TheFrontPageCover
~ Featuring ~
Impeachment Trial Day 1: The Senate Begins
Thomas Gallatin  
.
As The Impeachment Trial Begins, 
Democrats Are Losing Their Minds
By John Daniel Davidson
{ thefederalist.com } ~ 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. scumbag/liar-Adam Schiff and scumbag liar-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. scumbag/liar-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, scumbag/liar-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 scumbag/liar-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...
.
scumbag/liar-Adam Schiff Would Be The Last 
Person To Get A GOP Senator To ‘Cross Over’
By Erielle Davidson
{ thefederalist.com } ~ The Democrats’ fervent hope in the impeachment process is no longer to remove President Donald Trump but rather to attain the moral victory of convincing just one Senate Republican to “cross over” and vote in favor of removal following the impeachment trial... For the adoring left within the media and on Capitol Hill, a crossover vote would give Democrats the bipartisan label they have so craved but have been unable to secure throughout the entirety of this process, largely due to their gross unprofessionalism and the obviousness of the Ukraine phone call being a pretext for ambitions they have held since 2016. If the Democrats want to garner crossover votes in the impeachment trial, Rep. scumbag/liar-Adam Schiff, D-Calif., is the last person who should be managing the impeachment circus, largely because he has become the insufferable face of House partisanship and the blatant crookedness of the impeachment process. Yet he was one of seven Democrats chosen by Speaker of the House liar-Nancy Pelosi last week to do so. But his performance today, combined with his salacious history, is a reminder of why he should be nowhere near the impeachment process.In his opening statement before the Senate this morning, scumbag/liar-Schiff waxed poetic about concerns that the Senate would not hold a “fair trial,” declaring, “Right now, a great many, perhaps even most, Americans do not believe there will be a fair trial. They don’t believe that the Senate will be impartial. They believe that the result is pre-cooked, the president will be acquitted.” scumbag/liar-Schiff’s statement, in all its attempts to grasp at some form of political gravitas, serves as a stark reminder of all that scumbag/liar-Schiff himself has done in the past to ensure this impeachment process would be as dishonest as possible. Granted, Americans — and Republicans in the Senate — may want a fair impeachment trial, but scumbag/liar-Schiff has shown himself to be incapable of offering that. scumbag/liar-Schiff has spent the vast majority of Trump’s presidency peddling unfounded and debunked conspiracy theories and “leaking” false information to countless media outlets in hopes of forwarding the Democratic #Resistance narrative. In the time period preceding the impeachment inquiry, scumbag/liar-Schiff invented a transcript for President Trump’s July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, fabricating entire events within the phone call that never actually took place and reading his falsified narrative before the House. Later, he claimed to have had no communication with the whistleblower prior to the formal filing of the complaint. That, too, like the phone call summary he delivered before the House, proved to be a lie...
.
State AGs urge Senate to reject impeachment
in stinging letter: 'A dangerous
historical precedent'
By Ronn Blitzer
{ foxnews.com } ~The attorneys general of 21 states have come forward with a blistering rebuke of the impeachment of President Trump, asserting that it "establishes a dangerous historical precedent."... The Republican attorneys general, in a letter submitted to the Senate Wednesday morning and obtained by Fox News, urged the chamber conducting Trump's trial to "reject" the impeachment articles. "If not expressly repudiated by the Senate, the theories animating both Articles will set a precedent that is entirely contrary to the Framers' design and ruinous to the most important governmental structure protections contained in our Constitution: the separation of powers," they wrote. The letter accuses House Democrats of impeaching Trump as a politically motivated response to the 2016 election and warned that it poses a threat to the 2020 election as well. "Even an unsuccessful effort to impeach the President undermines the integrity of the 2020 presidential election because it weaponizes a process that should only be initiated in exceedingly rare circumstances and should never be used for partisan purposes," the letter continued.The attorneys general proceeded to pick apart the impeachment articles themselves. The abuse of power article, they claimed, "is based upon a constitutionally-flawed theory" that is "infinitely expansive and subjective" because it relies on the motivation the president had for "exercising  concededly lawful constitutional authority" emphasis in original that Democrats deemed to be corrupt."It cannot be a legitimate basis to impeach a President for acting in a legal manner that may also be politically advantageous," they continued. "Such a standard would be cause for the impeachment of virtually every President, past, present, and future."...
.
The Impeachment Trial Briefs Are In,
 And The Winner Is…
by FORMER REP. BOB BARR
{ dailycaller.com } ~ The House impeachment managers and the lawyers for President Donald Trump have both filed their memorandums for the Senate impeachment trial which gets underway in earnest today... While the two documents are nearly identical in length, the president’s is by far the stronger document. Neither memorandum breaks new legal, political or constitutional grounds, but there was no expectation they would. The only “new” evidence – if it can be characterized as such – is that the managers’ memorandum includes references to matters that came to light in the month since the two Articles of Impeachment were passed by the House. The managers discuss statements recently made by Ukraine-American operative Lev Parnas in television interviews and refer also to a Government Accountability Office memorandum released last week after being requested by Democratic Maryland Sen. Chris Van Hollen. The GAO report found fault with the grounds on which the Office of Management and Budget temporarily delayed the release of military assistance dollars to Ukraine last summer. Even if the Senate decides to consider this “new” evidence, however, it adds nothing to the underlying question confronting the upper chamber – whether President Trump is guilty of the offenses alleged against him by the Democrat majority in the House and should be removed from office. If the grounds on which this seminal question is to be answered are to be gleaned from these first filings, the answer is a resounding, “Not Guilty.” While the trial brief filed on the president’s behalf is over 100 pages long, the operative language, capturing the full essence of why the Senate trial should result in acquittal, is set forth in the preliminary “Answer” filed last Saturday and which continues as a central theme throughout the memorandum: “the Articles of Impeachment are constitutionally invalid on their face and fail to allege any crime or violation of law whatsoever, let alone ‘high Crimes and Misdemeanors,’ as required by the Constitution.” That truly is all the president’s lawyers need assert in his defense, because it rebuts completely what the House is attempting to do in direct violation of the explicit language in the Constitution itself. The Constitution mandates that the only grounds on which a president may be impeached and removed from office are “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors”. Neither the First nor the Second Article of Impeachment levelled against Trump constitutes a violation of any state or federal law. “Abuse of Power” is not a crime, and “Obstruction of Congress” is not a crime. No amount of wordsmithing by the House managers can shoehorn either of these “offenses” into any criminal statute. Notwithstanding former President scumbag/liar-Clinton’s valiant but unsuccessful effort to escape impeachment in 1998 by arguing, “it all depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is,” what is written in the Constitution of the United States means what it says. Lawyers may argue about whether a particular crime constitutes a “high” crime the House decided in 1998 that perjury and obstruction of justice by a sitting president did meet that criteria. But they never should be permitted to prevail in arguing that behavior which is not a crime is a crime in order to rid themselves of a president they do not like...   https://dailycaller.com/2020/01/21/former-rep-barr-impeachment-brie...  
rino-Mitt Romney Lets the Left Down on Impeachment and Makes a Good
 Point Along the Way
by Bonchie
{ redstate.com } ~ I may not be a rino-Mitt Romney guy, but I have to give him credit here. After initially signaling he might buck Mitch McConnell and hand Democrats leverage they didn’t deserve... the Utah Senator is now doing the right thing and pushing the trial forward. In 53-47 vote, Chuck scumbag-Schumer’s plans to bully the majority went up in flames. No one defected. Not rino-Romney, not rino-Collins, nor rino-Murkowski. rino-Romney put out a  statement letting it be known that he supported the scumbag/liar-Clinton era rules being proposed by McConnell. The allegations outlined in the articles of impeachment passed by the House are extremely serious – did the President abuse his office for personal political gain, and did he obstruct Congress’ investigation by blocking subpoenas? These allegations demand that the Senate put political biases aside, and make good faith efforts to listen to arguments from both sides and thoroughly review facts and evidence. I have made clear to my colleagues and the public that the Senate should have the opportunity to decide on witnesses following the opening arguments, as occurred in the scumbag/liar-Clinton trial. The organizing resolution released tonight includes this step, and overall, it aligns closely with the rules package approved 100-0 during the scumbag/liar-Clinton trial. If attempts are made to vote on witnesses prior to opening arguments, I would oppose those efforts.  That’s a bit dramatic, but I realize that rino-Romney is rino-Romney so it’s not worth caring about. He’s going to let it be known that he’s super serious so he can continue to appear as the unbiased statesman. When it comes to votes, he’s fallen in line. Multiple amendments proposed by scumbag-Schumer after his initial defeat earlier in the evening have been tabled with the help of rino-Romney. One just happened less than an hour ago...
.
Tulsi Gabbard Files Defamation Lawsuit 
Against scumbag/liar-Hillary Clinton
By  Ashe Schow
{ dailywire.com } ~ Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) announced Wednesday morning that she has filed a defamation lawsuit against scumbag/liar-Hillary Clinton for the former secretary of state’s claims that Gabbard is a “Russian asset.”...  In a press release published to Gabbard’s presidential election campaign website, Gabbard claimed scumbag/liar-Clinton “deliberately and maliciously made false statements in an attempt to derail Rep. Gabbard’s campaign.” scumbag/liar-Clinton made the remarks about Gabbard during an October 17, 2019 interview, saying, “somebody who is currently in the Democratic primary … is a favorite of the Russians… Yeah, she’s a Russian asset.”  Gabbard’s press release notes that after scumbag/liar-Clinton’s comments, the media “extensively republished and disseminated these statements, which were interpreted widely as scumbag/liar-Clinton asserting that Gabbard is a Russian asset.” In the lawsuit itself, Gabbards attorneys at Pierce Bainbridge Beck Price & Hecht LLP allege that scumbag/liar-Clinton possibly made the remarks “out of personal animus, political enmity, or fear of real change within a political party scumbag/liar-Clinton and her allies have long dominated.” They allege scumbag/liar-Clinton lied about Gabbard “publicly, unambiguously, and with obvious malicious intent” and that the claims have harmed Gabbard. The lawsuit calls scumbag/liar-Clinton “a cutthroat politician by any account,” who held a grudge against Gabbard because the Hawaiian politician endorsed scumbag/liar-Clinton’s presidential rival, Sen. commie-Bernie Sanders (I-VT), in 2016. scumbag/liar-Clinton went on to lose the election to President Donald Trump...
.
.
Impeachment Trial Day 1: The Senate Begins
Thomas Gallatin:  The Senate’s impeachment trial of President Donald Trump begins today. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell released his proposed rules on Monday evening, which predictably had Democrats immediately crying foul. The biggest curve ball in McConnell’s proposal is a rule requiring that all evidence collected by House Democrats be approved via a vote before being admitted into the trial — and then only after opening arguments by both the House Democrats and Trump’s legal team. McConnell’s rules allow for a vote on whether to call witnesses, which Democrats insist on doing.

It’s clear that McConnell wants to avoid a drawn-out process, which is exactly what Democrats are aiming for. McConnell allotted 24 hours over two days for partisans on each side to present their case, starting with House Democrats. Then, following the Trump team’s rebuttal, senators will have up to 16 hours to submit questions in writing to both sides. Only after that process is complete will the Senate consider “the question of whether it shall be in order to consider and debate under the impeachment rules any motion to subpoena witnesses or documents.”

Furthermore, if the Senate votes to call witnesses, “no testimony shall be admissible in the Senate unless the parties have had an opportunity to depose such witnesses.” And any deposing of witnesses will be done behind closed doors.

Also on Monday, Trump’s legal team released its  blistering 110-page brief against the Democrats’ articles of impeachment, calling them “an affront to the Constitution and our democratic institutions.” Team Trump adds that the “two flimsy Articles of Impeachment,” which “allege no crime or violation of law whatsoever — much less ‘high Crimes and Misdemeanors, as required by the Constitution,” will “permanently weaken the Presidency and forever alter the balance of power among the branches of government in a manner that offends the constitutional design established by the Founders.”

Trump’s acquittal is almost a foregone conclusion given that it would take the votes of 67 senators to convict, though the Democrats’ real ploy is not conviction but political damage. To that end, their aim is to paint Republicans as unfair if they vote against calling witnesses — witnesses House Democrats didn’t bother to call. Minority Leader Chuck scumbag-Schumer and company do hold the advantage of needing only a simple majority vote to get their witnesses, whom vulnerable Republicans will feel compelled to vote in favor of calling. By getting witnesses called, scumbag-Schumer hopes to drag out the trial for as long as possible with the hope of damaging Republicans and aiding the Democrats’ bid to gain control of the Senate in the 2020 election. As we grow tired of noting, the Democrats’ whole despicable exercise is purely partisan political theater.   ~The Patriot Post

https://patriotpost.us/articles/68035?mailing_id=4813&utm_mediu...  

Views: 7

Comment

You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center

Comment by Rudy Tirre on January 23, 2020 at 8:34am

Bonnie

At the beginning of this scam they had nothing  But they hate this president that they will continue on. Their case is nothing their ideas are nothing. American needs to wake up and vote them out of office.

Comment by Bonnie Somer on January 23, 2020 at 6:01am

So is anyone going to really tell me the Dems are done .  NO.   they don't care if the pres is acquitted it is not abt that.   can they turn any senators?   prob not.  they have nothing.  they know it. 

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by Michael RamirezPolitical Cartoons by AF Branco

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

ALERT ALERT

Obama Lies Again: – Ignores That The Year After Signing The Stimulus More Than (4) Million Jobs Were Lost

Former President Obama, the only President in US history who had his FBI and other Intel agencies spy on the opposition party candidate, claims that he created the great economy that Americans are enjoying today. The only thing Obama created was debt and massive job losses with his horrible economic recovery.

Yesterday the former President tweeted an effort to take credit for President Trump’s successful economy:

Joe Hoft@joehoft

Of course another @BarackObama lie. He can’t open his mouth without lying. 11 years ago the US lost (4.3) million jobs over the next 12 months. Horrible liar. https://twitter.com/barackobama/status/1229432034650722304 

Barack Obama  @BarackObama

Eleven years ago today, near the bottom of the worst recession in generations, I signed the Recovery Act, paving the way for more than a decade of economic growth and the longest streak of job creation in American history.

President Obama’s policies were a disgrace and a failure. He doubled the national debt in spite of zero interest rates from the Fed. His recovery was the worst in US history.

Also, Obama’s assertion is just plain false. The ‘Stimulus’ was passed in February 2009 right after Obama took over the Presidency. He promised to not pass any bills for at least a week to allow for the bills to be read by the people but lied as soon as he was sworn in. The Stimulus was hundreds and hundreds of pages of government handouts to Democrat districts and it was close to $1 million. This was not what America needed and it led to the Tea Party.

Far-left Wikipedia has this to say about the Stimulus:

Note that in his infinite wisdom, NYT economist Paul Krugman is credited with arguing that “the stimulus was far smaller than the economic crisis warranted”. (He also said the markets would crash and burn if President Trump was elected President.)

The data shows that the 12 months after Obama’s stimulus, the US lost 4.3 million jobs:

In Obama’s first three years he netted a loss of 1.5 million jobs compared to President Trump who has added more than 6.7 million jobs.

When it comes to the economy, the billionaire schools the community organizer every time.

Tucker: Bloomberg is trying to buy the election

© 2020   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service