sharon ostwinch's Discussions (5,432)

Discussions Replied To (5425) Replies Latest Activity

ADMIN

"We all know this.  Problem redistribution would not involve him.  He just wants to b…"

sharon ostwinch replied Sep 18, 2012 to Alleged Audio of Barack Obama in 1998: ‘I Actually Believe In Redistribution’

11 Sep 19, 2012
Reply by Paul Z.

"Obama barks orders and the media jumps all over it.  Now that this is illegal they c…"

sharon ostwinch replied Sep 9, 2012 to Media Blackout: GAO Says Obama's Welfare Waivers Illegal

28 Sep 10, 2012
Reply by allen blaine

"I love this artist.  This is so damn cool.  must share."

sharon ostwinch replied Aug 30, 2012 to Jon McNaughton: Obamanation

10 Aug 31, 2012
Reply by Philip D. Steenbergen

"Now knowing that Islam is taking an active role at the DNC convention - these questi…"

sharon ostwinch replied Aug 22, 2012 to CONFIRMATION OF "BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY".... THE AXIS OF WH EVIL SUNSTEIN/JARRETT/OBAMA/HOLDER

103 Aug 25, 2012
Reply by Oren Long

"Eric from the showThe Five on Fox  said he would pay the $1000 so this women can con…"

sharon ostwinch replied Aug 18, 2012 to Good Samaritan, Angela Prattis, fined for feeding the poor in Chester Township, Pennsylvania

22 Aug 19, 2012
Reply by Charles Bill L.CDurry

"I can't wait.  I would love to see this explode all over this Presidency.  As it sho…"

sharon ostwinch replied Aug 13, 2012 to HUMA ABEDIN'S TIES TO MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD DEEPER THAN REP. BACHMANN SUSPECTED

39 Aug 15, 2012

"It seems to me the TSA was put there via the government a** wipes.  He force people…"

sharon ostwinch replied Aug 11, 2012 to AN EXPLOSIVE CASE AGAINST THE TSA

36 Aug 13, 2012
Reply by Neal W. Welsh

"It makes a point - valid and true  So going to far not at all.  We need more of the…"

sharon ostwinch replied Jul 28, 2012 to Does billboard comparing Obama to alleged shooter go too far?.... (freedom of speech?)

106 Jul 30, 2012
Reply by Karen Fraker

"It is more than disgusting that Obama is playing host to terrorists at the White Hou…"

sharon ostwinch replied Jul 25, 2012 to More Terrorist Organizations to visit U.S?

16 Jul 26, 2012
Reply by Pat Riot

ADMIN

"Excellent  but I though that Roberts was bought or influenced in some way by the Oba…"

sharon ostwinch replied Jul 8, 2012 to TED NUGENT: Turncoat Roberts

51 Jul 14, 2012
Reply by Healani

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

ALERT ALERT

Horrible: Democrats Set The Constitution On Fire With Fraudulent Impeachment

House Democrats unveiled two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump on Tuesday morning after an investigation that violated fundamental provisions of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

The investigation of the president began with the complaint of a so-called “whistleblower” who turned out to be a rogue Central Intelligence Agency employee, protected by a lawyer who had called for a “coup” against Trump in early 2017.

Democrats first demanded that the “whistleblower” be allowed to testify. But after House Intelligence Committee chair Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) was found to have lied about his committee’s contact with the “whistleblower,” and after details of the “whistleblower’s” bias began to leak, Democrats reversed course. In violation of the President Trump’s Sixth Amendment right to confront his accuser, Democrats refused to allow the “whistleblower” to testify. They argue the president’s procedural rights, even if they existed, would not apply until he was tried in the Senate — but they also invented a fraudulent “right to anonymity” that, they hope, might conceal the whistleblower even then.

Schiff began the “impeachment inquiry” in secret, behind the closed doors of the Sensitive Compartmentalized Information Facility (SCIF) in the basement of the U.S. Capitol, even though none of the testimony was deemed classified. Few members of Congress were allowed access. Schiff allowed selective bits of testimony to leak to friendly media, while withholding transcripts of testimony.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), having allowed the secret process to unfold, legitimized it with a party-line vote authorizing the inquiry. The House resolution denied President Trump the procedural rights enjoyed by Presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, and denied the minority party the traditional right to object to witnesses called by the majority.

Rather than the House Judiciary Committee, which traditionally handles impeachment, Pelosi also deputized the House Intelligence Committee to conduct fact-finding; the Judiciary Committee was turned into a rubber stamp. Schiff held a few public hearings, but often failed to release transcripts containing exculpatory evidence until after they had passed.

In the course of the Intelligence Committee’s investigation, Schiff quietly spied on the telephone records of his Republican counterpart, Ranking Member Devin Nunes (R-CA). He also snooped on the phone records of a journalist, John Solomon; and on the phone records of former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, acting as President Trump’s personal lawyer.

Schiff’s eavesdropping violated both the First Amendment right to press freedom and the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Yet he proceeded undeterred by constitutional rights, publishing the phone logs in his committee’s report without warning, confirmation, or explanation, alleging that Nunes and the others were part of a conspiracy to assist the president’s allegedly impeachable conduct. When Republicans on the Judiciary Committee asked the Intelligence Committee’s majority counsel, Daniel Goldman, to explain the phone logs, he refused to answer,

Ironically, Schiff had done exactly what Democrats accuse Trump of doing: abused his power to dig up dirt on political opponents, then obstructed a congressional investigation into his party’s and his committee’s misconduct.

Democrats’ articles of impeachment include one for the dubious charge of “abuse of power,” which is not mentioned in the Constitution; and one for “obstruction of Congress,” which in this case is an abuse of power in itself.

Alexander Hamilton, writing about impeachment in Federalist 65, warned that “there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.” Democrats have fulfilled Hamilton’s worst fears.

The Trump impeachment will soon replace the 1868 impeachment of President Andrew Johnson — which the House Judiciary Committee staff actually cited as a positive precedent — as the worst in American history.

In service of their “coup,” Democrats have trampled the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The Republic has never been in greater danger.

You don't get to interrupt me

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service