He’s a great coach. But we have great coaches. But the job you’ve done is incredible.

On the road to the title, this team overcame a brutal schedule. And I had no idea how brutal until I looked at these numbers: You defeated seven teams in the top 10, four in the top 5, and beat the national champions of the past four years. So what did you do? You get the schedule and you look at it. What did you do when you first saw the schedule, Coach? You weren’t happy.

COACH ORGERON: “Hopefully we have a great quarterback.” (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT: Now, think of that for a schedule. You know, you get your schedule and you say, “Wait a minute. Every team is like a great team we have to play.” You didn’t have too many easy weeks.

But your explosive offense pushed every opponent from the breaking point and to the breaking point. And for the first time since the legendary Coach Paul Dietzel — a name we all know — and the Fighting Tigers of 1958, LSU had a perfect, undefeated season. So rare. (Applause.) It’s really rare. And it’s amazing how seldom you see that, Coach, right? It’s really — it’s a hard thing to do.

But your opponents did not make it easy for you. In late October, number nine Auburn — really great football school, great school — headed to Death Valley, as they say, hoping to put a stop to the LSU juggernaut.

It was all tied up at the start of the second half when Auburn took the lead for the third time that game. An LSU touchdown in the third quarter put you on top. And from that point until the championship, you never trailed again for a single second in a single game. Although, I must tell you, in the championship you did. I was getting a little bit concerned. (Laughter.) You were a little behind there. I said, “Hey, what’s going on over here?” Must be a pretty unusual feeling, right? He didn’t — he didn’t know that feeling.

The next game, I was in the stands in Tuscaloosa where you beat your archrival Alabama in another great game — (applause) — and that was for the first time in eight years. Alabama also, great coach, great team. LSU was unstoppable, and soon you faced Oklahoma in the opening round of the playoffs. And Oklahoma had a great season.

You shut the Sooners down from the very first drive. LSU held Oklahoma to their lowest total yards in a single game since 2015 — I’m sure they weren’t happy — as wide receiver Justin Jefferson had 14 receptions for 227 receiving yards and four touchdowns. (Applause.) A college football playoff record.

Where is Justin? (Applause.) He’s going to be so rich. (Laughter.) Oh — we’re looking at money. (Laughter.) And this guy, Chase, wherever the hell he is, he was catching — (laughter) — where the hell is Chase? He was catching balls all over the place. You guys are going to make so much money. (Laughter.)

And I don’t think your quarterback is going to do too badly, Coach. I don’t know. (Laughter.) Right? I don’t think going to do too badly. You beat Oklahoma 63 to 28. That doesn’t happen to Oklahoma.

Then it was on to New Orleans. You needed one final big win against a truly great team. And one last time, LSU learned that its star quarterback, Joe Burrow, was something very special.

After breaking a bone in his hand playing at Ohio State, Joe sat on the bench and wasn’t happy about it. I heard he was not thrilled. (Laughter.) That was not your happiest moment.

MR. BURROW: Not my best one.

THE PRESIDENT: He didn’t like it. I heard stories. He was going a little crazy. Then the coach took charge and took a chance and brought him to LSU.

Joe soon became the best quarterback in all of college football — and not close — because he set an NCAA record with 60 touchdowns — I’ve never even heard of that, 60 — in a single season, averaging a touchdown every quarter, and won the Heisman Trophy by the largest margin in the history of the Heisman Trophy. (Applause.) That’s incredible.

And as he received the trophy, Joe fought back tears. I don’t know, I don’t think he’s ever cried in his life. I don’t believe it. Did you actually fight back tears?

MR. BURROW: A little bit. (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT: A little bit. (Laughter.) It’s like the coach: If you told me he cried, I — I don’t believe it. Maybe when he was a baby, but I doubt it. (Laughter.)

He dedicated it to the kids in his beloved hometown of Athens, Ohio — a great state. Within weeks, Joe’s heartfelt speech raised over a half a million dollars for the Athens County Food Pantry. Thank you. (Applause.) Thank you, Joe.

And, Joe, I want to say, on behalf of the country, that you make our country very, very proud. You’re really an inspirational talent and all of that. But you’re an inspirational player and you’re an inspirational person. And you have a heart that’s incredible, and you have a team that respects you so much.

With Joe quarterbacking, and a team of unrivaled talent right alongside him and beside him, LSU had to beat the reigning champions — a team that was here last year, and nice guys and they were very large. (Laughter.) You know, we served them a lot of food. They ate so much food, we didn’t know what the hell to do. (Laughter.) They kept eating and eating. A team that had not lost a game in 741 days, the Clemson Tigers. They really are really special, right? Amazing.

Before the game, the First Lady and I were honored to walk out on the field escorted by the ROTC cadets from both schools. We then joined tens of thousands of proud, patriotic Americans to watch the battle of the titans. This was a great game. This was a tremendous game. And, Coach, they had tremendous ratings on television. The ratings came in, they were — not surprisingly, but they were tremendous — beyond what normally would be for even a championship game.

On your first drive — I think you might have had something to do with that, (inaudible), I don’t know. Although these two guys maybe too, but you had a lot to do with it.

On your first drive, the celebrated LSU offense was pinned back at your own goal line. I watched it. I’ve never seen — I bet you haven’t been pinned back that many times, because every time I saw you, you were on the three-yard line like — (laughter) — what happened? It was just, like, constantly. But you kept doing just fine. You did just fine, Coach.

COACH ORGERON: We were rope-a-dope —

THE PRESIDENT: You were — right, that was a rope-a -dope. (Laughter.) That’s true. The first time you got the ball — and then you made that great play and they called it back, as usual. You made the great pass. He’s all over the place. He’s — he was going to be tackled four times, like, on the first play.

And you threw the ball and everybody was excited, and then they said, “There’s a flag on the field.” Too many flags, Coach. Right? (Laughter.) Too many flags. You know, the referees, they want to get themselves in the limelight, but — (laughter) — that was a play that should have not been called back, but that’s all right.

You punted after a rare three and out, and soon Clemson struck first with a touchdown and for the first time. All season they were behind. Then, Ja’Marr Chase — that’s the man; I was watching him — caught a 52-yard bomb from Burrow to tie it up. By the end of the game, Ja’Marr had nine catches and two touchdowns, setting a playoff championship record with 221 receiving yards. That’s phenomenal. (Applause.) Come here, Ja’Marr. Come here. (Applause.)

I said, “You got to say something.”

MR. CHASE: How y’all doing? How y’all doing? I’m just happy to be in the White House, to be honest. (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT: That was very good. (Applause.)
Hey, Coach, if I practiced, could I beat him in a race? What do you think? Could I beat him in a race? (Laughter.)

COACH ORGERON: You may need — may need a little head start. (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT: (Laughs.) A little head start, right? I think I might need a head start.

Midway through the third quarter, it was a tight three-point game. You increased your lead with a touchdown. Then in the fourth quarter, Terrace Marshall stretched out and caught a beautiful 24-yard pass in the end zone, and LSU went up 42 to 25, and all hope of a Clemson comeback — and they were used to winning games. It was — they won, I think, 28 in a row or something, Coach. It’s a pretty unusual feeling for them too. Shows how great a team you have.

But all hope of a Clemson comeback came to an end when LSU forced a fumble. The ball was picked up by a true freshman cornerback who had spent the game shutting down Clemson’s offense — that’s for sure — on his side of the field: Derek Stingley, Jr. Where’s Derek? (Applause.) That was a good feeling, Coach. With that play, the game was over.

With an eye-popping 628 yards, the most passing touchdowns in a playoff championship game, and the SEC’s first-ever 15 and 0 season, LSU became the College Football National Champions.

And Coach Orgeron said after the game, “God had a plan…All I did was follow the plan.” The fact is God had a great coach here. This is a great, great coach. I really mean that, too. (Applause.) And the truth is, with a great coach, an outstanding quarterback, an entire team filled with heart and skill and hope, and courage and passion and strength, and unbreakable will to win — that’s what they have; they have an unbreakable will and confidence. They went into that game against a team, 28 and 0. They went into the game; I don’t think they had a doubt about what was going to be happening, I don’t think. Did you ever doubt?

MR. BURROW: No.

THE PRESIDENT: Not even a little bit? (Laughter.)

MR. BURROW: No.

THE PRESIDENT: Huh? (Laughs.) That’s — oh, he’s going to be so rich. (Laughter.) Looks sort of like a young Tom Brady. Does that make sense to you? We call him “young Tom Brady.”

This LSU team will long be remembered as one of the greatest in college football history. And I just want to say congratulations, and go Tigers! (Applause.) Go Tigers. (Applause.)

So, Coach, there’s another coach that I respect a lot. His name is Bill Belichick, right? Do you respect him? Yes. Everybody respects him. He has a lot of respect for you. I talked to him; he has a lot of respect for you. And he thinks you’re a great coach, and we know that. The results speak louder than anything — or anything I can say.

I just want to congratulate you. It’s great to get to know you. You have a real friend here.

COACH ORGERON: Thank you.

THE PRESIDENT: If I can ever help you with rescheduling, like next year, where we give you a little bit easier schedule. What do you think? (Laughter.) Bill, we’ll work that out. But let’s have the coach say a few words. Boy, does he deserve it. It’s great to have you in the White House. (Applause.)

COACH ORGERON: Thank you, President Trump. What an honor to be here at the White House. I speak on behalf of our football team and our great assistant coach and staff. I do have the best organization in the world. One team, one heartbeat.

This is a player-driven program. It’s about the men behind me and the men in front of me. You guys did it. You guys set out on a plan, last year, January 17, that you were going to win the national championship. You never talked about it. You went about it through hard work, dedication, and you did it. And we’re so proud.

I’d like thank my wife Kelly, and my boys and my family, who are here to be with me. (Applause.) And all the coaches’ wives. I’d like to thank Scott Woodward, (inaudible) the administration, for all the great things that they did for us. One team, one heartbeat. Go Tigers! (Applause.)

At this time, I’m like to bring up our interim President, Tom Galligan.

MR. GALLIGAN: Thank you, Coach. Good morning.

AUDIENCE: Good morning.

MR. GALLIGAN: On behalf of everyone at Louisiana State University and the entire LSU Tiger family, I want to say what an honor it is for us to be here today at the White House representing our great university as national champions.

Now, while a trip to the White House is traditional for national champions, Mr. President, I don’t think you have ever had a team quite like ours visit before. The achievements of Coach O and these young men are truly historic. If I were a poet, I would say they are absolutely epic. This group will forever be known as one of the best to ever take the field in college football.

Now, as I’m sure you’ve heard and seen, there is no group of supporters more passionate and dedicated than LSU’s. And I can tell you that our entire university, our community, and our state take immense pride in what this team and what you all have done.

At LSU, we are champions on the football field, and we are champions in the classroom, in the laboratory, on the stage, in the art studio, in the Moot courtroom, and more.

Our state gives much to this great nation: from commerce, to culture, to cuisine, and always character. Now we have given the country what we believe is the greatest college football team ever. (Applause.)

Mr. President, Coach O and this team represent not only the best of LSU, but the best of Louisiana. Thank you, and go Tigers! (Applause.)

It’s now my privilege to introduce — originally from Athens, Ohio, but now we claim him in Baton Rouge, Louisiana — the most decorated player in college football history, the Heisman Trophy winner, and a man who is already rich, because he is a recent LSU graduate, Joe Burrow. (Applause.)

MR. BURROW: I’ll keep this short and sweet, because I’m sure Mr. President has some more pressing matters to get to. (Laughter.) But, no, I just want to say it’s truly an honor to be here. And thank you for having us so soon after the game so the seniors could be here. That means a lot to us. This is a moment we’ll never forget, and it truly does mean a lot that you — that you did that so soon. So thank you.

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you.

MR. BURROW: Um, yeah, it’s so awesome to be here. It’s a moment we’ll never forget. It was a great season, but this is a great way to cap it off. So thank you so much. And we got — we got a little jersey for you right here. (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT: Oh, I thought he was going to give me the Heisman.

MR. BURROW: Sorry, you can’t have my Heisman. (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT: I thought he was going to give me the Heisman Trophy. (Laughter.) He’s just giving me a jersey.

(A jersey is presented.) (Applause.)

So, Joe, I just told the coach, we don’t normally do this, but I’m doing it for this team: Anybody who would like to come with me to the Oval Office, we’ll take pictures in the Oval. It’s a special place. There’s no place like the Oval. They come from all over the world, they have their own big offices and everything; they go into the Oval and they say, “There’s no place like this.”

So, Coach, if you’d like, we can take whoever wants to come to the Oval Office. We’ll take pictures behind the Resolute Desk. It’s been there a long time. A lot of Presidents — some good, some not so good. (Laughter.) But you got a good one now, even though they’re trying to impeach the son of a bitch.

Can you believe that? (Laughter.) Can you believe that? Got the greatest economy we’ve ever had, Joe. We got the greatest military. We rebuilt it. We took out those terrorists like — like your football team would have taken out those terrorists, right? But we’re doing good.

So we’re going to go to the Oval Office with some of the players — and all of the players, I guess.

And again, I want to just congratulate the team. I want to congratulate your great representatives, all of you. You’ve been fantastic all season long — before they went on this big streak.

And it’s an honor to have everybody at the White House. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you. (Applause.)

[End Transcript]

Jan 18 2020

Manufacturing President Jay Timmons: President Trump Made Promises, President Trump Kept Promises…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree house on January 17, 2020 by 

MAGAnomics – National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) President and CEO Jay Timmons describes how President Donald Trump has “delivered” for manufacturers, noting that “promises are being kept” on tax reform, regulation, and trade.

.

The passage of USMCA in combination with incentives for domestic manufacturing investment in the U.S.; and overlayed with the framework of the China ‘phase-one’ agreement, has set the foundation for a competitive North American manufacturing alternative to southeast Asia.  The capital investment will follow.  America First!