Explaining the impeachment proceedings in the US House

  • The corruptness of it
  • Why it continues

MADE POSSIBLE BY THEIR CHAMPIONS IN THE DOMINANT MEDIA

The two articles linked or excerpted below go a long way toward explaining the most recent attack lines by the deep state, the Democrats and the media (largely one and the same). The hypocrisy, the duplicity the mendacity of them would be of the rankest order if we were talking about mere political scandal, but their actions have so many criminal elements that it is nothing short of a slow motion coup against our republic. The scheme of the Trump antagonists has everything to do with protecting their own sinecures, influence, world view through the most despicable means, some with criminal activity.

This first article takes pains to offer a disclaimer that it is not impugning the patriotism or loyalty of the articles focus, the background and activities of one Lt Colonel Alexander Vindman. But the known facts as related in the article surely point to indictable activity on his part. Call him a treasonous, insubordinate, or criminal but don’t deny his patriotism! However one should be clear about what country or whose policy he feels beholden to! Veterans of his grade or longer specialty I have talked to have indicated to me their contempt for Vindman.

Writing about him at The Federalist is Jim Hanson president of Security Studies Group and a U.S. Army Special Forces veteran. (excerpt)

Alex Vindman Is Living, Breathing Proof That The Deep State Exists, And It Is Corrupt
Democrats and the Deep State have elevated more policy disagreements to what amounts to an attempted coup. Just listen to Alex Vindman.

Vindman’s Testimony Gives the Game Away

They began with a “whistleblower,” but it was quickly shown that this person was nowhere near any of the events in question and likely colluded with Democrats prior to even filing the complaint. They needed a better front man, and Vindman was perfect: a military officer with a Purple Heart and privy to all the requisite details as the Ukraine desk lead for the National Security Council. Who would dare impugn his honor?

But Vindman gave the game away with his prepared testimony. He believes the permanent bureaucracy should reign supreme, and if some elected politician gets crosswise with the solons of the state, then they must act. So he did, as he detailed in his prepared statement and testimony to Congress. From the statement: “In the Spring of 2019, I became aware of outside influencers promoting a false narrative of Ukraine inconsistent with the consensus views of the interagency. This narrative was harmful to U.S. government policy.”

There is a lot of wrong in those two sentences, which profoundly illustrate the fundamental flaw Vindman and his fellow Deep Staters operate under. The interagency he mentions is a collection of staff from the major agencies like the State Department, Department of Defense, and intelligence agencies, who meet to coordinate and plan implementation of policy. They most certainly are not supposed to decide what policy the United States will follow. That is 100 percent the purview of the president.

——————————————————————————————————-

Every substantive thing the Trump haters/tormentor have said in their impeachment push has been debunked so that they continually have to move on to another phony “trumped-up” charge.

But how can that be sustained?

In part because they have no shame, but that is because they know they will never have to say they are sorry to their base or likely the court-room (a mere presumption we hope).  They have the dominant leftist media, they are of the media, the media is of them, they are in symbiosis.

Also writing at The Federalist is a useful article by Hrand Tookman (excerpt).  While identifying the problem unfortunately his solution “of not playing the medias game” hardly pinpoints an alternative.  You can’t just let people throw mud unanswered or shove propaganda without resistance.  Politics and elections are like sumo wrestling (with uglier players). They are about moving a decisive element inches over the line to legislative or electoral success.  You have to be in the game.

Here’s How Impeachment Helps Democrats Even If They Fail 

. . .  it always amused me when people like Resistance Jake Tapper or others in the media would claim: “We don’t choose the stories. The stories choose us. All we’re doing is reporting what’s going on in the world. That’s our job.”

It amused me because they literally write the headlines. They choose exactly what stories to cover. As has become painfully obvious to anyone with a pulse, they also choose the narratives attached to those stories and how every twist and turn is characterized throughout the 24/7 news cycle.

If you couple those realities — that the media are nothing more than Democrats’ marketing arm, and that they’re responsible for deciding what we talk about and how it’s characterized — it becomes really hard to take “the news” seriously.

Yet I feel like I’m on an island under the weight of that reality. That’s because after watching our nation spend three years dignifying the preposterous notion that Donald Trump is a Russian spy who stole the 2016 election, I’m now watching us do the exact same thing with a fevered focus on hearsay witnesses to a phone call that we’ve all already read the transcript for.

It’s maddening. And every conservative media person and outlet, and every Republican advocate and official, and every Trump supporter and team member is just playing into the media’s (i.e. Democrats’) hand.

They don’t necessarily believe they’re going to impeach the president. They just want us talking about it nonstop because that means they’re controlling the narrative. Even if we’re “winning” the conversation, it’s still the conversation they want us having. This conversation is a disruptive cloud over Trump world and can slowly chip away at the stamina of any Independents or Democrats who might have been leaning toward working with or supporting him.

The good news is I think it’s having the opposite effect. I think most people see through the charade.  . . .

You must know your opposition to defeat your opposition, so we must get our heads around the reality that it’s the powerful media, not the feckless and otherwise-toothless Democrats, who are our greatest enemy and threat.

Some people say the media aren’t biased. They say they’re just doing it for ratings. But if that’s the case, why isn’t U.S. Attorney John Durham’s name as widely recognized as former special counsel Robert Mueller’s was?

From the moment Mueller was appointed special counsel, the media wouldn’t stop talking about him. Every story they focused on, guest they had, and discussion they moderated was centered on Mueller and what he might or might not be doing and what that might or might not mean for Trump and everyone around him. Also flying in the face of claims that the media are just in it for ratings, every aspect was always characterized in the most negative terms possible for President Trump, his team, and his supporters.

But now we’ve got Durham doing a similarly massive and sensational investigation with nefarious national implications as far-reaching as Mueller’s, with exponentially more evidence-based plausibility, and they never even mention the man’s name, let alone what he’s working on. The focus instead is on what people you’ve never heard of thought about a phone call you already read the transcript of.

Imagine I told the world that you approached me on the street, beat me up, spit on me, and then walked away. And the whole world believed me. Then you released a video that showed the incident: I was walking down the street, you approached me, we chatted, shook hands, then went our separate ways.

Now imagine the media pretending that video didn’t exist. Instead, they spend the next several months breathlessly trotting out “witnesses” who claim to have heard about the incident and back up my story. Rather than accept the actual evidence, the media has the whole world ignoring it and focused like a laser on people who back up my lies about what you did.

Pretty infuriating, right? Well that’s what’s happening with the Ukraine phone call nontroversy.

The president of the United States is allowed to qualify the absence of corruption before handing over taxpayer dollars to a foreign nation, and running for president on the Democrat ticket doesn’t absolve someone from culpability in any such corruption. Full stop.

But the media are pretending not to understand any of those simple realities. They’re pretending the transcript doesn’t exist and that we need the opinions of unelected bureaucrats to tell us what happened. They’re pretending that President Trump doesn’t get to guide his own foreign policy. And they’re pretending that being a Democrat candidate for president is itself exculpatory, and that anyone who scrutinizes that candidate’s bad behavior is guilty of something possibly criminal and definitely impeachable.

Every minute of every day that we talk about the “Ukraine phone call” and the ridiculous “impeachment inquiry” attached to it, we’re letting the media win. We’re ceding the national conversation to them, regardless of how good we might feel about “winning” it.

Pretend you’re starving for food. You want to talk about getting yourself some food, but I take the conversation somewhere else by telling everyone you like to kick puppies. So you offer gobs of evidence that you don’t like to kick puppies and, as a result, everyone ends up believing you and thinking I’m a liar. Nice work. Now we can talk about getting you some food. Right?

Wrong. Because next I say that I was mistaken about the dog thing, but I have good evidence that you like to step on cats. In a sane world, at this point people wouldn’t believe me and we’d all talk about getting you some food.

But that’s how powerful the media are. Because now, instead of talking about getting you some food, we’re going to spend the next several months making you prove that you don’t like to step on cats. You might win that conversation also, but in the meantime you might die of starvation.

For most Republicans and conservatives, “starving for food” means celebrating individual liberty and renouncing the socialism that kills it, judging people by the content of their character rather than by their so-called identity, “draining the swamp” that for decades has served itself at our expense, and putting America first instead of attacking it or apologizing for it. None of those things will happen if we keep playing the media’s game.

It will take a strong, coordinated, major push from Republicans, conservative media, and the grassroots. But if we keep dignifying the notion that the feckless and wildly out-of-touch Democrat Party would have a leg to stand on without corporate media (they have to have lie about the application and mission of literally every policy they pursue), and we don’t recalibrate our firepower and ferocity entirely on that media, then all we’ll end up doing is dying of starvation a little more slowly.

We can’t let that happen. We must stop playing the media’s game.

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Comments Off on Explaining the impeachment proceedings in the US House

Congress’s Homecoming King and Queen: Al Green and Ocasio-Cortez (‘Impeachment beats elections any time’)

Revealing the “woke” game plan:

WE DON’T NEED NO STINKIN’ ELECTIONS!

According to Congress’s Current Leading Dimwit, ‘those damn voters will go and reelect somebody I don’t like’

Ocasio-Cortez: Impeaching Trump Is About Preventing His Reelection in 2020 

“…if it is this Ukrainian allegation that is what brings the caucus together, then I think we have to run with however we unify the House.” (Even if the ‘allegation’ is false, if it brings us together, who cares?)

Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez admitted that the Democrats’ efforts to investigate President Trump are, in part, meant to prevent him from winning reelection in November 2020.

The freshman New York congresswoman made the admission in an interview on CNN Wednesday evening, hours after the House had its first public hearing in the impeachment investigation into Trump’s foreign policy decisions regarding Ukraine.

“I think many of those considerations will be taken up by the Judiciary Committee when all of this evidence is brought forth,” Ocasio-Cortez stated. “We’ll see. I personally do believe that the president has engaged in flagrant violations of the emoluments clause. I’m concerned that we would allow this corruption to continue. But at the end of the day, we have to be able to come together as a caucus, and if it is this Ukrainian allegation that is what brings the caucus together, then I think we have to run with however we unify the House.”

Ocasio-Cortez has called for the president’s impeachment since before her inauguration.
“While I believe personally that we should be pursuing and investigating quite flagrant abuses of the emoluments clause, even reporting as recently as the suspicious stops at Trump properties even in congressional delegations or rather in foreign trips, I think all of this is game for investigation,” she added.

“We also need to move quite quickly because we’re talking about the potential compromise of the 2020 elections. This is not just about something that has occurred, this is about preventing a potentially disastrous outcome from occurring next year,” she concluded.

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Comments Off on Congress’s Homecoming King and Queen: Al Green and Ocasio-Cortez (‘Impeachment beats elections any time’)

About Politico’s “Surprisingly Plausible Path to Removing Trump From Office”

Hard to believe that it was not written by a high school newspaper intern

If this “surprisingly plausible path” suggested here  in Politico were actually taken, we submit that the life of the “Grand Old Party” would end on that day!

If the person offering this “strategy” is not the most naive political “thinker’ ever…nor just another ‘Bush style’ Trump-hater…she is then a Democrat operative who has the mind and temperament of a child

To really appreciate just how ridiculous, you must read the entire piece (see link). We guarantee that, if you are in the least bit aware at all of how politics works and how politicians think and you understand today’s political landscape (Trump voters disgust with the political system), you can only believe that its writer is attempting (amateurishly) amusing parody.

And what does it say about Politico that it actually published it?!

Finally, NOT SAYING THAT THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH SENATE REPUBLICANS, INCLUDING SOME IN LEADERSHIP, WHO WOULD SUPPORT SUCH A PLAN. THE CONCLUSION, HOWEVER, PERSISTS:

A) IT WOULD EFFECTIVELY DESTROY THE REPUBLICAN PARTY

B) ELECTIONS IN AMERICA MEAN FAR LESS THAN ITS CITIZENS EVER THOUGHT…AND ITS FOUNDERS EVER INTENDED.

*****************************************
There’s a Surprisingly Plausible Path to Removing Trump From Office  

At Politico by Juleanna Glover

It would take just three Republican senators to turn the impeachment vote into a secret ballot. It’s not hard to imagine what would happen then.

By most everyone’s judgment, the Senate will not vote to remove President Donald Trump from office if the House impeaches him. But what if senators could vote on impeachment by secret ballot? If they didn’t have to face backlash from constituents or the media or the president himself, who knows how many Republican senators would vote to remove?

A secret impeachment ballot might sound crazy, but it’s actually quite possible. In fact, it would take only three senators to allow for that possibility.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said he will immediately move to hold a trial to adjudicate the articles of impeachment if and when the Senate receives them from the House of Representatives. Article I, Section 3, of the Constitution does not set many parameters for the trial, except to say that “the Chief Justice shall preside,” and “no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.” That means the Senate has sole authority to draft its own rules for the impeachment trial, without judicial or executive branch oversight.

During the last impeachment of a president, Bill Clinton, the rules were hammered out by Democrats and Republicans in a collaborative process,as then Senate leaders Trent Lott and Tom Daschle recently pointed out in a Washington Post op-ed. The rules passed unanimously. That’s unlikely this time, given the polarization that now defines our politics. McConnell and his fellow Republicans are much more likely to dictate the rules with little input from Democrats.

But, according to current Senate procedure, McConnell will still need a simple majority—51 of the 53 Senate Republicans—to support any resolution outlining rules governing the trial. That means that if only three Republican senators were to break from the caucus, they could block any rule they didn’t like. (Vice President Mike Pence can’t break ties in impeachment matters.) Those three senators, in turn, could demand a secret ballot and condition their approval of the rest of the rules on getting one.

Some might say transparency in congressional deliberations and votes is inviolable, and it’s true that none of the previous Senate impeachments have been conducted via secret ballot. But the Senate’s role in an impeachment is analogous to a U.S. jury, where secret ballots are often used. When Electoral College gridlock has resulted in the House picking the president—the House elected Thomas Jefferson in 1800 and John Quincy Adams in 1824—that vote has been secret. And, of course, when citizens vote for president, they do so in private.

Trump and those around him seem confident that he won’t lose the 20 Republican senators needed to block a guilty verdict. But it’s not hard to imagine three senators supporting a secret ballot. Five sitting Republicansenators have already announced their retirements; four of those are in their mid-70s or older and will never run for office again. They might well be willing to demand secrecy in order to give cover to their colleagues who would like to convict Trump but are afraid to do so because of politics in their home districts. There are also 10 Republicansenators who aren’t up for reelection until 2024 and who might figure Trumpism will be irrelevant by then. Senators Mitt Romney and Lisa Murkowski have been the most vocal Republicans in expressing concerns about Trump’s behavior toward Ukraine. Other GOPsenators have recently softened in their defense of him, as well—all before the House has held any public hearings.

There’s already been some public speculation that, should the Senate choose to proceed with a secret ballot, Trump would be found guilty. GOP strategist Mike Murphy said recently that a sitting Republican senator had told him 30 of his colleagues would vote to convict Trump if the ballot were secret. Former Senator Jeff Flake topped that, saying he thought 35 Republican senators would vote that way.

While it’s unlikely Trump would support a secret ballot, it’s possible he might actually benefit from one in the long run. If a secret ballot is agreed on and Trump knows the prospect of impeachment is near, he could then focus his energies on his post-presidency. Once he leaves office, Trump faces multiple possible criminal investigations, at the federal, state and local level. He almost certainly knows that a President Pence could pardon him only for federal crimes. To avoid the prospect of serving time, Trump could negotiate a collective settlement—just as the Sackler family has done in the OxyContin matter—with all the jurisdictions now running independent investigations into his activities. Trump’s impeachment, followed by a quick resignation, might appease Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance’s and New York Attorney General Letitia James’s thirst for justice, making them more likely to agree to a deal.

Even McConnell might privately welcome the prospect of a secret ballot.He has always been intently focused on maintaining his Republican majority in the Senate. Trump’s approval numbers continue to languish, and support for impeachment has been rising. McConnell himself, facing reelection next year, has an approval rating of just 18 percent in Kentucky, not to mention that the Republican governor there just suffered a stunning upset in last week’s election. All of which suggests McConnell might warm to the possibility that he and his caucus could avoid a public up-or-down vote in defense of behavior by the president that’s looking increasingly indefensible.

A secret ballot might get Trump out of office sooner than everyone expects: The sooner any three Republican senators make clear that they will support nothing short of a secret ballot, the sooner Trump realizes his best course could be to cut a deal, trading his office for a get-out-of-jail-free card—a clean slate from prosecutors—just as Vice President Spiro Agnew did. And if Trump were to leave office before the end of the year, there might even be enough time for Republicans to have a vibrant primary fight, resulting in a principled Republican as the nominee.

UPDATE: Some constitutional scholars have pointed out that Article 1, Section 5, of the Constitution designates that 20 senators can oppose a secret ballot on “any questions,” but “questions” are defined as “Any matter on which the Senate is to vote, such as passage of a bill, adoption of an amendment, agreement to a motion, or an appeal.” No mention of impeachment proceedings is made. And, as others have pointed out, preceding this one-fifth requirement is crucial language: “Each House shall keep a Journal of its Proceedings, and from time to time publish the same, excepting such Parts as may in their Judgment require Secrecy.” Precedents are so thin here, but it is clear the Senate has the power to make its own rules over the trial proceedings. Those rules have historically required a simple majority of support.

Note to Politco’s “updater” (see bold)

The construction used above is absurd. “Any question” and “any matter” means any question and any matter and is/are not limited by the examples. Further, publishing a journal is not directly related to the matter of secret ballot. We presume a roll call could be called and notes kept. Regardless, if the Republicans in control allowed a secret ballot on such a monumental issue —  well to say the least all would suffer and it would likely be the end of support for the Republican Party.

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Comments Off on About Politico’s “Surprisingly Plausible Path to Removing Trump From Office”

An inquiry into the ‘inquiry’

THIS is the “BOMBSHELL”???

(Acting Ukrainian Ambassador) William Taylor: “Following the call with President Trump, the member of my staff asked Ambassador Sondland what President Trump thought about Ukraine”…

“Ambassador Sondland responded that President Trump cares more about the investigations of Biden.”

This disclosure, according to the Wall Street Journal, “undercuts argument by the president’s allies that Mr. Trump’s request to Mr. Zelensky (newly elected Ukraine president) for investigation, visible in a rough transcript of the July 25 that the White House released, were passing comments.”

In our opinion, that the WSJ would put this in a story about the attempt by the opposition political party to impeach a US president is reprehensible, dishonest, and blatantly biased.

Whether or not the Journal writers were accurate in their portrayal of this “testimony” is not even the most relevant aspect of this ‘report’. (If, indeed, however, this precisely reflects the intent of the party attempting the removal of a duly elected president, that IS relevant! And shocking!)

a)  This was a ‘key part’ of the Journal’s report to its readers about an event of monumental importance to the nation…the world…and it was under the page one, top of the page headline, ” PUBLIC HEARING SURFACES NEW CLAIM “

b)  The “new claim” is that, as the lede in this story asserts, “President Trump…asked about politically advantageous investigations he wanted the Ukrainian president to announce…” (Note: Nowhere can it be found that President Trump ever asked for “politically advantageous” investigations.)

c)  “Proof” of the above is the heretofore-not-disclosed recollection of witness Taylor’s ‘staffer’. Taylor acknowledges the staffer had not mentioned this recollection until “after” Taylor’s closed door testimony!

d)  “Proof” that the president has lied about his desire to “broadly” combat corruption in the Ukraine is the “bombshell” reply that the ‘staffer’ only recently recalled when he asked Amb. Sondland what President Trump THOUGHT ABOUT UKRAINE !

e)  And, thus we have Mr. Sondland supposedly revealing what he ‘thought’ President Trump ‘thought’ about Ukraine!

f)  And this is IT! The “smoking gun”…the “bombshell” that will bring down the president of the United States?!?!?!

g)  Republican members of the “inquiry” committee made a lot of fun of Wednesday’s surprisingly amateurish testimony of the “star witnesses” brought forward by Adam Schiff and the hapless Democrat members of his committee. Sharpest criticism correctly focusses on the remarkable absence of substance in the testimony, replaced by “hearsay”.

h)  The Wall Street Journal is reporting the “hearsay” as “serious” testimony…as are many other “news” outlets, in hopes of convincing the public, most of whom have neither the time nor patience to watch the ‘public’ proceedings, that President Trump has been guilty of “something” which merits overturning the 2016 election.

It would be very appropriate in our view, if Amb. Taylor and the entire Democratic members of the “Schiff Committee” had dressed like Secretary Kent (the other “star” witness)…in vest and bow-tie, looking like a “Peewee Herman” imitation, and portraying the whole ‘impeachment proceeding” as the poorly rehearsed Vaudeville Act it really is.

dlh

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Comments Off on An inquiry into the ‘inquiry’

Trump’s big weakness…personnel selection

TRUMP’S PERSONNEL SELECTIONS: SOME GOOD, SOME REALLY BAD…MANY UNFORTUNATELY FAILED TO LIVE UP TO THE IDEALS ON WHICH THEY WERE CHOSEN

In a thoughtful commentary, John Hinderaker at POWERLINE blog puts his two cents worth in regarding the Nikki Haley revelations about Former Trump Chief of Staff, John Kelly and former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson.

Hinderaker, as we do, takes Ambassador Haley’s side on this one. In our case we never had the impression that Kelly and Tillerson were “pro-Trump”. Unfortunately, their behavior went well beyond “anti-Trump”…venturing onto the edges of treasonous territory.

We believe Ms. Haley’s account that these two tried to get her to join their desire to “overthrow” the president, or at least stall his agenda (“believing they were sAving the country”.)

Kelly and Tillerson make believable suspects as to the identity of “Anonymous”…another “savior of the country”, whose book is coming out, giving another inside story on just how “awful” Donald Trump is.

We have another one-time member of the White House ‘team’ we suspect even more so.

That would be former National security Advisor, H.R. McMaster.

And here, according to the 2017 “Conservative Review”, is all one needs to know about McMaster:

“National security adviser H.R. McMaster continues to purge conservatives from the ranks of the National Security Council”

Harvey was closely involved in president Trump’s efforts to rid the National Security Council of Obama holdovers, who were suspected of leaking national security secrets to the press. After extensive research, Harvey compiled a list of suspected leakers and reportedly delivered it straight to the president, who then took his list to McMaster.

Even though President Trump asked McMaster to fire the individuals on the list, the NSC chief refused the president’s directives to get rid of the Obama holdovers. This comes as Congress continues to sound the alarm about the national security implications of a White House that can’t control the release of classified information.

And as the classified leaks continue to spill into the public domain at a record-high rate, the National Security Council remains staffed with a shockingly high percentage of holdovers from the Obama era. Reached for comment, a White House official estimated that well over fifty percent of the National Security Council staff are Obama holdovers.

But instead of firing the Obama holdovers, McMaster has purged several conservative Trump supporters from the ranks of the NSC.

(Full Article appears beneath Hinderaker post)

Sadly, these are just three incredibly unscrupulous individuals who have served in the White House or other areas of the Trump administration. These are people who were entrusted to advise and/or carry out the policies of the duly elected president. Many of them were retained from the previous administration but were assumed by Mr. trump (perhaps naively) to be trustworthy and committed to the national interest .

Others were chosen by Trump and his team as accomplished, widely respected, highly reputable, faithful to the US Constitution. These three fit this characterization, but apparently failed dramatically to live up to the ideals they seemed to embody.
dlh
————————————————————————————————–

Powerline, NOVEMBER 12, 2019 BY JOHN HINDERAKER
NIKKI HALEY, WHISTLEBLOWER

Nikki Haley has a book coming out about her experiences in the Trump administration. I think it will be interesting in many ways, but what has gotten the most press so far (based on advance copies received by the Washington Post and the Associated Press, two virulently anti-Trump and anti-Republican outlets) is her conflict with former Chief of Staff John Kelly and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. The Dallas Morning News reports:

Former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson is disputing a claim by Nikki Haley, the former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, that he sought to subvert President Donald Trump’s agenda in an effort to “save the country.”

Tillerson, a former ExxonMobil chief executive, told media outlets on Monday that during his tenure as America’s top diplomat, “at no time did I, nor to my direct knowledge did anyone else serving along with me, take any actions to undermine the president.”
***
That denial came after reports emerged that Haley, in her new book, said that Tillerson worked with former White House chief of Staff John Kelly to combat Trump’s decisions and that Haley rebuffed their efforts to join their cause.

“Kelly and Tillerson confided in me that when they resisted the president, they weren’t being insubordinate, they were trying to save the country,” Haley wrote in “With All Due Respect,” which is set to be released on Tuesday.

“It was their decisions, not the president’s, that were in the best interests of America, they said. The president didn’t know what he was doing,” she wrote, according to an advanced copy obtained on Sunday by The Washington Post.Tillerson went so far as to tell Haley that if he didn’t resist Trump’s decisions “people would die,” Haley wrote.

One can only wonder what foreign policies Tillerson had in mind. I suppose you could say about virtually any U.S. foreign policy decision that “people could die,” but Trump has been quite pacific and has committed no new troops to battle.

“To undermine a president is really a very dangerous thing,” she wrote, according to the Associated Press, which also obtained an advanced copy. “And it goes against the Constitution, and it goes against what the American people want. And it was offensive.”

Haley has embarked on an aggressive book tour, and she no doubt will have much more to say about her relations with Kelly, Tillerson and others. My guess is that Haley isn’t making this up.

Multiple morals could be drawn. Pending more information, it seems that some people who deem themselves smart and sophisticated, who watch the evening news and live in D.C., have succumbed to the anti-Trump Zeitgeist and have tried to distance themselves from the president. Some, like both Kelly and Tillerson, have been fired by Trump and therefore have aligned themselves, at least partially, with the Democratic Party Resistance. What is interesting about this particular instance is that neither John Kelly nor Rex Tillerson is a member of the “Deep State.”

Which means, I think, that this episode illustrates the power of the Deep State. Kelly and Tillerson are not members of the fraternity; on the contrary. But when they fell out with the president, they adopted the Deep State pretense of superiority toward the duly elected President of the United States and his voters. And in Washington, if they betray their former boss, they will be richly rewarded.

I am pretty sure I am on Haley’s side on this one. She, at least, has remained loyal to the president who hired her, rather than running after approval from the left-wing press.
————————————————————————————————

McMaster declares war on Trump loyalists, continues NSC purge

On Thursday, McMaster fired Col. Derek Harvey, a renowned Middle East expert who served under Gen. David Petraeus. Neither the White House nor the National Security Council gave a reason for Harvey’s firing.

Harvey is recognized in national security circles as a brilliant Middle East strategist. The Weekly Standard (which first reported Harvey’s firing) describes him as an “out-of-the-box thinker who has shown a keen knack for identifying threats before they’ve matured.” The report then cites a passage from Bob Woodward’s 2008 book “The War Within,” which delivers an intimate look into Harvey’s remarkable background:

In the late 1980s, Harvey traveled throughout Iraq by taxicab—500 miles, village to village—interviewing locals, sleeping on mud floors with a shower curtain for a door. He [was] full of questions, intensely curious and entirely nonthreatening. After the 1991 Gulf War, when the CIA was predicting the inevitable fall of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, Harvey, then a major, insisted that Hussein would survive because members of the Sunni community knew their fortunes were tied to his. He was right. Months before the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Harvey wrote an intelligence paper declaring that al Qaeda and the Taliban leadership in Afghanistan posed a strategic threat to the United States.

In 2008, Gen. Jack Keane described Harvey as “hands down the very best intelligence analyst that the United States government has on Iraq.”

Harvey released a statement after his firing:

statement just in from Derek Harvey, fired today from NSC: pic.twitter.com/5mn1kBKk42

— Rosie Gray (@RosieGray) July 27, 2017

Harvey was closely involved in president Trump’s efforts to rid the National Security Council of Obama holdovers, who were suspected of leaking national security secrets to the press. After extensive research, Harvey compiled a list of suspected leakers and reportedly delivered it straight to the president, who then took his list to McMaster.

Even though President Trump asked McMaster to fire the individuals on the list, the NSC chief refused the president’s directives to get rid of the Obama holdovers. This comes as Congress continues to sound the alarm about the national security implications of a White House that can’t control the release of classified information.

And as the classified leaks continue to spill into the public domain at a record-high rate, the National Security Council remains staffed with a shockingly high percentage of holdovers from the Obama era. Reached for comment, a White House official estimated that well over fifty percent of the National Security Council staff are Obama holdovers.

But instead of firing the Obama holdovers, McMaster has purged several conservative Trump supporters from the ranks of the NSC.

He has also allowed top officials from President Obama’s White House to come and go in and out of the White House compound as they please. Robert Malley, Obama’s “ISIS czar,” who has been described as an apologist for Islamic terror groups, has met with National Security Council staff on multiple occasions.

Promotions to top positions in the NSC include Kris Bauman, who created President Obama’s West Bank security plan that endangers Israel’s sovereignty. McMaster has placed Bauman in charge of Israeli-Palestinian affairs at the NSC. In his Ph.D. dissertation, Bauman blamed sitting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for “inciting” Palestinian terror and demanded that Israel engage with the Hamas terrorist group. In June, Bauman’s proposal to implement his Obama-era plan into the Trump administration was leaked to anti-Israel Haaretz.

Author: Jordan Schachtel

Jordan Schachtel is the national security correspondent for Conservative Review and editor of The Dossier for Blaze Media. Follow him on Twitter @JordanSchachtel.

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | 1 Comment

Ukraine transcript: 5 pages that Democrats thought they could reshape the world with (assuming nobody actually saw them)

And then Trump went and released them

The text as set forth here indicates no “quid-pro-quo” no bribery, nothing illegal  and in context only what is appropriate under the President’s powers and responsibilities. Everything said about it by House Democrats is calumny and all in the hope that people will never read it and only have an opinion based on what they say it says with their partners in the media.  Read it for yourself.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Comments Off on Ukraine transcript: 5 pages that Democrats thought they could reshape the world with (assuming nobody actually saw them)

Is the Pope Catholic . . .

  • It used to be a retort regarding the obvious or a sure thing
  • Now it seems a legitimate question
  • Praise God some things never change — bears still sh*t in the woods
  • Inquisitor General visits US Bishops, will be keeping a list of who’s not commie and who’s nice
  • Bishops told to insure indoctrination according to the works of Chairman Pope Francis

It may be too bad the Church does not have A “25th Amendment” for removal of a Pontiff who is clearly mentally unable to carry out his duties.

Of note:

VATICAN ENDORSES U.N. PRO-ABORTION SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AGENDA

“According to U.N. globalists, the big “sin” against the planet is the birthing of children since they will grow up to “pollute” the environment, so they see abortion as a sacrifice to this terrestrial deity, in a similar way children have been sacrificed to the Pachamama idol. The “Mother Earth” Pachamama idol that was venerated at the Vatican during the Amazon Synod merely symbolized this globalist cause of “atoning” to the planet. To think that Rome has joined the infamous U.N. in bowing to its planetary idol! “

“Hail Pachamama, full of grace…”?

Related reading: This article does a great job of explaining the controversy regarding recent Roman Catholic events implicated as having heretical problems and potentially schismatic under Pope Francis.

100 priests, lay scholars call Pope Francis to repent for Pachamama idolatry at Amazon Synod


Bishops told to get inline `~~ You WILL get fully on board with pushing Francis’ screeds.  (excerpt –  our annotations in red) )

Vatican envoy tells U.S. bishops to get in line with Pope Francis in ‘bomb-drop’ address

BALTIMORE, November 11, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) — The apostolic nuncio to the United States told the American bishops to get in line with the Holy Father and show they are taking steps to hand on the “Magisterium of Pope Francis” to their flock.

“The pastoral thrust of this pontificate must reach the American people,” Archbishop Christophe Pierre told attendees at the opening of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) fall general assembly.

Translation – the American election is coming up so get to proselytizing politically correct stuff, indeed go ahead and obsess

“Especially,” he added, “as families continue to demand of parishes and diocese the accompaniment envisioned by Amoris Laetitia.”

Translation – take our Blanqui word that the proletariat demands you get with the gosplan

Pierre also exhorted the American bishops to make “greater efforts” to have the pope’s environmental message in Laudato Si’, already well received by young people, “reach the hearts of political and civil leaders.”

Translation: Having reached the youth we have no time for Menshevik parents dragging their feet

Moreover, to prepare for their ad limina visits with the pope, “it may be useful to prayerfully reflect on our communion with the Bishop of Rome … namely by measuring to what extent we and our local churches have received the Magisterium of Pope Francis,” Pierre said.

Translation : I’m making a list and checking it twice

That includes making the pope’s first encyclical, Evangelii Gaudium, the “framework for efforts at evangelization,” he said.

“Adopting its missionary zeal and being in a permanent state of mission might represent tangible signs of communion with the Holy Father, for it shows the reception and implementation of his teaching as the key for missionary evangelization,” Pierre said.

Translation: mission,  revolution, whatever

The pope’s “emphasis on human fraternity” could “serve as a means for deepening the richness of American culture and creating an openness to the new waves of immigrants who are seeking a brighter future,” he added.

“Our communion with the Holy Father can be expressed in the concrete actions that we take to make his magisterium better known among our people,” the nuncio said (full text here).

Translation:  Better known magisterium – i.e. Marxism


V’PAC

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | 2 Comments

Obamatization of the Marine Corps

  • Full frontal tradition attack
  • Umbrellas are minor issue in comparison

Accolades though still insufficient are widespread for veterans this Veterans Day week.  We commend them to you. Our own purpose today is more to decry unnecessary attacks on traditions involving military branches.  In that regard we believe Obama really did have contempt for our Armed Forces; But the media never seemed to notice.

In this short video clip the fine corporal outside the White House looks mortified at the umbrella duty . . . one can almost hear his thoughts . . .

Marines Upset Over Regulation Change Permitting Umbrellas; Much Less Press Coverage When Proud Leathernecks Were Forced To Hand Over Their Personal Weapons  To Be “Permitted” To Leave Yemen!

Seems that US Marines are all in a dither over a change in uniform regulations that now allow leathernecks to carry umbrellas.

Semper Dry; Now Marines Can Carry Umbrellas, Setting Off Stormy Debate

The New Rule:
“UMBRELLAS,” now reads paragraph 3035 of the uniform regulations. “Marines may carry an all-black, plain, standard or collapsible umbrella at their option during inclement weather with the service and dress uniforms.”

“Marines out in the field or in battle, wearing their camouflage utilities, still won’t be toting umbrellas alongside their rifles and rucksacks. And Marines in formation will likely still be braving the elements. Umbrellas are permitted only with the green service uniform (the military equivalent of a business suit) and dress blues, for occasions such as working in a headquarters or on recruiting duty, or for formal dinners.”

“It further seems that the monumental rule change has come about in part thanks to one of President Obama’s stunts, which we believe, was  apparently aimed at humiliating the Corps. (Though this article notes that some Marines were rather upset by this not-so-subtle putdown by Obama, we never saw the media report any ‘criticism’.)

“A 2013 incident involving then-President Obama seemed to cement the umbrella’s fate. At a press conference, a Marine in blues held an umbrella over the president as he spoke. The incident, known by some Marines to this day as Umbrellagate, rained criticism on Mr. Obama for appearing to not know, or care to follow, Marine Corps protocol.”

But then, we never saw much press coverage concerning an even more serious 2015  Obama ‘in your face’ insult to our nation’s iconic military branch and its embassy responsibilities:

“U.S. Embassy Marines in Yemen handed over their M-9 pistols and M-4 carbines before evacuating the chaotic country with diplomatic personnel, the Pentagon said Wednesday.

“Warren said the Marines destroyed their machine guns and other crew-served weapons before leaving the Embassy for the airport. He also said that it was unclear who now had custody of the weapons and vehicles that were surrendered.

“A Marine spokesman could not immediately say whether the surrender of weapons by Embassy Marines in an evacuation was unprecedented.”


dlh

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Comments Off on Obamatization of the Marine Corps

Somebody ought to ask Butch Cassidy what he thinks

WE GET IT! “SUNDANCE” AT CONSERVATIVE TREEHOUSE DOESN’T LIKE NIKKI HALEY, AND, TO HIM, NIKKI’S DISCLOSING THE MENDACITY OF TILLERSON AND KELLY IS EVIDENCE…

OUR QUESTION, “SUNDANCE”, IS…SO?…DOES THAT MAKE TILLERSON AND KELLY LESS TREACHEROUS, OVERBEARING, BITTER, AND CONTEMPTUOUS OF THE U S CONSTITUTION?

Don’t think so…

dlh
——————————————————————————————————–

Nikki Haley, President Trump and MAGA Convenient Friction… 

Nikki Haley, President Trump and MAGA Convenient Friction…
Posted on November 10, 2019 by sundance

You might have noticed today how former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N, Nikki Haley, has grabbed multiple headlines. Apparently within her new book, the former South Carolina republican – who removed historic monuments and then moved her permanent residence to New York, has outlined Rex Tillerson and John Kelly as stealth insiders working to undermine President Trump and attempting to bring Haley into their clique.

This move is so typically Nikki Haley it would almost have been predictable right?

Well, it was.

In 2018 CTH foretold and forewarned of exactly what Nikki Haley would do. She is as predictable as the sunrise. [SEE HERE] Everything about Nikki Haley is opportunistic, political and false. Nikki Haley is the female version of Mitt Romney.

CTH Archives […] Due to the increasing success of the MAGA or Trump Republican apparatus, Haley will need to carefully position herself as a stealth Decepticon and not upset the vulgarian hordes; ie. the new republican party base voter.

As a smart and tactical politician Haley will invest heavily in the optics of supporting the MAGA movement; and embrace President Trump to avoid any conflict. (more)

I’m not going to write about it again. CTH forecast exactly what would happen.

Nikki Haley relies on people with short memories. She is a liar, a manipulator, and a purely political animal. She wants to be president. She will manipulate anyone and everyone in the process in order to achieve her career goals.

Remember in January 2016 when Nikki Haley gave the State of the Union rebuttal so she could attack the outside candidacy of Donald Trump? A month later she endorsed Marco Rubio for president. Or maybe you remember in June 2016 when Nikki Haley blamed Trump supporters for causing violence in San Jose?

Nikki Haley has one priority, Nikki Haley. Everything else is a transaction.

She claimed South Carolina as her home in order to advance her political career. Haley would never have become Governor without the endorsement of Sarah Palin and the help of the Tea Party; months later Haley openly rebuked, dismissed and disparaged Ms. Palin.

Haley enamored herself with the uniparty political ruling class, and after the politically correct and opportunistic response to the Emmanuel Church shooting, including the removal of all confederate flags, civil war monuments and historic South Carolina history….. she bailed out of South Carolina permanently and moved to New York.

Haley is for Haley, and she will do anything, sell-out anyone, and hitch her wagon to any helpful enterprise (ie. MAGA) to attain her political ambitions. In 2016 she thought Marco Rubio was her best play; then she moved to join the Trump administration. Now she has her eyes on the oval office.

She is the worst form of politician.

If Nikki Haley can ride a coup into the White House….

Don’t take my word for it, ask Rex Tillerson and John Kelly.

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Comments Off on Somebody ought to ask Butch Cassidy what he thinks

The “we’re in charge here” gang

Tillerson, Kelly are only the tip of the cabal as Nikki Haley reveals nefarious plans

Nikki Haley Reveals Kelly and Tillerson Tried To “Save America From Trump”

– Hard to say enough about the embittered ‘political general’ and the jealous CEO who couldn’t believe America wanted Trump as president, and not him!

– God bless Nikki Haley, a great United States Ambassador to the United Nations; Instructs two arrogant “big shots” on the US Constitution and how to behave responsibly

– US military deserved a General with better character than Kelly

– Has the “Anonymous” author been revealed (maybe it is “AnonymousES”?     dlh

——————–
Nikki Haley Reveals Nefarious Plans (excerpt)

The biggest problem with unelected bureaucrats and the so-called “Deep State” is they believe their sensibilities are superior to anyone, even the President and especially even the voters. They pretend to be acting on their conscience, but Haley made an important point when interviewed by CBS Evening News anchor Norah O’Donnell.

“It should’ve been, ‘Go tell the president what your differences are, and quit if you don’t like what he’s doing,’” Haley told O’Donnell. “But to undermine a president is really a very dangerous thing. And it goes against the Constitution, and it goes against what the American people want. And it was offensive.”

“She is 100% correct. In fact, it’s very possible she acted on her own advice; Haley resigned from her post last year, and while she has never been openly opposed to the President’s plans, she has reportedly pushed back against him at times. Yet she left in good standing and with the President’s blessings. More importantly, she left with her credibility intact, something that cannot be said about Kelly or Tillerson.”

. . .

It’s also quite egotistical. They didn’t get elected. President Trump did. He is in charge and the decisions he makes are clearly having a positive impact on the United States and the world. For these bureaucrats to attempt to force their personal agendas onto the country is disgraceful. Both of them and the rest of their cabal should be ashamed of themselves, but they won’t be. In their minds, their potentially treasonous actions are justifiable.

. . .

With the upcoming book by an anonymous White House bureaucrat due out soon, speculation will turn to Tillerson and Kelly as possible authors. But as we’re learning, the cabal’s credibility is diminishing and their resistance is fading. That doesn’t mean they’re not still dangerous. The President must be very cautious about the people he allows into his orbit.

Tillerson and Kelly must be scratching their heads as to why the nation is heading in the right direction even without their resistance. But they were just bad actors in a much bigger conspiracy, one that is ongoing today. Watch your six, Mr. President.

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Comments Off on The “we’re in charge here” gang