House Speaker Nancy Pelosi threatens President Trump with new obstruction of Congress charges if the White House fails to submit to subpoenas from House committees as part of the impeachment inquiry. But even if Democrats manage to impeach Trump, and a Senate super-majority removes him from office, could he still get reelected in 2020? Bill Whittle Now with Scott Ott is one of dozens of shows produced by our Members each month thanks to their voluntary contributions. They want these conversations around time-tested principles to multiply and spread. You can join the movement at https://BillWhittle.com/register/
QUESTION: I really do not understand how this is an impeachable offense to ask Ukraine if there was any wrong doing on the part of Biden?
UD
ANSWER: It is not. They are twisting this by claiming Trump was seeking help from a foreign country to interfere in the 2020 election. It is the same old theory with Russia. It ignores the question of whether there was any criminal activity on the part of Biden. I am not concerned about the claim that Biden demanded a prosecutor be dismissed for investigating his son. I am not sure that is a true statement or allegation to begin with.
My focus would be on HOW Biden’s son got that job in Ukraine to start with when his father was Vice President. That would be a hot topic and a prosecution the SEC would bring against any fund manager who happened to get funds from that entity to manage. That is the questionable area to investigate and that is completely valid.
The Democrats were demanding Trump’s tax returns to investigate what he did in the past. This foreign interference, which the USA does all the time, is a novel theory to prosecute on. Obama ordered Trump to be investigated during the election. Is that OK because it wasn’t involving anyone overseas? Hillary paid for Steele dossier which began the Russian investigation. That too was ok? That involved foreign players.
When Speaker Newt Gingrich made the push for impeachment of Clinton, the House held a formal vote to begin the inquiry and even 31 Democrats joined all 227 Republicans in support. Clinton actually committed perjury. While that was a crime, it was not directly involving his role as president. I thought that was going too far as well.
The November 1998 midterms turned into a referendum on Clinton. Here, the Democrats will turn the 2020 election into a referendum on Trump. It did not go well for the Republicans and Newt later lost his seat.
This will be the new scandal designed to keep the same theory of foreign interference in an American election. So get use to it. This will occupy the headlines going into the election. There was nothing with Russia so they have used the same theory with Ukraine.
QUESTION: Do you think this latest Ukraine scandal is another attempt by the Deep State to get rid of Trump?
SK
ANSWER: Yes, I do. This whistleblower did NOT have direct knowledge. His report was wrong but that does not seem to matter even though it was not something he even had personal knowledge of. Hearsay is not acceptable in a court of law because it can be a rumor and the person cannot testify that it is true and correct. The CIA changed the rules by allowing a whistleblower to file a report without personal knowledge. In other words, hearsay the day before this was filed confirms that there is a deep conspiracy going on here. This is not acceptable in a court of law and it will never fly in an impeachment proceeding. It is a political ploy to create another scandal in hopes of unseating Trump in 2020.
The Deep State knows full well Trump will not authorize war. There is absolutely a very serious problem behind the curtain. Like Japan, once the military seized control of the government, they took Japan into war. There was no evidence that the emperor ever made such a decision.
Baron de La Brède et de Montesquieu (1689–1755) influenced the Founding Fathers in creating the Constitution and provided the reason for the Second Amendment — the right to retain arms. Montesquieu met the political leader and soldier known as the Prince Eugene of Savoy (1663-1736). The political discussions between these two men helped Montesquieu understand the evils of government and forged the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution and the right to bear arms. The Prince of Savoy was considered, even by Napoleon, as one of the seven greatest strategists in military history. He fought against the Turks (1683-1688, 1697, 1715-1718) and he fought against the French in the War of the Grand Alliance (1689-1691). He was also the teacher of Frederick the Great of Prussia (b 1712; 1740–1786) who he shaped into a brilliant military strategist. He even acted as a military strategist for the Holy Roman Emperor Leopold I (1640-1705) who was fighting the Turks. He distinguished himself in the siege of Vienna in 1683 and his military career was born.
The Prince of Savoy acquired brilliant skill and wisdom that allowed him to see that military victory was merely an instrument for achieving political ends. He was Europe’s most formidable general who was wounded 13 times, yet always faced a world of cunning foes with conspirators at his back, which he regarded as the “hereditary curse” of Austria. He served three emperors: Leopold I, Joseph I, and Charles VI.
He was a truly brilliant man of many talents. The Prince of Savory came to see standing armies as evil, for they were easily used because of the expense of keeping them. He came to see that there should be NO standing armies and that was the only way to reduce the risk of war.
This brilliant insight of the Prince of Savoy greatly influenced Montesquieu, for this was his source that it laid the foundation for the right to bear arms, as the Second Amendment to the United States constitution. The underlying idea was to eliminate standing armies that feed the cycle of war.
Indeed, there is a tremendous risk of standing armies and building huge defense systems. These people naturally want to play with the toys they create. The danger I see is there is a major effort to overthrow Trump because he is against starting wars. This is one of the reasons I am greatly concerned about what comes after Trump.
All of these efforts and every scandal has come out of the CIA. It was former CIA operative Mike Morell who in August 2016 penned a piece that appeared in the New York Times accusing Trump of being an “agent of the Russian Federation.” The former CIA director John Brennan actually accused Trump of “treason” and called on all Republicans to oust this “traitor” for accepting Putin’s word that he did not interfere in the 2016 election at Helsinki.
Clapper of the NSA and Comey used the Steele dossier, which was fake. Muller never even mentioned it in his report for he would have had to investigate the source which led back to Hillary funding the thing.
The latest whistleblower from the CIA is just hearsay without direct knowledge. After the transcript came out, it got the facts wrong anyhow — there was no quid pro quo. It is very strange that they want to prosecute Snowden as a whistleblower, but hail this hearsay as a champion of democracy.
By now it is clear the anonymous CIA ‘whistle-blower’ complaint was a constructed political effort by House Democrats, IC allies and Lawfare members therein. HPSCI Ranking Member Devin Nunes discusses the fraud behind the construction of Chairman Adam Schiff.
Furthermore there’s nothing in the translation that would raise any alarm bells. The Sept. 9th letter was written BEFORE Schiff raised his fake concern to @ODNIgov IG about a mysterious complaint he hadn’t seen.
Judiciary member and ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, Jim Jordan, outlined the House Intelligence Committee testimony today from Kurt Volker, the former State Department Special Representative for Ukraine Negotiations. “Nothing said today supported Adam Schiff and the democrats’ impeachment narrative. Nothing”
.
Additionally, John Roberts (Fox News) is confirming the White House will send a letter to Speaker Nancy Pelosi saying the administration will not comply with any demands from congressional investigators until the full House votes to launch an impeachment inquiry.
David Mamet had a famous saying, essentially: …‘in order for democrats, liberals, progressives et al to continue their illogical belief systems they have to pretend not to know a lot of things’… By pretending ‘not to know’ there is no guilt, no actual connection to conscience. Denial of truth allows easier trespass.
This hate-filled Democrat ideology relies on our willingness to accept their lies, falsehoods, and scripted presentations; and simultaneous demand we grant benefit amid their seeds of doubt…. Hence, Nancy Pelosi and her sanctimonious “prayerful” commentary.
Today both Minority House Leader Kevin McCarthy and Representative Michael McCaul draw attention to Speaker Pelosi’s manipulation of House rules specifically intended to achieve articles of impeachment without Republican representation.
In a blatant display of committee manipulation, today the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Chairman Adam Schiff, worked around committee jurisdiction rules and took a deposition from Kurt Volker, the former State Department Special Representative for Ukraine Negotiations.
Not only was the jurisdiction of the House Foreign Affairs Committee usurped, but Chairman Schiff also limited republican members to having only one staffer present during the testimony. [Read McCaul Letter Here] This blatant manipulation of House rules was made without Speaker Pelosi holding a House vote to initiate an impeachment inquiry.
The House Rules that Pelosi changed in 2018 were designed to exploit the Trump-Russia impeachment via obstruction goal. Those same changed rules are now being used in the Trump-Ukraine effort. The committees’ need to gather impeachment evidence without the pesky interference by House republicans. This was always the purpose for changing the rules.
A formal vote to initiate an “impeachment inquiry” is not technically required; however, there has always been a full house vote until now. The reason not to have a House vote is simple: if the formal process was followed the minority (republicans) would have enforceable rights within it.
Without a vote to initiate an impeachment inquiry, the articles of impeachment can be drawn up in committee without any participation by the minority; and without any input from the executive branch. This was always the plan visible in Pelosi’s House rules.
Thankfully key Republican leadership have now realized Pelosi’s decree of an “Official Impeachment Inquiry” is a feature, not a political flaw. They are beginning to push-back, at least call-out publicly, their lack of input around the rushed committee investigations.
House minority Leader Kevin McCarthy writes: “I have written to Speaker Pelosi to halt the impeachment inquiry until we can receive public answers to the following questions. Given the enormity of the question at hand—impeaching a duly elected president—the American public deserves fairness and transparency.”
Once the committees’ have assembled their evidence, assuming the public becomes aware of the partisan construct, Pelosi will likely initiate the full House vote to proceed with the assembly of articles of impeachment. However, the committees’ will have already done the investigative work without republican involvement, so the full House vote will essentially be a moot point.
You are detained and questioned extensively. You answer all the questions. At the conclusion of your inquisition you are read your rights. Your attorney shows up; questioning stops. A week later you are indicted and the material evidence against you is your statements. This is what Pelosi/Lawfare are constructing. It doesn’t matter that the trial judge will throw it out, what matters is the indictment.
This is why there is such a massive narrative push by Pelosi, committee leaders and their media allies right now… they need to assemble evidence while republicans remain locked out of the process and committee staff (hired Lawfare) construct the articles. The goal is impeachment. They achieve that goal via a majority House vote on any individual article.
The ‘Resistance‘ and ‘Deep State‘ facilitators (writ large) are all-in on this impeachment effort. Impeachment as an offense is their best defense to anything being investigated by U.S. Attorney John Durham, Attorney General Bill Barr and DOJ-IG Michael Horowitz. This entire group is also racing the clock.
The ‘whistle-blower’ complaint is only a vehicle; a president can be technically impeached by hearsay, innuendo and anonymous complaints – it is simply a House vote. However, a president cannot be removed (Senate) under that impeachment case construct.
The primary goal is only impeachment from the House.
Their secondary hope is that outcome assists the 2020 removal from office.
Sean Davis
✔@seanmdav
An official familiar with the testimony of State Dept. official Kurt Volker describes the testimony as a “setback” for Schiff’s impeachment efforts.
So far, Volker’s testimony “does nothing to advance Chairman Schiff’s theory of the case,” the official says.
Hearing from two sources with knowledge of the Volker deposition that Schiff at one point took over questioning from his counsel. One source described that as “unusual” given that staff was supposed to lead, and indicates Dems are “nervous” about how it’s going.
.@SpeakerPelosi on impeaching Trump: “The re-election of Donald Trump would do irreparable damage to the United States. We have some serious repair and healing to do in our country for what he’s done so far. I’m not sure two terms might be irreparable [sic].”
President Trump’s attorney Rudy Giuliani appears for a discussion with Lou Dobbs to outline how Adam Schiff was working in concert with left-wing political allies to create the CIA whistle-blower complaint as evidence for their impeachment agenda:
.
Some of the information provided by the State Department IG to congress included the investigative notes of Rudy Giuliani in conversations with Ukraine officials. Additionally, Giuliani appeared on Fox News with Sean Hannity to expand the discussion.
For two days the mainstream media were breathlessly reporting on an “urgent request” from the State Department Inspector General for a closed-door meeting.
Media sources whipped their left-wing audiences into an anticipatory frenzy with predictions of devastating information soon to come from an “explosive” and “highly unusual” request. It must must be connected to President Trump and Secretary Mike Pompeo hiding devastating information, they said…
Well, the super-anticipated ‘closed door’ briefing was held today, and the IG handed out packets of information related to revelations of Democrats colluding with the Ukraine government. The exact opposite of what the media and the professional left anticipated.
WASHINGTON – The State Department’s Inspector General shared a packet of months-old news stories and other Ukraine-related documents during an “urgent” briefing with Congressional staffers on Wednesday, sources told the Daily Caller.
Sources familiar with the meeting said the IG handed over a packet containing, among other old materials, news articles written this past spring by The Hill’s John Solomon about Democratic ties to Ukraine.
In fact, several news outlets reported earlier in the day that the briefing would be about State Department leadership retaliating against career employees who wanted to cooperate with the Democrats’ investigation into Trump. (read more)
Whether the briefing was a set-up to embarrass the media is now being debated.
Through a FOIA request Judicial Watch has received Rod Rosenstein’s email communication around the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller [See Here]. The content further confirms when Rosenstein took Mueller to the White House on May 16th, 2017, the purpose was for Mueller to preview his target, President Trump.
Many are focused on May 12, 2017, where Rosenstein sent an email to Robert Mueller, Subject: “I assume you realize”… “The boss and his staff do not know about our discussions”; however, that date is being misconstrued.
Rosenstein took Mueller to visit Jeff Sessions on May 13th, the specifics of that email likely concern keeping prior private conversations out of the discussion with Sessions.
If we insert the Rosenstein email conversation into our timeline the picture is clear.
Perhaps the most important aspect is how DAG Rosenstein took Robert Mueller to the White House on May 16th, to interview President Trump. The decision to appoint Mueller as special counsel was pre-determined prior to the White House visit:
♦James Comey was fired at approximately 5:00pm EST on Tuesday May 9th, 2017. The next morning, less than 15 hours after Comey was fired, Rosenstein contacted Robert Mueller about the special counsel appointment.
During the congressional testimony of Robert Mueller, Representative Andy Biggs noted evidence of a phone call between Mueller and Rod Rosenstein on Wednesday May 10th, 2017, at 7:45am. Listen carefully at the 2:26 point of the video.
.
From the current FOIA release we can see that following the 7:45am phone call Rod Rosenstein received contact info from Mueller’s asst (8:09am), and Rosenstein emailed his assistant at 8:13am with instructions to contact Mueller’s asst and set up a meeting for Friday May 12th:
Marcia Murphy from the Office of the DAG, then followed through and set up a meeting for 8:00am, Friday May 12th at Main Justice, between Rosenstein and Mueller:
Following that May 12th 8:00am meeting with Mueller, Rod Rosenstein then met with Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe Andrew McCabe. – According to McCabe:
… “[Rosenstein] asked for my thoughts about whether we needed a special counsel to oversee the Russia case. I said I thought it would help the investigation’s credibility. Later that day, I went to see Rosenstein again. This is the gist of what I said: I feel strongly that the investigation would be best served by having a special counsel.” (link)
Later that night (May 12th), at 9:15pm Rosenstein then emails Robert Mueller: “I assume you realize the boss and his staff do not know about our discussions.”
That email is directly related to a meeting scheduled on Saturday May 13th between Rosenstein, Mueller and Jeff Sessions; which is confirmed in the Andy Biggs questioning.
♦Sunday May 14th – Comey transmitted copies of Memos 2, 4, and 6, and a partially redacted copy of Memo 7 to Patrick Fitzgerald, who was one of Comey’s personal attorneys. Fitzgerald received the email and PDF attachment from Comey at 2:27 p.m. on May 14, 2017, per the IG report.
♦Monday May 15th, McCabe states he and Rosenstein conferred again about the Special Counsel approach. McCabe: “I brought the matter up with him again after the weekend.”
On this same day was when James Rybicki called SSA Whistleblower to notify him of Comey’s memos. The memos were “stored” in a “reception area“, and in locked drawers in James Rybicki’s office.
♦Tuesday May 16th – Per the IG report: “On the morning of May 16, Comey took digital photographs of both pages of Memo 4 with his personal cell phone. Comey then sent both photographs, via text message, to Richman.
Back in Main Justice at 12:30pm Rod Rosenstein, Andrew McCabe, Jim Crowell and Tashina Guahar all appear to be part of this meeting. I should note that alternate documentary evidence, gathered over the past two years, supports the content of this McCabe memo. Including texts between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok:
[Sidebar: pay attention to the *current* redactions; they appear to be placed by existing DOJ officials in an effort to protect Rod Rosenstein for his duplicity in: (A) running the Mueller sting operation at the white house on the same day; (B) the appointment of Robert Mueller as special counsel, which was pre-determined before the Oval Office meeting.]
While McCabe was writing this afternoon memo, still May 16th, Rod Rosenstein took Robert Mueller to the White House for a meeting in the oval office with President Trump and VP Mike Pence.
After six days of phone calls, emails and in person meetings, this visit to the White House was clearly Rod Rosenstein introducing Robert Mueller to the target of the investigation. Rosenstein already knew he was going to appoint Mueller; and Mueller, along with the small group in the FBI, already knew Mueller was going to be appointed.
Later that night (May 16th), following the Mueller visit, there was a debriefing session back at Main Justice. This evening meeting appears to be Lisa Page, Rod Rosenstein and Andrew McCabe; along with Tashina Gauhar again taking notes.
♦ Wednesday May 17th, 2017: Rod Rosenstein and Andrew McCabe go to brief the congressional “Gang-of-Eight”: Paul Ryan, Nancy Pelosi, Devin Nunes, Adam Schiff, Mitch McConnell, Chuck Schumer, Richard Burr and Mark Warner.
… […] “On the afternoon of May 17, Rosenstein and I sat at the end of a long conference table in a secure room in the basement of the Capitol. We were there to brief the so-called Gang of Eight—the majority and minority leaders of the House and Senate and the chairs and ranking members of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees. Rosenstein had, I knew, made a decision to appoint a special counsel in the Russia case.”
[…] “After reminding the committee of how the investigation began, I told them of additional steps we had taken. Then Rod took over and announced that he had appointed a special counsel to pursue the Russia investigation, and that the special counsel was Robert Mueller.” (link)
Immediately following this May 17, 2017, Go8 briefing, Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein notified the public of the special counsel appointment.
According to President Trump’s Attorney John Dowd, the White House was stunned by the decision. [Link] Coincidentally, AG Jeff Sessions was in the oval office for unrelated business when White House counsel Don McGahn came in and informed the group.
Jeff Sessions immediately offered his resignation, and Sessions’ chief-of-staff Jody Hunt went back to the Main Justice office to ask Rosenstein what the hell was going on.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 