SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : A Real American President: Donald Trump -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Honey_Bee who wrote (182560)1/23/2020 1:21:26 PM
From: FJB2 Recommendations

Recommended By
Honey_Bee
Woody_Nickels

  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 454313
 
Debunking Trump's Impeachment with One Simple Thought Experiment
By Stephen Green January 22, 2020
pjmedia.com /vodkapundit/debunking-trumps-impeachment-with-one-simple-thought-experiment/

Are you one of the millions of Sane-Americans who can't get too worked up about Donald Trump's impeachment?

It's impossible to avoid news of the Dems' Big Sham, which is so "exciting" that CNN spent hours on Monday running a never-ending picture-in-picture livestream of the empty Senate chamber. If that doesn't get your blood pumping, what could?

Democrats can't come right out and say they're impeaching Trump just for being Trump, even though that's exactly what they're doing. So they held this big investigation, and found that yes indeed, President Trump had committed foreign policy. They can't actually impeach him for that, either, so instead they impeached him for defending himself against the charge of having committed foreign policy.

Before we get to my little thought experiment, let's be clear on exactly what foreign policy Trump is guilty of having committed. For that, let's go to the indispensable John Solomon:

It is irrefutable, and not a conspiracy theory, that Joe Biden bragged in this 2018 speech to a foreign policy group that he threatened in March 2016 to withhold $1 billion in U.S. aid to Kiev if then-Ukraine’s president Petro Poroshenko didn’t immediately fire Shokin.“I said, ‘You’re not getting the billion.’ I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money,’” Biden told the 2018 audience in recounting what he told Poroshenko

“Well, son of a bitch, he got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time,” Biden told the Council on Foreign Relations event.

Whoops. That's what Joe Biden did, not Donald Trump -- my bad. What Trump did was ask the president of Ukraine to look into what happened, to see if any Americans (cough, Hunter Biden, cough) might have been involved in some high-level and very highly-paid corruption. There was no arm-twisting, no illegal withholding of aid, or anything remotely like a high crime or a misdemeanor. If there had been they'd be in the Articles of Impeachment -- and I'd be writing a much different column today.

Here's where we get to that thought experiment.

Let's pretend that Joe Biden had a different name. No, better: Let's pretend that Joe Biden had a different letter after his name. Let's pretend he's Joe Biden (R), former vice president under George W. Bush.

In that case, what would the Democrats be doing differently? Literally everything.

Instead of impeaching Trump, they'd be praising him (although perhaps reluctantly) for his non-partisan willingness to look into Republican malfeasance. Adam Schiff would hold months worth of hearings, looking back into the Bush administration in ways he'd never dare look back into Obama's. The Democrat-controlled press would be 24/7 "Biden! Biden! Biden!" Jerry Nadler would have to go back to, I dunno, eating mayonnaise with an ice cream scoop.

So while the other, much-more talented writers here at PJMedia have been doing stellar jobs of covering all the ins and outs of the impeachment charade, I just haven't been able to muster the interest. The thing is such an obvious partisan hit job, that I've found it impossible to muster more energy than it takes to roll my eyes.

That's not to say Trump's impeachment isn't a serious issue, because clearly it is. But not for any of the reasons listed in the Articles of Impeachment, not for any of the "revelations" of the investigation, not for any of the House antics that got us here, or for any of the Senate antics we're witnessing right now.

It's serious because the Democrats have subverted the weightiest action described in the Constitution -- the unmaking of a freely elected president -- into a vitriolic shamble of pure partisanship.

Bill Clinton was impeached for obstruction of justice, perjury and suborning perjury. He was rightly impeached for those high crimes and misdemeanors, but not removed from office because the Senate decided (rightly, IMHO) that since it was "just about sex," his crimes didn't rise to a level serious enough for removal. He stained a dress and lied about it, Congress stained his reputation. Fair enough, even if it was one of those compromises doomed to please almost no one.

Richard Nixon was going to be impeached, and almost certainly removed from office in a bipartisan vote, for much more serious offenses. He chose to resign (wisely, IMHO), rather than put the country through a political trauma unlike any in our sometimes troubled history.

Donald Trump has been impeached for having the temerity to look into a Democrat's guilty-by-his-own-admission malfeasance on behalf of his coke-whoring son.

OK, maybe I'm a little worked up, but clearly not for the reasons the Democrats wanted.

So let the Democrats "make their case for removing Trump for office," as all my desktop notifications just started screaming at me every couple of minutes. Because they don't have a case to make, and the (D) after Biden's name is all the proof you need.

pjmedia.com



To: Honey_Bee who wrote (182560)1/23/2020 1:23:11 PM
From: FJB3 Recommendations

Recommended By
Honey_Bee
locogringo
Woody_Nickels

  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 454313
 
As The Impeachment Trial Begins, Democrats Are Losing Their Minds



John Daniel Davidson
thefederalist.com /2020/01/22/as-the-impeachment-trial-begins-democrats-are-losing-their-minds/

On Monday, as senators and House impeachment managers prepared for the opening of President Trump’s impeachment trial Tuesday, Democrats and their courtiers in the mainstream press decided to ratchet up the their rhetoric to the point of delusional hysteria.

The House managers—led by Reps. Adam Schiff and Jerrold Nadler—issued a statement that essentially accused Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of a coverup, saying his proposed rules for the trial are “rigged,” nothing more than an “effort to prevent the full truth of the President’s misconduct from coming to light.”

That wasn’t all. Schiff and the impeachment managers also called on Trump’s lead impeachment lawyer, Pat A. Cipollone, to disclose what he knows about the president’s alleged behavior underlying the two articles of impeachment, saying Cipollone is a “material fact witness,” and that, “The ethical rules generally preclude a lawyer from acting as an advocate at a trial in which he is likely also a necessary witness.”

Funny they should mention that. As my colleague Mollie Hemingway pointed out on Twitter, Schiff is himself a material fact witness to this entire impeachment imbroglio, beginning with his office’s coordination with the whistleblower.

As for McConnell’s rules being some kind of coverup, compare them to the House impeachment inquiry, which turned up no evidence of a crime despite Schiff stacking the deck in Democrats’ favor by not allowing GOP members to call witnesses or ask substantive questions.

By those standards, McConnell’s proposed rules are generous to Democrats, stipulating a four-day calendar in which each side gets two days, 12 hours per day, just for opening statements. After that, senators would have 16 hours for written questions for the prosecution and defense, then four hours of debate—all to adjudicate a purely partisan impeachment probe that after months failed to persuade even one GOP member of the House that Trump had committed an impeachable offence.

To a certain mindset—apparently rampant among Democrats and media elites—none of this matters. Nothing we learned during the House impeachment inquiry, not to mention what we all know about Trump’s phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky after the White House released the transcript, seems to matter to Democrats hell-bent on delegitimizing the Trump presidency.

If their impeachment removal gamble fails, as it inevitably will, they’ll say it only failed because McConnell rigged the trial, or because the president covered up his crimes by instructing key witnesses not to cooperate, or because all Republicans are corrupt. The narrative takeaway will be that Democrats tried to save the country and the Constitution by removing a dangerous criminal from the White House, but were thwarted, and only voters can stop Trump now by throwing him out of office in November. After all, the future of the republic is at stake.

Impeachment Is Untethering Some People From Reality


The overdone rhetoric turned out to be contagious, especially for Never Trumpers like Bill Kristol, a formerly serious person who on Monday compared the upcoming Senate impeachment trial to a show trial in an authoritarian state.

Perhaps the best example of this fevered mindset whirling away in real time is a Twitter thread from Will Wilkinson of the Niskanen Center, who warned that an acquittal would amount to a “war on the Constitution and the rule of law,” and that “McConnell will not only be striking a blow to our democracy, he will be communicating that [there] are no rules, only power.”

He goes on to suggest that McConnell is exposing the political process as a “sham,” that Trump is “dead set on stealing the election to stay out of jail and line his pockets with impunity,” and the result of all this will be violence in the streets because “we can’t just ‘decide it at the ballot box” if the ballot box is stuffed.”

Does Wilkinson really think that’s what happening here? Or does he just think that if the Democratic Party and its media allies fail to overturn the results of a free and fair election with a years-long string of investigations and half-baked accusations against the president, then that’s really what amounts to election theft and a stuffed ballot box? In other words, Democrats’ impotent efforts to remove Trump are proof positive that the republic itself is in danger, and our political process is a “sham.”

What’s most telling in these Twitter rants is the apparent unawareness that for many Americans, the political process has indeed been revealed as a sham—a long time ago. After decades of elite incompetence and corruption, from illegal immigration to the Iraq war to Katrina, the housing crash and ensuing recession, the sluggish recovery and the dismal reality of Obamacare, Americans have plenty of reasons to think the Constitution has been trashed, voters have been ignored, and the entire political process exposed as a sham run by our elites for their benefit at the expense of everyone else.

What the American people did about it was elect Trump president. For the political and media establishment, that’s Trump’s real crime, and the one thing that must not be allowed to happen again.

Language Games Reveal More About Dems Than TrumpTo make any rational sense in their arguments, they must evacuate terms like “election theft” and “democracy” of all meaning. Trump of course didn’t steal an election in 2016, and if he wins again in 2020 that won’t be a stolen election, either. But this mangling of language is a common trope among the impeachment crowd.

As Eric Felton of Real Clear Investigations noted in a thorough fisking of a brief from Democratic impeachment managers, Schiff and his crew “are convinced that thin allegations can be bulked up if repeated often enough.” Felton points to the repeated use of words and phrases like “baseless,” “debunked,” “discredited,” and “conspiracy theory” whenever impeachment managers discuss questions and assertions made by Trump or Rudy Giuliani about Ukraine or Hunter Biden.


For example, the brief entirely ignores a January 2017 report in Politico about efforts of officials in Kiev to boost Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump in 2016, and instead repeat, dozens of times, that concerns or questions about possible 2016 election interference from Ukrainian officials are nothing more than a “conspiracy theory.”

Most Americans are wise to this sort of thing. They realized a long time ago that the political establishments of both parties care about power above all and have long governed on behalf of special interests, not the people. Most Americans also know that despite earnest paeons to the Constitution in recent months, Democrats don’t care about the Constitution and would be happy to get rid of much of it, including the first two amendments in the Bill of Rights.

So in the days ahead, when Schiff and other Democratic leaders mention a “rigged” trial or a “sham” process, they’re unintentionally invoking language that many Americans have been using for some time now—not about Trump, but about the political establishment they elected Trump to overthrow.




To: Honey_Bee who wrote (182560)1/23/2020 1:44:50 PM
From: GUNSNGOLD2 Recommendations

Recommended By
Honey_Bee
Thehammer

  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 454313
 
I hope Australia is preparing 3rd degree Murder charges (or their equivalent) against the arsonists who have set those wildfires.

G-n-G